The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda Packet 1992/04/07 Tuesday, April 7, 1992 4:00 p.m. "I declare under penalty of perJury that 1 em eml'~oye:j by the City of C:,u,-' Vi~'a in the Oc'lice o-f the city Clerk an;! \t..,' I ;)0$,0(\ tbis Agenda/Notice on the Bulie:," B~rd at the Public Services BUiJdi~~On H PATED.t.4/3 Iq7- SIGN , Council Chambers Public Services Building ResnUar MeetinlZ of the City of Chula Vista City Council CALLED TO ORDER 1. CALL nm ROIL: Councilmembers Grasser Horton -' Malcolm -' Moore -' Rindone -' and Mayor Nader _. 2. PLEDGE OF AlLEGIANCE TO nm FLAG. SILENT PRAYER 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: March 17 and March 24,1992 4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF nm DAY: a. Oath of Office - Child Care Commission: Nancy Reeves. b. Proclaiming April as 'Community Services Month. - The League of California Cities encourages cities to declare April as "Community Services Month. and encourages their residents to take full advantage of the many community services available. Community Services Month is an annual observance designed to focus attention on the various community services provided by California's cities which include: parks and recreation, child care, arts programs, historic preservation, health services, and many more. The proclamation will be presented by Mayor Tim Nader to Bill Castro. c. Proclaiming the week of AprilS through April 11, 1992 as 'Altrusa International Week'. d. Proclaiming the week of April 13 through April 17, 1992 as "National Building Safety Week' - The Board of Appeals and Advisors at their 4/13/92 meeting unanimously approved the recommendation to the Council to identify by proclamation the City's support of National Building Safety Week. Jodee Arnold, Vice-Chair of the Board of Appeals and Advisors, will accept the proclamation on behalf of the Board and the Department of Building and Housing. e. Presentation of Certificate of Recognition and reward to Christa Castellano for reporting graffiti vandalism resulting in a conviction. CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 5 through 18) The staff recommouJotions regarding the following itons listed under the Consent Cakndor will be enacted by the Council by one motion without discussion unless a Councilmmrber, a member of the publie or City staff~ that the item be pulled for discussion. If you wish to speok 011 one of these items, pleIlse fill out a .Request to Speak Form' available in the lobby and submit it to the City ClerIc prior to the muting. (Complete the green form to speok in favor of the staff -=ommendation; conIJIIek the pink form to speok in opposition to the staff reconunendotion) ltem3 pulled from the Consent Cakndor will be discussed after Action ltem3 and Board and Commission Recommendations Item3 pulled by the publie will be the first itons of business. Agenda -2- April 7, 1992 5. WRITIEN COMMUNICATIONS: 6. a. Letter inviting the City to submit a proposal to establish a veterans home the area - William C. Manes, Chairman, Governor's Commission on a Southern California Veterans Home, 10411 Garden Grove Blvd., #46, Garden Grove, CA 92643. b. Letter in opposition to widening of OtayValley Road and as.""sment - Jewell Rochmes, 916 Guatay Ave., Chula Vista, CA. c. Letter requesting that the newly appointed Mobilehome Park Rent Review Commisoion meet to elect officials - Marie O. Scrivener, 26 Corso di Italia, Chula Vista, CA 91910. d. Letter requesting waiver of requirements for business licenses for the Bonitafest to be held on Saturday, 9/26/92 - Marguerite Maniscalco, Bonitafest Chairwomen, Bonita Business & Professional Association, P. O. Box 284, Bonita, CA 92002. e. Letter requesting waiver of fees and deposits related to the processing, development and construction of a Churclt - Dan Benedict, Pastor, and Charlotte Helms, Chairperson, Board of Trustees, First United Methodist Church, 710 Third Ave., Chula Vista, CA 91910. f. Request for assistance in the acquisition of Bayocene Mobilehome Park - Bayscene Mobilehome Park Residents and Park Acquisition Committee Members. g. Letter requesting assistance in further development of the automated traIIic-citation process - Lawrence W. Stirling, Judge, The Municipal Court, San Diego Judicial District, County Courthouse, 220 W. Broadway, San Diego, CA 92101. h. Letter requesting a resolution in support of spending already collected funds as intended by Proposition A - Randy Dibb, President, Deputy Sheriffs' Association of San Diego County, 7546 Trade St., San Diego, CA 92121, Jim Roache, Sheriff, San Diego County, and Dianne Jacob, Member, Jamul-Dulzura School Board. i. Claims Against the City - Peerless Construction, Rendell and Margaret Whittington, and Phillip and Gayle Nowakowski, c/o Jeffrey Garber, Esq., Edwards, White & Sooy, Attorneys at Law, 1615 Murray Canyon Road, Ste. 1000, San Diego, CA 92108. Staff recommends that the claim be denied. (Director of Personnel) j. Letter requesting waiver of $200 filing fee to install an elevator at the Veteran! of Foreign Wars Hall- Merlin Harberts, Commander, Veterans of Foreign Wars, Robert H. Scholer Post 2111, P.O. Box 93, Chula Vista, CA 92012. ORDINANCE 2498 AMENDING CHAPTER 3.48 OF TIlE MUNICIPAL CODE TO AlITHORIZE ISSUANCE OF REDEVELOPMENT BONDS TO FINANCE OR REFINANCE INDUSTRIAL, COMMERCIAL, OR UTIIJ1Y PROJECTS LOCATIID WI1HIN OR WlTIiOur TIlE CI1Y UPON A FINDING OF BENEFIT TO TIlE CI1Y (second readim!: and adoutionl - San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E) has requested City assistance in financing or refmancing certain gas and electric generation, transmission and distribution facilities located outside the City as well as within the City. Chapter 3.48 of the Municipal Code does not currently authorize the City to issue revenue bonds to finance or refinance projects outside the City. Staff recommends Council place ordinance on second reading and adoption. (City Attorney and Director of Finance) Agenda -3- April 7, 1992 7. ORDINANCE 2499 APPROVING 1HE PLANNED COMMUNl1Y D1SIR1Cf REGULATIONS FOR 1HE SALT CREEK RANCH SEcnONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN (second readin... and adoDtion) - The Baldwin Company has submitted a SPA Plan and related items for the 1,197.2 acre Salt Creek Ranch project, located north of the EastLake Business Park, northwest of Upper Otay Reservoir and bisected by Proctor Valley Road. Staff recommends Council place ordinance on second reading and adoption. (Director of Planning) S.A. RESOLUTION 16559 ACCEPTING A COUN1Y OF SAN DffiGO TECHNICAL ASSISfANCE PROGRAM GRANT TO EsrABIJSH COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL RECYClJNG PROJECTS, AND AUTIIORIZlNG 1HE CI1Y MANAGER TO EXECUTE 1HE SERVICE AGREEMENT WlTIi 1HE COUN1Y - Last October, Council authorized staff to submit a grant application to the County's Technical Assistance Program. The City has been notified of an award of $11,373. Under the grant, the City's Business Recycling Outreach Project would be expanded to offer additional technical assistance for recycling program development to offices, as well as restaurants/bars and industries. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Administration) B. RESOLUTION 16560 AMENDING FISCAL YEAR 1991-1992 BUDGET TO ADD A TEMPORARY, PART-TIME POSITION IN UNCLASSIFIED SERVICE IN 1HE WAsrE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM AND APPROPRIATING 1HEREFOR - 4/5th's vote required. 9. RESOLUTION 16561 AU1HORIZlNG AMENDMENf OF LOAN AGREEMENT WlTIi SOU1H BAY AMBULATORY SURGERY ASSOCIATES - The purpose of the amendment is to make minor changes to the language requiring that the South Bay Ambulatory Surgery Associates provide audited fmancial reports. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Finance) 10. RESOLUTION 16562 AMENDING FISCAL YEAR 1991-1992 BUDGET, PROVIDING FOR AN UNEMPLOYMENT TRUSf FUND APPROPRIATION TO 1HE UNEMPLOYMENf INSURANCE - Amending Fiscal Year 1991-1992 budget, providing for an Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund appropriation to the Unemployment Insurance Account. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Personnel) 4/5th's vote required. 11. RESOLUTION 16563 AU1HORIZlNG TEMPORARYa.osuR.E OF TIiIRD AVENUE ON MAY 2, 1992 FOR 1HE CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION'S CULTURAL ARTS FFSlWAL AND AU1HORIZlNG A WAIVER OF BUSINESS IJCENSE FEES FOR REGISTERED VENDORS AT 1HE EVENT - The City's Cultural Arts Commission is requesting permission to conduct a Street Scene event on Third Avenue on 5/2/92. They are also requesting a waiver of business license fees for registered vendors at the event. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Cultural Arts Commission and Director of Parks and Recreation) Agenda -4- April 7, 1992 12. RESOLUnON 16564 APPROVING SEWER CONNECTIONS POR TIm SAN DIEGO COUNlY WATER AUlHORl1Y FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED IN VAUEf - The San Diego County Water Authority is negotiating with property owners in Proctor Valley for additional right of way for their pipeline four extension project. The proposed right of way encroaches on the existing private sewer leach fields for two homes. The City of Chula Vista's Salt Creek I sewer is in front of both homes along Proctor Valley Road. The County Water Authority has requested that these two properties be allowed to connect to the City's sewer to solve the public health issue. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works) 13. RESOLUnON 16565 ESTABUSHlNG DATFS FOR PROPERlY OWNERS TO BE READY TO RECEIVE UNDERGROUND SERVICE AND REMOVAL OP POLES AND OVERHEAD PACIlJ1'lES WI1HIN PHASE I OF UNDERGROUND UTIlJTY DISTRICT NUMBER 117 ALONG BROADWAY PROM "1." STREET TO MOSS STREET - On 12/10/85, Council adopted Resolution No. 12276 establishing Underground Utility District No. 117 along Broadway from "I" Street to Moss Street. In accordance with Section 15.32.150 of the Municipal Code, adopted Resolution No. 12276 states that the Council shall by subsequent resolution fix the date on which the affected property owners must be ready to receive underground service and the date poles, overhead wires and associated structures shall be removed. The conversion of overhead utilities to underground is almost complete within Phase I of Underground Utility District No. 117. The limits of Phase I extend along Broadway between "L" Street and Moss Street. This resolution covers Phase I only. Staff recommends Council approve the resolution and: (1) set 6/30/92 as the date property owners within Phase I of the Underground Utility District No. 117 on Broadway (from "L" Street to Moss Street) shall be ready to receive underground service; and (2) set 8/31192 as the date poles, overhead wires, and associated structures shall be removed within Phase I of Underground Utility District No. 117 on Broadway (from "L" Street to Moss Street). (Director of Public Works) 14.A. RESOLUTION 16566 MAKING PINDINGS ON TIm PETITION POR ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 91-1 (TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD - PHASE m - In April 1989, the EastLake Development Company began the construction of Telegraph Canyon Road - Phase II which extends from approximately 2,250 feet west of the future Paseo Ranchero Road to 600 feet east of Apache Drive. The improvements are now complete, and it is proposed to assess the cost of these improvements to a portion of EastLake development utilizing an acquisition proceedings pursuant to the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions and set the time and date for the public hearing be set for 5/12/92 at 6:00 p.m. (Director of Public Works) B. RESOLUnON 16567 MAKING APPOINTMENTS AND APPROVING AGREEMENT IN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 91-1 (TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD - PHASE II) Agenda -5- April 7, 1992 C. RESOLlmON 16568 ADOPTING A MAP SHOWING nm PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICl" NUMBER 91-1 (TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD - PHASE m D. RESOLlmON 16569 DECLARING INTEN110N TO ORDER nm INSTALLATION OF CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS IN A PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DISTRICl"; ORDERING nm PREPARATION OP A REPORT DESCRIBING nm DISTRICl" TO BE ASSESSED TO PAY nm COSTS AND EXPENSES TIiEREOP; AND PROVIDING POR nm ISSUANCE OP BONDS PORASSESSMENT DISTRICl" NUMBER 91-1 (TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD - PHASE m E. RESOLlmON 16570 PASSING ON nm "REPORr OP nm ENGINEER, GIVING PREUMINARY APPROVAL, AND SETI1NG A TIME AND PlACE POR nm PUBUC HEARING POR ASSESSMENT DISTRICl" NUMBER 91-1 (TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD - PHASE II) 15. RESOLlmON 16571 ACCEPTING IDDS AND AWARDING CONTRACl" POR TREE TRIMMING SERVICE POR FISCAL YEAR (PY) 1991-1992 IN nm CI1Y OP CHULA VISTA - On 2126/92, the Director of Public Works received sealed bids for tree trimming service for FY 1991-92. The work to be done consists of trimming broadleaf and eucalyptus trees located on various streets in the City. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works) 16. RESOLUTION 16572 APPROVING PIRSf AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT Willi JONES AND ROACH, INC. PROVIDING APPRAISAl. SERVICES POR VARIOUS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJEcrs - Staff needs to obtain up to twenty additional appraisal reports for Broadway "F" to "I", Beyer Way, and Otay Valley Road. The cost of these appraisal reports is estimated to be $50,600. Staff has already contracted for twelve appraisal reports costing $21,720. The total cost exceeds the $25,000 authorized by the current agreement. The agreement needs to be amended which increases the authorization to $75,000. Staff recommends approval the resolution. (Director of Public Works) 17. REPORT AMERICAN YOUTIf HOSTELS' REQUEST TO CONDUCl" A BICYCLE TOUR - The San Diego Council American Youth Hostels is requesting to conduct the Annual American Youth Hostels (AYH) International Bicycle Tour on Sunday, 4/12192. Staff recommends Council approve the request subject to staff conditions. (Director of Parks and Recreation) 18. REPORT BONITA ROADRUNNERS' REQUEST TO CONDUCl" A IOK ROAD RACE - The Bonita Roadrunners, Inc. is requesting permission to stage a 5K and a 10K road race around Rohr Park on Saturday, 5/23/92. Staff recommends Council approve the request subject to staff conditions. (Director of Parks and Recreation) * * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * * Agenda -6- April 7, 1992 PUBUC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES The following items have been advertised and/or posted as publk hearings as required by law. [fyou wish to speak to any item, please fill out the "Reqest to Speak Form" available in the lobby and submit il to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete the green form to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete the pink form to speak in opposition to the staff recommendation.) Comments are limiled to five minutes per individual 19. PUBUC HEARING ORDINANCE 2501 PCM-92-05 - CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO TIiE RANCHO DEL REV EMPLOYMENT PARK DESIGN GUIDEUNES - RANCHO DEL REV PARTNERSHIP - This amendment would increase: the allowable wall- mounted sign area from 50 to 100 feet, the number permitted from one facing the street to one per building side including the building side facing East "H" Street, the sign area of wall-mounted signs to a maximum of 150, and the sign area of freestanding signs. Staff recommends Council hold the public hearing and place the ordinance on fIrst reading. (Director of Planning) AMENDING TIiE RANCHO DEL REV EMPLOYMENT PARK DESIGN GillDEUNES ADOPTED BY TIiE CITY PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NUMBER 2244 (fIrst readiIui:) **The meeting will recess to a joint Counci1/Redevelopment Agency Meeting to discuss the following: AGENCY BUSINESS 20. RESOLUTION 1246 COUNCIL BUSINESS A PUBUC HEARING ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 15092-18 AND ADDENDUM THERETO AND ADOPTING MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM, APPROVING OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT OP/BF FOUR WI1H ROHR. INC. TO CONSTRUcr AN ADMINISTRATIVE/CORPORATE OFFICE BUIlDING, A 1HREE-STORY PARKING STRUcrURE EXPANSION, PROJEcr PARKING WITIiIN ADJACENT SDG&E EASEMENT; AunIORlZE APPROPRIATING $110,000 TO TIiE BAYFRONT FINE ARTS ACCOUNT; COMMITTING $737,000 OF FUTIJRE TAX INCREMENT TO BE DERIVED FROM DEVELOPMENT OF PROPERlY AND TO BE REIMBURSED TO ROHR. INC. FOR DEVELOPMENT AND PERMIT FEE OFF-SET; AND RECOMMENDING TIiAT TIiE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AMENDMENT NUMBER TEN TO TIiE CERTIFIED LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AND BAYFRONT SPECIFIC PLAN, APPROVE A PARKING AGREEMENT TO ALLOW OFF-SlTE PARKING WITIiIN TIiE ADJACENT SDG&E EASEMENT, AND INITIATE TIiE VACATION OF A PORTION OF "G" STREET AND TIDELANDS AVENUE - 4/5th's vote required. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Community Development) TO CONSIDER AMENDMENT NUMBER TEN TO TIiE CERTIFIED LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AND BAYFRONT SPECIFIC PLAN - Rohr Inc. proposes to construct a 125,000 square foot, six-story office building on property located at 850 Lagoon Drive where Rohr is currently constructing a Agenda -7- AprU 7, 1992 245,000 square foot office building and two subterranean parking garages. In addition to the new office building, Rohr proposes to expand the south parking structure with three above ground levels and develop the adjacent San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E) right-of-way with landscaped parking. A south vehicle ingress/egress way will be constructed along 'G' Street to Bay Boulevard. The project is located within Bayfront Redevelopment Project and within the Local Coastal Zone. The project will require Agency approval of an owner participation agreement and Council approval of a Local Coastal Program amendment, a parking agreement, coastal development permits, and vacation of 'G' Street. Also, to allow the six- story building, California Coastal Commission must approve the proposed Local Coastal Program amendment. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions and that staff be directed to initiate the vacation of a portion of 'G' Street and Tidelands Avenue as described on Attachments Nand V. (Director of Community Development) RESOLUTION 16573 ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DEa.ARATION 15-92-18 AND ADDENDUM TIiERETO AND ADOPTING MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM; APPROVING AMENDMENT NUMBER TEN TO 1HE CERTIFIED LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AND BAYFRONT SPECIFIC PLAN AND AIJ1HORIZING SUBMlTIAL TO 1HE CAIJFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION; AND, ENTERING INTO A PARKING AGREEMENT WITH ROHR INC. TO ALLOW OFP-SITE PARKING WITHIN 1HE ADJACENT SDG&E EASEMENT; AND, DIRECUNG STAFF TO INITIATE 1HE VACATION OF A PORTION OF 'G' STREET AND CONVEYANCE OF A PORTION OF TIDELANDS AVENUE B. PUBliC HEARING TO CONSIDER COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NUMBER FIFIY-SEVEN FOR 1HE CONSTRUCUON OF A nIREE-STORY PARKING STRUCTIJRE EXPANSION AT 850 LAGOON DRIVE AND DEVELOPMENT OF LANDSCAPED PARKING WITHIN ADJACENT SDG&E EASEMENT RESOLUTION 16574 ADOPTING MITIGATION NEGATIVE DEa.ARATION 15-92-18 AND ADOPTING MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM; AND ISSUING COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NUMBER FIFIY-SEVEN FOR 1HE CONSTRUCUON OF A THREE-STORY PARKING STRUCTIJRE EXPANSION AT 850 LAGOON DRIVE AND DEVELOPMENT OF LANDSCAPED PARKING WITHIN ADJACENT SDG&E EASEMENT **1be joint Council/R.edevelopment Agency Meeting will recess and the City Council Meeting will reconvene. ** ORAL COMMUNICATIONS This is an opportunity for the general public to address the City Council on any subject matter within the Council's jurisdiction that is not an item on this agenda. (State law, however, generally prohibits the City Council from taking action on any issues not included on the post agenda.) If you wish to address the Council on such a subject, please complete the yellow 'Request to Speak Under Oral Communications Form' available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Those who wish to speak, please give your name and address for record purposes and follow up action. Agenda -8- April 7, 1992 AGnON ITEMS The items IiskJ ill this S<<IioII ofIM agenda an expected to dicit substantiJJl ~ IlIIIl ddibuaIions by 1M Cowu:i/, atII/f, or memben of 1M general pubIie. The items will be c:onsidered individually by 1M Coundlllllll staff ~ may ill cotoin CIISU be prumted ill 1M altentoIive. TIIo8e who wish to speok, please fill out a .Request to Speak." [ann available ill 1M lobby IlIIIl submit it to 1M City CItri prior to 1M ~ PubIU: commenIS an IimiUtl to fiw minutes. 21. REPORT 22. ORDINANCE 2502 23. ORDINANCE 2503 RESPONDING TO COUNCIL REFERRAL OF REQUEST FROM FRED DUFRESNE OF OTAY lAKES WDGE MOBILEHOME PARK, FOR A DETERMINATION OF TIIE R1GHf TO ARBITRATE, AND REQUEST FOR MODlFICATION OFMOBILEHOMEPARKRENTCONTROLORDINANCE TO REQUIRE NOTICE OF RENT INCREASE TO INCOMING AND OUfOOING TENANTS . On 3/24/92, Mr. Dufresne of Otay Lakes Mobilehome Lodge submitted a letter to the Council complaining that the City had impermissibly denied affected tenants of the ordinance-based right to arbitrate a 4/1/91 rent increase in excess of CPI effective upon sale of coach as the result of a mediation. If requested a modification of the mobilehome rent control ordinance to require notices of rent increases and the right to arbitrate be given to both incoming and outgoing tenants. Staff recommends Council place ordinance on fIrst reading. Continued from meeting of 3/24/92. (City Attorney) AMENDING CHAPTER 2.31 OF TIIE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO TIIE MOBILEHOME RENT REVIEW COMMISSION TO MAKE CERTAIN TEOOOCAL OiANGES AND CORREGnONS (first readin2:l - In May, 1991, when the Council recognized by ordinance the Mobilehome Rent Review Commission, it was recommended originally to have seven members. At the last minute, a change was made to reduce the number of voting members from seven to fIve. However, other sections of the ordinance wherein reference was either made or implied that the Commission had seven members was not correct. The ordinance amendment proposes to correct those references. In addition, it is the City Attorney's recommendation to amend the ordinance to require that ex. officio members have no interest in a mobilehome park, either as a tenant, owner or manager. This is proposed in order to avoid the conflict that a tenant or mobilehome park owner will have in reviewing either a specific rent review case or matters of general policy. Staff recommends Council place ordinance on fIrst reading. (City Attorney) AMENDING SEmON 2.56 OF TIIE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO PURCHASES OF SUPPUES, SERVICES AND EQillPMENT (first readin2:l . At the 7/23/91 meeting, Council requested a report on the City's use of consultants and service contracts. The report was discussed by Council on 10/18/91. During Council discussion, it was determined that a Council subcommittee be established to address the issue of consultants and service contractors more in depth. The Council subcommittee included Councilmembers Leonard Moore and Shirley Grasser Horton. The subcommittee has met with staff and is proposing the approval of revisions Agenda -9- April 7, 1992 to the Municipal Code, the establishment of a new Council policy, and some modifications in City procedures for determining the need for consultants, consultant monitoring, and hiring practices. Staff recommends Council place ordinance on first reading and adopt the resolution. (Budget Manager) RESOUTnON 16575 ADOPTING PROPOSED COUNCIL POllCY ON CONSULTANT AND onmR SERVICFS 24. ORDINANCE 2504 ADDING SECl10N 2.58.060 TO nm aruLA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATING nm PAYMENT OP PREVAIlJNG WAGES POR CONTRACTS IEf BY nm CI1Y (first reading' - The proposed ordinance will elevate our existing policy on the payment of prevailing wage, now contained in Resolution 12493, to the level of an ordinance, thereby clarifying that the Council is not waiving any of its home rule authority granted to it by the State of California as a charter city. The proposed resolution will create a condition of ripeness that will permit opponents to our determination not to pay prevailing wages on the Fifth Avenue project to litigate that issue prior to our having become contractually obligated to the bidder to whom the project is let. Staff recommends Council place ordinance on first reading and approval of the resolution. (City Attorney and Director of Public Works) RESOLunON 16576 ANNOUNaNG nm COUNCIL'S INTENT TO AWARD nm IDDS ON nm FIP1li AVENUE PROJECT, NAPLES TO ORANGE, ON nm BASIS OP nm BID ALTERNATE A, WlTHOur REQillRlNG nm PAYMENT OP PREVAlIJNG WAGE 25.A. REPORT ON INTERIM STAPFING REQUESTS FOR nm DEPARTMENT - Over the past several years, and particularly since the adoption of the City's General Plan Update in 1989, the City has received a large number of major development proposals for review and processing. In addition, both the Montgomery Specific Plan and the General Plan Update caIled for a number of follow-up implementation actions and special studies, and other major planning issues have arisen during this period. As a result, until recently the Planning Department used planning consultants in many instances to perform special studies and to act as project managers for the review of major development projects by the City. However, based on recent direction from the Council, the Planning Department has curtailed the use of consultants except in very specific circumstances, and has been evaluating other means by which adequate staffmg may be provided to respond to workload demands. The report presents specific recommendations regarding interim staffing requests in order to meet short-term needs within the Department. An overall proposal will be presented for permanent staffing to meet long-term needs as part of the Fiscal Year 1993 budget. Staff recommends acceptance of the report and approval of the resolution. (Director of Planning) B. RESOLunON 165n CREATING TEMPORARY SCIENTIFIC, TECHNICAL OR EXPERT PROPESSJONAL POSITIONS IN nm UNCLASSIFIED SERVICE AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS n-IEREPOR - 4/5th's vote required. Agenda -10- April 7, 1992 26. REPORT ON TIlE PROGRESS OF TIlE MAYOR'S "ENVIRONMENTAL AGENDA FOR TIlE 90'S" - Recommendation to bring forward three items listed on the Environmental Agenda, including a CO, Reduction Package, Water Conservation Program, and a Toxics Reduction Package. These three items are recommended to be reviewed by the Resource Conservation Commission (RCG) with the intent that specific proposed language be brought back to the Council on an item-by-item basis for future review. Staff recommends acceptance of the report in concept and refer Items A, B, and C to the RCC for review and recommend it be brought back to the Council for formal adoption. (Administration) BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS This is the time the City Council will consider items which Iulve been forwtll'ded to them for 00IISiderati0n by one of the City's Bomds, Commissions tlIUl/or Committee.s. None submitted. ITEMS PULLED FROM TIlE CONSENT CALENDAR This is the time the City Council will discuss items which Iulve been rmwved from the Consent CaIendDr. ~ items pulled tit the mpIDI of the publil: will be considered prior to those pulled by CoundJmembers. l'ub1k commmts are 1imiUd to five minutes per individuIlL OTIlERBUSINESS 27. CI1Y MANAGER'S REPORTCS) a. Scheduling of meetings. 28. MAYOR'S REPORTCS) 29. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilman Malcolm a. Proposed caretaker home on the ttee farm site at East 'H" Street and 1-805. Councilman Moore b. Memorandum regarding National Debt. Councilman Rindone c. Request the City Manager to prepare written policy prohibiting managerial employees from receiving consultant fees or other consideration or compensation from a person, firm, or other legal entity that is currently doing business with the City of Chula Vista or is likely to do business with the City in the future. ADJOURNMENT The meeting will adjourn to the Regular City Council Meeting on April 21, 1992 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. A special joint meeting of the City CounciVRedevelopment Agency will be held immediately following the City Council Meeting. ~\f?- 2~~~ ..-...;;..-...;:~~ ~~~~ CllY OF CHULA VISTA OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL March 26, 1992 Ms. Nancy Reeves 1935 Gotham Street Chula Vista, CA 91913 Dear Ms. Reeves: During the City Council meeting of March 24, 1992, 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 April 7, 1992. It will be held at 4:00 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 commission secretary, Kim Tefft, will send you information regarding the meeting dates. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact her at 691-5031. Thank you for your continued interest In serving the City 01 Chula Vista Sincerely, ....p ~ ~ - Tim Na r ~ ..... . Mayor LMM:dv appoint cc: City Clerk Kim Tefft, Secretary '-I a.. ,/ 276 FOURTH AVENUE/CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 919101(619) 691-5044 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item --%- Meeting Date 4n 192 ITEM TITLE: PROCIAMATION: Proclaiming April as Community Services Month Director of Parks and Recreation0. SUBMrlTED BY: The League of California Cities, by resolution, encourages cities to declare April as "Community Services Month" and encourage their residents to take full advantage of the many community services available. Community Services Month is an annual observance designed to focus attention on the various services provided by California's cities which include: parks and recreation, child care, libraries, arts programs, historic preservation, health services, and many more. The Parks and Recreation Department performs many valuable community services, including but not limited to, the following activities: distribution of 4-5 tons of government commodities monthly to 1200 Chula Vista families; assisting seniors, low income families and the handicapped in completing their income tax returns and/or renters credit applications; issuance of emergency food to needy families; providing information and referral to available and appropriate health and human care services. The quality of life of the citizens of Chula Vista is enhanced by the variety of recreational services offered by the Department. The age range of those served is from preschoolers to seniors. The Department recognizes the leisure needs of the community's special population by offering recreation programs such as sports, aerobics, dances, field trips, and day camps to the physically challenged and the developmentally disabled. Intergenerational programs provide an opportunity for the young and old to share in leisure time activities. The Department is also responsible for coordinating the activities of five commissions whose main function is to advise the City on the delivery of community services which improve the quality of life for all our citizens. These commissions are the Commission on Aging, Child Care Commission, Youth Commission, Cultural Arts Commission, and the Parks and Recreation Commission. Community Services Month promotes the positive experiences vital to good physical and mental health. Community Services facilitate intellectual, emotional and social development and strengthen the community. The Proclamation declaring April as Community Services Month will be presented by Mayor Tim Nader to Bill Castro. csmonth t./b-; PROCLAIMING THE MONTH OF APRIL 1992 AS "COMMUNITY SERVICES MONTH" IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA WHEREAS, suitable and positive experiences are vital to good physical and mental health and enhance the quality of life for all people; and WHEREAS, all citizens can enjoy self-renewal in the use of Community Services, i. e. libraries, arts programs, recreation, museums, green spaces, and parks facilities; and WHEREAS, citizens can fulfill their potential through the varied individual and group opportunities provided by Community Services programs; and WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista recognizes that the efforts of the professional Community Services workers have enhanced the services available to City residents: NOW, THEREFORE, I, TIM NADER, Mayor of the City of Chula Vista, California, do hereby proclaim the month of April 1992 as "COMMUNITY SERVICES MONTH" and urge all citizens to enjoy their City Community Services programs and to remember those who have contributed to enhance them. commserv 1/ b -;;.. ~ . . . t COURCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ITEM t.J C, MEETING DATE 4/07/92 ITER ~ITLB: Proclamation - proclaiming the Week of April 5-1', 1992 as "ALTRUSA INTERNATIONAL WEEK" SUBKITTED BY: Mayor Tim Nadm ("/STRS VOTE: YES_ NO"::" The proclamation proclaiming the week of April 5 through April 12, 1992 as "ALTRUSA INTERNATIONAL WEEK" will be presented by Mayor Nader to Ms. Suzanne Jung, President of A1trusa International of Chu1a Vista. L/c - / PROCLAIMING THE WEEK OF APRIL 5 THROUGH APRIL 11,1992 AS "ALTRUSA INTERNATIONAL WEEK" IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA' WHEREAS, Altrusa International, Inc., is a volunteer, service organization with 17,000 members in sixteen countries around the world dedicated to improving their communities; and WHEREAS, the concepts and principles A1trusa represents are symbolized by its motto, "Patriotism, Efficiency, Service;" and WHEREAS, on April 11, 1992, Altrusans in the City of Chula Vista and elsewhere around the world will celebrate Altrusa's 75th Anniversary; and WHEREAS, Altrusa International of Chula Vista, founded in 1957, was instrumental in establishing the Ute racy Program in Chula Vista which continues to provide ongoing support for the Chula Vista Uteracy Team and South Bay Community Services' Teen Ute racy Program; and WHEREAS, Altrusa International of Chula Vista also provides support for the bonita Equestrian Therapy for the Handicapped, OnStage Productions, Casa Nuestra, and many other worthwhile organizations and activities; and WHEREAS, it is fitting that the members of this worthwhile organization be recognized for the outstanding services they provide our community and other locations around the world: NOW, THEREFORE, I, TIM NADER, Mayor of the City of Chula Vita, California, do hereby proclaim the week of April 5 through April 11, 1992 as "AL TRUSA INTERNATIONAL WEEK" in the City of Chula Vista, California. altrusa '-Ie -).. COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ITEM NO.: '-/&/ MEETING DATE: 4/7/92 ITEM TITLE: Proclamation Declaring the Week of April 13, 1992 through April 17, 1992 as "NATIONAL BUILDING SAFETY WEEK" in the city of Chula vista SUBMITTED BY: Director of Building and HOUS~~~ REVIEWED BY: city Manage~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes No~) BACKGROUND: The importance of building safety has been traditionally celebrated during the second week of April throughout the country. The city of Chula vista annually recognizes this event through Proclamation identifying the City's support of National Building Safety Week. DISCUSSION: "BUILDING SAFETY IS NO ACCIDENT" In an ongoing effort to insure that Chula vista residents and individuals patronizing business within our City are afforded the highest construction standards available, the Department of Building and Housing is proud to announce National Building Safety Week. The slogan, "Building Safety Is No Accident", has been adopted as the theme to emphasize the important role the Department plays in the development and maintenance of safe buildings in our community. Life-safety regulations are enforced via adoption of the latest Model Codes by the Department of Building and Housing, and by reviewing building plans, issuing permits and inspecting such buildings during the various stages throughout the course of the construction project. JoDee Arnold, Vice-Chair of the Board of Appeals and Advisors, will accept the Proclamation on behalf of the Board and the Department of Building and Housing. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A FISCAL IMPACT: N/A KGl/BWR:yu (A:\WPS1\NATlBlDG.PRC) tf c/- / PROCLAIMING THE WEEK OF APRIL 12 THROUGH APRIL 18,1992 AS "NATIONAL BUILDING SAFETY WEEK" IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA WHEREAS, from the inception of this nation, it has been the responsibility of the states and their local governments to adopt legislation and enforce laws and ordinances whenever necessary to protect their citizens' health, welfare and safety; and WHEREAS, it has been a fundamental part of the democratic principles of this nation to involve all interested and affected parties from both the public and private sectors in the formulation, adoption and, to the fullest extent possible, in the administration of such laws and ordinances which assures the public's health and safety in the buildings in which people live, work and play; and WHEREAS, to assure such safety, the State of California, working together and in conjunction with the counties and cities, enforces a uniform statewide building code which has been designed and is maintained with the assistance of the building industry and the consumers; and WHEREAS, it is through the untiring efforts of state and local building officials and their cooperative relationship with the construction industry that the administration of these health and life-safety regulations is assured: NOW, THEREFORE, I, TIM NADER, Mayor of the City of Chula Vista, California do hereby proclaim the week of April 12 through April 18, 1992 as "NATIONAL BUILDING SAFETY WEEK" and encourage all residents and business leaders to visit with our Department of Building and Housing to better familiarize themselves with the important life-safety services and information provided by these dedicated professionals. bldg J/c/-3 . . . .",.. .'0 '. April 3, 1992 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: The Honorable Mayor and City Council ;';/ b/JI John D. Goss, City Managerz; J City Council Meeting of April 7, 1992 This will transmit the agenda and related materials for the regular City Council meeting of Tuesday, April 7, 1992. Comments regarding the Written Communications are as follows: 5a. This is a letter from William C. Manes, Chairman of tle Governor's Commission on a Southern California Veterans Home, invitin~ the City to submit a proposal regarding establishing a Veterans Home. This Commission was created by AB 514, which was signed last October. Council referred this issue to staff on March 6, 1992, and staff has had some preliminary discussions with Ron McElliott of Income Property Group, who has expressed an interest in submitting a proposal for a Veterans Home to be established in the Lower Sweetwater area. Mr. McElliott would like to make a verbal presentation to the Council regarding this issue, and IT IS THEREFORE RECOMMENDED THAT COUNCIL INVITE MR. McELLIOTT TO VERBALLY SUMMARIZE HIS PROPOSAL AT THE APRIL 7 COUNCIL MEETING. 5b. This is a letter from Jewell Rochmes, 916 Guatay Avenue, concerning the equity of financing 'the Otay Valley Road Improvements by the use of an assessment district. Staff has contacted Ms. Rochmes and informed her that there will be two meetings before the City Council in the next two months, and she would receive notification of them. Also her letter will be Kept on file with the other correspondence for that project and the issues raised in her letter will be discussed at the public hearing for the assessment district. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT MS. ROCHMES' LETTER BE ACKNOWLEDGED AND SHE BE PLACED ON THE NOTIFICATION LIST FOR THE HEARINGS REGARDING THIS ITEM. 5c. This is a letter from Marie Scrivener, 26 Corso di Italia, requesting that the newly appointed Mobilehome Park Rent Review Commission meet to elect officers. On December 18, 1991, the Mobilehome Rent Review Commission met and elected officers; the Chair is Steve Thomas and the Vice-Chair is Carl Grieve. On February 26, 1992 the Commission adopted bylaws, and the Commission is now prepared to hear rental disputes. Staff is contacting Ms. Scrivener to inform her of the status of the Commission and the procedure for bringing rental disputes to the Commission. IT IS THEREFORE RECOMMENDED THAT MS. SCRIVENER'S LETTER BE RECEIVED AND FILED. During the last meeting (September 14, 1991) of the Mobilehome Issues Committee, the Committee reviewed the petition from residents of the Chula Vista Mobilehome Park and voted to continue to allow rental increases based on the Consumer Price Index. . '. 5d. This is a letter from Marguerite Maniscalco, Bonitafest Chairwoman, requesting waiver of requirements for business licenses for the Bonitafest to be held on Saturday, 9/26/92. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE LICENSE REQUIREMENTS AND FEES BE WAIVED, AS IS CONSISTENT WITH PAST PRACTICE OF ~ THE CITY COUNCIL. 5e. This is a letter from Dan Benedict, Pastor, and Charlotte Helms, Chairperson, First United Methodist Church, requesting waiver of fees and deposits related to the processing, development and construction of a church. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THIS REQUEST BE REFERRED TO STAFF FOR REVIEW AND REPORT BACK TO COUNCIL. Sf. This is a request from Bayscene Mobilehome Park residents for assistance in acquisition of the park by the residents. This is addressed in the enclosed informational memo on the status of Bayscene Mobilehome Park. THE WRITTEN COMMUNICATION REQUIRES NO ACTION BY THE COUNCIL OR STAFF BEYOND THE PREVIOUS REFERRAL TO ASSIST THE RESIDENTS TO EXPLORE THE PARK ACQUISITION. 5g. This letter from Judge Larry Stirling of the San Diego Municipal Court, is requesting City Council support for an Automated Traffic Citation Program. A pilot program was targeted for the East County area by ARJIS (the Automated Regional Justice Information System) in order to test the ability of an automated system to streamline the citation issuance and tracking process involving law enforcement and the San Diego Municipal Courts. The pilot program was to be funded by the County through AB 189 funds, but the County is now unable to fulfill its prior commitment. Since Rick Emerson participates on the ARJIS Board of Directors, Police staff will be reviewing this issue further with other affected agencies. ~ IT IS THEREFORE RECOMMENDED THAT JUDGE STIRLING'S LETTER BE ACKNOWLEDGED AND FI LED. 5h. This is a letter from Sheriff Jim Roache, Randy Dibb, and Dianne Jacob requesting that the Council adopt a resolution they submitted that would request the Fourth District Court of Appeal to permit San Diego County to use the approximately $340 million collected under Proposition A (before the 1/2 cent sales tax was ruled unconstitutional) for the opening of the East Mesa Jail and construction of additional Court space. Instead of the resolution submitted with the Written Communication, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE MAYOR BE AUTHORIZED TO SEND A LETTER TO THE FOURTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL INDICATING THE COUNCIL'S POSITION IS THAT IF THE COURT IS UNABLE TO IDENTIFY AN EQUITABLE AND PRACTICAL WAY OF RETURNING THE MONEY COLLECTED, THEN THE COUNCIL WOULD SUPPORT THE USE OF THE FUNDS COLLECTED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF NEW JAILS AND COURTS. 5i. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY FILED BY PEERLESS CONSTRUCTION, RENDELL AND MARGARET WHITTINGTON, AND PHILLIP AND GAYULE NOWAKOWSI BE DENIED. 5j. This is a request from Merlin Harberts, Commander of the Veterans of Foreign Wars Chula Vista Post, to request waiver of a $200 filing fee to install an elevator at the VFW Hall. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THIS FEE BE WAIVED IN ACCORDANCE WITH COUNCIL POLICY FOR WAIVER OF FEES FOR NON PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS. JDG:mab trans --. . . . INFORMATION MEMORANDUM April 3, 1992 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council -~b 1. -;r John D. Goss, City Manager V' ? Chris Salomone, Community Development Director G / . VIA: FROM: SUBJECT: Status of Bayscene Mobilehome Park This memo is a status report on the issue of possible sale of Bayscene Mobilehome Park. . Backl!:round As the City Council is aware, the residents of Bayscene Mobilehome Park received a notice of intent to sell the park from the owner, Richard Hall. This notice is required by state law; it does not convey any right to purchase to the residents. Subsequently, through oral communication at the March 17 City Council meeting and written communication at the March 24 meeting, some residents of Bayscene Mobilehome Park asked the Council to assi~t them with acquisition of the mobilehome park. Staff has been directed to analyze the situation and report back to the City Council. . Actions Staff has communicated on this issue with the following individuals or groups: . John Grinder President, Bayscene Mobilehome Park Residents Association . Jim Lovett Member, Bayscene Mobilehome Park Residents Association . Janet Gilbert Representative of owner, Richard Hall . Vickie Talley Professional Consultant for Mobilehome Park Conversions, contracted to Richard Hall to effect resident acquisition, and part owner of Bayscene Mobilehome Park . Rose Marie Rosinski -- Chair, Bayscene Mobilehome Park Acquisition Committee . Southern California Mobilehome Park Acquisition Financing Committee The following important information has been obtained as a result of those contacts: 1. The owner of Bayscene Mobilehome Park, Richard Hall, has an interest in selling the park to the residents and has employed the consulting team of Vickie Talley and Marilyn Wisnan to effect such a sale. Ms. Wisnan is the past Community Development Director of the City of Escondido, and, as such, she acquired several mobilehome parks for that City. The HDnDrable MaYDr and City CDuncil Re: Status Df Bayscene MDbilehDme Park April 3, 1992 Page 2 ~ 2. The Bayscene residents have fDrmed an AcquisitiDn CDmmittee and elected its Chair, RDse Marie RDsinski. It has been made clear that Ms. RDsinski is the Dfficial spokespersDn and cDntact fDr, the AcquisitiDn CDmmittee. The CDmmittee is circulating a petitiDn amDng the residents regarding their interest in acquiring the park. That petitiDn is !lQt the petitiDn submitted under written cDmmunicatiDn fDr the April 7 City CDuncil meeting. The submitted petitiDn was nDt authDrized by the AcquisitiDn CDmmittee. The CDmmittee has scheduled a meeting fDr the evening Df April 6 at which they will cDnsult with a local real estate attDrney and discuss pDtential City participatiDn with Assistant CDmmunity DevelDpment DirectDr GustafsDn. The AcquisitiDn CDmmittee is scheduling anDther meeting next week with the park cDnversiDn cDnsultants representing the Dwner. Mr. GustafsDn has been invited to. that meeting and will attend. 3. Mr. Hall's representative indicates that the park has nDt been SDld and no. specific Dffers are pending. 4. A variety Df acquisitiDn mechanisms exist which cDuld be pursued. SDme Df thDse mechanisms cDuld possibly be assisted by City issuance Df revenue bDnds. Staff discussiDns are occurring with bDnd underwriters and professiDnals specializing in cDnversiDns. The CDnsensus Df DpiniDn to. date from prDfessiDnals active in the cDnversio.n field is that Bayscene is nDt a likely candidate fDr cDndDminium cDnversiDn due to. the age and physical characteristics Df the park and the incDme levels Df the residents. CDrporatiDn, land trust, Dr cooperative Dwnership appear mDre feasible mechanisms at this point. ~ . Recommendation Staff recDmmends that staff cDntinue to' engage in dialDgue with all appropriate parties and return to' the CDuncil! Agency with analysis and actiDn recDmmendatiDns when appropriate. In light Df the fact that the Agency lacks the financial reSDurces it had when Orange Tree MDbilehDme Park was cDnverted, that the City! Agency hDusing reSDurces are currently pressured with many priDrity needs, and that the expected rate Df equity growth from the Orange Tree MDbilehDme Park cDndDminium cDnversiDn has nDt materialized, staff recDmmends that all parties be advised to. diligently and methodically explDre all mechanisms fDr accDmplishing the Bayscene residents highest need: to. preserve their current hDusing at the mDst affDrdable level. [C,IWP5l\COUNClLIMEMOSIINFO-II.MEM] ~ ,.--.,. STATE OF CALIFORNIA - STATE AND CONSUMER SERVICES AGENCY PETE wn.soN, Governor DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS POST OmCE BOX 942895 SACRAMENTO. CA 94295-0001 RECEIVED @ March 12, 1992 '92 MR 24 P2 :37 Mr. ~~~::fij :~i~~~ Southern California Veterans Home 10411 Garden Grove Blvd., #46 Garden Grove, California 92643 , , .' !i~U' . I' \: l.U.D 19 I i" I'J/'\\\ I ;" 1'"61 .J I _~_~ ~ '_:" ~C,,;~!~u'i[,S CHJ~I-\ \'I~Tjo-'" CA Mayor City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Ave. Chula Vista, CA 92010 Dear Mayor: With two-thirds of California's veterans residing in Southern California, the need for a veterans home in the area is well established. The state may be closer to meeting that need now that Governor Wilson signed Assembly Bill 514 last October. The bill created a 12-member Commission to advise the Governor and the Legislature on establishing a veterans home in a seven county area. The counties include Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, and Ventura. Under its legislative mandate, the Commission will examine and advise the Governor and the Legislature on a number of issues. The issues include: number of sites and possible locations, scope and level of health care, the resident population to be served, cost estimates, financing options and management alternatives. The Commission began work in January and the report of findings and recommendations is to be completed by July I, 1992. In order for the Commission to complete its work well informed of available options, your community is invited to submit any proposal you might consider appropriate for consideration. The Commission has deliberately not defined criteria or format for community presentations. The only constraint to the content and form of presentations is time, where it is requested that presentations not exceed thirty minutes. The Commission must give consideration to the availability of federal surplus property and any property available for no cost, or at less than market value, from public or private sources, and to a competitive site selection process which would compare the relative merits of all available sites. The Commission will be interested in what your community might be able to offer in this regard. cc: q5 Z"':J/d '/ ) 5! d~,9~. ~ W~~\ ffiRE A VETERAN - ffiRE EXPERIENCE 5a.-1 WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS tr '1/7/'7.;2. 11 It is fully recognized that the present economic climate may not be conducive for some communities to put forth a great effort to prepare very detailed proposals. However, the creation of the Commission, and the efforts of its members to determine the best possible sites for a new veterans home does provide a unique opportunity for a progressive community to make its interests and resources known. The Commission will, in fact, be interested in receiving proposals or recommendations presented which are general in nature at this time. Such presentations would give the Commission members some assurance that reasonable efforts can be made on our part to consider the maximum number of areas in southern California before our report is submitted. It should be noted, for the potential interest of your community in this project, that the Commission has not made a final determination covering the full scope of the project. It is expected, however, that a veterans home facility of 400-600 residents would provide for approximately 2()()"300 new jobs in each community where one of the sites would be located. The Commission meets twice each month at various locations in the seven county area. To find the location of the next or following meetings, please contact the San Diego County Veterans Service Office, Mr. Robert D. White, (619) 589-2111, or the Department of Vete~s Affairs Project Director, Mr. Thomas Langley, (916) 653-2158. Should you desire to provide any material in advance of the meeting in your area or if you have any questions, please contact Mr. Langley. Sincerely, .~ WILLIAM C. MANES Chairman cc: Thomas Langley Project Director Robert D. White San Diego County Veterans Service Office HIRE A VETERAN - IDRE EXPERIENCE 5ct,-~ RESOLUTION NO. 16578* RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA URGING THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TO SITE A VETERANS HOME IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby resolve as follows: WHEREAS, the need for a Veterans Home in Southern Cali forni a is well established, with over two-thirds (2/3) of the state's veterans residing in Southern California; and, WHEREAS, the State of California has created the Governor's Commission on the Southern California Veterans Home to advise the Governor and the Legislature on the placement of such a home; and, WHEREAS, it is contemplated that, wherever the Veterans Home is located, it wi 11 provi de shelter and servi ces to 400 to 600 veterans and create 200 to 300 new local jobs; and, WHEREAS, the City Council believes that the social and economic benefits of developing the Veterans Home in Chula Vista would be very significant; and, WHEREAS, Income Property Group has expressed interest in submi tti ng a joi nt proposa 1 wi th the City to the Governor I s Commi ss i on regardi ng a potenti a 1 Veterans Home in the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby finds that a Veterans Home in the City of Chula Vista would be beneficial and urges the State of California to select a site in Chula Vista for said Veterans Home. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council further resolves to provide the state, the Governor's Commission on the Southern California Veterans Home, and all other interested parties with all available information which might assist in the siting decision. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council is interested in further exploring the possibility of locating a Veterans Home in the City and therefore di rects City staff to work with Income Property Group and the Governor's Commission in examining the feasibility (including economic, land use, and environmental issues) of locating a Veterans Home in the City. Presented by as to ~ rh~ Chris Salomone Community Development Director * Corrected to reflect floor amendments Bruce M. Boogaard City Attorney Sa - J- Resolution No. 16578 Page 2 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, California, this 7th day of April, 1992, by the following vote: YES: Counci 1 members: Moore, Ri ndone, Nader NOES: Counci 1 members: Grasser Horton ABSENT: Councilmembers: Malcolm ABSTAIN: Counci 1 members: None Tim Nader, Mayor ATTEST: STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO) ss. CITY OF CHULA VISTA ) I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 16578 was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council held on the 7th day of April, 1992. Executed this 7th day of April, 1992. " . . . . \ ~ RESOLUTION NO. 16578 J,1f'fU.Jc..{ 10 ~&I'+- 1'/"" &mt"JMt~ ..1tA I'))~ fy r - A ,'I 7, 111( . RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY CHULA VISTA URGING THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TO SITE A/VETERANS HOME IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA " The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby resolve as follows: '" WHEREAS, 'the need for a Veterans Home j;il Southern California is well established, with over two-thirds (2/3) of t;he state's veterans residing in Southern Cali forni a; and, ,/ /^ WHEREAS, the State of California ha~'created the Governor's Commission on the Southern California Veterans Home to;advise the Governor and the Legislature on the placement of such a home; and, WHEREAS, it is contemplated at, wherever the Veterans Home is located, it will provide shelter and servic s to 400 to 600 veterans and create 200 to 300 new local jobs; and, WHEREAS, the City Coun 1 believes that the social and economic benefits of developing the Veterans orne in Chula Vista would be very significant; and, WHEREAS, Income Pro erty Group has expressed interest in submitting a joint proposa 1 with the Ci to the Governor's .. ardi n a otenti a 1 terans Hit wer Sweetwate Are d b come Pro er Group and prope y 0 ned by the ~. NOW, THEREF E, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby fi s that a Veterans Home in the City of Chula Vista would be beneficial and rges the State of California to select a site in Chula Vista for said Veterans orne. j BE I,/FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council further resolves to provide the state / the Governor's Commi ssi on on the Southern Cali forni a Veterans Home, and all jother interested parties with all available information which might assist n the siting decision. ~ . J" JA J~/ "\> ;/" tlf'J ~ t, . , . Resolution No. 16578 Page ,2, ",.: '!'" >- C~'1- Go~e~~orls'commission in examining the feasibility (includ6=iC. lanase. and environmental issues) of locating a Veterans Home in ~ai~ aYea. - Presented by as to by ~~ Chris Salomone Community Development Director ~ Bruce M. Boogaar City Attorney ,-, . . .#' .. ~ .. ........ Item 5A RESOLUTION 16578 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA URGING THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TO SITE A VETERANS HOME IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA does hereby resolve as follows: WHEREAS, the need for a Veterans Home in Southern California is well established, with over two-thirds of the state's veterans residing in Southern California; and WHEREAS, the State of California has created the Governor's Commission on the Southern California Veterans Home to advise the Governor and the Legislature on the placement of such a home; and WHEREAS, it is contemplated that, wherever the Veterans Home is located, it will provide shelter and services to 400 to 600 veterans and create 200 to 300 new local jobs; and WHEREAS, the City Council believes that the social and economic benefits of developing the Veterans Home in Chula Vista would be very significant; and WHEREAS, Income Property Group has expressed interest in submitting a joint proposal with the City to the Governor's Commission regarding a potential Veterans Home in the Lower Sweetwater Area on property owned by Income Property Group and property owned by the City. , NOW, THERJ~' BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby'S that a Veterans Home in the City of Chula Vista would be beneficial and urges the State of California to select a site in Chula Vista for said Veterans Home. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council further resolves to provide the state, the Governor's Commission on the Southern California Veterans Home, and all other interested parties with all available information which might assist in the siting decision. Page 1 of 2 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council is interested in further exploring the possibility of locating a Veterans Home in the Lower Sweetwater Area and therefore directs City staff to work with Income Property Group and the Governor's Commission in examining the feasibility (including economic, land use, and environmental issues) of locating a Veterans Home in said area. CL.~ Chris Salomone Community Development Director i Presented by: ruce M. Boogaard City Attorney [C:\ WP51 \COUNCILIRESOSIVETSHOME.RES] Page 2 of 2 .--.:",~ -. '.- W. tIAR 24 P2 :37' ,- '. ~LD WI & .....~ ;.\'''"'1 CITY 01' 1"14';. A ",.., A ..' . ..' ....'... .'-.".,3. .'........l....)').J CITY C'I,;;r.n..",' .-'" /",. - '_L'''''''''''''fE l' '" ~ ~ /luvJJl::..~;:-~ ,'j}[p. 7hM'. / I/J19 ; ~~;-.-- , ~ ;b -k.r~~~ .:tL<-- lMAti YJ, .i'~A~~~ --.-.0 ~/~;u.::i-~ ~;t-k ,. ,~~ ~~A ,L ' J;!~~~~~~r J) ~~~~~~ , ~d/ud{Ue4,~~q~ t:r.k~~,,_f7' ,(/. U (h~~~~b/.L€-' .' O(dM~~-'!~~~ /~Mrd-~~~ t(..:tar j>> k;t ,v~~' ~ ~ tU1a~~~~PLb~ ~.:i-~~/~~~~ /JI""J. ~ .klk :li~~~ ~. &/Ifd- -fi--Aa:! ~.-i~?cY ff~ 'r~ j)~iI~~'((j~ ~a'P/~aV..27;~Jfrrv . . " !I' ~-~ ~ /JJ &rt, ~ pJ; CC: & #'1) WRmEN COMMUNICATI.O.....H! '2)~~J,/ C' . ....~ ~~"'" -.:/;-j /r> '1N!1.2 RECEIVED v- -. .-.... ~f'- ... . ~ . . i i i I ! ! . j i .' !- I . . I 1 ~"'.,.,...,..'<\W. :- '^_:u'~'''~,.~,._~~/~~~~/(:-. ( . . , . . -. ~I"'\. - ~)Jk1rr/~~~ ~, 7I...J. . /. . ~ tiUN~v ~. ~ ""A/~~f~~_'~ I ~~~~~p!UL -:tr ~/ A-vrA ~ u.;u 4ddJ~.td- ~~;t;..~~~~ ~~~aU~~~~~ i ~I- r.O~:ttH~--n-d~ 7n;;~~N-V~_ .~ 511-;< < / Chu1a Vista, CA 91910 Honorable Mayor and Council Members City of Chu1a Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chu1a Vista, CA 91910 <----- - --~.~~~- ]' ,);;1! 'UUJ MAA 20 i992 :w . CITY COUi~CIl OffiCES J CHULA VISTA. CA March 18, 1992 Mobi1ehome Parks Rent Review Commission This is written in the hope that you have arranged for the newly appointed Mobi1ehome Parks Rent Review Commission to meet, or have already, to elect their chairman and other officials prior to the time they will meet for making decisions. This should be done in an expeditious manner so that when the Supreme Court comes down with its decision on the Escondido mobile home park case, the Commission will be ready to meet legally and satisfactorily. Attached is a copy of the petition presented to you on 9/3/91 at a Council meeting and which was signed by 140 residents of the Chula Vista Mobi1ehome Park. This matter is of vital importance to us as well as the thousands of resident/voters who live in the many mobilehome parks in Chula Vista. It will be appreciated very much if you let me know when you will consider this matter so I can notify residents to hear your decision on TV or, better yet, attend the meeting at that time. Thank you for your attention to this matter. /} I ",0~ (J..xt!'U't~ Ma....ener Attachment cc: Councilman Len Moore Councilman David Malcolm Councilman Jerry Rindone Councilwoman Shirley Grasser-Horton ~~~~ l'-<) ~^'\ ~.'.' . -^"^'\ "- ,,\\ \'~. \.Jh}-" .,-....~ WRITTEN CO~~~Ni~TJONS 1:"- 4\1 1i'tS ~._,. ">~ . '-.- "" ,. - - ..,~~ --..- " ,.'" '-'0;:--.--.- AUGUST 15, 1991 PETITION To: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS CITY OF CHULA VISTA, THE CURRENT CITY OF CHULA VISTA ORDINANCE ALLOWING THE I INCREASE OF RENT FOR SPACES IN MOBILE HOME AND TRAILER pARKS BASED UPON THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA CONSUMER PRICE INDEX (CPI) IS UNFAIR AS,THE CPI INCREASE FOR FIXED INCOME PEOPLE ON SOCIAL SECURITY IS BASED ON A FEDERAL CPl. As .THE INCREASE IS ALLOWED, PEOPLE ON FIXED INCOME SOCIAL SECURITY ARE LOSING MONEY ANNUALLY. THE FIGURE OF THE CPI TAKES INTO ACCOUNT MANY THINGS THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE INCREASED COSTS FOR THE OWNERS OF THE PARKS. WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, WOULD REQUEST THAT THE RENTAL INCREASE ALLOWED THE OWNERS BE FIXED AT SIXTY PER CENT, OR SOME FIGURE THAT IS FAIR TO BOTH RESIDENTS AND OWNERS, OF THE CPl. ~ ADDRESS DAIf. 1/.3 Jr / -- . f , ~J~./ Sc. -~ BONITA BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION RECEIVED ,-'; March 23, 1992 Mayor Tim Nader City of Chula vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Dear Tim; The Bonitafest Committee and its sponsoring organization, the Bonita Business & Professional Association, would appreciate reassurance from you and/or the appropriate city departments as to a waiver of requirements for business licenses for the Bonitafest. Primarily, the Bonitafest events involving craft and food booths along Bonita Road will occur on saturday, September 26, 1992, an enforcement of requirement for business licensing of booth people would greatly deter many of our booth people from taking part. A $25 or $50 fee charged to these people would in many cases represent a good portion of their profit. We would appreciate a reply to this letter confirming that the booths will not be required to obtain a license if they are legitimately registered booth participants setting up in designated areas arranged by the sponsoring group. Thank you for your prompt consideration and response. Sincerely, ~ Marguer e Maniscalco Bonitaf st Chairwoman Shields Realty 479-3120 MM:pd CC' 7'.J:1r (y) ::J.J~i'r~ '. \ . POST OFFICE BOX 284, BONITA, CALIFORNIA 92002(619)475-2030 U~ ;f~~4-c-. 54-/ ',. "~~~"~','0",~~''''''Y." """oN...' "f..q;;"i"",.G.",_,,,~~ WRlnEN COMMUNICAT,ION'~ tf~ o/'1~..z. ...._ ~_ _.n.. " ",~~"'o/"".,.,~.u,.-. .,~, .'-'<-">~~-> , glut runlt,J c:It1dhoJl~t Chu'Lch 710 Third AVflIlue . Chule Vlste, Cellfornle 91910 Church (619) 422-2525 RECEIVED '92 ItAR 30 A 8 Daniel T. BenedIct, Senior Pcalor Mary Allee McKlnll8Y, Aaoclale Pastor James Qearhart, Vlaltanon Minister John Iloce, Youth Minister Judy Helton, Auoclaleln Chrlsnan E4ll4/tt1@ii ,c;Hl!'~ ,Il}LS CITY CLtKI\ :, Unl Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth A venue Chula Vista. CA 91910 'frD? @ ~ U w~ 1 .J .._....,~_.~<_n March 23, 1992 Honorable Mayor and City Council: Our church is planning to relocate from our current location at Third and J Streets to a new site in the masterplanned community of Rancho del Rey. As you may know, our congregation has been a part of this community since the city of Chula Vista became an incorporated city. Originally located on Church Street. we moved to our current facility in 1952 to what was then in the path of progress. We have served the community well from this location, but now find our mission leads us to once again find a new site which will best serve the ~ community. Enc1o~ed is a list of community services which take place in our facilities. As a non-p1'9fit organization, our budget contraints could limit such activities if our cost of'relocation is not well managed. In this view, we respectfully request a waiver of fees and deposits related to the processing, development, and construction of our new facility. Your assistance is greatly appreciated. May God bless. a;~ Dan Benedict, Pastor (:k~fl~ Charlotte Helms, Chairperson Board of Trustees DTBllh enc1 _ WRITTENCOMMUNICA TIO~Sr:002- Lc:M~M. I" 0V1..1UY~ 5e-j <--"''''~''''--''-''''~''-~'''''''''''''''''''''"~'''";'''''''''''''~''-'''-.7 _. """",,"'_ . ~ ../1 ~. .-" .~,.. ~. ",. - ~ "'- .. J':_. ".." Community Services Which Utilize Our Facilities Alzheimers Day Care Program: A Morning Out Club which has 10-15 members. Daughters and Sons United: YMCA support groups for children and youth who have been sexually abused. Interfaith Shelter Network: an ecumenical project that offers housing in churches on a rotation basis for homeless families to enable them to find jobs and permanent shelter. Parents Day Out on Wednesday mornings: child care from 9:00 am-1:00 pm. . Scouting Programs: Boy Scout, Girl Scout, Brownies and Cub Scout troops meet here as well as leadership training programs, Roundtables, Order of the Arrow and other organizational meetings. SHARE provides food boxes for a nominal fee to families and individuals who do some form of community work. Sign-up and distribution take place in our facilities. Calico Twirlers Square Dance Club Chuta Vista Quilters Guild Gateway to Glory Church New Hope Apostolic Church Filipino Seniors (Four different groups) Spiritual Journey 12 step group Singles Support Group American Youth Soccer Organization Centro De Fe Missionary Church Se - c2. ._~.,,~" ."..~~,._.,..,.,.,.,...,.>~."..._,-,............-.".......', - . - - - - -- .. ---.- ---- ". -- =- 25 March 1992 To: City of O1ula Vista MaYOR, Members of City CotmCiI, & Housing Coordinator Fran: '!he Bayscene fobbilehane Park Residents and Park Acquisition carmittee Members We, the undersi']Iled Bayscene fobbilehane Park Residents and Park Acquisition carmittee Members of Bayscene r:k:lbilehane Park, do hereby express our desire and intention to take all possible action to achieve the acquisition of Bayscene fobbilehane Park concerning which the owner, Richard Hall, has sent us a "Notice of Intention to Sell". We hereby petition the O1ula Vista Mayor (Tim Nader) and Housing Developnent Coordinator (David Gustafson) - and the Members of the 01ula Vista Council -- to assist the residents in the accanplishment and implarentation of this acquisition project. We feel strongly that . this acquisition will benefit both the City of 01ula Vista -- and the residents -- by eliminating the many problems 'OCM existing within the park, i.e., exhorbitant rent increases (yearly and upon sale), oonstant harassment of the residents by the In-Park Managers, sewer problems, etc., etc. '1hese past problan areas have taken up much time of the O1ula Vista Mayor and Members of the City CotmCiI & Housing Coordinator. A meeting of the Residents was held Wednesday (3/25/92) and a Ba.~ fobbilehane Park Acquisition 10 Project carmittee was formed by volunteers who signed up.( ,.,'S + ., f c.h1w.I HU. II 'fflIeJa ea.. · RESIDENl' I S SI~TURE l'lIOOE # -e.. R, ('n" .. w w cc.' "._""..-'''''~._"..._. ~.. ""-"""''',",,:.''.'"'~'''''~''''''''''''''~ ""-'" - ~ItY.s c E. Nf: AClQ VI s I lIt) N :3/J.rlf~ MoB Il-E IfoM t: 'PA'R I<... Co f'It1Il1./ rr ~ E. I, J ~. Rose Marie Rosinski I.S. Gephart Marsha Cushinq Gloria Aquilar Jerry Milar Victor Dimanuqa Mike Wells Adam Ziel ~ J~ 33 115 24 85 50 40 Lynn Brown Oscar Elias Warren Buckles James Limbert Chuck Stevens Cezar Lopez Hennrietta Whitaker James Lovett Jack Grinder 86 71 56 20 51 121 121 94 69 75 1 - <!.. .5 f'-J.. ~~e ~uuiripa1 GIourt UWRENCE W. STIRLING JUG.. SAN DIEGO JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY COURTHOUSE 220 W. BROADWAY SAN DIEGO. CA 82101 RECEiVED March 24, 1992 ._.__ '92 lIAR 30 A 8 :33 r::.' . .-)' i~ Ii' r r, \\7 R . r:...\ ~! ,,~, blV",' 15mJ liu -~, ClTT'OF"l. - A fA I, U I [ fflT~fl fi: ' '.J (C;::;CE I! IlJl MAR 2 ,~ J' ., v. ; < "" L___.~:._. ern COj;'.~r;_ 8fL~ES cr:~:~:. \'S"..:. (,1:; Mayor Timothy Nader City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 ~I ~ Dear MayO~ I was just informed that the ARJIS staff (Mrs. Nancy Angus, 490-0717) was required to suspend further development of the automated traffic-citation process because funding has been deleted by the County (please see enclosed request for proposal). In the past, I believe that you, your management, and your law enforcement agency supported the evaluation of the automated-citation process because of the very real probability that it would save significant resources and substantially improve the prosecution, trial, enforcement and revenue picture of traffic matters. Indeed, such an application, combined with lap-top technology and the necessary software, networks, and operational support, could fundamentally improve the police-prosecution-defense-court process with the opportunity to save millions. Given the significant potential savings and the significant operational improvement possibilities, the cessation of the ARJIS effort appears to be, for the time being, a significant lost opportunity in the administration of justice. 6' I therefore respectfully request that youriOuncil, management, and law enforcement agency consider whether there is any means by which the ARJIS effort could be kept on schedule. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. LS:srt WRITTEN COMMUNICAT~. ONS Enclosures: r 'I ;;/9.;2 1. Portable Computer Specifications Task Group - SDDPC - dated Wednesday, January 29, 199 2. D R AFT - Request For Proposal For Automated Citation Issuance System ~;~~~~ ~-/ " , . , . " PORTABLE COMPUTER SPECIFICATIONS TASK GROUP SDDPC Wednesday, January 29, 1992 MEMBERS PRESENT: Nancy Angus, ARJIS Administrator Joonho Kim, ARJIS Analyst Caroline Rodley, EC Muni Court, Traffic Sgt. Jim Lee', SDPD Pam Scanlon, SDPD Deputy Mike Bowles, SDSD Sgt. Gary Haigh, SDSD Sgt. Keith Sears, LMPD 'MEMBERS ABSENT: David Taylor, SDDPC Hal White, Sr. Analyst, Muni Court, EDP Lt. Bill McClurg, ECPD GUESTS: Deputy Franco Del Rosario, SDSD Lemon Grove Dan Portuguez, MTDB The meeting was called to order at 1:45 p.m. by Nancy Angus. Nancy began the meeting by distributing a summarized list of issues (see Attachment #1) and reviewing the issues from last months meeting held on December 18. Issues addressed and/or clarified at this meetinq: o The first issue referred to whether the Court' s decided against retaining hard copies of citations. Caroline Rodley stated that she spoke with Fred Lear and he indicated that the Court Administrators are prepared to take this issue to the Judges as soon as the RFP is completed. o The next issue was the by-passing of DIS. because DIS is working on their system, addressed in the future. Joonho stated that this issue will be o Regarding the costs for the DIS pass-through, Nancy stated that there are no costs unless DIS has to process the information. The understanding is that the set-up will be similar to the subpoena system. o Traffic warning entry is still an iSS1)e. research.) ~ (Pam;, Scanlon to ..' 1 {j-J , Joe explained that since most vendors will not have references for the service that is being requested and the RFP is so detailed, the vendors will have to answer specific questions. It was decided that a voluntary bidder's conference be held two weeks after the RFP's are sent out. Joe recommended the following plan: *************************************************** *************************************************** ADVERTISE/SEND OUT RFP 2 weeks BIDDER'S CONFERENCE (voluntary) 45 days PROPOSALS DUE 45 days (evaluation and demo's) SELECTION APPROVAL BY ARJIS MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS CONTRACT AWARD *************************************************** *************************************************** There was general agreement with Joe's suggestions. The RFP will be updated to reflect these additions. Issues/Items for the next meetinq: o Nancy will draft a letter to send to Fred Lear regarding the uniformity of court times and dates. NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING - FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 1992, 1:30 P.M. TO 3:30 P.M., SDDPC, BOARD ROOM. THIS MEETING WILL BE TO GET THE PORTABLE COMPUTER CGMMITTEE TO BUY OFF THE PROPOSED RFP SO IT CAN BE PRESENTED TO THE'lfMANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ON MARCH 4, 1992. 3 <.~-y Attachment III ISSUES - PORTABLE COMPUTER SPECIFICATIONS TASK GROUP ISSUES ADDRESSED AND CLARIFIED: o Clarify - Would Table Update Coordination be an ARJIS or agency specification responsibility. o Submit - Proposed vendor information from agencies. o Clarify - Whether the Judges are included when referring to the Court's decision not to retain hard copies of citations. (Marshal's Office.) o Clarify - By-passing DIS from file to ARJIS. o Clarify -.Costs for the DIS pass-through. o Clarify - Traffic warning entry. (Pam Scanlon.) o Clarify - Citation routing for Sheriff's Stations. Bowles.} (Mike o Submit - Draft of RFP specifications. (Joonho Kim; subject to Joe Giammona's availability to participate.) o Clarify - Court's computer description. (Caroline Rodley.) o Clarify - RFP legality and appropriate order of contents.-._. (Expert.) o Submit - Completed citation routing list for discussion. (Joonho Kim.) o Submit - Updated RFP Introduction for review. o Submit - Information publications for representative.} on'. proposed vendors and/or lists of advertizements. (Each agency o Submi t Inforamtion on and be establish evaluation criteria representative.) prepared to discuss and list. (Each agency o Submit - Addition of interfacing with ARJIS to the Court's Computer description. (Joonho Kim.) o Clarify - Statement "no hard copy citation will be retained by the court." Information pegarding this restructuring (Court Finance Reorganization Act). {Bill McClurg.} 1 50-5 1/28/92 Attachment 112 Potential Vedor List to Issue RFP Enforcement Technology Hal Kluqe 3002 Dow Avenue, Suite 502 Tustin, CA 92680 Tel: (714) 832-3883 Radix Corporation Steve Horrocks 4855 Wiley Post Way Salt Lake City, UT 84116 Tel: (800) 367-9256 R's Data Services Jack D. Spencer 9l55-B Alabama Ave Chatsworth, CA 91311 Tel: (818) 700-7866 Fax: (818) 700-6013 MICROSLATE 9625 Iqnace.Street Brossard (Montreal), QC, Canada J4Y 2P3 Tel: (514) 444-3680 Fax: (514) 444-3683 Group Three Electronics Ernie Machado 3 Corporate Park Drive Irvine, CA 92714 Tel: (714) 863-1382 Fax: (714) 863-0632 San Dieqo: (619) 292-0525 AMREL Technoloqy Inc. 9525 E. Baldwin Place El Monte, CA 91731 Tel: (818) 575-5110 Fax: (818) 575-0801 Data Entry Systems 701 Pratt Avenue, Suite 101 Huntsville, AL 35804 Tel: (205) 539-2483 Fax: (205) 539-2486 5j-~ 620 Haggard, Suite 600 A&B PIano, TX 75074 Tel: (214) 424-9000 P.O. Box 2207 Stamford, CT 06913-0423 Tel: (203) 357-9901 Fax: (203) 853-1226 I .- -, J,.. ~ ~ Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc. Computer Systems Division 9740 Irvine Blvd. Irvine, CA 92718 Tel: (714) 583-3000 Compaq Computer Corporation P.O. Box 692000 Houston, TX 77269-2000 Tel: (713) 370-0670 Sharp Electronics Corporation Sharp Plaza Mahwah, N3 07430 Tel: (201) 529-8200 ,< ,: ~ -1':. t ; ~-? ~ CCIf/"v'u , ECHNOLOGY APPLICATION --- /7;.: :. .-.~ . r' ..r~~f:A../(:;'_ d .J I'tP ;-c :J S LAPTOPS IN THE FIELD After four years. what has one police department learned? Bv Alec Gaane r.;iorgan Hil~ Calif. Police Department In August of 1989. the Morgan Hill. I e:.lif. Police Depanment re- poned on the successful installa- tion and live operation of what was then one of the first laptop computer-based. mobile RF digi~1 communications systems to be uuhzed bv law enforeement. The system c~nvens a standard laptop or PC computer into a mobile workstation that outperforms traditional mobile di2ital terminals. while 5tilJ functioning as"'a stand-alone computer for tield offieers. During the past four years. we have learned a lot from our experience regarding the funCtionality and praCticality of this new approach to field computing. This experience. combined with the popularity of this alternative to the traditional MDT (Mobile Data Terminal). has prompted us to share some of our experiences with others who may be considering a similar quest for field computing. SOME HISTORY The Morgan Hill Police Department A patrol unn eqUipped wilh. Spccuhzcd Mobile Computer. 1\(. Lacument: ~i.,j )..11 PI) be~an luoL:.ml! al field com n~ in 1985. """hen our depanmen."!'i fiTSt ! automated criminal activity trackin~ ~y~tem was implemented. OUT depart. ment fint invtsti!!ated Ih~ use of standard MDT.. We learned that this appru4lch wa~ vel')' expensh'e. but was also limited in capahililY. The .\'ailability of ponable compulers led us 10 look at laptops as a solution. In 1987. we purchased severallaplOps for field use. The next step was to establish a communications network thai would permit these laptops to communiCate with our rapidly grov.'ing.. in-house computer system. Cellular telephone was explored and proved to be 100 slow. 100 expensive. and not private enough to meet the securit)' require- ments of CLETS (California Law Enforcement Telecommunications Net- workl. A dedicated radio frequency was then established striCtly for data transmission-this proved to be economical. fast and secure. The use of vinualterminal emulation to make these laptops function like an)' other system terminal was anempted. but the r~sults were very disappointing. In 1988. we be2an a total revisionofour approach and decided that the only way to make this an efficient system was to shift as much of the "work" as possible to the computer in the vehicle. in order to enhance the user interface and minimize the di2ital radio traffic. This is when we be;an to work with a produCt called RAOCOM II. This new approach pro"ed to be fast. flexible and reliable. HARDWARE SELEC liON The laptops purchased were pre-assembled to a popular confil!ura- tion. That configuration was an 80:!86 processor. I megab)~e of RAM. a 1.44 megabyte 3.5 inch floppy disk. a 20 megabyte hard disk. and a l!as plasma display screen. Liquid Crystal Displays (LCDs) were also available. but were /101 chosen because they are difficult 10 812d from an angle. and are often very" temperature sensitive. . . ", . We encountered some challenges in our search for the right hardware. ' Problem #l-The hard disk. We liked the idea of having a hard disk because we thought that as the number C ommunu:.allons ~9 ~-~ : .. . .. "'OJnou~ code~ typically u~ed for many :>.Iate and NCIC 1c"c1lOqulne!\ has . M~nificantly encouraged use of the ~\~!\Iem. A~ a J;cncral rute. if the n;emOriZ3110n 01 specific code~ or ~ynta),. IS needed 10 perform a task. the t;!\L. IS les~ likely to [\e performed. -Er'l!onomics. This 1:0.. 4i big topic in the computer industry. and there is no doubt that it is even more imponant in OJ "ehicle. Remember that the patrol car i~ someone' s office far ei~ht hours. and II 1~ tmpanant 10 make thai office comfonable as well 3S funttionaL Having a computer which permits the screen to be mounted where it is the most \'isible. the keyhoard mounted where it is the most comfonable. and toe computer where it is "out of the \\. a\' .. s'eems to address the issues of fu~c~ionality as well as. officer saiety. while helping to reduce Ihe over.1I COSI of Ihe un;l. OPTIONS There is no doubt that the power. . . flexibili.y and affordabili.y. of an "intelhl!ent" laptop or mobile com. puter-based RF dil!ital communaC4il1on~ nstem war..tnts !IOOrne serious consid- e-r.:uion. Don't be M:ared off by any of the ne~ative thint:s discussed com..~rn- in~ the use of standard laptop-style computers. Laptop computers were desi~ned wilh specific environments in mind. and use in an emer~enc)' vehicle .....as prubably nOI one of them. This doesn't nlean that they won't work: it simply mcans that there may be somc inslallation and usage issues thai must be considered. The field compuler !'ystem has worked very well for our dcpanment. and we believe it is clearly the Irend for the furore of law enforcement. and all public safe.y field computin!!, = About the Author Alec Ga~ne is a police officer, and systems information manager. with the Morgan Hill, Calif. Police Depanmenl. Interested . In a product or . serVIce in this magazine? Fill out the card on page 67 to receive information. GomlJllJm.~CltlOns The CTI Advantage For Changing Tim~s and Changing Customer N~eds ...". . .... -,~ . -' . '.J~1::::: ','!"I"NEWS.' ,,*'* .~.~.;-. - .:-:;-;:!: , ~.., ';:~':,'t .. -' . !,;",:Sil:.... .\{~*;!~...lf~IL-.....~ ft~ '~..":* ..... . ...,~ ~~~. ,.~ . ";' . .' . . . .~. .l~~ .... . . . uJNEW zF!r9du.cts -,to~be~ntroduced by:CTIP.:: . ..;.when:lF,ebruary'j8,'19,~O ~~her~i~IMQ~as~a~_~_"~. <<,;;. ...--.-.-......... .' .... .8Booth746 ': . . tWatch formoredetails:tobe released at a Jater.date. .. ( l[[jj CTI P. o. BOX 780 - CORINTH, MISSISSIPPI 38834 - (601) 287-8081 Inc. . FAX 601-287-9427 - SALES 800-752-3646 43-1'''--'-'-- .- ... -... - - .....--....... .i"i- 2.1 Evaluation Criteria The following are the criteria which will be used by the Portable Computer Citation Issuance System (PCCIS) proposal evaluation committe in its decision regarding selection of a vendor for the softwarejhardware. A consensus evaluation for each of the following areas will be completed by members of the commitee, comprised of staff from involved agecies. A. Hardware (30 Points): Evaluation based on the responses to hardware and technical information. B. Performance Capabilities (30 Points): Including but not limited to the following: 1. Transaction volumes, reponse times., data storage requirements, expansion, backup, and update requiremets and capabilities. 2. Interface capabilities and requirements. 3. User and technical documentation. 4. Ease of use by San Diego County Law Enforcement personnel. 5. Type and structure of data base. 6. System security. C. Understanding of Project (15 Points): The prospective vendor's grasp of San Diego County Law Enforcement methodologies involved, soundness of approach for implementation of the system and time schedules for mOdifications/installation of the software will evaluated. D. Traning Package (10 Points): After sales support, user help, user friendliness, documentation, licensing, staffing, training, telephone and on;line help. E. Type of software (10 Points): Development software capabilities and cost. (1) user friendliness and flexibility to facilitate the court data processing department; (2) system enhancements and upgrade capabilities, optional system applications, ease of use, etc.; (3) standardization of development software and standardization between proposed system and systems installed elsewhere. F. Experience (10 Points): Related to successful implementation of Portable Computer Citation Issuance System elsewhere. Vendor's experience in providing, installing, mOdifying and maintaining :amilar sys-t.ems. 1;-" G. Functions (5 Points): Additional features and functions offered beyond the specified requirements. H. Maintenance (5 Points): Ability to provide technical support via telephone or in person. I. Warranties (5 Points): Software/Hardware installations, ~.-/O ,.,~.." ~ ".X"'....,..>,h ~W.'" .-..~.....ll'.-... DRAFT REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR AUTOMATED CITATION ISSUANCE SYSTEM Prepared by Automated Regional Justice Information System AND San Diego Data Processing Corporation 5975 Santa Fe Street San Diego, California 92109 ~i';' . 5g -/ I ~~ '.'~ "" ,>.'" ~ ", ~ . .. ... TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 SYSTEM OVERVIEW. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1 1.1 PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL . . . . . . . . . .. 1 1.2 1.3 OBJECTIVES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PARTICIPANTS .................. . . . . . . . 2 3 1.3.1 SAN DIEGO DATA PROCESSING CORPORATION MUNICIPAL COURTS/COUNTY .OF SAN DIEGO. . . . . . . 3 3 1.3.2 ; 2.0 EVALUATION CONSIDERATIONS. . . . . . . . . . 2.1 EVALUATION CRITERIA ........... . . . . . . . . 4 . .. .... 4 7 7 7 3.0 INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS 3.1. CONTACTS....... 3.1.1 QUALIFICATION - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1.2 ADDENDA TO THIS REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS . . . . . 7 3.1.3 PROPOSAL PACKAGING ... . . . . . . DULY AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE ... . . . .. .... 7 3.1.4 8 3.1.5 AUTHORIZED NEGOTIATOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .8 3.1.6 RESPONDENT RESPONSIBILITY FOR PROPOSAL COSTS. 8 3.1.7 CONFIDENTIALITY AND OWNERSHIP OF PROPOSALS .. 8 3.1.8 PROPOSAL ACCEPTANCE - REJECTION 3.2 SCHEDULE FOR RFP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 . . . . . . . . . . 8 9 3.3 .. PRODUCT DESCRIPTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3.1 PRODUCT DESCRIPTION AND FUNCTIONALITY 9 3.3.2 SOFTWARE DESCRIPTION AND AVAILABILITY . . . . .. 9 3.3.3 HARDWARE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9 5J - /cl . ~ 3.3.4 3.3.5 3.3.6 3.3.7 3.3.9 3.4 3.4.1 TRAINING SUPPLIES .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 10 10 VENDOR DESCRIPTION AND INFORMATION. . . . . .. 11 CONTRACT CONSIDERATIONS . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 12 3.4.2 . 3.4.3 3.4.4 3.4.5 3.4.6 3.4.7 3.4.~ 3.4.9 3.4.10 3.4.11 3.4.12 3.4.13 3.4.14 3.4.15 3.4.16 3.4.17 3.4.18 3.4.19 3.4.20 3.4.21 - .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. SYSTEM. COSTS .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... 10 REFERENCES .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... 10 SCOPE .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... 12 CHANGE ORDER ...............f!............ .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. LICENSES, PERMITS AND CERTIFICATES .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 12 12 INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 12 ASSIGNMENT AND SUBCONTRACTING . . . . . . . . .. 13 RIGHT OF SDDPC TO TERMINATE CONTRACT ..... 13 CLAIMS FOR LABOR AND MATERIALS . . . . . . . . .. 14 PROTECTION OF PROPERTY AND PUBLIC LIABILITY 15 LAWS AND ORDINANCES. . . . . . . PATENTS .............................. HINDRANCES AND DELAYS. . EXTENSIONS OF TIME . . . . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. SETTLEMENT OJ?;}fLAIMS ;' . . . . . . INSURANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CONFIDENTIAL MATTERS. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. e. .. .. .. .. WARRANTIES . . . . . . . . . . INDEMNIFICATION . . . .... . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. CONTRACT VENUE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . EQUAL OPPORTUNITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MINORITY AND WOMEN BUSINESS PROGRAM. . . . . . . . '0' . . . . . ENTERPRISE .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE ................. sg '/3 15 15 15 16 16 16 20 20 20 21 21 22 23 - 4.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION FOR THE AUTOMATED CITATION ISSUANCE SYSTEM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 24 4.1 BACKGROUND...................................................... 24 4.2 CURRENT PROCEDURES/SYSTEMS ............... 25 4.3 DATA AND FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS ........... 28 5.0 FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS RESPONSE .... . . . . . . . . . . .. 43 rc.o..:,": r. ~-/r . 1.0 SYSTEM OVERVIEW 1.1 PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL The purpose of this Request for Proposal (hereafter called the RFP) is to obtain a vendor to develop and implement an automated citation issuance system, to include electronic portable computers with printers, for the issuance of traffic and other minor offenses citations in the field. This system or systems may ultimately be used by some or all of the Automated Regional Justice Information System (hereafter called ARJIS) police agencies in the County of San Diego as well as other local law enforcement agencies in the County ... (See App<m"hr A for agency statistics) 'I:he system will first be tested in the El Cajon Judicial District by the EI Cajon Police Department, La Mesa Police Department and the San Diego Sheriff's Department working together with the El Cajon Municipal Court. The ARnS Adminh.trator has agreed to coordinate the project and serve as contact person for vendors. After testing the new system in this limited manner in one of the four Judicial Districts in the county, recommendations may be made to law enforcement agencies and courts throughout the remainder of the County. It is anticipated that the system will be tested for one year. Funds have been approved for the required equipment and services for the testing phase. It has been agreed that all equipment purchased will be reallocated to ARnS law enforcement agencies after completion of the pilot program in East county. Responses to this RFP will be evaluated based on the total bid, and the award, if made, may be to a single vendor or to multiple vendors. It is anticipated that several different devices could be tested at once by different police agencies but that all must be compatible with the Court's and ARJIS comP4ier system. . . .. ARJIS AGENCIES: Carlsbad P.D., Chuls Vista P.D., Coronado P.D., EI Cajon P.D., Escondido P.D.,La Mesa P.D., National CityP.D., OceansideP.D., San DiegoP.D., San Diego Sheriff's Dept. . 1 --% ~)-> - . 1. 2 OBJECTIVES 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. The automated citation issuance system must accomplish the following: 1. Permit police agency patrol officers to automatically issue a notice to appear form in the field using a portable device (hereafter called an ECD, electronic citation device) with a printer. Allow the ECD to read, interpret and proceas the data on the magnetic stripe driver's licenses issued by the California Department of Motor Vehicles and incorporate that information on the printed citation. Allow the officer to produce a printed hard-copy citation in the field. The citation must conform"to the format of the California Judicial Council's approved "Traffic Notice to Appear". Allow for the printing of duplicate copies in cases where the driver has no license and a thumbprint is required for police records. Allow the ECD to be downloaded to the issuing agency's PCs for report processing and to the court system for court processing. Allow for the transfer of specific fields on the citation or the entire citation to desired destinations so that some information ( officer's notes or citations processed through the District Attorney's Office, for example) would not be uploaded to the Court's system. Speed the process of filing a citation with the court, eHm;nAte duplicate data entry and thereby shorten the time between issuance of the citation and receipt of the courtesy notice by the violator. 2. 3,. . Allow most officers to reduce the amount of time they require to write a citation (after trA;n;ng and three months experience in using the systemhby using various tables and user-friendly prompting devices:' . Allow for access to stolen vehicle or other scofflaw data bases which could be downloaded to the ECDs on a regular basis. 2 -fJ -/~ 1.3 PARTICIPANTS 1.3.1 SAN DIEGO DATA PROCESSING CORPORATION (SDDPC) San Diego Data Processing Corporation is a California non-profit public benefit corporation estabUshed June 15, 1979, by the City of San Diego, to provide data processing services to the City and other Governmental organizations. SDDPC is qualified under section 501 (c) (3) of the federal income tax code and is considered a wholly-owned instrumentality of a political subdivision of a state. SDDPC is operated by an independent Board of Directors appointed by the City of San Diego acting through its City Council. ; 1.3.2 MUNICIPAL COURTS/COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO The County of San Diego is a political subdivision of the State of California and is located in the far southwest portion of the state. It ranks tenth in land area and second in population among the 58 counties in California. A five-member Board of Supervisors represents the people of San Diego. The Board performs both legislative and executive functions for County government. The County of San Diego is one of 12 Charter counties. The Charter allows the Board of Supervisors to establish an administrative structure which is responsive to local needs. In California, San Diego county is the delivery system for Federal, State and local programs. The County provides a wide range of services to its residents such as courts, probation, jails, health and welfare services and basic local services such as roads, parks, libraries and law enforcement. The Municipal courts of San Diego County provide an accessible forum for the determination of the guilt or innocence of persons charged with the cOmmission of public offenses consistent with due process of law and for the adjudication of non-crlmlnAllegal disputes. Municipal courts have original jurisdiction over all criminAl misdemeanors, infractions and traffic offenses as well as civil cases involving less than $25,000 and small "IAlm.. cases. Municipal court judges also provide over preliminAry' hearings in felony cases: In the County of San Diego there are four separate Municipal court jurisdictions. They are in order of greatest size, the San Diego Municipal court, North County Municipal court, E1 Cajon Municipal court and the South Bay Municipal Court. PARTICIPANTS, HEREAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE "PARTIES". 3 ~-/? 2.0 EVALUATION CONSIDERATIONS 2 .1 EVALUATION CRITERIA The "Parties" , after evaluating the quality, functionality, adaptability . costs, and suitability of the proposed system, will choose the system that best satisfies their needs. All propoaals will be subject to the same evaluation criteria with the following considerations: 1) Adherence of the proposed System to the specifications. All exceptions must be noted and documented or it will be assumed that the System will meet all specifications as written in this document. . 2) The quality of the vendor's performance on previous contracts ; and services. 3) The financial stability of the vendor. 4) The capability of the proposed System to handle future growth and the ease of System expansion. 5) The vendor's schedule of enhancements and procedures for continuous improvement and upgrading of the software product. 6) Reliability and maintenance of the proposed System. n The training program proposed by the vendor. 8) Documentation provided. 9) The Parties request access to source codes, either directly or VIA escrow agreement. rfi 4 ~-/~ The following criteria will be used by the Portable Computer Citation Issuance System (PCCIS) proposal evalustion committee in its decision regarding selection of a vendor for the software/hardware. A consensus evalustion for each of the following areas will be completed by members of the committee, compriaed of staff from involved agencies. A. Hardware: Evalustion based on the responses to hardware and technical information. B. Performance Capabilities: Including but not limited to the following: : Transaction volumes, response times, requirements, expansion, backup, requirements and capabilities. 2. Interface capabilities and requirements. data storage and update 1. 3. User and technical documentation. 4. Ease of use by San Diego County Law Enforcement personnel. 5. Type and structure of data base. 6. System security. C. Understanding of Project: The prospective vendor's grasp of San Diego County Law Enforcement and San Diego County Courts methodologies involved, soundness of approach for implementation of the system and time schedules for modifications/installation of the software will evaluated. D. Training Package: After sales support, user help, user friendliness, documentation, licensing, staffing, training, telephone and on-line help. r;: . E. Type of software:r'Developlllent software capabilities and cost. (1) user friendliness and flexibility to facilitate the court data processing department; (2) system enhancements and upgrade capabilities, optional system applications, ease of use, etc.; (3) standardization of development software and standardization between proposed system and systems installed elsewhere. F. Experience: Related to successful implementation of Portable Computer Citation Issuance System elsewhere. Vendor's experience in providing, installing, modifying and maintAining similar systems. 5 .,..- I' ./~ - G. Functions: Additional features and functions offered beyond the specified requirements. . H. Maintenance: Ability to provide technical support via telephone or in person. I. Warranties: Shall begin after the installation and acceptance of the Software/Hardware, labor, etc., and remain in effect for one year thereafter. J. Overall Cost of Project: In providing the software/hardware, total initial cost to include delivery, installation, software, training, data conversion, and other miscellaneous costs. Proposals will be evaluated for adequacy, realism, and reasonableness. . K. Agreement to Terms and Conditions: To include Standard Terms and Conditions, Instructions to Proposers, General and Special Terms and Conditions and Technical Specifications. L. Delivery Time: Evaluation based on responses to delivery requirements. r' .. ~. "r", 6 ~ -;2P 3.0 INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS 3.1 CONTACTS A Bidders Conference will be held two weeks after the date of issuance of the RFP. Questions and/or comments regarding this Request For Proposal will be addressed at the Bidders Conference. Attendance of the Bidders Conference is voluntary. Send all correspondence to: 3.1.1 .. Joonho Kim San Diego Data Processing Corporation 5975 Santa Fe Street San Diego, California 92109 QUALIFICATION Any qualified company, firm, or corporation that is, or can be licensed to conduct business in the State of California is qualified to submit a proposal. 3.1.2 ADDENDA TO THIS REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS If it becomes necessary to revise any part of this RFP, an addendum will be provided to all firma that have received this RFP. Respondents should contact SDDPC if they find inconsistencies or ambiguities. Any clarification becomes an addendum. 3.1.3 PROPOSAL PACKAGING Each Respondent's proposal must be sealed to provide confidentiaUty of the information, thereby insuring that when proposals are opened, 45 days after the Bidders Conference, your proposal has remained intact. Respondent must submit 20 copies of the proposal, including all supporting documents. SDDPC will not ac~pt any responsibility for opening unmarked or mis-marked pro~osa1s. Proposals may be sealed in multiple packages as long as each package is clearly marked with the number of packages being submitted, and your company name and proposal label is clearlrvisible on each package. 7 ~-,2J 3.1.4 DULY AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE The proposal must contain the signature of a duly authorized officer of the Respondent's company empowered with the right to bind the Respondent. 3.1.5 AUTHORIZED NEGOTIATOR The Respondent must designate an authorized negotiator. This designated person shall be empowered to make binding commitments for the Respondent firm and its subcontractors, if any. 3.1.6 RESPONDENT RESPONSIBILITY FOR PROPOSAL COSTS ~ The Respondent shall be fully.. responsible for all proposal development and submission costs. The "Parties" assume no contractual or financial obligation as a rasult of the issuance of this RFP, the preparation and submission of a proposal by a Respondent, the evaluation of an accepted proposal, or the selection of finalists. 3.1.7 CONFIDENTIALITY AND OWNERSHIP OF PROPOSALS All proposals and associsted materials become the property of the "Parties". The content of all sealed proposals and associsted materials will be held confidential until an award of contract is made, to the full extent permitted public agencies under California law. Any items regarded by the Respondent to be trade secrets should be clearly indicated. 3.1.8 PROPOSAL ACCEPTANCE - REJECTION The "Parties" reserve the right to reject any or all proposals, to. accept or reject any or all items in the proposal, to waive any informality in the proposals received, and to award the contract in whole or in part ~ it is deemed to be in their best interest. The "Parties" rese~,e the right to negotiate with any Respondent after proposals are opened, if such action is deemed to be in their best interest. 3.2 SCHEDULE FOR RFP The deadline for submission of the RFP is 45 days after the Bidders Conference. The evaluation of responses, demonstration of products, and the selection of a vendor is targeted for completion 90 days after submission of the RFP. Contract award is targeted for 45 days after the selection of a vendor. Installation is targeted for 90 days after the contract award. These target dates are subject to revision.. 8 ~ -~.1 3.3 PRODUCT DESCRIPTION 3.3.1 PRODUCT DESCRIPTION AND FUNCTIONALITY The proposal should include a detailed product description and explanations of the available functions. It should clearly state which functions are mandatory for successful operation of the System and which functions are optional. The vendor must clearly state whether or not the specifications can be met using the codes and format of Section 5.0. For each specification that cannot be met, the proposal must include an explanation why it cannot or should not be met. The exception must be sufficiently detailed to allow full evaluation of the exception. - 3.3.2 SOFTWARE DESCRIPTION AND AVAILABILITY The vendor should provide a description of the System's design, progrsomming language(s), file access methods, hardware on which it will execute, and how long the version of the proposed System has been fully operational at other clients' sites. The vendor should describe the provisions for access to the program source code in case the vendor is unable or unwilling to maintain the system. 3.3.3 . HARDWARE The proposal should indicate the recommended hardware configuration (processors, terminAl.., communication equipment, etc. ) , including make and model of all equipment, quantities, and unit costs. The proposal should also identify alternate compatible. equipment on which the System can operate. ~ 9 .53'~.l:J 3.3.4 3.3.5 3.3.6 3.3.7 TRAINING Vendors must describe their tl'Aining programs in detail, including hours of training provided, subjects covered, how the tl'Aining hours are organized and scheduled, number of people allowed in each session, and the level of staff that a vendor recommends should be trained. SUPPLIES The proposal must include a list of all supplies necessary for the operation of the System, giving lead time, recommended stock level and costs for acquisition if not part of the purchase price of the System. SYSTEM COSTS The proposal should include an itemized list of initial and continuing costs for the proposed System, which should be submitted under SEPARATE COVER. Cost estimates should be provided for all equipment, supplies, software, delivery , installation, maintenance, service, communications, training, and all other related costs. All costs must be stated in unit costs. All unit costs stated in the vendor's proposal will be the only costs which the "Parties" will honor. The "Parties" reserve the right to alter the quantities in the contract from the quantities suggested in this Request For Proposal. Vendors should also include the cost to acquire system software exclusive from any equipment. The "Parties" reserve the right, at their sole option, to acquire any or all of the proposed system hardware components from a source or sources other than the Respondent, if such acquisition is deemed advantageous. REFERENCES (~ THE PROPOSAL MUST INCLUDE A LIST OF A MINIMUM OF THREE (3) CLIENTS CURRENTLY USING THE SYSTEM. This list should include each client's name, address, description of hardware, number of terminals performing data collection per site. The reference list of clients should alao indicate which clients share a computer environment. 10 5o"';.t( 3.3.9 VENDOR DESCRIPTION AND INFORMATION The proposal must include a description of the company, including the following: 1) The principals involved. 2) The names and addresses of all parent companies and subsidiaries affiliated with the vendor - inside and outside the United States of America. 3) The names and addresses of all sub-contractors which will be utilized on this project. 4) An audited financial statement of the last two years of operation. .. 5) An organizational chart. 6) A description of the customer support group's functions, number of staff, number of programmers/system administrators, "hotline" services for clients, etc. 7) A statement indicating whether the vendor is certified as a Minority Business Enterprise (MBE) or a Women-owned Business Enterprise (WBE) , and if so, list the certifying agency or agencies. If not certified, vendor will respond "NOT CERTIFIED". 8) A statement of experience in research and development. r," .fi 11 5j"$ 3.4 CONTRACT CONSIDERATIONS This Request For Proposals and the selected vendor's submitted proposal will become part of the formal contract between the "Parties" and the vendor. The formal contract will be negotiated with the selected vendor and will Include. but not be Umited to. the following terms and conditions: 3.4.1 SCOPE These General Terms and Conditions shall be Incorporated In the contract and shall apply to all proposals. The Respondent with whom a contract is successfully negotiated shall be referred to as the Contractor. 3.4.2 . CHANGE ORDER 3.4.3 Any change In the scope or description of the work. or In the contract price. shall be by written order executed by the "Parties". This shall constitute a Change Order. This shall not affect the validity of the contract or any terms or conditions not changed thereby. LICENSES. PERMITS AND CERTIFICATES All licenses. permits. and certificates required for and In connection with any and all parts of the work to be performed under the provisions of these Contract Documents shall be secured by the Contractor entirely at its own expense. 3.4.4 INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR The relationship of the Contractor to the "Parties" shall be that of an independent contractor. !1.~ .1'; 12 3j-'?~ 3.4.5 3.4.6 ," ASSIGNMENT AND SUBCONTRACTING The Contractor shall not assign or subcontract the work, or any part thereof, without the previous written consent of the "Parties", nor shall he/she assign, by power of attorney or otherwise, any of the money payable under the Contract unless written consent of the "Parties" has been obtained. No right under the Contract, nor claim for any money due or to become due, shall be asserted against the "Parties", or peraons acting for the "Parties", by reason of any so-called assignment of the Contract or any part thereof, unless such assignment has been authorized by the prior written consent of the "Parties". In case the Contractor is permitted to assign monies due or to become due under the Contract, the instrument of assignment shall contain a clause subordinating the claim of the assignee to all prior liens for services rendered or materials supplied for the performance of the work. The Contractor shall be fully responsible and accountable to the "Parties" for the acts and omissions of his subcontractor, and of persons directly or indirectly employed by him/her. RIGHT OF THE "PARTIES" TO TERMINATE CONTRACT If the "Parties", at their discretion determine that the work to be done under the contract has been abandoned by the Contractor or if the contract has been assigned by the Contractor without the written consent of the "Parties"; or if the Contractor is adjudged bankrupt; or if a general assignment of his/her assets is made for the benefit of his/her creditors; or if a receiver is appointed for the Contractor or any of his/her property; or if at any time the Project Director certifies in writing to the "Parties" that the performance of the work under the contract is being unnecessarily delayed, that the Contractor is violating any of the conditions of this contract or that it is executing the same in bad faith or otherwise not in accordance with the terms of said contract; or if the",work is not substantially completed within the time named for its":completion or within the time to which such completion date may be extended; then the "Parties" may serve written notice upon the Contractor and his/her attachments of the "Parties" intention to terminate this contract. Unless within five (5) days after the serving of such notice, a satisfactory arrangement is made for' 'continuance, this contract shall terminate. In the event of such termination, the surety shall have the right to take over and complete the work; provided that if the surety does not commence performance within thirty (30) days, the "Parties" may take over and prosecute the work to completion, by contract or otherwise. The Contractor and his/her surety shall be liable to the "Parties" for all excess cost sustained by them by reason of such prosecution and completion. 13 5j ...).? - 3.4.7 Termination Subject to the provisions below, the contract derived from this Request For Proposal may be terminated, by the "Parties" upon thirty (30) days advance written notice to the Contractor, but if any work or service hereunder is in progress, but not completed as of the date of termination, then this contract may be extended upon written approval of the "Parties" until said work or services are completed and accepted. Termination for Convenience: In the event that the contract is terminated or canceled upon request and for the convenience of the "Parties", without the required (30) days advance written notice, then the "Parties" shall negotiate reasonable termination costs, if applicable. Termination for Cause: The "Parties", at their discretion can terminate this contract for cause, default or negligence on the part of the respondents which then shall be excluded from the foregoing provision; termination costs, if any, shall not apply. The thirty (30) days advance notice requirement is waived in the event of Termination for Cause. Termination Due to Unavailability of Funds: When funds are not appropriated or otherwise made available by the City of San Diego to support continustion of performance, the contract shall be canceled and the respondent shall be reimburaed for the reasonable value of any nonrecurring cost incurred but not amortized in the price of the supplies or services delivered under the contract. CLAIMS FOR LABOR AND MATERIALS The Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless the "Parties" from all "1"lm,, for labor and materials furnished under this contract. When requested by the "Parties", the Contractor shall submit satisfactor;:,:' evidence that all persons, firms, or corporations, who h8ve done work or furnished materials under the contract, for which the "Parties" may become liable under the laws of the state, have been fully paid are satisfactory secured. In case such evidence is not furnished or is not satisfactory, an amount shall be retained from monies due the Contractor which, in addition to any other sUms that may be retained, will be sufficient, in the opinion of the "Parties", to meet all claims of the person, firms, and corporations as aforesaid. Such sum or sums shall be retained until the liabilities as aforesaid are fully discharged or satisfactorily secured. The "Parties" may require a labor and materials bond for this purpose. 14 ~-.,2~ 3.4.8 3.4.9 3.4.10 3.4.11 PROTECTION OF PROPERTY AND PUBLIC LIABILITY The Contractor shall be accountable for any damages resulting from his/her operations. All ~'''''''ges shall be paid for by the Contractor. He/She shall be fully responsible for the protection of all persons, including members of the public and employees of other contractors or subcontractors and all public and private property . LAWS AND ORDINANCES The Contractor shall do all work in such a manner as to comply with all Ordinances and laws of the City, County, State, and Nation as apply to the work herein outlined. He/She shall also obtain all necessary licenses and permits and keep necessary records as required. PATENTS Royaities and fees for patents covering materials, articles, apparatus, devices, or equipment (as distinguished from processes) used in the work, shall be included in the contract amount. The Contractor shall satisfy all demands that may be made at any time for such royalties or fees and he/she shall be liable for any damages or ('lAlm.. for patent infringements, as more fully described in 3.4.17. The Contractor shall, at his/her own cost and expense, defend all suits or proceedings that may be instituted against the "Parties", and hold them harmless for infringement or alleged infringement of any patents involved in the work and, in case of an award of damages, the Contractor shall pay such award. Final payment to the Contractor by the "Parties" will not be made while any suit or claim remains unsettled. HINDRANCES AND DELAYS In executing the Contract Agreement, the Contractor expressly covenants and a~s that, in understanding to complete the work within the" time therein fixed, it has taken into consideration made allowances for all hindrances and delays incident to such work, whether growing out of delays in securing materials or workmen or othllrwise. No charge shall be made by the Contractor for hindrances or delays from any cause during the progress of the work, or any portion thereof, embraced in this Contract. .. 15 ~ -..2i 3.4.12 3.4.13 3.4.14 EXTENSIONS OF TIME Should the Contractor be delayed in the final completion of the work by any act or neglect of the "Parties" or of any employee of either. or by any other contractor employed by the "Parties" or by strike. fire. or other cause outside of the control of the Contractor and which. in the opinion of the "Parties". could have been neither anticipated nor avoided. then an extension of time sufficient to compensate for the delay. as determined by the "Parties". will be granted. In no event shall the Contractor be entitled to any increase in the contract price or to damages or additional compensation as a consequence of any such extension of time or delay. SETTLEMENT OF CLAIMS Losses insured under policies that include the "Parties" as an additional named insured shall be adjusted and made payable to the "Parties" as trustee for the insured. as their interests may appear. The "Parties" and Contractor waive all rights against each other for damages caused by f"l1'8 or perils to the extent covered by insurance. except such rights as they may have insurance proceeds held by the "Parties" as trustee. The Contractor shall require similar waivers by subcontractors as provided in the General Conditions. INSURANCE The Contractor shall secure and maintain. throughout the duration of the Contract. insurance of such types and in such amounts as may be necessary to protect itself and the interests of the "Parties" against all hazards or risks of loss as hereinafter specified. The form and limits of such insurance. together with the underwriter theJ;8of in each case. shall be acceptable to the "Parties". but reiarctless of, such acceptance. it shall be the responsibility of the Contractor to maintain adequate insurance coverage at all times. Failure of the Contractor to maintain adequste coverage shall not relieve it of any contractual responsibility or obligation. Satisfactory certificates of insurance shall be filed with the "Parties" prior to starting" any work on the Contract. The certificates shall state that 10 days advance written notice will be given to the "Parties" before any policy covered thereby is changed or canceled. 16 5;)-3tJ Workers Compensation and Employer's Liability This insurance sball protect the Contractor against all claims under applicable state compensation laws. The Contractor sball also be protected against claims for injury, disease, or death of employees which, for any reason, may not fall within the provisions of the worker's law. This policy sball include an "all states" endorsement. The liability limits sball not be less than: Workers Compensation and Disability Statutory Employer's Liability $1,000,000 each occurrence Public Liability IDsU1'llDce The Contractor shall maintain during the life of this Contract such Public Liability Insurance as sball protect it against claims for QAlftAgeS resulting from (a) bodily injury, including wrongful death, and (b) property damage, which may arise from operations under the Contract whether such operations be by itself or by any subcontractor or anyone directly or indirectly employed by either of them. The minimum acceptable limits of liability to be provided by such Public Liability Insurance sball be as follows: (a) Bodily Injury Limits: $1,000,000 each occurrence $1,000,000 aggregate (b) Property Damage Limits: $1,000,000 each occurrence $2,000,000 aggregate .<f'~ \.it 17 5;)...3 ) The Public Liability Insurance required by the preceding subparagraph shall include the following extensions of coverage: (a) The coverage shall be proved under a Comprehensive General Liability form of policy or IidmllAr thereto. (b) The property dAmAge coverage shall include a Broad Form Property TlAmAge Endorsement. (c) Contractual Liability coverage shall be included. (d) Protective Liability coverage shall be included to protect the Contractor against "lAlm.. arising out of operations performed by his/her subcontractors. (e) Products Liability and/or Completed Operations coverage shall be included. Automobile Liability Insurance The contractor shall take out and maintain during the life of the Contract such comprehensive Automobile Liability Insurance as shall protect it against "lAlm.. for damages resulting (I) bodily injury, including wrongful death, and (2) property dAmAge, which may arise from the operations of any owned, hired, or non-owned automobiles used by or for it in any capacity in connection with the carrying out of the Contract. The mInImum acceptable limits of liability to be provided by such comprehensive Automobile Liability Insurance shall be as follows: (1) Bodily Injury Limits: (2) Property Damage Limits: Umbrella Policy $1,000 ,000 each occurrence $1,000,000 aggregate This insurance shf.l.l protect Contractor against all claims in excess of the liDltts provided under the Compensation, Comprehensive Automobile Liability, and the Comprehensive General Liability. The liability limits of the Umbrella Liability Policy shall not be less than.$2,OOO,OOO. 18 ~ - 3co2, ~~ . Owner's Protective Liability This insurance shall be in the name of the "Parties" and maintained in force for the duration of the contractor's Policy and shall provide a liability limit of not less than $2,000,000 and shall protect Owner against any and all "\.Im,,, and liability for injury to or death of person, or cJ.tftAge to property caused in whole or in part by the negligent acts or omissions of Contractor, his/her agents, employees, or subcontractors, in connection with or resulting from the operations performed under the terms of the Contract. Proof of InsurBnce Each certificate of insurance shall state the type of coverage certified, and, where approprillte, indicate the "Parties" as additional named insured, and shall be identified as one of the following: 1- 2. 3. Insurance Covera2l! Worker's Compensation Limits Employer's Liability Comprehensive General Liability Bodily Injury Property Damage Statutory $1,000 ,000 each occurrence $1,000,000 each occurrence $1,000,000 aggregate $1,000 ,000 each occurrence $2,000,000 aggregate 4. Comprehensive Automobile Bodily Injury Property Damage Umbrelia Policy Owner's Protective, Liability ; $1,000,000 each occurrence $1,000 ,000 each occurrence $2,000,000 $2,000,000 5. 6. .- 19 ~-.33 3.4.15 CONFIDENTIAL MATTERS AIl data and information gathered by the Contrector and its subcontractor, and all reports, recommendations, drawings, specifications, photographs, and da~ shall be treated by Contractor and Ita subcontractora as confidential. The Contractor and ita subcontractors must agree not to communicate and disclose the aforesaid matters to a third party or use them in advertising, publiclty, or propaganda, and/or in another job or jobs, unless written consent is obtained from the "Parties". 3.4.16 WARRANTIES Contractor shall, at Ita expense, defend any claim or suit instituted against the "Parties" and indemnify and hold them harmless against any loss, cost, "expense, award of """"'ges or liability against the "Parties" based on the claim that any product or products furnished by Contractor under this Agreement infringe any patent or copyright of the United States; provided the "Parties" give Contractor prompt notice In writing, permits Contractor to defend the suit, and give Contractor all available information, assistance, and authority to do so. The "Parties" shall control the defense of any such suit, Including appeals and all negotiations, to effect settlement. If any product or products is held to infringe and ita use is enjoined, Contractor shall, at its election and expense (1) procure, for the "Parties", the right to continue using the same; or (2) replace or modify the infringing item so that it becomes non-infringing. These warranties shall be signed by an authorized agent and notarized and submitted to the "Parties" prior to final payment. 3.4.17 INDEMNIFICATION The Contractor agrees to Indemnify and hold harmless the "Parties" their employees, directors, or agents, from and against all claims, damages, losses, and expenses, Including attorney's fees arising from deaths or accidents or destruction of tangible property (other than the work itself), Including the loss of use resulting therefrom, resulting to employees of the Contractor, or its subcontractors, In the work contemplated and done under the Contrsct, and to Indemnify and hold harmless the "Parties", and their employees, directors'- or agents, from and against all claims, damages, losses, and expenses, Including attorney's fees, decrees, or judgements whatsoever arising from any and all injuries, including death or damages or destruction of property resulting to any third person or persons, corporation, partnerships, or associations caused by any act, omission, failure, or neglect of the Contractor, its Subcontractors, or agents, servants, and employees, or otmu- persons under its supervision or direction In the performance of any work under the terms of the Contract. This Indemnification obligation shall 20 5j-JY 3.4.18 3.4.19 not be limited in any way by any limitation on the amount or type of damages, compensation or benefits payable for or by the Contractor or any Subcontractor, manufacturer, or supplier under the Worker's Compensation Act, disability benefit acts or other employee benefits acts. CONTRACT VENUE If a contract is awarded to a non-California corporation, such corporation sball obtain authorization to do business in the State . of California. The laws of the State of California sball govern the contract executed between the successful Respondent and the Owner (as the "Parties" are referred to in the Contract) and any interpretations or constructions thereof. Further, the place of performance and transaction of business sball be deemed to be San Diego County, State of California, and in the event of litigation, the exclusive venue and place of jurisdiction sball be the State of California, and more specifically I San Diego County, California. EQUAL OPPORTUNITY All contracts awarded by the "Parties" are subject to the following provisions and must submit the completed "Equal Employment Program, Certificate of Compliance" form (Appendix E). 1. The Contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, sex, religion, national origin, or age. The Contractor will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed and the employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, color, sex, religion, national origin,. or age. Such action sballinclude but not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion, ortransferj requirement of advertising; layoff or termination; rates of payor otheV"forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The Contractor agrees to post, in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices to be provided by an appropriate agency of the federal government setting forth the requirements of these non discrimination provisions. 2. The Contractor will' state, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf of the Contractor, that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, sex, religion, national origin or age. 21 5j -3->' 3.4.20 MINORITY AND WOMEN BUSINESS ENTERPRISE PROGRAM Efforts shall be made by proposer to achieve the "Parties" Minority and Women Business Enterprise contracting goals of ten percent (10\) MBE and tan percent (10\) WBE for this contract. MBE/WBE goals may be achieved through utilization of subcontractors and/or suppliers. All subcontractors/suppliers receiving $10,000, or more than one-half of one percent (0.5\) of the total proposed amount, must be listed in the proposal. Those prime consultants who are certified MBE/WBE's will receive credit for their own Minority or Women Business Enterprise participation but are expected to satisfy the l'f'mAining goal. The goals will be applied to the total compensation provided under the agreement and shall also apply to amendments adjusting the contract price. To comply with the "Parties" MBE/WBE Program requirements, the apparent successful proposer either must make the goals or demonstrate a good faith effort to do so. Good faith efforts include, but are not limited to, the following: (1) Efforts by proposer to advertise subcontracting opportunities, in a timely manner, in media focused towards minorities and womenj (2) Efforts by proposer to utilize services of associations and organizations, which serve minorities and women, to assist in recruitment and placement of MBEs and WBEsj (3) Efforts by proposer to apportion the proposed work to mAYimi~e opportunities for participation by MBEs and WBEsj (4) Efforts by proposer to interact with interested MBEs and WBEs to infgrm them of opportunities, and to negotiste with them in a fair and objective mannerj (5) Efforts by proposer to assist interested MBE's and WBE's in obtAining bonding, lines of credit, or insurance. 22 ~'3/' Definitions A "Minority Business Enterprise" (MBE) means a business which is at least fifty-one percent (51\) owned and operated by one or more minorities. In the case of a publicly-owned business, at least fifty-one percent (51\) of the stock must be owned and the business operated by those minorities. A "Women Business Enterprise" (WBE) means a business which is at least fifty-one percent (51\) owned and operated by one or more women. In the case of a publicly-owned business, at least fifty.one percent (51\) of the stock must be owned and the business operated by one or more women. 3.4.21 - DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE Contractor shall certify to the Corporation that it will provide a drug-free workplace and do each of the following: 1. Publish a statement notifying its employees that unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensation, possession or use of a controlled substance as defined in schedules I-V of section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U. S. C., I 812) is prohibited in Contractor's workplace and specify the actions that will be taken against employees for violation of the prohibition. 2. Establish a drug-free awareness program to inform employees about all of the following: (a) The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace. (b) The Contractor's policy of maintAining a drug-free workplace. (c) Any a'Vai1able drug counseling, rehabilitation and employee assistance programs. (d) the penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations. 3. Post the statement required by subdivision 1 in a prominent place at Contractor's main office and at any job site large enough to necessitate an on-site office. 23 5J ~J7 4.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION FOR THE AUTOMATED CITATION ISSUANCE SYSTEM 4.1 BACKGROUND Each of the law enforcement agencies in the County of San Diego has as one of its responsibilities, the management and regulation of vehicle traffic to achieve safe, lawful and efficient use of the highways and roads within its jurisdiction. An additional responsibility is the regulation and enforcement of the county and municipal codes of their respective jurisdictions. To fulfill these responsibilities, the agencies use patrol officers who issue hard-copy citations for violations of various state and local s~tutes. The current procedure is a manual operation. Officers issue the citations from citation books that hAve multiple copies. Copies are returned to the station where they are processed by entry into the regional ARnS system. This manual processing results in duplication of tasks, frequent errors and substantial delays both before and after the citations are delivered to the local court. Once at the court, the citations are edited, counted and again entered into an automated system----this time the court's system. The data captured is then run at night against the automated driver's license files at the Sacramento Department of Motor Vehicles. Prior conviction records are captured and identifying information is verified for correctness. Once these corrections are made and the data is captured, the court's automated system generates a "courtesy notice" which gives the defendant information about what to do to settle his or her case. This is subsequently mailed to the defendant at the address listed on the citation. By automating the issuance of citations, neither the police agencies nor the court will manually enter data on citations from ARJIS agencies. Electronic transfer of information will occur, edits will be built into the systems so that correction will be made as the citations are generated and no hard copy citation will be retained by the court. t"." . As a result of reduced delay in entering citations in the court's information system, the time it currently takes for the defendant to receive the bail information from the court will be substantially reduced. Not only will the cou.rt's workload be reduced by the eHm;n..tion of citation entry but the reduced delay in notifying the defendant will further decrease that workload as defendants get the information they need before contacting the court either in person, by phone or mail. 24 5;J :3Y Both the court and law enforcement agencies wish to evaluete the suitability of ECDs to field operetions and to court operetions. The El Cejon Municipal Court will be working with the E1 Cejon Police Department, La Mesa Police Department and the San Diego Sheriff's Department in this endeavor. The results of this Eastern San Diego County project will help the other law enforcement agencies and courts in the county to determine to what extent and with what equipment they wish to automate the citation issuance process in the future. 4.2 CURRENT PROCEDURES/SYSTEMS The Notice to Appear (citation) is a multiple part, multi-colored, NCR form. A sample law enforcement agency citation is provided in Appendix D. The citing officer writes the appropriate data on the citation. The form is signed by the violator and the officer. The copies are distributed differently by different agencies but the original is forwarded to the court and one copy is retained by the defendant. Currently, processing of the citation consists of both manual and automated tasks. The issuing officer fills out the form, has it signed by the violator, gives one copy to the violator and retains the other three copies for future processing. At the end of shift, the officer returns to the station and submits the office copy and the court copy of the citation to be processed. The citation clerk sorts and prepares the documents for data entry into ARJIS, and then for subsequent delivery to the court or the District Attorney's Office depending upon the nature of the violation. The current process of handwriting citations is time-consnming for the officer. Attempts by the officer to write more repidly can produce unreadable, incorrect and inconsistent citations. Transposed numbers, incorrect spelling, illegible handwriting, and incorrect dates or incorrect violation numbers are the typical kinds of errors which occur. These errors, in turn, result in data input errors. In addition, the citation clerk may make a computer inquiry to the DMV via CLETS. This is done to obtain driver's license status which may ultimately result in modification of the charges filed against the violator and affect the agency's decision to file the citation directly with the court or with the prosecutor for approval first. ' The local court receives the original citation from the law enforcement agency. Citations are edited, counted and prepared for data entry into the court's automated system. Again, because the citation is hand written data input errors are common. Those fields that are not edited by law enforcement's automated system are then edited by the Court's automated system. Many times, citations must be returned from the Court to the law enforcement agency for correction. The violation might be written without a required sub-section, the court date might be an invalid date or the citation itself might be forwarded to the Municipal court rether than the Juvenile court. 25 3;5-31 If the violation is one that must be reviewed by the District Attorney before issuance, the citation goes first to the District Attorney's Office and then to the court. Sometimes It is only after a citation has been reviewed by the D.A.'s office that lnaccur,acies In violations are discovered. Citations must then be returned to the D.A.'s office Instead of the police agency. Once citation Input errors have been corrected, either by the operator In the system or by the police officer after return to'the agency or the Deputy District Attorney, the data is then run against the statewide Department of Motor Vehicles data base to discover prior violation history . Upon completion of this process, a "convelope" is created and a "pourtesy notice" is generated which is mailed from the court to the defendant. The convelope, with the citation, is used as the court's case file. It contains the information from the citation, the prior violation history of the violator and the ball information for each violation. The courtesy notice contains some of the same Information as the citation and convelope, as well as additional Information about court proceedings and the violator's options In settling the case. Thus, with the current manual system, much time is spent handwriting citations, duplicating Information and correcting errors. Automating the citation issuance process In the field would not only reduce the time it takes to write and process traffic citations but would reduce the delay now experienced. ('Ii 26 ~ "'/1) CURRENT SYSTEMS ARCHITECTURE OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY MUNICIPAL COURT AND SAN DIEGO DATA PROCESSING CORPORATION The Municipal Court Network consists of two Bull DPX/2 systems running UNIX, located at the downtown court facility in San Diego, five Bull DPS/6 systems located at the four courts and the Marshall's Bull DPS6+ located at the Kearny Mesa facility. The processors are all connected to Ethernet LAN segments. The LAN segments are connected to six sites via brouters (bridge/routers) to make a WAN and two smaller remote sites via multiplexers. The brouters have dual 56Kb circuits, either microwave or ADN. The systems are also connected to the County IBM mainframe and the state Department of Motor Vehicles IBM mainframe. The systems also have access to the San Diego Data Processing Corporation's IBM mainframe (lBM3090/400J running MVS/Ef!A) via the county mainframe. In addition, each of the four court jurisdictions has a PC based file server for word processing and other clerical functions. The system currently support 525 term;nAlo::/PC's and 270 printers. The network is availsble from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. The DPX/2 systems support Civil, Small Claims and Minor Offense processing. The DPS/6 systems support the accounting systems. The accounting systems will be converted to run on the DPX/2 and the DPS/6 systems will be removed. The Marshal's system along with San Diego's DPS/6 are used to support deferred warrant printing. Part of this system will be converted to run on the DPX/2. Currently, traffic citations are manually entered into the courts system and the file is transmitted every night to the San Diego Data Processing Corporation's (SDDPC) IBM mainframe. Automated Regional Justice Information System (ARJIS) resides in the SDDPC's mainframe and the transmitted file is processed to update the ARnS IMS databases. When the 'Portable Computer Citation Issuance System' is fully implemented, the citation information will be electronically uploaded to the courts system and the file containing the information will continue to be passed to the SDDPC's IBM mainframe from. the courts system via the county's IBM mainframe. " 27 5;,-1/ 4.3 DATA AND FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS The following Section, Data Requirements, describes the data elementa (fields) that are processed in the current system and procedures. The future Portable Computer Citation Issuance System will process these data elements with the same attributes. Data Requirements 1. Agency Code Alpha Edit Requirements: Required field Validate against table Length: 2 2. Citation Number Alpha Numeric Length: 10 Edit Requirements: Required field System generated number 3. Citation Type Alpha Length: 2 Edit Requirements: Required field Validate against table 4. Citation Issue Date Numeric Length: 6 Edit Requirements: Required field System generated User should be able to override 5. Citation Issue Time ~> Numeric 1'; Length: 6 Edit Requirements: Required field System generated User should be able to overnde 6. Citation Issue Day of Week Alpha Length: 3 System calculated 28 . ~-9..2 7. Case Number Alpha Numeric Length: 9 Edit Requirements: Validate the format if entered 8. Defendant's Information Name (Required Field): First Name: Alpha Length: 12 Edit Requirements: Validate the format Required field Middle Name: Alpha Length: 9 Edit Requirements: Validate the format if entered Last Name: Alpha Edit Requirements: Required field Validate the format Length: 15 Name Suffix: Alpha Length: 3 Edit Requirements: Validate the format if entered Address (Required Field): Street Number: Alpha Numeric Length: 6 Edit Requirements: Numeric check if entered . Apartment Number: Alpha Numeric 't,~, Edit Requirements: None Length: 6 Street Direction: Alpha LEiligth: 2 Edit Requirements: Validate against table if entered Street Name: Alpha Numeric Edit Requirements: None Length: 20 29 ~~J/j Street Type: Alpha Length: 2 Edit Requirements: Validate against table if entered City: Alpha Length: 15 Edit Requirements: Validate against table if entered State: Alpha Length: 2 Edit Requirements: Validate against table if entered Zip Code: Numeric Length: 9 Edit Requirements: Numeric check if entered Driver's License Number: Alpha Numeric Length: 18 Edit Requirements: Validate format if entered Driver's License State: Alpha Numeric Length: 2 Edit Requirements: Validate against table if entered License Class: Alpha Numeric Length: 2 Edit Requirements: Validate against table if entered Date of Birth: Numeric Edit Requirementsf?;,' Required field . . Numeric check Length: 6 Race: Alpha Length: 1 Edit Requirements: Validate against table if entered Sex: Alpha Length: 1 Edit Requirements: Required field Validate against table 30 ~ --'1'1 Hair: Alpha Length: 3 Edit Requirements: Validate against table if entered Eyes: Alpha Length: 3 Edit Requirements: Validate against table if entered Height: Numeric Length: 3 Edit Requirements: Numeric check if entered Weight: Numeric Length: 3 Edit Requirements: Numeric check if entered Social Security Number: Numeric Length: 9 Other ID Field: Alpha Numeric Length: 18 Edit Requirements: None Military: Alpha Length: 1 Edit Requirements: 'Y' or 'N' 9. Vehicle Information License Plate Number: Alpha Numeric ff/ Length: 10 Required field . License Plate State: Alpha Numeric Length: 2 Edit Requirements: Validate against table if entered 31 '5J-t/5 Year: Numeric Length: 2 Edit Requirements: Required field Numeric check Make: Alpha Numeric Length: 4 Edit Requirements: Required field Validate against table Model: Alpha Length: 3 Edit Requirements: Validate against table if entered"" Type: Alpha Length: 2 Edit Requirements: Required field Validate against table Color 1 (Upper Half) : Alpha Length: 3 Edit Requirements: Validate against table if entered Color 2 (Lower Half): Alpha Length: 3 Edit Requirements: Validate against table if entered VIN Number: Alpha Numeric Length: 20 Edit Requirements: None ~4\;' 10. Male Passenger Indicator Alpha Length: 1 Edit Requirements: None 11. Female Passenger Indicator Alpha Length: 1 Edit Requirements: None 32 . .5j-'-/~ 12. Registered Owner or Lessee Same Name As Driver: Alpha Length: 1 Edit Requirements: 'Y' or 'N' If same name as driver, system generates the name and address of the registered owner. Same Address As Driver: Alpha Length: 1 Edit Requirements: 'Y' or'N' If same address as driver, system generates the address of the registered owner. First Name: Alpha Edit Requirements: Required field Validate the format Length: 12 Middle Name: Alpha Length: 9 Edit Requirements: Validate the format if entered Last Name: Alpha Edit Requirements: Required field Validate the format Length: 15 Name Suffix: Alpha Length: 3 Edit Requirements: Validate the for~}f entere~ Address: Street Number: Alpha Numeric Length: 6 Edit Requirements: Numeric check if entered Apartment Number: Alpha Numeric Length: 6 Street Direction: Alpha Length: 2 Edit Requirements: Validate against table if entered 33 5j}-L/?, , Street Name: Alpha Numeric Length: 20 Street Type: Alpha Length: 2 Edit Requirements: Validate against table if entered City: Alpha Length: 15 Edit Requirements: Validate against table if entered State: Alpha Length:. 2 Edit Requirements: Validate against table if entered Zip Code: Numeric Length: 9 Edit Requirements: Numeric check if entered 13. Evidence for Financial Responsibility Alpha Length: 1 Edit Requirements: 'Y' or'N' 14. Financial Information Alpha numeric Length: 30 Edit Requirements: None 15. C. V. ( Commercial Vehicle) Alpha Length: 1 Edit Requirements: 'Y' or'N' ~:,~ 16. H.M. (Hazardous Material) Alpha Length: 1 Edit Requirements: 'Y' or 'N' 17. Violation Sections Codes Eligible for Dismissal: Alpha Length: 1 Edit Requirements: 'Y' or'N' 34 Sj-Jj8" Violation Section: Alpha Numeric Length: 15 Edit Requirements: Minimum one required Validate against table Violation Code: Alpha Length: 2 Edit Requirements: Minimum one required Validate against table More? (to enter next violation) Alpha Length: 1 Edit Requirements: 'Y' or'N' 18. Booking Required Alpha Edit Requirements: 'V' or 'N' Length: 1 19. Speed Violation Estimated Speed: Numeric Length: 3 Edit Requirements: Required if speed violation Numeric check if entered Posted Speed: Numeric Length: 2 Edit Requirements: Required if speed violation Numeric check if entered Vehicle Speed Limlu, Numeric '.fl( Length: 2 Edit Requirements: Numeric check if entered Safety Speed Limlt: Numeric Length: 2 Edit Requirements: Numeric check if entered 20. Radar Field Alpha Length: 5 Edit Requirements: Validate against table 35 ~..tJ' 21. Weight Violation Numeric Length: 4 Edit Requirements: Numeric check if entered 22. Violation Location Street Number: Numeric Length: 6 Edit Requirements: Required Numeric check if entered Street Direction 1: Alpha Length~ 2 Edit Requirements: Validate against table if entered Street Name 1: Alpha Edit Requirements: Required Length: 20 Street Type 1: Alpha Length: 2 Edit Requirements: Validate against table if entered City: Alpha Length: 15 Edit Requirements: Validate against table if entered Street Direction 2: Alpha Edit Requirements: Validate against table if entered n" ,I'; Length: 2 Street Name 2: Alpha Length: 20 ,*\ Street Type 2: Alpha Length: 2 Edit Requirements: Validate against table if entered Multiple Intersection Indicator: Alpha Length: 1 Edit Requirements: 'X' or blank 36 I,. SJ-5o -=---- 23. Violation Date Numeric Length: 6 Edit Requirements: Required field Numeric check 24. Violation Time Numeric Length: 4 Edit Requirements: Required field Numeric check 25. Violation Day of Week Alpha Length: 3 System generated 26. Weather CLR: Alpha Length: 1 Edit Requirements: 'X' or blank FOG: Alpha Length: 1 Edit Requirements: 'X' or blank CLDY: Alpha Length: 1 Edit Requirements: 'X' or blank RAIN: Alpha Length: 1 Edit Requirements: 'X' or blank r~:- 27. Road Conditions WET: Alpha Length: 1 Edit Requirements: 'X' or blank DRY: Alpha Length: 1 Edit Requirements: 'X' or blank 37 Sj-s/ DEBRIS: Alpha Edit Requirements: 'X' or blank 28. Traffic Conditions HRA VY: Alpha Edit Requirements: 'X' or blank MED: Alpha Edit Requirements: 'X' or blank LIGHT: Alpha Edit Requirements: 'X' or blank Length: 1 Length: 1 Length: 1 Length: 1 29. Direction of Travel Alpha Length: 1 Edit Requirements: Validate against table if entered. 30. Accident Alpha Edit Requirements: 'Y' or 'N' Length: 1 31. Court Code Alpha Edit Requirements: Validate against table if entered (",;,~ .r~~ 32. Night Court Alpha Edit Requirements: 'X' or blank Length: 2 Length: 1 33. Court Appearance Date Numeric Length: 6 Edit Requirements: System generated User should be able to override Validate against table (court calendara) Incorporate the current Courts Scheduling Information in the system. See Appendix B for Court Calendars. 38 ~ -5d- 34. Court Appearance Time 1 Numeric Length: 4 Edit Requirements: Numeric check if entered 35. Court Appearance Time 2 Numeric Length: 4 Edit Requirements: Numeric check if entered 36. Violation committed in my presence Alpha Length: 1 Edit requirements: 'Y' or'N' 37. Special Field Alpha Numeric Edit requirements: None Length: 4 38. P.C. (Probable Cause) Field Alpha Numeric Length: 15 Edit requirements: None 39. Issuing Officer ID Numeric Length: 5 Edit requirements: Required Validate against table 40. Arresting Officer ID Numeric Edit requirements: Required if an arrest takes place Validate against table l<!'~ l.fIj' Length: 5 41. Division Numeric Edit requirements: Validate against table if entered Length: 2 42. Watch Numeric Length: 1 Edit requirements: Validate against table if entered 43. Beat Numeric Length: 3 Edit requirements: Required field Validate against table 39 ~-5J 44. Defendant's Signature 45. Officer's Signature 46. Officer Witnessed Defendant's Signature Field Alpha Length: 1 Edit requirements: 'Y'or'N' 47. Agency Retained an Identification Copy Field Alpha Length: 1 Edit requirements: 'Y' or'N' 48. Officer's Comment Page Officer's Vehicle: Alpha Length: 10 Edit requirements: 'PKD', 'ROLLING' or 'STOPPED ON' Officer's Vehicle Location: Alpha Numeric Length: 20 Edit requirements: None Officer's Vehicle Direction: Alpha Length: 1 Edit requirements: 'N'. 'E', 'S' or 'W' Officer's Vehicle Lane: Numeric Length: 1 Edit requirements: 1.2.3,4or5 Officer's Vehicle Other Lane: Alpha Numeric rl' Length: 15 Edit requirements>:?; None Officer's Vehicle Number: Alpha Numeric IAii1gth: 8 Edit requirements: None Officer's Vehicle Make Year: Numeric Length: 4 Edit requirements: Numeric check if entered. 40 5i --5,/ " '. . Officer's Vehicle Date of Calibration: Numeric Length: 6 Edit requirements: Numeric check if entered. Officer's Vehicle Calibration By: Alpha Length: 15 Edit requirements: None Officer's Calibration Template: Alpha Length: 2 (Occurs 5 times) Edit requirements: Numeric check if entered. Stopped By: Alpha Length: 7 Edit requirements: 'RED LITE'. 'SIREN'. 'HORN' OR 'HAND' Defendant's Vehicle: Alpha Length: 10 Edit requirements: 'PKD'. 'ROLLING' or 'STOPPED ON' Defendant's Vehicle Location: Alpha Numeric Length: 20 Edit requirements: None Defendant's Vehicle Direction: Alpha Length: 1 Edit requirements: 'N'. 'E', 'S' or 'W' Defendant's Vehicle Lane: Numeric r'",,' Length: 1 Edit requirements:' . 1,2,3,4or5 Defendant's Vehicle Other Lane: Alpha Numeric Length: 15 Edit requirements: . . None Stopped At: Alpha Numeric Edit requirements: None Length: 40 41 5a --5f Driver: Alpha Length: 10 Edit requirements: 'OUT OF CAR' or 'IN CAR' Passengers : Alpha Length: 2 Edit requirements: 'SO'. 'RF' J 'MF'. 'RR' J 'MR' or LR' Other Passengers: Alpha Edit requirements: None Length: 15 Distance Observed: Alpha Numeric Edit requirements: None Length: 10 Distance Vehicle Behind: Alpha Numeric Length: 10 Edit requirements: None Remarks : Alpha Numeric Edit requirements: None Length: 200 6' '.f; 42 ~-5t 5.0 FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS RESPONSE In your response, please use the following codes to indicate the operational or development status of each of the requirements below. OP - "Operation" - in production at all sites where the product is installed. AV - "Operationally Available" - conditionally available to all customers and in production at some sites as an optional feature selected as part of the customization process. DE ,"In Development/Testing/Pilot/Planning" the function is not yet in production at. this time. Indicate the expected date it will be fully functional (not pilot) in a production customer site, and the names, addressed, and contacts at the pilot sites. SP - "Special Feature" - considered a special function for San Diego Data Processing Corporation that does not exist at other sites. The vendor will develop this feature for the "Parties". Please provide the estimated cost for this special feature. NP - "Not Planned" - the function is not available and is not expected to be a future function. OT - "Other" - none of the above. Please provide an explanation. The following functional requirements are grouped for palmtops, laptops and PC's separately. Requirements for notepads are also included. ~ r. Palmtop: Status Code (R) - Required (H) - Highly Desirable 1. (R) System generates Citation Numbers and Agency Code should be the first two characters. 2. (R) System generates Citation Issue Date and provides an ability to override. 43 5j -57 3. (R) 4. (R) 5. (R) 6. (R) 7. (R) 8. (R) 9. (R) 10. (R) System generates Citation Issue Time and provides an ability to override. System calculates Citation Issue D.ay of the week. User has a choice of entering a value for the Citation TYpe or request the system to display the values to select. Citation TyPe: T - Traffic (Default) N Nontraffic M Misdemeanor W Traffic Warning C Complaint . User must be able to select multiple Citation types for one citation. User has a choice of entering a value for the following fields or requests the system to display the values to select. Race - Race Code Table Sex - M, F, X Hair - Hair color table Eyes - Eye color table Vehicle Upper Color - Vehicle Upper Color Table Vehicle Lower Color - Vehicle Lower Color Table Weather - CLR, FOG, CLOY, RAIN Road Conditions - WET, DRY, DEBRIS Traffic Conditions - HEAVY, MED, LIGHT Direction Of Travel - N, S, E, W After entering Eligible For Dismissal and Violation Section/Violation Code, if 'Y' is entered ill<More? field, system prompts the next violations~ Otherwise, system skips to Estimated Speed Field. Each page includes maximum three violation codes. System displays" error messages for all validation errors. If defendant is juvenile, juvenile court must be entered. If vehicle license number is not entered, vehicle license state must not be entered. 44 ~-5~ ~ 11. (R) 12. (R) 13. (R) 14. (R) 15. (R) 16. (R) 17. (R) 18. (R) 19. (R) 20. (R) If vehicle make is not entered, vehicle model or type must not be entered. At least one charge must be entered. Duplicate charges are allowed. If speed violation, estimated speed and posted speed must be entered. If common place is entered, direction, street type or multiple intersections must not be entered. User must be able to enter any information in Officer's Comment Page if requested. Ability to print Officer's Comment Page for PC. Ability to scroll up and down the citation formes) and modify the contents before printing the citations. Ability to display validation tables. Ability to modify validation tables. Ability to process input data from driver's license via magnetic strip reader. User identification automatically recorded for each transaction for the logged-on 10. Ability to void citations under specified conditions and track the voided citations. Security ~gainst unauthorized data access and manipulation (Password and Officer 10). Print functions Ability to print as many copies of each citation as needed. Warning for less --than X number of citations left in the printer. Ability to interrupt or cancel printing. Multiple page indication on Citations, such as 1 of 3, 2 of 3 and 3 of 3. 45 5J'" 5' _ 21. (H) _ 22. (H) _ 23. (H) 24. (H) _ 25. (H) Laptop: If driver's name is same as registered owner, i.e. 'Y' is entered, system generates the name and address of the registered owner and skips to Evidence For Financial Responsibility field. If not same name, system prompts the name. If driver's address is same as registered owner's address, i.e. 'Y' is entered, system generates the address of the registered owner. If not same address, system prompts the address. If 'Y' is entered in Evidence For Financial Responsibili ty, system prompts Financial Information. Otherwise, system does not prompt Financial Information. Relationship validations If street name is not entered, address, direction and street type must not be entered. If only driver's license number is entered, system should default the driver's state to 'CA' . If only driver's license state is entered, system should generate 'NIP' in the driver's license number field. Officer's Vehicle Number, Year and Make, Calibration Date, Calibrated By, and Calibration Template information are entered one time at the beginning of the shift. .</.-- <g . All the requirements are same as defined for Palmtop with the following exceptions. 1. (R) 2. (R) Display screen includes minimum 10 Eligible For Dismissal, Violation Section/Code fields. If more than 10 violations must be entered, 'More?' box can be checked and additional violations are entered on the next screen. 46 5j ,t,() 3. (H) 4. (H) Notepad: Validation immediately after a value is entered in a field, not after all fields are entered. Diagramming ability (Locations, etc.) If a keyboard is used with notepad, the functional requirements are same as laptop. 1. (H) pc: 1. (R) 2. (R) 3. (R) 4. (R) 5. (R) 6. (R) 7. (R) B. (R) 9. (R) _ 10. (R) Touch screen ability provided that key board is displayed on the screen instead of being a separate unit. Ability to modify citation information. Ability to generate management and statistical reports in a user friendly manner on B 1/2" x 11" papers, without requiring programming skills. Ability to transfer data to mainframes in a user friendly manner. Ability to concurrently upload data from multiple palmtops and/or laptops. Ability to download the tables defined in Section III.A, to palmtops and laptops. Ability to,download vehicles ~nd more citations. information on stolen than five outstanding User identification automatically recorded for each transaction. Ability to void - citations under specified conditions. Security against unauthorized data access and manipulation. Tape back-up. 47 ~~~I 11. (H) 12. (H) Ability to run the application that is ported from laptop. Ability to handle different routings for transfers, such as to Court System, Attorney's System, DA's System. (See Appendix C for Citation Routings) data City SECTION IV: Technical Specifications ~equirements Responses PORTABLE COMPUTER: Status Code 1. (R) 2.' (R) 3. (R) 4. (R) 5. (R) 6. (R) 7. (R) (R) - Required (H) - Highly Desirable The portable computer must be specifically designed for use in harsh environments and must be sealed against rain, snow, humidity and dust. The portable computer must require no protective casing for use in inclement weather. The portable computer must operate over a temperature range of -22 to +131 degrees Fahrenheit (-30 to +55 degrees Celsius) and humidity of up to 100 percent, condensing. The portable computer must be carried and held in one hand. It must have a handle or a hand strap for convenient, comfortable use by a left or right-handed operator. .~ ~ The external case must be made of a highly durable material. The portable computer must have at least 512K of permanent, non-removable RAM and must be available in 1 megabyte and 2 megabyte memory sizes. The portable computer must use standard rechargeable Nickel-Cadmium (NiCad) batteries. The batteries must be field replaceable. 48 ~-~-2 8. (R) 9. (R) _ 10. (R) 11. (R) 12. (R) 13. (R) 14. (R) _IS. (R) _ 16. (H) The portable computer must have a lithium backup battery to protect data that has been entered on the keyboard but has not yet been written to disk - Le., it must save the keystrokes of an incomplete transaction - for at least 48 hours. '1'0 conserve power, the display must have a time-out feature to power down after a pre-set period of inactivity and to reactivate when the operator presses a key. For use in darkened conditions, the display must include back-lighting as a standard feature. The standard keypad must accommodate special user-friendly functions without custom labeling and should work well not only for this application, but also for a variety of additional applications. The portable computer must contain a real-time clock that keeps track of the current year, month, hour, minute and second. The portable computer must be one unit that includes a printer and magnetic strip reader. The portable computer must not only accept the vendor software, but also be programmable in several standard programming language so that the user may have additional software written for portable computer if desired. Application programs must reside in the portable computer's RAM, rather than in ROM. This will} enable the user to load new or modified programs into the portable computer and replace internal chips. Dimensions for the portable computer are as following: . Length, 10 inches; width, 8 inches, depth, 3 inches (250 mm x 200 mm x 75mm). Weight, 5 pounds (2.32 kilograms), including batteries and printers. 49 . ~-t3 _ 17. (H) _ 18. (H) 19. (H) 20. (H) 21. (H) 22. (H) 23. (H) 24. (H) _ 25. (H) LOADER: 1. (R) The portable computer should withstand repeated drops up to 6 feet on to a hard surface without any structural or operational damage. For the quickest possible unloading data, the portable computer should be capable of communicating at speeds of up to 48,000 baud. The batteries should have enough power for at least 12 hours of use. The portable computer should have a lithium backup battery system that protects data in memory for up to 5 years in event of power loss or removal of the main batteries. Display should be readable from any angle in direct sunlight. The display should contain a minimum of 96 characters, in 4 lines of 24 characters each. The display includes a switch for extra light for the display panel and has an automatic time-out feature. The portable computer incorporates a full alphanumeric keyboard on the display panel with at least 40 keys, including alphabetic (A-Z) and numeric (0-9) characters plus appropriate function keys. Individual keys should be clearly labeled, and grouped by function, preferably in color- coordinated groups. The operator should be able to press keys easily and accurately, even while wearing winter gloves. ,,<;- Customizatlon of the keypad should be available as a separately priced option. The vendor must provide an interface device to link the portable computer to an IBM compatible PC provided by the user. This devi.ce must provide both data and communications (loading and unloading). 50 5j-ttj 2. (R) 3. (R) CHARGER: 1. (R) 2. (H) 3. (H) 4. (H) S. (H) 6. (H) FIELD PRINTER: 1. (R) 2. (R) 3. (R) . The vendor must offer two types of loader. A model that accommodates a single portable computer, and another that supports multiple units. Each slot on the loader must have light-emitting diodes (LEOs) to indicate power, as well as communications for each slot. The vendor must provide two types of charger. A model that accommodates a single portable computer battery, and another that supports multiple units. Each charger should have 3 LEOs to indicate charging, faulty battery, and completion of charge. The charger should feature in case the tolerance level. have thermal shut-off temperature exceeds the The charger should be stackable to save space. The charger should be wall-mountable. The charger and loader can be one unit as long as requirements for both devices.are met. ra>;,~ The field printer must be capable of printing an official looking form on minimum 4-inch wide stock that can be pre-printed to the user's specification. User must be able to determine the length of the form. paper used for the forms must be waterproof and tear resistant. The image printed onto the form must remain legible and not smear when the form becomes wets. 51 3J -'~.> 4. (R) 5. (8) 6. (8) 7. (8) The field printer must be capable of printing enlarged, emphasized and condensed character; sideways and upside down fonts. The field printer should be programmable graphics. Information on citation should be legible after being exposed for 24 hours in the direct sunlight and six years in storage. The print speed should be such that a standard 4-inch citation form can be printed in 10 seconds or less. "" .,. ~ .....' r.. 52 ~ -~t. .~ A.PPENDIX A - AGENCY STATISTICS ..4 '~ ~ ...... "" ~ '/,'/ ~I Io-(J Io-(J Io-(J ~E ~E ~E O'l:t 00 00 'l""N 'I"" 'I"" Io-(J Io-(J Io-(J I- ~E 5E 5E <( O'l:t 00 cno en 'l""N 'I"" 'I"" en . Io-(J Io-(J Io-(J . - ~E 5E 5E l- e:: - u. cn'l:t 00 cno Z 'l""N N 'I"" :::J 0 => Io-(J Io-(J Io-(J CJ C) ~E ~E 5E - (1) :E: LL .- I- O'l:t 00 cno LL C 'l""N 'I"" ,.. < c: Io-(J Io-(J Io-(J a: C'CI c 5E ~E I- en w ~E 3: 00 00 cno LL . . 'I""'l:t ,.. ,.. 0 > (.) W Io-(J Io-(J Io-(J a: c: ~E 5E ('OE W (1) => (J I- O'l:t 00 00 OJ C) 'I"" "4" ,.. ,.. :E < :::J z Io-(J Io-(J Io-(J 0 ~E 5E 5E Z :E ,.. 'l:t 00 00 ,.. N ,.. ,.. - - - 0 0 0 0 0 0 U) - _U) - - M - 'I"" .- N =0 .- .c .c . en . .c . en 0 0 en 0 - 0 "c 0 "C 0 en U) C M 10- 0 'I"" 0 N ,.. M N - - - Sj-&'O - "'C .. ... c 0 U) (.) (1) - - m (.) ~ z (.) 0 ... U) U)O - I- ... ... ... e:( ca caO ...J 0 O:E in . 0 in C'?CO o' It) - CD ,... 0) CD ~ > 0) ,... It) CJ ... ~ z C"') - > 0' m :E I- - 0 z . ::) ?- m m z c 0 0 l- I- - W - - :E u.. I- Z Z - u.. e:( ::) ::) m e:( ...J ...J Or Z a: w ..~ 0 I- 0 - . a: u.. - a: u.. I- > m l- e:( e:( m 0 'e:( a: t- e - - C. I- 0 I- W m ...J ...J ...J ::) - e:( ~ e:( UJ l- e:( l- I- m I- 0 0 0 - ~ m l- I- I- o . 5:; "'.J. 9 z -(,) -(,) -(,) caE BE 'B E ::) (,) UJ cc 00 00 -(,) -(,) -(,) I- BE BE BE <( ...-N ...- N 00 UJ en -(,) -(,) -(,) . - BE BE BE . ~ a: - u. ,...N ,...N 00 Z ::;:) ::) -(,) -(,) -(,) (.) "'C ~E ~E ~E - ca ::I: u. .c I- ...-N ...-N 00 U. en <t - I- -(,) -Co) -Co) a: ca c BE BE I- (.) w ~E 3: ,...N 00 U. ,...N . . 0 > (.) w -(,) -(,) -Co) a: c: ~E ~E caE ::) Co) W 4) I- ...- C)!I.. ,... N 00 OJ C') <t .ir :E :::) z -Co) -Co) -Co) 0 ~E .~ E BE Z :E ...-N ...-N 00 - - 0 Q Q C) - ~ =cn - - ...- .- ...- - .- .c. - .c . .c UJ 0 UJQ en - 0 'CQ 'C en to c...- - ,... 0 N ...- M - - ~ - 70 .~ ~ ~I _u _u _u BE BE BE 00 00 00 ~I -u -u -u BE BE BE 00 0,,"," 00 en fi:1 -u -u -u ~ - BE BE BE . - o M 00 00 Z :J m ... U en ~ -u -u -u BE BE BE .- :x: - > u.. .- 00 o&n 00 u.. m <C - ::J -u -u -u a: .c c BE BE ~ U w BE ~ u.. 00 o&n 00 . . 0 ~ CJ W -u -u _u a: s:: ~ BE BE BE W (1) .- al C) 00t!_ O~ 00 ~ <C .f'; :J z -u -u -u 0 ~E BE ~E Z == 00 ON 00 - - 0 0 0 - 0 - co - &n - - - - .. .- 0 =. ""'" - =. CJ) =. U) I . en - o. "C 0 "C en 0 c 0 - ""'" N N ?"- M N 0 - - 58" 7/ """"'. -7"< ""...... ,. ~I ..(.) ..(.) ..(.) ~E ~E ~E (.) C\l0 ,..0 00 ~I ..(.) ..(.) ..(.) ~E ~E ~E C\l0 C\l0 00 en ..(.) ..(.) 1.0(.) . - ~E ~E ~E t- o a: - LI. MO C\l0 00 Z :::) U ;:) ..(.) ..(.) ..(.) c: ~E ~E BE - 0 J: U. 0- I- ~o C\l0 00 U. co <t U 1.0(.) ..(.) a: c ..(.) ~E ~E - w BE t- W 3: u. ~o C\l0 00 . 0 0 > (,) w ..(.) 1.0(.) ..(.) a: c: ;:) BE BE ~E W Q) (.) I- ~o C\l0 00 aJ C) t'i':-' :IE <t .. :::) Z 1.0(.) 1.0(.) 1.0(.) 0 ~E ~E ~E Z :E MO MO 00 -- -- 00 00 00 - 00 - ~cn - C\l0 = - 0- .- ,.. ,.. r. C\I~ - r. rJ) . . r. rJ) . I 0 - 00 'C 00 'C 0 00 C 00 1.0 ,.. <0 ,.. C\I C\I~ M 0,.. ,..~ -- -- ~ - 7.,:1. ~I a..(,) a..(,) a..(,) ~E ~E ~E cc NC CN ~I a..(,) a..(,) a..(,) ~E ~E ~E cc ,.. ,.. ,..N en ~I a..(,) ;(,) a..(,) t- ; ~E (,)E ~E - CC ,..N Z ,.. ,.. ::::) 0 "C :J a..(,) a..(,) a..(,) (J .- ~E ~E ~E - "C :I: U. C I- C C N,.. ,..N U. 0 < (.) a..(,) a..(,) a: en c a..(,) ~E ~E t- W w ~E ;: U. cc ,.. ,.. ,..N . . 0 > (.) W a..(,) a..(,) a..(,) a: C :J ~E ~E coE W Q,) (,) I- cc ,.. C') CO C) ,.. ,.. t\' :E < tt ::::) Z a..(,) a..(,) a..(,) 0 ~E ~E ~E Z :E cc NC ON - - - It) It) It) ,.. ,.. ,.. _(0 = It) _C') ::C .- ,.. ::N .::: . .:::, .::: . en It) CJ>1t) CI)&n - ~ "C,.. "C~ CI) N C(O a..~ ,.. N NO C') ,.. - - - SJ-'7J ~I &..(,) &..(,) &..(,) ~E ~E ~E 00 00 00 ~I &..(,) &..(,) &..(,) ~E ~E ~E 00 00 00 en ffl &..(,) &..(,) &..(,) . ~E ~E ~E l- . - 00 ~o Z ~~ ~ ~I (J &..(,) &..(,) &..(,) co ~E ~E ~E - en u. CI) 00 ~~ ~o u. :E <t ~I &..(,) &..(,) &..(,) a: co ~E ~E ~E I- -I U. 00 ~~ ~o . . 0 ~ ~I (,) &..(,) &..(,) &..(,) a: C ~E ~E ~E W CI) m C) 00 ~~ ~o '"(i/ :E <t ~ Z &..(,) &..(,) &..(,) Z 0 ~E ~E ~E :E 00 C"I~ ..-0 - o =Je .- 0 ~. UJo -0 (1)(") ..-~ - '& - 7'/ - o =0 -an ~ ..- UJ. ,,0 cJ2 ~o - - - o 0 =~ ~ -~ 0 ~ (I) · &.. · " 000 &..0 0 (") an an ..-. ..- - - ~I .u .u .u BE BE BE 0,.. ,..0 00 ~I .u .u .u BE m . Be uE 0,.. ,.. 0 00 en ~I .u .u .u - ~E ~E ~E l- . - >- ,.. N NO 00 Z -- .- ::) u ~I .u .u .u U - BE BE BE co - u. c. ,.. N "",,0 00 U. 0 <t .- -- .u .u a: co ~I .u ~E ~e I- Z ~E U. ,..N ,..0 00 . . 0 >- (.) ~l .U .U .u a: c ~E ~E me W a> u CD C) ,.. N ,..0 00 ,.....- :E <t '""",, ~\ ::) .U .u .U z ~e Be ~e ,.. N ,..0 ~o - - - 0 0 0 0 _0 C') - ...... =M =..... - - ,.. .co - 0 .c . (/). .c. (/) fI) - 0 ~o "00 fI) 0 CO .C') ,.. ...... N...... M'" 0 ,.. N - - - ~-7f ~I ~tJ ~tJ ~tJ ~E ~E BE 00 00 00 ~tJ ~tJ ~tJ t- ~E ~E ~E < 00 00 00 en en . ~tJ ~tJ ~u . ~E ~E ~E - I- a: - LL. N c.c 00 00 Z => Q) (.) "C ::J ~tJ ~tJ ~u .- ~E ~E ~E - U) J: LL. C:' t- ,.. c.c 00 00 LL. ca <t Q) ~tJ -u (.) ~u a: c ~E ~E 0 w ~E l- s: Nc.c 00 00 LL. . . 0 ~ (.) W ~tJ ~tJ _u a: c: ::J ~E ~E ~E W cu t- ,.. U:L 00 00 CD C) n :E <t =>. z ~u -tJ -u 0 ~E ~E ~E Z == N c.c 00 00 - o o =c.c .- ,.. .c I. eno -CO) !!,... , 0 - - - .- .c en "C c N - - .- .c (I) "C - CO) ~-7~ ~I -(.) -(.) -(.) BE BE =E (.) . ,...N in .,.. coo .,.. ~I -(.) -(.) ~(.) BE BE uE COM 00 00 .,.. .,.. en ~I -(.) -(.) -u t- BE BE BE - N~ .,.. in NO Z .,.. .,.. N .,.. ::) (.) :::) -(.) -u -u en BE BE BE - :t: U. .. I- MCD MCD NO -.- U. -.- .,.. .,.. N .,.. .- <t ~ Q) -(.) -u a: J: C -(.) BE BE t- .00 w BE == U. MCD OCD .,.. 0 . . .,.. .,.. N .,.. 0 > (.) ~I -(.) -(.) IooU a: c: BE BE =E W Q) u m C) MCD .,.. CD NO <t .,.. .,.. N .,.. :E il ::) 100(.) IooU 100(.) BE BE Be z M~ CD CD coo .,.. .,.. .,.. - - - 0 0 0 0 0 0 _in - M -,.... - :::,... - N ~= .s::. .s::. . rJ) . .s::. . rJ) 0 0 en 0 - M "C M "C M en CD C ~ 100 N .,.. 0 N .,.. M N - - - C' - ?? APPENDIX B COURT CALENDARS t" > ..... r" ~ - 7<6 MUNICIPAL COURT ARRAIGNMENT TIMES/OAYS (SUMMARY) SAN DIEGO MUNI NORTH COUNTY EL CAJON SOUTH MUNI MUNI BAY MUN Tr Infractions 8:00AM(Officer's 8:00AM M-F 8:00AM- 8:00AM last name A-L:SDPD) EXCEPT BELOW 2:30PM M-F 12:30PM (Officer's 12:30 PM M-F M-F last name M-Z: SDPD) CHP-ESCOND.PD Tr Misd . SAME SAME SAME 12:30PM . M-Th Non Traffic SAME AS TRAFFIC 8:30AM/.1.;.3Q PM SAME SAME MINOR OFFENSES DUI DAILY 12:30 THURS 8:00 FRI 8:00 FRI 8:00 weeks set into 7 weeks 4-6 weeks (7) 4-6 weeks 4 weeks future The days and times that officers are requested by the courts to schedule arraignments depends upon t courts scheduled calendar at that particular time, the number of citations that.agency issues for that co and the kind of violations involved. RECOMMENDATION FOR RFP: Allow the various agencies to program the appearance date informat into tables which can be changed by the agency. Municipal Court calendars and jurisdictions; comoletely separate and it is extremely unlikely that courts would agree to consistent calendars co un wide. ..iJ. -. '.-",," -"~.;. ~ .. ?1 , """.~,,-\ .-~. - . ~------ .... 0; 0; c;.....: '" iO (II >- '" >- .!:! .- 15 '" >-t: a: cn~ : III > .. '" . U "'= .. .z C = ::l _iii Ew c l- e ,.,,.,ca> = '0 G:>- 0 >- c :20 ::0 0> 0 ftI.~II,., C .. .. 0 ::c oi::i c C >- U -u 2 ~.2 ~.~ '"::l ... "g'i:i-! .. 0 ",,,, '0 . o. u 8li: .~ ,~ e :'5! ::i ",'0 '0__ '" &:", 0 ....10; a: o ~.g :s';: '" "" ... N.: III '0 .l!! c" E Q,'" t:'3 i= 0 <'0 .", "C 0 :II ::i...."'.c... e "'= ",>- Q,u :!:= a>~ :2 5- 01 &: .. '" ..i =0> ~.... -.c 0;'0 C a: '" ;;;w '" Z 01 - >- oj u... .. 0'" e( :'i .c. ... - C . . ",. '" >-l;; u= ~ .0 :l'" ~ 8 =~ ... 0 =0 '" ::! a: - 0'" : ..", ~ 0 ~~ '" c Z -0> .'0 "'~ a: z ~"; ~ ::; c( 0 u'" a:; ~:> ..~ 'OQ, 0 w ",- e.z III 0; ",Jt 0 -0 co; c ':: Co Cc "E e.w ~ 'iii 0 ...'" ...J =~ ..:!: .c A. '> cCl 01. "'- 0'" lI. c( c:_ ;: I- ",'" . .>- ~ =.: 'c,; A. is 0.5: . c: JtU .. &: U "'- .sz '" :> C .!!Jt II: '" "', 0'" ..- "'", -Cl c 21 :;:) '" ->- _a> Q.o; -'0 7&0 '" .='" : '" c Q. '0", "'''' ..c Cl : ....c: "'- .~ 01 -0 ",'" "C 0 . "'- 0 Q. ='0 ....- Q.", -0 -- 2 CC "'.. .5: '" -. ';'0 .. -c -.. "'~ :l::i "'8 c E. ",a: - &: .... U Uo ",,,, -.. .... -a: '" :> c:J ~I -- .!:! 0" :i 0 ..- 'S ~~ ~'" .. 'iiic ~.. c~ ::c 0; '" z "'''' >- -- ai.g ::l '0 -'" '" 0 'O&: C - ",'" ..0 'Ol!! '" _e. _c. ca: '0 .. i= Ul 01 ",- '" ~E _Jt ->- t:'" Q E III '" c. >-.. ..e. .... .510 '" iO I- uC c'" ..- Ill' .t: .!!'" s! '" . Q. ~I c- e 0' -:l ~'O '0" 81 ;;;z c'" 'u III ",.. :: cQ. 1>0 .e : e. "'!!! ..u (II '" "'.IOCDO ",. c'" "': .: C 0 U .>- I- ..>- "'~ E- =. (J .. ..- .... "'w .c .. a: ....II ~~~~~ ..'" - .. "'&: -'" '" 0'- 2.. ~::i .... '" )( CI oooao "''0 ::l C" "'.. -- ~; "'>- -I> (II iii -.. ",,, s 0 ~ Q.- 0 0:2 E~ .'" Ul", ~= -.. le -w e.'" '" ;\ -Mr.n,...." Q.c -. "'u '0.. I- '0 ~ ' (!o Q..!! en u'" "'- Q.C .!!... "''0 C.!! a: > - ..- ~ui III "'''' '0", -c ..c ~c. ~~ -c "'. ",.c "'. 0'" "'" -= ::l cUl !i;.. "'0 20 ... &:.! .01 . . '0'" :l= "'0 .c... ::l ~I -", Q.'" alUl "''0 ow g:!: >.- -- -" E", "'~ 0 ~o ,!::?M -", />>;; e ="6 .Eo '" ,c",. "'~ =0 =N =~ -", -Q. "'Q. &:", &:'0 -&: >- (J ..e( ~~ - - III -. -Q. ,cQ, U.c Uc =li~ j: 'y ..., -&: ::0 Oce 0- <: : (/)1 CD e(_ <'" ..... Ul_ Ul.'" 0 CI '0 cci N '" ... \l) "" (II ....I. Z - N ,.; . ... ''''I i:1 Ia< ...0.1- fit 0,... , ' ,.....-. l"'I-.~~= -.... ~ _1'lI~ :I~; ,.....-. ",;..1 .PlO"" '''' t-l"'~~= -.... -.... 'lD .C,)I tDPlO"" Z ~ .Neft. '2 ..~... en a<1~1 -.... .::l --.. '''' ~ --.. W .e "'N.. ., .._elD , ,.. fit 0""" :~ t-I --.. .. ). ;.~.. : != .. --.. .- ;21 ..-... 2 2 .....0 < --.. . ~I -..... ! en! , 0 ''''' - , I '" , .- a: 1"'1 i 1:1...0..._ '" ::::l . I~I-."''' ... N....,O 0 .> "'N ......N.., '.. -..... a: t-l ,.....-. . i'" "_.f'l0 I", .. ...IDI'lI_ u'" .. ; _NN >- "'NPI 1= I: -.... en = ~I ......0.. ell -....... .,..... -. u.en acl, -.......... 21.. ~~E 'Cl -.... :I~i III :. 1= .. ~..,o,... 0'" ~'=" · .i e ~.. .. . 12 _ft 2 __~..N a: !"', I",j '" < . 0 1"'1 I z I 1"'1 1ft w I... ..~CD'" I... ...e. 0 ~ .N.. .. >i , __N - -.. --.. < actt-.'" 2: ~:;;:; . i"-.. I \.=-.. ::!!I-, __N I> ~ '__N u cl~I"""'''' 0 ll:1~ ..,0,..... 5. fill..... en =1 -..... --.. . ~_N .z .ef~ ""-~:J~ ~ r .. "~."'Jl.i; c...i ........ o _NI'lI '~2i..... CD :~ ~.~.... ' 2 ..~~ ' _ N . "N ft ! ., .' :5;-8'tJ '" ~ ....0,... a< -.... '" .. IAN.. '. -~.. Ii ~ .~. -- .. ..,0....- __"'PI .0 2 "_."'0 ! -..... '" '" a< ~ _..N -.. '" .. ...~- N '''' -.. .~ ~ .fIIO"" en '" -.... en > .. .N.. ... 0 ~-.. z 2 ~ .. -.. 1ft .. ~ lIP_.. I~ - -.. .. ...0...._ . . --..... 0 ~ "'.."'0 .. -..... U .. ~..... 0 ~"i 2 .. - .. 'fIl , .--.--- '" ~ ...0.... -.... :: .. iaN.. C,) -~.. a< ~ ....-. e --.. "'0,....._ 2 .. --I'll" 2 "....0 _N... fIl '" ~ ......~. > _"N a< .. ...0.... e -"N = ~ ..... a< -.... . .. ..-.. '" --.. ~ 2 ... . N '" , I> '" ~ ..,o......~ --I'll" N....O ia< .. -..... ie ~ ..I'lI. ,= -.... IZ ,......- Ie .. ~.... ," 2 ...... .. i - .. '" . APPENDIX C - CITATION ROUTINGS ~. ~. ~-8"1 . , , I r- )> :e CJ) m C) ; )> z - -n -I Z 0 )> C :0 -I - - m (j 0 , C)_m-nz QzS:OJ] o ~:oo o -J c: C II ~ . i )> -= Z 1<, ..' :z -I C> G> -< m en z 0 - m CJ) ~'-8';' . s: -t I r... 0 < 0 r...s:-t-f ~o~g r...g..-f C i:-f; 0 0 0 < '""- !ca= - 0 Or... -t _.::1 _ (') c:< -< c c: --.-. . )> ::D (1)(')(')0 . ::D )> -. -. -t "'C s:- -f =I m _.CD U) U) -tn o~ , "'OOCD:g ~ 0~3 -.. CD CD.. r... i: -ts:-t -t "'OOI>>-f < 0 0 S:O-n CD _.::1 '"" 0 :,cD' g a 0 m == - (') 0 :E < 0 s: (1)-f r ~ I>> (1) '"" r... 0 i: ~o ::I < 0 0 -. -. ::I 0 co - ::I:i:-f ~I':,' ~o~ "._" "-f ::I: i: '"" (1) -.1>> mtn- 0 0 -~- - -. - 0 :TCD(') -f m3-n r... -< c: ::I CD CD < ~ ::D c,l>>o -t U)::I::I U) mO'< -'"" r- (1) m - '< ~ i: 0 0 z 53 -rrJ ~ APPENDIX D - SAMPLE CITATION ~:,' 'I', ~-8'1 <. . .J IMPORTANT. READ CAREFULLY ........ING: It feu ..11......'_.ra.c.id~......~:~. ... ..". J ~~ "'n~d Ioy . II. .ONTHS IN ~AIL ""~lt;. ....~...NE;. . . ... H~"'.lh. """...I-.p.lY'.h. COoIi s.c........ _JO.n. '.SK..I J.1.r.......iddH.......~...-II~ ...1 wl114'MOtD ."'....ua_... ,......r.. yeut"i.....,.. .......~.ft...., ~l'''''. ".!~d _.1 jl!!ort!!.IlI:I.....~~,.,..~- - .- aAlLJH RIIA.T.OH~" lie ..rll ot~ COIIILIa ..... .... "'""~ .. .~, An ace.,. I ......h ot 1Il.1t .. ....,..... ,., .......,....... For .0.... ottan... 1M eourt ...., ._..... ............ Itr .... ..M ....... " I. M ......I!H. ........., ,......1'. ,... ot ,.......,.,.. .....r. Utwktr Vahle" CodIl ..cUon 11101 . ..11 tort........ I. . .on.tot.... ot 1M cIIIl,... o"a.... .... Into,........... .......... fro.. ......... ......,f~"'.....~ Il ~... -". Aeou".., ....te. ..., 1M --'1M to '1M ...... ........... ..... cltat_ '.".Ia", ,......Mr . In ..,..,..... ..... .........., ... 'n4lclllifl Iha 0.; 'lqulrMI "IHMU ., ......, .h..h "'., .. .......... It ,ou eo net ,...... '''.. MI~ ,.1!'Il......- ....11. .,..,.........~........uM .............. .,pea, In court .., Dr INt.,. u.. .IIM .n' .... ~IfM41 Oft lha lace of thla C"'l~n. ___"I.c""1I1 .r........onI~ ....1* ~ .. .pt:rk..Dt.JII'.Co;wL.. NIGHT COURT: ....tOM .,. h.ld ..e" W........, C....... ..,., ".Ud.,.) II ZIO ~lIal.'''.I: 'II c.Q.. 'Ior ....Ti.ri..ilill........."... ill,.... .......1. 'aki...,., ,... 01 lull', .. HI eulU,. 1.1.. ,.. . lriIIl ute .f,... w'''' . Irtal. 0"'1"1 ..nd ......... YOU' "aU. or ... oW..................."... ....... : fUUIJ. T. UN ...,... court. 1M at ,... Clan.. OttIeo...... "u..,.. Court .. .~ plI. _ lhe Wed_., .._.....'M~~.._ eIled ...._... eour't h~rI".. .... te, ..loIalloM et ............. -If. Me trlala .... ....d a. aIIftL.... '" ..... - - .-- -_:...,.. .~ , I I , I I I I I :' '.0 ~!' you _..-., court. ... ,our n!.~.... n..;,~ .... MU.' 11M 8ceolft.a"l.d .., yeu, ..-,.".ca) Of' .uanlll.n(.~~ . CORRECTAILE VIOLATIONS;. Tho.. "rlw.,~.IIMaM. ...... ,.....'..lon. .nd ",.chanlcal ..laU.n. ch.d In ace.''''''. _".. V."lc" Cod. ..cllon 40110(alwlll .. dl.......... .., the court It PROOF OF COAAECTlON I. ,.,..."t.d '0 IN c.un " ",.U 0' In ~....... _ ... IMtore ,... .p....'.nce d.... Vi......... of V.htele Cod. .-,.... ...a (_",'_..._1" tn..re.e, "'8r ... . d11I1I'laoOol .; 'Ihe _ u_ ......; -..0Wiftt ~jj;jji ......liCe . .. "........... ,.............'.1" 8 'ot.. co...Ie.."t wi'" V.h.... Cede ......,. 1102.... ... ..nd .. 'M ,I.. '''I. cll.'"'' W.. "'.d.. - - -- . -.-. ...: :. "fOIl' of cornelloft ."ould 1M O....IMtII N' _,....,.. ........ ",11.".tlon, .nd .........nl .t...nON: COIIIIE~;Illl;""'.~!" ~~Tic?NS !1I.IIEDlA'TILY. IIETHODS C!, OITAININD CEIIY"ICATION.Of c:.ORIIECTIOH: ,. ttouuUon cD"ItOl ~..... .101.11.... ........ eNlltiMI .., . .... chM:1r. .'.110" lie....... " 1M Call...... ....... .. .......o~;.. "pair. L.",p. .....,... ..... ........ .,..... ........... ...,... nrtlfled .. J. CorMcl.d"r.n ."''''rlud .napHlloa.... ............ ....... .....M . ...elfle wto..Io"(.>>.. . .~... ............... .... ..w.,.. ........ .......... ..,................. ..".ct.d ,. .I.ft onlc. of .... O'...rt......., ........y~.IOllV' ... .., _. cl.,. or daput, cl.,1I of . court. ,. P,oof.' corr.ctlon. alC." to, wiola.Io"8 ...tc" 1IMt.. 1M 0'"'''' .t . .."If_d 1ft.'.U.'ion .nd lupeClI_ ..........tDIIV... '" . etM of '''a c....... ",a, ... oM.IMld ., ..., poIlc. tI...."..... du,I"1 telU10, .......... _.. . CERTIFICATE OF CO....EC1'ION S.cllofl(a) ~~~~~~~ ., ...,.... 'I.D.. Ag.ner D... VIOl.,.d C It I C."..,toft , ,. I .. .... t. I I .- ---.-- -- ---. - . o-r'. .\::... .... .' 5j - 8'5' i LA liES" __ICE DEP_NT, LAIIIESA, CAUFOANIA NonCE TO APPEAR G 0_ -.-.e '--e'ENlOR - . , . ... , .. 0:::::- [J =- AI , . n c.....fY.c.UI) o IOOIC_ -.... - . I y - I'l&.l POll......." (Y.c a..,~ III al"", I'" .u 110......... c... o 0 o 0 o 0 r- ''''&0 """tloa. t "...tII.... I ".fl. _I. LOca,.. 0lI' WtOUTtOIlfS, ":&I;;&C I -= "~ ,.....=:=.~ c:rn OCCUIItI W III ...AO COIIDCTIOWa T...,,.C COtIOfTtOIlI na.,oo Q..O'r .....Iwn ..,. ..... ...."... UDMT I ....J vtOUT1OWI1IOT co....nID . in' "lIIl1.Ct. OICL..,. 011""011....,....... nun. f___~ .....,.-...-.......c:.................__...... ""-'t....~ La__ - -...........-. -....~ 10____ j WfTMOUT aCMnn__ .""1. T. I ...~. TO ........ aT TMI f.... "..I.ACI -.caTCO "LOW. : X SGIIWE 1,'.tI. .. .....DOI Otl CLUe 0lI' TMI "LOW UIITID CO\ItI, ..T, ::lAM :::: JIM ON ::J "...' ....1. .....~......I'..:...~.. caT --: NWI...... "."HIe coun NOeAlIOIlI ea"". .. - :....J ..., ..ADOW".... H~ u."OO, CA o ::":.c:=':::::='~'hOII 0 =:~-.:=~~ca:_oo.C& .-.........ttor-........c........c.-... .... ,.,... w.c. ...... ...,.... "1Q,..c. en... NOH"ReN aUIIND' FOIlMS ".......7192 (21.1) 6MC71 50 - ~I, ~'''' --L.. '. { . 0296 MONAacH aUl1NU1 FOUlS tn.....TJ12 OUlUWZ71 LA MESA POLICE DEPARTMENT,LA MESA, CAUl'ORNIA CONTINUATION OF 0-- NonCE TO APPEAR T."""'..._...... 00. .... I All DAYwncawu.. CU _.1. 0'" .... .... VI'" UC. lID. "A" Sue_LI POIII _....L fW.c. ...tel H' ....... ... n. .. ......-... - Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl 0 Cl Cl Cl Cl l:! - Cl Cl ::; ::J ~ ~ A< Cl Cl y-,~ Cl 0 Cl ~ ~ Cl Cl 0 - ~ D ::J Cl Cl D ::J "11 TM* o WIOUTtOIfI IIOT __ma _..... NIHtICL OICU,H. _..-a..... ... M&.-.'. I___.__.._...._.,c....__~......_ ....--....---- .... --..-.~ ,..- .......-.~.._____.ca.r 1,0, _ "'MOUT ADlIIln.... GUILt. 1 "litOtI", 10 P"'''. ..,'''II' ,... .M._&.ACI, tMOICllT.D_'.... x=''''. ___ (/0 I 0 ._..........,.,............c........~ Ill..., ,.,... .,t. ...... ...,..... "au. ..c::. ....... ... ....... ~'g'7 0" \ , . APPENDIX E = EQUAL EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM, CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 11'> .1'; . ~,-" I.' . - '.~ , ~ , , EQUAL OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM FOR CONTRACTORS DOING BUSINESS WITH THE SAN DIEGO DATA PROCESSING CORPORAnON The Sari:Diego DPC Is committed to en Equal OpPortunity Program purauant to epplicable State end Federal laws end guidelines, to provide Equal Oppon,,-nity In all activities including employment of Individuals end firms which contract with San Diego OPC, . CERnFlCATE OF COMPLIANCE. IFirm namel The objectives of the Equal Opportunity Program for contractOra doing buaineu with the San Diego OPC are to promote equality of opportUnity end to prohibit discrimination in employment practices. As an authorized official for the above-named firm I hereby certify by the signature affixed below that said firm will comply with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. as amended, the California Fair Employment Practices Act and any other applicable federal and state laws and regulations hereinafter enacted es well as those requirements addressed by the City of San Diego's Equal Opportunity Program, recorded with the City Clerk as D?Cument RR-262633. Funher, if awarded a contract with San Diego OPC, I will submit a current work force Analysis Form and, If requested, an Equal Opportunity Plan which addresses the affirmative actions that will be take'\'l by me to achieve the OPC's goalS for the employment of minorities, women, and the handicapped. IName Of AuthorIZed OffICial) ~TitII) ISlgnature of AuthOrIZed OffiCIal) 10atal 3jj"Yi -~----._---,._-~---_._._.- TInS PAGE BLANK ~ -' <Jo .. DEPUTY SHERIFFS' ASSOCIATION OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY RECEIVED 7546TradeStTeet. SanDlego, CA 92121 March 25, 1992 '92 lIAR 31 P 4 :36 ;"::v"-:--' ".... . - .,. ., ,. " if D ) JI5CH~.A~A"~ IA i I I -W,~~.Rm-'m';~.i jLE 'I fifiJ! -j 17 ; r' L,HAR 3 J 1992 f lj t I 01"7:",;,,.__ I J ~ (\!)~:,>/'-,:,!~ GFF'~S It ~-"~"l';'-~' \'''1; ~.,---u[ Honorable Tim Nader City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Dear Mayor Nader: We are writing you about an issue of which we know you and your constituents are greatly concerned -- jail and courtroom funding. As you are aware, in June 1988 San Diego County voters approved proposition A to establish a one-half cent sales tax to fund needed construction of jails and courts. The County had collected approximately $340 million when the california Supreme Court ruled the proposition unconstitutional. In May, the Fourth District Court of Appeal will 'begin deliberating on the disposition of the $340 million already collected, on which the Supreme COurt was silent. There is no fair or practical way to return it to the people from whom it was collected and there is no legal precedent for the disposition of these funds. The court could well decide to give the money to the state general fund. We are asking your COuncil to support a grassroots effort to petition the Fourth District Court of Appeal to ask them to permit the county of San Diego to use the funds already collected for the purposes voters originally intended -- to open East Mesa Jail and to construct additional court space to get dangerous criminals off our streets. we are asking your council to the already collected funds as Sheriff's Association office. pass the enclosed resolution to support spending intended and to send that resolution to the Deputy The Resolution should arrive by May 1st. Because of the serious crime problem in the region and the critical need for justice facilities, we believe these funds should remain in San Diego County to be spent for the purposes a majority of the voters intended. Thank you. Sincerely, YIWOA-l\. T>if;(J ~ vY\ (~ Randy Dibb, President Deputy Sheriffs' Association Jim Roache,Sheriff San Diego County Dianne Jacob, Jamul-Dulzura Board ~~~(C\) ~~ ~t\.~ ~,'-'., ~"J 'ts~ ~~Q'- 234-2611. 578-5950. 480-8369. 943-0462. (FAX) 271-9610 WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS .5 h- / fn '1/7h~ RESOLUTION THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA TO: THE HONORABLE JUSTICES OF THE FOURTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL WHEREAS, in June 1988 San Diego County voters approved Proposition A to establish a one-half cent sales tax to fund needed construction of jails and courts; and WHEREAS, the County of San Diego has collected approximately $340 million in sales tax revenue pursuant to proposition A; and WHEREAS, said proposition has been ruled unconstitutional and the County of San Diego has been ordered to cease collection of said one-half cent sales tax; and WHEREAS, a critical shortage of jail and court space persists in San Diego County which forces law enforcement authorities to release potentially dangerous criminal suspects onto our streets; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council on behalf of the residents and taxpayers do hereby respectfully petition the court to permit the County of San Diego to use the approximately $340 million already collected for the purposes voters originally intended it...opening of the East Mesa Jail and construction of additional court space to get dangerous criminals off our streets. Date 5;., -;;. COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item ~. Meeting Date 4/7/92 ITEM TITLE: Claim Against the City SUBMITTED BY: Director of personnel~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes____ No~) REVIEWED BY: ci ty Manager '1 Claimant: Peerless construction, Rendell and Margaret Whittington, and Phillip and Gayle Nowakowski c/o Jeffrey Garber, Esq. Edwards, White & sooy Attorneys at Law 1615 Murray Canyon Road, Ste. 1000 San Diego, CA 92108 On March 9, 1992, a Claim against the city was filed on behalf of the above claimants by the law firm of Edwards, White & Sooy. The Claim alleged damages occurred on September 25, 1991, within the limits of the Superior court, allegedly resulting from the city's improper construction, supervision and/or approval of street improvements, construction and/or grading conducted by or on behalf of the city at 35 Las Flores Drive, Chula vista, CA. Peerless construction was served with a Summons and Complaint concerning construction defects and filed this claim for indemnity against the City. Due to questionable liability on the part of the City, it is the recommendation of our claims administrators, Carl Warren & Company, and Risk Management that this claim be denied. RECOMMENDATION: Deny the above claim. J Form A-113 (Rev. 11/79) 5/-1 VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS OF THE UNITED STATU POUNDIED t... . ROBERT H. SCHOLER POST 2111 P. O. BOX 113 CHUL.A VISTA. CAUF. 112012 March 24, 1992 His Honor the Mayor, City of Chula Vista. Dear Mayor Nader: The Veterans of Foreign Wars Post #2111, located at 299 "I" Street here in Chula Vista will soon submit an application requesting permission to install an elevator on our building. Because we are a non-profit organization, your consideration to waive the $200.00 filing fee will be appreciated. Thank you. Sincerely yours, q~cK~. Merlin Harberts, Commander. cc - City Council Members. Mr. Malcolm: Thank you for your support. Your concurrence will be appreciated. ~q(J~ ~N~lnEN COMMUNICATIONS 5j'-/ . . . council Agenda statement f.,.~ nem:~ ~rJ. Keeting Date: March ~ ~/11'1<.. :rtem Title~~. Ordinance "Ij~ - Amending Chapter 3.48 of the ~~ Chula Vista Municipal Code to Authorize the ~ Issuance of Revenue Bonds to Finance or Refinance ~~ Industrial, Commercial or utility Projects Located ~~ Within or without the city Upon a Finding of vOY Benefit to the City # B. ~:~~~:~;o~il.~~:;eD:~;:~~:gB~~~:niv;~l:~~: to SDG&E for Electrical Facilities n..~ Submitted by: Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney ~ Lyman Christopher, Director of Financ~~ Agenda Classification: () Consent ( X) Action Item ( ) Public Hearing ( ) Other: 4/5ths vote: ( ) Yes (X) No San Diego Gas & Electric Company ("SDG&E") has requested city assistance in financing or refinancing certain gas and electric generation, transmission and distribution facilities located outside the City as well as within the City. .However, Chapter 3.48 of the Municipal Code does not currently authorize the city to issue revenue bonds to finance or refinance projects outside the city. The attached ordinance amends Chapter 3.48 to include additional findings with respect to city benefits to be derived from financing and refinancing utility facilities and would permit issuance of city revenue bonds to finance or refinance projects located outside the City provided that the City Council first makes a specific finding that city interests would be served by such financing or refinancing. The attached ordinance also makes certain amendments to Chapter 3.48 to reflect current federal tax law. . The attached resolution will permit expenditures hereinafter incurred by SDG&E for such facilities to be recovered from such bond proceeds. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the attached ordinance which permits the city to issue revenue bonds to finance or refinance industrial, commercial or utility projects located within or without the city upon a finding of benefit to the city. h -I Adopt the attached resolution. BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: None. None applicable. -., DISCUSSION: PurDose of Amendment SDG&E provides electric and gas service throughout service areas that include the City. Under California Public Utility Commission ("CPUC") rules, SDG&E's costs of providing this service are passed through to its retail customers, including its customers in the City. SDG&E expects to incur over $2 billion of future costs through 1996 in acquiring or constructing electric and gas facilities needed to continue providing retail gas and electric service throughout its service areas. This includes Projected costs of repowering SDG&E's South Bay generating units and other facilities within the city, as well as facilities located outside City limits. Many of these facilities located outside the city will be needed to provide reliable gas and electric service to SDG&E's customers within the City. SDG&E expects it will finance approximately half of the cost of these new facilities (about $1 billion) through debt. .-" Interest on that debt will be passed along to SDG&E's ratepayers. Because the CPUC requires SDG&E's rates to be set on a uniform basis, gas and electric rates imposed on city residents will be equally affected by interest expense on debt issued to finance facilities within the city and facilities located outside the City. In order to minimize its retail electric and gas rates, since 1983 SDG&E has borrowed over $550 million on a tax-exempt basis through the City of San Diego and over $100 million on a tax-exempt basis through the California Pollution Control Financing Authority (the "CPCFA"). Such tax~exempt financing now is possible only to the extent the California Debt Limit Allocation Committee makes a share of the State's private activity bond volume cap available. In recent years, SDG&E has been unsuccessful in obtaining the full amount of desired private activity bond volume cap. SDG&E believes its chances of obtaining additional volume cap will be enhanced if the City also is in a position to issue tax-exempt revenue bonds for the benefit of SDG&E. SDG&E has indicted an interest in borrowing up to $100 million on a tax-exempt basis through the city in 1992. However, the attached ordinance would not obligate the city to issue any bonds for the benefit of SDG&E. Rather, it would -., 2 6-4 . . . merely empower the city in the future to determine to issue such bonds. "''''f' Authoritv for Amendment Section 200 of the Charter of the City provides, in part, as follows: "The city shall have the power to make and enforce all laws and regulations in respect to municipal affairs, subject only to such restrictions and limitations as may be provided in this Charter and in the Constitution of the State of California. In section 3.48.010 of the Municipal Code the city Council has found and determined that the City's financing and refinancing of industrial and commercial development within the city constitutes a "municipal affair" of the City. Accordingly, section 3.48.020(K) presently limits such financing to "industrial and commercial" facilities that are "located within the city." Section 3.48.200 permits these aspects of the Municipal code to be amended, provided the interests of holders of outstanding bonds are not adversely affected. The attached ordinance includes a finding and determination of the City Council that the issuance of revenue bonds for the purpose of financing and refinancing regional utility facilities also constitutes a "municipal affair" of the City. It also. includes a statement that the city Council is of the opinion that the proposed amendments will not impair or adversely affect the interests of existing bondholders. It is proposed that these City Council findings and determinations be confirmed and validated by a final judgment of the California state courts before the City actually issues any bonds pursuant to these amendments. Bonds Any bonds issued by the city on behalf of SDG&E will be limited obliaation revenue bonds and will not constitute an indebtedness against the general credit or taxing power of the city or the State of California. Payment of the bonds will be solely from and secured by a pledge of revenues to be received from SDG&E pursuant to a Loan Agreement to be entered into prior to the issuance of any bonds. FISCAL IMPACT: As mentioned, any bonds issues will be limited obligations of the city of Chula Vista. All staff and other costs incurred relating to a bond issue will be reimbursed to the city by SDG&E. 3 b ...3 In addition to the above, City staff and SDG&E have discussed the payment of a one-time fee, payable at the time of ~ issuance of bonds, in an amount equal to .25% of the principal amount of the revenue bonds issued for the benefit of SDG&E. The fee is the same as currently charged by the. city of San Diego, Thus, if the City were to "issue $100 million of revenue bonds for the benefit of SDG&E, the city would expect to receive $250,000 in fees. -., ~ 4 t- -'I t,()14PtE1'E IJ~/J. !e/,IJ/JlfJ 3/2.1//91- ORDINANCE NO. ~4qls' Seca WD~ . ~DII\1 G~ Z> -4Da \Or/~ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 3.48 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE TO AUTHORIZE ISSU- ANCE OF REVENUE BONDS TO FINANCE OR REFINANCE INDUSTRIAL, COMMERCIAL OR UTILITY PROJECTS LOCATED WITHIN OR WITHOUT THE CITY UPON A FINDING OF BENEFIT TO THE CITY WHEREAS, the City of Chula vista (the "City") is a municipal corporation and charter city duly organized and exist- ing under a charter (the "Charter") pursuant to which the city has the right and power to make and enforce all laws and regula- tions in respect to municipal affairs and certain other matters in accordance with and as more particularly provided in Arti- cle XI of the Constitution of the State of California (the "Constitution") and section 200 of the Charter; WHEREAS, Chapter 3.48 of the Municipal Code of the City (the "Municipal Code") authorizes the City to issue bonds for the purpose of financing or otherwise assisting the acquisition of projects located within the city to promote the health, safety and welfare of the City, to encourage industrial and commercial development within the City and to enhance the financial resourc- es of the City; WHEREAS, the City Council of the City has heard public testimony and reviewed written materials, which together with the personal knowledge of the members of the City Council, evidence the need for the city to provide financial assistance with respect to regional utility generation, transmission and distri- bution systems in order to promote the aforementioned City interests; WHEREAS, the City Council of the City, acting under and pursuant to the Constitution and the Charter, finds and deter- mines that the public interest and necessity require the adoption of this ordinance to authorize issuance of revenue bonds for the purpose of financing and refinancing regional utility generation, transmission and distribution systems and that providing such assistance constitutes a municipal affair of the City; WHEREAS, the City Council of the City desires to amend certain provisions of Chapter 3.48 of the Municipal Code in order to authorize the issuance of such revenue bonds and to conform certain references in such chapter to applicable federal tax law; and AMEND.DOC D4D452-DDDDD2-5D6 03/19/92 at 09:02 bA-1 eIJHPI.6re ()Il./). S~II"'N~f.> 3/.z~/q2. ~OND 'fl: ORDINANCE NO. 2499 RtADING ire "IND JJ.Do AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA 'PilO/f APPROVING THE PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS FOR THE SALT CREEK RANCH SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN WHEREAS, the area of land which is the subject matter of this ordinance is a parcel of land located north of the EastLake Business Park, northeast of the upper Otay Reservoir and south of the San Miguel Mountain, and is diagrammatically presented in Exhibit A ("Project Area"); and, WHEREAS, a person having control over all or a portion of the development of the project area to-wit: the Baldwin Company has proposed or is in the process of proposing the development of the project area with the following improvements: a plan for the construction of 2,662 dwelling units (on 749.7 acres), a neighborhood and community park (29.3 acres), two elementary school sites (3.1 acres), a fire station site (1.0 acre), 2 community purpose facility sites (7 acres), natural open space areas and nature roads, all of which is more specifically described in section 2.0 "Project Characteristics, of the document entitled "Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report - Salt Creek Ranch SPA" (EIR No. 91-3) prepared by ERCE Environmental and Energy Services Inc. ("Consultant" now known as Ogden Environmental & Energy Services, Inc.) and dated February 1992 ("FSEIR") which project description contained therein, and is further refined on pages R-1 through R-5, is incorporated hereby by reference as the "Project" as if fully set forth herein and which takes precedent to any inconsistencies with other descriptions or reference to the project herein contained; and WHEREAS, in conjunction with the Salt Creek Ranch SPA Plan, the Baldwin company and City staff have concurred on Planned Community ("PC") District Regulations ("Zoning Regulations") for the Project Area, a copy of which is on file in the office of the city Clerk as Document No. PCM-91-4; and, WHEREAS, the city Council did, by the adoption of Resolution No. 16554 ("Certifying Resolution"), certify that the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, as defined therein, was prepared in accordance with the requirement of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Environmental Review procedures of the city of Chula vista, and the guidelines lawfully promulgated thereunder, and as further certified that the information contained therein has been reviewed and considered by them; and, WHEREAS, the recitals and resolutions of the city Council contained in said Certifying Resolution are incorporated herein as if set forth in full here at; and, 1 7- I /".' . . . \ COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item xeeting Date ~7 n..-I ("?~/1/~1.. ITEM TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Salt Creek Ranch sectional Planning Area . (SPA) Plan, Public Facilities Financing Plan, Water Conservation Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan and Planned Community District Requlations and Desiqn Guidelines (PCM-91- 4): the Baldwin Company 19. Resolution 1~~~~rtifYing that the Final SEIR-91-3 for Salt Creek Ranch has been prepared in compliance with CEQA, the state CEQA Guidelines and the environmental, review procedures of the City of Chula Vista ~. Resolution "Jr~roVing the Sectional Planning Area Plan for Salt Creek Ranch, Public Facilities Financing Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan, Water Conservation Plan, Design Guidelines, CEQA Findings, _~itigation Monitoring Program, and stateme~\e~ OVerriding Considerations C. o~~~~e .2Y"Adopting the Planned Community ~~GDrstrict Requlations ' <(-~J'Y , ~ S~~D BY: Director of ;;anning(f ~ f'" /JrI/81'f/1/" ~IEWED BY: city Manage~ . (4/5tha Vote: Ye. ___ No -1-) The applicant, the Baldwin Company, has submitted a sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan and related items for the 1,197.2-acre Salt Creek Ranch project, located north of the EastLake Business Park, northwest of Upper Otay Reservoir and bisected by Proctor Valley Road (Exhibit A, attached). The property is primarily located within the Chula vista Sphere of Influence and is included in the Chula vista General Plan but has not yet been annexed. LAFCO is processing a Sphere Amendment for 240 acres of the 1,197 acre total as well as the Annexation application concurrently with the City'S SPA processing. A LAFCO Commission hearing will likely be held in May with Chula vista consideration to adopt an annexation resolution in June, 1992. Copies of the Final Supplemental EIR-91-3, sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan, Planned Community District Requlations and Desiqn Guidelines, Air Quality Improvement Plan (contained in SPA), and Water Conservation Plan have been previously forwarded to the )'.5' c.J". "-1 page 2, I:tem Meeting date 15" 3/24/92 ........ Council. Included with this report for your consideration, along with those items previously distributed, are copies of the Public Facilities Financing Plan, CEQA Findings, Mitigation Monitoring Program and Statement of OVerriding Considerations. In October, 1990, the Salt Creek Ranch General Development Plan was approved by the city Council. A Community Forum was held at Bonita Vista Junior High School on December 19, 1991 to familiarize area property owners and interested parties with the SPA Plan. B. RECOMMENDA'1'I:ON 2. 1. Adopt a resolution Certifying that the Final SEIR-91-3 for Salt Creek Ranch has been prepared in compliance with CEQA, the state CEQA Guidelines and the environmental review procedures of the City of Chula Vista: Based on the Findings contained in Attachment No. 1 and Conditions listed herein, adopt a resolution approving the Sectional Planning Area Plan for Salt Creek Ranch, Public Facilities Financing Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan, Water Conservation Plan, and Design Guidelines: -.." 3. Adopt a resolution approving the CEQA Findings for SEIR-91-3, Salt Creek Ranch: 4. Adopt a resolution approving the Mitigation Monitoring Program for SEIR-91-3, Salt Creek Ranch: 5. Adopt a resolution approving the Statement of OVerriding Considerations for SEIR-91-3, Salt Creek Ranch. BOARDS/COMMI:SSI:ONS RECOMMENDA'1'I:ONS On January 16, 1992, the Parks & Recreation Commission recommended approval of the conceptual park plans and trail system (minutes are attached). . On January 20, 1992, the Resource Conservation Commission recommended certification of the Supplemental EIR-91-03, for Salt Creek Ranch SPA and on March 9, 1992, the Commission recommended approval of the Air Quality Improvement Plan and Water Conservation Plan (minutes are attached). --... )5'#,.). ,..}.. . . . Page 3, It_ Meeting date If 3/24/92 On February 26, 1992, the Planning Commission Certified SEIR-91-3 and held a public hearing to consider the SPA plan, Public Facilities Financing Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan and Water Conservation Plan. The Commission continued the public hearing to March 11, 1992, for consideration of the above items as well as the PC District Regulations and Design Guidelines, CEQA Findings, Mitigation' Monitoring Program and Statement of overriding Considerations. The Commission recommended that the City Council approve all of the above items, subject to the conditions listed in this report. In addition to the actions noted above, the Planning Commission also requested staff to work with the applicant to reduce the total number of units in Neighborhoods lOa, lOb, 11, 12, and 13 by approximately 5%, but double the size of approximately 15 lots. In addition, staff and the applicant were requested to evaluate the feasibility of developing a portion of Subarea #3 at the same time as phase I of the project is developed in order to make large lot product available early on in the marketing of Salt Creek Ranch. It was requested that staff return with a report on both of these items when the tentative map comes before the commission. DISCUSSION Salt Creek Ranch General DeveloDment Plan The Salt Creek Ranch General Development Plan defines the general location of all proposed uses and the general circulation system. Its purpose is to serve as a bridge between general descriptions contained in the General Plan and more detailed descriptions proposed in the Sectional Planning Area Plan. The General Development Plan map is included as Exhibit B, attached. It details that within the 1,197.2 acres of Salt Creek Ranch, there are proposed a maximum of 2,817 dwelling units, ranging from multiple' family and townhomes to mid-size single- family detached to large lot single-family dwellings. Also included in the plan are two 10-acre elementary school sites, a 7-acre neighborhood park and 20-acre community park, a l-acre fire station site, two Community Purpose Facility sites totally 7 acres and 351.1 acres of open space. ;:5'- ;J ."7"3 . - """"" Page 4, It_ J'> Xeeting date 3/24/92 The approved Salt Creek Ranch General Development Plan calls for the following mix of land uses and authorizes a maximum of 2,817 dwelling units: LMl'D USE ACRES UNITS 431.1 862 273.7 1,232 35.2 211 47.6 405 787.6 2,710 27.0 72** 354.6 35** 7.0 N/A .-. 20.0 N/A 1.0 N/A 1,197.2 2,817 Low Low Medium Low Medium* Medium Community/Neighborhood Park Open Space Community Purpose Facilities 2 Elementary Schools Fire Station Project Total *LM use at the highest allowable density of LM category. **Density credit permitted by the General Plan. Environmental Review Suppl_ental EIR-91-3 As is noted below in this summary, the direct project related impacts can be mitigated to a level below significant 7 however, there would be cumulatively significant impacts in the following areas: . Aesthetic/Landform Alteration . Water Supply . Coastal Sage Habitat Loss """"" r;F'T ~,. . ;,tl. . . . page 5, It_ Meeting date )5 3/24/92 Summarv Land US8 Potential compatibility. impacts would exist with adjacent properties and developments. The SPA Plan proposes specific techniques to ensure compatibility with adjacent land uses. This EIR identifies sensitive surrounding area and specifies mitigation to provide adequate buffer and design at those boundaries/areas to ensure compatibility. Inconsistencies with the General Plan involve the provision of affordable housing. Measures include the provision of affordable housing as determined by the 1991/92 Housing Element revisions to be adopted by city Council. Landform/Aesthetics Urbanization will permanently alter existing topography, views to the site and aesthetic character of the area. Measures require detailed open Space and Landscape Plan: sensitive grading, design standards: natural open space preservation: greenbelt an scenic highway view treatments: and extensive buffer treatments to be created at the SPA Plan and subsequent stages (see Section 13 below). Hydrology The increase. in impervious surface as a result of the proposed project will change drainage courses and increase flow rates downstream. Additional hydrologic analysis is required prior to' final map approval to specify facilities (size, dimension, etc.) necessary to handle. onsite and downstream flows after development. No significant impacts are forecast. Water Quality The proposed project would create potential water quality impacts due to short-term impacts from construction activity as well as the long-term effects of urban development. The project shall be subject to review and approval by the State Department of Health Services (OBS). The project shall implement ""/y, :l:"S Page i, It_ Meeting date If' 3/24/12 -." mitigation measures as set by DHS prior to issuance of any grading permit. other measures include the preparation and approval of a diversion ditch plan (or acceptable plan), an onsite mitigation monitoring program, an erosion control plan, and a storm drain plan. Biological ae.ource. Project development will significantly and directly impact riparian wetlands, coastal sage scrub, native graSSland habitats, and the California qnatcatcher and cactus wren, both sensitive species. The additional SPA impact to riparian habitat is 0.2 acre. To mitigate additional SPA impacts to 0.2 acre of riparian habitat, ERCE recommends creation/enhancement of riparian habitat. Construction practices and long-term urban activities present secondary threats to adjacent and/or sensitive non-development areas. Impact mitigation includes. construction activity limitations to protect resource preservation areas; revegetation with native species in fire break and cut slope areas; clearing and trimming restrictions; fencing and landscape buffering around open areas by dedication of a natural open space easement. PUblic Service. and utili tie. ...... Water: The project will demand 1,531,531 qpd of potable water and 188,139 qpd of reclaimed water for a total average water demand of 1,719,670 qpd. Impacts related to water can be adequately offset by requirements cited in Section 3.9. Regional cumulative water supply impacts can be slightly reduced by water conservation mitigation herein. Waste Water The project will generate approximately 788,800 qpd of waste water. Mitigation measures include the approval of a Master Plan of Sewerage for the project and the payment of waste water development fees. Ultimate capacity of the Telegraph Canyon and Salt Creek interceptor will be determined prior to approval of final grading ~~. ~ ~-: t - ,...tp ~.__._-_. -- - . . . page 7, zt8111 Keeting date /5 3/24/92 Trall.portation aIld Circulation The project would generate 31,290 daily vehicle trips with 2,777 trips expected during the morning peak hour and 2,986 trips expected during the afternoon peak hour. since the project site is currently vacant, generation of these trips would be additional to those trips already on the street network. Major improvements to the surrounding roadway networks have been identified to mitigate the traffic impact of this project. Improvements necessary as a result of implementation of the SPA Plan are outlined in section 3.7 Mitigation. Noi.e Traffic-generated and urban noise will result implementation. Onsite future noise levels due traffic will require onsite noise attenuation roadways. from project to cumulative along various For the project to comply with the city of Chula vista standards, mitigation and exterior noise impacts must be incorporated into the project design. An additional interior acoustical analysis will be required for all mUlti-family residences located within the 60 dBA Ldn contour. Prehistoric Resource. The potential impacts to prehistoric resources as a result of implementation of the SPA Plan are identical to those that would have occurred with implementation of the GDP. sixteen of the 18 important sites will be directly impacted by the project. Portions of six of those sites, and one additional site, are also at risk of indirect impacts due to phased development of the project. Also, the site possesses a high potential for the existence of paleontological resources. Recommended mitigation includes avoidance and/or data recovery of important cultural resources. This involves a complete data recovery program for cultural resource sites, and paleontological monitoring during grading and, if necessary, a salvage program for resources discovered. -i{ , .., Page 8, Item J.5 -"""'\ Keeting date 3/24/92 Offsite Area of ImDact Biology Hunte Parkwav. A total of 13.8 acres of various habitats would be impacted. Additional impacts from the construction would total 19.7 acres. Any proposed impacts to disturbed wetlands would be considered significant and since a detailed alignment has not yet been determined the exact total, if any, is not known. Measures include enhancement of riparian habitat as 1:1 ratio to . any impacted wetlands. Prior to construction, a final 1603 Streambed Alteration Agreement must be obtained from the California Department of Fish and Game. East H Street. Approximately 5.0 acres of high quality coastal sage scrub would be lost. Additional impacts from the construction corridor would total 6.0 acres of coastal sage scrub. Potential impacts to coastal barrel cactus and California gnatcatcher are considered significant. ~ ,. Measures include a strategy of avoidance, habitat enhancement, and preservation. Reservoir /Waterl ine. Impacts to coastal sage scrub and Cleveland' s golden star are considered significant. Measures include a combination of avoidance and habitat enhancement. Landform/Aesthetics Short-term visual impacts will occur during the construction of Hunte Parkway, East H Street, and the waterline/reservoir. Short- term visual impacts are not significant due to their limited duration and temporary nature. No mitigation is required. The pad elevation of the reservoir is higher than the elevation of the project site and would be visible from most of the surrounding area. Measures to mitigate the visual impact of the reservoir include landscaping the site and painting the tank an unobtrusive color. -"""'\ .if-r . .,.. ~ . . . page 9, J:t_ 15 Meeting date 3/24/92 CUltural Re.ource. Hunte parkwav. Construction of both the proposed interceptor line and Hunte Parkway will affect portions of CA-SDi-12,037; CA-SDi- 12,038; and CA-SDi-12,039 and Isolate 1-314. Mitigation of impacts to important cultural resources can be achieved thr,ough either avoidance or by conducting a data recovery program. East H. street. construction of both the 10-inch pipeline and proposed East H street segment will affect portions of site CA-SDi- 4,530/W-643, which has been tested and determined to be important pursuant to CEQA criteria. Mitigation of impacts to important cultural resources can be achieved through either avoidance or by conducting a data recovery program. Water Reservoir/Waterline. Both direct and indirect impacts of equipment staging and access may affect archeological resources identified as sites CA-SDi-ll,403 Locus F; CA-SDi-II,403 Locus G; CA-SDi-ll,415; CA-SDi-12,030, CA-SDi-12,301; CA-SDi-12,032; CA-SDi- 12,031; CA-SDi-12,034;CA-SDi-12,035; CA-SDi-12,036; CA-SDi-12,260; and CA-SDi-12,261. Mitigation of impacts to important archeological resources due to locating the reservoir and/or waterlines can be achieved through either avoidance or by conducting a data recovery program. Final SPA Plan Desian Alternative The Final SPA Plan design (Sec. 5.3) would maintain the same total land use acreage (1,197.2) as the proposed project. However, the aIr,aunt of acreage allotted for residential, open space, and institutional development would be redistributed. The total number of dwelling units (2,662) would be less than the proposed project by 155 dwelling units. The residential density for both designs is the same at 3.67 dwelling units per acre. Open space acreage is somewhat less than that depicted on the original SPA design but actually increased from that proposed in the GDP. Public facilities acreage is slightly less than the proposed project by 1.2 acres. As described in the SEIR, this final design alternative would have the same or less significant impacts as the described project in Section 2.0 of the SEIR. The analysis in the EIR and the summary are adequate for this alternative. 151 ._ .-:1'1 paqe 10, ztem 15 --.,. Meetinq date 3/24/92 CEQA Findings The CEQA Findings conclude that there would be significant unmitigated impacts in the following areas: cumulative landform/aesthetics, cumulative water supply, and biological off- site impacts. There would be significant but mitigable impacts in the following areas: land use, landform, aesthetics--on and off site (project level), hydrology, water quality, on-site biology, on- and off-site cultural resources, traffic, noise, water supply and facilities, and waste water. This EIR 'is supplemental to EIR-89-03, which found significant unmitigated impact in the cumulative air quality impact, significant but mitigable impacts on schools, geology, soils, conversion of agricultural lands, public services and utilities. Mitigation Monitoring Program The Mitigation Monitoring Program is designed to assure the implementation of measures to avoid significant environmental impacts. statement of OVerriding Considerations The statement of Overriding Considerations was drafted by the applicant's attorney, reviewed and modified by staff. It now forms the basis for approving this project given the significant environmental impacts which will result. --., Salt Creek Ranch Sectional Plannina Area (SPA) Plan According to the Chula Vista Municipal Code, the purpose of the SPA Plan, in a Planned Community (PC) zone, is to provide for orderly replanning of large tracts of land containing a variety of land uses which are under unified ownership or development control. Approval of the Salt Creek Ranch SPA Plan will be the basis for further discretionary approvals. The Salt Creek Ranch Site Plan (Exhibit C, attached) contains 15 residential neighborhoods divided into three subareas: Subarea I, consisting of the westerly neighborhoods (1, 2, 3, 4a, 4b, 5 and 6), will consist of a variety of housing types including multiple family, townhouse, small and mid-sized single-family lots, a 7-acre neighborhood park, a lO-acre elementary school site and a l-acre ~ ~}5 /P _'7.",'0 . paqe 11, :n_ )5 x.etinq date 3/24/92 fire station site: Subarea II, consistinq of mid-sized sinqle- family lots, a 22-acre neiqhborhood park, a 3-acre Community Purpose Facilities (CPF) site and the Salt Creek qreenbelt corridor, and: Subarea III, consistinq of estate-size lots, a 4- acre CPF site and 351.1 acres of natural open space. The Salt Creek Ranch SPA Plan calls for the following mix of land uses: ~ VSR DXSTRXCTS GROSS ACRBS TOTAL maTS SFE Single Family Estate 294.4 440 SF1 Single Family Detached 116.1 380 SF2 single Family Detached 144.2 564 SF3 Single Family Detached 62.1 280 SF4 Single Family Detached 50.3 263 SFA Single Family Attached 35.0 211 . MF Multiple Family 27.7 390 MF Small Lot Single 25.9 134 Family Detached Subtotal OS1 Open Space (Natural) OS2 Open Space (Parks) Neighborhood Park Community Park IS Institutional Uses 2 Elementary Schools 1 Fire station CPF Community Purpose Facilities GRAND TOTAL . ~u - / " .__ .,.. IL 749.7 2,662 351.1 7.3 22.0 23.1 1.0 7.0 1,197.2 2,662 Page 12, :I:t_ )5 .~ Meeting date 3/24/92 Plan structure and Desian Salt Creek Ranch is planned as a residential community with a wide range of housing types which will become available to families and individuals with various income levels and housing needs. The project is basically divided into three subareas with each subarea broken into 'individual and distinct neighborhoods. Densities within the Salt Creek Ranch project are highest at the western edge of the project and decrease as the project extends easterly. Densities also decrease as the project progresses north from the EastLake Business Park, located south of the project. The focal point of the community is proposed to be the Salt Creek corridor, which extends from the foothills of San Miguel Mountain, bisects the project, then extends south through the EastLake development, and eventually to the otay River Valley. This corridor is a major link in the "Chula Vista Greenbelt" and will contain trails that provide essential links in the 26-mile greenbelt system. .....", Subarea #1: The western subarea consists of five distinct residential neighborhoods, bisected by East "H" Street. Neighborhoods 1 and 2, located north of East "H" Street and west of Hunte Parkway, form a typical mid-sized lot (7,560 sq. ft. ave.) single-family neighborhood (standards comparable to R-1-7 zoning). These two neighborhoods, totalling 564 lots, are bisected by an internal open space greenbelt providing a local trail linkage down to East "H" Street. Neighborhood 3, located south of East "H" Street and west of Lane Avenue, is designed as a small-lot (5,230 sq. ft. ave., min. 4,500 sq. ft.) single-family neighborhood containing 263 lots and a sit~ for a I-acre (net) recreation facility designed to provide for this neighborhood's residents. Maintenance of this facility will be handled by a homeowners association. Designs for this facility will be submitted for review and approval prior to approval of the Tentative Subdivision Map. Neighborhoods 4a and 4b, located adjacent to the EastLake Business Park and west of Lane Avenue, consists of 390 multiple family units (at 17.9 dujac) and 134 small-lot (4,750 sq. ft. ave., min. 3,800 sq. ft.) single-family lots, ~ respectively. The total number of units within Neighborhoods Jc;~~ ~'I1- . page 13, ztem xe.ting date ;5 3/24/\12 4a and 4b do not exceed the maximum permissible density for the medium density residential designation approved in the GDP (11 du/gross ac). . Neighborhood 5, located south of East "H" street and west of Hunte Parkway, will contain 111 single-family attached units (at 9.25 du/ac) and 100 mid-sized (6,400 sq. ft. ave., min. 5,000 sq. ft.) single-family lots (standards comparable to R- 1-5 zoning). The total number of units within Neighborhood 5 do not exceed the maximum permissible density for the low- medium residential designation approved in the GDP (6 du/ac). Neighborhood 6, located south of East "H" street and west of Hunte Parkway, will contain 222 mid-sized (6,280 sq. ft. ave., min. 5,000 sq. ft.) single-family tots (standards comparable to R-1-5 zoning). contained within Subarea #1 will be a 7-acre (net) neighborhood park, a 1-acre fire station site and a 10-acre (net) elementary school site. A grade-separated open space buffer is proposed between the EastLake Business Park to the south and residential neighborhoods 4a, 4b and 5. A local recreational trail will connect the neighborhood park/elementary school to the Salt Creek corridor and the community park. Subarea '2: The core subarea and focus area for this community is located east of Hunte Parkway, north and south of East H Street and consists of the Salt Creek drainage basin. This subarea consists of three neighborhoods. Neighborhood 7a, located adjacent to the otay Water District property ownership to the north and east of Salt Creek, consists of 58 mid-sized (7,360 sq. ft. ave., min. 5,000 sq. ft.) single-family detached lots (standards comparable to R-1- 5 zoning). . Neighborhood 7b, located north of East "H" Street, east of Salt Creek, consists of 138 single-family lots (8,140 sq. ft. ave., min. 7,000 sq. ft.). This neighborhood consists of estate-type units on clustered mid-sized single-family lots. Both neighborhoods 7a and 7b surround a 10-acre (net) elementary school site, which is located adjacent to the Salt Creek greenbelt cor~idor. . - ~'::J- --" )3 Page 14, It_ Meeting date 15 3/24/92 .""" Neighborhood 8, located south of East "B" street and adjacent to the proposed EastLake Woods development, is proposed as a clustered neighborhood with 242 gate-guarded single-family lots (8,320 sq. ft. average, minimum 7,000 sq. ft.) and a private open space greenbelt, which leads to a 22-acre (net) community park adjacent to the Salt Creek open space corridor. A 3-acre Community Purpose Facility is proposed adjacent to the community park. Subarea #3: The eastern subarea, located north of East "B" Street and east of a prominent north/south ridgeline (neighborhood #13), consists of six physically separated neighborhoods. Separation of these neighborhoods is dictated by a series of natural'canyons and the prominent ridgeline. A total of 440 single-family estate lots, averaging in excess of 1/2 acre in size and ranging from 1/3 to 2 acres individually, are located throughout this subarea. Neighborhoods 12 and 13 are proposed as a 140-lot gate-guarded community with 43 of these lots located on the north/south .__ ridgeline. Offsite access from this subarea has been provided through Neighborhood 11 to properties located north of the project. Parks A 7-acre net (7. 3-acre gross) neighborhood park is proposed. adjacent to a l-acre fire station site, and a 10-acre elementary school site within Neighborhood 3. A conceptual design has been prepared by the applicant, and is reflected in the SPA Plan. A 22-acre net (22-acre gross) community park is proposed adjacent to the Salt Creek greenbelt corridor and south of East "B" Street. A conceptual design has also been prepared for this park. Final designs for each park facility will be required prior to tentative subdivision map approval. Trails Bicycle, recreational, equestrian and hiking trails are proposed throughout the project (Exhibit D, attached). A buffer area between the EastLake Business Park and Neighborhoods 4a, 4b, 5 and 6 also serves as a corridor to connect a 10-foot wide recreational trail ~ from the 7-acre neighborhood park to the Salt Creek corridor if/.i( _.,~ I it . . . page 15, zt_ Ke.ting date If' 3/24/92 (north/south Chula Vista greenbelt) and the community park. This trail will meander along the buffer and is shown in the SPA as encroaching within the EastLake property to the south. Staff is recommending that, since this trail system is intended to serve the Salt Creek Ranch community that the recreational trail be located entirely within the Salt Creek Ranch project boundary. Grading plans will be required to incorporate the trail, and final alignments and details will. be subject to approval with the tentative subdivision map. Connection of this trail to the 22-acre community park will involve crossing the Salt Creek drainage course via some type of bridge structure. The details of this structure will be required with final trail plans at the Tentative Map stage. Bisecting Neighborhoods 1 and 2 is an internal greenbelt trail system subject to maintenance by an open space maintenance district. Staff is recommending that the recreational trail and plant materials be subject to final approval at the Tentative Map stage. In an effort to provide continuous trail connections throughout the community, steps should be taken to connect the recreation trail from the 7-acre neighborhood park north to East "B" street (A portion of this trail occurs offsite and involves coordination with adjacent property). Salt Creek Ranch is a major link in the Chula Vista greenbelt system and provisions for this system include equestrian and recreational trails through Salt Creek as well as along East "B" Street connecting future greenbelt links along the otay Lakes. The SPA Plan proposes two arched roadway undercrossings at Salt Creek and at the east end of the project, both providing the ability for trail systems to cross East "B" Street. The Chula Vista greenbelt links with off-site areas are and will be subject to further review as part of the City's Greenbelt Master Plan. The applicant will be required to participate in the greenbelt implementation within the boundaries of the Salt Creek Ranch project. ~ 1:5'~ "1' IS Page 16, It_ Xeeting date I.>" 3/24/92 .-.. b. Low Densitv Clusterina in Subarea #2 Neighborhoods 7b and 8 are proposed as clustered low density residential (0-3 du/ac) neighborhoods acting as a transition from higher density areas to the west and estate/rural areas to the east. The General Development Plan calls for clustering per criteria of Section 6.3 of the Chula Vista General Plan within Subarea 2. Staff supports the proposed cluster concept based on the following. a. Clustering is proposed within Subarea 2 to provide a logical progression from higher density neighborhoods to the west, to large-lot low-density estate neighborhoods to the east. Neighborhoods 7b and 8, designated as low density in the General Plan, are located on sloping terrain which fall approximately 100 feet down to the Salt Creek corridor. The designs for these two neighborhoods respect this landform and incorporate it within the neighborhood design. Neighborhood 7b is bounded by natural open space on the east, the Salt Creek corridor on the west and East "H" Street open space to the south. Open space abuts 1/3 of the lots in this neighborhood. The 10-ac. (net) elementary school site, proposed within this neighborhood, will be buffered by a 10- foot wide landscape strip which will add visual open space to the interior of the project. Providing the appropriate grades for the elementary school, necessitated the lotting pattern proposed. ..-.. Neighborhood 8 provides an internal greenbelt with access from a series of cul-de-sacs. Internal open space is also provided by enhanced landscaping along the loop street but additional internal open space was limited due to close proximity to the 22-acre community park. c. The designs for Neighborhoods 7b and 8 are unique responses to topographical and open space systems and are a result of the community form described within the approved General Development Plan. Circulation Access to Salt Creek Ranch will be provided by East "H" Street, Lane Avenue and Hunte Parkway. Existing access to the project from the east is provided by way of unimproved Proctor Valley Road. .-.. ~/(F ,..,,, . . . 1.5 paqe 17, xt_ .e.tinq date 3/24/92 The General Plan desiqnates East "H" street as a 6-lane Prime Arterial into the project from the west, extendinq to Hunte parkway. East "H" street, from Hunte Parkway east to the project boundary, is desiqnated as a Class X Residential Collector. Hunte Parkway is desiqnated as a 4-lane Major roadway, and Lane Avenue is desiqnatedas a Class I Residential Collector. The Proposed SPA improvements for these streets are consistent with the General Plan, except for East "H" Street, east of Hunte Parkway . Riqht-of-way (128 ft.) for this seqment of East "H" Street is beinq reserved by the applicant to accommodate a potential 6- lane Prime Arterial in anticipation of future development within the Proctor Valley area, to the west. The Salt Creek Ranch Traffic Analysis (willdan, 1991) focused on external circulation system requirements, the necessary improvements and their implementation based on project phasinq. The analysis considered existinq traffic conditions, traffic expected to be qenerated by previously approved projects and the projection of future traffic. Throuqh preparation of the traffic analysis, it was found that to enable existinq development and development of all previously "approved projects" (identified in the Eastern Chula vista Transportation Phasinq Plan and the Growth Manaqement Proqram) additional improvements on the circulation .system would be necessary to maintain required threshold standards. These improvements (1995 Base Condition) are unrelated to the development of Salt Creek Ranch and will require incorporation into the city's Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (DIF) Proqram, to be implemented. The Salt Creek Ranch Traffic Analysis determined the available capacity of the city's circulation system, prior to the necessary construction of an interim SR-125 facility, determined the impacts of the Base 1995 condition (existinq traffic + "approved projects" + additional improvements required of previously approved projects and included in a revised city DIF Proqram), and found that the remaininq capacity of the circulation system (with additional specific mitiqation improvements contained within EIR-91-03), could permit a total of 1,137 dwellinq units. Althouqh Salt Creek Ranch SPA, Phase I is proposed to consist of 1,350 dwellinq units, the maximum number of units that Salt Creek Ranch could construct in Phase I, based on circulation capacity, would be 1,137 units. 15~,." rrrl....17 Page 18, I:tem Meeting date 15' 3/24/92 -., The City ofChula Vista has contracted independently for a financing study (being prepared by H.N.T.B., a consulting firm) for the construction of an interim SR-125 facility. Since there are competing projects within the City's eastern territories for the remaining available circulation system capacity, prior to the needed construction of SR-125, staff. is recommending that no tentative Subdivision map be approved until; 1) the completion of the H.N.T.B. SR-125 financing study and determination as to the consistency of the Salt Creek Ranch development with the conclusions of the study, and unless the tentative map is conditioned upon 2) the revision of the Eastern Chula Vista Transportation Phasing Plan (ECVTPP) and Public Facilities Development I:mpact Fee (DIF) Program based on those conclusions." Development within Salt Creek Ranch will be phased concurrently with the provision of adequate road capacity and access improvements. The proposed development phases and associated circulation system improvements are described in the Public Facilities Financing Plan. Access to Offsite Areas .-., Access to offsite properties to the north and east of subarea #3 of Salt Creek Ranch has been provided in the SPA design (Exhibit E, attached), consistent with the approved General Development Plan. The primary north/south Class III roadway, which provides access from East H Street, through neighborhoods 9, lOa and 11 to offsite properties will have capacity to provide for approximately 490 additional single family homes with this as their sole point of access, in addition to units within Salt Creek Ranch. If a secondary point of access is determined from Proctor Valley (located east) to the northern and eastern properties then additional unit yield could then be accommodated. CUrrent land use designations for unincorporated offsite areas north of Salt Creek Ranch are dictated by the County of San Diego General Plan. The County General Plan will permit a maximum of 100 units on the approximately 400 ac. of topographically and biologically constrained property located to the north of Salt Creek Ranch (actual permitted density may be somewhat less due to property constraints). -- /5'-I$'. .... '"2, Jg . . . page 19, It_ 1.5' .eeting date 3/24/92 The sole undeveloped property, currently within the City of Chula Vista's GP (designated Low Density Residential (0-3 du/ac), is the Watson parcel (approximately 160-ac.) which is located at the northeast corner of the Salt Creek Ranch project. The Planning Department has received written correspondence from the attorney representing ownership of adjacent parcels regarding their intent to oppose certification of the final EIR, based on issues relating to offsite access (see Exhibit G). The Planning Department has responded to this correspondence, clarifying processing issues related to this matter (see Exhibit H). Gradina The Salt Creek Ranch SPA proposed grading is in general conformance with the General Development Plan. The conceptual grading presented in the SPA is intended to present a landform grading technique which will emphasize neighborhoods with curves and varying slope ratios designed to reflect the appearance of the surrounding terrain. The grading proposal will preserve the Salt Creek drainage corridor and the natural drainage areas within the eastern subarea 3. The open space adjacent to East H Street will be contour-graded with variable slope ratios. An effort has been made to limit slopes between building pads to 25-30 ft. so as not to be visible above a two story dwelling. Grading within subarea 3 will consist of the provision of a minimum of 10,000 sq. ft. pad areas on large (1/2-acre average) lots. The remaining lot areas will be graded with gradual slopes to transition into natural canyon areas. A master homeowners association will be set up to control grading and structure encroachments within non-pad areas. The slope areas located along the south edge of neighborhood 9 are highly exposed to East H Street and staff has some concern regarding the visual effects of potential encroachment onto the slope as well as the maintenance of the slope area. Staff recommends that the lot lines for the lots within neighborhood 9 which face East H Street be held to the top of slope and that the slope area be included in the adjacent open space maintenance area to provide better maintenance control adjacent to a designated "scenic" highway. This issue should resolved prior to approval of the tentative subdivision map. I}J, },- Page 20, :It_ /5 Xeeting date 3/24/92 -,., Neighborhood 13 consists of a ridge line and proposed grading guidelines for this area are contained within the SPA and Design Guidelines. Techniques to be utilized include, contour grading, daylight grading, rounded slope transitions to natural areas, tilted rear grading lines to eliminate stepped-pad edges. Thresholds Analvsis Standards adopted by city policy require that the Salt Creek Ranch project be analyzed to determine whether the approval of this project will have an adverse impact on the threshold formulated by the City. Review of the project EIR, the PFFP, and other supporting SPA documents provides evidence that the project is consistent with the threshold standards of the City. An analysis of Thresholds is contained in the environmental document for Salt Creek Ranch, EIR- 91-03, and in the PFFP, by development phase. Low and Moderate Income Housina The recently updated Housing Element requires that subdivisions of over 50 dwelling units provide 10% of the total project unit count as affordable units for low and moderate income households, with one-half of those units being afordable to low income households. The Salt Creek Ranch SPA Plan proposes to comply with the City of Chula Vista affordable housing policy as required at the time of .. Tentative Map approval. . -,., Communitv Pumose Facilities The proposed project identifies a total of 7-acres to be reserved for Community Purpose Facilities (CPF), a 3-acre site south of the community park a 4 acre site north of East H Street within Subarea #3. The Municipal Code requires that 1.39-acres of land per 1,000 population within the project be designated for CPF uses. The project proposes a total of 2,662 dwelling units which would result in an estimated project population of 8,240. This would require a total required acreage of 11.45-acres of CPF land, or an additional project requirement of 4.45-acres. The developer is proposing that a reciprocal agreement be negotiated with the City for use of parking within the community park for the adjacent 3 acre CPF site, thereby receiving credit for a portion of the required additional acreage requirement. In addition, should a reciprocal agreement not be reached the developer is proposing to locate an alternate site or sites at the ~ final subdivision map stage and preclude development of the land '.>- 1 S' , - .") - ).j) e e. e Page 21, :Item If Keeting date 3/24/92 for a period not to exceed 5 years at which time if a use is not secured the land would revert back to residential. staff recommends that the developer identify permanent locations for the additional 4.45-acres of CPF land, subject to approval of the Director of Planning and prior to approval of the tentative subdivision map, and that, in accordance with the Chula Vista Municipal Code, there be no reversion of acreage clause for CPF sites in the approved SPA Plan. Public Facilities Financina Plan The objective of the Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP) is to identify all public facilities, such as transportation, fire and emergency medical service, water, flood control, sewaqe disposal, schools and parks required to support the planned development of Salt Creek Ranch. The PFFP for Salt Creek Ranch is written to guide development of the project and is the first such analysis required by the City's new Growth Management Ordinance. It proposes recommended financing programs to ensure the construction of necessary improvements, as well as to ~dentify regional facilities needed to serve this project and costs to construct those regional facilities. . The improvements stated in the PFFP shall be requirements of subsequent discretionary permits. In most cases, they will become conditions of approval of Tentative and Final Subdivision Maps. In other cases, building and occupancy permits will be the means of implementation. Improvements called for in any development phases are intended to be completed and usable prior to occupancy of any dwelling unit within that particular phase. The plan discusses improvements through available financing techniques. Some facilities will be financed by the developer and others can be better financed through specific techniques available in state law. For example, the financing of schools can be assured by the use of Mello-Roos Community Facilities District financing. The plan also ties the project into the City'S Development Impact Fee (DIF) program which primarily provides for transportation improvements necessitated by development east of 1-805. Public Facilities Development Impact Fees are needed for other City services including public safety, libraries, corporation yard, fire training facility, civic center and geographic information system. /f.i I T -Z'.t, Page 22, zt_ Keeting date 15 3/24/112 ~ b. The financing plan is dependent on city-wide documents beyond the General Development Plan, Environmental Impact Report and SPA Plan. It is also based on the Eastern Chula Vista Transportation Phasing Plan, the Development Impact Fee and the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee of the City of Chula Vista. If upon the completion of a financing study for SR125 (under preparation by H.N.T.B., a consulting . firm) and determination as to the consistency of the Salt Creek Ranch development with the conclusions of the study, the project's phasing results in a significant or material modification of proposed phasing of public facilities, then an addendum to the PFFP should be prepared which reflects these changes. Revisions may also be required of the ECVTPP and the Public Facilities DIF Program. Also included in the PFFP is a statement of current Thresholds and an analysis of how each Threshold will be complied with, by phase. The Executive Summary of the Salt Creek Ranch PFFP also recommends necessary mitigation. . with respect to public facilities such as parks and recreation, ~ schools, libraries, water, sewer, storm drainage, police and fire facilities, the Salt Creek Ranch SPA Plan makes the following provisions: a. Transportation: The transportation projects to be financed by Salt Creek Ranch are of two basic types: 1) Those facilities that provide for major circulation within Salt Creek Ranch which will primarily benefit the Salt Creek Ranch development; and 2) Those facilities that are off-site of Salt Creek Ranch that will be of benefit to other eastern area developments including Salt Creek Ranch. The phasing of on-site improvements are made part of the PFFP and will be constructed prior to need. Off-site and regional improvements are also included in the plan by reference. Salt Creek Ranch will be subject to the revised Transportation Phasing Plan and will participate in improvements required by that plan as needed. Parks and Recreation: Salt Creek Ranch includes a 7-acre (net) Neighborhood Park and a 22-acre (net) Community Park, incorporating active recreation and passive park uses. Both the Neighborhood and Community Park designs will be subject to ~ ;:5'- .).l 7')4. . . . page 23, J:t_ Keeting date 15 3/24/112 approval prior to approval of the Tentative Subdivision Map. The developer will be required to construct the parks under direction of the Director of Parks and Recreation. The developer will also make separate contributions or additional improvements toward meeting the required park improvements per the city's Park Land Dedication Ordinance. Staff recommends that a modification . to park phasing, that assumes that adequate project park acreage will be developed in accordance with project population and unit phasing. At no time will the project be deficit in park acreage and details of park phasing will be subject to approval of the Director of Parks and Recreation. Schools: The Salt Creek Ranch project will be required to reach agreement on a financing plan for school facilities prior to approval of the Tentative Subdivision Map. A Mello- Roos community Facilities District to finance elementary, junior and high school facilities has been suggested as a mechanism subject to approval of the individual school districts. Two 10-acre (net) elementary schools are proposed within Salt Creek Ranch and financing for off-site junior and senior high facilities will be required for the 507 junior and 267 senior high students anticipated from this project. d. Water Facilities: The Otay Water District will provide water service to Salt Creek Ranch, which is located partially within the 980 zone system and partially within the 1296 zone system. To provide water within the 1296 zone, an off-site water storage facility will be required. If Salt Creek Ranch is the first to need water service in the 1296 zone, it will have to build the storage reservoir. c. e. Water services allocated to Salt Creek Ranch will be determined for a future quarter as a part of an agreement with the Otay Water District for construction of required terminal reservoir storage and other major water facilities. The facilities identified in the PFFP shall be required of the developer either as constructed facilities or through the payment offers as indicated. A reclaimed water system will be constructed within Salt Creek Ranch in accordance with the Master Plan now being developed by the Otay Water District (See Sewer Section of PFFP). Sewer Facilities: The Salt Creek Ranch project currently lies within four drainage basins. These include Proctor Valley T:J5"~ , - 1...~J Page 24, zt_ Meeting date If 3/24/92 .-., Basin, Telegraph Canyon Basin, Salt Creek Basin and Otay Lake Basin. New trunk sewer extensions will be needed to convey sewage to the Spring Valley Sanitation District and to the Telegraph Canyon Interceptor. Flows from the Salt Creek Basin and otay Lake Basin will require pumping into the Telegraph Canyon Interceptor. A permanent pump station will be needed to pump flows from 406 units in Subarea #3 of the SPA Plan and approximately 100 future off-site units into the Salt Creek Basin. Until the Salt Creek Interceptor is constructed, these flows along with the Salt Creek Basin flow will be pumped to the Telegraph Canyon Interceptor. Construction of the Salt Creek Interceptor is dependent on development within EastLake and otay Ranch. The proposed 12 mgd water reclamation plant within the Otay River Valley will have capacity to treat Salt Creek Ranch flows. g. On-site collection sewers and pump facilities will be built and funded by the developer as a subdivision exaction. The developer shall be responsible for payment of fees for the project's share of off-site facilities, including the Salt ........ Creek Interceptor. f. Drainage System: Salt Creek Ranch will be served by a series of on-site storm water facilities that will serve to collect and convey the storm water for this project into the City's storm water system and within the Salt Creek Basin providing for continued natural drainage flows. An urban runoff protection system will be required subject to approval of various agencies, including the City of San Diego, for drainage within the otay Lake Basin. The Upper otay Reservoir, recipient of drainage from that basin, is a source of drinking water to the residents of the City of San Diego and, therefore, water quality must be protected. Salt Creek Ranch proposes an interim water quality protection and moni toring program designed to protect this source of drinking water.. It is expected that a future permanent reservoir protection system will be installed for both Upper and Lower Otay Reservoirs. The developer will be responsible for the design and construction of this Urban Runoff Protection System and all on-site drainage facilities. Library: The Salt Creek Ranch project does not propose any on-site library facilities, although the developer will be """ :> .Jy - ~, 7'" J..y . page 25, 1t_ /S Keeting 4ate 3/24/92 . responsible for the payment of fees, based on estimated project population, into the city's Public Facilities DIF program. Library facilities are planned for implementation within the adjacent EastLake Development, immediately to the south. h. Fire and Emergency Medical Services: Salt Creek Ranch will be providing a l-acre (net) fire station site within the project. Construction of a fire station of approximately 4,000 sq. ft. and purchase of a reserve fire pumper will be required along with installing necessary streets and water facilities to service the station. If this project proceeds ahead of the adjacent Rancho San Miguel project then a brush rig will be required and the developer will be required to front the necessary funds and then will be credited against the payment of public facilities fees. Other Facilities: While there are no other public facilities proposed for inclusion within the Salt Creek Ranch project area, the developer will be responsible for the payment of fees into the Public Facilities DIF program which will fund the city's corporation yard, police facility improvements, civic center expansion and an automated city geographic information system. i. Salt Creek Ranch may be required to front funds for the above facilities to the extent that DIF monies are not available for capital expenditures. These monies will be credited against the payment of public facilities fees for costs up to the amount of fees due. Air Oualitv ImDrovement Plan The City's Growth Management Ordinance requires that projects of 50 units or greater provide an Air Quality Improvement Plan. As discussed in the Salt Creek Ranch SPA Air Quality Improvement Plan (Section 7.8 of the SPA), the most significant air quality. improvement measures are those policies and regulations established at the broadest geographic level (i.e., State or Federal). However, measures implemented on a City or project level can have a positive impact. The Air Quality Improvement Plan prepared for Salt Creek Ranch includes mitigation measures suggested by the developer and those recommended by the consultant reviewing the plan, Stevens/Garland & Associates. These include pedestrian and bicycle . '" ___._____._. ~ __'___""T"___'''_ )~ .;.R 7 ,.;.~ - - -- Page 26, l:t8lll Meeting date 3/24/92 15 ~. paths, jobs/housing balance, access to regional travel systems, access to transit and educational proqrams to increase awareness. Local and regional air quality requ1ations including the Air Pollution Control District program are being drafted that will supersede existing standards. Salt Creek Ranch is being reviewed in advance of these programs. The Air Quality Improvement Plan recommends several improvement measures with the project to help limit individual car trips, including encouraging car pooling and bus ridership. Staff recommends the provision of pedestrian walks from specific open-ended cul-de-sacs along East H Street, west of Hunte Parkway, to improve neighborhood access to transit routes. In addition, Salt Creek Ranch will be subject to on-going monitoring programs inherent in the city's Transportation Phasing Plan and Growth Management Program. The need for park-and-ride facilities, as well as neighborhood commercial facilities to serve this project and adjacent projects has been discussed during review of the project to help reduce the number of project-generated vehicle trips. Staff is recommending ~ that a neighborhood commercial site be developed within the adjacent Rancho San Mique1 project, along East H street, and that the developer commit to funding its proportionate share of a future park-and-ride facility. The location of a park-and-ride facility in the area of East H Street/SR-125 has not been identified, although, the developer is recommending that the community park site could be used as an interim park-and-ride facility until a permanent site closer to SR-125 is developed. This approach would require approval of the" Director of Parks and Recreation. Water Conservation Plan The Salt Creek Ranch Water Conservation Master Plan (prepared by Wilson Engineering, 1991) is briefly summarized in the SPA document (Section 7.2.13) and is enclosed with this report. This master plan is patterned after the "Rancho Del Rey Water Conservation Plan, with the exception of discussion of a water offset program which was required of the recently approved Rancho Del Rey project. The Salt Creek Ranch Water Conservation Plan states that the projected average water demand for all areas of Salt Creek Ranch is 1,781,618. With the implementation of on-site measures recommended in the plan (efficient fixtures and devices in the units, efficient landscaping and irrigation, public awareness and education programs) a savings of approximately 294,600 gallons per day (ave. 110 mgd per residence) can be realized. ~ lyrA' . i-AI-. . .. . page 27, xt_ Ke.ting date )5 3/24/92 Consistent with the city's approach on prior projects staff is recommending that the developer commit to participate in any off- site mitigation program adopted by the city designed to offset all or a portion of their new water demand (see Attachment NO.2). Said program may require one or more of the following: . Compliance with a regional water use offset program, to be administered by the san.Diego County Water Authority. . Compliance with a locally administered water use offset program (such program may be administered by the City, water district, or a combination of both); . Implementation of specific water use offset measures for this project, if neither a regional or locally- administered water use offset program is in place prior to issuance of building permits for any portion of this project. In the event that a City-approved water offset policy is not in effect at the time building permits are issued, the requirements of this plan should be met through implementation of specific water offset measures for this project, with the level of offsets and specific measures to be approved by the city. Imt:ilementation Beyond the standard implementation methods utilized for this project, such as Tentative Subdivision Map and site Plan approvals, there are several other implementation tools which are applicable to this project. a. PC District Reaulations Planned Community (PC) District Regulations specifically tailored to fit the proposed development provide standards and regulations to guide the development of Salt Creek Ranch SPA. These regulations, which provide specific implementation standards, should be applied in conjunction with the design guidelines for both the residential and landscape elements of the project. The standards contained in this document have been patterned after other recently approved masterplanned communities within the City of Chula vista for consistency. /5',J? - '1,,27 page 28, It8111 Meeting date 3/24/92 I~ ""'" b. Desian Guidelines As stated above, the design guidelines are an inteqral part of the Salt Creek Ranch SPA Plan. They are presented in a preliminary form to permit input from the Planninq Commission prior to review of the Tentative Map. The proposed guidelines are intended to establish minimum standards for the design and architectural character of the Salt Creek ~anch SPA. They are provided to ensure that the quality and fundamental concepts established at the master planninq staqe are maintained in the final phase of detailed planninq and desiqn. The desiqn guidelines are structured into four basic sections: a) Desiqn Review, b) Community Desiqn Guidelines, c) Architectural Desiqn Guidelines, and d) Landscape Architectural Desiqn Guidelines. These sections address unique features of the Salt Creek Ranch project, includinq ridgeline development ""'" and grading guidelines, project edge .treatments, fuel modification (fire retardant brush management) standards in natural open space areas, and scenic corridor treatment. c. Monitorina Proaram Salt Creek Ranch will be required to submit updated development summaries, forecasts and development data, such as actual traffic counts and buildinq permit information to the City for evaluation and comparison to the Financing Plan. as adopted. The Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP) needs to be updated annually, as the actual amount, timing and location of the new development takes place. The monitoring plan shall also review the ongoing fiscal impact on the city's Operation Budget. The Fiscal Impact Analysis prepared as part of the PFFP, shows a positive cumulative impact in the city over the first 15 years of the Salt Creek Ranch project. Should the fiscal impact in the City chanqe in the future, the annual monitorinq program will provide the analysis for the reasons, and the alternative courses of action which are to be taken. """', ..~~r ...'},8 . . . If page 211, zt_ xeeting date 3/24/112 COBDITIONS OJ' APPROVAL Approval of the Salt Creek Ranch Sectional Planning Area Plan and supporting documents shall be subject to the following conditions: 1. The Public Facilities Financing Plan shall be approved subject to the recommended mitigation contained in the Executive Summary and the following conditions: a. The first paragraph on page xi, of the Public Facilities Financing Plan shall be modified as follows: "The first phase of Salt Creek Ranch could develop to a maximum of 1,137 dwelling units. No tentative subdivision map shall be approved prier ~e ~ke adep~ieR sf a sapasi~y alleea~ieB pre gram ~y ~ke ei~y whisk ~ill ae~eFmiRe ~ke JIIaui_ sf firs~ pkase lIRi~s. until: 1\ the comnletion of the R.N.T.B. SR-125 financina studv and determination as to the consistencv of the Salt Creek Ranch develonment with the conclusions of the studv. and unless the tentative man is conditioned unon 2l the revision of the Eastern Chula vista Transnortation Phasina Plan CECVTPPl and Public Facilities Oevelonment Imnact Fee COIFl Proaram based on those conclusions." b. Insert as paragraph 8 after last sentence on page x the following: "Approval of this PFFP does not constitute prior discretionary review for projects within the boundaries of the Plan. All future projects within the boundaries of the Salt Creek Ranch PFFP shall undergo review as defined in the Chula Vista Municipal Code. This PFFP analyzes the maximum allowable development potential for planning purposes only. The approval of this plan does not guarantee specific development densities: however. the nrovision of nublic facilities and imnrovements in this PFFP are based unon achievina certain residential develonment thresholds Cin terms of dwellina unitsl in each nhase of the Salt Creek Ranch develonment. In the event that the residential develonment thresholds are either reduced or not annroved. 8nnroval of this nlan shall not reauire Cor otherwise commitl the develoner to nrovide the facilities and imnrovements identifie4 in this nlan. Instead. the develoner shall meet and confer with a committee aDnointed bv the city Manaaer to aaree /5''';'17 .. 7'2/(. paqe 30, It_ Meetinq date 15 3/24/92 -.. uDon any DroDosed chancres that are in substantial conformance with this Dlan. The chancres will address the reduced residential develoDment thresholds (in terms of dwellincr unitsl in each Dhase of the Salt Creek Ranch Dro;ect and the facilities and imDrovements t~ b; nrovided in each 'Dhase of the 'Dr~;ect.1I c. The .second paraqraph on paqe xv shall be modified as follows: "Prior to the approval of a tentative map within the boundaries of the Salt Creek Ranch project, the developer shall reserve a 1.3 acre (1.0 ac. netl fire station site adjacent to the neiqhborhood park alonq the western boundary of the project as shown in the SPA. The station site shall be conveyed to the city Drior to the final subdivision maD for any units contained in Dhase II of Salt Creek Ranch. If the City decides not to construct a station within Salt Creek Ranch then the site shall revert back to the develoDer and a decision on what should be the aDDroDriate land uses for the site shall reauire review and 8DDroval bv the ci~v Council." ~ d. The last paraqraph on paqe xv shall be modified as follows: "Addi tionally , should Salt Creek Ranch commence development ahead of Rancho San Miquel, the Developer shall be responsible for frontinq the necessary funds to enable the City to purchase the brush riq and equipment as detailed in the Fire section of this PFFP. Salt Creek Ranch will be resDonsible for frontincr the necessarv funds if after 6 months from the date of the first Salt Creek Ranch buildincr Dermit no buildincr Dermit has been acauired for any tlortion of the Rancho San Miau~l nro1ect... e. Remove the last two sentences of the first paraqraph on paqe xv. f. Modify the second paraqraph under "Parks and Recreation" on paqe xvi as follows: "No final map will be allowed within the boundaries of Salt Creek unless provisions have been made for fiBaBelft! ae~ieitieB er dedication to the City, of the necessary -.. hff:"'JP , ....".... -;'.JI> . if page 31, :Item Xeeting date 3/24/92 park sites identified in this PFFP, and provisions have been made for the financing of the necessary improvements on these park sites to the satisfaction of the Park and Recreation Director and City Council. The cost of the improvements shall not exceed the total amount of SPA park fee obligation." g. Modify the paragraph under "Open Space and Trails" on page xvi as follows: The maintenance of trails and open space which lie within public .easements or on which the City holds title in fee will be considered for funding through the use of an open Space Maintenance District formed pursuant to the provisions of the Landscape and lighting District Act of 1972, er e~her a,pre,ria~e laRd see~ed p~lie fiflaReiRg .ea1\aBi811. h. . 1. . The Public Facilities Financing Plan shall be followed with improvements installed in accordance with said plan or as required to meet threshold standards adopted by the City of Chula Vista. In addition, the sequence that improvements are constructed shall correspond to any future Eastern Chula vista Transportation Phasing Plan adopted by the City. The City Engineer may modify the sequence of improvement construction should conditions change to warrant such a revision. An annual fiscal impact report reflecting the actual revenue and expenditure impacts based upon the development of the project shall be prepared by the developer. The project shall be conditioned to provide funding for periods where expenditures exceed projected revenues. The details of such a funding program shall be determined prior to approval of the tentative subdivision map. j. The last three paragraphs on page 3.5-9, of the Public Facilities Financing Plan shall be modified as follows: The Sweetwater Union High School District will adjust enrollment boundaries as necessary to utilize available school capacity. The Baldwin company pledged the provision of alassFee. spaee certain lands for school facilities in the otay Ranch project commensurate with the need caused by the Salt Creek Ranch project. The ./5-..2 ! _u 7.. ~} 15 paqe 32, ztem Xeetinq date 3/24/92 .timinq and availability of such facilities will be of critical importance. As f~~~re development applications are processed ift tae eas~erft tarriteries Bfta within boundaries of Salt Creek Ranch, the City sftall ~ coordinate with the School District~ to ensure that development approvals do not take place until the provision for and financinq of school facilities is atltlroved bv each of the school districts and are pre7iaea consistent with the threshold standard. The approval of a tentative map within the boundaries of Salt Creek Ranch will not be made unless the city receives a letter from the Districts confirminq the provision of necessary school sites ADlU.or additional slass reams Bfta school facilities or participation in eft appre~ea financinq proqrams a~tlroved bv the school districts. Conditions a, b, c, d, e, , ::I above have been incorporated into the PPPP document. 2. The project applicant shall aqree to participate in a reqional or subreqional multi-species coastal saqe scrub conservation plan. If, prior to approval of the qradinq plan for Neiqhborhoods lOa, lOb and 11, an off-site reqional wildlife corridor linkinq San Miquel Mountain with the Upper otay Reservoir has not been approved as part of the conservation plan, the development of the 17-acre Neiqhborhood lOb shall not occur and a reconfiquration of the northeastern Subarea 3 to provide a wider open space area for a reqional wildlife corridor shall be implemented. The width of the open space area shall be sufficient to ensure lonq-term viability of the wildlife corridor, per crosshatched area on SPA Exhibit #17. This condition shall also be included as a condition of the Tentative Subdivision Map. NOTE: 3. If the existinq 20" reclaimed water line, located in the existinq easement between Neiqhborhoods 1 & 2, is required to be moved solely due to construction of Salt Creek Ranch the developer will be responsible for the actual costs of relocatinq that line without interruption of service.. Sound attenuation walls (5 ft. hiqh) shall be installed at rear property lines on each side of East H Street. This shall 4. ~..3~ -_.:2--..;2.... ... ......... ....... ....... . .. . page 33, Item. If Meeting date 3/24/92 occur west of Lane Avenue and at selected areas east of Hunte Parkway per EIR-91-03. Final location of walls shall be approved by the Director of Planning prior to approval of the tentative subdivision map. 5. Salt Creek Ranch shall submit annual building permit reports, traffic counts and fiscal impact analysis to the City. 6. Approval of the SPA does not constitute approve of the final lot configurations and street design shown within the SPA Plan. Modifications may be made by staff, the Planning Commission or City Council during Tentative Subdivision Map processing and consideration. 7. The multiple family area within neighborhood 4a and the townhouse area within neighborhood 5 shall be developed according to an approved Precise Plan. The PC Regulations and Design Guidelines shall be reviewed and recommendations received from the Planning Commission prior to city Council review of the SPA Plan. 9. The developer shall enter into an agreement with the city of Chula Vista regarding the provision of affordable housing, prior to approval of the Tentative Subdivision Map. Such agreement shall be in accordance with the adopted 1991 Housing Element. . 8. 10. The developer shall identify permanent locations for the additional 4.45-acres of CPF land which will be subject to approval of the Director of Planning prior to approval of the tentative subdivision map, and that, in accordance with the Chula Vista Municipal Code, there be no reversion of acreage clause for CPF sites in the approved SPA Plan. 11. The Salt Creek Ranch Water Conservation Plan, prepared by wilson Engineering, October 1991, shall be revised to include provisions for an approved water offset policy. The revised language to be added to said document is contained herein as Attachment No.2. 12. Flag lot designs shall adhere to the provisions for Panhandle Lots, located within the Chula Vista Municipal Code. 13. The details of access to the otay Water District property located to the north of Salt Creek Ranch, shall be subject to 7~>> "'7'-3~ paqe 34, Item 15 --.. Keetinq date 3/24/92 review and approval of the city Enqineer prior to approval of the tentative subdivision map. 14. Final recreation trail fence desiqn and location shall be subject to approval of the Director of Parks and Recreation. 15. All plant materials, sizes and locations within parks and open space areas will require approval by the Director of Parks and Recreation prior final subdivision map approval. 16. The equestrian trail within Salt Creek shall not encroach within the Community Park. 17. Details and responsibilities for fuel modification areas within dedicated open space areas shall be delineated at the tentative subdivision map staqe. The developer shall be responsible for the initial cycle of fire manaqement/brush clearance within natural open space areas. 18. Open space maintenance access points shall be a minimum of 10 feet in width and subject to approval by the Director of Parks and Recreation prior to tentative subdivision map approval. 19. The determination of open space district parcel boundaries and maintenance responsibilities shall be subject to approval of the Director of Parks and Recreation prior to approval of the tentative subdivision map. 20. The equestrian-style fence shall be provided between the recreation trail alonq Hunte Parkway and the Salt Creek drainaqe. 21. Provide a bridqed trail crossinq of Salt Creek to the Community Park, providinq an east/west link over Salt Creek, subject to review and approval of the city Enqineer and Director of Parks and Recreation. """'" 22. Details of the fuel modification zones shall be subject to review and approval of the Fire Marshal and the Director of Parks and Recreation prior to tentative subdivision map approval. """'" .Ir' 3Y 7" ~9-__ . Page 35, xt_ .eeting date If 3/24/92 . 23. The recreation trail system shall be expanded to include: a. The greenbelt open space lot bisecting neighborhoods 1 & 2 shall provide adequate access for maintenance vehicle access and final landscape materials and design shall be consistent with open space criteria and subject to approval of the director of Parks and Recreation prior to approval of the final subdivision map. b. The equestrian-style fence shall be provided adjacent to a 10 feet recreation trail along the north side of the community Park, adjacent to East H street, and continue with the trail along the east side of the park until able to enter the park. The 10 feet wide recreation trail proposed from the EastLake buffer, along the westerly property line (future San Miguel Road) to the neighborhood park, shall be extended along the westerly edge of the Neighborhood Park, and along the frontage of the Fire Station. Ultimately, this trail is intended to extend offsite to East H Street. c. d. The recreation trail proposed within the EastLake Business Park buffer shall be designed to accommodate maintenance vehicles, be a minimum of 10 feet in width, and be provided with maintenance vehicle access at each adjacent open-ended residential cul-de-sac. The trail shall be located entirely within the Salt Creek Ranch project boundary unless an agreement is reached between the project proponent and the adjacent property owner which is acceptable to the city. Design and final layout of the recreation trail shall be subject to review and approval of the Director of Parks and Recreation prior to tentative map approval. 24. The trail systems shall be extended along the north side of East H Street to the eastern property boundary. 25. Final trail alignments will be subject to approval the Director of Parks and Recreation prior to tentative subdivision map approval. . 26. Access to open space canyons for open space maintenance shall be subject to approval of the Director of Parks and Recreation prior to approval of the tentative subdivision map. )5-~ '1.3$ Page 36, :It_ Meeting date J5 3/24/92 ~ 27. Final details of habitat enhancement, protective measures for sensitive habitat/species, brush modification and temporary irrigation shall be subject to approval of the City Manager or his designee prior to final grading and landscape plans. 28. Both the Neighborhood and Community Park plans are considered conceptual, therefore, final designs and grading will be subject to review by the Parks and Recreation Commission and approval by the Director of Parks and Recreation. Total net park acreage could be revised as a result of the final approved plans. 29. The final design of the two proposed East H street undercrossings, planned for pedestrian and wildlife, shall be subject to review and approval of the Directors of Parks and Recreation and Public Works prior to approval of the tentative subdivision map. 30. The Design Standards shall be revised to reflect the "Amended City of Chula Vista Landscape Standards". ~ 31. The developer shall comply with the subdivision manual and the adopted City street design standards for all cul-de-sacs unless otherwise approved by the city Engineer. Parking in substandard cul-de-sacs shall be provided as required in the design standards. 32. The developer shall improve and construct Hunte Parkway from East H street to otay Lakes Road and dedicate right-of-way within the project boundaries to meet four lane major street standards. The design speed shall be 45 mph unless lesser standards are approved by the city Engineer through the process indicated in the adopted city street design standards. 33. Private streets shall meet the standards contained in the subdivision manual and street design standards unless otherwise approved be the City Engineer. Private street cross sections shall conform to those shown in the SPA plan for curb-to-curb width and right-of-way width unless otherwise conditioned. 34. All sidewalks shall have a minimum width of 4 feet. All public sidewalks shall meet City standards. . -" 1. ~ ?~-. - - --_?...3~_ . . . If Page 37, zt_ .eeting date 3/24/92 35. The design and location of pedestrian and bike paths shall be determined by the City Engineer and Director 'of Planning. All walls which are to be maintained by open space districts shall be constructed entirely within the lot dedicated to the City. 36. 37. Lane Avenue shall be designed to meet Class I collector standards unless otherwise approved by the city Engineer in accordance with the provisions contained in the street design standards. Additionally, curb-to-curb and right-of-way widths shall provide for bike lanes, as determined by the city Engineer. All private streets shall provide easements for fire hydrants, cable television and other utilities and facilities as required by said utilities. 38. 39. Any private or public street which does not meet all aspects of the design standards of the City of Chu1a vista shall be indicated on the tentative map. The City will condition the approval of any deviation prior to tentative map approval. 40. Specific methods of handling drainage and sewer issues shall be subject to approval by the City Engineer prior to approval of final maps. All current provisions of the NPDES and Clean Water Program shall be met. 41. Lot lines shall be at top of slope, except in Subarea 3, where the SPA concept allows for this exception. Final grading plans and lot line locations will be subject to approval of the City Engineer and Director of Planning. 42. The developer shall enter into agreements with the city to provide for diversion of sewage or drainage at such time as required by any condition(s) placed on any tentative map(s). 43. Runoff from the development shall not exceed present flows for the 100 year frequency storm. Retention/detention facilities will be required as approved by the city Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits to reduce the quantity of runoff to amount equal to or less than present flows. 44. Graded access shall be provided to all storm drain c1eanouts, inlets and outlets, and paved access shall be provided to all 'if ,j"" 0__.__.'-37. Page 38, It_ Xeeting date 3/24/92 If ......., sewer manholes. Exceptions may be determined on a case by case basis by the City Engineer. 45. Improvements shall be installed as indicated in accordance with the public facilities financing plan or any changes to same approved by the City Engineer. Specific improvements will be determined prior to approval of the tentative map. 46. Pedestrian walkways shall be provided from specific cul-de-sac ends which are designed with open ends along East H Street, west of Hunte Parkway, to the walk system along East H Street. Details of the pedestrian walk system will be subject to review prior to approval of the tentative subdivision map. 47. Transit stop designs, including benches and shelters, shall be reviewed by the City's Transit Coordinator and the Director of Planning prior to approval of the tentative subdivision map. 48. The installation of transit facilities shall be concurrent with transit service availability. Since this may not coincide with project development the developer shall commit to fund ~ these facilities and they be installed when requested by the City. 49. The developer shall commit to funding the project's fair share of a park-and-ride facility at which time as one is located in the vicinity of the East H Street and SR-125 interchange 50. The maximum roadway gradient within the project shall not . exceed 15%. 51. Water main pressure within the project shall not exceed 150 psi. 52. Fire sprinkler systems may be required for residences located on flag lots. A final determination will be made by the Fire Marshal. 53. The mitigation measures included in Section 6 of the Supplemental EIR (EIR-91-03) shall be incorporated herein as conditions of approval (mitigation measures identified at the GDP level have been incorporated in the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the SPA). 54. A sound study shall be conducted at the time of tentative map for those areas where Salt Creek Ranch's proposed residential .--, ~ u_______ ____ _1,.", _.. . . . If page 39, It_ Meeting date 3/24/92 lievelopment abuts EastLake' s approved industrial uses. The study and required mitigation will be the responsibility of the Salt Creek Ranch developer at the time either party processes a tentative map. 55. Prior to the sale of units in neighborhoods 5 and 6, sales disclosure documents shall be provided which identify the allowable uses in the EastLake Business Center. FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable. MISC#4:\SPA-91-4.c:c /..J< .:J,.. 1'31 page 40, It_ Xeeting date /5 3/24/92 --. ATTACBKENT NO. 1 RBCOKKBNDED FINDINGS 1. THE PROPOSED SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN IS IN CONFORMITY WITH THE SALT CREEK RANCH GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THE CHUIA VISTA GENERAL PLAN. The Salt Creek Ranch Sectional Planning Area Plan reflects the land uses, circulation system, open space and recreational uses, and public facility uses consistent with the Salt Creek Ranch General Development Plan and Chu1a Vista General Plan. 2. THE PROPOSED SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN WILL PROMOTE THE ORDERLY SEQUENTIALIZED DEVELOPMENT OF THE INVOLVED SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA. ........ The SPA Plan and Public Facilities Financing Plan contain provisions and requirements to ensure the orderly, phased development of the project. The Public Facilities Financing Plan specifies the public facilities required by Salt Creek Ranch, and also the regional facilities needed to serve it. 3. THE PROPOSED SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT ADJACENT LAND USE, RESIDENTIAL ENJOYMENT, CIRCUIATION OR ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY. The land uses within Salt Creek Ranch are designed with a grade-separated open space buffer adjacent EastLake Business Park, a neighborhood park will be located adjacent to the westerly project poundary to serve both project and adjacent residents, and the project will provide a wide range of housing types for all economic levels. A comprehensive street network serves the project and provides for access to offsite adjacent properties. The proposed plan closely follows all existing environmental protection guidelines and will avoid unacceptable off-site impacts through the provision of mitigation measures specified in the Salt Creek Ranch Environmental Impact Report. ""'"' . J.f y,p - ,-,.._tfo . . . page 41, It_ .eeting date /5 3/24/92 ATTACBKBRT BO. 2 Amendments to Salt Creek Ranch. Water conservation Plan Wilson Bngine.ring, October 1991 Page 17, RBCOKKBNDATlONS: RBCOKKBNDATlONS We recommend tnat in the development of the Salt Creek Ranch project, the following onsite water conservation measures should be included: Ultra low flow toilets. Ultra low flow showerheads. Faucet aerators. Pressure reducing valves. Water conservation quide. Use of reclaimed water where possible Drought resistant plants in parks and public landscaping. Effective irrigation system such as soil moisture sensors or drip irrigation. The water conservation guide should urge the homeowner to use low water use landscaping, install automatic timers on hoses, and choose an effective irrigation system. . . . . . . . . The tlro;ect shall comtllv with a Citv-aDDroved water use offset Dolicv in which one or more of the followina offsite measures mav be reauired: . ComDliance with a reaional water use offset tlroaram. to be administered bv the San Dieao Countv Water Authoritv. . ComDliance with a locallv administered water use offset tlroaram (such Droaram mav be administered bv the citv. water district. or a combination of both}: --,/a r I":> - I 1-1.( I Page 42, It_ Meeting date 3/24/92 1.5 --., . ImDlementation of sDecific water use offset measures for this Droiect. if neither a reaional or locallv- administered water use offset Droaram is in Dlace crior to issuance of buildina cermits for any Dortion of thi; croiect. In the event that a Citv-aDDroved water offset Dolicv is not in effect at the time buildina Dermits are issued. the reauir';m~~t~ ~f this Dlan shall be met throuah imDlementation of sDecific ~~t;r offset measures for this Droiect. with the level of offsets and sDecific measures to be aDDroved bv the City. MISC#3:\SALTCRK\ WATERAMD -, ,~ '/~~ , .. t.I 2.. WHEREAS, a public hearing was held before the Planning commission on the Baldwin Company's proposed Salt Creek Ranch sectional Planning Area Plan, Public Facilities Financing Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan, Water Conservation Plan and Design Guidelines ("Public Hearing") on or about February 26, 1992 and March 11, 1992; and, WHEREAS, prior to the first reading of this ordinance, the city Council of the City of Chula vista adopted Resolution No. 16555 by which it approved the Salt Creek Ranch Sectional Planning Area Plan, the Public Facilities Financing Plan, the Air Quality Improvement Plan, the Water Conservation Plan and Design Guidelines ("SPA Approval Resolution"). The City council of the City of Chula vista does ordain as follows: A. CEOA Findinqs The City Council does hereby adopt, as their own, each and everyone of the findings as are set forth in the document entitled "Salt Creek Ranch sectional Planning Area Plan supplemental EIR-91- 03, Candidate CEQA Findings, March, 1992", attached as Exhibit C to the SPA Approval Resolution. B. certain Mitiqation Measures Feasible and Adopted The city Council does hereby find, pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081 and the CEQA Guidelines section 15091, that the mitigation measures that are identfied in FSEIR under Section 5.0, are feasible and will become binding upon the City in approving the Project. C. Infeasibilitv of Alternatives The Council hereby finds that none of the proposed project alternatives set forth in the FSEIR can feasibly and substantially lessen or avoid environmental impacts that will not be substantially lessened or avoided by the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures for the Project. D. Adoption of Mitiqation Monitorinq Proqram As required by Public Resources Code section 21081. 6, the Council hereby adopts the mitigation monitoring and reporting program ("program") set forth in Exhibit D to the SPA Approval Resolution, which is incorporated herein by reference. The Council hereby finds the Program is designed to ensure that, during project implementation, the Permittee/project applicant, and any other responsible parties, implement the Project components and comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified in Paragraph B above. 2 7- J./ If E. statement of Overridinq Considerations Even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures and alternatives, certain significant or potentially significant adverse environmental effects caused by the Project will remain. Therefore, the Council hereby issues, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15093, its statement of Overriding considerations as set forth in Exhibit E of the SPA Approval Resolution thereby identifying the specific economic, social, and other considerations that render those unavoidable significant adverse environmental effects acceptable. F. PC District Requlations The city Council does hereby conditionally approve and adopt the Planned Community District Regulations, also referred to herein as the Zoning Regulations, for the Salt Creek Ranch project. The conditions of this approval are as follows: 1. The Developer shall identify permanent locations for the additional 4.45-acres of Community Purpose Facility ("CPF" sites") land which will be subject to approval of the Director of Planning prior to approval of the tentative subdivision map, and that, in accordance with the Chula vista Municipal code, there be no reversion of acreage clause for CPF sites in the approved SPA Plan. 2. All plant materials, sizes and locations within parks and open space areas will require approval by the Director of Parks and Recreation prior to final subdivision map approval. 3. That Developer implement each and every Mitigation Measure identified in the FSEIR as Mitigation Measures. 4. That Baldwin implement each and every aspect of the Mitigation Monitoring Program hereinafter referred to. Failure of the conditions of approval to occur shall, at the option of the City exercised at a public hearing, notice of which and an opportunity at which Baldwin has been given to be heard on the matter, revoking the zoning regulations hereinabove conditionally approved. 3 7,,/5" Presented by Bob A. Leiter Director of Planning , , A~ as to, ora by ~ro~ M.1L S City Attorne 4 7-'1~ COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item ~/loI [J Meeting Date04/07/92 ITEM TITLE: I'l. Resolution 1~5.5"9 Accepting a County of San Diego Technical Assistance Program Grant to' Establish Commercial and Industrial Recycling Projects and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Service Agreement with the County. !J. Resolution /~5'~ending FY 1991-92 Budget to add a Temporary, Part-time Position in Unclassified Service in the Waste Management Program and Appropriating Funds Therefor. SUBMITTED BY: Conservation Coordinator~ City Managert) (4/Sths Vote: Yes-X-No___) REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: Last October, staff developed a proposal for commercial and industrial recycling projects in the City; Council authorized a $23,970 grant application be submitted to the San Diego County Recycling Technical Assistance Program (TAP) for program funding. The City has now been notified of a $11,373 grant award. The grant process was very competitive and only ten grants were awarded under the TAP III cycle. As originally established, the Business Recycling Outreach project, partially funded through a County TAP grant (FY 1990-1991), was part of the City's Model Office Recycling Program. It involves targeting ten businesses in the City for the set-up of office recycling programs. Scripps Memorial Hospital, Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates, Bay Medical Plaza, the Eastlake Business Park and the San Diego Union Tribune have all been provided assistance by City staff in developing their in-house recycling programs through the Outreach Project. It is now staff's intent to use the new TAP grant (FY 1992) to expand the Business Recycling Outreach Project to establish a more comprehensive commercial and industrial recycling program which will support the following projects: 1) Office Recycling Project; 2) Service and Hospitality Recycling Project; and, 3) Industrial Recycling Project and Materials Exchange Bank. Attachment A contains a detailed description the projects. Since the City is only receiving partial funding of the original grant request, staff has been asked by the County to develop a revised budget that will become part of the service agreement to be filed with the County in order to begin the process for receipt of monies for program start up. Attachment B contains the Notice of Intent to Award from the County. Council is asked to review this report and adopt the 1 $'_/ resolution for the commercial and industrial recycling projects to begin. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolutions. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Resource Conservation Commission will review this report at their April 6, 1992 meeting. A brief oral report of the RCC member's comments may be given to Council at this meeting, if requested. DISCUSSION: The proposed expansion of the City's Business Recycling Outreach Project to include additional commercial and industrial projects will benefit the City in helping meet the AB 939 diversion goals, as well as assisting businesses to comply with the mandatory recycling ordinance. The continued funding of the Business Recycling Outreach Project Intern will allow the expansion of the Project to additional offices, industries and restaurants/bars. The grant funds, amounting to $11,373, will be utilized to fund the salary, benefits and mileage reimbursement of the Project Intern, for 20-25 hours per week for a maximum of one year. The part-time temporary .Intern position will be included in a new Waste Management Program budget established to track the expenditures of this grant and other recycling related activities. Because of administrative, accounting and auditing needs staff has recently set up special budget 270-2700 to track the non-General Fund expenditures and revenues associated with Waste Management Programs, such as the Pilot Home Composting Project and activities related to the Mandatory Recycling Ordinance. This new TAP grant from the County will be the third project in the new Waste Management Program budget. The County has requested that although they are not funding the total original amount requested ($15,430) they would like the same level of service in order to receive the grant funding. The City will thus need to provide a larger "hard match" than originally anticipated in order to meet the service requirements. This request is being made of other TAP grant recipients as well. Attachment C contains a copy of the proposed budget for the Project; this information will be forwarded to the County if approved by Council. The Project Intern will work with the City'S Conservation Coordinator to continue gathering information for the City's business and industrial recycling data base and conduct business-to-business (walk- in) and telephone information dissemination about recycling, the County and City Mandatory Recycling Ordinance, AB 939, source reduction, waste exchange, and other aspects of commercial recycling. The intern will assist in the targeting of establishments for recycling program set-up; conducting waste audits; and, development and distribution of guidebooks, educational and promotional materials, and other project materials. The intern will also assist in conducting managerial and employee trainings for the recycling projects and 2 g'... .2. organization of the business and industrial recycling roundtables, meetings and presentations. Providing the businesses with recycling guides and related project information, as well as promotional materials (posters, table tents, container labels, etc.) will not only reduce costs to the businesses, it will promote recycling to other businesses and customers, and assist in educating employees of the respective businesses. As part of the expanded Business Recycling Outreach Project staff will continue to search for alternative end-uses for those materials for which markets are currently limited, including plastics, mixed paper and mixed construction debris. Procurement of recycled products will be a primary component of the expanded Project fostering the importance of recycled product procurement for "closing the recycling loop." Particularly applicable to the proposed Industrial Recycling Project will be the development of a "materials exchange bank." A listing of available "waste" by-products will be created, as well as listings of those "waste" materials that are "wanted" as feedstocks. The information will be forwarded to the California Integrated .Waste Management Board for inclusion in their new CALMAX waste exchange program. All proposed project aspects, including program set-up, promotional material development, source reduction, procurement and participation in the materials exchange bank, will allow for a comprehensive approach to waste management, providing a model for other businesses and industries throughout the City. This comprehensive approach should allow for greater cost effectiveness to be realized, beyond the sale of recycled materials. Waste diversion accomplished through source reduction and materials exchange, combined with recycling, should allow participating businesses to realize cost benefits through the reduction in their waste disposal needs and costs. The model approach will allow the City to establish the projects as "pilots" to learn from the experience and develop programming to better serve the City's multi-faceted economy. Distribution of guidebooks and related project materials will allow for recycling information to reach over 500 businesses, allowing for additional program development to occur. City development and distribution of educational and promotional materials, staff experience, press activities, and all other related experiences cannot be underestimated in terms of Citywide educational value, both in the short-term and the long-term. FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost of the proposed expanded Business Recycling Outreach Project is $21,556, although this amount includes a "soft match" of $6,483 for the Conservation Coordinator's time which therefore is currently appropriated. The remaining Project costs of $15,073 require appropriation at this time in order to accept the grant and proceed with the Project. 3 8"-J The grant funding, amounting to $11,373 will reimburse the City for the estimated costs associated with the Project Intern (salary & benefits @ $10,776; mileage @ $597). These funds can be appropriated directly to the new Waste Management Program budget (as described above). The City's "hard match" will provide funding for printing and postage, requiring an additional appropriation of $3700 (printing @ $2,975 & postage @ $725). It is proposed that this additional appropriation come from part of the unanticipated revenue received into the General Fund in February 1992 from County of San Diego Tonnage Grants. The City's hard match will be transferred from the General Fund to the Waste Management Program budget. As Council may recall, the Tonnage Grants are awarded from the County to the cities on a noncompetitive basis for each ton of material recycled from the residential wastestream. The County has awarded this money to the cities to be used for promotion and enforcement of the Mandatory Recycling Ordinance. The use of these funds for the proposed projects will benefit the City and the businesses in complying with the Mandatory Recycling Ordinance. 4 rr''I Attachment A BUSINESS RECYCLING OUTREACH PROJECT PROPOSED COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL RECYCLING PROJECT EXPANSION 1. Office Recycling Project This project will expand upon Chula Vista's awarded TAP Grant (FY 1990-1991), Model Office Recycling Program, to allow targeting of twenty (20) additional offices for complete recycling program consultation. The Office Recycling Guide, developed under the City'S Model Office Recycling Program will also be distributed to 250 additional offices. Chula Vista has a relatively high proportion of small offices, which often find the cost and operation of recycling difficult to incorporate. The expanded project will particularly assist these offices. Additional information, including comprehensive procurement guidelines for commercial establishments, source reduction, and space allocation guidelines, will be developed and distributed along with the Office Recycling Guide. Continued development and expansion of the business recycling baseline begun under the TAP 1990-1991 award will also occur. Charitable organizations and "second-hand" stores will be included in the Materials Exchange Bank (described below) to encourage business donation of used office equipment and furniture. 2. Service and Hospitality Recycling project This project will involve the development of a "Guide for Restaurant and Hospitality Recycling," focusing on specific waste characteristics for these establishments (e.g., glass and cardboard); market specifications required; and collection characteristics pertinent to these types of establishments (including space limitations, contamination problems, employee turnover, etc.). Ten (10) establishments will be targeted for consul tat ion and program set-up, to include restaurants, bars, motels, and hospitals of varying sizes; 150 guidebooks will be distributed to interested businesses. Vendor lists for recycling equipment and area recycling collection providers will also be included in the guide. A basic training will be developed that can be given to managers and supervisors, as well as employees. The training would be designed so that the managers/supervisors could then offer ongoing training to their respective employees. This will provide an innovative approach for accommodating the significant employee turnover prevalent in the service and hospitality industry. Two business recycling roundtables will be held in order to inform businesses about the requirements under AB 939 and the County Mandatory Recycling Ordinance, as well as to announce the available business recycling instructional materials and program set-up opportunities. 5 8'" -5' All training materials and sessions would focus on specific characteristics inherent in the service/hospitality industry, including the problem of contamination, employee turnover, space limi tations, staffing requirements, etc. Procurement and market development for the City and South Bay region) will also playa key role. Targeted businesses will be given all necessary training materials, suggested press materials, decals and signs to be placed in recycling areas and on containers, and promotional table tents, posters, and other materials. The business recycling data base started under the City's Model Office Recycling Program will be expanded to include service and hospitality establishments. 3. Industrial Recycling Project This project will involve development of a "Guide for Industrial Recycling" to include a complete listing of what is recyclable for industries (demolition and construction debris, metals, chemicals); vendors lists for equipment and area processors; material specifications, contaminants, etc. The focus will be on Chula Vista for industrial. needs, but list industrial/construction debris recyclers for all of the County and throughout the State. All industrial establishments will be targeted for consultation and information dissemination through two roundtable discussions with area industrial representatives. Through these meetings, representatives will discuss with City staff specific impediments to recycling both industry-wide and in the region; recycling program development; and AB 939 and the County Mandatory Recycling Ordinance. Additional contacts will be made directly by City staff and through work with the Chamber of Commerce. Marketing tips; procurement; and market development will also be explored. A Materials Exchange Bank will be developed to promote the concept of materials reuse as a viable source reduction strategy. The City will work in conjunction with the State's new CALMAX materials exchange program to facilitate the distribution of this local listing throughout the State, as well as provide State- wide information for use by local establishments. City staff will also facilitate business participation in the State's Market Watch program to better encourage procurement of recycled products and joint purchasing practices. The business recycling data base developed under the Model Office Recycling Program will be expanded to include a baseline of industries, industrial waste characteristics, current recycling acti vi ties, and information to be included in the Materials Exchange Bank and Market Watch. Again, the focus will be on the needs of local industries, but include markets available in other areas of County and State. 6 8' -(P ') .,,,.. "...:. ." ~......",~ ~ ..~- ~"" ' %?~ QIonnt!l of ~an ~ iego ATTACHMENT B JAMES G. TAPP DIRECTOR (61g16lW.2920 FA.)( 57&'113 DEPARTMENT OF PURCHASING AND CONTRACTING S5S5 OVERlAND AVENUE. BUilDING 11 P.O. BOX 85975. SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92186-5975 MAR 1.01992 NOTICE OF INTENT TO" AWARD REQUEST FOR GRANTS PROPOSALS (RFGP) NO. 20009 . REO'CLlNG TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (TAP 111) FOR THE COUN7Y OF SAN DIEGO, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS - SOLID WASTE DIVISION, RECYCliNG SECTION. This is notice that the County of San Diego announces its intent to award the following grants subject to succc:<.<ful negotiations, Cor the above-captioned RFGP to the Collowing entities: R~cycling Earth Products La Mes. Spring Valley Schools Sot'n3 Rccycl~rs Mashburn $~nitation fibre Resc>urces San Oiego Recycling Crossmant College universal Refuse City of Solana Beach City of thula vista DrywaU Recycling: equipaent, site iarproyements School Rec~llng: full program Ill\>l......totion North County Coa1JOSt Ins!: full program iq)lemenut ion Saler teamer-ciel/lndustrial Reeyel ing: equipnent Commercial/lndustrtal Education: 3 yard bins Office/Yard Uaste/Edueation: equipment. supplies. pa, conference Office Paper Recycling: 3 yard bins commercial/Office/Hospft~lity: full progr~ implementation Office, Hospitality, Industrial: intern sallry & benefits '100,000 S99,942 S99,800 SSO,OOO SSO, 000 S39,766 S27,22S 525,000 S21,894 511,373 Thc total of funds awarded is $525.000.00. Questions or comment with regard to this No/ice of 1/llen/ 10 Award should he directed to the undersigned at (619) 4g5-5522 or at the addres.< on the ICllerhcad. JAME.'; (;. TAPP, DircClor .. P1I4g7. C:;;'~ ~~ -,~ ~ H. M. MARTINEZ COll/racljng Officer IT: ~1'1J;Clf1 F- Olivas;. Ik("o"tnmcnl of Puhlic Wnrk" . Snlict W;I$;le/l1.ccydinlL s..,.,i,nn eM'" nVl~t ".risla M~ys.. Ilc('o"tnmcnl ur IJublk W~..-L.",. s..lh,I\V.~SlC/Il('cydin" SC'.',i"1I (MS (n."'l" I~F(jIl No. 2(XX1) File. '"\;duation Committee RFP No. 20001) \;a Krisla ~1;1\"'" f 8'-7 o Pri.I~" O. ,~ydftI plIpel' '< Attachment C PROJECT BUDGET GRANT FUNDS project Intern Salary ($7.82/hr. x 1196 hrs.) Benefits (@5.2%) Overhead (10%) Total Intern Mileage 2295 miles x .26 per mile TOTAL GRANT FUNDS MATCHING FUNDS Hard Matchl Printing Covers for Guidebooks Guidebooks & Other Copying Generic Table Tents Generic Decals & Signs Generic Posters Design & Production Services Total Printing postage .29 x 2,500 = Soft Match: Conservation Coordinator: $43,218 x 15% = TOTAL MATCHING FUNDS I $9,353 $487 $936 $10,776 $597 $11,373 $375 $200 $400 $900 $600 $500 $2,975 $725 $6,483 $10,183 2'02'AL POR PROJECTS (Grant and lIatch) Intern Salary Mileage printing Postage Conserv. Coor. TOTAL $10,776 $597 $2,975 $725 $6.483 $21,556 8 ?r~g/ RESOLUTION NO. /41551 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING A COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM GRANT TO ESTABLISH COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL RECYCLING PROJECTS AND AUTHORITY THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY WHEREAS, last October, staff developed a proposal for commercial and industrial recycling projects in the city and Council authorized a $23,970 grant application be submitted to the San Diego County Recycling Technical Assistance Program (TAP) for program funding; and WHEREAS, the city has now been notified of a $11,373 grant award with only ten grants being awarded under the TAP III cycle; and WHEREAS, as originally established, the Business Recycling Outreach Project, partially funded through a County TAP grant (FY 1990-1991), was part~f the city's Model Office Recycling Program and involves targeting ten businesses in the City for the set-up of office recycling programs; and WHEREAS, scripps Memorial Hospital, Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates, Bay Medical Plaza, the Eastlake Business Park and the San Diego Union Tribune have all been provided assistance by City staff in developing their in-house recycling programs through the Outreach Project; and WHEREAS, it is now staff's intent to use the new TAP grant (FY 1992) to expand the Business Recycling Outreach Project to establish a more comprehensive commercial and industrial recycling program which will support the following projects: 1) Office Recycling Project; 2) Service and Hospitality Recycling Project; and, 3) Industrial Recycling project and Materials Exchange Bank. NOW, THEREFORE, Presented by Athena Bradley, Conservation coordinator C:lnltapl ~/i"1 RESOLUTION NO. /~~&;t' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING FY 1991-92 BUDGET TO ADD A TEMPORARY, PART-TIME POSITION IN THE UNCLASSIFIED SERVICE IN THE WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR WHEREAS, last October, staff developed a proposal for commercial and industrial recycling projects in the city and council authorized a $23,970 grant application be submitted to the San Diego County Recycling Technical Assistance Program (TAP) for program funding; and WHEREAS, the City has now been notified of a $11,373 grant award with only ten grants being awarded under the TAP III cycle; and WHEREAS, the Project Intern will work with the City'S Conservation Coordinator to continue gathering information for the City'S business and industrial recycling data base, distribution of guidebooks, educational and promotional materials, and conduct managerial and employee training for the recycling projects; and WHEREAS, since the City is only receiving partial funding of the original grant request, staff has been asked by the County to develop a revised budget that will become part of the service agreement to be filed with the County in order to begin the process for receipt of monies for program start up. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that tpe city of Chula vista does hereby amend the FY 1991-92 budget to add a temporary, part-time position in the Unclassified Service in the Waste Management Program. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the sum of $15,073 is hereby appropriated from the unappropriated balance of the General Fund and transferred into the following accounts: $9,353 into Account 270-2703-5105 487 into Account 270-2703-5143 936 into Account 270-2703-5145 597 into Account 270-2703-5225 2,475 into Account 270-2703-5212 500 into Account 270-2703-5 1 725 into Account 270-2703 2 8 1ty Presented by Athena Bradley, Conservation Coordinator C:\rs\tapapp 8"(3-1 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item 9 ITEM TITLE: Meeting Date 04/07/92 Resolution /1P5' J Authorizing Amendment of Loan Agreement with South Bay Ambulatory Surgery Associates SUBMITTED BY: Director of Finance vt;; REVIEWED BY: City Manage~ (4/5THS Vote: Yes___No-X-) In 1984 the city of Chula vista issued $2,730,000 of commercial Development Revenue Bonds on behalf of the South Bay Ambulatory surgery Associates ("Company") in order to finance the surgical and medical facilities on Landis Avenue. The Company has requested that the legal documents be amended to require the company to provide annual financial statements that have been prepared in accordance with "Sound Accounting Principles" and certified by an "Independent Accountant". RECOMMENDATION: That council approve the Resolution and authorize the Mayor to execute said Amendment. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: One of the legal documents supporting the 1984 Commercial Development Revenue Bonds was a loan agreement between the Company and the City of Chula vista providing for financing the acquisition, construction and equipping of the surgical and medical office facilities on Landis Avenue. The loan agreement requires the company to furnish annual financial statements which are certified by an "Independent Certified Public Accountant" to have been prepared in accordance with "Generally Accepted Accounting principles". The company is requesting that the above quoted phrases be changed to "Independent Accountant" and "Sound Accounting Principles". The above change is acceptable to Bank of America as Trustee and to Golden State Sanwa Bank as issuer of the Letter of Credit which secures the bonds. As such, staff recommend approval of the Amendment. FISCAL IMPACT: None. The 1984 Commercial Development Revenue Bonds are secured by a Letter of credit issued by Golden State Sanwa Bank. The City of Chula vista has no liability for the bonds. 9-/ /II-J.. RESOLUTION NO. /(,.5~1 RESOLUTION OF lHE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUlHORIZING AMENDMENT OF LOAN AGREEMENT WITH SOUlHBAY AMBULATORY SURGERY ASSOCIATES WHEREAS, the City has previously assisted the fmancing of an out-patient surgical and medical office facilities located at 251 and 255 Landis Avenue in the City of Chula Vista, by South Bay Ambulatory Surgery Associates, a California general partnership (the "Company"), from the proceeds of a tax-exempt bond issue of the City; and WHEREAS, in connection with such financing the Company and the City have previously entered into that certain Loan Agreement dated as of December 1, 1984 (the "Loan Agreement") under which the Company has agreed to make payments of debt service, and in addition such fmancing is secured by an irrevocable letter of credit issued by Golden State Sanwa Bank (the "Bank"); and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 5.06 of the Loan Agreement the Company is required to furnish annual fmancial statements which are certified by an independent certified public accountant to have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and the Company has requested that the City approve an amendment of such provision at this time in certain respects; and WHEREAS, the City has been advised that such amendment is acceptable to the Bank and that the law firm of Jones Hall Hill & White, A Professional Law Corporation, is willing to render an opinion that such amendment is permitted to be made at this time; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, that the Loan Agreement is hereby authorized to be amended pursuant to that certain First Amendment to Loan Agreement by and between the City and the Company, in substantially the form on file with the City Clerk together with any changes thereto deemed advisable by the Director of Finance, and that the Mayor and the City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute and attest said First Amendment to Loan Agreement on behalf of the City. Presented by Lyman Christopher Director of Finance as to fbrm b f~ i /- 9:3 ! q.1f . . . FIRST AMENDMENT TO WAN AGREEMENT This FIRST AMENDMENT TO LOAN AGREEMENT is dated as of December _, 1991, by and between the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a charter city and municipal corporation organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of California (the "City"), and SOUTH BAY AMBULATORY SURGERY ASSOCIATES, a general partnership duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of California; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Company and the City have previously entered into that certain Loan Agreement dated as of December I, 1984 (the "Loan Agreement") for the purpose of providing for the financing the acquisition, construction and equipping of out-patient surgical and medical office facilities located at 251 and 255 Landis Avenue in the City of Chula Vista; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 5.06 of the Loan Agreement the Company is required to furnish annual financial statements which are certified by an independent certified public accountant to have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and the Company and the City wish to amend such provision at this time in certain respects; and WHEREAS, the Company and the City have been advised by Jones Hall Hill & White, A Professional Law Corporation, that such amendment is permitted to be made at this time; NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto do hereby formally covenant, agree and bind themselves as follows: Section 1. Amendment of Loan AIITeement. The Company and the City hereby amend Section 5.06 of the Loan Agreement by (a) striking the phrase "independent certified public accountant" in such Section and inserting in its place the phrase "independent accountant", and ((b) striking the phrase "generally accepted accounting principles" in such Section and inserting in its place the phrase "sound accounting principles". . Section 2. Amendment Authorized. The Company and the City hereby determine that the amendment made to the Loan Agreement 'pursuant to Section 1 hereof are authorized to be made pursuant to the provisions of Section 10.04 of the Loan Agreement and Section 11.01 of the Indenture. Section 3. Effective Date. This First Amendment to Loan Agreement shall become effective upon the execution and delivery hereof by the Company and the City, and upon the execution by the Bank of its consent hereto. Section 4. Miscellaneous Provisions. This First Amendment to Loan Agreement shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the Constitution and laws of the State of California. This First Amendment to Loan Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall for all purposes be deemed to be an original and all of which shall together constitute but one and the same instrument. 9-5' . . . IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and the Company have caused this First Amendment to Loan Agreement to be executed in their respective names by their duly authorized officers, all as of the date first above written. (SEAL) Attest: By: City Clerk 9_~-2- CITY OF CHULA VISTA By Mayor SOUTH BAY AMBULATORY SURGERY ASSOCIATES, a California general partnership By Managing Q:eneral Partner COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ITEM MEETING DATE /tJ April 7. 1992 ITEM TITLE: Unemployment Account. Resolution l~f~.tAmending FY 1991-92 Budget, providing for an Insurance Trust Fund appropriation to the Unemployment Insurance SUBMITTED BY: DIRECTOR OF PERSONNEL 0.f}--- REVIEWED BY: CITY MANAGE~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes~ No___) The City pays for its unemployment insurance claims by reimbursement. Each quarter, the Employment Development Department (EDD) sends an itemized bill of unemployment insurance benefits paid and the City, after verifying the bill, reimburses E.D.D. In the past, the estimated annual amount was budgeted in the Unemployment Insurance Account #100-0700-5234. It was agreed during FY 1991-92 Budget Revi ew to not request the normal budget requi rement but rather to appropri ate each quarter from the Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund. Thi s agreement was reached in an effort to hold the line in the Insurance Budget and utilize Trust Fund monies specifically set aside to pay unemployment claims. RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution providing for an appropriation of $12,216.00 from the Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: NIA DISCUSSION During the budget hearings for FY 1991-92, it was agreed that staff would not request a line item budget for unemployment insurance (Acct. #100-0700-5234) but would rather request an appropriation from the Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund each quarter when claims are due and payable. The Trust Fund has more than $400,000 in reserve, and the interest earnings to the Fund more than offset the normal budget requirement. As in the past, excess interest earnings continue to flow back to the General Fund. FISCAL IMPACT: A total of $12,216.00 is to be appropriated from the Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund to Unemployment Insurance Account #100-0700- 5234 for the quarter ended December 31, 1991. The sum appropriated to this account will be expended by authorization and approval of the Finance Director. A:\(A113)\UNEMPLINS#3 ItJ-/ RESOLUTION NO. 1~.5'~~ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING FY 1991-92 BUDGET, PROVIDING FOR AN UNEMPLOYMENT TRUST FUND APPROPRIATION TO THE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE WHEREAS, the City pays for its unemployment insurance claims by reimbursement and each quarter, the Employment Development Department (EDD) sends an itemized bill of unemployment insurance benefits paid and the City, after verifying the bill, reimburses E.D.D.; and WHEREAS, in the past, the estimated annual amount was budgeted in the Unemployment Insurance Account #100-0700-5234; and WHEREAS, it was agreed during FY 1991-92 Budget Review to not request the normal budget requirement but rather to appropriate each quarter from the Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund which agreement was reached in an effort to hold the line in the Insurance Budget and utilize Trust Fund monies specifically set aside to pay unemployment claims; and WHEREAS, a total of $12,216.00 needs to be appropriated for the quarter ending December, 1991. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city Council of the City of Chula vista does hereby appropriate $12,216.00 from the Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund to Unemployment Insurance Account #100-0700-5234. Presented by Candy Boshell, Director of Personnel 2ZdJ" to fO:[ Bruce M. Boogaar , city Attorney C:\n\unemploy /(J -,2., COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item .Ll SUBMTITED BY: Meeting Date 4n /92 Resolution 1~5~hOriZing temporary closure of Third Avenue on May 2, 1992 for the Cultural Art Commission's Cultural Arts Festival and authorizing a waiver of business license fees for registered vendors at the event. Cultural Arts Commission M./7 Director of Parks and Recrealo!j4. City Manag~ (4/5 vote: Yes_No X) ITEM TITLE: REVIEWED BY: The City's Cultural Arts Commission is requesting permission to conduct a Cultural Arts Festival on Third Avenue on May 2, 1992. They are also requesting a waiver of business license fees for vendors that are registered participants at the event. RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the street closure and waiver of business license fees, subject to staff conditions. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable DISCUSSION: The City's Cultural Arts Commission, in conjunction with the Downtown Business Association (DBA), is requesting permission to conduct the first of what is scheduled to be an annual event, the Cultural Arts Festival. The event will be conducted May 2, 1992, on Third Avenue between "E" and "G" Streets, from 11:00 AM to 4:00 PM. Parking and traffic on Third Avenue will be restricted from 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM to allow for set-up and fmal tear down. "E" and "G" streets will remain open to through traffic at all times during the event. The event will include the use of Memorial Park and Memorial Bowl as well. Activities at the May event will include musical performances by various groups, dance displays and demonstrations, food vending booths, arts and crafts booths, displays of multiple forms of art, children's art activities, and artisans demonstrating their work. As a co-sponsor, the Downtown Business Association is fully supportive of the event. Letters were distributed to all affected businesses and residents notifying them of the date and time of the City Council meeting when the proposed event would be considered for approval by Council. These letters were distributed three weeks ago. The Commission has requested City support to assist them with conducting the event. This support includes police services, trash and litter control, use and set up of the City's portable stage, and the service of an electrician throughout the event. The costs for these services will be absorbed into each department's current operating budget. These costs are estimated to be approximately $2,450. A breakdown of these costs is indicated on Attachment "A". The Cultural Arts Commission has been able to secure funding to help offset the costs of the entire Festival. The Commission received $4,000 from the City, and a $4,000 matching amount from theh 11-1 Page 2 Item~ Meeting Date 4n/92 Baldwin Company. More recently, the Commission was able to secure a $2,000 grant from the Birch Foundation, $500 from SDG&E and $250 from the AItrusa Club. In addition, the Commission has received an in-kind donation from Laidlaw to provide portable toilets, trash receptacles, a trash dumpster, and street sweeping services for the event. The donations will be used for various event expenses, which include professional consultative services, stipends for artists, design, printing, and distribution of promotional materials and rental of necessary equipment and services. The Commission expects to receive some revenues from the sale of tickets for a piano concert featuring Gustavo Romero and from a nominal ticket price for several other events. Ail fees collected will be used to offset actual costs for producing various events. Staff is recommending approval of the event subject to the following conditions: 1. Provision by the DBA of evidence of general liability insurance in the amount of $1 million, in the form of a certificate of insurance and policy endorsement which names the City as additional insured. 2. The posting of "no-parking" signs along Third Avenue at least 24 hours in advance of the street closure. 3. Provision of adequate traffic and crowd control equipment and services, as determined by the Police Department. 4. Provision of adequate trash control and final event clean-up. The Police Department, Risk Manager, and Parks & Recreation staff concur with staff conditions. The Transit Department will arrange for the re-routing of buses as necessary due to the closure of east-west traffic along "F' Street, as well as north-south traffic on Third Avenue. The Transit Department may experience a loss of revenue due to reduced ridership during the time of street closure. San Diego Transit will also detour buses normally running along Third Avenue. The event is exempt from CEQA requirements with a Class 23 exemption. FISCAL IMPACT: Council previously allocated $4,000 on July 9,1991 to assist the Commission in defraying the expenses of this event. The cost of City provided services and equipment will be absorbed in each affected department's operating budget. No additional impact is anticipated. thirdave II"~ ATTACHMENT A PROJECTED COSTS CULTURAL ARTS FESTIVAL 1. Parks Division Staff Staff to deliver, set-up, and remove City-owned equipment and to provide trash control during and after the event. 2. Police Department Staff Regular duty and paid reserve officers to monitor street closures and provide traffic and crowd control. 3. Public Works Staff Construction and Repair Division electrician to provide support services throughout the event. 4. Recreation Division Staff Leaders and necessary supplies to conduct a variety of children's activities during the event. TOTAL /1-3//1-5 $ 460.00 $1,500.00 $ 210.00 $ 250.00 $2,420.00 RESOLUTION NO. /t.5(,3 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY CLOSURE OF THIRD AVENUE ON MAY 2, 1992 FOR THE CULTURAL ART COMMISSION'S STREET SCENE EVENT AND AUTHORIZING A WAIVER OF BUSINESS LICENSE FEES WHEREAS, the City's Cultural Arts Commission, in conjunction with the Downtown Business Association, is requesting permission to conduct the Third Avenue Street Scene and a waiver of business license fees for vendors; and WHEREAS, the Commission's Cultural Arts Festival is being held on May 2, 1992 and will be conducted on Third Avenue between "E" and "G" Streets, from 11:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.; and WHEREAS, parking and traffic on Third Avenue will be restricted from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. to allow for set-up and final tear down. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city Council of the city of Chula vista does hereby authorize the temporary closure of Third Avenue on May 2, 1992 from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. for the Cultural Art Commission's Street Scene event subject to the following conditions: 1. provision by the Downtown Business Association of evidence of general liability insurance in the amount of $1 million, in the form of a certificate of insurance and policy endorsement which names the City as additional insured. 2. The posting of "No-Parking" signs along Third Avenue at least 2 hours in advance of the street closure. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the authorize a waiver of business license accordance with Chula vista Municipal C Jess Valenzuela, Director of Parks and Recreation in Presented by C:\I'I\llUce&lC II-~ COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item J ).. SUBMITTED BY: Meeting Date 4/7/92 Resolution I~~~~ approving sewer connections for the San Diego county Water Authority for properties located in Proctor Valley. Director of Public work~ City Manage~ (4/5 Vote: Yes___No~) ITEM TITLE: REVIEWED BY: The San Diego County Water Authority is negotiating with property owners in Proctor Valley for additional right of way for their pipeline 4 extension project. The proposed right of way encroaches on the existing private sewer leach fields for two homes. The City of Chula vista's Salt Creek I sewer is in front of both homes along Proctor valley Road. The County Water Authority has requested that these two properties be allowed to connect to the city's sewer to solve the public health issue. RECOMMENDATION: That the Council approve the resolution. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: None. DISCUSSION: In the attached letter, the San Diego County Water Authority has indicated that their Pipeline 4 Extension project requires additional right of way that will encroach on existing private leach fields on properties located adjacent to the City's Proctor Valley Sewer serving Salt Creek I. The letter states that, as a result, the County Health Department has declared a public health hazard. The Water Authority's letter formally requests that they be allowed to connect two properties to the Proctor Valley Sewer. The properties to be connected are located in the unincorporated area and are not. close enough to the City boundary to make an annexation feasible. Council Policy 570-02, "Sewer Service To Property Not within The ci ty Boundary," requires any property owner not wi thin the City boundary wishing to connect to the city's sewer to be within an area that could logically annex to the city and to sign an agreement to annex. These properties are not in an area that could logically annex to the City at this time. Further, as stated in the Authority'S letter, it is unlikely that the property owners will sign an agreement to annex. city staff recommends that the County Water Authority be to make the requested connections subject to the conditions: permitted following I'; - / Page 2, Item 1.7.. Meeting Date 4/7/92 1. Such connection be allowed without the otherwise required annexation agreement. 2. That only existing development on the two properties be permitted to connect and that an annexation agreement be signed before any new development is allowed to connect. 3. That the County Water Authority pay all applicable non- capacity charges related to the sewer as levied by the City. In addition, they shall pay to the City of Chula vista a sewer capacity charge which is equal to the higher of the capacity charge imposed by either the City or Spring Valley Sanitation District. 4. That the County Water Authority pay any costs, fees or charges by any governmental agency other than Chula vista which are relative to and/or necessitated by the construction of sewer facilities to serve the property seeking connection. FISCAL IMPACT: None. CLS:A:CWASBWER.113 040292 /..,2. - .2. ~\2. (~) RESOLUTION NO. I GS (0'-1 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING SPECIAL SEWER CONNEC- TIONS FOR THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED IN PROCTOR VALLEY WHEREAS, the San Diego County Water Authority is negotiating with property owners 1n Proctor Valley for additional right of way for their ~~ipeline 4 eExtension ~~roject; and WHEREAS, the proposed right of way encroaches on the existing private sewer leach fields for two homes common Iv known as 3645 Proctor Vallev Road (APN 585-101-07) and 3655 Proctor Vallev Road (APN 585-101-04) ("Two Properties"); and WHEREAS, the City of Chula vista'a Salt Creek I sewer is in front of both homes along Proctor Valley Road; and WHEREAS, the county Water Authority has requested that these two properties be allowed to connect to the City'S sewer to solve the public health issue. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL DOES HEREBY FIND. DETERMINE. RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: section 1. The citv Council does hereby find that the permittinq of sewer connections as herein provided is a substantial and material deviation from our current policy aqainst permittinq extraterritorial sewer connections without imposinq the collateral obliqations to not oppose subsequent annexations of the area served. The city is permittinq this practice in this case only as an accomodation to the Countv Water Authoritv. another public aqencv. and only to reduce their cost of doinq business. an act which will inure to the benefit of all water consumers both inside and outside the citv of Chula vista. The city Council declares that it is not to be deemed to have any precedential value for future requests for extraterritorial sewer connections. section 2. BE IT REEOL\'ED that tThe City council of the city of Chula vista does hereby approve sewer connections for the San Diego County Water Authority for the Two P~roperties located in Proctor Valley subject to the following conditions: 1. EueR eeflfle;e'tieR se allo"n"c.a ;:i t.heut the et.herwioc reEIuireel. aRReuatioR a~rccmcRt. 2. That only ~~roperties annexation development existing development on the ~Two be permitted to connect and that an agreement be signed before any new is allowed to connect. 1 J~.~ 3. That the County Water Authority pay all applicable non-capacity charges related to the sewer as levied by the city. In addition, they shall pay to the City of Chula vista a sewer capacity charge which is equal to the higher of the capacity charge imposed by either the City or spring Valley sanitation District. 4. That the county Water Authority pay any cost, fees or charges by any governmental agency other than Chula vista which are relative to and/or necessitated by the construction of sewer facilities to serve the property seeking connection. Presented by Approved as to form by John P. Lippitt, Director of Public Works Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney c:\proctor1.wp 2 ):1-7' @ San Diego County Water Authority A Public Agency Operations Center 610 W. 5th Avenue. Escondido, California 92025 (619) 480.1991 FAX (619) 480.9867 February 21, 1992 subject: San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA) Pipeline 4 Extension, Phase II (P4EII) City of Chula Vista's Salt Creek I Offsite Proctor Valley Road !C CR w .':n ~. -- ~.j - . ~'~ ...... ::; e,.,. f'l""" r. rn ~-, t'"") ,AI :r. p, '~r:: :: ~; ~ f~ ,.., t.J ...... ..c" ftl..: -0 (1) -i .- . ,.. m ..... ....... {B N """ Mr. Clifford Swanson, City Engineer city of Chula vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 92010 Sewer At Dear Mr. Swanson: Pursuant to your request at our meeting of February 18, 1992 with John Goss, city Manager, John Lippitt, Director of Public Works, and yourself, attached is an October 8, 1991, County of San Diego, Department of Environmental Health Services letter concerning the need for public sewer connections for two existing homes (Roark APN 585-101-07 and Jensen APN 585-101-04) located along Proctor Valley Road and southerly of Jonel Way in the County of San Diego. SDCWA is acquiring right-of-way (ROW) through these properties under eminent domain for the construction of the treated water 72-inch diameter P4EII. The pipeline and ROW will encroach on the existing private sewer leach fields for these two homes. As a result, the County Health Department has declared a public health hazard. The City of Chula vista's Salt Creek I Sewer is in front of both homes along Proctor Valley Road. SDCWA formally requests that the Roark and Jensen homes be allowed to connect to the city's sewer to solve the public health hazard issue. Both properties are located in the County of San Diego and are not contiguous to the City of Chula vista boundaries. It is unlikely that the property owners will willingly agree to annexation to the city as SDCWA has been unable to reach a settlement agreement with either owner and will acquire the P4EII ROW through condemnation. Therefore, SDCWA requests that the city waive the requirement for annexation or owner agreement for future annexation to the city and permit two 4-inch diameter sewer lateral connections to the Salt Creek I Sewer as indicated on the attached conceptual drawings. SDCWA will pay connection fees and will install the sewer lateral and connections as part of the construction of P4EII. MEMBER AGENCIES CITlfS _0.1 Mar. Escondido-NationolOty .. Oc-.ide.I'awoy" So.. Diego IUlGAJION DISJRICTS _Son!oF.._SouthIloy COUNTY WAfER DfSrRICT .- MUNICIPAL wAlIa DlSlWIC1S .IluenoColon>do .1cI~ .. CarisbacI .. Ramona .~ . Ilino;on del Diablo .. PDch Dam .. \lDhy c..u- .Yuimo COUNlY .s.m0ieg0 (..officio) PUBUC unurY DfSTIICT WAII!R DtslRlcrs .. FuIbtook . ""- . eo., J ., - /' HDfRAL AGENCY . Son o;.guito ;. -> .PwndIetonMlitaoyr-wtion PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Mr. Clifford Swanson February 21, 1992 Page 2 We understand that the City may contact the spring Valley Sanitation District (SVSD) and develop an agreement between the city and District to provide sewer service to these two homes. For your information, we believe that the Roark property (APN 585-101- 07) is currently annexed to SVSD. Time is of the essence for this major water supply pipeline that will serve south San Diego county including the city of Chula vista. Please respond to this request by March 5, 1992 and provide any required application forms and other requirements. Should you have any questions, please call me at (619) 480-1991. Sincerely, ~.i- fI/. ~ .(or Michael T. stift Principal civil Engineer MTS/bu Attachments 1l..\"EIII",. ;,).- (, ASL-SAH DIEGO 61967~~~50 P.":!; .'., , . ". .' f~ 0- 3r1 .1 FlIlLlAM COX. M.D.. Ph.D OU~IiCTO" r.TEVIEN .. loICOIIOZA ".I,.TAN'f DIRECTOR QInurt~ .of ~tttt ~i.ego .,e_AI"TM"NT OF HEALTH SI!RVICeS ENVIRONMENTAl. HEALTH SERVICES DIP/a: Of' TIIC I)Il'IJn ~tr-:- P.O. 101 U261 1M DIICD, CA 92'3a.~!.!. (619) m.m' ,.. '1 1:1&-2114 October 8, 1991 . FROM: owiqht SlIIith, Deputy County En91neer . Depa~tment ot Public Works - Liquid W4.te Oivision Gary R. stephany, ~eputy Director Environmental Health services TO: ( URGENCY ANNEXATION AND PUBLIC S!W!R CONNECTION FOR 3645 ANI) 3655 PROCToR VALLEY ROAD, BONITA - APN 585-101-07 AND 585-101- 04 It has been brought to my attention that the two single-family rosidences raterenced abOVe ax-l:I lQc;;ated in the right-ot-way for the expansion of the County Water Authority's aqueduct. The construction ot this pipeline will take place through the; exist in; private sewage disposal systems servin9 each house. Relocation of the disposal systems is not feasible b~~.u.e or setback requirements and insufficient J:OQIII to relocate a septic system. . ( Public sewer is readily available 1n front of these homes 0" Proctor Valley Road. The owners, Pat~ici. Holland and Hilda Edeen at 3645 Proctor Vall~y Road, and Donald and Georjean Jansen at 3655 Proctor Valley Road, are all anxious to connect to pUblic sewer. Connection to public sewer must bQ completed prior to any construction of the aqueduct on the subject properties. Enough lead time should be allowed to permit the leach line trenches to dry out before they are unearthed. The septic tllJlltlS lllU.st be pu~ped o~ their contQnts, by a licen5cd p~ping service, and dQstroyed by crushing and backtillin'1 with clean fill material. This Pepa~tMent request. urqency annexation o~ ths properties and i~ediate publio sewer connoction. This will prevent a public health hazard from occurring. I,), - 7 ASL-SAH DIEGO 619673:5:5:50 P.04 ~i3'd !\:jlOl Ill. '.. .... , ~ P"Iigb.t Slaith -2- OQtober 8, 1991 should )'QU hllve l:lny quest:lone, pl,,"S. contact Michael J. Devine, Chief, EnvironJllental Health Serviees, Land Use Division at 338-2270. ~/~ GiAR~ R. sfEPHANY, Deputy Direc~or Environmontal H.al~h SerViC8& ( GRS:RG: jga eCI Michael J. Devine, Chief, EHS, Land Use Divi~lon George MeCandl..s, Environmental Land Use Specialist IV, ERS Land Use Division Robert cieslck, Environmental LAnd Use Specialist Ill, EllS Land Use Division Martin Ortega, Environmental Land Use Trainee, EHS Land Ume Division . Pat KloOk, Dapartment of PUblic Works. Liquid Waste Division (0-384) patricia Holland and Hilda Edeen, 3645 Proctor Valley Road, Bonita, CA 91908 Donald and Georjean Jensen, 3655 proetor Valley Road, Bonita, CA 91908 j)..g/ ( 0: W -J Z < 0: 0: ~ ~ '':t: :s ':.l !! \ " ct. "'" J ..,...----, / \ I \ I I ~ \ I 0: < , 0 'A.. 0: . 0 Ii 1.0 1.0 - (.? Z i= -J ~< VI W(/) x Gffi w -z . ~ - ~~ ~ i~ ~ <if VI () ~ 4 < (/) J. ? ~~ ao ($)~. g I ~I>! ~~ ($) -f! J ~ ~.i 0 z ~'l 0 VIM W · 0 VI Z COz W CO .., 8 (.?w ~Ii ' zz - i=J . . VlW - -0. C ~ x_ wo. o. /)..- 230 ---- 220 ....-..-- .---...-.-...--.-.---.--.----. -- 210 ----------- 200 ---------- 190 180 Q: ~ mil ~"! _0 01 !!!:> Xz w_ 6 San DisQO Ccxnty Water Authority ASL Condante, Inc. ARCADIA . CMIAII.LO . IrW€ PAUl SPItaIGS . ItANCHO OJC&UQJoIGA. - SAN D€GO -- PROCTOR /'" ~~~bEY / _____._.__1____.. -..-.. .--'-"-' . ...m_'" . -..- 0 - 0 -..-..-.. .0._ / .J -- - ~-- ^ I \ , I I I , I \ I v .0 + I') . ".0 <t. ~" VlO N I')il w ZlX)il ::::il') W+" 9=a!iU! Q.lX)- 01 ~ !!!<:> X~Z WVl_ .:> Q.~ SCALE HORIZ: 1" = 40' VERT: 1" = 8' J)..'/P 4" LATERAL SEWER LATERAL PROFILE ROARK RESIDENCE I . -- -- m l.: cr < 0 cr ...l I cr< ...l ~~ < cr LL1< 3 (II...l \ ~ 21 Z(fl :l...l crILl C) 8~ Z ..... i= Q) o~ + (II .,. x .,. LLI ..... - ..(W ...l ~ ""'01" LL1(fl (fla. Gcr _ILl () ::E(: ~ zcr << Ii (/) (IIa. t') ,J 0 ~< z w z il [ij a. CL ~ .. (/) . ~ $ i> (!l z t:; g I x w w - ! :. cD!- ' v; ~il l! 1,)..../1 ;IIi c ~ .. 220 ------------------------ PROCTOR VAlLEY ROAD 210------ -- -- ------------------- ----------------~--- -- -- - - - LA TERAL " , \ , , I I , I \ , v 0-~~-- 200 ------------- 190 ------------------------ " a: "l-H GO W + ..... .,. ..... z"l-H .,. -r- 1Il-H ....1+ r- 180 . "l e:GOO! '01 1/'). <. ~~ Q.GO~ I-lO 01 .,.01 III 01 ...:~ ...: ~ ~ !!!:> !!!<:> L;;i:> Xz XI-z "'z .....- .....1Il_ Q.- 170 - SCALE HORIZ: 1. = 40' VERT: 1. '" 8' San Diego Colnfy Water Authority ASL ConsUtants, Inc. AItCADtA . CAMAltU.O . ItWiIE PAUl $f"ttIrtGS . IIANCHO ~ . SAN DCGO , SEWER LATERAL PROfiLE /:L ~ /.2 JENSEN RESIDENCE ~ -- ~~, \'4 ~ - ~ -- - j II: I ,-'" / ',\II , ,~ I II: ,~ \ I l5 ~ ~ ~\ ,.._#' u z 61", ( ,. -""\ \II ~ ~i" \\\ r '-"1--1 al ~ ..,... ~= ~\ \ .'W'r-4 I ~ I zz ~~ \...J i=i3 "... ~a.. a:.c x_ ",II: ...... $~ ~ ~~ . .. ~ '" " + .. .. " .cei ...~ \II a. 1~-13 ( ... "'12 ~~ ::a~ ~~ '" oIlI z'" ~d 8~ 0" - - - ~ w 0 ..J m <( 0:: a: UJ z I- <( ~ ..J 0:: ~ W '"') UJ 0 Vl ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ 5~ 0== O~ 0'5 .~< QL- eS &l~ 4 . 8 . ... o is c: ~ _...IIl Z of~ . --. c: . ~ a:so~ ~ ;ll.! j~o ~~~ 0.. ().'" Q . RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING SPECIAL SEWER CONNEC- TIONS FOR THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED IN PROCTOR VALLEY WHEREAS, the San Die~o County Water Authority is negotiating with property owners 1n Proctor Valley for additional right of way for their ~Eipeline 4 eExtension ~Eroject; and WHEREAS, the proposed right of way encroaches on the existing private sewer leach fields for two homes commonlv known as ("Two Properties"); and WHEREAS, the City of Chula vista'a Salt Creek I sewer is in front of both homes along Proctor Valley Road; and WHEREAS, the County Water Authority has requested that these two properties be allowed to connect to the city's sewer to solve the public health issue. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL DOES HEREBY FIND. DETERMINE. RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The citv Council does herebv find that the permittina of sewer connections as herein provided is a substantial and material deviation from our current policv aaainst permittina extraterritorial sewer connections without imposina the collateral obliaations to not oppose subseauent annexations of the area served. The citv is permittina this practice in this case only as an accomodation to the County Water Authority. another public aaency. and only to reduce their cost of doina business. an act which will inure to the benefit of all water consumers both inside and outside the City of Chula vista. The city Council declares that it is not to be deemed to have any precedential value for future reauests for extraterritorial sewer connections. Section 2. BE IT REGOLVED that tThe City Council of the city of Chula vista does hereby approve sewer connections for the San Diego County Water Authority for the Two P~roperties located in Proctor Valley subject to the following conditions: 1. EliSa eelu\cctioR Be allet....eEi ui'tReat. the ethc1':\:ioc reqairea aRfleuat.isR agreement. 2. That only ~Eroperties annexation development existing development on the ~Two be permitted to connect and that an agreement be signed before any new is allowed to connect. 1 /1- ;rf 3. That the County Water Authority pay all applicable non-capacity charges related to the sewer as levied by the city. In addition, they shall pay to the City of Chula vista a sewer capacity charge which is equal to the higher of the capacity charge imposed by either the city or spring Valley Sanitation District. 4. That the County Water Authority pay any cost, fees or charges by any governmental agency other than Chula vista which are relative to and/or necessitated by the construction of sewer facilities to serve the property seeking connection. Presented by Approved as to form by John P. Lippitt, Director of Public Works Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney e:\proctor1..wp 2 J.2~ /It COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item /.3 ITEM TITLE: Meeting Date 4/7/92 Resolution 1~5~> Establishing dates for property owners to be ready to recei ve underground servi ce and removal of poles and overhead facil ities within Phase I of Underground Utility District No. 117 along Broadway from "l" Street to Moss Street lX)~ Director of Public Work~~ . City Manag~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No_A.J SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: On December 10, 1985, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 12276 establ i shi ng Underground Utility Di stri ct No. 117 along Broadway from "I" Street to Moss Street. In accordance with Section 15.32.150 of the Chul a Vista Municipal Code, adopted Resolution No. 12276 states that the City Council shall by subsequent resolution fix the date on which the affected property owners must be ready to receive underground service and the date poles, overhead wires and associated structures shall be removed. The convers i on of overhead utili ties to underground is almost compl ete withi n Phase I of Underground Utility District No. 117. The limits of Phase I extend along Broadway between "l" Street and Moss Street. Thi s reso 1 ut i on covers Phase I only. RECOMMENDATION: That Council: 1. Set June 30, 1992, as the date property owners wi th in Phase I of the Underground Ut il i ty Di stri ct No. 117 on Broadway (from "l" Street to Moss Street) shall be ready to receive underground service. 2. Set August 31, 1992, as the date poles, overhead wires and associated structures shall be removed within Phase I of Underground Utility District No. 117 on Broadway (from "l" Street to Moss Street). BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: On December 10, 1985 the Chula Vista City Council approved Resolution No. 12276 establishing Underground Utility District No. 117. The District limits extend from "I" Street to Moss Street. Due to the length of the District, construction of the project was divided into three phases. Actual construction work to convert all overhead util ity 1 ines to underground was started in 1987. However, construction was halted due to a change in City standards that required the widening of Broadway. Conversion work is resuming on Phase I, the limits of which are between "l" Street and Moss Street. Removal of poles must precede the construction work scheduled for CIP Project No. ST -102 (wideni ng and reconstruct i on of Broadway between "l" and Napl es Streets). 1;3-/ Page 2, Itell / J Meeting Date 4/7/92 Duri ng a meeting of the Utility Underground Advi sory Convni ttee on March 11, 1992, the utility companies informed Engineering staff that they can meet the following schedule for Phase I of the underground conversion district: Date for Customer to be Ready to Receive Underground Service June 30, 1992 Completion of Undergrounding Work and Removal of Overhead Utilities August 31, 1992 Since these dates cover Phase I only, the City Council shall approve a separate resol ut ion setting the "Customer Ready" and "Pol e Removal" dates for Phases II and III of Underground Utility District No. 117. A transparency showi ng the di stri ct boundari es of Phase lis avai labl e for Council viewing. FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of undergrounding overhead util ities within Phase I, along Broadway between "l" Street and Moss Street is estimated to be $300,000. This cost will be covered by the SDG&E allocation fund. Replacement of street lights will funded as part of the CIP project. WPC 5942E SMN:AR-OI8 I J"-,2, RESOLUTION NO. /~u5' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ESTABLISHING DATES FOR PROPERTY OWNERS TO BE READY TO RECEIVE UNDERGROUND SERVICE AND REMOVAL OF POLES AND OVERHEAD FACILITIES WITHIN PHASE I OF UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 117 ALONG BROADWAY FROM "L" STREET TO MOSS STREET WHEREAS, the City Council has heretofore by Resolution No. 12276 established an underground utility district along Broadway from "L" Street to Moss Street, and WHEREAS, it is now desired, pursuant to said resolution, to fix the date on which affected property owners must be ready to receive underground service. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city Council of the City of Chula vista that the following dates are hereby established ordering the property owners to prepare properties for receipt of underground utilities: 1. The property owners in Phase I of Underground utility District No. 117 along Broadway from "L" Street to Moss Street be ready to receive underground service from San Diego Gas and Electric Company on June 30, 1992. 2. Poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures must be removed with Phase I of Underground utility District No. 117 on Broadway by August 31, 1992. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the city Clerk of the City of Chula vista be, and she is hereby directed to forward a certified copy of this resolution to all affected utility companies and property owners. Presented by John P. Lippitt, Director of Public Works C:\rs\UUD aervice /.3-3 L I .... II. . . : : 133~lS SSO~ - '! .. . . . . . . CO : ,.... ll) . ,.. c 50 ... : - : : ? : co '" . ,.. b coleo co c>>: .............. : . gee II II' ..11.11 133~lS ,,1. CO) ,.. I ,.. co % ,.. co ,.. ? ,.. ~ ,.. co . o : :; : ~ ~-mo-g~9 . . . . ~~-c::c::o-8~9 ~ <( ~. : C . :<( . o a: CD :133~lS . . : . . . . . . . VNOZI~V C\j ,.. I ,.. C\j % ,.. co co C\j I ,.. C\j co % :L ,.. C\j co % ,.. co H 0 '" UJ '" (J) <( 90e :I: l1. S :. . l '" . ~","""I"'I"I"""I"""I""""""""""""'I~ --- b ~ 1() ll) . '" - . '" '" CO) ,.. I ,.. C\j % ,.. co UJ (J) <( :I: ll. I / -> r // .... ,... I- ,... W . W 0 ~ Z I- CJ) I I- CJ) 0 >- CJ) - <( 0 ~ I- 3= :E CJ) 0 - <( 0 0 0 Z e" ~ <( Z m - I- 0 II Z I W :':::J W ~ 1-0 - I- -~ CJ) me" w -~ CJ) II :l:w <( ...I ><0 :I: II Wz Q. Z :::J Il'l I W iO ..:l W . Eo< > . . H 3= . Eo< l- . . . - . Eo< l- . ...I . t.l . Il'l - W . . .., l- . m . 0 . :::J . ~ . Po > IlC c( CI Z ..: N ;:) . Gl .., 0 . I ID ::E 0 N t- .. I CJ >0 C') - III IlC i .. t- Il'l 0 a - CI Q MAILING LIST FOR BROADWAY CONVERSION DISTRICT NO. 117 PHASE I - L ST. TO MOSS ST. (LABELS ON 5931E) OCCUPANT Wadolete Corp. N;cola Comes & Delores Humphrey Alberto R. Real OCCUPANT OCCUPANT WPC 5932E -1- 13---" .\ OCCUPANT WPC 5932E -2- /3-7 MAILING LIST Bacarti Nehme Paul Thompson San Diego Gas Christine Andrew Cox Cable San Diego, Inc. Patricia Barnes San Die 0 (MI\UUAC.MTG) 13..-7 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT I telll---'!l- Meeting Date 4/7/92 ITEM TITlE: a) Resolution 1~..5j.~ Making findings on the petition for Assessment District No. 91-1 (Telegraph Canyon Road - Phase II) b) Resolution lI>n7 Making appointments, approving the acquisition/financing agreement, and authorizing the Mayor to execute the acquisition/financing agreement for Assessment District No. 91-1 (Telegraph Canyon Road - Phase II) c) Resolution /~.5'/.y Adopting a map showing the proposed boundari es of Assessment Di strict No. 91-1 (Tel egraph Canyon Road - Phase I I) d) Resolution 1"5'&.9 Declaring intention to order the installation of certain improvements in a proposed assessment district; ordering the preparation of a report describing the district to be assessed to pay the costs and expenses thereof; and providing for the issuance of bonds for Assessment District No. 91-1 (Telegraph Canyon Road - Phase II) e) Resolution 1~.F7t:> Passing on the "report" Engineer, giving preliminary approval, and setting a pl ace for the publ i c heari ng for Assessment Di stri ct (Telegraph Canyon Road - Phase II) SUBMITTED BY: Director of Publ ic Work}! r REVIEWED BY: City Manager~ ~ (4/Sths Vote: Yes___No-X-) In April 1989, the EastLake Development Company began the construction of Telegraph Canyon Road - Phase II which extends from approximately 2,250 feet west of the future Paseo Ranchero Road to 600 feet east of Apache Drive. The improvements are now complete, and it is proposed to assess the cost of these improvements to a portion of the EastLake development utilizing an acquisition proceedings pursuant to the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913. of the time and No. 91-1 REC~ENDATION: Adopt the resolutions and execute said agreement. Set the time and date of the public hearing for May 12, 1992 at 6:00 p.m. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS REC~ENDATIONS: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: Tonight's action is the initiation of the proceedings for the formation of Assessment District No. 91-1 (Telegraph Canyon Road - Ph. II). Through the approval of these resolutions, the following will generally be accomplished: 1. The RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS ON THE PETITION accepts the property owner petition requesting assessment district financing of the Telegraph Canyon Road - Phase II public improvement. /tJ'l Page 2, Item 1'/ Meeting Date 4/7/92 2. The RESOLUTION MAKING APPOINTMENTS AND APPROVING THE ACQUISITION/ FINANCING AGREEMENT is the formal appointment of the Director of Public Works as Superintendent of Streets, makes other administrative appointments, and approves the acquisition/financing agreement. 3. The RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MAP SHOWING THE PROPOSED BOUNDARIES is the formal action establishing and approving boundaries of the proposed assessment di stri ct. The boundary, as proposed, i ncl udes the southerly portion of the EastLake Greens and the Olympic Training Center. 4. The RESOLUTION DECLARING INTENTION is the jurisdictional resolution under "1913 Act" proceedings, declaring intent to finance improvements through the issuance of bonds and declaring that the improvements are a benefit to the property in the district. This resolution also directs the Engineer-of-Work, Willdan Associates, to prepare a report on the plans, specifications, cost estimate, assessment spread of the assessable costs, and a description of the improvements. Further, it provides for the issuance of bonds on the project. 5. The RESOLUTION PASSING ON THE "REPORT" AND SETTING THE PUBLIC HEARING is the preliminary approval of the Engineer's "Report" as required in the previous resolution, and sets the time, time, date, and place for the public hearing. The public improvements proposed to be financed through this acquisition proceedings are nearly complete and include improvements to complete the full six lanes of Telegraph Canyon Road within the project limits. The estimated total amount proposed to be assessed to the land in the district is $7,091,389.46 including $4,560,136.31 for construction of grading, storm drains, curb, gutter, sidewalk, medians, paving, landscape and irrigation, and other related construction, and $2,531,263.15 in incidental expenses such as right-of-way, design engineering and plan check costs, inspection costs, consultant fees, city administration costs, and bond reserve fund and discount allowances. Telegraph Canyon Road is a component of the circulation element street system for the Eastern Territories and as such, is also included in the Eastern Territories Transportation Development Impact Fee (DIF) program. It is proposed that the DIF amount, currently $3,060 per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU), be uti 1 i zed as the method of spreadi ng the cost of Tel egraph Canyon Road - Phase II to the land within the assessment district boundaries. With the bond issuance expenses added to the DIF amount, the assessment is $3,700.76 per EDU. It should be noted that the full cost of the Telegraph Canyon Road - Ph. II project is not being assessed to the district. The EastLake Development Co. has requested that only $5,863,572 of the total $11,128,046 DIF eligible costs be assessed to land within their development. The remaining $5,264,473 will be util ized by the EastLake Development Co. as a credit against DIF charges for future development. By Resolutions 15893 and 13715, the City Council authorized EastLake Development Company to receive DIF credit for construction of Telegraph Canyon Road and Channel - Phase II. It is not proposed to include any channel DIF costs in this assessment district. J'/.-;;. Page 3, Item /'/ Meeting Date 4/7/92 The next step in the assessment district proceedings is the public hearing. Adoption of tonight's resolutions will set the public hearing for May 12, 1992, at which time the district may be formed and the assessments levied. FISCAL IMPACT: The developer has advanced all City expenses related to the proposed assessment district. In conformance with Council policy on developer requested assessment districts, Eastlake Development Co. will deposit the origination charge of approximately $70,000 prior to the public hearing. The actual amount will be based on the Final Engineer's Report. DDS/AY075 WPC 5946E /J/:J DATE OF MEETING: STAFF: CITY COUNCIL: CITY COUNCIL: CITY COUNCIL: CITY COUNCIL: STAFF: CITY COUNCIL: APRIL 7, 1992: MAY 12, 1992. ORDER OF r.........ullRB CITY OF CHULA VISTA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 (TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD, PIlASE I I) APRIL 7, 1992 General presentation as to boundaries of Assessment District and extent of works of improvement. Adopt RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS ON PETITION: Formal action and acceptance of Petition submitted by property owners. Adopt RESOLUTION MAKING APPOINTMENTS AND APPROVING AGREEMENT: Formal appointment of Superintendent of Streets. newspaper, etc., and approves the ACquisition/Financing Agreement for execution. Adopt RESOLUTION ADOPTING PROPOSED BOUNDARY MAP. Formal action approving boundaries of proposed Assessment District. Adopt RESOLUTION OF INTENTION. Jurisdictional Resolution under "1913 Act" proceedings, declaring intent to finance improvements through the issuance of bonds. Presentation of Engineer's "Report" pursuant to the provisions of "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", consisting of the following: Plans Specifications Cost Estimate Assessment Roll Assessment Diagram Adopt RESOLUTION PASSING ON REPORT AND SETTING PUBLIC HEARING. Preliminary approval of the Engineer'S "Report" and sets date, time and place for public hearing. *** PROPOSBD SCHBDULB. ADOPT JURISDICTIONAL RESOLUTIONS PUBLIC MEARING TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING. A, CONFIRMATION OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICT B. ORDERING IMPROVEMENTS C. APPROVE ENGINEER'S "REPORT" * * * /'1~.> John Lippitt, Public Works Director city of Chula Vista March 31, 1992 Page Two 1IBSOLUTIORS ~hrough the adoption of the enclosed Resolutions, the following will generally be accomplished. ~he RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS ON PETITION is the formal action and acceptance of Petition submitted by property owners. ~he RESOLUTION MAKING APPOINTMENTS AND APPROVING AGREEMENT is the formal appoint- ment of the Superintendent of Streets, newspaper, etc., and approves the ACquisition/Financing Agreement for execution. The RESOLUTION APPROVING BOUNDARY MAP is the formal action establishing and approving boundaries of the proposed Assessment District. The RESOLUTION OF INTENTION is the jurisdictional Resolution under "1913 Act" proceedings, declaring intent to finance improvements through the issuance of bonds. The RESOLUTION PASSING ON "REPORT" AND SETTING PUBLIC HEARING is the preliminary approval of the Engineer'S "Report" and sets date, time and place for public hearing. WRI'l'TBK OOIIMtlRICA~IORS As written communications are filed in connection with the proceedings, copies should immediately transmitted to the following. A. Each member of the legislative body B. Office of Project Hanager C. Office of A.sessment Engineer D. Office of Bond Counsel CORJ'ORMIID COPIES I would appreciate receiving conformed copies of all Resolutions upon their adoption, . together with a copy of the minutes of the meeting where the Resolutions have been adopted. ROrICBS Under separate cover I will be transmitting all notices, affidavits and certif icates in order to meet the necessary notice requirements following the conclusion of the meeting. /'/~~ John Lippitt, Public Work. Dir.ctor city of Chula Vi.ta March 31, 1992 Page Three Upon your review of the enclo.ed material, if you have any que.tion., comments or .ugg..tion., plea.e call. V.ry truly yours, '-{Yw.v F. MACKENZIE BROWN FMB.bd encl.. cc. Donna Snider, A....sm.nt Di.trict Coordinator Thoma..Meade/ Municipal Finance Administration J.rom. Fournier/ Willdan A.sociates . 1'1-7 DATE OF MEETING. STAFF. CITY COUNCIL. CITY COUNCIL. CITY COUNCIL. CITY COUNCIL. STAFF: . CITY COUNCIL. APRIL 7, 1992. MAY 12, 1992. OltDBR OF ~ORB CITY OF CHULA VISTA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 (TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD, PHASE II) APRIL 7, 1992 G.n.ral pr...ntation a. to boundar i.. of A.....ment Di.trict and extent of worke of improvement. Adopt RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS ON PETITION. Formal action and acc.ptanc. of Petition .ubmitted by property own.r... Adopt RESOLUTION MAKING APPOINTMENTS AND APPROVING AGREEMENT. Formal appointment of Superintendent of Streete, newepaper, etc., and approves the Acquisition/Financing Agr.ement for .x.cution. Adopt'RESOLUTION ADOPTING PROPOSED BOUNDARY MAP. Formal action approving boundaries of propoe.d Asses.ment District. Adopt RESOLUTION OF INTENTION. Jurisdictional R.solution und.r "1913 Act" proceedings, d.claring int.nt to financ. improvem.nts through the i..uanc. of bonds. Preeentation of Engin..r' e "Report" pureuant to the provi.ions of "Municipal Improvem.nt Act of 1913", consieting of the following. Plans Specifications Cost Eetimate A....sm.nt Roll As....ment Diagram Adopt RESOLUTION PASSING ON REPORT AND SETTING PUBLIC HEARING. pr.liminary approval of the Engin..r'. "R.port" and ..t. dat., time and plac. for public h.aring. *** PIIOPOSBD SCBBDULB. ADOPT JURISDICTIONAL RESOLUTIONS PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING: A. CONFIRMATION OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICT B. ORDERING IMPROVEHENTS C. APPROVE ENGINEER'S "REPORT" * * * It/.,g" RESOLUTION NO. /"SV,," RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA MAKING FINDINGS ON PETITION FOR ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 (TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD, PHASE II) WHEREAS, the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, has been presented by certain property owners an executed Petition requesting the installation of certain public improvements, together with appurtenances and appurtenant work in connection therewith, said improvements to be installed pursuant to the terms and provisions of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", being Division 12 of the streets and Highways Code of the state of California, in a special assessment district known and designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 (TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD, PHASE II) (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District"); and, WHEREAS, it has been reported that said Petition contains the signatures of more than sixty percent (60\) of the property owners of the assessable area of the property to be subject to assessment for the proposed works of improvement. Said Petition meets the requirements of Sections 2804 and 2804.5 of Division 4 of the streets and Highways Code of the State of California. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS. SECTION 1. That the above recitals are all true and correct. SECTION 2. That it is hereby found that said Petition has been signed by owners owning land constituting more than sixty percent (60\) of all assessable land within the boundaries of the proposed Assessment District, and said Petition meets the requirements of Sections 2804 and 2804.5 of Division 4 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. SECTION 3. This legislative body hereby further finds and determines, based on written evidence submitted, that the total estimated amount of the proposed assessments will not exceed seventy- five percent (75\) of the estimated fair market value of the land proposed to be assessed after the proposed public improvements shall have been installed. SECTION 4. That said Petition shall be filed with the transcript of these proceedings and shall remain open to public inspection. Jt./I9-j Presented by Approved as to ~ John P. Lippitt Public Works Director Bruce M. Boogaar City Attorney PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED of Chula Vista, california, this 1992, by the following vote. by the City Council of the City day of AYES: Councilmembers. NOES: Councilmembers. ABSENT. Councilmembers: ABSTAIN. Councilmembers: Tim Nader, Mayor ATTEST. Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO CITY OF CHULA VISTA ss. I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council held on the day of , 1992. Executed this _____ day of , 1992. Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk II.( f).; J, , RESOLUTION NO. /~R7 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA MAKING APPOINTMENTS AND APPROVING AGREEMENT IN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 (TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD, PHASE II) WHEREAS, the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, is considering the formation of a special assessment district, pursuant to the terms and provisions of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", being Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, for the installation of certain public works of improvement, together with appurtenances and appurtenant work, said special assessment district to be known and designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 (TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD, PHASE II) (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District"); and, WHEREAS, at this time, this legislative body is desirous of making the required appointments and designating persons to perform certain duties, in order to allow the proceedings to go forward to completion in accordance with the provisions of law; and, WHEREAS, there has been submitted to this City Council for review and approval, an Acquisition/Financing Agreement setting forth certain terms and conditions, as well as estimated prices and quantities of work to be installed and financed pursuant to said Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS, SECTION 1. That the above recitals are all true and correct. SECTION 2. That the PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR is hereby appointed to perform all of the duties and functions of the Superintendent of Streets as said duties are specified and designated in the "Munici- pal Improvement Act of 1913", being Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, for the above-referenced Assessment District. SECTION 3. That the place for recordation of the assessment roll and diagram shall be in the Office of the Superintendent of Streets, and said assessment roll and diagram, upon recordation, shall be kept as a permanent record. SECTION 4. That the STAR NEWS is hereby designated as the newspaper for all publications as required by law and as necessary for completion of this Assessment District. SECTION 5. That WILLDAN ASSOCIATES is hereby appointed the Assessment Engineer for said proceedings, and said Assessment Engineer shall perform all of the duties and responsibilities as set forth by law as they relate to said Assessment District. /YB-j SECTION 6. That BROWN, DIVEN & HENTSCHKE, Attorneys at Law, is hereby appointed to act as Bond Counsel for the purposes of prepar- ing proceedings and issuing an approving opinion attesting to the validity of the proceedings and the enforceability of the bonds. SECTION 7. That KADIE-JENSEN, JOHNSON & BODNAR is hereby appointed as Financial Consultant for purposes of obtaining a proposal or bid for the sale of bonds to be issued in order to finance said proceedings, and said bonds are to be issued pursuant to the terms and provisions of the "Improvement Bond Act of 1915", being Division 10 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. SECTION 8. That the Acquisition/Financing Agreement, as submitted for the referenced Assessment District, is hereby approved, and execution is authorized .to be made by the Mayor and City Clerk. A copy of said Agreement shall be kept on file in the City Clerk and remain for public inspection. SECTION 9. That this legislative body hereby establishes a special IMPROVEMENT FUND designated by the name and number of the Assessment District, and into said fund shall be placed all proceeds from the sale of bonds and cash collections. In order to expedite the improvements or acquisition under these proceedings and as autho- rized by law, funds from any available source may be transferred into said special fund. Any funds transferred are a loan to the fund and shall be repaid out of the proceeds of the sale of bonds, including authorized incidental expenses, as well as costs for the installation of the authorized public improvements, all as required and authorized by law, and specifically Section 10210 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. Presented by John P. Lippitt Public Works Director PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED ofChula Vista, California, this 1992, by the following vote: by the City Council of the City day of /1 8 ~2. . AYES: Councilmembers: NOES: Councilmembers: ABSENT: Councilmembers: ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: Tim Nader, Mayor ATTEST: Beverly A. Authelet, city Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO CITY OF CHULA VISTA ss. I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council held on the day of , 1992. Executed this _____ day of , 1992. Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk I '-I /J ..-J ACQUISITION/FINANCING AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this by and between the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a public (hereinafter referred to as "City"), and (hereinafter referred to as "Property Ownerlt). day of , 1992, agency of the State of California WHEREAS, the City is considering the formation of a special assessment district under the terms and conditions of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", being Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, for the construction of certain public improvements, together with appurtenances and appurte- nant work within the jurisdictional limits of said City, said special assessment district known and designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 (TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD, PHASE II) (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District"); and, WHEREAS, Section 66462 of the Government Code of the State of California ("Subdivi- sion Map Act") expressly authorizes financing and completion of public improvements under an appropriate special assessment act, and Section 10102 of the Streets and Highways Code ("Municipal Improvement Act of 1913") expressly authorizes the acquisi- tion of any improvements authorized to be constructed under said law; and, WHEREAS, Property OWner, in order to proceed in a timely way with its development, desires to construct and has constructed certain public works of improvement that are proposed to be included with the works of improvement for the Assessment District, namely, the improvements as set forth and described in the attached, referenced and incorporated Exhibit "A"; and, WHEREAS, the City and Property Owner are in agreement that the determined eligible works of improvement may be included within the Assessment District financing at prices determined by said City to be reasonable; and, WHEREAS, it is the intent of this Agreement to provide that Property Owner shall, upon a successful confirmation of assessment and sale of bonds for the Assessment District, be paid for the works of improvement which are integral and a part of the Assessment District, as the prices as determined by the City; and, WHEREAS, the properties within the boundaries of the Assessment District will be assessed only for those portions of the works of improvement that benefit the proper- ties within the boundaries of the Assessment District, and this Acquisition/ Financing Agreement and payment for the works of improvement will apply to and only cover those portions of said works of improvement; and, WHEREAS, in performing under this Agreement, it is mutually understood that Property Owner is acting as an independent contractor and not an agent of the city, and City shall have no responsibility for payment to any contractor, subcontractor or supplier of the Property OWner; and, WHEREAS, Property OWner shall be the owner of and retain title to all of the works of improvement constructed pursuant to this Agreement until such time as the city, acting pursuant to the provisions of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", shall acquire such works of improvement. Upon such transfer, such improvements shall become the property of the public agency and/or regulated utility authorized to provide the service to the Assessment District; and, ItjtJ-.I'f WHEREAS, the city has no objection to purchasing the improvements from said Property Owner, and Property owner is desirous that the city purchase said improvements, and at this time said improvements are owned by property Owner; and, WHEREAS, if the work is not being constructed in a timely manner, the City may, at its option, proceed and install authorized facilities pursuant to applicable public contract laws, with payment to be made from bond proceeds. Upon exercising this option, the work being constructed shall automatically be deleted from this Agree- ment; and, WHEREAS, Property OWner hereby further agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City of any challenge involving the validity or enforceability of this Agreement and Property Owner further agrees to defend or provide the monies in advances for any defense as it relates to a challenge to this Agreement; and, WHEREAS, City may, at its option, terminate this Agreement at any time if any legal challenge is filed relating to the validity or enforceability of this Agreement for these assessment district proceedings. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED between the respective parties as follows: SECTION 1. SECTION 2. SECTION 3. SECTION 4. SECTION 5. That the above recitals are all true and correct. The City has no financial obligation to construct the improvements, and all expense for said improvements, including all incidentals thereto, shall be borne by owners of property within the Assessment District. That said City does intend to proceed with the adoption of a Resolution of Intention and the formation of a special Assessment District for the improvements above described; however, the City reserves the right to determine those facilities which are eligible for final funding. That the City agrees to acquire and finance through the use of special assessment proceedings, and Property Owner agrees to convey all completed improvements to the City, those improvements being all as set forth in the previously referenced Exhibit "A". Property OWner agrees to post with the City the required bonds to guarantee the performance of the work and payment of all labor and materials, said bonds to be in the amounts as determined by the City. Property Owner shall be responsible for the maintenance and shall maintain said improvements in a satisfactory condition prior to any final transfer and acceptance. No acquisition monies shall be paid until the described improvements to be acquired have been transferred free and clear of all liens, claims and encumbrances, and Property Owner does hereby indemnify the City against any liens, claims or encumbrances relating to said acquired improvements. 1'/(;-15 SECTION 6. The final facilities and actual prices to be paid for said improvements are those that the City believes to be integral and reasonable and to confer special benefit on properties within the Assessment District. The estimated prices for the improvements are set forth in the attached, referenced and incorporated Exhibit "8". Final prices shall be based upon unit prices and quantities as determined by the City to be reasonable, and no other costs and expenses shall be allowed unless expressly authorized by the legislative body of the City. The Property Owner shall provide all substantiating documentation and certifications of authenticity as requested by the City in the determination of either the quantities of work constructed or the prices to be paid for such improvements. SECTION 7. The estimated quantities set forth in the previously referenced Exhibit "8" shall be revised to reflect the actual quantities of works of improvement actually constructed at prices as determined by the City. Any final determination shall be made by the City as to the prices and quantities to be paid. SECTION B. The costs of acquisition shall also include the necessary engineering and related incidental expenses, including, but not limited to, the preparation of plans, specifications, bidding and all related documenta- tion. Said final costs and expenses are to be determined upon the completion of the works of improvement and certified by the City. SECTION 9. The cost for said works of improvement shall be spread in accordance with the benefits received, as determined by the Assessment Engineer for the Assessment District; however, the assessable amount shall not exceed the ,applicable street improvement development impact fee in the amount of $3,060.00 per dwelling unit and/or equivalent dwelling unit, p~us related incidental and financing costs. SECTION 10. All plans and specifications shall be submitted by the Property Owner, and all improvements shall be bid and constructed in full compliance with all applicable local rules and laws. Property Owner agrees to keep records and to allow the City to review said records for all bids and contracts let for any of the improvements. City shall have the right to inspect all works of improvement as if said works of improve- ment were being constructed as a public works contract let by the City. SECTION 11. Upon execution of this Agreement and completion of the improvements, the City shall have the right to use said improvements as determined necessary and integral for the works of improvement within the Assess- ment District. SECTION 12. The acquisition monies, upon the sale of bonds, shall be distributed pursuant to written instructions executed by all persons having an interest in the property, as disclosed by a current title report. /'1(j~ 3 "Interested parties" shall consist of property owners as shown on the last equalized assessment roll for property taxes, as well as any beneficiaries under any existing deeds of trust. No cash distribution shall be made until all parties have executed the appropriate written instructions. SECTION 13. Acquisition monies may be withheld until all improvements required to be installed by the Property OWner have been completed, and a reason- able amount of monies due under this Agreement may be subsequently with- held to cover final possible corrections and/or adjustments in the work, said work to be accomplished subsequent to the confirmation of the assessment and sale of bonds. SECTION 14. This Agreement is contingent upon the confirmation of assessments and successful sale of bonds, and it shall be null and void if said bonds are not sold within a three (3) year period following the date of this Agreement, or any mutually agreed extension; however, this time can be extended by request of the Property Owner and concurrence of the legislative body. SECTION 15. Property owner hereby agrees to provide written notice to any potential purchasers of lots in a form satisfactory to City so advising the potential owner of the fact of the proposed or confirmed Assessment District, with said document being executed by the potential owner. Such notice shall be provided to the potential owner a reasonable time before the potential owner becomes contractually committed to purchase the lot so that the potential owner may knowingly consider the impact of the assessment in the decision to purchase the lot. A copy of all such notices executed by actual purchasers shall be sent to the City. SECTION 16. Property owner agrees to and shall assume the defense of, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers and agents, from any action, damages, claims or losses of any type resulting from this Agreement, including without limitation the design, engineering, construction bidding, award of the contract contract and construction of the improve- ments. No provision as contained herein shall in any way limit the extent of the responsibility of said Property Owner for payment of damages resulting from the construction of the improvements and/or any contractual relationships between Property Owner and contractor and/or subcontractors. SECTION 17. This Agreement is binding upon heirs, assigns, and successors-in- interest. SECTION 18. This Agreement, by its execution, amends and supercedes any terms and conditions that may be inconsistent in any previous agreement, includ- ing any subdivision improvement agreement, relating to the construc- tion, installation or financing of said improvements. J'IlJ.,j,'l4 SECTION 19. The prevailing party in any litigation relating to, interpreting or enforcing this Agreement, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney' s fees as determined by the Court. SECTION 21. This Agreement and the construction subject to all local laws and ordinances improvement agreements, land division, applicable development requirements. of the improvements shall be relating to the requirement of improvement security or other EXECUTED by and between the parties hereto on the day and year first hereinabove written. "CITY" CITY OF CHULA VISTA MAYOR CITY OF CHULA VISTA STATE OF CALIFORNIA ATTEST: CITY CLERK CITY OF CHULA VISTA STATE OF CAIFORNIA "PROPERTY OWNER" EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY By: Vit1/dJo~,,~ Robert L. Santos, President 1'18-8 5 EXHIBIT A ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 91-1 TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD ACQUISITION AGREEMENT DESCRIPTION OF FACILITIES The work to be financed by the proposed assessment district consists of the following: Improvement of Telegraph Canyon Road to a 6 lane prime arterial. The limits of the project are from approximately 2,250 feet west of the future Paseo Ranchero east approximately 8,500 feet to 600 feet east of Apache Drive (between stations 69+50 and 158+00 as per City of Chula Vista Drawing Numbers 88-922 to 88-907). I. Acquisition of necessary right-of-way. 2. Grading of the 134 foot street right-of-way. 3. Improvement of Telegraph Canyon Road to include two 44 foot street sections, a 24 foot landscaped median, and two 11 foot sidewalk sections. Improvments include base, asphalt pavement, curb, gutter, sidewalk, pedestrian ramps, guard rails, street lights, storm drain and dry utlities. 4. Installation of two parallel water mains. /o/e-' EXHIBIT B CITY OF CHULA VISTA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 91-1 TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD Telegraph Canyon Road Improvements ITEM 1 Clear & Grub 2 Existing Structure Removal 3 Excavation & Embankment 4 Export 5 Surface Drainage 6 Storm Drain 7 Sewer 8 Water 9 Electric 10 Concrete Improvements 11 Base & Paving 12 Landscape Construction 13 Landscape Maintenance 14 Structure Adjustment 15 Street Lights 16 Miscellaneous 17 Masonry Retaining Wall 18 PCC Cribwall 19 Sub Drain 20 Telo Conflict 21 Adjust Sewer Manholes 22 Rip Rap 23 Fencing 24 Alluvium & Subdrain 25 Utility Undergrounding Total Construction IIIIJ-'II} AMOUNT 78,411.00 11,592.00 731,610.57 963,859.14 247,644.70 1,214,955.63 47,577.15 977,053.66 195,401.00 633,945.41 1.677,264.36 625,518.81 9,100.00 20,750.00 84,030.00 212,357.29 11,200.00 69,391.00 18.000.00 240,000.00 27,149.00 352,484.49 66,848.75 346,148.75 519,853.22 9,382,145.93 EXHIBIT B CITY OF CHULA VISTA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 91-1 TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD Incidentals ITEM 26 Design Engineering 27 Soils Engineering 28 Landscape Design 29 Landscape Maintenance 30 Special Studies Engineering 31 Construction Management 32 Plan Check & Inspection Fees 33 Construction Staking 34 Improvment Security 35 Right-ol-Way Acquisition Total Incidentals 11/8-11 AMOUNT 715,434.71 186,493.31 74,605.40 40,264.25 120,216.40 10,583.82 195,145.05 132,317.69 113,260.00 873,849.52 2,462,170.15 EXHIBIT B CITY OF CHULA VISTA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 91-1 TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD Project Summary Total Construction Less Channel Credit Total Incidentals 9,382,145.93 (935,820.00) 2,462,170.15 Total Acquisition Amount Developer DIF Credit 10,908,496.08 5,264,473.44 Total Acquisition Assessment Amount 5,644,022.64 /o/B-Jj. /] ) ) COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) On ~1_~~e me, personally appeared personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name(s) are/is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their/ authorized capacity, and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrume STATE OF CALIFORNIA ss. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature ~~r OffiCIAL SEAL Q:...., S1LVAN4 BRAZELL , NOTARY PUBliC CALIfORNIA . -' PRINCIPAL O'flCE Ifl . SAN .1IlGO COIINTY :, ~"'. My Commis~ Expire.; h:b. 12, 1994 (SEAL) 1'18"/~ RESOLUTION NO. /~5~g/ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADOPTING A MAP SHOWING THE PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF ASSESS- MENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 (TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD, PHASE II) WHEREAS, the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, has been presented and has. received a map showing and describing the boundaries of the area proposed to be assessed in an assessment district under the provisions and authority of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", being Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California; said assess- ment district known and designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 (TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD, PHASE II) (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District"). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the above recitals are all true and correct. SECTION 2. That a map of the Assessment District showing the boundaries of the proposed Assessment District and lands and property to be assessed to pay the costs and expenses of the proposed improvements designated as "PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 (TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD, PHASE II)" is hereby submitted, and the same is hereby approved and adopted. SECTION 3. That the original map of said proposed boundaries of the proposed Assessment District and one copy thereof is to be filed in the Office of the City Clerk. SECTION 4. A certificate shall be endorsed on the original and on at least one copy of the map of the Assessment District, evidenc- ing the date and adoption of this Resolution, and within fifteen (15) days after the adoption of the Resolution fixing the time and place of hearing on the formation or extent of said Assessment District, a copy of said map shall be filed with the correct and proper endorsements thereon with the County Recorder, all in the manner and form provided for in Section 3111 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. Presented by Bruce M. Boogaa City Attorney John P. Lippitt Public Works Director I 'Ie - / PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED of Chula Vista, California, this 1992, by the following vote: by the City Council of the City day of AYES: Councilmernbers: NOES: Councilmembers: ABSENT: Councilmernbers: ABSTAIN: Councilmernbers: Tim Nader, Mayor ATTEST: Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO CITY OF CHULA VISTA ss. I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing ReSOlution No. was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council held on the day of , 1992. Executed this _____ day of , 1992. Beverly A. Authe1et, City Clerk 1'!e-2- . . RESOLUTION NO. / ,,~~, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DECLARING INTENTION TO ORDER THE INSTALLATION OF CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS IN A PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT; DECLARING THE WORK TO BE OF MORE THAN LOCAL OR ORDINARY BENEFIT; DESCRIBING THE DISTRICT TO BE ASSESSED TO PAY THE COSTS AND EXPENSES THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF BONOS IN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 (TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD, PHASE II) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The public interest and convenience require, and it is the intention of this body, pursuant to the provisions of Divi- sion 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the state of california (the "Municipal Improvement Act 1913"), to order the installation of certain public improvements, together with appurtenances and appurte- nant work, in a special assessment district known and designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 (TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD, PHASE II) (here- inafter referred to as the "Assessment.District"). DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS A. The financing of certain public improvements described as the construction of certain street improvements, together with apurtenances, in TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD, to serve and benefit properties within the boundaries of the Assessment District. B. said streets, rights-of-way and easements shall be shown upon the plans herein referred to and to be filed with these proceedings. C. All of said work and improvements are to be installed at the places and in the particular locations, of the forms, sizes, dimensions and materials, and at the lines, grades and elevations as shown and delineated upon the plans, profiles and specifications to be made therefor, as hereinafter provided. D. The description of the improvements and the termini of the work contained in this Resolution are general in nature. All items of work do not necessarily extend for the full length of the description thereof. The plans and profiles of the work as contained in the Engineer's "Report" shall be controlling as to the correct and detailed description thereof. E. Whenever any public way is herein referred to as running between two public ways, or from or to any public way, the intersections of the public ways referred to are included to the extent that work shall be shown on the plans to be done therein. /L/!J- J , F. Notice is hereby given of the fact that in many cases said work and improvement will bring the finished work to a grade different from that formerly existing, and that to said extent, said grades are hereby changed and said work will be done to said changed grades. DESCRIPTION OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICT SECTION 2. That said improvements and work are of direct benefit to the properties and land within the Assessment District, and this legislative body hereby makes the expenses of said work and improvement chargeable upon a district, which said Assessment District is hereby declared to be the Assessment District benefited by said work and improvements and to be assessed to pay the costs and expenses thereof, including incidental expenses and costs and which is described as follows: All that certain territory in the District included within the exterior boundary lines shown on the plat exhibiting the property affected or benefited by or to be assessed to pay the costs and expenses of said work and improvements in the Assessment District, said map titled' and identified as "PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 (TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD, PHASE II)", and which map was heretofore approved and which said map or diagram is on file with the transcript of these prOCeedings, EXCEPTING there- from the area shown within and delineated upon said map or plat hereinabove referred to, the area of all public streets, public avenues, public lanes, public roads, public drives, public courts, public alleys, and all easements and rights-of-way therein contained belonging to the public. For all particulars as to the boundaries of the Assessment District, reference is hereby made to said boundary map heretofore previously approved and on file. REPORT OF ENGINEER SECTION 3. That this proposed improvement is hereby referred to WILLDAN ASSOCIATES, who is hereby directed to make and file the report in writing containing the following: improvements; A. Plans and specifications of the proposed B. An estimate of the cost of the proposed works of improvement, including the cost of the incidental expenses in connection therewith; C. A diagram showing the Assessment District above referred to, which shall also show the boundaries and dimensions of the respective subdivisions of land within said Assessment District, as the same existed at the time of the passage of the Resolution of Intention, each of which subdivisions shall be given a separate number upon said Diagram; /Jf J}. ;;. D. A proposed assessment of the total amount of the assessable costs And expenses of the proposed improvement upon the several divisions of land in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by such subdivisions, respectively, from said improvement. said assessment shall refer to such subdivisions upon said diagram by the respective numbers thereof; E. The description of the works of improvement to be installed under these proceedings, and acquisition, where necessary. When any portion or percentage of the cost and expenses of the improvements is to be paid from sources other than assessments, the amount of such portion or percentage shall first be deducted from the totl1l estimated costs and expenses of said work and improvements, and said assessment shall include only the remainder of the estimated costs and expenses. Said assessment shall refer to said subdivisions by their respective numbers as assigned pursuant to Subsection D. of this Section. BONDS - SECTION 4. Notice is hereby given that bonds to represent the unpaid assessments, and bear interest at the rate of not to exceed the current legal maximum rate of 12'" per annum, will be issued hereunder in the manner provided in the "Improvement Bond Act of 1915", being Division 10 of the Streets and Highways Code of the StAte of California, which bonds shall mature a maximum of and not to exceed TWENTY-FOUR (24) YEARS from the second day of September next succeeding twelve (12) months from their date. The provisions of Part 11.1 of said Act, providing an alternative procedure for the advance payment of assessments and the calling of bonds shall apply. The principal amount of the bonds maturing each year shall be other than an amount equal to an even annual propor- tion of the aggregate principal of the bonds, and the amount of principal maturing in each year, plus" the ~ount of interest payable in that year, will be generally an aggregate amount that is equal each year, except for the first year's adjustment. Pursuant to the provisions of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, specifically Section 10603, the Treasurer is hereby designAted as the officer to collect and receive the assessments during the cash collection period. Said bonds further shall be" serviced by the Treasurer or designated Paying Agent. Refunding Any bonds issued pursuant to these proceedings and Division (a) may be refunded, (b) the interest rate on said bonds shall not exceed the maximum interest rate as authorized for these proceedings, and the number of years to maturity shall not exceed the maximum number as authorized for these bonds unless a public 1'Il).J hearing is expressly held as authorized pursuant to said Division 11. 5, and (c) any adjustments in assessments resulting from any refundings will be done on a pro-rata basis. Any authorized refunding shall be pursuant to the above conditions, and pursuant to the provisions and restrictions of Division 11.5 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, commencing with Section 9500, and all further conditions shall be set forth in the Bond Indenture to be approved prior to any issuance of bonds. "MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 1913" SECTION 5. That except as herein otherwise provided for the issuance of bonds, all of said improvements shall be made and ordered pursuant to the provisions of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", being Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. SURPLUS FUNDS SECTION 6. That if any excess shall be realized from the assessment, it shall be used, in such amounts as the legislative body may determine, in accordance with the provisions of law for one or more of the following purposes. A. Transfer to the general fund; provided that the amount of any such transfer shall not exceed the lesser of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) or five percent (5\) of the total from the Improvement Fund; B. As a credit upon the assessment and any supple- mental assessment; C. For the maintenance of the improvement; or D. To call bonds. SPECIAL FUND SECTION 7. The legislative body hereby establishes a special improvement fund identified and designated by the name of this Assessment District, and into said Fund moniea may be transferred at any time to expedite the making of the improvements herein autho- rized, and any such advancement of funds is a loan and, shall be repaid out of the proceeds of the sale of bonds as authorized by law. PRIVATE CONTRACT SECTION 8. Notice is hereby given that the public interest will not be served by allowing the property owners to take the contract for the installation of the improvements, and that, as authorized by law, no notice of award of contract. shall be published. /'1 j) ~i . GRADES SECTION 9. That notice is hereby given that the grade to which the work shall be done is to be shown on the plans and profiles therefor, which grade may vary from the existing grades. The work herein contemplated shall be done to the grades as indicated on the plans and specifications, to which reference is made for a descrip- tion of the grade at which the work is to be done. Any objections or protests to the proposed grade shall be made at the public hearing to be conducted under these proceedings. PROCEEDINGS INQUIRIES SECTION 10. For any and all information relating to these proceedings, including information relating to. protest procedure, your attention is directed to the person designated below: JOHN LIPPITT, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR CITY OF CHULA VISTA P. O. BOX 1087 CHULA VISTA, CA 92012 TELEPHONE: (619) 691-5021 PUBLIC PROPERTY SECTION 11. All public property in the use and performance of a public function shall be omitted from assessment in these proceed- ings unless expressly provided and listed herein. ACQUISITION SECTION 12. That the public interest, convenience and neces- sity requires that certain land, rights-of-way or easements be obtained in order to allow the works of improvement as proposed for this Assessment District to be accomplished. The Engineer'S "Report", upon adoption, shall set forth a general description of the location and extent of easements and/or land necessary to be acquired. NO CITY LIABILITY SECTION 13. This legislative body hereby further declares not to obligate itself to advance available funds from the Treasury to cure any deficiency which may occur in the bond redemption fund. This determination is made pursuant to the authority of Section 8769(b) of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, and said determination shall further be set forth in the text of the bonds issued pursuant to the "Improvement Bond Act of 1915". PETITION SECTION 14. That a petition signed by property owners repre- senting more than 60% in area of the property subject to assessment for said improvement has been signed and filed with the legislative JL/j)~5 . body, and no further proceedings or actions will be required under Division 4 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of Califor- nia, the "Special Assessment Investigation, Limitation and Majority Protest Act of 1931". WORK ON PRIVATE PROPERTY SECTION 15. It is hereby further determined to be in the best public interest and convenience and more economical to do certain work on private property to eliminate any disparity in level or size between the improvements and the private property. The actual cost of such work is to be added to the assessment on the lot on which the work is done, and no work of this nature is to be performed until the written consent of the property owner is first obtained. ANNUAL ADMINISTRATIVE ASSESSMENT SECTION 16. It is hereby declared that this legislative body proposes to levy an annual assessment pursuant to Section 10204 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, said annual assessment to pay costs incurred by the City and not other- wise reimbursed which result from the administration and collection of assessments or from the administration or registration of any associated bonds and reserve of other related funds. Presented by Approved as to form by John P. Lippitt Public Works Director 4-- At. ~...ki PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED of Chula Vista, California, this 1992, by the following vote: by the City Council of the City day of AYES: Councilmembers: NOES: Councilmembers: ABSENT: Councilmembers: ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: Tim Nader, Mayor /II J)-(, . ATTEST. Beverly A. Authelet, City clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO CITY OF CHULA VISTA ) ) ) ss. I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, california, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council held on the day of , 1992. Executed this _____ day of , 1992. Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk Il/ lJ- 7 ;' RESOLUTION NO. 11P5?c> RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PASSING ON THE "REPORT" OF THE ENGINEER, GIVING PRELIMI- NARY APPROVAL, AND SETTING A TIME AND PLACE FOR PUBLIC HEARING IN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 (TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD, PHASE II) WHEREAS, the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, has instituted proceedings for the installation of certain public works of improvement and appurtenances under provisions of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", being Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of california, in a special assessment district known and designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 (TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD, PHASE II) (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District"); and, WHEREAS, there has been prepared and filed with the legislative body a "Report" provided for in Sections 10203 and 10204 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, and this "Report" has been presented for consideration; and, WHEREAS, a Resolution of Intention for this improvement. was previously adopted by the legislative body; and the "Report" as now presented shall stand as the "Report" for the purpose of subsequent proceedings hereunder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS. SECTION 1. That the above recitals are all true and correct. SECTION 2. That the "Report" of the Engineer referred to hereinabove is considered adopted, passed upon, and preliminarily approved, as follows. A. That the plans and specifications for the proposed improvements to be made, contained in said "Report" be, and they are hereby preliminarily approved and adopted; B. That the Engineer's estimate of the itemized and total costs and expenses of said acquisition, where necessary, and improvements, and of the incidental expenses in connection therewith, contained in said "Report", be, and each of them are hereby preliminarily approved and adopted; C. That the diagram showing the Assessment District referred to and described in said Resolution of Intention, and also the boundaries and dimensions of the respective subdivi- sions of land within said Assessment District, as the same existed at the time of the passage of said Resolution of Intention, each of which subdivisions have been given a separate number upon said diagram, as contained in said "Report", be, and it is hereby prelimi- narily approved and adopted; 1'1&'1 " D. That the proposed assessment upon the several subdivisions of land in said Assessment District, in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by such subdivisions, respectively, from said acquisition and improvements, and of the incidental expenses thereof, as contained in said "Report", be, and they are hereby preliminarily approved and adopted; E. That the maps and descriptions of the lands and easements to be acquired, as contained in said "Report" be, and the same are hereby preliminarily approved. SECTION 3. That said "Report" shall stand as the Engineer'S "Report" for the purpose of all subsequent proceedings had pursuant to said Resolution of Intention. SECTION 4. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT ON TUESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF HAY, 1992, AT THE HOUR OF 6.00 O'CLOCK P.M., IN THE REGULAR MEETING PLACE OF THIS LEGISLATIVE BODY, BEING THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, ANY AND ALL PERSONS HAVING ANY OBJECTIONS TO THE PROPOSED WORK, OR ASSESSMENT, OR EXTENT OF THE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, OR TO THE PROPOSED GRADES, HAY APPEAR AND SHOW CAUSE WHY SAID WORK SHOULD NOT BE DONE OR CARRIED OUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RESOLUTION OF INTEN- TION AND THE "REPORT" OF THE ENGINEER. PROTESTS MUST BE IN WRITING AND MUST BE DELIVERED TO THE CITY CLERK AT OR BEFORE THE TIME SET FOR THE'PUBLIC HEARING. 'SECTION 5. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to give notice of said Public Hearing by causing to be conspicuously posted on all open streets within the ,Assessment District, not more than 300 feet apart on each street so posted,' but not less than 3 in all, notice of the passage of the Rellolution of Intention and of this Rellolution, all in accordance with the provisions of said Division 12. SECTION 6. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to give notice of said Public Hearing and of the passage of the Resolution of Intention and this Resolution by causing such notice to be published in accordance with Section 6066 of the Government Code, in the newspaper previously designated as the newspaper for all publica_ tionll as required by law and as necessary for completion of this Allsesllment District. SECTION 7. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to mail notice of said Public Hearing and the adoption of the Resolution of Intention and of the filing of the "Report" to all persons owning real property proposed to be assellsed, whose names and addresses appear on the last equalized assessment roll for County taxes prior thereto, or as known to said City Clerk, and to all other persons as prescribed in accordance with the provisions of said Division 12. SECTION 8. That the City Clerk is hereby further directed to file a copy of the proposed boundary map in the Office of the County Recorder within fifteen (15) days of the adoption of the proposed boundary map; said boundary map to be in the manner and form as set forth in Division 4.5 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. J'IE-.J.. - . Presented by John P. Lippitt Public Works Director PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED of Chula vista, California, this 1992, by the following vote: AYES. Councilmembersl NOES: Councilmembers: ABSENT: Councilmembers: ABSTAIN: councilmembersl ATTEST: Beverly A. Authelet, city Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO CITY OF CHULA VISTA ss. Bruce M. Boogaar City Attorney .J) by the City Council of the City day of Tim Nader, Mayor I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, california, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council held on the day of , 1992. Executed thie _____ day of , 1992. Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk /L/E -..3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S REPORT ~(~ ~ ~ - - - -- -- CITY OF CHULA VISTA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO.91-1 (ACQUISITION) TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD, PHASE II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 (ACQUISITION) TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD, PHASE II CITY OF CHULA VISTA Mayor Tim Nader City Council Members David L. Malcolm Jerry R. Rindone City Staff John D. Goss John P. Lippitt Bruce Boogaard Cliff Swanson Leonard M. Moore Shirley Grasser-Horton City Manager Director of Public Works City Attorney City Engineer Professional Services Willdan Associates Municipal Finance Administration Brown, Harper, Burns & Hentschke Kadie-Jensen, Johnson & Bodnar Assessment Engineer Project Management Bond Counsel Financing Consultant Preliminary approval by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista on the _ day of , 1992. City Clerk, City of Chula Vista Final approval and confirmation by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista on the _ day of , 1992. JSSVEROMEI04(X)().RPTiMarch 31, 1992 City Clerk, City of Chula Vista I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Section ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD, PHASE II CITY OF CHULA VISTA TABLE OF CONTENTS Page A Order of Procedure and Schedule of Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 B General Information .................................... 2 C Resolution of Intention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 D Engineer's Report. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4 Part I Part II Part III (a) (b) (c) (d) Part IV Part V Part VI Plans and Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6 Improvement Costs and Expenses .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 7 Assessment Roll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10 Submittal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10 Assessments Per APN . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 13 Certificates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 14 Method and Formula of Assessment Spread . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 15 Diagram (Reduced) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 21 Description of Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 23 Right-of-Way Certificate ......................... 24 ADDendix A - Acquisition Agreement B - Actual Cost Information (Bound Separately) JS5VEROME\04lXXJ.RPnMarch 31, 1992 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SECTION A ORDER OF PROCEDURE AND SCHEDULE OF EVENTS ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 Event Date 1. Acquisition Agreement 2. Adopt Boundary Map 3. Resolution of Intention 4. Presentation of Preliminary Engineer's Report 5. Public Hearing Confirmation of Assessments JS5VEROMEI04()(J().RP11March 31, 1992 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SECTION B GENERAL INFORMA nON ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 91-1 The Assessment District is proposed for the purpose of acquiring certain public improve- ments under the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913. The general administration of this District will be undertaken by the City of Chula Vista and all official actions will be made by the City Council. Following the public hearing to confirm the assessments, the property owner has thirty (30) days in which to pay all or any portion of this assessment without interest or penalty. Each property owner has the option of paying their total proportional share in cash, or by paying each in installments through the issuance of assessment bonds. If the property owner elects not to pay the assessment within the 30 day cash collection period, assessment bonds, in the amount of the unpaid assessment, will be sold to cover the cost of the assessment. The total cost may include, but is not limited to, such items as construction costs, design costs, legal fees, various consultant fees, printing and publication charges, and costs of servicing bonds. The cost of the acquisition of these improvements and incidentals is assessed and spread proportionally over every parcel of land within the District that has received an im- provement or has benefitted by the improvement. The method of making the assessment spread is in accordance with the benefits received. The level of benefit varies according to land use and utilization of the improvements funded. Additional information may be obtained by contacting the office of the Public Works Director, John P. Lippitt. JS5lJEROMEI04OOO.RP1lMarch 31. 1992 2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SECTION C RESOLUTION OF INTENTION (To Be Provided by Bond Counsel) JS5IJEROME\(J4(}(J(J.RP7Warch 31, 1992 3 I I I I I I"~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I SECTION D ENGINEER'S REPORT PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 10204 OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE Pursuant to the provisions of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", being Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California and in accordance with the Resolution of Intention No. , adopted by the City Council of the ~o"',-".':l.~;'c"",.'i;,,-~c - :"r.._ _: ;'. '_,~~"''''-'''._; -_~""':~:_*.,r,;;;~ . . ,_..,- ,....."-~,_.__.~"~'" - CITY OF CHULA VISTA :<-,'~~'_;'_:""-C'~: (hereinafter referred to as the "CITY"), in connection with the proceedings for ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 (TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD, PHASE II) (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District"), I, John P. Lippitt submit herewith the Report for the Assessment District, consisting of six (6) parts as follows: PART I Plans and specifications for the improvements to be acquired are filed herewith and made a part hereof. Said plans and specifications are on file in the Offices of the City Clerk and the Superintendent of Streets. PART II The estimated cost of the improvements to be acquired, including incidental costs and expenses in connection therewith, is set forth on the lists thereof, attached hereto, and are on file in the Office of the City Clerk. PART III A proposed assessment of the total amount of the costs and expenses of the improvements upon the several subdivisions of land within the assessment district, in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by such subdivisions, from said improvements, is set forth upon the assessment roll filed herewith and made a part hereof. JSSlJEROMEI04OOO.RP1iMarch 31. 1992 4 I I I I I J I I I I I I I I I I I I I PART IV A Diagram showing the assessment district and the boundaries of the subdivision of land within said assessment district, as the same existed at the time of the passage of the Resolution of Intention is filed herewith and made a part hereof. PART V Description of the work for the improvements are filed herewith and made a part hereof. Description of all rights-of-way, easements and lands to be acquired, if necessary, is set forth on the lists thereof and are on file in the Office of the City Clerk. -""~}".-- ~"::c,,,:~~,,,.,*~-~":~-~~"' _ ____. --...-.... o;~_~,.;:::;;-.::_-::-.:~__~._ . "~~_."'.5iie.:..'*3,:'~"-''''''~...,"'_. -."""-" """"",,..",:,=,,~.-,,,.?..C",,'''''''''''''''''''~";'f.;~~.,.....~,,:, PART VI The Assessment Engineer's Certificate stating that the right-of-way associated with the improvements to be acquired by the City will be transferred to the City by easement or other means. This Preliminary Report dated this day of , 1992. John P. Lippitt Superintendent of Streets City of Chula Vista This Final Report dated this day of , 1992. John P. Lippitt Superintendent of Streets City of Chula Vista JS5VEROMEI04OOO.RPTlMarch 31.1992 5 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I PART I PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 Plans and specifications for the improvements to be acquired are filed herewith and made a part hereof. Said plans and specifications shall be on file in the offices of the City Clerk and the Superintendent of Streets. lS5VEROMEI04OOO.RPTWo",h 31, 1992 6 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I PART II IMPROVEMENT COSTS AND EXPENSES ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 TABLE 1 A. ACQUISITION CONSTRUCTION COSTS No. Item Preliminary Amount Confinned Amount I Clear & Grub 78,411.00 2 Existing Structure Removal 11 ,592.00 3 Excavation & Embankment 731,610.57 4 Export 963,859.14 5 Surface Drainage 247,644.70 6 Storm Drain 1,214,955.63 7 Sewer 47,577.15 8 Water 977,053.66 9 Electric 195,401.00 10 Concrete Improvements 633,945.41 11 Base & Paving 1,677 ,264.36 12 Landscape Construction 625,518.81 I3 Landscape Maintenance 9,100.00 14 Structure Adjustment 20,750.00 15 Street Lights 84,030.00 16 Miscellaneous 212,357.29 17 Masonry Retaining Wall 11,200.00 18 PCC Cribwall 69,391.00 19 Sub Drain 18,000.00 20 Telo Conflict 240,000.00 21 Adjust Sewer Manholes 27,149.00 22 Rip Rap 352,484.49 23 Fencing 66,848.75 24 Alluvium & Subdrain 346,148.75 25 Utility Undergrounding 519,853.22 TOTAL $9,382,145.93 A. Total Construction $9,382,145.93 B. Incidentals (see next page) 3,909,536.96 C. Total Project Cost 13,291,682.89 D. Less Telegraph Canyon Channel Cost (935,820.00) E. Less Developer Credit (5,264,473.44) F. TOTAL TO ASSESSMENT 7,091,399.46 lS5VEROMEI04OOO.RPnMarch 31, 1992 7 I I I TABLE 2 11'OCIDENT ALS Preliminary Confinned Item Amount Amount 1 Project Management 18,235.00 2 Assessment Engineering 56,880.00 3 Design Engineering, Surveying & Staking 847,752.40 4 Construction Management 10,583.82 5 Bond Counsel 37,728.47 6 Financial Consultant 59,395.00 7 Landscape Design 114,869.65 8 Improvement Security 113,260.00 9 Plan Check & Inspection Fees 195,145.05 10 Public Agency Project Management 20,000.00 11 Right-of-Way Acquisition 873,849.52 12 Special Studies Engineering 120,216.40 13 Soils Engineering 186,493.31 14 Printing, Advertising & Posting of Public Hearing Notices 3,000.00 15 Bond Printing. Servicing & Registration 10,000.00 16 Street DIF Project Administration 1,353.00 17 2 % Street DIF Program Support 218,196.98 18 Capitalized Interest 100,697.73 Subtotal Incidentals 2,987,656.33 Bond Discount 212,741.68 Reserve Fund 709,138.95 TOTAL INCIDENTAL EXPENSES 3,909,536.96 0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I JS5VEROMEI04OOO.RP1lMarch 31, 1992 8 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I PART II (Continued) CALCULATION OF BOND DISCOUNT AND RESERVE FuND Preliminary Confirmed A. Acquisition Construction Cost $ 9,382,145.93 $ B. Incidental Subtotal without Bond 2,987,656.33 Discount and Reserve Fund C. Contributions & Credits $ (6,200,293.44) D. Subtotal $ 6,169,508.82 $ E. Bond Discount (3%)(2%)* 212,741.68 F. Reserve Fund (10%) 709,138.96 G. Total Discount and Reserve Fund $ 921,880.64 $ H. TOTAL TO ASSESSMENT $ 7,091,389.46 $ * Bond discount is calculated at 3 % for preliminary expense and at 2 % for con- firmed expense. JS5VEROMEI04OOO.RP11March 31.1992 9 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I PART III ASSESSMENT ROLL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 PART III (a) SUBMITTAL MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 1913, DIVISION 12 OF THE STREETS AND HlGHW A YS CODES OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA WHEREAS, on April 14, 1992, the City Council did, pursuant to the provisions of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", being Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, adopt Resolution of Intention No. for the acquisition of certain public improvements, together with appurtenances and appurtenant work in connection therewith in a special assessment district known and designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD, PHASE II (Hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District"); and, WHEREAS, said Resolution of Intention, as required by law, did direct the appointed Superintendent of Streets to make and file a report consisting of the following: 1) Plans and specifications; 2) Estimated cost of improvements; 3) A proposed assessment of the costs and expenses of the works of improvement levied upon the parcels and lots of land within the boundaries of the assessment district; 4) Assessment diagram showing the assessment district and the subdivisions of land contained herein; 5) A description of the public improvements to be acquired; For particulars, reference is made to the Resolution of Intention as adopted by the City Council. JS5VEROMEI04OOO.RP71March 31, 1992 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I NOW THEREFORE, I, John P. Lippitt, as appointed Superintendent of Streets, and pursuant to the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913" do herein submit the following: 1. I, pursuant to the provisions of law and the Resolution of Intention, have assessed the costs and expenses of the works of improvement to be performed in the Assessment District upon the parcels of land in the Assessment District benefitted thereby in direct proportion and relation to the estimated benefits to be received by each of said parcels. For particulars of the identification of said parcels, reference is made to the Assessment Diagram. 2. As required by law, a Diagram is herein included, showing the Assessment District as well as the boundaries of the respective parcels and subdivisions of land within said district as the same existed at the time of the passage of said Resolution of Intention, each of which subdivisions of land or parcels or lots respectively have been given a separate number upon said Diagram and in said Assessment Roll. 3. The subdivisions and parcels of land and the numbers therein as shown on the respective Assessment Diagram as included herein correspond with the numbers as appearing on the Assessment Roll as contained herein. 4. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that bonds will be issued in accordance with Division 10 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California (the "Improvement Bond Act of 1915"), to represent all unpaid assessments, and the last installment of said bonds shall mature a maximum of TWENTY -FOUR (24) YEARS from the 2nd day of September next succeeding twelve (12) months from their date. Said bonds shall bear interest at a rate not to exceed the current legal maximum rate of 12 % per annum. 5. By virtue of the authority contained in said "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", and by further direction and order of the City Council, I hereby make the following assessment to cover the costs and expenses of the works of improvement for the Assessment District based on the costs and expenses set forth as follows: I I Preliminary I Confirmed I Acquisition Construction Costs $ 9,382,145.93 $ Incidental Costs & Expenses 3,909,536.96 $ Contributions and Credits (6,200,293.44) Amount to Assessment $ 7,091,389.46 $ For particulars as to the individual assessments and their descriptions, reference is made to the Assessment Roll attached hereto. lS5lJEROMEI04fXX).RPnMarch 31, 1992 11 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 6. In addition to or as a part of the assessment lien levied against each parcel of land within the Assessment District, each parcel of land shall also be subject to an annual assessment to pay costs incurred by the City and not otherwise reimbursed which result from the administration and collection of assessments or from the administra- tion or registration of any bonds and/or reserve or other related funds. The maximum amount of such annual assessment upon each such parcel of land shall not exceed 5 % of the amount of the annual assessment installment. 7. All costs and expenses of the works of improvement have been assessed to all parcels of land within the Assessment District in a manner which is more clearly defined in the "Method and Formula of Assessment Spread", which is a part of this Assessment Roll. The preliminary report dated: April _, 1992 By: John P. Lippitt Superintendent of Streets City of Chula Vista State of California The final report dated: May _' 1992 By: John P. Lippitt Superintendent of Streets City of Chula Vista State of California JSSVEROMEI04O(X).RP11March 31. 1992 12 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I PART III (b) ASSESSMENTS PER APN Assessment Assessor Preliminary Confirmed Number Parcel Number Assessment Assessment 1 643-020-23 $ 222,045.36 $ 2 643-020-22 & 643-030-07 4,345,427.73 3 643-030-08 507,003.58 4 MAP 12831 LOT 1 92,533.70 5 MAP 12831 LOT 2 75,815.17 6 643-040-07 1,848,563.92 TOTAL $ 7,091,389.46 JS5VEROMEI04OOO.RP11March 31,1992 13 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I PART III (c) CERTIFICATES I, Beverly A. Authelet, as City Clerk, do hereby certify that the foregoing assessment, together with the diagram attached thereto, was filed in my office on the day of 1992. City Clerk City of Chula Vista State of California I, Beverly A. Authelet, as City Clerk, do hereby certify that the foregoing assessment, together with the diagram attached thereto, was approved and confirmed by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista on the _ day of 1992. City Clerk City of Chula Vista State of California I, John P. Lippitt, as Superintendent of Streets of said City, do hereby certify that the foregoing assessments, together with the diagram attached thereto, was recorded in my office on the day of 1992. Superintendent of Streets City of Chula Vista State of California JS5VEROMEI04()()().RPnMarch 31. 1992 14 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I PART III (d) METHOD AND FORMULA OF ASSESSMENT SPREAD The law requires and the statutes provide that assessments, as levied pursuant to the provisions of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", must be based on the benefit that the properties receive from the works of improvement. The statute does not specify the method or formula that should be used in any special assessment district proceedings. This responsibility rests with the Assessment Engineer, who is retained for the purpose of making an analysis of the facts in determining the correct apportionment of the assessment obligation. For these proceedings, the City has retained the services of Willdan Associates. The Assessment Engineer makes his recommendation at the public hearing on the Assessment District, and the final authority and action rests with the City Council after hearing all testimony and evidence presented at the public hearing. Upon the conclusion of the public hearing, the City Council must take the final action in determining whether or not the assessment spread has been made in direct proportion to the benefits received. First, it is necessary to identify the benefit that the public improvements will render to the properties within the boundaries of the assessment district. The overall benefit derived by the properties within the proposed boundary of the assessment district is the construction of the public improvements which will enable the properties to develop. Developments within the EastLake Development Company property participating in the costs of the improvements, in whole or in part, are the properties commonly referred to as the EastLake Greens Phase II, and the Olympic Training Center. Diagram 1 shows the location of the improvements installed by EastLake Development Company and acquired by this district. JS5VEROMEI04OOO.RPTWarch 31, 1992 15 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Diagram 1 Telegraph Canyon Road Improvements, Phase IT ... o .. , ~ (', L, 'a (--,._.1 ~ "....J I \ "" I v I I I EAST 'Ho ~ TELEGR""':-" \ ~'ojE.o f~OlV-" ,,'ojE.o ",,~<;E. \ ---' JS5VEROMEI04OOO.RPTWarch 26. J992 16 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I A. Street Imoravements Elil!ible far Develaoment Imoact Fee Credit It is proposed that Telegraph Canyon Road Phase II improvements be financed by an assessment district against parcels which receive a special benefit from the street improvements. The amount of the assessment against each parcel is directly related to the average daily traffic generation expressed in equivalent dwelling units as indicated in Section 4 of the Eastern Area Development Impact Fee for Streets (DIF) report dated November 19, 1990. Justification of the need for these improvements is contained in the development project's Environmental Impact Report, tract map conditions and the Transportation Phasing Plan for the eastern territories. Upon completion, Telegraph Canyon Road Phase II will be a six lane prime arterial within a 134 foot right-of-way. It is one of a number of major streets required to be widened or constructed to provide a circulation system which will accept the cumulative number of trips generated by new development in the eastern area of the City of Chula Vista. Through the construction of this street, another link in the overall major street network is completed, thereby providing additional capacity in the overall circulation network. Telegraph Canyon Road Phase II together with these other major streets is included within the City's Development Impact Fee program for financing the major circulation element streets in the eastern area. The benefit to property is that, through each property's participation, it attains its share of capacity in the eastern area circulation street system. Since Telegraph Canyon Road Phase II is a part of this program, the same methodology used in the formulation of the Street DIF program can be used here. Therefore, the assessment levy against each parcel equals the Development Impact Fee for a particular land use and parcel size. The Street DIF Report also contains provisions (see Section 5) for the advance construction of DIF eligible improvements by an owner/developer. Table 1 identifies the construction and incidental expenses eligible for Development Impact Fee credit. The dollar amounts listed for the Development Impact Fee Credit were divided by the DIF value of $3,060 per EDU to obtain the total number of EDU's eligible for DIF credit as shown on Table 2. These credits will be spread to lots in the EastLake Greens Phase II and Olympic Training Center as identified in Table 2. The resulting assessment will be reapportioned at the time final maps are recorded . The DIF eligible costs, as noted in Table I, exceed the DIF capacity of the project area as noted in Table 2. Therefore, additional DIF credit in the amount of $5,264,473.44 is available to the EastLake Development Company. This additional credit will be applied at a future date. It should be noted that this credit will not be bonded and will apply to costs incurred for the dry utility replacement and undergrounding and other project areas where applicable. JSSVEROMEI04()(X).RPT\March JJ, 1992 17 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE 1 ELIGIBLE STREET DIF COSTS Total DIF Funded Total DIF Costs with A.D. 91-1 Total Construction 9,382,145.93 4,560,138.00 I INCIDENTALS I Design Engineering 715,434.71 347,732.92 Soils Engineering 186,493.31 90,644.00 Landscape Design 74,605.40 36,261.53 Landscape Maintenance 40,264.25 19,570.21 Special Studies Engineering 120,216.40 58,430.49 Construction Management 10,583.82 5,144.20 Plan Check & Inspection Fees 195,145.05 94,849.13 Construction Staking 132,317.69 64,312.25 Improvement Security 113,260.00 55,049.37 Right-of-Way Acquisition 873,849.52 424,729.53 Street DIF Project Administration 1,353.00 657.62 2 % Street DIF Program Support 218,196.98 106,053.39 .' Total Incidentals 2,681,720.13 1,303,434.63 TOTAL 12,063,866.06 5,863,572.62 Less Channel Cost (935,820.00) Total DIF Eligible ll,128,046.06 Total DIF Funded in A.D. 91-1 5,863,572.62 TOTAL DIF CREDIT REMAINING 5,264,473.44 JS5VEROMEI04OOO.RP11March 31. 1992 18 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE 2 TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD PHASE II FEE CREDIT SUMMARY Assm't Lot Number Unit DIF Per 91-1 Number Designation Units/ Acres Type Unit/Acre Street DIF I R-25 75 SPA 2,448 183,600.00 2 R-4 104 SPD 3,060 318,240.00 2 R-6 88 SPD 3,060 269,280.00 2 R-9 51 SPD 3,060 156,060.00 2 R-IO 167 SPD 3,060 511,020.00 2 R-12 93 SPD 3,060 284,580.00 2 R-15 88 SPA 2,448 215,424.00 2 R-16 83 SPA 2,448 203,184.00 2 R-18 87 SPA 2,448 212,976.00 2 R-20 164 SPA 2,448 401,472.00 2 R-21 120 SPA 2,448 293,760.00 2 R-23 162 SPA 2,448 396,576.00 2 R-26 64 SPA 2,448 156,672.00 2 R-27 71 SPA 2,448 173,808.00 3 R-I 54 SPD 3,060 165,240.00 3 R-3 83 SPD 3,060 253,980.00 4 Golf Course 31.255 GC 2,448 76,512.24 5 Golf Course 25.608 GC 2,448 62,688.38 6 GTC 150 GTC 10,190 1,528,500.00 DIP Assessed in Assessment District 91-1 5,863,572.62 Telegraph Canyon Road Phase II DIP Available 11,128,046.06 Additional DIP Credit Available 5,264,473.44 JS5VEROMEI04OOO.RP11March 31. 1992 19 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I B. Incidentals The total of eligible street program incidentals have been apportioned to those parcels being assessed for those street improvements. In addition, the non-fee program incidentals (bonding related incidental costs) have been apportioned to those same parcels based upon the percentage each parcels' assessment related to the total fee program incidentals. Where parcels will be subdivided at a future date, this same method will be used to reapportion the incidental costs to the new parcels. In conclusion, it is my opinion that the assessments for Assessment District No. 91-1 are spread in direct accordance with the benefits that the land within the district boundary receives from the works of improvements. Dated: :3/31/9 t- , WILLDAN ASSOCIATES B 6ho/51.3 , , JS5VEROMEI04OOO.RP11March 31, 1992 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I PARTlY ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 Reduced copy. Assessment Diagram is on file in the offices of the City Clerk and the Superintendent of Streets Said Assessment Diagram is filed herewith and made a part hereof. IS5VEROMEI04()()(}.RP71March 31. 1992 21 I I Ii II DIAGRAM ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 91-1 I II ~ ~ \ CITY OF CHULA VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD, PHASE II I I LEGEND @ NOT TO SCALE I I I I I I I _ - - DISTRICT BOUNDARY PARCEL BOUNDARIES NAP NOT A PART OF THE DISTRICT I I ....N ASSESSMENT WAS LEVIED BY THE CITY COUNCil Of THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ON PARCELS OF LAND SHOWN ON THIS ASSESSMENT DIAGRAl.4. SAID ASSESSMENT WAS LEVIED ON THE ____ DAY or ______ 1992. SAID ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM AND THE ASSESSMENT ROLL \VERE RECORDED IN THE omeE OF THE STREET SUPERINTENDENT OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ON THE __ DAY OF _______ 1992. REFERENCE IS MADE TO THE ASSESSMENT RQU. RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE STREET SUPERINTENDENT FOR THE EXACT AMOUNT Of EACH ASSESSt.lENT lEVIED AGI\INST EACH PARCEL OF LAND SHOWN ON THIS ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM. r~L~~~I~_-=--=-pO:Gl ~__ 6r-t;iAP's 1~f2A~JESSI,4E:NTO~~~~lhs:-RfCoRDER'S DOCUl.4ENT NO. ______ IN THE OffiCE Of THE COUNTY RECOROER Of THE COUNTY Of CHULA VISTA, STATE Of CAUfORNIA. I CITY CLERK-CITY Of CHUlA\iJST A ANNETTE EVANS COUNTY RECORDER FILED IN THE OffiCE OF THE CITY CLERK Of THE CITY Of CHULA VISTA THIS _ DAY or ____, '992. BY:___________________________ DEPUTY COUNTY RECORDER CITY-CLERK,CiTYOr-i:HU"LA-\1'STA RECORDED IN THE orner Of THE STREET SUPERINTENDENT OF THE CITY OF CHULA V1ST A THIS ____ 0,1. Y Of ________~ 1992. NOTE: THE BOUNDARY AND PARCELS AS SHOWN HEREON ARE AS SHOWN ON THE ASSESSOR'S PARCEL MAPS Of THE COUNTY or SAN DlEGO, STATE Of CAUfORNI.... IN 04000 STR1:EfSUPERiNTEND1~--- CITY OF CHULA VISTA \Xl WILLDAN ASSOClATES . CONSUlllNCENOlNEERSANIlPlANNERS ...._OLSWOI__....(90.IO"'.n. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I PART V DESCRIPTION OF WORK ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 EXHIBIT A ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 91-1 TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD, PHASE II ACQUISITION AGREEMENT DESCRIPTION OF FACILITIES The work to be financed by the proposed assessment district consists of the following: Improvement of Telegraph Canyon Road to a 6 lane prime arterial. The limits of the project are from approximately 2,250 feet west of the future Paseo Ranchero east approximately 8,500 feet to 600 feet east of Apache Drive (between stations 69+50 and 158+00 as per City of Chula Vista Drawing Numbers 88-922 to 88-907). 1. Acquisition of necessary right-of-way. 2. Grading of the 134 foot street right-of.way. 3. Improvement of Telegraph Canyon Road to include two 44 foot street sections, a 24 foot landscaped median, and two II foot sidewalk sections. Improvements include base, asphalt pavement, curb, gutter, sidewalk, pedestrian ramps, guard rails, street lights, storm drains, and dry utilities. 4. Installation of two parallel water mains. JS5lJEROMEI04()(X).RP11March 31, 1992 23 I I I PART VI I I RIGHT-OF-WAY CERTIFICATE I STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO CITY OF CHULA VISTA I The undersigned, RICHARD K. JACOBS, hereby CERTIFIES UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY that the following is all true and correct. I I At ail times herein mentioned, the undersigned was, and now is the authorized representative of Willdan Associates, the duly appointed ASSESSMENT ENGINEER of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFOR- NIA. I That there have now been instituted proceedings under the provisions of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", being Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of Cali forma for the construction and acquisition of certain public improvements in a special assessment dist~ct known and designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 I (hereinafter referred to as the" Assessment District"). I THE UNDERSIGNED STATES AND CERTIFIES AS FOLLOWS: ( check one) o a. That all easements, rights-of-way, or land necessary for the accomplishment of the works of improvement for the above referenced Assessment District have been obtained and are in the possession of the City. I 181 b. That all easements, rights-of-way or land necessary for the accomplishment of the works of improvement for the above referenced Assessment District have been obtained and are in the possession of the City, EXCEPT FOR THOSE DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" attached hereto. showing maps of rights-of-way and easements not yet obtained at this time. I I I I I I JS5VEROMEI04OOO.RPTlMarch 31, 1992 24 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I APN 640-198-27 tELEGRAPH APN 641-020-19 LEGEND EXHIBIT ' A' APN 641-030-12 CANYON APN 641-030-09 STREET BOUNDARY PARCEL BOUNDARY ~ RIGHTS-OF -WAY AND/OR EASEMENTS NOT OBTAINED ROAD APN 641-030-10 ~ 1\1 / NOT TO SCALE W WILLDAN ASSOCIATES CONI\L TING ENGINEER' AND PLANNERS uu_~1E ~SoVl_tAmZ:(I..I)fn-11" I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I APPENDIX A ACQUISITION AGREEMENT Original on file at the office of the City Clerk JS511EROMEI04OOO.RPnMarch 31,1992 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I APPENDIX B ACTUAL COST INFORMATION (Bound Separately) JS5VEROMEI04OOO.RPTlMarch 31. 1992 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item 15 Meeting Date 4/7/92 Resolution /~~71ccePting bids and awarding contract for "Tree Trimming service for FY 1991-92 in the City of Chula Vista, California" SUBMITTED BY: Director Of Public Wt.~ REVIEWED BY: City Manager r (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No-1L) At 2:00 p.m. on February 26, 1992, in conference room 2 of the Public Services Building, the Director of Public Works received sealed bids for "Tree Trimming service for FY 1991-92 in the City of Chula Vista, California". Funds for this project were budgeted in the FY1991-92 Public Works Budget. The work to be done consists of trimming Broadleaf and Eucalyptus trees located in various Parks and on some streets in the City of Chula Vista, California. ITEM TITLE: RECOMMENDATION: That Council accept bids and award the contract to Golden Bear Arborists, Inc. in the amount of $68,610. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable DISCUSSION: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Bids for this project were received from seven contractors as follows: Golden Bear Arborists, Inc. Monrovia, CA Tip Top Tree Service, Inc. Lancaster, CA Atlas Environmental Services, Inc. San Diego, CA West Coast Tree Co. Bonita, CA West Coast Arborists, Inc. Buena Park, CA Davey Tree Surgery Co. Livermore, CA Pac West Land Care, Inc. Solana Beach, CA $68.610.00 72,842.00 79,077.40 81,736.95 84,760.00 92,530.12 117,008.00 The low bid by Golden Bear Arborists, Inc. is below the Engineer's estimate of $97,918.00 by $29,308. or 29.9%. Although Golden Bear Arborists has not performed such work for Chula Vista, the company has performed such work for and in other California cities including Dana Point and Mission Bay Park and the Public Works Department believes they are adequately qualified to perform the contract. The low bid has been reviewed and staff recommends awarding the contract to Golden Bear Arborists, Inc. The company will, as is typically done, obtain lodging for its employees while in Chula Vista. Attached is a copy of the contractor's disclosure statement. When Council approved the Tree Trimming contract for FY90-91, they requested that the agenda statement for the FY91-92 contract contain a comparison between the cost to trim trees by contract and by City Staff. Accordingly, staff has prepared the information in the following table: 15,/ Page 2, Item 15 Meeting Date 4/7/92 TOTAL: #OF TREES 477 283 113 721 1,594 TOTAL CONTRACT COST/TREE $34.23 $54.23 $104.23 $44.23 CITY TTL CST/TREE $38.74 $154.92 $309.84 $77.46 TYPE OF TREE EUCALYPTUS-SMALL EUCALYPTUS - MEDIUM EUCALYPTUS-LARGE BROADLEAF As can be seen from the table, it is significantly more exwnsive per tree for city crews to perform this type of tree trimming than for the contractor. There are several reasons for this. The most important is that City crews are not set up to do block trimming, but rather to perform complaint, hazard, and decorative trimming, while the contractor's crews are set up just for block trimming. City tree crews consist of two people, a large truck( 2 with high ranger lifts) with a chipper body, and a chipper. Conversely, the crews used by the contractor might consist of 10 people with several dump trucks and high rangers. This permits the contractor to shuttle vehicles back and forth to the dump, while keeping the remaining crew members productively trimming. This large crew size also permits the contractor to pay their employees at a lower average rate per employee, since most of the employees do not need the skill level required by our small crew size. Staff believes it is still most productive for the City for our crews to be used for complaint and hazard trimming while continuing to use contractors for major block and park trimming. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: Funds Required for Construction Contract Amount Staff Contingencies Total Funds for Construction $68,610.00 6,861.00 6.861.00 ~82.332.oo Funds Available for Construction Special Contractual Services (100-1450-5203) $121.710 FISCAL IMPACT: This reflects an expenditure of funds authorized in the FY1991-92 Public Works Budget. MC/DCB/dcb/JY -061 STIRCN92 15".2./15""~ IHIHlRAf!D.!LM March 5, 1992 File: JY-061 TO: John Goss, City Manager Bruce Boogaard, City Attorney Lyman Christopher, Director of Finance Beverly Authelet, City Clerk Roberto Saucedo, Senior Civil Engineer Harlan Wilson, Street Maintenance Su~erintendent FROM: John P. Lippitt, Director of Public Work~~ SUBJECT: Resol ut ion accepting bids and awarding contract for "Tree Trinvni ng Service for FY 1991-92 in the City of Chula Vista, California. 1. Funds Reauired for Construction a. Contract Amount b. Staff c. Contingencies $68,610.00 6,861.00 6.861.00 Total Funds for Construction $82.332.00 2. Funds Available for Construction Account 100-1450-5203 - Special Contractual Services Total Funds Available for $121,710 $121. 710 WPC 5928E If., J , , . THE CITY OF CHUU nSTA PARTY DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Statement of disclosure of certain ownership interests, payments, or campaign contributions, on all matters which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all other official bodies. The following information must be disclosed: 1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the contract, i.e., contractor, subcontractor, material supplier. GOLDEN BEAR ARBORISTS, INC. . 2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership. BRAD BOYAJIAN 3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. 4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months? Yes No L If yes, please indicate person(s): 5. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants or independent contractors who you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter. nnn~ 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 ejection period? Yes _ No ~ If yes, state which Councilmember(s): ~ is deCined as: 'Any individual, Jiml, co.partnership,.joint venn Ire, associmion, social club, frmernal organizmion, corporation, estme, truSI, receiver, syndicale, Ihis and any olher county, city and counn)', cit)', municipality, districl or other political subdivision, or an)' olher group or combinmion aCling as a unil,' (NOTE: Anach additional pages as necessary) O 2/24/92 ate: I,\.ll.l',\;OISCLOSE,TXll BRAD BOYAJIAN - PRESIDENT Print or type name of contractor/applicant /Ilevi,cd; 11/30NO) /5-'1 \ RESOLUTION NO. /~~17/ RESOLUTION OF CHULA VISTA CONTRACT FOR 1991-92 IN CALIFORNIA" THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING "TREE TRIMMING SERVICE FOR FY THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, WHEREAS, at 2:00 p.m. on February 26, 1992, in Conference Room 2 of the Public Services Building, the Director of Public Works received the following seven bids for "Tree Trimming Service for FY 1991-92 in the City of Chula Vista, California": Golden Bear Arborists, Inc. Monrovia, CA. $68,610.00 Tip Top Tree Service, Inc. Lancaster, Ca. ' $72,842.00 Atlas Environmental Services, Inc. San Diego, Ca. $79,077.40 West Coast Tree Co. Bonita, Ca. $81,736.95 West Coast Arborists, Inc. Buena Park, Ca. $84,760.00 Davey Tree Surgery Co. Livermore, Ca. $92,530.12 Pac West Land Care, Inc. Solana Beach, Ca. $117,008.00 WHEREAS, the low bid by Golden Bear Arborists, Inc. is below the Engineer'S estimate of $97,918.00 by $29,308 or 29.9% and said bid has been reviewed by staff who recommends awarding the contract to Golden Bear Arborists, Inc. who can produce an acceptable performance bond. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula vista does hereby accept said seven bids and awards the contract for tree trimming service for FY 1991-92 in the City of Chula Vista, California to Golden Bear Arborists, Inc. in the amount of $68,610.00. Director of is on BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that hereby authorized and directed to execu behalf of the City of Chula vista. Presented by John P. Lippitt, Public Works C:\n\ll'cetrilll /5-5 ORDINANCE NO. 2499 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS FOR THE SALT CREEK RANCH DEVELOPMENT PROJECT WHEREAS, the area of land which is the subject matter of this ordinance is a parcel of land located north of the EastLake Business Park, northeast of the Upper Otay Reservoir and south of the San Miguel Mountain, and is diagrammatically presented in Exhibit A ("Project Area"); and, WHEREAS, a person having control over all or a portion of the development of the Project Area to-wit: The Baldwin Company, has proposed, a plan for the construction of 2,662 residential dwelling units, a neighborhood park totalling 7 acres, a community park totalling 22 acres, two elementary school sites totalling 20 acres, a one acre fire station site and two community purpose facility sites totalling 7 acres, all of which is more fully described as the Project in the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 91-3 ("FSEIR"), hereinbelow described, which shall herein be referred to as the "Project"; and, WHEREAS, in conjunction with the Salt Creek Ranch SPA Plan, the Baldwin Company and City staff have concurred on Planned Community ("PC") District Regulations ("Zoning Regulations") for the Project Area, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk as Document No. PCM-91-4; and, WHEREAS, the city Council did, by the adoption of Resolution No. 16554 ("Certifying Resolution"), certify that the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, as defined therein, was prepared in accordance with the requirement of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Environmental Review procedures of the city of Chula Vista, and the guidelines lawfully promulgated thereunder, and as further certified that the information contained therein has been reviewed and considered by them; and, WHEREAS, the recitals and resolutions of the city Council contained in said certifying Resolution are incorporated herein as if set forth in full here at; and, WHEREAS, a public hearing was held before the Planning commission on the Baldwin company's proposed Salt Creek Ranch sectional Planning Area Plan, Public Facilities Financing Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan, Water Conservation Plan and Design Guidelines ("Public Hearing") on or about February 26, 1992 and March 11, 1992; and, WHEREAS, prior to the first reading of this ordinance, the \C;c.- - \ Ordinance No. Page 2 city Council of the City of Chula vista adopted Resolution No. 16555 by which it approved the Salt Creek Ranch sectional Planning Area Plan, the Public Facilities Financing Plan, the Air Quality Improvement Plan, the Water Conservation Plan and Design Guidelines ("SPA Approval Resolution"). The city Council of the City of Chula vista does ordain as follows: A. CEOA Findinqs The city Council does hereby adopt, as their own, each and everyone of the findings as are set forth in the document entitled "Salt Creek Ranch sectional Planning Area Plan Supplemental EIR-91- 03, Candidate CEQA Findings, March, 1992", attached as Exhibit to the SPA Approval Resolution. B. Certain Mitiqation Measures Feasible and Adopted The City Council does hereby find, pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081 and the CEQA Guidelines section 15091, that the mitigation measures that are identfied in FSEIR under section 5.0, are feasible and will become binding upon the city in approving the Project. C. Infeasibilitv of Alternatives The Council hereby finds that none of the proposed project alternatives set forth in the FSEIR can feasibly and substantially lessen or avoid environmental impacts that will not be sUbstantially lessened or avoided by the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures for the Project. D. Adoption of Mitiqation Monitorinq Proqram As required by Public Resources Code section 21081.6, the Council hereby adopts the mitigation monitoring and reporting program ("Program") set forth in Exhibit _ to the SPA Approval Resolution, which is incorporated herein by reference. The Council hereby finds the Program is designed to ensure that, during project implementation, the Permittee/Project applicant, and any other responsible parties, implement the Project components and comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified in Paragraph B above. E. Statement of Overridinq Considerations Even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures and alternatives, certain significant or potentially significant adverse environmental effects caused by the Project will remain. Therefore, the Council hereby issues, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines ) '5 c.- - ;.... Ordinance No. Page 3 section 15093, its statement of overriding Considerations as set forth in Exhibit of the SPA Approval Resolution thereby identifying the specific economic, social, and other considerations that render those unavoidable significant adverse environmental effects acceptable. F. PC District Requlations The city Council does hereby conditionally approve and adopt the Planned Community District Regulations, also referred to herein as the zoning Regulations, for the Salt Creek Ranch project. The conditions of this approval are as follows: 1. The Developer shall identify permanent locations for the additional 4.45-acres of Community Purpose Facility ("CPF" sites") land which will be subject to approval of the Director of Planning prior to approval of the tentative subdivision map, and that, in accordance with the Chula vista Municipal Code, there be no reversion of acreage clause for CPF sites in the approved SPA Plan. 2. All plant materials, sizes and locations within parks and open space areas will require approval by the Director of Parks and Recreation prior to final subdivision map approval. 3. That Developer implement each and every Mitigation Measure identified in the FSEIR as Mitigation Measures. 4. That Baldwin implement each and every aspect of the Mitigation Monitoring Program hereinafter referred to. Failure of the conditions of approval to occur shall, at the option of the City exercised at a public hearing, notice of which and an opportunity at which Baldwin has been given to be heard on the matter, revoking the zoning regulations hereinabove conditionally approved. Bob A. Leiter Director of Planning 1!~" Bruce M. Booga City Attorney Presented by \S Co.-3 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ITEM TITLE: Item / " Meeting Date 4/7/92 Resolution /~.>'701 approving first amendment to agreement with Jones and Roach Inc. providing appraisal services for various capitaJImprovement Program Projects Director of Public worksrj city Manager cj (4/5th Vote: Yes No X ) SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: On November 11, 1991, the City entered into an agreement with a consultant, Jones and Roach Inc., to provide appraisal services for capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects on an "as needed" basis through October 31, 1992. Because most of our CIP projects were not far enough along in design to know how much right of way would be needed during the year, we estimated the amount of expenditures this fiscal year would be less than $25,000. The city Manager, therefore, executed the agreement on behalf of the City in accordance with sections 2.56.220 and 2.56.230 of the Municipal Code. The consultants fee was not to exceed $25,000. Now that our design is further along, we have been able to determine more accurately the actual number of parcels we will need to acquire this fiscal year. To date, staff utilized Jones and Roach Inc. to provide twelve appraisals for a not to exceed fee of $21,720. Staff needs to obtain appraisals for at least seventeen (17) additional parcels that need to be acquired prior to June 30, 1992. The additional cost of these appraisals will exceed the $25,000 as approved by the City Manager and authorized by the agreement. The agreement must be amended which increases the fee so that staff may contract with Jones and Roach Inc. to provide additional appraisals for projects currently under design. RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt resolution approving the first amendment to the agreement with Jones and Roach Inc. for professional property appraisal services. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: The Engineering Division of the Public Works Department has five projects for which final construction plans, specifications and cost estimates are being prepared. It is the goal to advertise these projects for bids prior to June 30, 1992. Right-of-Ways need to be acquired for these projects which affects 28 separate parcels of land. Jones and Roach Inc. reports for twelve $21,720.00: to date have been contracted to provide appraisal of these parcels at a not to exceed cost of /~-/ Page 2 Item Meeting Date It. 417/92 Oxford street storm Drain - 1 easement Crested Butte storm Drain - 1 easement otay Valley Road widening - 3 easements Broadway "L" to Naples - 7 parcels $ 1,020 $ 1,725 $ 7,950 $17,025 In addition, the City needs to obtain appraisals and purchase sixteen parcels for the widening of Broadway from "F" to "I" streets. The parcels obtained will provide the right-of-way for ultimate curb returns at street intersections. An estimated cost for the sixteen appraisal reports is $40,000. It is urgent that these appraisal reports be obtained so that the right-of-way can be acquired. The Broadway "F" to "I" project is in the cycle 2 for S.B. 300 funds. If the contract is not awarded by June 30, 1992, the city could lose up to $800,000 in SB 300 reimbursement. The right of way needs to be acquired before the award of contract. Engineering Division also needs to obtain sale of excess right-of-way on Beyer Way. report is estimated at $1,600. an appraisal report for the The cost of this appraisal The Community Development Department has indicated that they may need additional appraisals for two of three parcels along Otay Valley Road. They estimate the cost of these appraisals in the range of $8,000 to $10,000 dollars. Engineering expects to contract for seventeen additional appraisal reports this fiscal year for an estimated fee of $41,600. Including community Developments additional two to three appraisals at an average cost of $9,000 brings the total expected additional cost to $50,600. The total fee to Jones and Roach Inc. during this fiscal year is expected to be $72,320. Engineering staff is therefore recommending that Jones and Roach Inc. contract be increased from $25,000 to $75,000. The cost of the appraisal reports is charged against the appropriate CIP budgeted project, or in the case of the sale of excess right-of-way, will be included as part of the sale price. staff issues purchase orders for each project as appraisal services are required. Fees for appraisal services are negotiated individually based on the fee schedule included in the agreement. Compensation for services provided under this first amendment to the agreement shall not exceed a total of $75,000 for appraisal services. This will allow staff to proceed with project designs in a timely manner. City staff does not currently have the expertise to provide appraisal services. At this point, we cannot accurately predict the amount of appraisal work required during next fiscal year. However, based on the current fiscal year appraisal activity, which has been greater than any of the last three to five years, we do not generate sufficient activity to add a staff position to the budget. As a result of our review of next year's proposed CIP budget, we do not expect an increase in the level of appraisal activity above that of this fiscal year. When this is determined staff will return to Council with a /~ .~ Page 3 It_ Meeting Date It. 4/7/92 second amendment to authorization to cover appropriate. Fiscal Impact: Funds not in excess of a total of $75,000 will be encumbered from individual project accounts as services are required. To date, we have contracted for $21,720 in appraisal services with Jones and Roach Inc. the agreement to increase the expenditure next fiscal year's activity if that action is KJG:rb/sb File # KY-178 (K10l\A113) /1, - J/II_-'f RESOLUTION NO. J~5?;l. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH JONES AND ROACH INC. PROVIDING APPRAISAL SERVICES FOR VARIOUS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECTS AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAME WHEREAS, on November 11, 1991, the City entered into an agreement with Jones and Roach Inc. to provide appraisal services for Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects on an "as needed" basis through October 31, 1992; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the approved agreement, the consultants fee was not to exceed $25,000; and WHEREAS, to date, staff has contracted with Jones and Roach Inc. to provide twelve appraisals for a not to exceed fee of $21,720; and WHEREAS, staff needs to obtain appraisals for at least 17 additional parcels that need to be acquired prior to June 30, 1992; and WHEREAS, the additional cost of these appraisals will exceed the $25,000 as approved by the City manager and authorized by the agreement; and WHEREAS, the agreement must be amended to increase the fees to a not to exceed of $75,000 so that staff may contract with Jones and Roach Inc. to provide additional appraisals for projects currently under design. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the city of Chula vista does hereby approve the First Amendment to Agreement with Jones and Roach Inc. providing appraisal services for various Capital Improvement Program Projects, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said agreement for and on behalf of the City of Chula 'sta. orm by Presented by / , I VBruce M. Attorney Boogaar , CJ.ty John P. Lippitt, Director of Public Works C:\n\roach /6 <.5" //6-i, ~/tP File # KY-178 FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR APPRAISAL SERVICES BETWEEN CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND JONES & ROACH, INCORPORATED This First Amendment to Agreement ("Amendment"), dated for the purposes of reference only, and effective as of the date last executed unless another date is otherwise specified in "Amendment" is between the City of Chula Vista, a municipal chartered corporation of the State of California ("city"), whose place of business is 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California 91910 and Jones & Roach, Incorporated, a California Corporation ("Consultant") whose place of business is 4715 Viewridge Avenue, Suite 210, San Diego, California, 92123- 1680, for professional appraisal services, and is made with reference to the following facts: RECITALS A. WHEREAS, on November 11, 1991, the City Manager executed an agreement on behalf of the City between the city and the Consultant for professional property appraisal services. B. WHEREAS, staff demonstrates the need for twenty (20) appraisal reports along Broadway "F" to "I" Streets, Beyer Way and Otay Valley Road. C. WHEREAS, appraisal reports are needed for acquisition of needed right of way.and sale of excess right of way. D. WHEREAS, Section 2d of the original agreement requires that any changes to the Scope of Work to be performed by the Consultant shall be mutually agreed upon doing so in writing by the City and Consultant. E. WHEREAS, the city desires to proceed in a timely manner with the acquisition of right of way for the construction of Broadway, "F" - "I", Otay Valley Road and the sale of excess right of way on Beyer Way. F. WHEREAS, Consultant warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed in a manner such that they are and can prepare and deliver the services required of Consultant to City within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the terms and conditions of the original agreement and this amendment. 1 1'-7 WITNESSETH THAT, in consideration of the recitals and mutual obligations of the duties as herein expressed, the City and Consultant do hereby mutually agree as follows: 1. Paragraph 2b: Compensation. The paragraph is amended to read as follows: The compensation to be paid by city to Consultant for all of the work required herein shall be at the rates set forth on Exhibit A, incorporated herein by reference, for each productive hour worked, not to exceed $75.000 of billings without further authorization, payable in monthly payments as billed, in an amount that the Public Works Director, or his designee, shall determine corresponds to the hours of productive time times the hourly rate. Consultant agrees to perform all of the services herein required, and in the manner of the detailed Scope of Work set forth in paragraph la, and shall incur all associated costs, including reproduction and printing, telephone charges, travel including automobile charges, for said Fee. II. Except as modified herein, all other terms and conditions of the original agreement remain as specified therein. 2 IlT'f Signature Page To First Amendment to Agreement with Jones & Roach, Inc. for Professional Property Appraisal Services IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this Amendment to the Agreement thereby indicating that they have read and understood same, and indicate their full and complete consent to its terms: Dated: ,19_ city of Chula vista by: Tim Nader, Mayor Attest: t ven D. Roach 4715 Viewridge Avenue suite 210 San Diego, CA 92123-1680 Beverly Authelet, City Clerk Approved as to form: by: Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney Dated: KJG:rb (KJG1\AMEND.FRMI 3 "-1/".'/ , THE CITY OF CHUU VISTA PARTY DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Statement of disclosure of certain ownership interests, payments, or campaign contributions, on all matters which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all other official bodies. The following information must be disclosed: 1. list the names of all persons having a financial interest in the contract, i.e., contractor, subcontractor, material supplier. Jones & Roach. Inc. 4715 Viewridge Avenue. Suite 210 San Dieqo. CA 92123-1680 2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership. Robert N. Jones (50%) Stephen D. Roach (50%) 3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. N/1I 4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months? Yes No....!... If yes, please indicate person(s): 5. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants or independent contractors who you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter. N/A . 6. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contnouted more than $1,000 to a Councilmember in the current or preceding election period? Yes _ No ~ If yes, state which Councilmember(s): Person is defined as: .Any individual, firm, co-pannership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization, corporation, eSlale, nusl, recci,'er, syndicate, this and any other county, city and country, city, municipality, district or other political subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as a unit.. (NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary) ( Date: 10/31/91 ctor/applicant I".) J ,.,\:DlSCLOSE.TXT] It -/ {J Robert N. Jones Print or type name of contractor/applicant [Revised: IJ130f./O] . THE CITY OF CHUIA nSTA PARTY DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Statement of disclosure of certain ownership interests, payments, or campaign contributions, on all matters which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all other official bodies. The following information must be disclosed: 1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the contract, i.e., contractor, subcontractor, material supplier. 2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership. 3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. 4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff, Boar~ Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months? Yes_ No A- If yes, please indicate person(s): 5. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants or independent contractors who you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter. 6. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contributed ~e than $1,000 to a Councilmember in the current or preceding election period? Yes _ Nr+ If yes, state which Councilmember( s): Person is defined as: ~ny individual,jim., co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club,fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, city and country, city, municipality, district or other political subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as a unit.' (NOTE: Date: [A,) J3'.'\:D1SCLOSE.TXT] I b-! I ~WI~;J D. /(O;CfcH Print or type name of contractor/applicant [Revised: 11/30190) /"/ i'-' 1. / :;;17 ~ .' C:__f '(' Id .. AGREEMENT WITH JONES & ROACH, INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL PROPERTY APPRAISAL SERVICES - This Agreement is made this 11 day of November 1991, for the purposes of reference qnly, 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 Jones & Roach, Inc. ("Consultant"), and is made with reference to the following facts: RECITAL Whereas, additional public right of way is anticipated to be required for several City projects currently in design. Whereas, the City desires to proceed in a timely manner with the design and construction of these projects and requires appraisal services to acquire the additional property . Whereas, Consultant warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed in a manner such that they are and can prepare and deliver the services required of Consultant to City within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City and Consultant do hereby mutually agree as follows: 1. Consultant's Duties. a. General Duties and Scope of Work. Consultant shall provide all of the following property appraisal services when requested in conjunction with various City projects. Upon execution of this agreement by both parties hereto Consultant will be authorized and directed to proceed with the preparation and completion of these Defined Services. Consultant shall proceed with the work immediately upon authorization and prosecute the work diligently to completion. Appraisal shall be in -1- ,&-/z,., (tcq Helie:> accordance with the California Government Code Section 7267 et. seq. (Exhibit B) as it currently provides or may be amended during the life of this agreement. Time is of the essence as to each project. The estimated completion date and lack of conflict of interest shall be negotiated as each project is assigned. Appraisal services are as follows:, 1) Description of the Project 2) Area/Neighborhood Analysis 3) General Valuation Analysis 4) Highest and Best Use Commentary 5) Parcel Appraisal(s) 6) Direct Sales Data 7) Market Data 8) Right of Way Plans 9) Limiting Conditions and Assumptions 10) Certificate of Appraisal 11) Introduction and Summary of Salient Facts 12) Qualifications 13) Pre-Construction Site Photos A copy of the preliminary title report shall be included in the appraisal report. The General Duties and Scope of Work of the Consultant as described herein in this section contained may herein after be referred to as "Defined Services". b. 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 -2- " '/J of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions and in similar locations. c. 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 and property damage 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 ~greement the following certificates of insurance to the City 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 which names City as an additional insured, and which is primary to any policy which the City may otherwise carry ("primary coverage"), and which treats the employees of the City in the same manner as members of the general public ("cross-liability coverage"). Errors and Omissions insurance to $500,000, unless Errors and Omissions coverage is included in the General Liability policy. 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 City's Risk Manager. All policies shall provide that same may not be canceled without at least thirty (30) days written notice to the City. 2. Duties of the City: a. Consultation and Cooperation. City agrees to furnish to the Consultant, in a timely manner, such maps, records and other documents and proceedings, or certified copies thereof, as are available from City offices and may be reasonably required by the Consultant in the performance of these services. City agrees to provide the Consultant legal descriptions, plats, and litigation title reports for the various parcels to be appraised. City agrees to provide engineering assistance to the Consultant if such assistance is necessary to accurately value the property. Such assistance would include preliminary development plans, quantity estimates, and cost estimates for implementing the plans. The cost estimates would include land development costs, if necessary, and costs to remedy adverse influence 1'_11./-3- created by the project. b. Compensation. The compensation to be paid by City to Consultant for all of the work required herein shall be at the rates set forth on Exhibit ...A.., incorporated herein by reference, for each productive hour worked, not to exceed $ 25.000.00 of billings without further authorization, payable in monthly payments as billed, in an amount that the Public Works Director, or his designee, shall determine corresponds to the hours of productive time times the hourly rate. Consultant agrees to perform all of the services herein required, and in the manner of the detailed Scope of Work set forth in paragraph 1a, and sh~1I incur all associated costs, including reproduction and printing, telephone charges, travel including automobile charges, for said Fee. c. Reductions in Scope of Work. City may from time to time reduce the Scope of Work by the Consultant to be performed under this Agreement. City and Consultant agree to meet in good faith and confer for the purpose of negotiating a corresponding reduction in the Fee associated with said reduction. d. 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 on Exhibit A. All compensation for Additional Services shall be paid monthly as billed. 3. Administration of Contract: The City hereby designates the Director of Public Works, or his written designee, as its representative for the review and administration of the work performed by Consultant herein required. 4. Term: Consultant shall perform all of the Defined Services herein required of it by not later than October 31. 1992, and shall abide by and comply with any interim time frames negotiated pursuant to paragraph 1. This agreement may be extended by written authorization from the Director of Public Works for an additional year. If so extended, this agreement shall control through. completion of appraisal services initiated prior to October 31, 1993. -4- I/,'/f a. Uquidated Damages. It is acknowledged by both parties that time is of the essence in the completion of this Agreement. It is difficult to estimate the amount of damages resulting from delay in performance. The parties have used their judgment to arrive at a reasonable amount to compensate for delay. Failure to complete the General Duties and Defined Duties specified within the allotted time period specified in this Agreement shall result in the following penalty: For each consecutive calendar day in excess of the time specified for the completion of the respective work assignment, the consultant shall pay to the City, or have withheld from monies due, the sum of $100.00. Time extensions for delays beyond the consultant's control, other than delays caused by the City, shall be requested in writing to the Public Works Director, or his designee, prior to the expiration of the specified time. Extensions of time, when granted, will be based upon the effect of delays to the work and will not be granted for delays to minor portions of work unless it can be shown that such delays did or will delay the progress of the work. 5. Financial Interests of Consultant: Consultant warrants and represents that neither he, nor his immediate family members, nor his employees or agents ("Consultant Associates") presently have any interest, directly or indirectly, whatsoever in the property which is the subject matter of the Project. 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 his immediate family members, nor his 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 shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officers and employees, from and against all claims for damages, liability, cost and expense (including without limitation attorneys' fees) arising out of the conduct of the I'~/b -5- Consultant, or any agenct or employee, subcontractors, or others in connection with the execution of the work covered by this Agreement, except only for those claims arising from the sole negligence or sole willful conduct of the City, its officers, or employees. Consultant's indemnification shall include any and all costs, expenses, attorneys' fees and liability incurred by the City, it officers agents, or employees in defending against such claims, whether the same proceed to judgment or not. Further, Consultant at its own expense shall, upon written request by the City, defend any such suit or action brought against the City, its officers, agents, or employees. Consultants' indemnification of City shall not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the Consultant. 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 Director of Public Works determines that the Consultants' negligence, errors, or omissions in the performance of work under this Agreement has resulted in expense to City greater than would have resulted if there were no such negligence, errors, omissions in the plans or contract specifications, Consultant shall reimburse City 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. //'''/7 -6- 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. 11. Ownership, Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material: All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms, designs, plans, procedures, systems and any other materials or properties produced under this Agreement shall be the sole and exclusive property of City. No such materials or properties produced in whole or in .part under this Agreement shall be subject to private use, copyrights or patent rights by Consultant in the United States or in any other country without the express written consent of City. City shall have unrestricted authority to publish, disclose 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 this Agreement, an independent contractor and shall not be deemed to be an employee of City, and none of them shall be entitled to any benefits to which City employees are entitled including but not limited to, overtime, retirement benefits, workers compensation benefits, injury leave or other leave benefits. 13. Responsible Charge: Consultant hereby designates that Robert N. Jones 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 City unless a claim has first been presented in writing and filea with the City of Chula Vista and acted upon by the City of Chula Vista in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, as same may from time to time be amended, the provisions of which are incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and procedures used by the City in the implementation of same. /1r/(-7- Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in good faith with City for the purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement. 15. Attorney's Fees Should that dispute result in litigation, it is agree that the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover all reasonable costs incurred in the defense of the claim, including costs and attorney's fees. 16. Statement of Costs. In th~ 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. 17. Miscellaneous. a. Consultant not authorized to Represent City. Unless specifically authorized in writing by City, Consultant shall have no authority to act as City's agent to bind City to any contractual agreements whatsoever. b. ( ) Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman. If the foregoing box is marked, the Consultant and/or their principals is/are licensed with the State of California or some other state as a licensed real estate broker or salesperson. c. Notices. All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to be given pursuant to this Agreement must be in writing. All notices, demands and requests to be sent to any party shall be deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served or deposited in the United States mail, addressed to such party, postage prepaid, registered or certified, with return receipt requested, at the addresses identified adjacent to the signatures of the parties represented. d. Entire Agreement. This Agreement, together with any other written document referred to or contemplated herein, embody the entire Agreement and understanding between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof may be amended, modified, waived or discharged except by an instrument in writing executed by the party against which enforcement of such amendment, waiver or discharge is sought. "." -8- e. Capacity of Parties. Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and represents to the other party that it has legal authority and capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this Agreement; that all resolutions or other actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter into this Agreement. f. Governing Law/Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Any action arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought only in the federal or state courts located in San Diego County, State of California, and if applicable, the City of Chuta Vista, or as close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement, and performance hereunder, shall be the City of Chula Vista. -9- Iltr ~() SIGNATURE PAGE TO AGREEMENT WITH JONES & ROACH, INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL PROPERTY APPRAISAL SERVICES IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this Agreement this ....!!.... day of November, 1991. Jones & Roach, Inc. BY~. 4715 ViewridgeAvenue, Suite 210 San Diego, CA 92123-1680 CITY OF CHULA VISTA Attest: Beverly uthelet, City Cler Approved as to form: ~J.U D. Richard Rudolf Assistant City Attor (C\JONES1.AGR) I''''J.J -10- Exhibit List to AGREEMENT WITH JONES & ROACH, INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL PROPERTY APPRAISAL SERVICES Exhibit A. Fee Schedule Exhibit B. Applicable Sections of California Government Code 7267 et. Seq. (C\RYALS1.AGR) ,/p"JJ., -11- THE CITY OF CHUU VISTA PAR1Y DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Statement of disclosure of certain ownership interests, payments, or campaign contributions, on all matters which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all other official bodies. The following information must be disclosed: 1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the contract, i.e., contractor, subcontractor, material supplier. Jones & Roach, Inc. 4715 Viewridge Avenue, Suite 210 San Dieqo, CA 92123-1680 2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership. Robert N. Jones (50%) Stephen D. Roach (50%) 3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. NIl>. 4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months? Yes No 2.. If yes, please indicate person(s): 5. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants or independent contractors who you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter. N/A . 6. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contnbuted more than $1,000 to a Councilmember in the current or preceding election period? Yes _ No ~ If yes, state which Councilmember(s): Person is defined as: "Any individual, jiml, ca-pannership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trost, receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, city and country, city;-municipality, dism'c! or other political subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as a unit." (NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary) Date: 10/31/91 ctor/applicant [A.II Jv\:D1SCLOSE.1XT] It> ~){} Robert N. Jones Print or type name of contractor/applicant [Revised: 1I130NO] EXHIBIT "A" JONES & ROACH, INC. SCHEDULE OF HOURLY RATES NOVEMBER 1, 1991 TO OCTOBER 31, 1993 TITLE RATES $ 150.00 $ 75.00 $ 35.00 . Principal Appraisers Senior Associate Appraiser Research Assistant (C\CONTRACT\JONES1.AGR) I,~g -12- - .- . EXH IBIT --8- <. I 7265.4 _II ."'()CA'l'JON AlSlSTANCE . 0-... I\AU_ ., _.. _ .......t. Mh. ~._ .. -., In........ ~ "- ... .. ,,, "'~ ., .... ..... _ I ft12. , -. I ....... ~JIll. ..- _.~ I CJ&-Lm~IIII._ I .... If I .. r .. ........, 11' 11I101 ~ Ie. ....._.. ., .......,.... ........ -- . .... ..... 11Ift.... ..... '""'" ... ..... ... _0.. .. .." ., 00."" eunl a. IN .... _ ... _ alllW .. eftI'4 ~. UI, 11 c.AM 181. . . '. I 7266. .... .,,.1IIIc -tltJ- NlDllItS.... '" Iioan1 (a) II a relocation appealllloard 1w been IIt&bUabed pumant to Sectlon 3341'7.5 of the Health aM Safety Code, a dty b)r ordiDaDce 11II)' desllnate the Iloard to bear appeala from aD public Cltltl., ex. eept thoae Nte qenc1es which have an appeal ~ _ : , 011 the e1lII. 1IWt)' tor, or the amount of, a pa)'Dlll)t authorized by tbla cbapter. . (b) An)' person qrrfeved b)' a determlnatlon u to eUcfbWty lor, or the amount of, a payment authorized by tbla chapter JIll)' have the appllcatlon reviewed b)' the public entity or b)r the 1'Iloca. . tlon appeals board Sf authorized under wbdlvlalon (a). The review of. lSetennlnatlon b)' a communlt)' redevelopment apnC)' all)' onl)' lie made b)' a relocation appeala board lltablllhed purIIWIt to SectlOll 13t1'7.5 of the Health and Safet)' Code. (A.... by ataU.lnc, Co C7, ,.102, II'" eff. Fib. "'1I7C.) . 1IIIIl. rill! NoU ,...... I 'I2ee. ..... b, ltata.lees. .. DertY.IIII: ,...... I .... ..... ., ,... ,. 1048. 11. ,rod'la, for tlo. fIuI. .,,1.1.1_. Co U8ll. ,. Ion. I I. .tlr If 1'tI'I.... b, ",bile ..dt, ., ..,...t IIIIlbUlt, .r _0"'. ... oepoaIelI ., 8IItLlt14. Co tT. ,.1Cl2, I U. 0- ....... 1'. 111_.,....... _t. _or p.u.4 ., In ...... ....... I .. ... .. pl...... .,......... _I ft12. ,- -. ..... - . ~~ t o....ut'tr - e-n,',_ CU''&'' ..J' A4..... . - . IIDL . ......... . PIUIltr If........ . ........ . ........ I ...... . ....lfl .. .. ......... WIlt" ,." .u...Itr ......41"'" .t .. . .. .....t uaIut It ., .., II _pIelDt ler bnt.. ., fttJ .. ........ IM"b, ........ _c.tI ., _._.a-.. .... ... tN f i~/)~ . . ., . )., . , r .. . l' ". , . ., J. - t ~.. '. . , Diy" -...' .. . -. ...b.lfll . *Ja tloa, ..... .....rIo' .tral ~...... CI'm _181. I. ........ .AkIlMrh CeIIf. " .... .., .. ... ... ... ..... ~1iM ..1111 ...rb ....".. .alaltl. .., eurlr ., ., loea .... ClaUtPtr. .... II ...AItMet. ..... .ldrr!'.t~ .. _h ..........h ... ...... .-' ..- II I - i.. .... II III .. ~""'Iln .. Ie I .. ..,..., _M ........... It.. all POrlor Oea" fa Clm) JII. CII.a, I. ......n ...... llIPIlral Irlolq ., of",," II "'bile edt, ... - 8lIlDlD/o1..ll.. .... 1tI. fell... II _. .. ....... - Ilor llro, ., ..... ... C1I17) aiOft,; 181. -- hut .... ...... ., Wo ....... WI" .....1IIt ....,... .lfl .,....... . ... ....olf" .. .. trlltloll Ie, .lft ., - far _.,. W1t~- ...r. ., ,....1 1111. ... .....rIcI .. .. I 7~67. ~ III order to = -V b)' ~ ~OIIlDthe the public p....~ ecqu!lltJOII practJ. tlcable, lie lidded eIuIIve, except tba 1 aDd SectIoD 'r.ii -. , , . . , ~~it..;..'-;':"?~.ci.'~"~',(fu;,-~' ,,">--,..:... ~.~%'-"';."'~',i~;~. .~~'~. ....~'n..."......~~l;>c. ~ ..-~~~P~Ii:::",,{~.,f~'5-~_ .- - .', :~;..:b::~:~~-:~:t~~..;;~ ~:;..::.~~~~.~~7J;..-:...' -; _..~...~: ~~":r6"S~~-'--~~':~': .' .A1J!1-;~;"2~~~;1d;.{!;t:~,ct:. M,2'S"*....~~i!-' . ~,~~~~~~.._..,.... ...,<<. ,..,~! "'.-. ,_~",,">,,',(4<""~-,<' ".~ '. . .--.;..:;;0....'.4 ' . . ftIt I Dl~. , , -OCA'I'ION ~AlfCl: I 7267 . I 7267. ... """",.......... III order to - w-tC'I &DC! ",",'te tile IIIlqUIIItIaa fIl .-1 prop- erv ., -.stemcbtl with 0WDeJ'I, to .wId IItIptioD &DC! nll_ llCIIIPItlon III tbe courtI, to UIure CIIIIIIIteDt tl'atllllllt far _aAlI III tile P'Jb1Ic pnIIJ'aIIlI, &DC! to ,. _te public GmItIdaa III public JaDeS . acquJaltlon practlcel, public eDtJtIeI abaD, till tbe ....._ extent praC- tf<'oo..~. .. IUlded II)' tbe proyIIl~ of 1IctIcIIlI1261.1 to 'D6'7:r, Ill- eIuIIw, ~t that tbe proyIIlCllll of mbdlvlllon (b) fIlllctlon 7261.- 1 &DC! IIctIOD 1X7.2 aballllOt QPIy to tIae MQIIlIItIaD fIlDl ... /i,./,) & '65 _.. I r .. _..., III ~.... . _ ... ... ..horItJ .... _ .. ..... .. _. 1IaI. ilia, _ ......... _ _,a.,... ,",."". 'INI . ...,.. 0.. e. PO" ., ~ (Un) ItO ..... -"" 111, ft Co ~117. L ......... ~ Calf... ..... IIIIIIlIMo III. .... _ .'_1, ....... '0. ..... iN ad 'h. tUJa. ., ........ _ ..... .r ..1000Iloo ....fll., ... ....'.....1. ... folrl, "po.lod ., ... _.. ._ .hlt-I, .., ."rlned ,._ .., .....4. ClI, .r Lot ....1.. Y, Doeh.. 111'1') SI:I CaUl,I.. 118. fl1 c:.A.I4 .... .&It..... "'Iloo ___ III. .... ..I ..~_I, pre\'I4t '0. . "'rtoc ., ....h eoI4t... III ...alred .. .. ta.... _I, ...ul......I. ... '.1.1, "po"od ., ... -.. ,.-e. .hlt-h W. RttI.. a. -. .f . ...s...ol.. ""U. 00111' .. 'h. ..... .r .., ,.roo. ...rlnlld ., . .. . '.nol..doo .. 10 oIIrlbllll1 '0. .. ....., of "'.'.1 ..Ihorlotd '" ......tl.. ... alaI..... .... crl,.f "ou.I.I. Via. Y. 'uperlo. Co." '0. 1a.1. Clore C...I, UI'I~) l2e CaUl,I.. 1GB, If c:.A.I4 7a. I. ......... '"'... .,pU...1 ,.. ......1... a_... .rIoI.. ., 01".. ., ...aIoId.. of lI.d ., ....U. .11t, ... ..I ,..alred .. ....... adIllloltl..ti.. ......10 .. 8m ...1..... III 'aDure Ie _. ...... ., a4aWa1tl... tr.. ........ ... ..I .,ro,... ..,.. .. 'Irol .. ...... Co. Y. Pert .f 00.. ...4 111'17) ltO CaUl,tr. III, ft c:.A.I4 117. . 'l'nu' ... fidJtd .. ."001 NOlIlIIto of ,... .-tIoa willi _pttt to ......, fer ......tloD "'tfIlO ... _, _dUed .. ....t at --..... ..reeda. tII. ........ ... ..1II0rll, to .., _h ...tfI111 ... ..d.... ,.. .rll ., .....1. _ . ...... II, _.,- wllIIlD .....,." ........ _10 ., tel'lllOl fIIIDI wllIo ... ....... ... .....rIt1 .. . fI"... .~. , .. .., .1111__ .. .... .. .... ..1.04 (1m) ltO .181. ... ..... . JIbed pumwlt '1 bv 'U'd1nInce Uc t1., ex. a, -- tbe l11li. 'I \ . chapter. I to e1lllbWt)' . chapter IDlY II)' the reloca. I. The review Ifte)' lIl&)' only ant to SectIon 1 ,., ..... hi 41.1 I. . - ........ .... ,.,._ 1 JIlIL I ..-"''' IDlIt .. . e , _pIIIo' .. ~ ......, . __ II. ... - Jf._ ..... -'lid ., "lot. .... e. "'I_te ....... DC Pa.ri IJUt. ~".) JIG ~,._ . r-.. ... .....* ..... ....... _ ...004 &, r..o ad .... _ -PtIltd Ie ...... .. WI ~ .... 0111 ...., .. ...01.. ... ,..,.", fer __ ad ... lII'ed .._.... MIll .. _. alOl. _" e... ........ ,.,.., .. ... _. ......... aedaa; ................ ... ... ..Ioautlld ... ...IaIoI..l/n -..u... _ ...oIred .. ........ ., .., ., __ -pltt.1 _.... a4aIloIoi..d.. ...... ... ..tII.. .... ., .., ., _. .. III'" _,Iolal .. _10001 ....ID. ClI1 ., .....tolD Vie. e. la,.rIo. Ceo" fer ".1. Do.. ClaaI1 Mil) Uf CaLapr.. ... If c.&.IoI ft. If . 'fl t..... ... ... MItd .....od ........ ....fIl. ., ....... MtI.. of ,... .....aJoa ..bIk _III' . II. ..... ....... ., ... .... ., III .......... ""'" ., .eh.. ."ro,rIote .othorll,. .. "'1 ........ ... a....I.. ".. ....1ol.1... tr.. _edlll, ... ..., ....... ....., III III fldtloDlDc ... ..perle. _" ,.. NIl.f .. a4aWa1ttradYt -.......... U. - .. FIaaIItr ~ ........ DoeIDleo ., ..bIk atIt1 .. .. ..,..., of ..........~ a_at afl.. ...po", III ..... ,.. ....It ....... III ... ..I, .. .. ,.HtIeot .r faC1, .,."". 'Iro, . .~.~ _0.. Y. Pe" ., 00...... (JI'IT) ltO COUIp,..1JII, ft c.&.IoIl87. L ....... ...... pe" . anberll1'o ......... fer ....... _ ....... '0. ....doD ...._ ....wed fer .. ......,. _ feft.aa4Io. ..1......doD ad .. .........111 .. .. ..... - fI" ., ........" ........, _ _ .....red .. ... -~. . It.d.. ft9ltw w... IIIIDJ 1M _....., fer _h ....... ... ...._ .. _"", _rt. .po.... ...1 . ...... 00, e. Pa" ., OahIt.d (U71'lltO cw.a.tr. 111, tI c.A.I4 117. -' - , . ..~ .- . . . " - ( t I 7267 .1rI<<\1'ION ~ANCE . 'IWe 1 DIY. f I 7267, 8efor entItlah& _tlon the: " tor the ......thI wJue'ol. wJue or 1\ .~ b)' J ~,or IUCh Impr within the l prded In C ! etlf1 aba1 writteD Ita tabll.~ . .. oceuplee deDtIa1 UDI a ClOp)' or t prlate, tile ""'--III U (Added ., 171, . L) ~. . 'ftt .. ~ .' , _1_ NIo' ... _NIoaL ......'\,~ P. IWtIoa., .. ...... ....... - J,.I. 11.. - --.a...-, W'"_ I 7267~ 'I'IIe -- .. . ... -t.l'IIbt.or-way, eoftIIIrIt, or other ,...." aM' r ar)' in_tit Ira 1'111 .._b-' to" aequJred tor tile alIlItnIctlcm, ftCGIIItrUct1cm, altera- tion, eJarpment, a1ntarllDce, ...waJ, ftPI1r, or iep'--t or .-tOfaet ...ra, waterliDla or ~ dralDa. ..,uc IluIb, . atonD water draJDL. . . (AMtd ., Itat.LIlTl. .. UJ4, .. 1110,110.... fTf ., It.~ 1m, .. .....112. 11.) ; .._.r ...... - . rr1lll NIU ~.I II ........: ...... . 'II8f _ _..... I 'II8f.. . ... ~ '1' ., Itata,ul1. .. II'., .. ato. . .. 0.. ..,_ .J\....-'Vn~ ..~ ..,........... .. -.... trU1IIa ., .... ....... ... . ~ . . I\..._doa ., ..... ., _..... ..... ,.1"<11' r ., In ...... ...... ~ 'l' .... II .-wool ., IIllo ..... _ I '12'12. . -. _I no..Ia _110. ,- -, .... . . ~.a. ......1 no..Ia I JII .. .... ....." _I ", - . .. Ie ......, CIt,'. fall... .. fellow II\IW.II- Ie. .._ .........tlOll. ..... t. (lI1, ., .... .....t1tIlll. w\1~ ........... ad.. thlI.... .. ........ (ltr81 111 ClaIJIptr. .12. . .. ..w .., _.. __ at ..do. .. ... c..t..Id e4. - I 7267.1. Aet1ddtlO1l ., IIIptIatlO1l; apprallaJ .' (.) The publlc entity aha11 make I'YI1')' I'IIlOftfbJe .rtort to ac- lIUIn expedltlo\llly real property b)' DIJOtlatlon. (b) Real property aha11 .. appraJaed before the IDJtlatlon or lit- ptlatlOlll, and the owner, or blI desllMted ...!-rllrltatlve, aha11 .. liven an opportuNf1 to accompt'ny tile appralIer durIIIi blI JaIpec- tkm 01 the property. (,....... II)' Itat.LIl71. Co U74, p. 1111, . 11.) . . 0..'" L , .. .l~-'. .~. .. ,-" - ... .. . II'" ........ ... 111..r-.r.__t....;a,:-- II t'-.I.... " .... ..... - I . ... If ... ....... _ ., In ...... ___ ~ 1 . .... _. ....--. ,- -. ... u.a.-' '~I-""', .... ". .. L ........ =~"rtr .. ..-... lor ~ - .... ..... If _ ., ..s.at ... dO. au..1 . ....' Do. t. .." ., .. It _ .......,wll II ..,..1" _ (un) HI cw.a.tr.1JI. II Co ....... --.... 1& II .. ...... ..... lit. tII { J~/ ;27 : I . . .' . . DIY. , ..., OCA'l'JON AllllTANCZ I 7267.3 t:We I nit III ftI1 _ 8Jtera. ~---,tcrl IPUctazib. '. I 7287.2. .. I . ..; ..,., lair - "'. ....; WIt&- ..... r &; ~._.._ .,~.... .-:. Before the IDItIatlaa ol8llOtlatlCllll for 1'1I1 ~ . . ~. tile public _t1~ Iha1I tltabUIb M ''''OUDt which It IIeJJtovIa to III ... -,en- atlcm therefoi'. IIDd IhaDIIlIkI a prampt ofter to acquire tile proper- ~ lor tM IuD amount 80 IItabllIbed. III DO evat IhaDIUCb amount III .... tban tM public eIltl~1 allP. ,-\led appraJu] or tM fair IIW'Icet YaJueof auch prope~. Any decr_ or IDcra.e III tM fair lIW'ket Ya1ue 011'1I1 ~v~tty to lie acquJred prior to tM date or YaJuatlon . caUled by tM publlc Improy.....,nt for which IUCb ......... t)' II ae- flUfre<l, or II)' tM IUce11bood that tM ........ttt wouJd lie acquired for wch Improwment, other tban that due to pb)ollcaJ deterioration WIthin tM NIIODIble control or tM oner or OCl:Uplnt, wm be d!Ire- prded In deterznlnlDi tM eompenutJon for the Pl~. t)'. 'l'be pubJlc entity Iha1I provide the owner 01 naJ property to be acquJred with a written ltltement of, Me! IUIDDW')' 01 tM bull for. tM lIIlount It .. tabJlshed u just COInptJllatJon. Where tM property lDvoJwc! II cwm- er occupJec! nsIc!entIaJ property ane! contl.lnl DO more tban four 1'1I1- dentlaJ units, tM bomeowner Iball, upon nq~ lie aJJowec! to review a COP)' 01 tM apprallaJ upon which tM offer Ji buec!. Where appro- priate, the just COJnpeDlltlon for tM rea! '""-'rty acqulNe! and for damaps to ,.....,..'WW naJ property IhaDlleltPU&teb' ltltec!. (Added .7 8&ata.1t71. c- 1174, .. 1181, I U. '''IIlidld'' 8tata.1'78, c- '71, 11.) . - l&ata.1tT1, .. ..... I ftIT.. n. .. aH, .. .. ...... ... . .J.! I I till. .... ., ... . e1t, ef .... .pt.. IJ2. . !ort to ac- Ir- ~1llI ..... ft. m. _ - .t ........ ... t1fdl _t.... ....dIlI . '"'"' ., . -PI ., ... _NIuL IUon or De- ,.,lbaJJbe .... ""'P"C , ...., "'-~.b.. . , . ., ~. 'f. . 'I. ,Ju.. ~ _. ar ~ ....." aGo, r'o . , .. ,1..lJod ., .... __ _,1ln2. . ...., ...... - CII'IlII I .... '. ..... '. . '- '. .. fit ... --. _ fit .." ...... ...... ~ ..... .. ... . . ........ - r .... 4 . ....... - W. 21'- t -. ...... "I., .- _, r .. 01.&- . .1........_ . . ..... I ./ At_. a 9. h.. l .. au. ft I 7287.3.......... Dtf.a _.... ..III . lit; ..*-.. . __; tIlDe 'I"be ......b.actlCIII or *. ."' ..,.t fIl a publlc L4>......acer.t IbaD III 80 .. I rhW tbat, to .... patllt .r..t praetIcabJe, DO ,Irr -- /t-'2'i! '11'1 . - -~ .' . . . . .-' . . ( I 7267.3 ....<<tnON AlSlSTANCE 'l'We I lawfuDy ClCCUP)'IDI naJ .......-.t)' ab&D lit nqu1re4 to move tram I lIwtJUDI. UIWIlInI I npJaClllllftt dwe1llnI wUl lit 1\'"I1I."1e, or to DIM b1111u1lnea 01' farm aperatlon, wSthOllt It IIut 10 da)II' writ. . .. IICltIce tnlm tile JUbUc 1DtIb' allIIe date IIy wbIch aICb move II ftQUIrI4. (,. u., b Ilata.U'lJ, ..1174, .. 1111.111.) : ... ..~ ~...... Ir_A_. . -.a- ._IL......--... - . ..m .. . .__ _L_ .. . .... .... .. ...., _......"........ ....__. 111............._ .. ........ ., .... --. _I ma. .- -. ~ .. . -, 'O&I".~ ~.(1). Cl.l& I( . ~"" ClhpA ~ - . uoo. . ..... 11.1 . . .. ......... _ te ... -we, .....ff7. ..... ... _.N .......... _aIoIlIaa ., "',. .. '-ISo f., alai.... ..... ., .... ., _. tIao ., ........... Iud .... . 1IaIWD, _'I. _tal .aI.., !.eo ....1.. CloDt, ... atNlt ..,..._at _1l1t" Ie.. .. "'Itb 08711 127 CII.I1,tr. ... U C. . __aid Iet..n,tIaa ., T '._~...' _ .A.Id ,.. . I 7267.4. PaIr nata! ftlael ..0......,.. eoeapler If the pubUc entlb' pennlta an oner or teDant to oceup)' the raJ property acquired on a rental buls fOl' a Ihort term. 01' for I pe. dod IUbject to termination by the pubUc entity 01'1 Ihort DOtIce. the amount of rent required aball DOt exceed the fair rental ftlue of the property to a Ihort.term occupier. (Added b7Itatl.l'71. c.lI7e. p. 1111. I Ie.) ( ... 0..... I ~ff7 ...,.wllaao ., ........ ., I '-~'tIaa, - b_'" aC IWa ..... - 1m.. ....... ., ..... .. _to ..... ""~~-' aC Ia....... 1M'" _ In', .... - .. ,NIIlI" .,... .noa. _ I ma. ---- t De.&Ia ...... ,- ~..... T T Cl.I&....... De.&Ia ... I 7267.5. OM 1I11.._....~m -I_price III 110 ftI!Ilt IbID the publlc etlb" either edvuce tile time err ..... f Ration, or defti' JIIIOtlatl... or OCDdemDatlClD IDd IIIe dapoIIt fIl fIIDda III CIlIlIrt for tile UIe err tile ftIIG', or take 1117 otber aetlon . II d~ III ..tun, III arcJer to pot Ill. J w."t_ tile prIDe to . ".alUOI' the ...-V. . - (~U I b llata.lt'll, """4, ..1111.111.) .'68 ( /h~c21 Di.. , ~m ... .m.. .......... at .. ,NWlt ......1 De -'. f 7267.( , ~ I Ifuy the JIOMr I . .,....."Iatl . It I'"'( ~": I fact err the , (AdIItd b . t ~ I ~~-:." ......... ., .. .......' -....*- IDoo 4- I 7267.1 . . , If tbt : ......'"'.. : .[I3-~le; tile IIIt!rI ~ ('......6b. .......'ln~~ ............ aC .. --u. ......- f 7267;~ (a) ~i _t Jlq;!". . . . , ! . '~."".,~'~. "1'"<:,'1ef. ""-~~::.<;;;.''''.:~::''':.'''.''''~;.'''"*---:'. - .~.;,:...'-!Iui:"'._<~. ""'::;'~.''':;~''. ;:. :'..'aw."'''''.;.~.;'~~&-''~'''~'-.;.;.,,--~~::.., .1. - -,~~r"'" -~::~ .~,.. "....~~: ]i!~,.;"';"~''-?:.~::-' ...~~~~~,. . '~;~"~'~-~:"~:---f~':~'~'_ tt-:;, '~.:.:~~ -:--"Jtt=-~.~ . ~~ p::!'";~~- ;".rii;!:.~y.-..yc _ ,-' ..#i~~~'~:-:;~:"';;~~-~~~::-!:"7="""-,-"' '~~~~'~~?j>.~~~. -"-;,~~-'";j.~..~~;;'.4Z~{<&:;~-:'~~~~'<;~15',"?;~;':",.3~i:';,~~~:'~:::l"~. ~~~"l-3:~~~~~""'i~l:.i:.";;~~6t:"*~~~~{i~~'-'t~Z~~f-:,..f!;:~~~'!C . '0'''''' .~"",~~.~;;;~t;~k:.4.' . ... '''''''~~:.:, ".t".~""';~..-", . .;:-"""r~"..':"'-::;~"';;:>':"'__'",,";: , . . ftJe I to IIICIft tram a avaUabJt, .. to It 10 ~' writ. :fa aICb IIICIft II . IHY.' , -<<:A'I'ION .uBll'l'AXCZ f 7267.8 '" 0.. ..... r.__Lt> t A . A .. ... . _ .. . 1m.. - r.. 1 1.... ., __... __ . -"'..... r-__ a . .. ~._.'f1............_ I ftft. . 0 1 II ..........._ .. ... .... ..... to' .n.... t ... ...... _ IN ........ .... . f ~ .- -, .. --'-.t ~ "170. ~...-. '~IIH, .. " I 726.7.6. c.......-tIoD.. m 1Ib..p1 ...11__.... ., paltUc _. _ ......, "., RIIer . If an)' IDterst In naJ .....I..".ty II to fie uquIred by exercIIe of the power or eminent domain, the pubUc ezrtJty IbaD tDItltute fonnal eondemnatJon Proceed1np. No public entfty IbaD JDtatfODlDy lIlIke It IIf( II 'I')' for an cnmer, to tDItltute lip] PI i fM{Ilnp to prove the fact or the IaJdnc or bIa NIl property. (Added 117 Stata.lln, 1.117" p. Ila.llI.) - :: ....... . 1100. ", -. .- . . I ... ..." ... 'd ., _ .t "", , .' It. Ceut, a. _laC. OCCUpy the or for a pe. : lIotJee, the ..we or the 0.. ... ~ ~"' ...,.w.... ., ........ ., . ~ I. . I......... .. .... .... _ I~. ~ . ,,",oed.. of ....r .r -..al. etHr ..... . -- ...........,..,., '" l.etIaa.... .. ........ ...... --. _I m2. ....., ~ ..1-. .- _, ... 1 ~...-. .'~I-. .. I 7267.7. ~OII.,.... to IU~1 ... '''--01'' ..m- ...so . .--t . If the acquJaJtfoa " _ a port!ClII fila ......... b would ...'" the ......,..,." portfoa III IUcb a ~ .. ODDdltfClll U to ..utute an WI. ~c .......,nt, tbe pubUc entf~ aIIaD filler to aDd ~ acqulre tbe CItIrt ...rt1 If the oner 80 dIIIra (~".Iot 117 11&ta.lt7J. L U7" p.11a.117.) .0...' .....ro _ "r -....... -., . . o' ... ... ....... _ 11m. . .. .. ., _r.. I -.. .... _.. ' . .. ... .... ..... ~ ..... .. ......... .. .... ..... -11J1ll. , ---- -'1 Ib....... . time of II dIIaIt III' Ion . pI-_ to ( /6<50 I 7267.8. ........ III "r~.. ., .... Wl!'1I'" I "'I~ .,. . ....... law (a) .AD pubUc entltllllbaD adapt NJeI aDd I'II\I1atloal to 1mp1.. ..u ~ta aDd to '-""'-teI' I'ItJocatloD UIIItaIIcI aDder the ' fll . ~ . ~ . .. . . . . . .( ( .. 7267.8 .sor OCAftON MIlITANCE ftJe I JI'O\'IIIDIlI or WI chapter. lucb na1eI aDd I'IIU1atlolllllbaD lie III ..rormJt)' wtth the ,wcSeUn. adoptee! by the "",.,,,,1_1011 or v.."'~ aDd ClaaImunIt)' DneJopment JlUl'lUaDt to IeetJoD '1268. Iucb rules aDd ftIIIJatlDlllIbaU, to the IUUeIt ateDt po-1bIe. .. III -.lltlDt .. to IIdera1 UId DlIDIedenJ p.~1I. . . (b) Jlfohrlthlb""''W tile P'VYlllOIII or IUb4lvilloa (a). With .... II*t to a 1e4eraJb' IwIded project, a public _tit)' abaD make 1'aIoca. tIaD UIIItaJIce IlQmIDtI &lid PI'OVSde nIocatloD adYIIor7 UIIItuIcI .. ~ UDi:Ier Ie4eraJ Jaw. . (I\..u/IJ I tU7, adW ." IV.ta.ltI., c. lea., .. lOCI. II, eft. 1Ipt, .. 1M.. aalUDllerecll tU7.. ad eaaW., IV."-1I71. c. U7.... 1110.1 I. '&-lIIded b7 8&&ta.1172, c.1I07.,. 1S07.ll.) -- 111I ... ftt 2m _........1 __..... tIl. -(') ..,.." -'0, ... ~._....... ., ..... ... .."ret. ... ear. w.... ...",. tIoIt "'pl.. " 1M Do..raa"l ., ..bII. -11 -.: . ~'.,lt ,., .ropertl ...oIaltloo. oltlI .. ....,...It DIe, ... -""'.... ., tIdo ~ ........... "'1' _b .... oaf NPIt. .,It, oltll .. .... .. oUclbl. "_II 1Ioaa.. oltlI .. ""Ied ., 1M ",n. ~ ........... ...,. ..... nI.. OD' ..11IIa. ."1. · .... .. 01,.11 .. ",,'ed h, ... 'Itlt "(e) .... """,tIoo. oltlI ....... lb. ..... ., COIII..I ,., .....", ....laId... ... ..,...It OD' ualtloaet ........ ., . · .,. .lal. .....,. or ... .....raJa. """ ",bU. ..dt, ..... .... alt,t., oltU .. ., a, ..... ..bU. adt,. ,., .....rl, ....111I.1....... ....., "'1 II 'air a' ....ltlll... h, ..... atll,. .''''01' -....bl...... Dlf... .. ...ee1..bl.. .... .. ..lttlo. to ......", ...",.Id.. "... .....ltd.... .b.U .Ito ....... "It ... fe, _do OD' .....It h, ,.bU. add.. ..,....It .hall .. .... .. .....'11' .. elIl.. .... .b. .11t. .hall .. .... to ... r:..lbI. .r. .. .....blp _". II ........ ........ ""h ... ,"NIo.. .f .rd.'. I.lI ...ltlo.. ... ..",lttln. oltlI ...,id. . (_.... wllh .....10. Jill) .f Cha,. .......1. .11.... lImI"tloo II .."..... It, J ., I>hi.loD J .f ... 1,,,," .D' II. .h. ....., ..d __.bI. ""D" .. III.'...,. Cod. ... .... nI.. 'D' ..",It. .0"", . ".011 lor .._ .,....... .... II oltll he ."pted ~ tIr. lla" Do. ftlI:l." "_"I" ..bile """L ........ .. . " "'to.2172. L UOT, .. ftt 1m ..........1 ....ret. ... __ -.oa. .......: ..... whl.' .rnIoul, -.: ..... I. n. 1.eIIaIt",.. ~I"" ..., "(., Esee,t .. ........ .. ..WlNloD ... .-WOII .f thlt 1ft oltlI aU II ... (hI. ..,..." DI'" ... ......'011 .f tlrlt alfo.. ad=laItt..,.... ., ",-dOD II. ehI"., oltll he .... to oUIihl. .....D. aI8taaot.,,.wIe _dtloo .....h... .... ~ .......D.. ..... ..... nit. ... .....It. _t.. ..... II ...11 .. ado,ted " .1.. BIIII. ....... ftIo let aba, ...... ...... 5:.. ., Coatrol '.r .rope", ...",.It"D' .... - ,... afll. Jto affoed.. ".L" . OIl" "'D',. .r ... ....raJa. bod, D' eth.. ..hU. adll. fe, .....rtI .......... ~, .... _dO. I I I i . '. - 0- ...... IIJIq ., .... oaf ......... ....... "_I .. .... ..... _ 1 'Ill81.1. . ........., en" ., _put, ..., ,ra ~v'r. '" II. 8MaI "'11:' _ --.. .... .. ~...1docI ., .... ....... _ 11212. .... "It .. . L II...... .. .... ....... 1....... ......... ..... ...... '"" .......17 ..="'..... ... _, Ie, _' ....tIoa .._ YIlI .. ..... ......... wlllelo .... _...." ..... ......., 24 _th. afto. ...... .... ...... lor .,', .... .......... .....1..... '- -' ......., _ 7eo I I ( / t.-J I Diy. , .... ., ,.., ...... c:e. . IdO CoI.Jlplf.1 W.... NIoe .., ...",... to ",''''" 10. . __.afll' . . 7268. (a) 'J'II abaD adopt. cbapter ant by pubUc G1' (b) 'J'II abaD, to tbl PnsJlSentIaJ PnsJdent of requirement t;)' Acqullltl< ftI\&I8t101l1 J (c) Sue 8IICt nqulre tered 111 a JD tlcable. 'Tbl I118deupro a44Itlon, IUC III determIDI ~ tor JIU11 (d) III I Communlt)' j Jac out the ~ (e) 'I'be IhalI provide draftIna and aDd to admID (AUtd ." at. 'ata.l t71, c. 1 Ie u.a.c.&. 1 'l'ht un _ ..._, II . ... .. ...,. .. , . I , _..."_ ~~.__.~~<_'~-.-<'":o.'_- --~""';-,"'i-: -~--_ - -l:."'~_~,'..;k. .~.;...~.-'-'::~2t.;-"'~.".:r..'; . ~-'"".",,,-- ;..,'- ...' - - - ';- --~~-::-~~""i~~~l~~i~-~- - _.~~ - '_~.~J~~~:~~";~J:~~.e: . - . _~''J;~~~~~iP~~;..;~~~. .,.. Cj"~;;'~~'~~::"~~~;:~""''i'''''ci;';:''''''~~~J>~i;;;~. ~'4;;,,,~""",~:>fiS.;;'~-~~'i. ~'-~:~.':;"'-:.::...rl._'- x.:~'!.-};,~J~ ~~~~ -:! .'_ _,' .....fl:~~: "'~~.e-__~_~~:,;.. ;'~,'''-' . -y~t;'"'' ;..L:;'_ -~.. u;..-~~o\~-:~:;.s:.;~..;..~:...-:~-:fi,.~"1";"'J;;/:::-' .~. ".".> ..._...,.t.;.~.' :"",,~....-.,!~,~._.'~~~~~~:~~tr;.-~~.~~d:'~"1':~~i'~:;"'=-~'" ....i~~~~;;;;}~._. ,..... '''.~',,", ,', .~ ~.~~ -"~''''''' ~-. .;J', '.,' . "~C"1---:-;:' "IWe I . . tw1 be III " JI.....~ Such NJeI IIDIIIIItIDt '. wftJI ... .Ire nJoca. uaIItaDce ft. Sept. .. . .. 1110. . . . .........w... ., a', 'dU. .. U.. - ......... t' ....rt. I ........ W, .....lrod .. . ".. .~aU .. , .. faI. ... , ,..meobl.. Yld. w, ... ....'11' . . .. ........ .u :.~. . .. ,...... · -:ria.t .. . IoclIotl . .. IIOT. .. ..... ..., .......... .....tI.. .. ...~.., Ole -. ...... ,"teo- . ::....... ." .,.rl' .. . WI _t.... after _rtJ .. ~...... . 'J' -: ~~ -:. ~. . '. . . . ; I 7268 DiY. f -. ~1'IOJtl MIlITANCE .......,~ .tkJ. .. de, Itrwt. eftr'" ~~ ... '!r.ll(: ... ...... _".. .. "rt ., Oakla.. (unl, .....'..11.. _ _ u,.. ItO CelJlpll.lll, III c.AM N7. ."H.bIe 1IelIla~ ...... ... ..., .. ..... NIoeatloe ....... .-, _ .ww.od.. NIoeaU'll1rtJ ... -, ... Ne..... .. _, ... ..'o..,.rt _.....nod., tetllel .... 8IocI _,~orl', fer ....... faftlftd .. ..... wttIlIa II _1M iIfIo'.....~ 1'e ....,... ....,... .,.........0 III ~" ....... '..... r ......... ' I 7268. thdla"-." _'-Ow II .. ~I'" -luiItJ "~aIopmlllt for ..~tI ... IIhlll'll. ......; . ....... to ,.1IIIc IdUeI (a) "J'be O-O""H'on of HouI!nI and 0aInm11l'llt)' Development aba1J adopt IUldel1nel tor the implementation of pa)'mIDtI uncJer tJIJI chapter and tor the unlf01'Dl admInJItratlon of relocatloD uaIItaDce b)' public ctltl. c:an')'IDa out the pnMafODl of tJIJI cbapter. (b) '!'be OommlIIIon of HOUIInI and Cw-"'UnIt)' DrYeJoPment '1ha1I. to the tulIest extent poalble, conform IUch 1\11"'11_ to the Presidential Guldellnes promulpted b)' the aecutlve office Of the PresIdent of the United Stat., Office of Manqement and Budpt, the nqulrements of the Uniform Relocation ~ and Ru1 Proper. ty Acquisition Pollcl. Act of 1970 (P.L.ll-M6>,' cd the naJeI and ncuJatlons promulpted pw'IlWIt thereto. '. ,~ (c) Such IUIdel1nellba1l provide that the pa)'IIl:Ints aDd UIIIt. ance nqulred of a public entlt)' under tJIJI cbapter I!iaD be ~I..I.. tered ilia manner that II taIr and ...-onable and u uniform u prae- . t1c:able. '!'be II1ldel1ne1lbaU also provide that the pI.)'1DIJlts ~ be made u promptly u poulble or, III bardahfp -. III advance. In addition, IUch IUldel1ne1lba11 provide a "lI01Iable ...~It Umltatlon III determllllll& the actual and ..--"It ~ IIIl11OY11l1a 1IuaI. ... tor JIW1: r of Iectlon 1262. (d> In adoptIJIa IUCb auJA-1I- the 0. "'-011 of H.....", aDd Cono"'UIIJt)' l)rye1opment abaJJ ClIftIUh wltJI the pubUc: .utili eur)'. _ out the pnMafODl of tJIJI cbapter. (e) '!'be DeputmeDt of JIouIIIlc aDd 0IaIzDuDIt)' ~.tL.....er.t abaD provide CllCIIU1tIIlI and tIctmlcal UIIItaDc:e to public etltlellll '6'IItIIlI aDd .,.......,~ NJeI aDd ftlUJatlODl to ~ IIQIDIDta ud to .......'..Ioter nJoc:atIaD UIIItaDoe UDder tbJa dIapter. (Added .., .tata-IH'. e. I"'. ,.IOU, . l, eff.Sept. .. un. .&.DeW.., 8tata.1l7l. e. U74. ,. .la. . II; 8tata.l.72, e. UO'l. ..1107. . L) .. 11.a.c.&.I_l. .... -' Ir . r___ ..... 'ft. 1171 _ . _, ~_..... ...,... ........__...,... ....... ., k ...._, .. ,.bIIe ..do ......... 8M w, ... ,........ Will ., ..:l''' ... . ..... ..... .. ....J1..... .. la. ............,.... - . .., TlI I b / };2. "/ .1 . " , J I f . . I I , I . . I . I . I . . " I " ( .( .....---.. JlIfC ....... .... -.. ..... ........... ... III aLIflr.lI7, . CoA.M No . . eo,,---~ COD.' .. ... . .. ..... , " ,..... - " . . . ~ t . , .) .,.....1IloD .. ~ .. _... ... Jtk ~..... ".. L M.....,. ......,...... . . · - -..!all ",- '1. IiiIIDf . · .......w.... ., till ...... t. _f19_':-~ "to&... r:L......~ "I'd Jl' L CIl....... == II ......, ..._-:'.:\::.~':,~~""~"'Iato""'..... " . "'~rI Nl . · · "WI.lIb... (Ii) IIloD lOt II'PI7 ... ...... _... .... ~ WIIlIac.... ....... ..,..... II ~ . 'tq 01......... ftiIIlar II ....W ~ R' II.' ... ~ "....,. 'f. .. ., ....1..1. .;-. .. un. . ~ .....1NI. Co ... . I.) - .......,.... ....-...... 1IIl" .... "-(0).._ ..._....... I - .... I . . -... _ _ ......... .-........; - ~ - flO. -- .. ...... . ... . ........ -...--Ool-lt,),..........- ... "ttl.. . ...."1. .......__ . - '!t 1:1' ..,.Ao-' .... ..... .... - -.......................... ..., .... - .... ... ................... . .., _. .. .... ..... .. ... ..... . . fIO'I* .... .... .' . ....., III ~;:-~............. .~...._............ ........ - - . lor . ..... _' ........ . ..... .. ....""" CJ) - .......101-..... ,... _ ...... t , L- ...... ..... ~ ...., ...... lor ~ ." _ .. .._.....,.-....... - - -......... . m ....._ - .... ...... .............. ..... CIoIoio -.. Low CAlf. IIIIII.ItII) _ oLi,.. 1ft. III c.AM m..' . . & ... -...... ...,..,-, .' _".a.,.. .._...,.s:-..~.- ..... ... ... " ....... - ...... .......~ .. ..-.-- ... .' ..... - -. ... t.: ..... . DIoLltB)., aLIflr.III. III ~ -If" .'. .....- ,-. ...._ 'I.... ~ .. ~. ,. .~. '~ . . . . A ~~'~~.. ~ =,., :A.~ ~~_os; 1Ic:.-:.~"'.a.. . ~~ ~ ~ .. ~ ...,..... aI!feaod. IIloD ... ~ ..., ___~~.4'" .. ~ - -lid 1Ile .:;,; ~n............ 1Ile ......1). aa.a.I., ., ... ~ __ C'l:'......,...... "", .. .... ir...l........ ".. _4L~... ~. tIl ~.. -- m~.!: ~ In. ""'1IIU!IPl. 1IIaII.. .. --.,. ~ .. ~ "'1iIr. .....~.~ ".. JIll' ~_~ _......,.. ~.,............ ...,... "'" ... .........lil - -...... .... - ., at .......~. ii;.-ui. It .,. '" aatIIII .... ~ .. .... ..... '" tit . . "-" I6aII .. - .... ftIIa lid I ..~ .....,.,...... ~ ~.lIiIa = ~~~~IIloDIIIIIl}a.c~t:~~...4L.. _j ...~. , ......~.._,,~. ~. '+-/, '. . :7r..~.?} ,- f' . ..,...-1"'~..,1.) t--e> '!I:f,/ . .. ... ... - ~ -- -......--- ~ - ~ - - --- - ~ ----- ! -- wuw~ CODE - ...~... .- .. .... .... . --..- ..-........... , . I~.'. _u ......._ ..."..... . L'.-"' Ctmlll .~:z:;. ..r-- .".. . 1_.1. r'. . .. tr.... tI) '" .... ..,16aII ~ _ tL..... . .1 ~-.:.= IW ~-= m: ~'''' ::.."T.....,art ~bl.;____~ f} . ..,-. . '-.~"I - ..........,. -. ... . . .... .... . ~...... . ...... . - ".. ....... . ..... ..... ,_... ,. ~ I. fIl.... \:~ ~.= ~.. jail I .... t Ifr~~~~=: _nab" -:;. lid. ..., ~ ~':-t ;-..... ~ UaII It........ .. ~tit........... :. ..-.... tIIat .. .,u:.y, iibaItaI.......llnllr ..... .. ....J:'........ .';; =u....l!'... wi _ ! =.. wwNw.."."... I r ...... .. ReI ...... 11 _...~....... ~ .- tl h ~ Ia _""1..;. ftt\. ~~~ ~ __"eM f -. . - - .' ( { ~y--~ aDDS - J ~ ..... "II "...... ., a . · -. _.....t..t... .. .. 1M -.oil. ~...tIJ. ... ~~ ~...~ III ~ r-.. ~ ........ ... pile :':::'"i1'.1 t 6tl ".... '1118. .. . I.) . .... "....... ~I' ( ..... ...... . .. " " , -- .,...... " .... . - ..... . JI\ -...._. I.ns~., .. - ~. Mo&.-........ ~ "C:: I "'1"'> >>D ~, 1M. m. ,,- . "CIOY.CWo'" 1.~ ._........__ ..: == .. ...........-. ---"-=-~":.= ~"",>>=,c:a... "I. I" ClII',," "'. ... . . '1~".. ...... _ -:. ~~""'1Io., ~ =-: ~~~ - ., ::: .....d...d Iorlle~~ ., 1M JIl!b :' ~.dod "... _4Il:.d ......-tJ. ~ ...... I.ZUllO). aIIaIl ~ t ""'iiiiii{ ..... aTlIii"'ii" or- ~" .... ....,..~_. 1. t"". . rcn=: ,~et!ll ~ . _III ftlcb ==~~ .,7J u:: ~ .... .... .1 ." ( ',II ... .. .... ... -.... . ~ . I "'.-.- - . .- ... -~--ur CODE - -.f- .. "" . ...... .. .. .",....-.-...- , ............. 17117.J -~T _.1117. - '. '0 ,........ , --....... ...- ... '0 CIIr"...... (I"'J UI ~. taa. .CoAM......~__..II1~._ , · -... ..' '" ... .... 'IJ L I . ... - , . ~ fte ......, ..........., _ ..... 181ft.,........... .. 0 . -.I _ ... ~.O~ 0 . _ --v~ .) ~ .........4} IW.. J. .......... LL. .. "'BoO ~ ., 1M __. !I' . I!I!O ~ ~ IW .. po_ UIIIPlll'IIaaItr It. .;! ~.:.. ,1IIrIjii ;u~~ ~~~ -L.~~I~:i. ~\':a~~. 'sr.~~"'~ ~=IN., -;;:~ _... -UOJ . . 0 . -.... ... ...... .... -.. .- . ". .. "" 0 ..... .. _ _ "..... .,. ..... . .... ".. ......... ... -- -..-- . , . · ~~......., ., &Q. .,... u.& ... .. U1. . , . · _...,.. . "'" .. l> ...... .. lilt ti --= ..... lilt ..... III Prior II ~ a MOhrlioa " ~ ......t ., .... ''''f.llOl .., "'lIu ~liNiou lor 11M Mq1lillUo~ of.., ...~ ~, PI!bIic -titr IW tIlUIiIIlu -=t -MIa It ..lle..' 10 .. jut -.,....... lIlIrItor. W .... .If(~ lilt ...,. __ "'..... IDiCij'lllN lilt Jll'OJlIrQ lor lilt IlaII -=t 10 IOlIb!ioW, ..... lilt ..., !IUDDt .. -Yd trIlb IIuoAlbIe ~DCle. fte ott., "'1 .. ~ IIPOD ... IICIoIacIq floIT. lall&llioa " lilt titer .,1Ucvlioa of. -lNcC of al!llUllloa . ~ of a -Mioa '" I1l;r _ ~ II ao _I IIlII/ ~ IDout" ....IMD tilt tUlle -!Iln Ifi ..11 JP;:'." "'1M lair......... '" 1M JII'Oputj. AIl,,,, II or ...... ... lair -.rut ..,... .., "-I) lID .. Mqa/rII JriOI' II Ulo .to "ot ~~ IIUMd ., ... tUlle "'rr~. lot lor trIlIcIl tilt ~ II MIll!hcl. or ., 1M IIbliboocl "'t ... JIII'OIIlutJ lIrOIIIcI .. Mqlilrld lor JI!! -fr). '~I,"'''''''1 ... II ~~"'I:.. tIotl WfWii &IIi ""-"10 -lnI of'" ..., -1IiIlIIu1, oWl .. .......~ AD lilt -n-..llft lor 1M 1I.r-.tJ. fte..... -*71W JIIOride 1M __"'" fI'DIlI.rl1 II .. l!IlIu.! trltA · .... ......t 0( lad ~ " 1M 6uII lor. 1M -=t It 1Ol&b1iaW u lait 'I .~-.lioa. ~ lilt r:1....l> .... II .... ~ I , ......W f1!.....~ .., -tIIu ao ..,. tIau Ioar..... lIIlIfI. ... tr'd wii.-:-' .. "'s.:" iIIoW 10 --- alDpJ "'&Ill ......., !IPl!D trIlIcIl lilt III. II lilt t -r.'... lor ... No! "-1) MIl""'" .. ...~ ., _ ....... ~": .. ~...... . . _ 1 L - '''''tl .._ _. /6.-J<{ . -., " .... -...... -....- . .~. ...... .. . M --- 0- . '- . '. . 71.701 eot-_W""".ft-t&- CDDI f t . ; ...~ I ...... -..,.... .::;...;....:..j>.. ~:r...;..:::;~. fir......... __ .., fir .., " . ........ _...... .. ... .....v~ ~~..~-...."'.- __fl_. ........_~_ . - .... fir ...:... ..... ___ . . .... --.. .. ............_~.. ..... . .. fI... ..... _ =. ....... "-"''''~III''-.. III.. .... - . - e . ............__.. ...... .... J .." -.... _ " _e. ........... ." . _~......_~ J>.. ....-. '. . ..... fI........ _ .......__ -."~-CWoflOril'-'IIUO.41Q. .. . ~ rI.....a" .. . A.. . .. ... _ .... .. - .. ... -. - CWo fI 0riI ... -. U4WQ. I , I . L .-.. _.... A__ _ '. ._. ..... - .. ..... ., - .... .. ...... . ~ .......,. .. J .........fI-,. car, fila ... .. CIIw Mo W_ ClI. (Aff. 1111& 811) m~. _.. CA.IlI ... a.., e ~. -.. . fI............~ . 1IrlIIlioo_.,.,...:. . fI_.......: . ~ fI _.. .. ..... .., _ =::.. .... c:' .:="...... ~-= w_ ClI. (Aff. I ....1117) m ~. _ . CA.IlI as. .....,........,~......IMIIJ a.. ........ - - - - ~....... .. ., -....... __..., r... _.... -,.. ........1llII17.... _ _ ,... I .. ... -.... car, fila ... .. CIIw o.a. w_ ClI. """ 11II&11I7)m~, _III CA.IlI ... 'If .,......,.....,.,_ J ._ .., _. .,.. ... .., , . .., 111#>>." fI..... I fl.'" __... ....,.,. - -..... -...- -....,.. -- . '... fI-, .., .... .. - car,.., &. ~ " ftooI (ItU) 1.1 c.La,Ir, lit. IG CA.IlI _ . . . .... ..,...... .-.. . ,tin... '!' . e. 'I"; e .. . ~. ~ '-.: .... it--r- L ..... ......, - --...... fIr~_ ~ " "':J."" - ~ ......., - .,..~. ........ 'J . - .. - - .. ............ -. -... ,fin.'. .& l......... ., ...... ... ~, . 0 e JlI' b ., rJ r 1. ~ .. ., ftllt... MqUltioa fit -'7 . ..... fit. = -w ..... ... ___ .... .. ... . -. - IDDdiiioD U II _lftuee .. 1 -"'t. ... .... -lItr aWl ""'" .. . . . Mq. .... e.,. . II~ If tM _ .. .... ' ". . ~"k~~'i.~ ~-_. u.,~.. .......... t UJ .. '. ( .< - ....... -..,.... -- .- ...... . ..... .-....... , .... .... ..,.. ....... ...... . - .. .. --- till........... ..,~. 'fin'" .....I~ '" -.,.... .. ti..._ "f!I!IINIln ., . . W All........ .... ... ..... .. :t;.: .. ~ .. l ~ ~ .... ........ . -. llIa . .,................. ..... ..... "~I ........ r u . .... ... · · · ~ MIl __1IaM ..... ....~ t of. . I .. UIuiiiIii ~.. J ,... . . ". . . .1 If~... 111'1.1' tI), willi...............,................ -- ~-.. ...... .. -.... 1................. aflW.1 . . - . ......... .IednI..... . J} ./ (rl- . t., ......1110. .. sur. .. _. II; f' . 1_. & .. t a) &:, ~ .? . . n _... .1 . - . .., '...... - . .. ..,. ... ---- .- ! . .. --- ---- ---- ww.~ClOn' . . .. If...... . . ..,. I a. - "'" r , . .. ..~fI_fl~'" -.... . ... ......, .. . . .....,. ..,. .... - ,-. .....,... '... 111110 r4IdV ....... .,. ii C't::l.~m CD =t:.:::....~ . ~lllo~-t~M =:,...a: =r........ {. . ~.,............. UIO, ~ .....,...... . - " ......... L _ '"'*iII-...... .::....t.. ..... . ..... -. . ma." . ..~- .......,- tal If. .-d.... II ....... ~ .. _.dolllae ".t~.::... ~E.~n~tic~":= ... ud tilt ....... u.-t .1IcdDD tIlL r- ... Dl'" -=. ~.:rr~ ~~wW*"~' . . ..,..... ,.., .. .. I . -' - .. r" . tt~ ,un. . ""!:~~ =-~ .lS.~If..-2'."~ -' eof_ .... ,,1. .._~.... ..,.,......... ., ... ....,. I 1_1' ~ ....... c:;= ....- .1 At .. .. of:::'L ;; 8IlIfJ ... r . ...- Cll ftI .... ...,.. .... .......'"'. . 1 ~ .-- .. " .... IIIlf .. . . ...., ., .... .~ .. ... , 11 I...... -j - .. - '. ( 10,.---"" CODE · l . . -...... ..... - . ,. ..... ! "l...... ~ -, ....... . ....:;. ~ ~::-..:, I~ .. -... C4Ie ... :...........,.. . 1 ..,... .. . .,-...~... . ., ~.' .. .... ..., - .-....... ~.....~ ~ - -.,.........- . "'1117) lit -..... -. .. . ......~....... ~ ._-...,~_. .. ..... ....."....... '!i!'.. I~.......- ." J _ ".. ... .. .. CIllo w_ I17)m~.-. IIIC4Ie... ., ...... fI"_ .., ..,. .,.. .. ., '.... - - ...... ._~-...- -- .....,,-, .... "'oJ"..........._ . & C4Ie ... . '.. "'R fI .. -wu .... III iIIcIlI oNe IatIlir Mall lit. .. . . · ~~!~ti:~~ . . ... In .. ............. ...~ r all&D.. III ,....IL_ fl.. . I .. Cliiiiiilij .., ....... ...... . .... ... M.~. . . . . :J . lit. 'IIIIa.. · I - ( , . , , , , . I . . ---_.. . . - -... ...-- eo. ~~ CODE . . .......... - ." . ...... ' '.' ., *.............~~"r ~ ...-. ~-....,..~ 4....... ~ · .... - ..... ............... AI- ~ .. .. ... III cq,.. 'n. 101 C4JI II. & - . .. .~ ........,II!iIJJIlIIoa....._ -!.... . - ..... ..... ... ... ...... ... .....-, . ...- ....&............ . . . -. .... fI.... . ............. . jt) Ho...,.. IIU...., ~.... ~l/~~1.~"~ ~~-~~....lfOOlJfllltrWJD.fIt~..... ~ cw.. .....1IJiI; ....:.a:;..~~ 1n,"U ~ ""'.... ....lIDolJ fI ,-' .'-.flaI.. -t" _ -fIoa_~ '. . 61Ho~ ...IWJ....* .._.. .......... :;''r:rIld''':a7.~......t.~ '\: =- .....-:.t, ';;':.~ ":;..~ (1- . '....... '.... .. WO. f 1.) , .. ........ . L _. ......... . -.. .. - ~.......--...,. -... " ..4......._..... ...... ..... .... ""'I" CWo ,. ~; .. . ... ...........,.. - ~ -.... ~. . . --, ..... -- .....,.. c:.u QL) _ till,,,, -. .117... 'w '" -- .. -....~ I.... . _ -. -', ". .. tt) II. -........ It ..,.., ... .... a.--. _ fI... cw. flta.a J'l ,_ _' IllIac.. .aeqlllllrioa fIt"-r- ~.., __t...... ... ... .... IIllaarW ., t.~.. .. aeqlliN ... JI-..-~" __1-' aequ.... JI-r-b" ............ __ .tCk..lw. .fJllftO~ IMII JI'09idt "'lioJl ~ ....ru. "'1Il&II-.l. .., fit... ~.. Nnlred Ii"li IUde b ... IDtItitJ ""lIIIlI .. ... ..... .. fit... ~ III IW!l"I!l7 wflIi IIIiI tIlIpltP IIl4f ... 1"idt1iDtt ....... ., ... - ..... fI D_""" ......... LItir""-, J III ~ .--1....... ,. . .. ... :~ .. ..., Al ftIJ ..... ... - 1IlPI1 .. ..... .... .... .. ..... ..:... ,... . .. fIt.inltlt . f - :lD& wftIa ..... fOOl flit aw....; I It PIut 1 fllNIIIiIiD f fI... hilic 11lIIiliJI cw. . .. ,uIie _titlIo ..... .. .... ...... ... ....... . (1 . .'.. ..... ..., .. .. f 11.) . · fin. ." .. fI.....~ - - ..tor...... - L.... .. ......, ft.l1llt ~Ul~~S!!lI ~ 1iD!iMd1w....~aWI_ _17 .. · ~ or · \ II C~~ __, JI'IPIItr IOId It - 1.IIc.D · ....art . . "-v ..... '!lid ......t .. Mut ... ir ~ ", .lIo.lt... ..-roo1> ...., fit................ It *":-~ :e.~""'. II - Ii ~ ~ It~ ,:..~ ~-=..~~ ~It~ Me ;-.:..:;. ::: L ~ ., i ~-==, .. It .. IIrItr&I ,... .. Ill""''' III ... ~ -l ~ _.~ 10"'-'- ~':..~~~Jtlorlllt~;.:r.u--~~.! r-~"-""fIt.-.J_ --...-....._ _1__. . __ ....... ....... .. I -.... ..... ~ .. .. ....... 1117 fI... a.a ClIdt. . '. .1 At ... .. fI = ..air. .. ........ ..,.;...... . r," fIla........ aWl ..., ... eo. ~..... ..... fI.. ..-...,:. .' . OJ fto .... ..,.. ..... tor ... . , . I .. '" _ ~.... ..tI... _ .. .. I '" _ Ii>-. :. . . '. ..., r' "'- ,. ..... - .._.... J . lit..... ........ ~ '"_Ii>- .....~..... '..t, ,. . . . ." c,ww .. ..... '"IN. .. 1M, f I.... . .Iir'" . ....... -. f 1.) . . - -. ~ - ~ - r.. III' 1._ - . ......0 111 . JI:<j!p .- . - . ~ '..- ... '7177 .f COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item J 7 ITEM TITLE: Meeting Date 4/7/92 Report: American Youth Hostels' request to conduct a bicycle tour Director of Parks & Recreati~ f City Manager V (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No_x...) SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: The San Diego Council American Youth Hostels is requesting permission to conduct the Annual American Youth Hostels (AYH) International Bicycle Tour on Sunday, April 12, 1992. RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the request subject to staff conditions. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: The American Youth Hostels is requesting permission to conduct their Sixth Annual International Bicycle Tour on Sunday, April 12, 1992. The ride is scheduled to start at 8:00 a.m. from the Bayside Park parking lot, and will travel south on Bay Boulevard toward the San Ysidro border crossing. After touring in Mexico, the ride will re-enter the U. S. at the Otay Mesa checkpoint, and will follow Otay Valley Road and Main Street west to Bay Boulevard and back to Bayside Park. The sponsor is expecting approximately 1,000 riders to participate. The sponsor will be utilizing the support services of Southwest React Teams (CB radio) and the American Red Cross Safety services. There will be ride marshals at several rest areas along the route, as well as mounted officials supervising the riders. The sponsor will be providing portable toilets, and is coordinating requests for approval with other affected agencies including Rohr Industries. The San Diego Unified Port District has approved the event. Participant parking will be handled at the Rohr Industries' parking lots. This event has been conducted for the past several years with no problems reported. The Police Department, Public Works Department, and the Risk Manager have reviewed the request and concur with the recommendation. Approval should be subject to the following conditions: 1. Receipt of a copy of the insurance certificate for $5 million general liability naming the City as additional insured. 2. Receipt of a hold harmless agreement signed by the sponsor. 17"'/ Page 2 .Itetll I 7 Meeting Date 4/7/92 3. Confirmation of Port District approval of the event. 4. Provision of adequate crowd and traffic control for the event at sponsor's expense. 5. Clean-up of any litter created by the event. FISCAL IMPACT: Other than administrative costs incurred in processing this request, there is no direct fiscal impact to the City. PC/F20 /7'~ COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT I telll Ill" Meeting Date 4/7/92 , ITEM TITLE: Report: Bonita Roadrunners' request to conduct a 10K road race SUBMITTED BY: Director of Parks & Recreation~ REVIEWED BY: City Managerfl (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No-X-) The Bonita Roadrunners, Inc. is requesting permission to stage a 5K and a 10K road race around Rohr Park on Saturday, May 23, 1992. RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the request, subject to staff conditions. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: The Bonita Roadrunners, Inc. a non-profit public benefit corporation has requested permission to conduct their Eighth Annual 5K and 10K road race on Saturday, May 23, 1992, around Rohr Park (see Attachment "A"). The 5K run is scheduled to start at 7:30 a.m. and the 10K at 8:00 a.m. The sponsor anticipates approximately 450-500 participants. This race is an annual event, and no problems have occurred in the past. The sponsor will reserve a picnic shelter at Rohr Park for use during pre-race registration and post race award activities. In addition, the sponsor has requested that the Park Ranger open the east gate to Rohr Park earlier than normal on race day to facilitate registration and race organization. The sponsor will pay all Park Ranger staff costs associated with the event. The race will not impact the renovation work at Rohr Park. Approval of the race shall be subject to the following staff conditions: 1. Provision of evidence of general liability insurance in the amount of $1 million in the form of a certificate of insurance and policy endorsement which names the City as additional insured. The Risk Manager concurs with the insurance limits noted in this condition. 2. Execution of a hold harmless agreement. 3. Provision of adequate traffic control, along the entire race course, OS determined by the Police Department. The race sponsor will be responsible for all costs of traffic control, including supplies and services. 4. Provision of adequate park ranger supervision, at the sponsor's expense. 5. Clean-up of any litter created by the event. FISCAL IMPACT: All by the race sponsor. administrative costs required police and Direct fiscal impact incurred in processing park ranger staff costs will be paId to the City is limited to the this request. WPC 1735R /8"-/ tJ) Q! U) 2 2 :;) ~ A c:r & ~ - 2' ~ b "2 cr <r~ l-ti -~ :z 2~ p85 \!) , - -~// ~ lil ~ ui ~ @ E 0 ~ 1 to 40 ~... t.Io ':2 cr; iii '3 re Ct~. oQ ~ E' .,.. I$'(\'?I~ :I: \9 ey..<!. @@(j) '~ E ~ o - ... E X III IS-l {j ~ ~ A 3 :z cr ::> ~_ }-u ~~ ri-c.o I.!) ^; ~ ~~, . ~~.... :J~l'03 ~.JA well w~ ~~lJl E ~ -:rZ; N @CIo 2 U I-""S , I- :3 ~ @ 3 ~ ,>-' ~ bt ,'- _ .J of: '" l1J "'.^"""o ~ 3 ';> '2 UI CI' .J \!}-:T" -q., u) ~ ti 8(;;~30~ct~ '1Il EW~A:Z <+"7 '\9f! " u../H o ~ CII CIa '<J <:sc .~a:: ill\!) W ~ '3 }-' w u.i a ~ W E:J~f:t ~~l:i: \9 ~ ~ ~' J. l1i ~ ~ ~ ::> e. ' ... ':2 i.caw~~e@@& qCj.-% 0,% % ~ % .. ~ 0 UJ :It I-llilll ~3uj lLi j\J ~ ~ I/) . III <=I::E'2.fEEEt'4 ~ <<l ~ W 1O \9 \9. ~~ @)8@@@@@~ COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Itell /9 REVIEWED BY: Meeting Date 4/7/92 Publ ic Hearing: PCM-92-05 - Consideration of an amendment to the Rancho Del Rey Employment Park Design Guidelines - Rancho Del Rey Partnership Ord i nance ,;...5'(// Adopt i ng an amendment to the Rancho Del Rey Employment Park Design Guidelines Director of Planning~~ City Manage~" (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No...l...> The app 1 i cat ion fil ed by Rancho Del Rey Partnersh i p (McMill in) proposes to amend the design guidelines adopted by the City for the Rancho Del Rey Emp 1 oyment Park to increase the all owab 1 e number and size of wall mounted signs and the size of freestanding signs provided certain findings contained in the amended guidelines are met. ITEM TITLE: SUBMITTED BY: The Envi ronmental Revi ew Coordi nator has determi ned that the proposal is a Class IIa exemption from environmental review. RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the ordinance amending the Rancho Del Rey Employment Park Design Guidelines. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: On January 13, 1992, the Design Review Committee by unanimous vote endorsed the proposed amendment and forwarded a positive recommendation to the Planning Commission. On February 12, 1992, the Planning Commission, by a vote of 7-0 and in accordance with Resol ut ion PCM-92-05 recommended that the Ci ty Council adopt the amendment as requested by the applicant. DISCUSSION: The Rancho Del Rey Employment Park consists of approximately 27 lots, some of which have been developed. The original park concept was designed for mostly light industrial users, offices and very limited service-oriented establishments. However, as the employment park evolves, more commercial oriented businesses may be built within the park. Consequently, the developer finds the need to modify the business identification criteria to allow greater flexibility for the different types of establishments expected to be located within the park. The proposed increase in sign area and number of signs allowed per building,as shown in the following table, are still within the maximum allowed within a comparable zone IL (limited industrial zone). However, because the Rancho Del Rey industrial compl ex is separated from East "W Street by an open space parcel, and because there is no direct access to individual parcels from this street, this edge of the industrial complex is considered the rear or side, depending on the lot orientation. Consequently, signage facing "H" Street, under a traditional light industrial zone could not be permitted unless the building faces a driveway or parking for 5 cars or more in between. The proposed amendment would allow signage facing "H" Street even if the buildings do not face parking or provide a driveway. 1'1--/ Page Z, Itell 1'1 Meeting Date 4/7/9Z The proposed amendment also offers a number of fi nd i ngs to be used as the basis to allow larger than authorized signs. Graphic illustration depicting acceptable and unacceptable conditions as well as graphic definitions of some of the language used are included as well. Staff finds the proposed amendment acceptable and recommends approval as presented. The proposed design guidelines amendment is summarized as follows: WALL MOUNTED SIGNS Current Guidelines Allowable sign area 50 sq. ft. ProDosed Chanaes 1 sq. ft. per lin. ft. of building frontage, or 15% of building face, or 100 sq. ft., whichever is less. However, ORC may increase sign area up to 150 sq. ft. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Allowable number of signs = One sign per building facing dedicated street One sign on each side of the building facing a dedicated street, driveway, parking area and East H Street. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Signs illumination Internally or externally illuminated signs No change ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DETACHED SIGNS (FREESTANDING) One sign per street frontage No change ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sign area allowed 50 sq. ft. per side No change ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORC - mav-not increase allowable sign area Sign area mav be increased with ORC approva 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PUBLIC INPUT A letter to the Planning Commission, opposing the proposed amendment, was received after the hearing and is attached for your information. FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable. WPC OZ3Zp 17-,2, ORDINANCE NO. ..25''' I An ordinance of the City of Chu1a Vista Vista amending the Rancho Del Rey employment park design guidelines adopted by the City pursuant to Ordinance No. 2244 WHEREAS, this app1 ication requested an increase in the allowable sign area from 50 to 100 sq. ft. and the number of permitted wall mounted signs from one facing street to one for each side of the building including building sides facing East H Street. The proposed amendment also grants discretionary authorization to the Design Review Conunittee to increase wall mounted and freestanding sign areas providing certain findings contained in the amended guidelines are met, and WHEREAS, the Environmental Review coordinator determined that the proposal was exempt from environmental review as a Class lla, and WHEREAS, the Planning Conunission and the Design Review Conunittee. At their public hearings on these matters held February 12, 1992, and January 13, 1992 respectively, unanimously reconunended the adoption of a an ordinance amending the Rancho Del Rey Employment Park Design Guidelines as requested by the applicant. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA DOES ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section I That the Design Guidelines as contained in ordinance 2244 are amended to read as shown in exhibit A. Section II This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirty-first day from and after its adoption. Robert A. Leiter, Director Planning Department ~ Presented By ~ Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney WPC 0240p 19 -.3 /1'1-1 (. :~~~ .J ~~AX~~ NORTH ( P~fo1-1~.~'). ~~~<1 . " .;' . , l.' J ,/iIo:' EXHIBIT A , ' 81... I. aAMCBO DZL .ZY KKPLOYKIMT .aax DE.IO. QVIDZLI.Z. ..9in p. 70 , ' [I. D.~.eh.d siern. o D.t.ch.d bu. in... id.ntitic.tion .i9n. .hould be limit.d to the displ.y ot the n.m. .nd/or .ymbol ot the busin... or bu. in..... occupying the .it.. No .....;.. or adv.rti.in; ot any kind includin;, but not limit.d to: adv.rtisin9 ot product., ..rvic.., or job op.nin;. .hould be p.rmitt.d. o No more th.n on. d.t.ch.d bu. in... id.ntitic.tion .i;n should b. p.rmitt.d on .ach str..t trontalil. ot a d.v.lopm.nt parc.l. o No d.t.ch.d busin... identificction sign .hould .xc.ed a .i;n ar.. w~i.~ ie 'he l...er ot 50 .qu.r. t..t p.r .id. er 'h. .aNi.uK 8tlft are. ,...i".. ~y 'fte 1...1 ,e~.rftift' a~'h.rity. The maximu~ sian area maY be increased~~Drova~ if the Des ion ReVle... Committee. The .ign .rea fi""'d'8fined .. the .rea of the surf.ce or surfaces which display letter. or symbols id.ntifyin; the bu.in.ss or bu. in..... occupy in; the sit., or when the .i;n i. ot treest.ndin; letter., the .in;le rect.n;u- l.r .r.. which tully encloses .11 lett.rs or symbo18 id.ntify- in; the business or businesses occupying the .ite. The .i;n .re. .hould not include the base or pedestal to which the .i;n is mounted. o All detached business identification sign. should b. p.rm.nent ";round" type signs and .hould not .xc..d . height ot 5 teet '.bov. the underlying tinish grade. o All detached busin.ss identitic.tion .i;ns .hould be ot .uch mat.rial. .nd d..i;n to be compatibl. with .nd complim.ntary to the on-site design concept .. 10.11 a. l.nd.c.pe .nd phy.ic.l d..i;n f.atur... . o D.t.ch.d bu.ine.. id.ntification sign. m.y be illumin.t.d by continuous .nd unitorm int.rnal illumination, back-lililhting, or IjIround li;hting. No tlashinljl or moving light. will b. p.rmitted. No unprotect.d lamp. providing .i;n illumin.tion .hould be directly vi.ibl. when viewed from any angle trom . dist.nce ot 20 te.t or mor.. No si;n illumin.tion .hould c..t . 91.r. which will be vi.ible from any .tre.t or acce.. drive. o Loc.tion: D.t.ch.d business identification .ign. .u.t be located within 20 teet ot . trontin; .tre.t and the access driv., but should not exceed 30 inches in height wh.n loc.ted in the tiret 10 teet .djacent to .cce.. drive clo.e.t to the etreet. , 0211"'1) 1 /9- d, . . ., (i I Buildina Moun~.d Sian. o Building mount.d bu. in... or building id.ntification .iqn. should be limit.d to the di.play of the buildinq name or the name and/or symbol of the bu.in.s. occupyinq the .it.. No m...aq. or adverti.ing of any kind includinq, but not limit.d to: adv.rtiainq of product., ..rvic.., or job op.ning. .hould be p.rmitt.d. o Bu.in... or building id.ntification sign. may be mount.d to any v.rtical surfac. of a building or building a..ociat.d wall, provid.d auch sign. app.ar a. an int.gral part of the ov.rall archit.ctural and sit. d..ign concept. o No more than one building mount.d .ign .hou1d be permitted ... 2D .ach .'raa' fraft'.'. af a .ava1a,.aft' ,areal ~ e~i~;j~~~*~~~~~ aaareaate area of a~l o T~a "',ft ara. af buildinq mount.d busine.. or building idantification .ign. ~~ .~l~~U~~~ ~~ !~~e~~ ~~: t~m'n~oo c e:r oJ.rJ.nuo f:;:;a ;~ .r ~ Ill.)!' ft.' eNeaes the le8se~ ef i9 ..ware f.., 81" _he aaX1R\l;lm 8wildi", aewJl\ted 81'1\ a:rea ,erai',.. lay 'he le.a1 ~~~~~!t ~:~~rq;~:. lal;i~ OS~i~zie~~~ l~Vt\~~ ?:i~~~~~~~:w~!~~:H 1iJ.lowlna crlterla:. ... ~~: ~~~~'iS~~~~aC';ieth :g: ~~~~:~~u~~lt~ean"t.oro~ ~~ ~ . !~;s:ff~~~~1:i;:::~~n o:u;~a;n5~ ~i~.;'I~:{'i~~a ~ Th. building mounted sign area is d.fin.d a. the araa of tha surfac. or surfac.. which di.play lettar. or symbol. id.ntify- inq the busin... or bu.in...e. occupyinq the sit., or when the .ign i. of freestandinq letter., the sinq1e r.ctangu1ar area which fully enc1o... all 1ett.rs or .ymbo1. id.ntifyinq the bu. in... or bu. in..... occupying the .ite. CI2/I"'I) 2 /9-'1 . .,.' L i'" . -' ,..... ,. ,,;i.r, o Building mounted busine.s should not extend beyond ,ra~ft. fl..~. ' or building ~. siqns ~he roofl\n1 A.-a ~k. o Building mounted busine.. or building identification si;ns may be illuminated by internal illumination or backlightinq provided that the color and intensity of such lighting appears as an inteqral part of the overall architectural and site design concept. (all other guidelines remain unchanged) ','j".' .l,r:, ,-_;~ _. :. ':'- ~ . I' r",.,. ;' ~ '- ~.- ;~. , . ~ " -"\ -':'-\' -I'" '/;, ~;.~ ~~. ..' '..,-'-' '!\ ~ . ,''; '1,'.. -'.' ~ ;.\: '. ";, ...., -;i' ... -.' ,', ',-" , .- ;! . I. . ,"" ,.', '. :... . ., ..t., ,? ", ..... , .~ . ", ..,1' ,r". Cf . :: . .,.. "i - . <" -',~,i :::-~foo, . f,~ :t~r~;.tJ:/~~'~ 0\",' '-:"6' , ..... '," , , .to.:. ") . _ OJIIIIJI) 3 /'-'5 "~--- .' "'.. Building Mounted Signage ;',~'~;.it';, " ; . . "';..?:. ;'~ ...~ r · /44X!HII!1 €f~ 1~()A16 ~ /irfr If'/' ~ /tJJr ~ tpltcr/tl7 #r ~r. If lUar~ ~ ~ 140 ~ {ef!!1... W~ /:' ~ ' · /'N6 tJ,(t{J/1J!!? ~ ~~ ~ ~ IH1 /~ ~ ,p.7f6N4f~ ~ DOODCD o 00 DO 00 .... DO , 11te.~ #f AU- /!IIIt(1;~ ffOflN{l:p 1Mi~ ~I'" /!UtaA}6 rFf~/J ~ ~ A- tll&e 'lIP ~ ~ ~~ ~-#fe3;I:5ItWS ~ ~p~ ':;d,.w A#!T tiXce87-#LM:WMw.{ /ML{)/AJt; f/tXIt ~ Nfit rD -Mil/tV .Jr-11r't't" {:Uu:rA)6 fflC6 ~1qtJ /eVlW 0tJ1-lft1i!lE M ~ve If ti6fU ~ l(7tJ Plft: /tit1CIt ~~ ~ eer rontt /A! ~ t?/)u;eu~. (3i06I92) 72 a. j 'I ,. , .. , '. . ',^'~, '. - . - " . . , . 'i \~:.. ~'< 'j'" . ", '.-.~. '~.:. '.~ .. . . . CJI06I92) - .;' '.' -~ ..' . -I~' ~ " .;. Building Mounted Signage lM:XI/1/Iff ~ ~ M t:t(tWdlf8r ~ If~~ ~ tIIltI/IAJG" ~ ~ J: #f tQUJltfJ!7 /7'lC8 (x . r) " IdOtlf*. ... IV/f/~e:r I~ t:-e~~ ~ ...., oaODODDDtJD OOODDtJODDlD 00 >- .} t/#~ If>>r#e " Cr1/t.P/t/lG7 (x) } , AVP/f1 f1IWI)JN ~ 4WI f'/,J(:effenr ef /fI/WIAif? ~5 . ~ 1~~~~1(~ ~1P;,f It~ dftrP 1k . G<I~Jls~ ;:if!:T ~ IA! 72b 19-/0 ': :,: \i,~'. " '. ., , . <<...::F,{ . ! Building Si.gnage Placement and Character ,.... ,'. j. NJ9rV f!1/6Ji'r!!e ... It/I...~ "AU ~/M!'.{tr ~ ~ f"- ~ .~.,.:'I" rr'.... ',' ~:~ _.,~;'r~~','r- ~.~.~ .... .~~ .',..;.;;-';,"">'''''''' ~~ ,-,...r/, .,..c:......,.'....,' ;-"! .1.1" ,,\ ,,;. .,.... .,,< '" ....." J~~'~i~~~li:1t';;!".... . ~iS...;.".." "'it""'" . <>.!~.~i~:,:~;?".. .. I ' .' . flD /I'r Ir/.tIrII ~ /.el7l!1'5 ? 8XTflIII() lJf!1AW 1l/1; 7&f II'" ~ -r*t:tt~ =~~ . 1iJ,.~ .,......,, \ ",,: &I> Iff Ic/JIfAI MIl ~ ? 5X{lfIJP fl!!IW-tk .",. or ~ t1('o/1IlTPIQIAJ4;. " .' './- l~' " . . . .;~., . ! ," ~ ~ tJ!OlI\6e' m-tk lUiPlAJ!7 t:/:)~'1D ~ Ml 1A'1/iitJt-.~ Ilt'pf 11t::' !UIQAP /We~ ~tW~ ~::'1/e /!M,i,v-o.m,. \'OI:N:C:.i r',~'%. 'i~i;"~':; :-';':':1 " ~. i, ll' _1,~1 CJI06I9'1) . ,'1 ~. 72c '- '. "~~' 'J .::;~ "',:j.'lt '. ...;', " /'1""// '.1 .. I.... ..~, . 1..": :~",~;" '. ... '. , .,/~,~- -, ,,'I Ii,'"" .t -. j ':\~~:'-~' Back-Lit Building Signage J.. .;.'" ,- 'i. ~~.,~ . ~;' .~ .~J! ':~~'l. ....J f/JI-IO ~ 1iI/f11 /~{...1JeIfrW6 W::P.-1:- f//:: < ~ tIIfIt ~ t:itifVAlG- 1ftW!;(( /l'exI- 6:'A$ ~ 5}{v#- ~ , \, . ~ 'J,. ' (, t"" Internally-Lit Opaque Building Signage ~~~ M~~- t:tr~. ,,' ,"" - "'''I'''' . ... . ~'4.~~'-li;_ . . """J'_"L ..:, t,' ','i"'~""';"';":1"\' .' '. .........'- ~'-I'of' ! l'l",-; "M:," . '\:',1'~~'~>'t.', ' 'i'~ 'I':' " ',:.:~ . ~. ". ,,).. \'1'IJ", .';-l '. --., \;... 'to .:.hi), ,'''', \,... v~./ :',_"~:~~~" '.'" . Up-Lit Building Signage ~'. .t' '0 , ,~. . 72d , /9-1.2 '. ' . 0/06I9Z) f ,- ~ ~ \ RANCHO DEL REY EMPLOYMENT PARK DESIGN GUIDELINES PROPOSED AMENDMENT J9~/~ i . \.....' ? -ro~. ...d.. \ ,I R~C:~~ ~e.~\- SIGNS IN RANCHO DEL .EY ZKPLOYKEHT PARK DESIGN GUIDELINES Begin p. 70 Detached Sians o Detached business identification signs should be limited to the display of the name and/or symlXll of the business or businesses occupying the site. No messages or advertising of any kind including, but not limited to: advertising of products, services, or job openings should be permitted. o No more than one detached business identification sign should be permitted on each street frontage of a development parcel. o No detached business identificction sign should exceed a sign area v~ieft is ~fte lesser of 50 square feet per side er ~fte aaui.am 811ft area ,ertai".a lay the leea1 ,e~:.r":l,,, alil'l\el'i~y. 1he maximur sian area mav be increased with ADDroval of the Desian Revl.ew Committee.. The sign area is defined as the area of the surface or surfaces which display letters or symbols identifying the business or businesses occupying the site, or when the sign is of freestanding letters, the single rectanqu- lar area which fully encloses all letters or symlXlls identify- ing the business or businesses occupying the site. The sign area should not include the base or pedestal to which the sign is mounted. o All detached business identification signs should be permanent "ground" type signs and should not exceed a height of 5 feet 'above the underlying finish grade. o All detached business identification signs should be of such materials and design to be compatible with and complimentary to the on-site design concept' as well as landscape and physical design features. ' o Detached business identification signs may be illuminated by continuous and uniform internal illumination, back-lighting, or ground lighting. No flashing or moving lights will be permitted. No unprotected lamps providing sign illumination should be directly visible when viewed from any angle from a distance of 20 feet or more. No sign illumination should cast a glare which will be visible from any street or access drive. o Location: Detached business identification signs must be located within 20 feet of a fronting street and the access drive, but should not exceed 30 inches in height when located in the first 10 feet edjacent to access drive closest to the street. OV16I91) 1 '/9--1'/ l Buildina Mounted Sians o Building mounted business or building identification signs should be limited to the display of the building name or the name and/or symbol of the business occupying the site. No message or advertising of any kind including, but not limited to: advertising of products, services, or job openings should be permitted. o Business or building identification signs may be mounted to any vertical surface of a building or building associated wall, provided such signs appear as an integral part of the overall architectural and site design concept. o es v es u con s v du of all Il1i " The s1,1'\ area af building mounted business or building identification signs ee a 0 e he bu ac . v s . ~ .a~. fte~ eueeed \l\e lesssl' af 59 .''tIaI'8 fee' SE' 'the aalllRl1:lRl sliildi"I ae\lPl\ell 8i,,, area ,erai,..1l lay "ke leeal i~mi~Si('#t l!:fi D~,~\~~li~$~:~!i~:H l.&. :~; ~~~~'i,~~~~ac';ietrh i~: :;'~~:~~~~~lth:l:;e~~soro:i~~: -!>u ~ 1 d ~ nll,i. . ;~;s:f~~~~~~~;::~~!~r9t~:~e[~n o:u:::s:;a~xr d~~ .... .l&. ~~f~~.;t3\~~~~~~~~ The building mounted siqn area is defined as the area of the surface or surfaces which display letters or symbols identify- ing the business or businesses occupying the site, or when the sign is of freestanding letters, the single rectangular area which fully encloses all letters or symbols identifying the business or businesses occupying the site. (\2116191) 2 11-1> ~ o Building mounted business or building ~ signs should not extend beyond ~he roofl~ a kel.,k" all eve "ke ,rall". fleer. o Building mounted business or building identification sign. may be illuminated by internal illumination or backlighting provided that the color and intensity of such lighting appears as an integral part of the overall architectural and site design concept. (all other quideline. remain unchanged) ~ ~ . OVI6I91) 3 11..-;/1 Building Mounted Signage · /4ItX!f.WI1 VI~ /~()JJ5 ~ fi(JT ;tr LIMN- /lJJr,f !t'1t{;yt1i!7 41'" ~y. If /?,U/.I:ltP!7 ~ dI'" /00 - ~ rePr... W~~~'" · /WG tJ.(t{)//J!? ~~ t:i~ ~ !~ 4'1/~ ~,f-1ft3 /tfCff~ ~ conDDD DCDDDon ~ .00 .1lte~M #f- AU-- /!'JIIt{?;tf}G f/OflN!CP eot:I~ ~fi,.. ev(ta'~~D# ~ m It ClI&e /!dLP;iP ~ ~ :.~~ O(-~ ~/6WS lIA'1en ~p ) fiW' NJT tiXcc:t:fl-/iL MWMvH tM/..{)/)/6l1t1f/~ ~ ~ rsw/TlW -IY--fJriT CUft.CYAJ6 {?tee .". f)fit:ICfJ ;zeV/w OtJHI1rr/"EE M ~ve If t:t6rlJ ~ f!7o I:tJ t'Jt1ft. /tIfIcIf ~~ ~ eer fi'fflt /1.1 1k- ~ &t/ltJeU/iJ5C5. (3/06192) 72a 19'/7 Building Mounted Signage NAXll1f1ff ~ 15 dfe:>ttWf!' /tift ttr ij~ $PT If /:t1/U7/tfJG" d( /~ ;; If f;t;WI~ ~ ( x . r) ~ Ilot7f*. ... 1t//f/~eI- f~ U'tj:5 o DCl DD DO 000 DtJDDDDODOO 00 ')- ~ tlA/6N-- 1Wrr\!e gf /!X'/tP/tIIG (x) ~ , AVtJ/(l flrt.J[)JM t5P-G 4wJ ,Pj,1::el-feJT ef tf;IW/)Jb ~5 ClDD DO 000 o DO 00 9.90 ,100 1{1J'E.,f!I!lf0pfufM{{~ fWl-/ffft;ye A.5~ ~tr(b ik . ~~~~:e:r~/AI (3/06/92) 72b /9'" /lr Building Signage Placement and Character NJ;iN e<~ at t+lL-:::x~ ~ CVt<J/A$-{I:r~ ~ /lO /I'r /rJ.tJtJ/ t$W terllJ!-5 .p. i5XWP ~/.lJ 1lIiJ" 1l'1' ,r- ~ 1f'-Ikt:ttLO/1J? ~a:J'-#vJ~ kvt6 fI.JfilfIJ Vlt:JJ/t:Jl7.ft>-. It/.- ~ ~ Iff IttuIIJ t:i!W ~ ? B;(fl?IJP fl3'PUo-tt.L 11f'.r ~ ~ ~ /!P(to;4lG /We ftrtaAi!? / ~ fW /hffiSM/- m411ie~ Po fM::l:;~ M1k /!tA'lO/AJ!7 ~1't~7Z' ~e 411/~ I'/v*r -+ ~ !MtQAP (3/06/92) 72c 1'1-/? Back-Lit Building Signage ( ~'( /,ff ~~AlG ~ !feX1- &11$ ,r 5J1/t#- ~ f!li./o~ IIIIth /AIl!:1WIt.-1IMf17IJb W::t-f; :::: Internally-Lit Opaque Building Signage /t'et"f-flu.CU/UfJJe> ~.J) 1~1AJt'I:Ta) M~l.J"r:*- t:rr~. \ ~"<"~- t%;; "Ii' ~ Up-Lit Building Signage (3/06/92) 72d /9.. .,2/} . " .- > ~ c::hM.- RESOLUTION NO. PCM-92-05 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE RANCHO DEL REY EMPLOYMENT PARK SIGN DESIGN GUIDELINES WHEREAS, a duly verified application for an amendment to the Rancho Del Rey Employment Park Sign Design Guidelines was filed with the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista on August 20, 1991, by Rancho Del Rey Partnership, and _- WHEREAS, said application requested an.increase in the allowable sign area from 50 to 100 sq. ft. and the number of permitted wall MOunted signs from one facing street to one for each side of the building including building sides facing East H Street. The proposed amendment also grants discretionary authorization to the Design Review Committee to increase wall mounted and freestanding sign areas providing certain findings contained in the amended guidelines are met, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a hearing on said amendment application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners within 300 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least ten days prior to the hearing, and WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 7:00 p.m., February 12, 1992, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed, and WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator determined that the proposal was exempt from environmental review as a Class lla. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT from the facts presented to the Planning Commission, the Commission has determined that the proposed amendment is consistent wJth the City of Chula Vista General . Plan and that public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice support the sign design guidelines modifications as presented by the applicant. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION recommends the the City Council adopt an ordinance to amend the Rancho Del Rey Sign Design Guidelines subject to the following precise plan development sta~dards: And that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the owners of the property and the City Council. /9-.)./ }. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this February 12, 1992, by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Commissioners Carson, Tugenberg, Fuller, Casillas, Decker, Martin and Tuchscher NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTENTIONS: None ATTEST: N~tJ', p~~ Secr tary PCM920S . ~ .' - 2 - , : -;)l.det, Susan Fuller, /9';;';' d /! ..,.J ./!.;./.'_' Chairperson DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES January 13, 1992 I'I"'~:J (4' .~ ,.-~ -- DESl:GN REV:rEW eoMMYTTEE -6- JANUARY 13. 1992 quideline. for the East H street frontages. committ.. Discu..ion Mem))er Lander. a.ked if there was specific criteria that would qualify tenants for signage on East H street? Mr. Fukuyama .tated that there was not, but that the agqregate signage was limited; therefore, unlimited numbers of tenants would not be able to place signage on this frontage. He added that large number. of multi-tenant sign. were not being advoca'ted by the.e proposed quidelines; rather, they presented the potential for multi-tenant identification if done ta.tefully. Further, approval from the Design Review Committee would be required, as well as from Rancho del Rey's internal design review committee. He pointed out the quidelines were still ' fairly conservative, but conveyed some flexibility for potential tenants who might require some multi-tenant identification. Chair Gilman asked staff if the committe~ needed to .ee the graphics that might be included? She stated that she had no problem with the textual changes, but agreed that qraphics were needed. Mr. Hernandez stated that as this item was going to the Planning Commission next, any changes or the inclusion of graphics could be brought back as an informational item. Member Landers stated that her major concern was that signage be restrained, noting that this was an industrial center and not a commercial area. MSUC (Gilman/Flach) (4-0) to recommend that the proposed amendments be forwarded to the Planning Commission as written, but with the inclusion of graphic illustrations depicting general proportions and building and sign ratios. ...... ,. I ?--~ '/ , . ~ I~' , . , -: l-- ~ I >--" J DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE -5- JANUARY 13. 1992 4. DRC-92-25 Rancho del Rev Emnlovment Park Rancho del Rev Amendment to the Sians section staff pre.entation Associate Planner Luis Hernandez introduced the proposal, which consisted of amendments to the sign section of the Rancho del Rey Employment Park Design Guidelines. He noted that the amendments would allow signage on elevations of the building facing parking, street frontages, or East H Street; additional signage, as well as increased area for signs, would be permitted under the proposed guidelines. The proposed amendments would allow applicants greater flexibility, and , would place requests for additional sign area in the design review track. Mr. Hernandez stated that staff had some concerns about proposed signage on East H Street, and therefore recommended approval of the proposed amendments, with the inclusion of graphic illustrations to clarify the intent of the amendments. He added that the committee's decision on this item would be forwarded as a recommendation to the Planning Commission, and then to the city Council for approval. Committee Ouestions Member Landers asked how the proposed signage compared to commercial signage, noting that these were industrial lots. Mr. Hernandez stated that the requested signage was actually less than that permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. Member Flach asked about concerns with signage along East H Street? Mr. Hernandez responded that the concerns had been primarily directed toward minimizing glare and impacts upon the neighboring residential areas; he stated that the scale of the proposed signage was such that it was really not perceivable by adjacent residential areas. Annlicant ReSDonse Craig Fukuyama of Rancho del Rey Partnership addressed the committee, stating that this item was long in coming. He stated that upon initial approval of these guidelines, the committee had requested greater flexibility in reviewing signage. Additionally, there was a lack of specificity as to authority for approval of signage facing East H street; these amendments would address this. This proposal provided guidance for the committee in approving signs of increased scope and area, while providing greater flexibility for applicants in designing signs. Mr. Fukuyama provided preliminary sketches that had been drawn to convey the types of signs that would be seen as acceptable within the new J9~.2f PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES February 12. 1992 I '-.2~ ] PC Minutes -5- February 12, 1992 ITEM 3: PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-92-o5: CONSIDERATION OF REVISIONS TO THE RANCHO DEL REY EMPLOYMENT PARK DESIGN GUIDELINES - McMillin Communities Associate Planner Hernandez presented the project. The proposal had been presented to the Design Review Committee on January 20, 1992, who endorsed the proposal as presented but with the recommendation that additional graphics be incorporated into the amendment to clarify some of the language in the guidelines. Mr. Hernandez noted that the project was exempt from the environmental review process as Class llA, and staff's recommendation was to adopt a motion recommending approval of the proposed amendment as requested by the applicant. Commissioner Martin, referring to page I-Detached Signs, asked the genesis of meeting more than 50 sq. ft. per sign. Mr. Hernandez answered that buildings in El Rancho del Rey were significantly larger than older buildings seen in commercial zones, and the combination of lots would possibly create more than one tenant with the potential of being accommodated in one freestanding sign. There was no specific limit as to the maximum, but the Design Guidelines were being followed to create appropriate monumentation which resembled the building architecture. Commissioner Casillas asked if there were any guidelines which addressed how large the border around the sign could be. Senior Planner Griffm responded that the entire sign area included the border in the square footage calculation. Commissioner Decker was concerned about signage facing "H" Street, and if it would be considered on an individual basis. Mr. Hernandez stated that in this particular instance, it would be allowed by right and subject to design review. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Craia Fukuyama, representing the applicant, supported staff's recommendation for approval of the request. ~He gave some background as to the signs facing East "H" Street and the language included to provide for sign visibility to East "H" Street. East "H" Street is a scenic highway corridor and much of the landscaping occurring on the slope along East "H" Street, when matured, would block much of the view. Also, the Design Review Committee was very careful and was looking at very strict landscape screening that would eventually screen much of the mass seen along East "H" Street. The intent was to provide minimal opportunity for some visibility; however, the Design Review Committee felt there should be some flexibility, so the Design Guidelines as proposed provided that these exceptions are allowable under given circumstances which the Design Review Committee found appropriate. Commissioner Tugenberg commented that I-L zone allowed for administrative, executive, and financial offices. He suggested the applicant might consider residence inns within the industrial . park. 19~.2? .. PC Minutes -6- February 12, 1992 Commissioner Tuchscher asked if the tenants who were expressing interest were higher-end tenants by comparison as to what would be found in other industrial areas in Chula Vista. Mr. Fukuyama said there was not a market for the office user; but they were finding users that were more owner occupied, less speculative building. Many were businesses already in Chula Vista who had outgrown their facilities. Answering Cominissioner Tuchscher's query, Mr. Fukuyama said exposure to East "H" Street was critical to some of the users, and in some cases could be a deal breaker. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. MS (FullerlTugenbera) to recommend approval of the proposed Rancho del Rey Sign Design Guideline Amendment as requested by the applicant. AMENDMENT TO MOTION: Commissioner Decker moved that the following amendments be made to the Guideline: 1. Part 2, page 2, third bullet, fifth line: "More than one sign per building side may be approved by the Design Review Committee with concurrence of the Planning Commission. " 2. Part 2, page 2, fourth bullet, seventh line: "That the Design Review Committee, with concurrence of the Planning Commission, may approve a sign ..." The motion died for a lack of second. VOTE ON ORIGINAL MOTION: 6-1 (Commi~ioner Decker voted against) ~ ~ 19.';8'" PUBLIC INPUT 19--..29 ., Cily Planning Commission City of Chula Vista. California 276 Fourth Ave. Chula Vista. Ca 91910 RECEIVED l::EJ:< l'j '1':' , . ...Le.' .... PLANNING MR.~DE CHULA VISTA, CA 91910 10F ebruary 1992 Dear Commission Members: ThiS letter is in reference to the hearing to be held on February 12th, regarding the MacMillan Communities request to amend the signage section at the Rancho Del Rey Employment Center. Having been involved with early phases of the SPA process for the Rancho Del Rey project, I feel that the residents of the City of Chula Vista are being taken advantage of. I felt the initial planning process that resulted in the entire Rancho Del Rey project was fair and consisted of a series of compromises that would serve the City of Chula Vista. the MacMillan Companies and the RESIDENTS of the area as well. Everyone had a chance for input on the project and its impacts on the local environment. Initially, I really believed that the process worlced and provided a plan that was practical and met the needs of all parties I now feel that my early opinion was a direct result of my naive belief that all parties were dealing in good faith. First, the agreed upon business park was requested to be changed to an . Automobile Row". That was never mentioned in the original plan for a light industrial park. Fortunately. that request was rejected I believe in large part to the public opposition that was raised. Now another request is on the table. If my memory serves me correctly. one of the "selling" points used to gain approval of the business park plan as it was originally presented was that the area would be completely self-contained in respect to its visual impact to the surrounding areas. Now MacMillan wants to change the rules that we all agreed to play by. If the signage requirements are a valid business issue, why did MacMillan agree in principle to the existing regulations at the start of the SPA process? Maybe its easier to agree with the popular public opinion in the early stages of project planning, and then go back and "amend" the agreements piece by piece at a later date Divide and conquer has been used as a successful tactic in many arenas since the dawn of time. In a time#when outdoor advertising is in decline, and people are more concerned with the visual impact of everything from fences to bridges on the environment, why should we permit MORE signs? My family and I are outraged at this request to change the signage section al Rancho Del Rey. First. I have no respect for an individual or a corporation that offers one plan. which is accepted by all involved, then goes back on the agreement later. Second, I do not want to see a forest of signs when I travel to and from my home, Perhaps more importantly, I am upset about the prinCiple that is at stake here. When any group of people work through an issue towards an acceptable resolution. I feel that the resulting agreement has to be honored by ALL participants, regardless if they are municipalities, corporations or private individuals. Therefore, I asic you to deny this request for an amendment to the signage section for Rancho Del Rey Employment Center, In doing so, I feel that you will not only be malc:ing the right decision for the community, but you will reinforce the beliefs that ethics and commitment do mean something in our local government. Sincerely, ~elpiV 19"31) "L:, ~'" \,\t/\/",- , '-~'. .,....- : . \ Il c,"\ File No. 'I ;er PUBLIC HEARING CHECK LIST CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING D~T~ ~., SUBJECT~~ DJ...<Mr- M'L~.lo ~ LOCATION C~" l:-o'/l d1~~~~ SENT TO STAR NEWS FOR PUBLICATION 3/d'x(q~ BY S .BY HAND: BY MAIL PUBLICATION DATE MAILED NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS ~ ~~ NO. MAILED _ Legislative Staf~, Construction Industry Fed. . PER GOVERNMENT CODE 54992: 6336 r.rppnwich Drive. Suite F. San Dieqo 92l2~ LOGGED IN AGENDA BOOK S/dS (qd COPIES TO: Administration (4)V Planning v" Oriqinatina Oppr_- EngineerinQ / Others: City Clerk's Office /- .. (2) . 3!dlJ!qj- POST on Bulletin Boards Special Instructions: " ~ CC /;-31 Rev.5/88 PROOF OF PUBLICA liON This space is for the County Clerkl s Filing Stamp (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. B, 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: Proof of Publication of 3/28 .P.u.b'}.i.e. ..He.a f'.i.n.g............. ........................... ...............\ ~~~~ ~~EP~"~ ~~"A .................. CITY COUNCIL1 CHULA i VIS~CAUFORNA NOllCE IS HEREBY GNEN THAT THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL will hold . .... bile hearing to conaIder 1he JoI.. lowing: To conalder an 8DPIic8don lubmltt&d by N' McMillin Cornmunltlel 10 amend 1ht .Ig~. HC1Ion of the Rancho Oil Rey Employment een.... located on Ihe nonh side of East "H" Street between Del Ray E!ou'evard and PU80 Rai'lchero. tf you wish ID challenge the CIty'. action on thla matW In court, you maybe llmlllld"" letng omy thou 'uu. you or someone .1.. ralaed at 1M pu. bile hMr\ng descrlblld In fhla nob., Of lri written corr8'~ dence delivered 'IJ 1he CIty O.k', Office at at: prlOJ'l/:I the publiC hearing. SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE_ HELD BY THE cITY CCUNCIL on Tu._Y. A.-II?, 1992".at 6~OO P.M.lrtlhe Coun- cil Chambers, Public SerYlcu Bullcllna-, 27&, Fourlh Avenue, at which tlme 8tI'f pefaotl delll'- Ingtt> bo h..rp may r. DATED: Mar~~'A.L""'al CltyClark CV 01723 .2J281Q2 all in the year 19...9.2... I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated at ..C.h.u.l.a...~.i.s.ta................................ California, this..22 day of S~.a.r.CrT'"'''''' 19...9.2 /"..-(1 \~';U~ ..............~..~t............................" Signature arch 28.1992 Principal Clerk )L ",,?(l . / - ~.,L NOTICE OF PUBUC HEARING BY THE CHULA VISfA CI1Y COUNCIL CHULA VISfA, CAUFORNIA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL will hold a public hearing to consider the following: To consider an application submitted by the McMillin Communities to amend the signage section of the Rancho Del Rey Employment Center located on the north side of East "H" Street between Del Rey Boulevard and Paseo Ranchero. If you wish to challenge the City's action on this matter in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk's Office at or prior to the public hearing. SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL on Tuesday, April 7, 1992, at 6:00 P.M.. in the Council Chambers, Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, at which time any person desiring to be heard may appear. DATED: March 25, 1992 Beverly A. Authelet City Clerk )c;-3) 2727 Hoover Avenue P.O. Box 9016 National City, CA 91951 (619) 477-4117 RECEIVED ~\\.McMillin Communities '92 MAR Z7 mO:4 6 March 26, 1992 CITY 0,.. ~H'" . i'-' r l",rfULl' ).) 1,11\ Cl'TY C! r;'.~", ;,rTWE 1o-L....'>,.. v.,, ,v Beverly Authelet City Clerk CITY OF CHULA VISTA 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 92101 SUBJECT: PUBUC HEARING NOTICE - PCM-92-05 This is to certify that the attached notice of public hearing was mailed out today to 221 residents as per the attached list. jdlp Attachments: Public Hearing Notice Copy of List ) 7 -}t( NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, for the purpose of considering an application submitted by the McMillin Communities to amend the signage section of the Rancho Del Rey Employment Center located on the north side of East "H" Street between Del Rey Boulevard and Paseo Ranchero. The proposed amendment consists of increasing the number of wall mounted signs and the allowable sign area for freestanding and wall mounted signs. Copies of the proposed revisions are on file in the Office of the Planning Department. Any petition to be submitted to the City Council must be received in the City Clerk's office no later than noon of the hearing date. If you wish to challenge the City's action on this conditional use permit in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at or prior to the public hearing. SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL on Tuesday, April 7, 1992, at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, at which time any person desiring to be heard may appear. DATED: March 24, 1992 CASE NO: PCM-92-05 Beverly Authelet City Clerk )/-']~ . . ,JIt " . ( .~~pey~' "UI~~ ~., HORTH [ ?LM : qz c 05 " ,.,1 rLOCATOR . , ) ~Iol .WIpa..tIol06 ,'. AM,~~~gtJr~.," ." n ~~':r- :1 m.1' C .~,;J r ("'f'<.' 1:> .~,~ <c < 0-....0 r-'j1 ~ -I I'" l' r- " <"""l'T' T' ;< ~ " .... C) ". , ~ ,. c ;~ "-.'. "-.1\ \'1 <;;" c. 0 r. ~ f'- , , ( Ur" \.. ( .<:; C 'cu v <( -. 0 , , " , , , () n ~ , p (lJn I."'.!' NC' " ''':') -1(-' -t8 < VI n\u "c' ,. , c , " , ~ ", .( n ~ ,,, , C n , r " :.1 .l:' C ;'C r c",,, l r>, co n'( " v (.., ...... l'(;.J , c " " r J:: '0 , ~ , ,. ("'~ ;<.; " L (') 1.>-0' " ~ C '::0 r r-_, I.~ -0 ,or <( JO . ~... ~ " -I '0 ~ n 10 ". , , ," " , ,. , , c C (0 l ,;.-l' I ';0, r" c;"', r- ;" mO :> e- N V c, CO , , ,. , ..0 , C ,) ,,1' :l '.l: C 1'0 r ;<r- 1" ,,,0 ')c < toO V VI 110 --l :>-( ~ V , c u " ~ , " c vO I };>,t- l' ro ;<, ....."-' r ;;'( 11' Un v CG ;'-" " " " Vl ;;U C ~ I " C '" , o ;.-; " " , " n 'J n " " r " c, -~O' X v, C. _-10 r- /1~_ f>-< -0 " <: loo..... " VI ",n -I Tro ~ " n m , -, 00 " , ~ , c n r' '1.;(J 1: '''I' C ') c. r ;v.-" r [( ~, ~" v , -I <C' , f' , );> l' , ~ , , , ',) '/0 (")"D' 1 '-......r- ;,-': CJ/O ; ,-. I.' n"'~J n:..-! _,;r',-" l ,---<l.-> Al l~ ,-. n 7rc t" el,- , , I" (J;>, "" n , ", n", " c ,,' un. , ~ " ," n , ,'" r,'O \ T-..I-""'>--<-" C 0 C 10 \r- t-' ',1.1' ( '- C;>-<q.l-' ;;'::::1''; .....,-' (r ;;1.L~';rU ptzr c. ""~ t ... t l'.I1'n o l: :; 1--1 r' ! ',~ " f , '\ I, , \. " n, ......,f' e< C r " -~ W .$:.... o ~, '0 ~ " c <, ~ ~ ,. ;>: n ,. I ~ ,. ~ , CG C, C ,;'"C r- r-,.. )". ) C ""('." , tF" C ')0 ,. , c , , , , " n i~ , ,. ':'0 " , ,.0 " o c< CJC') :r--I_ ~'O ~_c ,- , C , " ,^ -, ,- , , , " ~ , T C r , , " -,,,-" '-'0 "~ cc ~, ,. L.':) '" ",-, " N " ~ u -, , , c. .,- , " , " n 1:0- :t n'.r- '- ^O ,-' .(0--- l::> )>.0 ,,",r < 0 -1\.' VI '~lO '... ('0' ,. ~ ~ n l' C ~ , , ,. , , , ," r "" (< "I _t- C ..:."c f" .,..' , , , , , , , l ?'( -1 )."C , , c , " . , , .-. "- , , c C' 1'0 :1 l'.,f C NO , -,~ I.' '--0 , ..; ZO " '/1 no :..! ~ " ~ , C'l r- , c " t-. Il " " , < o :n " c' CC r }_ll c n '0 'n./' f'C- l,"'Jr" ~'. '- ,., , o. , , ".0 ", -~". l--'( , n ,. no V ~ , 7 , , , rn " , ~ , '" r , ~ \~~~~,~~ t~-..I DC ~-, <:I," :>';:1 CO ,,.(,1 "-' "C :<;O'-l- .. >--<111(') ,,11 r'- 0 :.; 1:::, --( If'?~ II' ,,~,<,~ t'/ rr-o oJ,f ~~. ,-I '.'---1 o c;.>' VI -'-,nl ( ,~;3; -~ :r :~~t\ ecn ~. -l -" 7- f' C ~." -< c , " :,- ~-:o 7(' "'-, :-:-..1 1;....'- ene- , . """ [,.r v'r- v n -~o =r II C -"0 , r. .~u :<:'-! -<:: 0 " Vl t>o ~ ,C v n , , , .r c r "-- }.~ C C c :-<0 I nt' e 7"e> r _..... ~ ;;;- c r" H'C ~N V , --I .-.0 I C " ,. v 'J> n c' , ,,; --I , " ,~ n"Vc~nU' ~~--' COU--IO r~ -< ;) ,__ nn .Jl ,__ '0 C-l 1N ;.".-< c, ~no ~ ',TO p C I 'f- n f,.". 1-n "'/ :: ~ ~ " r .' 'I , \ ,. .., n , \ ,'"" 0 Joo-..l---.r_f' ::~' ;-I~ \c _~..,1 q \~: ~ (iJ~) -':'f!t. :\~f;; :X .-,~. - l }~' p (,11c --< 1_' ,.rn v /'I." o 1"'- ~,I r -l :J 'a";;' I'." I 'v " I / -.. \0 " ~ ~ " n -, ;~ "JCl '.' ,T' \ ' ~-, , --If"c[:." ......_j ,( \-,\ -:;1" \~~E/ r ~ r' :;rC'-I ,,\;;r~'~ =r'f :.\/--;;., 0;1'0"" l / ~~ _q n';> .,.. f'"-I .( q;-' 0> '1m ~ I ~~l-, , t ~"' ~ " ~ \""" 0 ~J: -.J........, .r- roc-: 1'G ~~',r~:;. ~ l J... 0 \<(' -I, "- I:-..)<J,I,--" '-' -, /(' ( '1:1.'l1.';, r.. ll'C "';:,- , <)'1 r~l1l~~< ~:' ~'-:;' 7 \; n lUll' I nIl' e .:::'..J r zC' ,~ 'n'j1 ~c < ~" ", V'C> -~ CC' " '0 " n z , J' ~ " ~ c ~,:'::,c.;,~, _,,,,,,-,,'C '--" (,(') - -,-..! 'Tn ~;("~ C' , C. r.J" '" nil r~o ~ ~, ,:: -0 ~'I~ ,-- r"','1 '" C)~. '0 n.( ....~ L L'. -,- , , , , 1 (')-"r-n'l' ~r ". )" ., ,l c", ~"'-::-' r' ".;"c ,~ nl >--< r;'. ',H tun C <: VI--I, ..~ ...-<I..t-." ,,' ()O _,I... rc.( r_'_ ,- v n-; T1 J';}. 'I' In '" .( 11 n ",,'--j " c ~ 1 , , " c , '\ \ 7' ,.r-" co f> -..... '1"-" r.cc :'C Vl ..0 J;-.u r n v v'C.l1, #: 0 > " n -u ,ne> .,r r ( --Ill' ~~ '.l, "__ ""00- lo ~-, ;..'cn '7 D , C 0- (') 'T1 , , .... C! .", .r n' 1-' ~ Z v' ~ v -,: Z"-'{);UC,. ~""~~"f?,'/~ ~-j;: . . ,-' Trc c ,.--) "-' ""~'<H' \<~~ .0 ,;,~,;::. ." --I ...J -<1>\-'1' ",,": --< ';:'T\~--., J~lo. .( trr;- ~!~t~ 01' "fr, (. :"): mv. :;;'::r. -,- , . 'U ""'7:' \ ';,";-, ~ \;:~I';~' \ , " ",n' ':J.'" .. 11( ('1,1"[' 0 ~'~1L ~ ~ =" ~ " 'I"~ I'. "')U "~I "~'A ,( '~- i.l C / >; ~~ ~~ C) , \~~jl:;;;" ~ :, - -J:,," ~6 C~j \ ~i;:'~l~) C\tTr-r c =~(~." ."'!~ .~::: '{1n\,-, l 1'--':' !-l t:: "..... r"..... --i f1;' Jl <l'n c: ~. 7' nlV' :<':I '1 ,. , r r, \ ~~~~~ \( ;;<t,,- ;;:';.J"f:.O. l,e '" r::-':!~: <"'/"'''"1-'0 .,\;>r:' _{ "';""71'> ~tr: i.,;:,u 'l'J- D "1':" ..... l"'-j ,(J'l::jZ v: ....In q j:fO J n l{ i Ll -,~ .. ~ ~ , L"-'C' U[J' t...y.....~.r- -jNLJ.~O '~-..I nO n '"T.." -:" ,'C'('> :r-{1 I-' r-o-.c<:"''--'-' <>-..'no "..",'p ..."r _I 0-').' -< 1;.Z,n < ~ C"TlO 1 n.--" ,v .J. rr,<. "~ .J.' C~. ," Hi'll :",<;<' 'Cll/l ."::1 ,~ , LCl',l :''lJ'.t \ "'10 :'rf C U:~ \ I.~' I,V'O \ t:'--I( \ ~tf>- ,r r'~? .1'('-1 f \; I l' ! I I ;.'.....,r~(J "--"-";; -l' \ ~~( ~2, k- :":;1'- 1;~:lnc,0 ,,-c/ .....' f10-,'P') '("'-0-'" , ('l"r".r' C' ~~ ~~,.., --7y" ~~F.;: t )_. -:J n,;<., ~ l~€ /~:~ , ! . . \ ><:><::..;>(x>< ;..<xxXXX '-<.X><><><X xxxxxx XXXXX)( ,.,'>->-->,XX xx)()()(X x:,..-xxxx xx.,..;:xxx xxxxx>< x,,<:>o..xx'>< x>:>o><x><, xxx.xxx > )-:)< )<'xx xx,<xx:x )<;.. ><> xy x'o(x;,,;xx )~x,.;...xx ><xxxx'---: ,.)< ,,)-' x)< xx-xxx'X ><)- ::-,)-,)< x ~(',o(X ><::>( x >- ><,.. ),-)< X x><xxxx )<.)-' )-.): >- X xx. ).~xxx ')-'x )<.)- x,' xxx',,<'.><(X .....................,~ -.. , " < , , :? ,. ,<: ,. , ,. >:' K , , " , K " , K , " K K K " " )<;.. >-,,)- x ,,' x;.-:xxxx X X)< >-,. >-,.. x x X^X,.:" x )<" ,.. ,...)< > K yx"'x)<'>< x ,..,..,. )< >')- >< x X )(x :.~> >: "';,.-.,. "';"- >- )( xx><.;'<'x> K >-,. > > > >- xx,<>-:x,,,, >< '>-;"')'>"'" xxx>.:xx ,( )-' >< > >- ). > ~' x >-,"-<::X>< x ( )< ) ). )-.,..,.. xx:;.<xxx X >-,.)<)- :;-';"-:. >< xxxxxx x >< > .,. ,.. )-)< )~ xxxxx,>< X )<). >. )-':X> ,.. X)<XA.>':>< x x ,,_ :x>.)')< x xxxxxx >< ).).><)<)<,. ,.. ,..xx><",,',..' >( >- ;..,. > >-) >< ,",':.(X Xx"" , " :..c'<:.-::,',"';< y" )<'>-->. >< xx><,",-'" x )<)-)-">->'> ;--( >~)(;'" ,( ^ ::- >- )-':>-;")- xx",xx'.'< ,..;.. ) )";")- xxx;"',Yx x"" ><-)<)' '.(V),X)-'_Y )- >- :>< > >- ~ .><x)<::><:o<'< >. > > >-,..;.-. x.xxxxx :0- )- ), >-.). > x:><(xXx.>~ :><>')<)- >- > x-o<xxx."" )<'Y>>)--,.. ;..;.....><'<x.,.( >-,>,..))<) xx:><x-o(x ,.. x)< >'.)<." x'xx'<xx ). >' y>,>,>, XXXXYX xx,.->>->' xxxxxx x'w'XXY> ~ .. " .. .. .. .. .. .. > .. " " .. Y>,,. ;..-",.. XXXXXX > )<'xx>,,- xxxxxx xx>';.>> xxxxx>< >,;.')0.><>'>- xx XX""'" ) ) " >-),.. Y;Xxxx'x x ;><>-'.>: ),';' xxxxxx )<y><>,,,)< xxxxxx x>-.,. >,,. >- xxx""><->': )<,,>-x>->- :><xxx><>< XX>'XY>- xxxxxx xx>>-.>x xxxxxx xx"xxx xxxx-..:x yx)<x"')< xxxxxx )<yX><X)< xxxxxx x)<xxxx X)(XXXX , I VI(,. " r.l' r 2'....-' ~, a " ~,o :~ ':;~; 'T',,", ~IO o U o ~ < ~ c ", -" ,. )c. r ~"" :1 .tlj' ( ~. c r" .-'''_' , r '> .'" " v' C -oj <.1 , . , , I', ...... , ,. , ,. , , c , Her , , <0 , ~-, ~) , ,~ '," v ,. r " '^ ~ ,. n ,.. , ~ ,. , , u , c J '-t- , " f' ZN , 'C '0 v ~. " " roo -, '" , , ,. , , " " l0- t.. ~ Q <:;, " -'0- C m-t- '.'0 ~, "'0 ~;~ ~ <-0 " C0 "" I " , " o v o , n r (l I l..... C , r- 0r" I, .c ,") " ;...., V', cc -, ~'O , " r- 7: v c " :r n'..] c: ;c'0 r I'" J. c;J "LC V" " e VI r-<-, or v , n , 1- :'> V , , o 'J , , " r , " o '0 l '-l' C ,c.- r 7'r'~ , , >0 ,,, ""N V , ~ 0 , r r ~ v , T o V e C ~ r t-' ~- o n :to' . . C ~O r ,. to> -lQ C' < . ,'^ ~ '0 ~ '0 n ,. , v .... z , ,. o C' -< , . , ~r D' ;'.r ;lJt" "r ..~O , 1>0 ..-< .~'O , '" v , , , , , , v C e V o I' n T.IO . c' C .'J'.? , "' 1-' "-'''.1 L '" ..- ;'-.J VI ~"'-O oC to. I) r ... l::' .... ,. ~ , ~ o I o , r (C I C-f' C ~~o r z", I CC ;,0 c'' ~~ v < -I ro , c r ,. o , , 0 " ~" t> o ~ o < " "V"... n ~" . . C vo r 1'>, r-~ "0 " < , o Vl .:10 ~ , v n V , o < , " o , r ,. r (,'0 :J ;c-t-- C c:- ( r ,....1'>. 1 ,'r co . "N v- ) c.. -1 no , , , ,. v ~ n , , D , V ; , ~ ., ,. n co I , C zo r , '.. 1:0 or <: ...,-t- V' VO r-(' to- rr> > n , , o , ~ o ,. .. ( ;1<.0 :I '"-f' c; n'o /- <N , '0 o , . v , -I '0 , 7 , , v , o , , o r e' o c n o:r- r -. C mU C" )0'" v ~O "0 <: 7"'" ~ --'::0 _0 n . v " r , o r , o 7 C l=' ;:. r ; n r C'O I Cl,~ (' "",(' r- TlN t, t.: o v' J'" ~ C ----1 '0 , , , ~ , o e C' o ;'1(l' , N c.:: (PO r ___I'c t, 70 vo o'w 7< o -Ie ,. ~ C< ~ , o " o o r 0 I '-f' (' ::! C r N , 0 "0 '" ;0 v , _j IT.O , ~ o , " , o " u , 7 ~ Z o o ~ ~ , ~ n " c r v ~ '. nu , '0 < ~ ~ ,. ,. , ~ o , o ,. (I r.t' c '-'.f' 7 C U 10'( r.. (">Q ~ L.' r' ,. t -.,e _____0 :-. '; , , o 0 , n ,. o , c , ,. < ~ " , c ~ , ? , o ~ o o , 0 .1 ;o!.l' C I'e' r <N l' {'(' o , v 00 V ,. ( '"c.:, " ~ c , " " o , , o I-' :..' o ". w w o o " :r "-l' L ,,<.) r N , '0 o ...: ZN 1.c ~ 00 -l IC' o , , ~ ~ 1- o 0 " , I-' ".i , ~ ,. r ;<'0 _:1 ___-l C C C r ''''', J. 7 r C. v. ., , ::<L. J..e, " ~;0 r ? , to- 'n , o , ~ r__ C> "J , " c ~ ~ uo . o , c , '" " '0 , n nn :J T..!' C ....0 r -." '" '''0 " < W ("t--. '0 " l~ ^' n 7 C en 3 , .... :>t ., o ~ C , , ; , vO I J'./.' C ;;:0 r- ON ) :1.( H!Q ".1" N V _'L ---1 rno " 0 " r " r , o , .1;' ...... e V o V , > ...., ()' . . C 0 o " > 0 ., < ON ;.U" '" ~O ,0 a ,. , o ~ " L " o ~ C '" ,~ c' rc I "' c: ;"C r- ~, ('J t ,-to mn W , vc CC ,,1 I>C , r " , ,. , , ,[' rn , " c '" , " " '0' . '" c: "0 , , I> "0 C < '" 1:~ o < , n ~ ,. ~ ~ " , , " " " o " , , < o .0 D ...... .c - N ., C , 0 , o 0< , "' 'c, , , o ~ , o , , ,. ; , ,. n "'0' :r :"-f' C U C- T'I'O ,.,. 'to o < N .0 ~ 0 ;.: ~/--' , o "' ,. , " o , ~ , o , , , ,. m ,. , , c ,~ , , " ". r'c :>',"J nr; ,"0 , ON l"C -,-10 , , r ,. ., .. t" ~ , ,. n ""0- :r l_'.1' e ,<>0 r 7''' l" "'0 " < N LV V1 1>>0 <c- , , V 1---' :I .I: 11' I-' .Y! , o 0 I ll.t- o 0 r- ",' J. c- , '0 < , " v " -I _0 ,. , v r , o ~ , " , o n . c r > '" " -<>0 '" " o 00 .~ o " ., , n , , ~ " r CO CJJ' (, r'( r- r""> l (C 'W ".) IC- --I -.C> , c c , " ,. ;, n '(T . .. c ~.o r - t'. r. ,'--", o < ~o " Vl '0 ~ " > ; C' ". " n , , r " , .... ;]( , C .... Z , 'j , , r c ~o ::r 7Jr- c , r N ~ He ,..,<) ", VlO v , "0 " c . o 7 ~ ; > " D " ,. , o ,. ;; n ')0' :r. ...o-t- C vo r eN r> ':::0 C' < l-.... ,'w '<0 ~~0 n ,<.r :r ,'-f' c c r " t> Cr:: < S-:~ 1-( ,^, ,.,- ~ n n , r , ,. "- ,~ , ~ .... z .c l-' ~., t- , " ,---' (::> " c' ~ ,n , I , r , ~- fl C-l' ~ n '''''' ,..r: o .. t, ~ -, f.c --'0 '., r I r r , n'r: " )'.r ,., ; ~ ,,, ~, , ," , " " , , , , ,. o o , n , c , " , , , c, " '" r n " n . c , "H~ f.:-1 -~o , "') 70 '0 ,C ~C' <0 c' " :1 1- ~ C ~, r ,'f' ~ , '" , ~, VI ----l( " l>- ;;' , n "' ,. < '^ -, " c " , , , , , . " c o r c , ;:. ~ ., :>. '0 , c ;.- ; > 7 , .....0 I ,.... C J'e r- ZN ) c-c- 00 e' ',->:'0' v " ~'U r " " . c. r'{ r ~, I. n', ;>0>' T, '" l.' ,. o r " I- ;" < , , , ~ , o " e ,. " ~ e , o < " 7 o 0 , , ,0 t~ " C , , ~ ~ n '" ~ n ~ , u C G-'O r m", f>. "..... ~." <00 ~ ~o C'Q , ,:;'". , J> ~. , ,,~ ~~ ~ ~ , , n c ,. r '0 :r .......f' C" lC r -It. , . .-.", c ~ ...,., "C: , 0 , r , , , I'. r- , 41 1/, D , . , cO ~ , ,- n , C , " H "0 ,,' 0." ~c 00 c :-~ 0 ~, r , , , < , , , , In , " -, , ,. " :/'0 1.: I.~.t- ( C;C r ~N I ( ~~ Xl" C,C" w " ....0 ~. r " , " l~ m , o , e ~ , . V o C V > , n 0 , ~, C 2:0 1 Dr-. m~ U',_ CIN '00 VI 00 -< 0 > n , m ~, ~; " " l' r, ~ ^ . r. (",0 r fl, r- c r'c r rf'.! )0' >-,~ rl'~ " H~'" . ~-'C " (' II: , r c " '0 n ,<;0' :1 .-r C mO r n t~ '/1.._ c: ~. -<: nl'>.J , VI PC:) -t -.C' > n , ~ , ~ , , ~ c. , , r 0 , ., c zc r '00 ~. ~~ L~ Cc. ", , '0 r ,. , ~ , " " -iJ ::.: ~ m " r , o. , ~ , > , r c " n '" (" :10 I 11l-t- C Hr- C ,~ t c~ ~,- " '-L- v I C- Dc'"> , ~ n .. , .. , CO n , c.: , ,. < ~ ~ , n , , , ,. , r n T O.f'- ( :2'C' r 00 )0. 1-' ,. .," ~ , ""1 0 ,. o , , c ,. r ~ !l U o .. n . , o ~ n o , ~ o n,,,...nO" ~E;~:J c ~~ ~ , ~ nO r>f:;;~n 7C ~. ~. ~ m< ,.. ~\ VI ,\-1 'T.. , I, c -, " I i \ to C (.' In ......m-l' "" C;>. c: ,-,,'" ;.- -<-H r- Gill.' -< c- ;,- ~ '. ~ J: n I.C "",0 r .{1 r- Im V , ;:;.-1 , t> l..l " e r , . , ,r,t'" , " '1:0 , ~J....., ", n , c , ,. ~ H '0 <, m' ,../- ~ '0 00 uc m , ~ , " , ^ , , , D r ~ , , , c , u ',' V ,t".O po Cj-l' Z zc LN C" x-, ~. C'.~ 0---..... m~ " o r , c " m . , ~ . , , , o > , ~ , z ,. T1 "'-a- T' Z.J' ," DO r ON ~~ , ,. ~~ ~o ''1:0 -n r < ~ 00 Q " , 00 .n o ., '0 c< c ("" '" "'1-- l~..... "0"'- 11--' v r'( --i ro , ? ,. C p , , I- (I -.(l n" . w .< n c , , t: -10 r " I.> .:1-' " m~ r-". rno ;0'('. l~ I> n 0 , < ~ " ~ , C-, 0 I ~_t- C. 'c r ~ ). ll-' f-'- < , ew V " ~ ~:o , , ,. C , , ~ " , " r " < ~ " n ~~ , H C. 4:0 r Oc , m~ ;J<"-' <:: VlQ " ~" 1'n I" -.: "" ~ " o . ,0 , , " U L " , , , " n (~ T ." , '" c. T , r , ;'6~ " ;0., ",-j,,-, :;C"[ 1-" C7l-' .~ C , ~ .., ro r r ~ , o C > C c. ";;" ::l ',f C ~'O r- I'" t. -..- " < n o VI VIO -t "'c J;- )0 r " , , " , ,- rrL , , r. 0 -X liS- C , C r "00 t. t., .~ ~ C .... v , -l l~) ,. c ,. > , ~ " . ~ , , c n z c ~ ~ ~ " v c:J 0 ~ 'l>.t- C;, ., ^". l:: C....,.. r:: ~, l-' n f-V'C '::I <..1 ""...C 210-0 ,. r 1'> :"':;0 ,. ..c: Z. " )...... ~ "" . nn c. ;:..J n, ~.~ c;o -" e ,. , ~ ,. " o . " , , ;: n a :J -.of c ro r ......'" r.. 7...... .' '. ,~, r" Ul :I:G -l Ie ~ , r , , u ~, I ~ , , , 70 :J :'<;1- e (C r zr" ). IT'l- L...... [JC n.~ " 00 ,. r f_ n , .. p , , .. 0 " o ", v,...... to....... ~ ,. C " r 0 I '~.l' , 0 r oN J C'C- no <: :<-..J < V -Ie nj 1110 , , o < D ~ " , n ~ , < C ;00 r 'h- r- -to n-C "~ V .~O CIC > Z , r I" c < , . ., >" , n ::Ie 'I IT'~ C ;<c r Zr... ~ }.c.c zo ...., C"-.J In(l' H " ^' ,. c ~ m , ~ C o n ", , , .. ..... ::;< o , , ,- , co n' r > ~ n -(1' , < l: ..su r "r-,., l>o -""0 , <: .:0:0' < ~ " -l <-r. , ,- n m " -1:' n ~ ~ " e ~ ,. co '" -, -, n. r H , ,. C we r ~-'N r ;\ c """ ~ .on v no( <0 i, " , I~ ':J C o > , o , . r o n , " , v n 0' :J .J' C '0 r n'" --lC'l ~c <; -<..... r VI '';:r:' -t .....c ,. n , o n r , ,. , ,. e C , r r ::;.CO :..I. n.l' c c r roo , 'c co ,,~ .J:N v " ......u " , " r D r > .. ~ .... -'. " " n l:llJ' , " ~ ~o r zr" p >0 [lOr. < m& ~ VI rr..) -~ ......0 ~ ,. ,- n )c. ):. " " ,. c , ,.." I II' C ......("' r ~N I n-', Io !l," ,... V L c- .-t 0 , , ,. n o " o C) n .Of,. :r 1'-1' c ro , " T> -(') " "" VH:.I' ,. en ,- " ;; n 'n , , ~ , ~ , r. .." I l-l.- C , r 00 l-' f.C <0 roO ZCD , ...0 ~ Co ~ .Q '--( 0' .. , :; ~ n n , ~ n' o 7 Z 'n f ~1C:'" , " c ~o r ;X'N ~ ..0 ;"~ n 0 , H L..: ~'C , 0:;.'''- '" ',:1' ~, < D~I < ,- a ~ :'<G > '" -;-:: TIc: -t ~(" p 0 11; n , ,> " , " , ,. , , ,. o .- ,. r "" , ~ ~ ,. ~ .. , j,. r '0 , c, (" C"-c r -IN J fT1( 00 ,. :~.N V' ......c, -t no , , ,. n r 0 :r 1I1_~ (" [1'( ,- J-. ;> r PC " " ...." '( -, l',-- , ,. , ~ , , 11 ....... " " .' G n , ,. ,- " . 0 , > " o II' , " , " / n , c r " w " o n' I-~(") c '.0- o " c (1 I,;{) :l f'ol C .'( ~ (,~~ -H < -tU < e, l-( r < ,. n , .. c , " . " " , ,. , " ~ , , ~ m , , , ,- -"'0 :1'_ c-.,.r- I; '-'C r ......hJ T' JC 20 -< r-c , .' ;>, f,jO " n m r , " ~ , .. :;,co :J_ rf1t C L'C r Cll"- , , co J-C ," v " " " ," po n < " 0' " " ~ o z " . " ,- ~ < " 'V~ I C:~ C ru r r '" " N .. < ~ N <0 --l .,.e " ^ n ,. , ~ .r. ~ .< ~ , ~.-(l ".I: ",.r- C ~'C' , ,-_r" l t." <el...... " C"''-' ;>.", 1..0 , J" , , " , , , '-' r '" ,. n ll'llJ :1\ l,t C, , " "4D t-,_I' 'v " ,.~ or VI 1'0 ~ C 1-, ("'l n , ., . " n n T n-f' c. 70 r- VHV l --<I. rr,,~ H..... zV> , ~o ,. n c 7 " ~ , ..('l i!:. , n 0' , o < " n ,. n '-"',,. I ~~ c: 0 r- '" \00 L"J < '" /0 "' " "n ~ ~ ,. n , , .(' -:." ~ , -!~ C" .' C C t U , ,- " 'V " c .. "l'U T. ,.).r- c: "'0 r .....", t. "'" ~'!-. C ~., 11-' "0 r~. , , , ," " n , , o ~ ,- , D , n -<<J :r ~.-l C ..:0 c " )- '.", " < " Cle. D ;';'C- o , " . , . c' , ~ , c r J'O :r <nt, c ;"C NN 1-,,, , , " '. c C o ,. " .J> ~(r c t>.t- L ru n' ~ N lo> Tit-" ,,0 r :<.t- to- .....0 rD ~, -< " ~ c , c ~ ~ n " , , ,. v' -, , , , " , ~ , '::,". n -;;" :J """.f C La f C-.I' I" "v , , <.: t>o co AO " , " , " " (,I , , " c fr.....' N..... " .....0 " " " , " .' o C'N'--'("'lU- o . , ~':",;:;~-e r - N ...."TIn ,..... c_ w C~ N x-< ", '-'1--1 1'0 -1I.~Ir; "\ ' C . r ;:,'~"" ;':/'"~ , " ! \ , ~ , " , '" 2.1- ,-c N " u..... '-'c I'.," , ~o " > , _N ." ~ '0 , I " C , ::.. V' ~ , , , C ~lO "' ,. C ~ ,- , -.L' ...... , , , ,0 ..., <:0' :J ,-r.t' e zo r- Cr- ,. N q < --0 "'", ~ 00 ~, ....c " , < C r. , , ~ ~ , ,. C C< , ~I:f; )> Cr, .c:.~ "" c_ _ v' v. ....., _-I ro " , ~ , < ~ 0 , " " ,. " ~ . , u " , " I , n !"-IJ' o 7.t- ..<.> '10 C' ", Z .,,'..... l'> fl,' ,..> C...... L' ,en o (~ -le " , ~ o "' ~ ,. ~ n ~ " m 0 ", ~ "10 I Cl$- C ll_ C.'. /- 'nf'. )". ('I-' W "' :-1 .... -<., v '< -t [-0 .' , " , " (. :: .n ,"'. " C C'l> o o , -, n " , , C -0 , " 1.. ~h~ ~ < 'N fie VI [-(~ --l ~,(' " . , , 0- n, , , I-' I'll . , 0 :r p.,t- , C I 'J'" I 0:-:1- "W , N~ V " _~0 , Z , ~ ~ " n , , , " /-" ;<, o ll~ I :rv " ~ :: ~':: ~ .0 ~ " , 0 n ;. I. ,-, < " c " ,1: Jt- C :-C r mrv }> ;<'0- ,W " U' "'<: ~~O e ~ , " L} _< ~ " 1_ I', o -~ , ," > ," )<.)' )" '...t- v, ,<;)0 , ""- '-1'~ 11 r...... C'1 LI-' , e 1/1 '<0 ...',("" . r c o ;;' , -, < 'I" c 2C j fi l' r.. co . " r , ~ " . " ~ ~ . , o ~ " n ~ I '. C 0 C' N . ~~ W < "~ o V'1 -~o -l 'c ,. " ,. o C' ~ , , C I C ,- , o ". 'C " c <,.., < V -, , , " > < r ,. ~ , , , , r , <D " .v ~ .' ~,.'" :J ;'.1"- C DC.) r ;o.r- :. r,,1'--" ,.." -< VII-' .- r. NO _ ~C' " I ;--, I> , , U , . , < >-~ '" , , ,.... -< , , o ~I~~" "W .., I," ...... L<.>J v , - -,,0 10' n " c , ,. . , " " , " ~ . o , V I , L n 0 I " C ';;:0 r N . ,~ 7.....' < 0 <0 ~ -0 --l C>C'> , < n " r .' ~ ~ ~ , , .~ , o r. )".0 '_J: --(,f'- C ~c r- ,N t, l'r- W ..;; VC .~ V' :'\0 -l CO l' r' r C l:> ,'JC , -0 ,,-.0 . ~ ,- , o C" n 0 , . C <0 , " . ,~ .' < <0 _0 VI 00 -j -lC' . 0 , ~ , , " , ~ r , , r' :-.C' ~ n-i:' , 0 r Or" I,' )"-0-" W ~c I~ V ~, -l 0 , r 1'>- L ~ "' , ~ c' , o " c co " n I C C' . < ~ ~ " n ~ , ~ ,. ~ , -0 ~_.: ~ 0 n ". < " " c r , ~ :r ,'l' fl'--'" r() <-r" I,....... '"u.-' ....(':' '" " ^'Q , ,,, , I ~ ., , , ,. " , o ~ C' n T(1' :r _-i: C 0 r -II" ). ~~,~ ~v <~ (..:> , VI 1"0 -, -<(':' . :~, " , , , , , ~ . ,,, c: r " C I C c ,. V ~ , c o " , c o o " " n ~ :r f1$- L 0 r ",_, . O~ 'N < ~ ", v' n,? ~ r " C v I' If'l , ,n Vl , ., " , t-' ...: , " " ,. " " r ,. '" H :~;~. ,. In"" " 'W , ;"0 < ~ ~ , ,. " ,. , " " '. , , , o , r , " " , N ~ ~< " , " n -v~' :r T$- c /l1~O , '" I' ><,---< "" < --'-"'. , Vl <-0 -l 1'C "" :~ " n " , , ~ , .' < , , m , , 0 "" l;~ 5-~ c ,~ , 'C. " ....0 X.....$- C. l>C r U>N r. Jo'~ 'w C V " ---1 (/1<";) 1" n'. " r v v ~ N , , ~ ~ 0-- J;. o n , C m r z "' n v~ I . C 0 , " b ~~ ^-- <: 7.0 ~ ~ 0 ---l ;0 n T o. I ' C r ,. ,- <: '- <- '0 7 ~ n )-0 :-< , ""_ w ,.- r -I ~ , n ,.- " t-' (; ~ l' r. :-("1 _"L I:>t- ;1C r- 'i"-J l ...... .N ~.., \-" C -l ",'0 , c , ~l: '- , , " V ., , , c }" ~. , , , ,. " r. , " , " . , "-' ..... c ,-, C ~~ " n :;:0' :, t,',t <:... 10 r ['1', ,. (""~ 7^ < ,~ ,,' "', 1"0 --<c' n , n T C , , p n ,. , , , n Z , " ,.. ~ ~ , ,. " , , ~ , " m " X< r 1,0 :r n$- C '" r <N I' ([\1'--" CTN C " ,.- Lf "t" -l '''0 ,. ~ ~ , " ,. C , r c , < V -, , o ~ o . ~ r' o , o , .1 11:0- T C-l" C _<.IU r )...". .,. ","', ["'f'.. < Ol..' ", ~ oQ ~ !..:O r n I', " , ,() '-" ,.~ I <, " N " , 'n ~ , ~' I' ('1;0' 0 J..o-.J......l:,.t- _If'.. C'2'C' '-'--.1 0...... ~[f~=~~ .' -.n:c nn. "0 ... ;0 r J),!;-:;;J ~.I!'~,,: ~. e'~. " "T ~\. <;") "-.<1 "v L:r: ~~ o ;!.....'n...J'1' l-'-..'-"<:""l' '~""'C):<lO ,-.-..J " 'l .~'" D ::'~::l CL-'" t-.(") ""0 r (' ~~ ~ " ..;>-<Zo nnr'ne .....~)[-V, ~ ~v --<;~. ;= < , nnonrTl J. c ~., -~ -I " ..,. ,.. Cr..., , , ,}l or- e .0 , z , c. ,,- ::r.." 0 \:. ----l~,.f'" -':';'C :~nN '.::J.,J: .:. OI- l' r't.- r [IlOW ;." c n ::-:,0 ~ -~ 1" c.n C., ,. , I". 0'0 1.,-, -0 N;~ ... rn;>l" " ~~ v "~ o ('1 <A(J' :r ,.....-f L.. ':0 ,~ .. I' l> ~'" ,1'1" < DW 7,~ o ----l J. ~.' . , o J. (; '" ;0" , ~~ ,~ l'. C ;< ~ c, r co ~~ t- c: '-0 ( rTlk J ;Or- r'" " " ~.,r,' v' L':, ~-I me }o ;0 , > ,. , .p i" , ~ r " () on ,. n'I_,:) , ~, C 7'0 I nr, J_ "I~' " -< m'., -II>. VI .To _, Ir{ > .. o r~' , , '" , ,- " , ~ , c ;< . _. ;~ " IH, 'eN ;or.VJ , v :;{ ~ co J,> J c. , , r-~ ~,. c o c , " r o n 0_"0- 'l l>t_-f" C. .00 r C;:I" ....' CN '''-'N -< '.....N ~ VI '-'0 ----l .....0 ,. m v. n m I. 7' n , " "' Q c' < I." ,n ....... " , ~ , ~ L m , , ,,, -, " " n 00' , " C VO r rtN I l'H" ," C.lN :;:'", o .... <:""0 " C' n ,. , , o , ~ , , ~ 0 , " n " r ~o I n, , 0 r N I '1" N l.' mo v .....0:: ~ 0 1" :~ , , " I , o ITI , r C r r' o , :~ > , n --.>I:t' I m-J' C. "'0 r > ,"' "' 'N N Pb) o ----l U ('> I'" [n :>"' n ~ " < ~ , r < , r , r ~: { :< 0 :r 0..... r ~o r- ',,, t. ,.", " , , c' , -I 'C , , " .('1 , o r , " n {;, , n n u (r ::r rf'-f" C ,--0 r ,h I" .<"IN , h -< z,,, f.''' ~ 0 , r . , r ":J " "' v ~ , " " . " o ,. r r :;:'0 .I ~..f'" C <0 r 'N , , ~'" 'N ca. v v, ~ ~o .' ~ , , J;> In u r C , , .... ..- o w , "' ~ > < n , c r ., o "' mo ""' ~ ", ~ _,,0 o c < ~ ~ " o n n ,. n " I- Cl ,. , ~ " , " , r- :';0 ( l'-f" C "C, r G~"'" J; t.", :<1,,, ..: f'.' "0 ~ , ~ Q , , " .-" --, " , G ." 00' :l C.t C "'0 , " .'N h -< '1]'" n"~ VI 00 --I ;0 C J..o '-~, n r , r " ,.. I~ " , . co "' vC, mN ~ ~h ;<; ....' j :..~ v . v n ~. , , , > " ~ , ~ m , , ~ :: f. n :;!;Q- , m, C /.0 r CJr- r- ':IN ....,..... < >~ '" .0 -I 70 , ~ r n z .. o ,- , , " 7 ~ ~~ '" ~ -, po r , , ,- . :10 m-f" ;' C v'N Co ......, , ~.H.I _L '-0 < .. , ~. .. , , . " Fi, v , , ,- o , nl -10' I , C Le> < ,. 1.1 "'" '" <. ~ ~- v-' "'n .... n c' . " n > , " ,- < ~ C , , f"O c VO ::L PJ;- e TO , rrlN . '" '" < <;:,., DO> ;"( ----l '-0 , , U ,. v " ,0 0 ~. ~ r' o Z n ~o- , "' c: ZO /- """. , N h' <, .~ -, ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 > ^ n D " , , ~ , , , ,. , , n p :[ O-f" C :<:0 r 'N l' t." ~N . r ~ l> ':1 In' ~ ~ ,- , o z < " r. ~10' ,. 0--< ~ r. ,0 , -, I' (,h, H < -~ ;<'l.. .....C ~ e > . ,7 ~ . e z .... CJ < ~ , e .' 0" I ,<J.t- C C'C' r ::':N I. n'" -'''N , ~. '-' J ~ ~ no )" ;1 c > .0 r;: , , ~ " r o ~ . " t, po ,- ~ , C' -,N r:C u ~ . n ;: n n I C r . ~no 0' <0 -, 'TIN r-....) ro r~ o <0 < ~ ~ > n ,- ~ Q ~ " < , < , o n ., , ~ , ~ c< c " ,. v"o I mJ' C }"C , rTlN l--~ 7' I' 'N , "0 v 7( -I "'0 , , > <. > , , " r v o rT\ , " n q('r , 0 C 0 " , J~ PN o. ~>o ----l ~'C " < n '" , , .- , , ~ 0 -i: n " , " T n 00 I C, c: ,,-.c r ON jc. "..... v"" '" ....,>- o v C< -i ,<.:C J,:- C n r , " , ~ , , 0 " m v' 0 o N , n :i:& I " C 0 r " r>< I'.J N <, 0 D'" ~ 0 ~ ~O > m " n , " , ~ .... C "' ~ 1-' t. C ~ " n :;:0 :1' t-....... C ;'C> f- v'N I> ,,"" !1"'C r, v c'c ----l 0 , , r r , r- L D " , < , o n ~o c ~'b r :<~ '" 1>0 (,)N " <:: '-"0 ("...,.. U'l 00 -, -'Co > ~ n " . " " 7 ~ 2 < .... ~" , (" :.<'0 ~ O-f" C 70 r >N , v.N H "'0 v I'~ ---j 10 , , " D Z r , o , o r ,-, Vl(l' :r f--l c. .0 r "" "" ",..., ~ -< V'N H o ----l "",'n , " ~ ,"I c:J , r ~ ~ C , , " ~ , '-, l'.(' :r In-" C ...r. r 1>-'" , , "'1- e.... 0')\ " .... 70 I' , " ~ o , !- "t. n m r' , o ;tJ C n "'0 ::l: (I C 0<::> I ~[' ,. " <: ee. W!- Vl ""'0 ~ C l> i'~ < n m , n " !--- P , ~ ,. C ~ , (" T.O .1. ;':-f" C 0'0 . ,'->N , ~N C ~" V , .... ~ c.., " c' N . Y 0 .0 " , ~ :<: .... lO' o " . 4') ~)O' C Cl' '" mo ~N In -IN In .... .N "~l 0 r -0 r ,> " o "" o 0 '" ~ " I C C' " < , " r " ~ , " nri ., " , ,- ~ ~ " r , r < . < :-~o J"-" ~;:~ , O._~ 1'1' <,.- , ,e v " , , , " , v ~ , c ,> ,- .' c , o , '" < , o , " 'C -, ~, " " no-- :1 :1__ C DO r ,.,.1', I" N ". < <:J'" , " V1 ....0 -~ 'J'C l-> C ~', ,. <r ;1 , ~ , " , , ~ , ~ c r 70 , ~, C r~o . IT"'" , , , J_ -j , , , 1.'( "-'~~ c",. "'" '-' I ( .... '-Q , , . -, ,. , , " , C' () rn " "' ~ ~ Q 0 r "' fl , " ,. o r 2:~n1l;],'" .,.-,J.....I"J. -j'V02N ....-.J r....., o -"IO :C"nr~' ,,"0 0 rc'~_,n-.J , -c::: fr;O I'm ,-0 ~'Jr;<. -<l./zrn ,).1,0-< "/I'\'v ! <:I,. " n,; I-' '--t ..c' c.';: ,/l ,un C -~;< ,n"" CI ~- C ;'/'.''-'7' 0 }~ -,J..... 'l> .&- -1,",-,'[ ;,''', ....-,J r;....' )~(~f: ry, ,rl-o .' , :1;,:,;;' / <\-< f.n C, f,~ ~'':{ :' ;~.:\ c, 0;" " "Tn (') "<J n V L:L ~.. " Vl-or-VlO'l I>-' I>-'Cl"'" :;:) 0:::1 G'}O O-~N ClCO m<D ......03: W en ><1>-' N ~ , ~ OI--'l>-' 0 . = 0 wm n~3 " m , rt ~ N ~ m ~ ro N , ~ Vll--'OO\ '00c+...,. ,0\1>-' 0 .....<0'<0 , ~ ~ ~ 70 CO N <1>-0:::1...... ill 3 .....0 -'1>-000 -0 m ~~ :-O~ ~ no,,", "ww O-rt m ~ , N o a ~ 00 ~ rt J. o rt LN""'" "~ > -1,",,00 ""-.J "-, (') -<:>.0 ~~~ ;~ ~o C>;,:::=C' :; ;" --l'l>Vl I' <v n'n , '" '^ -:... ::j\ .c" v. ~, ~'=~~ F ~,. C .~ "-' CC~ ~ ._,oJ ~-" n' '"'- C't' ~. ( ( '\ ~'c'-::> '.":,p h,v ~~ ~. ,~\ ZNc>",(1 ).,-,'....l'..r -INCl;'N ...._J ...." o ~J:.v ;':it' " ~.O 0 I( ,-C-1' ;..;;;j;:'~'~ .---i,fJr --<\....:>. -<):>o,.zrn ,'........, qrnD. j "'v ,..( ~~ 'J-' ,-I " C '/l urn , :,-;0. m~ .I ...~.. .," 7'"'-('"70 ~,-,J.....~ -l -,,",-C-:i.',,-, z;~?vn~ );0 c 1':0 00- \< r ,,('. ~~~ro -:::~: '''::; '.-( 'J'''~~ ' ., ;) rn)(; ~ r_ o OL U TIT <:) :;0;'" mVI 2:L ~- ~ ,) r,,.. c nIl' r <0 < <~ rn ..(J )1- ,"'.....' r::H-~ C> ro- DO -I :-;:0 -< Cl n , ., o n w ,- -< '" r I , r , ~ -, , , , , , c , c n " , 2""':-"'''' 1',......r'J -~N.j;O ...'....'>-_1'- ,~> ,-D :;":lr/"-,, "',~ .... no cr o r. C"C \HIITo \-J,..., l~,::, ': ~ ~ '.r- -1\ "'!'-,r,, 0 r~...........o.t" .....1'.(' ;o.:.e1 -~ ~ fg~~ ~~~;o Pk ('" ~rn I-' !T''''' ... ~ v rr o "~-I }c e- r z o o ,. ~"-'nl7- J>.-.J:tl' -II-'P-O ....'"'-"~". o In.n :;,'-l ", P-'.,........ r:ro-.;,''''J Z-In roV-f'P," ~~" ", -jC'7 -<rl> -H n"".~ I-If: -.~ "r,l- l-";~ r- <, WI{.r c<-< r\l<) u c v -, -IZ "v, I '0 In.-l'- <r "" " , , ,;o.:(J ....l:..&- r:;;-, ,,~ :":1., "C,^, , !o..... ',' roo C CO--' , r ''\:' ...."') Zl" < , -~o , r t 7S .-. :'~ " 07 _' -';'n o ".>J ," ZT ~. ~ :'~Nn;1'''~ 1 -.J..... ~o .z -IN'.::JZ.O ,..-.1 1'1'- I.') -{I U "':J,"C', '.D '':=,'p''Cf.,. ron 'r c ,- ~ ;;" < ~ r ~ ~~ ~n :.;.0' n'~ ;<':C ..jH T 71''-:>0 ~-.J""'o.r' -.""(;t-e:, _~ N C :..0'..( Z:Lncw Jo.C v-.o-- r03.-....... ~;;,';:-';16 ....;o...r ~ , " n nrr p. UL ~~ V' r,. o _~ :I-'C- r z " o ~Nn,uo-- \:.-.J....."'l' -<.vULQ ""-.J r'"lV CJ <::[...0 '7 :rr."..... r>O 0 ,()<;C'lN <':"'mo \ :;~;(:o -<izm "f'\".... ~l :~~ 'J; n;\. ,~ I~-I " L 7 dl "Oln :,;t "'~ ~;:.: ", ;.'",,/, 0 )."---10-, -.11'- TC -~ ~ r:' ['-,C 7' ~c:,.J I C v r' ~.~~'~~: \ ...,.. ',-l ,/) ~ , .-:;n f"trn i0''f " '\. " , o .-'''-'n;>..ca I ....;.... C-l -1""'-)-"'<:> ......., I'. (J <(:0.....) :" ::rr' C.... \:>0 ''''0 "~:'::'7'b \-n' fl'C ::'$\;0) ~~ .,' L , " ;'-1'- r;to I.>-.J....O:'').-l'- -J"C ~"O --.J ", C :;'{l..( ;:~tOC:O ,0: a- ""2 _t'.,~, ~.,r v 1~; : ~~ I-' n'*! ... ~ v r.r o ....-1 " r z o a L."H.,ul1' J>-,J.....J>-l- -<NO.<::O H-.J C>N r:> ;::r.o ~"6N-~ C':~Ocn <-mo rTT',f") - 'r ~ ^ -(t>'..111 ~~: "\' 1T';;o:, 1-'-1 ;;:;',\ :<"- "'Vl ;.:'::r -,- " ;. ,0 -Il''€" -I.....C ::r.N ,.::J,C C,N C I- IT :',1' "< r"C.J C L ,. \~ n c., c' (' 1<> \'_~ ~ ~'\ ~ fl' , <: nro- n "".-l'- "1 0....0 " v'f' Tl n",..() -'" n; <,",-J r r (') '~o ";7C (.n , , o ~ , ~ 7'"'- r.;>. 0 l"-.......I.>-.&' -I!'-CJ7C ---.J r1N (' :<:J'J;' ~:I:nc-;.." ~.~~ >>.-\','0 :',~t(S ~ '~ -D ;;,:' ~.. . , "' 0 U -un o :.:<..u nv 2:1: -'.... ~ '<::N{'l-"'U' r.-.J....J>-l- -""'H::JL.l..l ....-,J "'" ~g~::~ <- 0 n'r' " ~ "'r :~~~ 0 ~:" ~:' J;"<' ,::\,.. t.. r\-< ..., o,t ~ ,~~ n ~- , '-'-.J -~ "0 , z c , ~- ~ ZNn,QV' J>...........r>-l- -<'"'-'(.)020 ....-.J n,",-, o -.er...o ;,,.n '''' \J>r:I 1-_ '-r:-C"lO \ <, '-"0 I'm ["'0 "1""':>1,,,_ ~\J> ,'n . ., "'l" 1'. ".l <" -L f\;:, ;.'" Q.;~ r:- r:~~~ :;....::1 ~- " 71'-. r':>, 0 J>...........J>.f' \;~'::,' ;:" r <:IJ. :~'.I ON ~. r' ~_' r-r: ";;u.._ _IT('' ~<;n-o '" ~," _ I :;0'" , ~ I C l> <no , .;(1 t'A' ~ ~~';' " -, \~~"~,~~;.',_:& \!=J . u,.:) l-:lrc" ",CJ '/)I~ r,c . >-t~ 3~~~~ ~vn~~: ~ ~~"., ~ n c ~. I , , r, ~~'::,' ';. -<r,.-(';'c ....-.J nN c- :1,( Z:I. "CoN .C 0-- CJ ':0'''' .. .ne <\IT 1-,0 ~~ ~x .., JO~ ~ ','.: ,~ , ~ z " -, rr'v' LT ~- ~ L"',,""'O' J> -.J-J J>~- \~~;;;;: :J .'x", 'T . ,",-, 0*," 0 n C'o- < <nO n.~ rc -~ ~, , -< ,In ~c--< n( n , ,,~ / l~,-i :J ~n~ -co v.v ...... ",,,, \ ~~t'~~~5' -.. I 0"-' .r- C' ,\7:~~ n ,0 , -j '~:>.' -<};'(l < " r.; , ," .(J ,1'-<" ~, tl; V r~r :.~ " c. ;'~~n;:';. -IN )NQ ........' " C) ":',",>) Z:Ie ,",-. ,..~C '/)0 r- r ~.......(J \~. ;::;;.g 'b,"'~ "0 ...( .? ,. "l'" l C Z "-j :,:rr' ~ , r . ~ co , z c ,- ,.,~o l'-.J.....:J.,. -m,c ,.., ~.;;~'":: ;~:r eN t,C V'C ro -:.....0 .. -...r nn;r-n1Cl ,,. r v. A~;~ \~':;' " UZ ~l ~~;;; IT:>.' ~ l~ o o ;~NnN<J' l'>-".....r--.t -1NU,ZU ~'-.J n,,-, Cl ~T...o ;'"TnC'I- \ 1.>0 0 \r~!...Pn~ mn'~r"o -" --< '-'''' -<r;r: ~?'T}:~_", '<');.> ..(" ";.,, I-f' r-l :';. ~i;' :,;>: rno./) ;':1 ~t.~ ~ 7/'. r ;;<. 0 ~> --,J.....CJ l' --'''' ( ;<c "h n, , ~ IT " \ ~~.r )CN l.:C vo '.ft'.:_<".,,, I 1-';"0 \O.;f'"frlO \- rl. ~~ H'-" I"'~',"~' T \ ~::. \~""l n'] ') V) ~, ~. r o "i-l ~:\ C' 7 "',,,,,,'rr lc--.J.....t .t -I"'L.A.iO ..~~n ~:" :I,,',." r":: \r~o ""0 ~' .., .........~o ~~".,.~' ---<'C;L, r n rim I'_ c:;~ I ,~ < \"" 1-'/ TlJCJ :';, ~)' c: 'IJ,~ ~\ z \ ~~:~..~.-.~ \ ~-C' '-"'C \r 0 _w n~~-;n;:=;' '~:>,I~~ 'f~7n r\...'rn I>, ~.:: "i\~~ .... IT';>;. " \'" 6 ~~ / ~c z o o ~N-'-'U' "--.JC'l' -INAl(') ....-.J 1'.' ') ." D \ ;:6~~:-; rC'~.,.. \. ~l~~:~ ~ -I ,,~ -<.c- ,I ~__ r \~;n." ,. , -, << n ~~: ~, "", "") r , ., -, " co 7,",-'~,,,,O \f;0~~g~ .'~ ::I. C'-Jj., U C- :.) ( r ~";/:' ~1 '~TO ~'<":- i~(>< {~., r- 1> \e, '" D ''.,.~ I" IT-;r _0 l{>'''' u ,t ~ o ;'>;Np",(f },-..-q:-l ::::.: ~r{.~: ~~ nr;l \;:~fc~ ; ..~ ."mc> cn~;:r r "'r~ ~ ^ ---<r-~nnl nt--~-< '/In" \,.~ < '. ,- If In .~, fn ~~ , , I \ ;.-,.. r.,. IT l'> -.J.....~~ l' -1/'.[.:"( ....-,J Or" (' ~~:c.., (~~~~L:: '\ "'1'" ~~.,,; ,,: ..,~.Ir -I, ":<,, -<!<~.~ c.n ~, r> ,n'" '..'lo. a im7-' J-,'r...-. .{l' o;~ uJ ~'n\ .qj is ~H ~ CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA STATEMENT Item 2,.0 Meeting Date 04/07/92 ITEM TITLE: AGENCY A. RESOLUTION 1246 ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS-92-18 AND ADDENDUM THERETO AND ADOPTING MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM, APPROVING OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT OPIBF 4 WITH ROHR INC. TO CONSTRUCT AN ADMINISTRATIVE/CORPORATE OFFICE BUILDING, A THREE-STORY PARKING STRUCTURE EXPANSION, PROJECT PARKING WITHIN ADJACENT SDG&E EASEMENT; AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATION OF $110,000 TO THE BA YFRONT FINE ARTS ACCOUNT; COMMITTING $737,000 OF FUTURE TAX INCREMENT TO BE DERIVED FROM DEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY AND TO BE REIMBURSED TO ROHR INC. FOR DEVELOPMENT AND PERMIT FEE OFF-SET; AND RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AMENDMENT NO. 10 TO THE CERTIFIED LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AND BAYFRONT SPECIFIC PLAN, APPROVE A PARKING AGREEMENT TO ALLOW OFF- SITE PARKING WITHIN THE ADJACENT SDG&E EASEMENT, AND INITIATE THE V ACA TION OF A PORTION OF G STREET AND TIDELANDS A VENUE (Redevelopment Action) CITY COUNCIL: B. PUBLIC HEARING: TO CONSIDER AMENDMENT NO. 10 TO THE CERTIFIED LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AND BAYFRONT SPECIFIC PLAN RESOLUTION' "'t;13ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS-92-18 AND ADDENDUM THERETO AND ADOPTING MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM; APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 10 TO THE CERTIFIED LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AND BAYFRONT SPECIFIC PLAN AND AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL TO THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION; AND, ENTERING INTO A PARKING AGREEMENT WITH ROHR INC. TO ALLOW OFF-SITE PARKING WITHIN THE ADJACENT SDG&E EASEMENT (City Council Action) C. PUBLIC HEARING: TO CONSIDER COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 57 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A THREE-STORY PARKING STRUCTURE EXPANSION AT 850 LAGOON DRIVE AND DEVELOPMENT OF LANDSCAPED PARKING WITHIN ADJACENT SDG&E EASEMENT. RESOLUTION \ \:><<3\"< ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATlVEDECLARA TIONIS-92-18AND ADOPTING MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM; AND ISSUING COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 57 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A THREE-STORY PARKING STRUCTURE EXPANSION AT 850 LAGOON DRIVE AND DEVELOPMENT OF LANDSCAPED PARKING WITHIN ADJACENT SDG&E EASEMENT (City Council Action) I" l-:J. SUBMITTED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR l..o... REVIEWED BY: EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/CITY MANAGER (4/5ths Vote: YesX No-> -:u> -, Page 2, Item 2J1 Meeting Date 04/07/92 Rohr Inc. proposes to construct a 125,000 square foot, six-story office building on property located at 850 Lagoon Drive where Rohr is currently constructing a 245,000 square foot office building and two subterranean parking garages. In addition to the new office building, Rohr proposes to expand the south parking structure with three above ground levels and develop the adjacent SDG&E right-of-way with landscaped parking. A south vehicle ingress/egress will be constructed along G Street to Bay Boulevard. The project is located within the Bayfront Redevelopment Project and within the Local Coastal Zone. The project will required Agency approval of an owner participation agreement and City Council approval of a Local Coastal Program amendment, a parking agreement, coastal development permits, and vacation of G Street. Also, to allow the six-story building, the California Coastal Commission must approve the proposed Local Coastal Program amendment. The Planning Commission, the Design Review Committee, and the Resource Conservation Commission have reviewed the project plans and environmental documents and have submitted their recommendations to the Agency and City Council. RECOMMENDATION: A. That the Redevelopment Agency adopt the attached resolution: 1. Adopting Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-92-18 and Addendum thereto and adopting the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program set forth in Attachment I; 2. Approving Owner Participation Agreement BF/OP No.4 with Rohr Inc. set forth in Attachment II; 3. Appropriating $110,000 to the Bayfront Fine Arts account; 4. Committing $737,000 of future Tax Increment to be derived from development of property to be reimbursed to Rohr Inc. to off-set development and permit fees; and 5. Recommending that the City Council approve Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 10, approve a parking agreement to allow off-site parking on the adjacent SDG&E easement, and initiate the vacation of a portion of G Street and the conveyance of a portion of Tidelands Avenue. B. That the City Council conduct a public hearing, consider public testimony, and adopt a resolution: 1. Adopting Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-92-18 and addendum thereto and adopting the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program set forth in Attachment I; 2. Approving Amendment No. 10 to the certified Local Coastal Program and Bayfront Specific Plan set forth in Attachment III and authorizing submittal to the California Coastal Commission; 3. Entering into a parking agreement with Rohr Inc. to allow off-site parking within the adjacent SDG&E easement as set forth in Attachment IV; and 4. Direct staff to initiate the vacation of a portion of G Street and conveyance of a portion of Tidelands Avenue as described on Exhibit A Attachment II. 2C -I- Page 3, Item b Meeting Date 04/07/92 C. That the City Council conduct a public hearing, consider public testimony, and adopt a resolution: 1. Adopting Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-92-18 and addendum thereto and adopting the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program set forth in Attachment I; and 2. Approving issuance of Coastal Development Permit No. 57 for the construction of a three-story parking structure expansion at 850 Lagoon Drive and development of landscaped parking within adjacent SDG&E easement. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDA nON: The Resource Conservation Commission recommended that the Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-92-18 be adopted. The Design Review Committee recommended that the project be approved subject to conditions and the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve LCP Amendment No. 10. Minutes to the Commissions and the Committee meetings are attached as Attachment V. DISCUSSION: The project site consists of approximately 15.25 acres (11.5 acres owned by Rohr + 3.74 acres within the SDG&E easement) located on the south side of Lagoon Drive about 400 feet west of Bay Boulevard. Currently, Rohr is constructing a 245,000 sq. ft. office building and two subterranean parking structures on the project site. This proposal includes the construction of a six-story, 125,000 sq. ft. administrative/corporate office building, a three level above ground expansion to the south parking structure, and development of the adjacent SDG&E easement with landscaped parking. The result of both projects will be a total of 370,000 sq. ft. of space and 1311 parking spaces. (See site plan, Exhibit B of BF/OP No.4, in Attachment II.) Site Plan and Architecture The new building follows the architectural design of the building currently under construction. The same color, materials, and architectural articulation of forms are incorporated into the design. The west side of the building design radius, ribbon windows and plaza design between structures reinforces Building No.1, creating an interrelationship between buildings and an overall design statement. The roof line for Building No. 2 is a conceptualization of an airplane wing, symbolic for Rohr. On-site vehicle parking will entail two parking structures and some surface parking to accommodate handicap spaces. The north garage (adjacent to Lagoon Drive) will be subterranean with the top level of parking at four feet above grade and will accommodate 219 spaces. The south garage will provide 624 spaces with subterranean and above-ground levels and 219 spaces will be on-site surfaces spaces. The adjacent SDG&E easement will be landscaped and will provide 340 vehicle spaces. Throughout the project, a total of 1311 vehicle parking spaces will be provided which exceeds the required number of spaces necessary to accommodate the proposed buildings. About 262 of the required vehicle parking spaces will be located within the SDG&E easement which Rohr has leased with options for at least 15 years. To ensure that the applicant will continue to provide the number of vehicle spaces required by ordinance, it is recommended that Rohr enter into the parking agreement attached as Attachment IV (potential Use Restriction on Office Space). The parking agreement guarantees to the City that Rohr will provide the required number of vehicle spaces on-site and adjacent to the site on the SDG&E easement. The agreement states that if the SDG&E easement for any ;2.D - 3 Page 4, Item )JJ Meeting Date 04/07/92 reason is no longer available to Rohr for parking, then Rohr will provide an alternate site satisfactory to the City for the 262 spaces. If, for any reason, no site is satisfactory to the City, then Rohr has agreed to reduce the active use of a maximum of 78,600 sq. ft. of floor area in the professional buildings to negate the need for the 262 spaces. The above-ground expansion of the south parking structure will be thirty-nine feet in height which is within the LCP's allowed forty-four foot height limitation. Building No.2, however, will be six-stories in height (94') which exceeds the building height limitation. To allow the six-stories, the height limitation must be increased. (See following discussion regarding proposed LCP Amendment No. 10.) The land use designation for the project site is Industrial: Business Park. The proposed industrial related office use is allowed within the that land use designation. The building floor area ratio (F .A.R) for the land use designation is .5. Building No. I, currently under construction, uses the site's allowed .5 F.A.R. To allow Building No.2 to be constructed, the on-site building floor area ratio must be increase to .75. (See following discussion regarding proposed LCP Amendment No. 10.) Fine Arts It is the policy of the Redevelopment Agency that a developer within the Bayfront Project Area contribute 1/2 of I % of their building valuation toward the development of Fine Art. The funds are to be deposited in a pool of funds to be used at the discretion of the Agency, in consultation with the developer, in creating and funding significant works of art. Also, the policy states that the Agency will deposit 1/2 of I % of the proposed building valuation into the pool of funds to be used for significant works of art. In the event a developer commissions a fine arts feature without Agency involvement, it must be consistent with the ambience of the site and surroundings and it will be considered as the developer's 1/2 of I % credit to the joint Fine Arts Fund. Based on the project's valuation of $22,000,000, Rohr and the Agency each will be required to deposit $110,000 into the Fine Art Fund for a total of $220,000. Rohr is currently investigating the potential for construction of an on-site work of art. Therefore, it is being recommended that, as a condition of approval, the Agency allow Rohr to propose and on-site feature prior to issuance of occupancy permit. If a work of fine art is not approved by the time an occupancy permit is requested, then Rohr would be required to deposit the fine art fee. Environmental Considerations Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-92-18 and an addendum and a mitigation monitoring and reporting program were prepared for the project. The mitigation monitoring program outlining mitigation necessary to be implemented to mitigate potential impacts has been included in Attachment I. Implementation of the program has been included in the conditions of approval for the project. A requirement for Rohr to enter into a third party contract with the City to hire a Mitigation Compliance Coordinator to oversee the program also has been included as a condition of approval to ensure that mitigation is incorporated into the project activities. Three comments were received during the public review period for the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service expressed concern primarily about preditor management adjacent to the FIG Street Marsh. City staff and the developer's representatives met with the U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service staff and responded to their concerns. The Chula Vista Elementary School District submitted a letter regarding the collection and basis for collection of school fees and the Public Utilities Commission sent a letter concerning 2D-l/ Page S, Item ~D Meeting Date 04/07192 public access over railroad tracks located within F Street. Letters in response to both agencies' concerns were prepared. Copies of staff's written responses are included in the addendum to IS-92-18 in Attachment I. Local Coastal Pro!!ram Amendment An amendment to the certified Chula Vista Local Coastal Program is being proposed in order to implement the proposed Rohr administrative/corporate office building. The amendment will affect the Rohr site only and will allow an increased amount of development on approximately 15.25 acres. (The current construction, which includes Building 1 and two parking structures, is consistent with all of the current LCP Provisions.) The amendment will increase the maximum permitted floor area ratio (FAR) on the site from 0.50 to 0.75. It will also increase the maximum permitted building height from 44 feet to 95 feet for a single building meeting certain setback requirements (see Exhibit B of Attachment III for proposed amendment text and graphics). In accordance with the requirements, any project proposing an FAR over 0.50 or a building over 44 feet tall will be required to meet special standards and will be subject to specific City review requirements. The rationale for these changes is included in the discussion below. A six-week local review period for this amendment began February 22, 1992. A Planning Commission public hearing was held on March 25, 1992 and the Commission recommended that the Council approve the subject LCP amendment. Subsequently, the amendments will be forwarded to the Coastal Commission for consideration. Approval of this LCP amendment is among the mitigation measures associated with Rohr's proposal to construct a six-story, 125,000 sq. ft. building at 850 Lagoon Drive. As proposed, the building height and building F .A.R. are inconsistent with the adopted LCP, however, approval of the LCP amendment as proposed will establish the necessary consistency and fully mitigate the inconsistency impact, as identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-92-18. Rohr has indicated that the purpose of these new office buildings is to house corporate and administrative staff functions which are currently distributed throughout the manufacturing facility to the south of the project site. Combining these functions at a single location is intended to increase administrative efficiency and provide greater flexibility for the development/redevelopment of other portions of the Rohr facility. Development intensity is regulated by fixing a floor area ratio (FAR) for the site. The current maximum allowed FAR for the site is 0.50 (building floor area may equal 0.50 of the site area). The total proposed development on this site has been calculated to include 500,452 square feet of building floor area for purposes of the FAR standard. This includes Buildings 1 and 2, and the parking structure. This intensity of development requires an FAR of approximately 0.75. If adopted, a 0.75 FAR would permit up to 510,000 square feet of development, which would accommodate the proposed project plus 9,548 square feet to allow a small degree of design flexibility. In order to assure adequate review of an increased intensity project, special review requirements are established for any project which proposes to exceed 0.50 FAR. The 0.75 standard is fixed as the absolute maximum (see Exhibit B of Attachment III - Specific Plan Appendix D for review requirements). The change in the FAR limit from 0.50 to 0.75 would allow a fifty percent increase in the permitted development intensity of the affected parcels. Although this is a significant increase, several factors suggest that increased intensity at this location could be considered appropriate: I. Proposal concentrates administrative and office based functions at a single location and allows for conversion of other industrial areas to coastal dependent uses via Rohr Master Plan process. ~D. 5- Page 6, Item 1.1> Meeting Date 04/07/92 2. Provides for positive corporate focal point within a generally undistinguished industrially developed area. 3. Allows additional investment by major regional employer encouraging continued contribution to local, regional and state economies. 4. Aesthetically improves visually degraded site, including SDG&E and railroad rights-of-way. 5. Incorporates structured parking which avoids visual and environmental impacts of massive open, at- grade parking areas. 6. Project is within Midbayfront project area, which is to be assessed to fund on-going operations of the Nature Interpretive Center. 7. Improves property and implements a portion of local circulation system to improve public access to coastal resources. 8. Recent conceptual approval of the Midbayfront project by the City Council, which includes significantly increased development intensity and building heights (compared to adopted LCP) on the parcel immediately north of the site. The primary factors which would tend to restrict or limit development intensity would be compatibility with adjacent uses and infrastructure/public service capacities. These issues were evaluated for this project in the environmental documentation prepared for the project and were all found to be insignificant or mitigable to insignificant through implementation of the mitigation requirements. By requiring specific review standards and criteria, the City can maintain the necessary level of control on the project when it exceeds the basic FAR standard, including service thresholds and aesthetic issues. The second aspect of the proposed amendment is an increase in permitted building height from 44 feet to 95 feet. The proposed Building 2 is designed to be 94 feet high. Again, the proposed amendment is intended to accommodate the proposed building with a small degree of flexibility for final design. Increased building height can increase the amount of ground level open space on the site and, if appropriately designed, create an aesthetically pleasing landmark or focal point for the surrounding area. The issues associated with building height are compatibility with adjacent uses, impacts to the Wildlife Refuge, and aesthetics. The proposed amendment includes special requirements for site design and review to ensure that the issues are appropriately addressed. The proposed amendment limits the number of buildings exceeding the 44 foot limit to a single building which could function as the landmark/focal point for the overall Rohr facility. In order to minimize potential impacts to adjacent properties, increased setbacks are required for any building which exceeds the 44 foot height standard. The setbacks from Lagoon Drive and the Wildlife Refuge are increased to 200 feet and the sethack from the SDG&E easement is increased to 50 feet. This assures that any tall building will be located in the central portion of the site, away from adjacent uses. In order to limit the bulk of a tall building, the building footprint is restricted to five percent of the site area. Potential impacts to the Wildlife Refuge were evaluated in the environmental documentation and the following measures have been incorporated: ,20 . Ie Page 7, Item jJ) Meeting Date 04/07/92 . The 94-foot high building must utilize non-reflective glass on the west side and bold architectural lines which are readily observable by birds. The glass which was approved for Building I will be used on this building. . No extraneous ledges upon which raptors could perch or nest can be included on the western side of the proposed 94-foot high building. Ledges facing west should not exceed two inches in width or should be sufficiently sloped to avoid perching. Additionally, the roof crests which are exposed to the wetlands must be covered with an anti-perch material such as Nixalite. A commitment to correct any additional problem areas should be obtained should heavy incidence of perching be observed on the buildings or in landscaping materials. . Outside lighting must be directed away from marsh areas or reflecting faces (windows) of the western side of the proposed building. Lights should be limited to the minimum required for security on the western side of the proposed building. These measures, among others, have been incorporated into the project through the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program. Other design requirements included in the LCP amendment for a project with increased FAR and building height are: a Comprehensive Landscape Plan indicating enhanced landscaping at project edges and within the SDG&E ROW parking area; off-street circulation connections to adjacent industrial and business park uses; compliance with all city-wide infrastructure/ service standards; and, a common, high quality architectural design and construction standard. These requirements will be evaluated in the special development project review required by the LCP amendment. Coastal Develoument Findine:s State and regional interpretive guidelines have been reviewed, and the proposed project has been found to be in conformance with the public access and public recreational policies of Chapter 3 of the public Resources Code. Based on the foIlowing findings, the Rohr Inc. proposal to construct a 125,000 sq. ft. administrative/corporate office building and three-level parking structure expansion at 850 Lagoon Drive and to develop landscaped parking within the adjacent SDG&E easement subject to conditions listed in Exhibit C of BF/OP No.4, is found to be consistent with the certified Local Coastal Program: A. The project will provide the number of on-site and adjacent vehicle parking spaces (through an agreement with the City of Chula Vista) to meet the vehicle parking requirements set forth in the certified LCP. The project is a minimum of one-third of a mile from the Bay's shoreline and public coastal park land. With adequate off-street vehicle parking provided by the development and the site's substantial distance from the bay's shoreline, no adverse impact on public access to the coast line is expected to occur. B. The project site is located adjacent to the F /G Street Marsh. However, Building I being constructed on the western portion of the project site will provide a barrier between the wetlands and Building 2 to be located on the eastern portion of the site. In accordance with Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-92-18, mitigation measures will be implemented to ensure that the building and associated activities will not adversely effect the adjacent wetland habitat. C. Ingress/egress via G Street will direct a large portion of on-site traffic to Bay Boulevard and away from ')P-1 Page 8, Item :B> Meeting Date 04/07/92 Lagoon Drive. Also public improvements to be incorporated into the project will provide an incremental increase toward improved access to coastal resources. D. The project site is designated for Industrial Business Park land uses. Administrative/corporate offices related to the industrial land use adjacent to the south are in conformance with the certified LCP land use element. FISCAL IMPACT: Fine Arts Fee In accordance with the Bayfront Fine Arts policy, the developer and the Agency are each required to contribute 1/2 of 1 % of the building valuation toward dine art within the Bayfront Project. Based on a building valuation of $22,000,000, the Developer and the Agency are required to each contribute $110,000 to the Bayfront Fine Art account for a total of $220,000. The Developer's contribution may be in the form of an on-site feature or as an alternative the developer may deposit cash into the Fine Art account prior to issuance of an Occupancy Permit. Funds for the Agency's portion are available from the unappropriated balance of the Bayfront/Town Centre Bond Fund. Tax Revenues Based on the project's estimated building valuation of $22,000,000, it is anticipated that the Agency will realize $220,000 annually in new tax increment from property tax following build-out. Provided the building is placed on the 1992-93 tax roll, the Agency should collect approximately $1,430,000 (present value) in new tax increment over the next 6 years. (Bayfront Redevelopment Project expires in 1999, although an amendment to extend the Project is anticipated.) Also, given a 40-year building life, approximately $2,736,800 (at present value) over the balance of the development project's life span would be collected by the City in new property tax. 6 years tax increment (Redevelopment) 33 years property tax (City) 40 years total revenue (present value) $1,430,000 $1.306.800 $2,736,800 Note: All revenues are based on conservative estimates. Present value has been used throughout and no increase in property values or interest on revenues has been added. For general fiscal information regarding estimates of new tax increment and property tax revenue that are anticipated to be collected from both Building 1 and Building 2 developments over a 40-year life expectancy, (see Table 1 attached). Please note that the figures used in Table 1 are simplified and no increases in property values have been calculated. Exoenditures If the Agency accepts staff's recommendation to provide the estimated development and permit fee off-set, expenditures would total an amount not to exceed $737,000. ($386,000 development and permit fees for Building 2 and $350,000 development and permit fees for Building 1.) If the Agency accepts staff's recommendation to participate in the financing of development and permit fee off-set, the $737,000 will be reimbursed to Rohr as the tax increment revenue is generated by the Building 2 development project. Based on the proposed project valuation of $22,000,000, total reimbursement is estimated to be 'J.-D~J' Page 9, Item :Lo Meeting Date 04/07/92 completed by the end of fiscal year 1995-96. Table 1 also shows Agency expenditures compared to revenues projected to be derived from projected new tax increment and property tax. Again, a simplified calculation has been used. (APR7RPn w.~ TABLE 1 AGENCY EXPENDITURES COMPARED TO PROJECTED REVENUES FROM BUILDING 1 AND BUILDING 2 DEVELOPMENTS (LAND NOT INCLUDED) Bldg. 1 Bldg. 2 Total Gross new tax increment $2,100,000 $1,430,000 $3,530,000 revenue thru FY 98-99 Expenditures (reimbursements 399.500 737.000 1.136.500 to Rohr) Net new tax increment $1,700,500 $ 693,000 $2,393,500 revenue through FY 98-99 Total new City Property 1. 782.000 1.306.800 3.088.800 Tax (33 years) Total new tax revenue $3,482,500 $1,999,800 $5,482,300 (40 years) (a,ltable2) ~.//) ROHR INDUSTRIES OFFICE COMPLEX Vicinity Map ~C-.. ":-:; - - - -,~- t<I",.1.I'~~ ~___ ~i--~ - -"'1- ~ ~___ lJ; G \:..>...~- -L <, .r --'" .! if ""r, >. \~ I~ I~ In o \~ \ N 'CD ~ ~~.d~ '" \0 s \0 ,3, .2tJ-11 ~tlft-~ POqL .)0-/)" . ATIACHMENT I . . J{)-J) . MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Contents Addendum to Negative Declaration Comment Letters and City Responses Mitigated Negative Declaration Mitigation Monitoring Program Initial Study Attachments . . J.O-11 . . . ADDENDUM TO NEGATIVE DECLARATION ROHR F & G STREET MASTER PLAN (15-92-18) The environmental review procedures of the City of Chula Vista allow the Environmental Review Coordinator (ERC) to prepare an addendum to a Negative Declaration or Environmental Impact Report, .if one of the following conditions is present: 1. The minor changes in the project design which have occurred since completion of the Final EIR or Negative Declaration have not created any new significant environmental impacts not previously addressed in the Final EIR or Negative Declaration; 2. Additional or refined environmental data available since completion of the Final EIR does not indicate any new significant environmental impacts not previously addressed in the Final EIR or Negative Declaration; and 3. Additional or refined information available since completion of the Final EIR or Negative Declaration regarding the potential environmental impact of the project, or regarding the measures of alternatives available to mitigate potential environmental effects of the project, does not show that the project will have one or more significant impacts which were not previously addressed in the Final EIR or Negative Declaration. This addendum has been prepared in order to provide additional information and analysis concerning project impacts. As a result of this analysis, the basic conclusions of the Negative Declaration have not changed. With implementation of mitigation measures, impacts are deemed to be less than significant for the proposed project. The minor change which has occurred in the project description is the identification of the source of employees to be housed in the Master Plan buildings. The Negative Declaration previously assumed that there could be some new employees in the Master Plan area, however, Rohr has submitted correspondence to the City stating that all employees in the Master Plan ~rea would be transferred from existing buildings in other parts of the Rohr campus. The only issue area which is changed by this new information is that of schools. Originally, it was determined that an indirect generation of students could occur from the proposed development, based on a worst case assumption that there would be new employees in the Master Plan area. This assumption, based on the Rohr correspondence, is invalid. Because all employees will be existing employees transferred over from the adjacent facilities, no indirect generation of students would occur, thus, no impact to the school districts would occur. Consequently, no mitigation would be required beyond the state-mandated fees collected for all new non-residential development. PC/F22 J~~/~ BOARD OF EOUCA noN CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT 84 EAST "J" STREET. CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910 . 619425-9600 EACH CHILD IS AN INDIVIDUAL OF GREAT WORTH OSEPH O. CUMMINGS. Ph.D. March 10, 1992 LARRY CUNNINGHAM SHARON GILES PATRICK A. JUDD GREG R. SANDOVAL SUPERINTENDENT JOHN E VUGAiN. Ph.D . . Mr. Chris Salomone Director of Community Development City of Chula vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 RE: Local Coastal Plan Amendment - Rohr Master Plan Dear Mr. Salomone: On December 20, 1991, the Chula vista Elementary School District commented on the Initial Study prepared for the Rohr Industries Master Plan. A copy of that letter is enclosed. There is still some question as to whether the current plan represents the entire master plan for the Rohr site. Since the California Environmental Quality Act does not permit a large project to be segmented, as segmentation does not permit assessment and quantification of cumulative impacts, any additional proposals for this property should be incorporated into this application. In reviewing the mitigated Negative Declaration, I note that the Initial Study correctly states that the project will result in the need for new or altered governmental services in the area of schools. However, the mitigation requirements listed on page 10, No. 11, do not adequately define how this mitigation is to be achieved. We have consistently stated that payment of State authorized developer fees alone falls far short of meeting facilities needs created by this project, and recommended participation in Mello-Roos financing or other alternative full-reimbursement mechanism. Mitigation requirementS for other public services are clearly spelled out, based on the identified project impacts. School mitigation should be similarly specific. Based on the proposed 650,000 square foot Master Plan, assuming the use to be Corporate Office (single user), 1,685 new jobs can be anticipated, 949 of whom will reside within the District, forming 935 new households. The District's student generation rate is 0.3 studentS/dwelling unit: therefore, 281 new students can be anticipated from implementation of this project. Participation (CFD) No. facilities. percent of in the District's Community Facility District 5 would fully mitigate impacts to school Non-resideRti~~ users are assessed 16.67 the rat~prqr6?residential development, a . . . March 10, 1992 Mr. Chris Salomone Page 2 RE: Local Coastal Plan Amendment - Rohr Master Plan proportion consistent with the State's authorized developer fee split. The current base tax rate for CFD No.5 is $ .157jsquare foot, and the tax commences when building permits are issued. Utilizing the taxing formula and the phasing schedule in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the first year's tax for Area A, assuming all permits were issued in the same year, would be approximately $9,684. I hope this provides additional . clarification as to the mitigation requested by the District. We ask that this information be incorporated into section F, page 10, No. 11, of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, to fully define mitigation necessary to reduce impacts to school facilities to a level of insignificance. If you have any questions, please contact me. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. Sincerely, .) I (1 \: ~'E. ~"-\...~" Kate Shurson Director of Planning & Facilities KS:dp cc: George Krempl Laura Romano Carl Kadie Tom Silva Ian Gill John Linn 20- )7 CARD OF EOUCA TlON ,PH D. CUMMINGS, Ph.D. ARRY CUNNINGHAM SHARON GILES PATRICK A. JUDO ;REG R SANDOVAl SUPERINTENDENT lHN F. VUGRIN. Ph.D . . CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT 84 EAST"J" STREET. CIlULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910 . 619425-9600 EACH CHILD,IS AN INDIVIDUAL OF GREAT WORTH December 20, 1991 Ms. Diana Richardson Community Development Dept. city of Chula vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 RE: Initial study - Rohr Master Plan, LCP Amendment and SDG&E Parking Plan IS-92-18 / FA-555 / DP-894 Bay Blvd./"F" street Dear Ms. Richardson: Thank you for providing a copy of the Initial Study for the Rohr Industries Master Plan. Commencing in July, 1990, through December of that year, the District provided comments and requested adequate mitigation for a 211,500 square foot office complex at the Rohr facility. We were unaware that further expansion of the Rohr Complex was contemplated, and that the project under consideration was only part of the first phase of a 650,000 square foot master plan. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not permit a large project to be segmented, as this makes it difficult to assess and quantify cumulative impacts. It is unclear why the first phase of this master plan was reviewed asa separate project. If any additional development is contemplated for the Rohr facility, it should be included in the master plan and analyzed at this time. The magnitude of the proposed project will have significant impacts on elementary facilities in Chula vista. since amending a Local Coastal Plan constitutes a Legislative Act, Yost v. Thomas (1984 36 Cal.3d 561), based on recent court decisions (Mira, Hart and Murrieta Valley), the city of Chula Vista must consider school adequacy and can condition project approval to provide adequate mitigation. The District requests that the city require full mitigation for impacts to school facilities. This could be in the form of participation in a Mello-Roos community Facilities District (CFD), or other form of acceptable full-reimbursement mitigation. Building 1 of Area A (211,500 square feet) did not involve a legislative act, and, therefore, the Qistrict was limited to collection of developer fees. Since no permit has been issued for this building, it would seem appropriate, and the applicant has the option, to include Building 1 of Area A in the total_~oject mitigation. ;2fl- /55 . . . December 20, 1991 Ms. Diana Richardson Page 2 RE: Initial study - Rohr Master Plan, LCP Amendment and SDG&E parking Plan The information provided indicates construction is proposed for vacant land, as well as replacement of existing structures with new and/or expanded facilities. In order to quantify impacts on school facilities, additional data is required. It is unclear from the information submitted whether the total project consists of 655,000 square feet (11/20/91 Starboard Application), or 650,000 square feet (Attachment A of Initial study). Assuming the total master plan consists of 655,000 square feet, less the 211,500 square feet of Area A, 443,500 square feet remain, not 455,000 as shown on the Starboard Application. It's unclear what is included in the application for an amendment to the LCP. The plan also indicates removal of 15,000 square feet of temporary trailers. Several years ago when these trailers were installed, the District agreed not to charge developer fees since the use was temporary. It was agreed that they would be removed and replaced by permanent structures which would then be subject to school mitigation, It should be noted that in calculating square footage for school mitigation, state law does not provide for demolition "credit" for anything other than a single family home, and then only when it is destroyed as the result of a natural disaster and is replaced in kind. As stated above, to adequately quantify impacts this project will have on school facilities, additional data is required. The District utilizes a formula for assessing a "fair share" for school impacts to non-residential development. Once the necessary information is provided, this can be calculated. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, ~S~~ Kate Shurson Director of Planning and Facilities KS:dp cc: Carl Radie Tom Silva John Linn Ian M. Gill 4:rohr-mas ;2fJ- /( . . . DODD DODD noHn ROHR INDUSTRIES, INC. POST OffiCE BOX 878 CHULA VlSTA CALIFORNIA 92012-0878 (619) 691-4111 . TELEX: 69-8)38 March 25, 1992 Mr. Chris Salomone Director of Community Development Department city of Chula vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Re: Rohr Office Complex Subject: Local Coastal Plan Amendment - Rohr Master Plan Dear Chris: We were recently made aware by our Development Manager, Starboard Development Corporation, of correspondence dated December 20, 1991, and March 10, 1992, submitted to you by Kate Shurson of the Chula vista Elementary School District. This correspondence was generated in response to the Initial Environmental Study and subsequent Negative Declaration associated with our LCP Amendment and Masterplan for approximately 35 acres between "F" and "G" Streets, Bay Boulevard and the U.S. Fish and wildlife's "FIG" Street Marsh property. The School District's opinion expressed in these two letters is that payment of the state mandated non-residential school fees alone, currently $0.26/square foot of habitable space for the proposed buildings, will not provide adequate financial mitigation to offset the cost of the additional student facility need created by our relocation. The District is therefore requesting an alternative and significantly more expensive solution for Rohr, namely annexation to an existing Mello Roos District CFD No.5. As its justification, the School District references a statistical formulaic approach which relates household generation, to job creation provided through commercial development. This formula approach was proposed in a special study report dated March 12, 1990, "School District Development Impact Fees: Relationship between New Non-residential Development and Student Enrollment" prepared by Sourcepoint and commissioned and funded by several South Bay school districts, . including Chula vista. It is our understanding that the existing state legislation which enabled collection of development fees on non-residential c2:;J-c20 . . . buildings required school districts to demonstrate a clear project specific nexus to justify even collection of the $0.26/square foot fee. As a good corporate citizen of Chula vista, Rohr chose not to challenge collection of the state mandated fees, a total of $63,700 attributed to our Design and Engineering Office building currently under construction, even though we felt no clear nexus had been demonstrated. Furthermore, this building and all future Rohr buildings planned for the 35 acre masterplan will exclusively house employees relocated from other existing buildings on our campus. These buildings will then either be demolished or recycled for use by other existing employees as part of our continuing effort to improve efficiency and consolidate staff functions to achieve the full benefits of co- location. This relocation of personnel will result in no new job creation at Rohr or the generation of any additional student enrollment and therefore no need for any additional school facilities. The approval of the 35 acre masterplan, including anticipated building types and projected timing of construction, has been a key element to maintaining Rohr's economic viability and a continuing commitment to Chula vista. Chris, as you are aware minimizing the lead time for planning entitlement and also the cost of these planned buildings is essential. We really appreciate your role on behalf of the city in helping us achieve our goals thus far. While we sympathize with the School District's desire to augment their existing funding sources, we see no justification for the request as it relates to our plan and we would appreciate your conveying this information to Kate Shurson, Director of Planning and Facilities of the School District. sincerely yours, r#-~ Arthur o. Sellgren Director Real Estate and Development AOS:mct cc: Ian M. Gill, Starboard Development Corp. Diana Richardson, city of Chula vista ;2lJ-02f . . . ~u~ -.~ . - -- ..-..-~- ~~ C1lY OF CHUlA VISTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT March 24, 1992 Ms. Kate Shurson Chula Vista Elementary School District 84 East J Street Chula Vista, CA 91910 Dear Kate: Since you last spoke with our staff regarding the Rohr Master Plan project, and subsequent to my receipt of your letter regarding the same, I have received a letter from Rohr which clarifies Rohr's use of the Master Plan buildings. Rohr has stated that they will use all of the Master Plan buildings for existing employees who currently work in other areas of the campus. This changes the assumption made in the Initial Study that an indirect generation of students could occur from new employees of the Master Plan area. Based on Rohr's statement, all personnel would be relocated, thus avoiding this potential impact. Therefore, no mitigation is required. Also, I would like to clarify that Rohr presently intends to build only Building 2 of the Master Plan area (as well as the accommodating parking). However, they have included the entire Master Plan area in this proposal in order to prevent the piecemeal planning you mentioned. If you have further comments please submit them to me prior to the Redevelopment Agency meeting on the project scheduled for April 7 at 4:00 p.m. Si~~ Chris Salomone Community Development Director DR/bb [C:IWP51ISALOMONEILEITERSISHURSON.LTR] >>-o<A ~O'l-'\?223:?4. T ':':>. R 1992 '" R '" eceived W $. ~De' Development fJ (f'!: p.,rtment '-I ....~ / <~ 1" ~Ol68L99.'(/" ' Tack S. Joe {415} 557-9884 PETE WILSON, Governor $1 A TE OF CALIFORNIA @...-... ~. - ~~..... . PUBLIC UTIlITIES COMMISSION ~5 VAN NESS AVENUE ~AN FRANCISCO. CA 94102-3298 MARCH 19, 1992 SCH #92021067 Diana Richardson City ofChula vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Dear Ms. Richardson: This refers to the City's Mitigated Negative Declaration for Rohr F & G street Master Plan, Case No. IS-92-18, SCH #92021067. . The staff has reviewed this declaration and notes that nothing has been discussed or addressed in regards to the railroad and transit operations that traverse through the project area. Our records indicate that the daily volume is 190 transit trains and 3 - 4 freight trains. It would appear that any vehicular traffic going into the area would, by necessity, have to cross the railroad tracks. What kind of impact is this likely to cause or occur? Secondly, our records do not seem to indicate any authority for Lagoon Drive which is shown crossing the railroad's right-of-way. Is Lagoon Drive a private or public roadway? We appreciate having had an opportunity to review and comment on this matter, thank you. sincerely, /;;7 /' ~~~:nsportation Engineer Special Projects section Railroad Safety Branch Safety Division cc: State Clearinghouse - Tom Loftus Ray Toohey . :2c~):S . . . ~J~ =~:-: ------ -- """'=-- """""-~ OlY OF CHULA VISTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT March 27, 1992 Mr. Tack S. Joe Public Utilities Commission 505 Van Ness Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102-3290 Dear Mr. Joe: I have received your letter regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Rohr F & G Street Master Plan (IS-92-18, SCH #92021067), and I am enclosing a letter prepared by Rick Engineering Company which addresses your questions. Though the public comment period is over, please do not hesitate to contact me if you have further questions. Sincerely, rJ~ft- Diana G. Richardson Environmental Facilitator DGR/ss Enclosure (a..Voe/ur) .JL9 - .J1( 276 FOURTH AVE/CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910/10191 f,Ql-"intl7 . "- i. ,; . . . 11AR 25 '92 13: 42 RICK ENGR. SAN DIEGOTR. P.2/5 ~." ~ RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY 5620 Fri.an. Road San Diego California 92110-2596 (619}29I.o707 FAX: (619) 291-4]65 March "25, 1992 Ms. Pam Buchan Community Development Department City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, California 92010 sOa.1ECT: POBLIC UTILITIES REGARDING ROHR F & G NEGATIVE DECLARATION COMMISSION (POC) STREET MASTER PLANS CASE NO. 15-92-18. COMMENTS MITIGATED REFERENCE ~ PUC LETTER DATED MARCH 19, 1992 REGARDING SUBJECT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION. Dear Ian: We have reviewed the reference letter and have prepared the following response as you requested by fax. The P.U.C. has two comments regarding the railroad that traverseS the project site: First, the volume of transit and freight trains may impact vehicular traffic to the project site. Second, their records do not indicate public. rights-of-way for Lagoon Drive as it crosses the railroad at the subject site. The following is our response to the P.U.C.s comments: First, the train volumes sited in the referenced letter, probably pertain to the railroad on the east side of Interstate 5. The railroad that traverses the project site is rarely used, and definitely not on a daily basis. The railroad east of Interstate 5 is controlled at crossings with automatre railroad crossing gates and traffic signals. The final project Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by J}{K and Associates did not indicate the controlled railroad crossings east of Interstate 5 or the railroad crossinq at the project site as potentially significant"impacts to the project. c1fJ/:2~ . . . 11RR 25 '92 13: 42 RICK ENGR. SRN DIEGOTR. MS. Pam Buchan March 25, 1992 Page 2 P.3/5 Second, right-of-way for Lagoon Drive has been granted to the City of Chula vista. We have attached the copies of the deeds. Sincerely, ;?i"~ K!!1:. Birke. l<LB:bk Attachments CCI Ian Gill - starboard Development ;2f)-,)f ~'f:-~;7~AR2~"sf2--"'13=44 -RICK 2i<- ;1~.,""f""''''''~''-'''' '.'' ".-. ~{.!;;~~- f' W~~~~;:::-t: . ~ :~~,~\it.~~. .~r...:"~ ~- . .,,,A',,",~ '''''''t'>'-z',' .-.' '.' .~:- 3';M,B:.~1t~~... ".' -' ~- '~~~::~::~-'~ ~~~.: ~~ ~~. ~-"~'-.i'ft:!:""" ",_-," ',' u'..,- -~ ....:. .~- ''''''' . . ~....'! . ~'o7f.' :;"''/7'J . . :,,:;..- /,/.... .' \< . /" . { I" \/4 ~cbQYI ,~..~ ~:-~4 ..""'. y'-'{ ~.edi'6h f L-,~ :' J ,~ ~l'.l .. <: . ,". :::,:... Til W ;;J;Q :..DD ~U^" . ...".....~ -.1, ~ .:; .~ ..,Nt.... mnbc aaI. "sac _taMe ..... ... br ~ d 1M 1,-. ... tt... ..... .r ,: i ~" WUuala, Ji"oft7 .c' "" ,It'a.. ...... ,~ d4 ... --u.n.11d ., f"_ (~.OOJ ....,,1an i: ~ ... I' S. k.& JIIIdAt a. ......~ .: _,_ ill il..-r ~.,... .... b ....J.Mn.U- .,. .t Qt ~ ud. 1"...".1a.. ~a,Jat\.d .....s..-l. .... "" ~,.....- ~ .:; .... to 1Jw C1'J ct ~ Tln..., . -UtSJIIol CWJ'CI~'1ea d'..1.... l& U4 ONDtJ' tlf ... 1)1.. ,.' . 1E~ ftah tit o.1UCl"lta. fel .u.... p1:I'p\l'" NlJ', .... ...n. ..~.ni... ~1Jl&Ib" ...,....... ..u n. ,.s~u. U1.l. ad bt..,ut 1.G ..JIlt, W \114.' :r..:& fnPJ""~7 .1-.,.. 111 ~ at, fit ana.. '1'&111.'4, bm1.~ ., .... ~.a<I. au'- flit WUoau.. ~ &at ~nbetl ... t.n_s_ n. lculbnlr hrlf (,.0) ,.., of 0.. ..da'lf tIaU d -Q.. JGJU.. ._~1" 0,I&n.'1' u& u.. toanll.,u hrir (.0) ,.... .t UHl ,.......1, ..u ef Cte Iosu.- ....'tal:,'~' ~ ~ hoUoI OM amu.. &1zt1""''' ClII). a1._ 1M ~""I [fWlr (40' t...t 01' '111.. ~'.nr ~et of Oaaz"'" -.nice. ~ 1tIaAQ.,d. ---.tr.:J t,..o ~!~....~i~t... ... ~....~ 4t 1& hu1_. .u,.n: " all Ult ,1p1..-&__1 Cl70..1~.~ ::MMI ~.'t";_it .,.-\..4- n1e (j~ >> .,u. tc) J>4IJ1U.... .. e1'--he d t_ p.1U1C b1&h"" .ip';, (BO) t.., w:Ii~. bwWifl u 'r 'n_t. ...t.,171 it ".s.m.c U2;~h04 tt.M ~ ~t. 'U... l).rN'U.:t h.:r81~ u...;.,.. ~1w.1.". \IN aZl4 ~_ho $l. "tb.. Jl"O)'tJIulT ,....tr (80) f..~ lit M-14 ~~~_:r. ~ the lo:Nu.erlt 'fwm'r (~) .i~~l-~ .~t! 1I1ili.a:J 2.~~' .1$1)10 1M J1r~S't7 J:..n~ ~1..e. f07 .. ,..;1.04. 01 ",,",,- (JO) ,..,.. _ ., '1..). No_ ~l ...._.- pl~u.C)a Of eyd;, ~,"lot! 1M 1~Cl'l "'0 \h. car of O.a.. l'1ak 102: ..t:r.~ nJ'POI'... :I..:' ....... ~ ~:.(.. .. j.;,~i ..:: :. f :::.: e:'.~:::l .. ~~~: .\-:... .2S',... LII""t 'I..)M... Gi.;O-..,.., h\."..... A. D..,1;140. , _..~'~"E. :~~~.., . ~.ro"" ... .. L. sa.~...,. . h\aQ ft!I1lG Ia U4 '91' t;h .......,. of ... m.... 8\&\e .~": !l" l' .' ....: _ ~~... ._.... _ OI11'Qh.... :r..1d:_ tlleui. M1 ..._1........~ ""~~...",..,... .;g.~~~. . ~ - -~ .I... ~ _hi. baC U MU 1te t1HI: ~l.. .....ao...'.. ~ ~..., u. ~I'pe;~ .~:;(t::".f~.'.~. . :~. -'I. ....e..Ht tu... ftl_ ,p~ 1k _s.\I4a ;,U\rwm aM';" m~ tc,... h .~:. "i'_-;~ :.- .) . . ~~@7~j< :~' . .;: ',;; '.. "- .~::: ......... ........ ........., of M14 ............ OM............... mc.~ ,--~~.,~_~. . .. - ..' ,',' .' .~. ~~~05;~~;.:;:~~:;~..~-:;~"'" ".:,l!.. :;. rr~-f7~~~f.1'~:'''~':' :';;J_" :" ~~~:~~~~~_'~:::~i~r.~~'.:~ ~;~. . . '.-, < 6 , > , .;,-~?~~. ~:: ,i... ::.r~ .'- _!-_w.'. .~~~ -,. 01__ ..... , ........ ". ENGR. "SAIi DIEGOTR. N,orUu IlL 0\ "F"4 cJ\ o~~F' ~ 101\ ~..., 1"r.. uG ~S~rp4 :.f ur $S1lU..t of tht- ~1_ "' !~ "'~pII. Il \lIllnc :W'tfl,II~ ~.:17 ~ aDt ~ ,.i; \.he C1t-;:r .: ar.\I1a ~$.U .W1 .ftI4. a.lC)~ ~ octu 11M III M14 .".. au"" --. .. ...,-'-ll.. hGI; .. .u.t. u U .., '-_ urlMb1". ~, .......r ~ 7WC17 (~) fH$ lIpGII. ~ tll" tt MJ.4 iO~ur 11M. -.!. n.t ..., _., d t.H Mi4 ~ ~ mQ\ bt ......-.4 ....1P$ "&ll. 1.1j.Z14. cf 10M en.t-n ~e1D.1~ ...S. :IdCIl..,-. bit. .w1 be p&14 rIOI' ad tf tll... .rJl'I7al 1v.a4 fahe4 lq 'ka4' .. an poo~ .1\::~ the aIfo1Cl~J.17' fI1'~l'l..u. to un 1Jt\1'0 !CUI ~ aben ~~ q4. 4e.CIdM4 ,,...,s... ~ "bf _14 Oft.Jl~. st.e .-.oe...ue ~ ...s1tZlof tvtflC. tu t1Ml ~... ~ 'POll 'Ow "'~U,,_ ,.....1. ~'t". -.t1Qtl-4.,. 1JZ UI ~ 1..dP CCHt.1CkA'nOlI". ITl oKlO I. JIU.H Yla. "",IC.' , "-"~ IlaU(v. ~, 1'. ...1DIttJ;Q8. hOf.t.f1'. ,~ ~ cJ fJ .-J '7 ( P.5/5 - ilL *::~, ., 31' ... .- ,... .- v. i - ... .. . .. . .. .. . ~ \'i.\'" ~ -->-; \<;~? ~ ... ~i- . .. .~ ".:' :-:.~ ..~~:.~ .' " .~;~. '. .::,...,. ':~' .::j$ -';--- :~::. :,~.:~'j ':":;' .. ", ~ ~. -. . .:;.-"c;",,::.> "j"lAR 25 '92 13' 43 RICK ENGR, SAU.DIEGOTR. la.. WI:U ,D(;'.'.t'M .b4P.. ~~'l~cn-i~;i~':'~~~:..~~:'~:~~.:~~~-:'- + ": _:Jit~;'H1 :~! ". t~~'~ 1& 'tlO1101Lo~&UO!l at \II. _ 01 '1'''' Dol1u.. ~f;f!(~t~:r~r' ':~~=&;~~l .. Dt'IO. :::::&~':::.:::8:a:~::~~ $::~ ~'p:;:~. TuiaV'. lT3:~~ f. ":;~:. ,.' : !1W.tM.ilI $lIf CUT .t CllNl.. Tida. Cl9uDtr /If be Di.SO. fta1. .t e&U.to~la, _".11 . ~ ~~~~:~ ,;" :: . ". ~a4 lle..".1k4 .. '.11.....'- .. . _;_'. . -", .'(Ull1!ll a. a pa1m _ tho b.at.,.1)111lt. of ~t.. !l.cU... ..... '",,,, ::{_.~~.:.~ ~~ic'2 bQ' ln, ~ne u.. _ u lntor...U4 bY ~. dh1alOD U". H'.MIl tIl. .-.rtll &ad ',., eOllt!; ba1".. $t.tlIe .dd ~~u eeaUCD. and. %IIllJl1lli t~ ,tIIttlo. IIolItIl 70~' w.n ~~::;l~:. ::., . aloa, 1b .&14 11lrto1111l 1111. '1'... n""...Dll o.D4 11i<b'1"lhi-." la043' t.o'~ ...n 'ot' 1.... ~'t.'...:' . W \II. _ 111t;ll .tor l1"f of Ge:ZI Di,to ~&JI ,lIttl.. ._llUll alollC \II" - !liP" ~.,t:~::.:. .... "';t8r 21... h & po"" "f_t fU'T (CO, t.f' 8' deb' -st.. tio. tll. .tor.MU Ill1'1dO" ~;.. . . tII,,, IIortll fO~' J:u1i W u.. at.ru:.ld ~ndoa 1ln. . if> .- . 11M .to tb. b.alotrl, 1t1l. ot u. ..14 ~.r boU.. ...."er U21 $1Iol'Cla ...~1l...2T i1;;<: aloAI tli. ,af4' bet.,~1:r 11D' hrt:r (40) f'..t to UI& poUlt. .r I'~' .t b&c1t6,Sq. fh l~i.t ::_~-::4.::;;:~::;.::~:::'~:.:~: ~:) ~ ::.,:: ::,:"PU:: t.,. .( .. . p-at4 ..u. 1&114 ....UOl.&4 &1>0.. tor ......" P'UPO'., ...,4 $b&t th.; .0" of: ~II. ,.14 '.'~.!;~( :::".;0;:':.:'::::'::: ::=~-:.::; ::...."":"' ......;..,'::::.:::: ~ :; ..14 Augua"u'. B. lCl.~l1, "'''ep\ ....11 .. portlDZl .. ..aul4 -~, 1>. ........Il\>:r ~~~~i~:~ ~e~ UA\161 a. 1....,. - $!';:, Th& &bon 4..orlll.d. 1-'>4 W be,"f4 tot .,r."" "'" 1l1~..., P\I%JlC'.' ,~1;~( .111'....4 I. tli. &1'm of' tIl. ...U at'.., er ll~", ""lZIr'~1'e4.. ... pIIloUo t:~_'~ . tae 1ud. d..ertb.4 lIenl1r. .hall %nen baOk t) tll.. ..14, . 3~' .U..' or bl&f1-:r .t &ZIT tl.. 1ZI tll. tutll~".. Aquftue .1. .a:1II~1. bl.. ".ir. or f,iW.)':- - ...lp attlloull ht U 111wu.. OA tIla.put fit tll. CU, of Clna1" 'lf~. i.!.ri.' .. _ ... ,_~ _.::.~: :.:.:: ':'~::' ':'=' ... ....n... ,....... ",1i'" . Wl'l'n:ss O1lt lIa!l4. ~ .~1.. un 18111 4&1 At lPn~, 11114. ;;:.&:. . 1li0;a.4 Mot ..._te4 lil P""."", .or..,.... ""_tIl. II." no.,.l (sw.) ).~'gj~. - '; '~~" , ""1" A. nalla11 (llDJo) ':'~:f.:: ~tt of o.1u.aS&.1 .-':,1:E{" Il$. tt'JJf. ' . oo.:at1 of ~ 1I1fsa. ,~.w;. Oll. W. 1etll &., ot 1/1"1'__, 4, II, .If..t.. lIuW.a UI4 ~.... '~j{.... t;;!,~~. . """n. .... ;_. - . h'"F lullU.. 111 W In ea14 -\1, N&141ac -'1ZI, ~ ',~, . 404.T ~.oSOIlf4 .... .....n; _MU7 _...." ~" II. lt1~1 UI\ MUte 4. ~it~:':, lr1D&'11. u...u.. -.... t&... to... tile pft_ _llrib"" D..... ..... _'u.-.. ~'f.~:'-' ~t~;~ ", . .....111&4 ia tile 1IS t111:t lsIat_t. """ ~ad&" 10 r:.e tlI&\ "-0' aMlll....e.t tIIa -.. i~4til':'-" %If llt'llllSlJ_:r. I 11&1'0 _to .., ., __ _ .,6"'&4 .,. _ ottS.l~ .&&1, .. rq .tUn UI 1ta\1oZIal 01t1', CIoaa':r ot __ 1)1.... flato ., c..11taft1&. ;. . , UI& .., ~..,OI\~ ill Ud. C1o"tUl-.,. tl~,' a1lo1'. mU... :~~~~;[" ~::''\''i .ata>1' ""1>110 1lIG14 to:': =.t.... Dt.lI'l. 'i,;:. \.. '~_ ./ 8'.,. C>t C!a1U....ta. 02,1/;';;Z r " .j , . :,i '.~:! ".... . ;-.' '.'!~~ .:]?;~ :':;~.~~. ".f<.;"':l ~:}~{1.l . ".~'1~~~ ...... :Or 'f~"~':'~ ~~~}~~t% ~,.,~.;;; ::iJl;-" ~i ~~~~~. "ii:~' {~b;.6~ ..~t!:~.~~. ". J1~;.~~ ':1'.u.~'"$.. . .~'''';l:...i' :. . "ff~,:.':':;~/~: '." ". .', ..... .. 1:{:~ .,;., '. .., .. r~~t:~ ." ~~...:.::. :'I>:'Ji'{ ~"~:"" . . -;(..,.,.: .J!~;'" . ~'{.:~;. i- ; "..' . .t~;:'I..;~.. ',: .. i~ '~;":".~. "," l,;io};~~.:~ -t:.?i,,*.:.f ........... 03/30/92 08:20 1i: 4155577463 cpuc Safety Div P.02 "STAlE Of CAliFORNIA PUt WILSON, CioMf"l'l'Or . PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION -'05 VAN NeSS AVENUj: . SAN FRI\NOSCQ, CA 9<4102-329t . March 30, 1992 Tack S. Joe (415) 557-9884 SCH #92021067 Diana Richardson City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Dear Ms. Riohardson: . This refers to your Fax letter of March 27, 1992 regarding tbe Mitigated Negative Deolaration for Rohr F & G street Master plan (16-92-18) and enclosing a oopy of a letter prepared by Rick Engineering Company in answer to our questions. I note that the Rick Engineering Company letter states that the right-ot-way tor Lagoon Drive has been granted to the City ot . Chula Vista. If the city of Chu1a vista proposes to make Lagoon Drive a public roadway which crosses the railroad tracks. it will be necessary for the City to apply to the Commission for this authority as required by the California Public utilities Code, Chapter 6, Sections 1201 et seq. sincerely, -/~~ Tack S. Joe, Transportation Engineer special Projects Section Railroad Safety Branch Safety Division . 02P~c2t i l 133/313/92 138: 19 6 41~5577469 CPUC Safet.Y Div ._....:,.;_,.-'-c......._:_~",.~""'-'-_ F.el . __..... .. _..: ._~ h.'- __._ 'fi'_ ._.... --~-_._- ...---.-----......-. .. rm WILSON. GQ.",,/"l1O( .1^lC QP Q'.UJ'QtV\R^ PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION &:)S v",... t4tM AVENUe: "AN nw"CCtK'O. CA 94101",2:PU nann:. .....A c::lL \L.-..9 ......_ .,.......,,; ,q:O>, =P, -~.~ J!'ACSIJfTT'" CQVItR SHEET TO I c:ty ~1 c:::~...I.~ V.~.~" KrTKNTION i DI....-.... 9.'.:_1-..:::.. .....-I~<:..-.... 1'.l\X HO I (~l"') 4"1<:'" - ,.;.,.., "" . 'l'OTAL HWlDER OF l'AGt:S (TNCT.nnrNG COVER SUEET) 'L FROH . ~~c.k.. 5. _)Oc. .--..--.......... . SPECIAL TNSTRUCTrOlfS I W~ .zl.RE; ';t'lUINSH:ITT1],'1G l"ROM: A CAHON FAXPHONE 24 FAX HO. (4J~) 557-7469 Il!' YOU DO 1110'.1' RKC]HVE JILL PAGES, PL!mSE CM.l:. (415) p!;>,. "'!>B"'--4 AS' sOON AS PQSSTHLl':. . SAFETY nrvrSTON I 5/6/91 >>~.JO @ . . . ROHR OFFICE COMPLEX U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICES MEETING MARCH 20, 1992 PHASE 1 COMMENTS Attendees: Martin J. Kenney U.S. Fish & Wildlife Services (USFW) (CV) Pam Buchan City of Chula Vista Diana Richardson Ian Gill Starboard Development Corp. Al deBerardinis Machele Taliaferro (SDC) Linda Zubiate (BSHA) (WRT) BSHA Kathy Garcia Wallace Roberts & Todd Miti~ation and Monitorin~ Plan Starboard briefly summarized the current construction status on Rohr's Phase 1 building, noting that they and Nielsen Construction Company have continued to coordinate compliance with all mitigation requirements. David Moreno with Animal Damage Control will be contracted to perform the predatory management mitigation and monitoring program. By mutual agreement, this season's program will run from March 31, Ig92 through August 15, 1992. Starting in 1993, Rohr will fund annual predator efforts within the Midbayfront Development Area. These predator control efforts will commence March 1st through August 15th. Predator control efforts will only be conducted by person(s) having permits from U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish & Game. Target species for predator control efforts include avian and mammalian species, unsupervised pets and feral animals. The program shall be conducted under the approval and direction of the Refuge Manager, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and Sweetwater Marsh National Wildlife Refuge. In the future, once Chula Vista Investors (CVI) initiates construction of their proposed development facilities, Rohr has the option to continue with the present plan or negotiate with CVI to pay a portion of the annual fees associated with the .2t9~ ) I . . . Rohr Office Complex u.s. Fish & Wildlife Services Meeting March 20, 1992 Phase 1 Comments Page 2 annual predator efforts within the Midbayfront Development Area. The plan would include the establishment and a raptor specialist who would be available on an as needed basis. Starboard agreed to provide the u.S. Fish & Wildlife with a monthly report outlining any potential problems affecting the environment and surrounding wildlife and also provide a list of any mammal or bird captures. Animal, Plant Life Starboard clarified for Martin Kenney that Nixalite has been specified .for any potential perching surfaces such as the parapet on this building, and should be installed by the time the skin on the westerly side of the building is in place. Hydroseeding along the western boundary has been performed and germination has commenced. After further discussion, it was determined the Service will tour the site to evaluate the plant growth in this area. Attached is a list provided by WRT of the hydroseeding utilized in this area. Additionally, Diana Richardson suggested including evaluation of the progress in establishment of hydroseeding and subsequent plant growth in the mitigation and monitoring plan. The Service identified at the meeting that if it is determined in future monitoring efforts that the hydroseeding effort was not successful, Rohr would be responsible for planting container plants of coastal sage scrub species approved by the Service. Success of the hydroseeding effort will be defined as the establishment of at least six of the nine species used in the hydroseeding effort and 85% of the site covered with these species. Along the north side of the site, the marsh gateway, WRT has specified some non-native plants. Further explanation by the Landscape Architect revealed that the non-native plants are located only along the eastern side of the swale and will be placed in planters to avoid over growth or migration. Martin Kenney asked if native plants could be substituted. Starboard and WRT explained that non-native plants were specified for several reasons, including compliance with the City of Chula Vista's landscape design guidelines and also provide a more colorful corporate image for Rohr. WRT agreed to provide Martin Jp~A . . . Rohr Office Complex U.S. Fish & Wildlife Services Meeting March 20, 1992 Phase 1 Comments Page 3 Kenney with a comprehensive list of the non-native plants specified for this area. For the life of the project, Rohr has agreed to maintain the drainage swale, oil and grease traps, and Nixalite materials in a functional and effectively operating manner. JJJvi;.J J . ~/J1Cf Brooks Ha er U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Office Supervisor (Enhancement) .g/,,2j/Y''''~ / D e n,Q0wt%~eA(JJ(L J~dv Albert F. deBerardinis ate Starboard Development Corporation Project Manager c2l) - .3:::> . . . ROHR OFFICE COMPLEX U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICES MEETING MARCH 20, 1992 PHASE 2 COMMENTS Attendees: Martin J. Kenney U.S. Fish & Wildlife Services (USFW) (CV) Pam Buchan City of Chula Vista Diana Richardson Ian Gill Starboard Development Corp. Al deBerardinis Machele Taliaferro (SDC) Linda Zubiate BSHA (BSHA) (WRT) Kathy Garcia Wallace Roberts & Todd Starboard summarized the scope of Rohr Office Complex Phase 2, showing that this phase includes construction of a second building and related three story expansion of the south parking structure. Rohr's corporate structure and group interaction dictated a 19,000 square foot floor plate, resulting in a six story structure on the east side of the Phase 1 building. Phase 2 also includes improvements to the SDG&E Right-of-Way and a driveway providing traffic access through to "G" Street. Bird flight patterns and surrounding terrain were analyzed prior to finalizing the location and design of this building. Water Martin Kenney asked if the surface water run-off could be adequately accommodated through the currently designed storm drainage system and if triple chamber silt basins had been specified. Diana Richardson noted that she had addressed this issue in depth with Rick Engineering, the Civil Engineer, and agreed to provide the USFW with information she has available. Additionally, the Developer will ask the Civil Engineer to provide a letter outlining the adequacy of the storm drainage system and calculations. Based upon Rick Engineering's analysis of the project, Rohr is willing to ensure that the existing drainage swale has sufficent capacity in 100 year storm event to ensure no run-off from their proposed building and parking lots will enter "FIG" Street Marsh. The Developer will also provide a letter from Rohr agreeing to bi-annual cleaning of the triple chambers. c2jJrJi . Rollr Offill" (;llmpl"x U.S. Fish & Wildlife Services Meeting March 20, 1992 Phase 2 Comments Page 2 . . Miti~ation and Monitorin~ Plan Rohr will provide Martin Kenney with a letter of permission allowing predatory control access to Building 1, Building 2 and Building 61. Plant, Animal Life Martin Kenney asked if there was a possibility of relocating the structure to an adjacent site in an attempt to avoid creating a potential perch location for predatory birds. Starboard explained that the building location was limited because Rohr owns the 11.5 acre site specified on the model, and existing buildings already occupy much of the site. In addition, the SDG&E Right-of-Way and zoning setback requirements will not allow the building to move any further east. Starboard noted that an existing 75' building (Building 61) located at the southwest corner of Building 1 could potentially be considered a more attractive perch location. Rohr has therefore agreed to install Nixalite (or another comparable alternative) on the northern and western edges of the roof of Building 61 by June 30, 1992, and also on the parapet and westerly edge of the roof line of Building 2 concurrently with the placement of these structural features. The extent of placement of Nixalite (or another comparable alternative) should be located to preclude perching for predator activity in the marsh. Li~ht and Glare Martin Kenney requested details of the lighting specified for Building 2, asking if there was any potential impacts due to lights and glare. BSHA responded, stating that all lighting fixtures are to be located at the lower levels of the building. Martin asked if Rohr could provide a letter agreeing to revisit lighting issues should the USFW determine lighting and glare a potential problem. Diana Richardson will review City Engineering requirements to determine if lighting along Lagoon Drive will be required and its potential environmental impact. Groundwater Dischar~e Martin Kenney asked about potential groundwater discharge during excavation. The Developer reported that groundwater discharge could only take place during the garage excavation. Excavation dV~ )~S' . . . Rohr Office Complex U.S. Fish & Wildlife Services Meeting March 20, 1992 Phase 2 Comments Page 3 for both the north and south garages is now complete and the water table was not compromised, therefore discharge was never an issue. Building 2 is nearly on grade and excavation will not require contact with the water table. Earth Also discussed was the planned expansion of the existing berm. Starboard explained the location of the berm expansion and agreed to extend the existing berm prior to initiation of construction. This expansion is not scheduled to take place until 1997, just prior to construction of any buildings planned for this area of the site. Additional Requirements Martin Kenney outlined additional precautions, including covered trash containers and screened drainage openings. The Architect noted that covered trash containers have already been specified for the project and the same precautions are being observed during the construction phase. The Developer also confirmed that no pile driving will be required for this building and therefore environmental disturbance is not anticipated. A small amount of jack hammering will occur south of the site when demolition of an existing building slab occurs as part of the masterplanning effort, but not until September, after nesting periods. Any construction that could possibly affect the wildlife will be performed either before or after the nesting period specified by Martin Kenney, March 1st through August 15th. The Architect stated that the elevations of the building include some articulation, but there are sloping surfaces to discourage perching. Rohr also agreed that if the Service could demonstrate that any portion of a building, structural features associated with exterior of the building, landscaping, or lighting should be used as a repeated perch site for avian predators, Rohr would be willing to modify the problem site in consultation with the Service and their consultants to the extent practicably feasible. ~p~3b . . . Rahr Orrica Complex u.s. Fish & Wildlife Services Meeting March 20, 1992 Phase 2 Comments Page 4 For the life of the project, Rohr has agreed to maintain the drainage swale, oil and grease traps, and Nixalite materials in a functional and effectively operating manner. ~p.~ Brooks HaUer U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Office Supervisor (Enhancement) 0/ <;:~~A'..t / D;it e O~qdv te n1y~A~~~~~ Albert F. deBerardinis Starboard Development Corporation Project Manager c1fJ- J 7 . . . ~~~ ~ ,.~ ~ --....--~~ -- --- C1lY OF CHULA VISTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT March 27, 1992 Mr. Martin Kenney U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service 2730 Loker Avenue West Carlsbad, CA 92008 Dear Martin, Thank you again for adjusting your schedule to accommodate the comment deadline on the Rohr F & G Street Master Plan project. This letter, with the attachments, constitutes the City's response to your comments. Phase I Responses I met with David Moreno of Animal Damage Control at the project site. We discussed his program, which he has scheduled for March 31 to August 15, 1992. He is also coordinating with Tom Alexander. Evaluation of the success of the hydroseeded area along the western project boundary will be added to the Mitigation Monitoring Program. If not successful (success defined as establishment of at least 6 of the 9 species used, and 85% of the site covered with these species), then Rohr will be responsible for planting container plants of coastal sage shrub approved by the U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service. See Rohr letter for commitments regarding maintenance of the drainage swale, oil and grease traps, and Nixalite materials. Phase 2 Responses See Rick Engineering's letter regarding site drainage. See Rohr letter with permission allowing the predator manager access to Buildings 1, 2 and 61; for commitment to install Nixalite on Building 61 by June 30, 1992, and on Building 2 concurrently with placement of the parapet and westerly roof; and for agreement to review lighting design should light and glare become a problem. c2iY-~~ 276 FOURTH AVEiCHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 91910/(619) 691-S047 . . . I will review the City's lighting requirements for Lagoon Drive and will report these to you by April 2. See Rohr letter for commitment to address and modify, if practicably feasible, any problem building perching sites; and for commitments regarding maintenance of the drainage swale, oil and grease traps, and Nixalite materials. Please feel free to call me if you have further questions or concerns. Sincerely, (] Diana G. Richardson Environmental Facilitator DGR/ss Enclosures (a:\kenny) Jf)~ :3 1 CITY OF CHULA VISTA . . . 03.27. 92 01:38 PM *STARBOARD COMPANIES P02 '-17&- '55/0 0000 0000 ROHR J/OHI! INDUSTRIES, INC. POST OffiCE BOX 878 QUA VISTA, CAl-ll'ORNIA 92012-0078 (619) 691-4111 . 1ElEX; 69-S008 Harch 27, 1992 Mr. Hartin Ranney U.S. Fl~h ~ wildlife servioes 2730 Loker Avenue West Carl.bad, CA 92008 Dear Martin: Thi. J.etter i. in responae to your meeting- with starbOard Development dated MArch 20, 1992. 1 am writing in ordQr to addre88 8everal issues on which you wanted clarification. Water YOU were concerned about the frequency of ROM l\18.intaining the triple chambers of the desiltatlon basins and I can assure you that ROhr's maintenance p1an will include instructions to clean the chambers on a bi-annual. basis. I Mitigation and Monitorin~ Pl.an Regarding your requested access to our two new office buildings and existing building 161 for predatory control purposes, we will be happy to work. with your personnel on this issue. We do, however, have security restrictions and requirements that prevent your entarinq without some advance notification. We will be happy to work with you further to resolve this issue. Li~htina and Gl.are We have asked BSHA, our Al:chitect, to review the lighting of the south parking structure and miniaize any liqhtinq and glare prOblems. We understand your ooncern regarding the impact of glare on the ~rpb and will. try to select a design that minimizes this possibility. We will oontinue to work with you fUrther on thil! issue in the unlikely event there laters proves to be a problem. ,)CJ-LjO 03.27.92 01 38 PM *STARBOARD COMPANIES P03 . J: ho~ thi. J.ett..r ad.dressea your ooncerns and <Jives you a J.evaJ. of oonfid.ence that Rohr will continue to work with you as II. '100<1 neighbor regarding issues affecting the "FIG" street Harsh and Wildlife Area. #: Arthur o. Sal.l.gren DlrOCltor. Ralll Estate , DovGl.opment AOS:mot ee: Diana Richardson. City of Ch1.1111. vista . . f. . J-i} -if ( . . . . RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY 5620 ft-ial"'S Ro~d S."lT1 Diego Califurnia. 9211()'2596 (619) 291-Q707 PAX: (619) 291-1165 March 27, 1992 Mr. Martin Kenney U.S. Fish and wildlife service Fish and Wildlife Enhancement Laguna Niguel Field Office 24000 Avila Road Laguna Niguel, California 97656 SUBJECT: ROHR'S F-G STREET LCP AMENDMENT DRAINAGE Dear Martin: The purpose of this letter is to briefly summarize the drainage for Rohr's "F-G" Street LCP Amendment Area. This area is broken into two drainage basins. The first is approximately 15.5 acres and includes the Building No. 1 site, Building No. 2 site, the parking structures, the "RISIn parcel, Lagoon Drive, and the SDG&E right-of-way east of the Building 1 and 2 sites. This area drains to the detention basin on the west side of Building No.1. The detention basin was designed to detain a 6 hour 100 year storm event for this drainage basin, while outletlng into the existing storm drain in "G" Street. The second drainage basin contains approximately 20 acres and is what we call the "G" street basin". It contains the Bay Boulevard parcels bounded on the north by the "RISI" parcel, on the west by the railroad right-of-way, and on the south by "G" street. This drainage basin also contains Rohr property east of Building 61, with "G" street on the south and the Building No. 1 site on the north. The fiG" Street basin" drains into the existing "G" street storm drain system. However, when this area is developed under the LCP Amendment Plan, water quality control structures and detention basins will be inoorpo:t'ated into the new development. The new detention basins in this area will be designed just as the large basin in Phase 1. They will be designed to detain a 6 hour 100 year storm eVent. . ~t)-LI) . . . Mr. Martin Kenney March 27, 1992 Page 2 I hope this brief explanation clarifies that no storm runoff from the LCP AJnendment Area will drain directly into the "F-G" Marsh. If you have any additional questions, please feel free to call me. Sincerely, RN~'i4 John D. Goddard, Jr. Associate JDG:bk ee: Ian Gill JtJ-YJ E/EOd ";..1lnC)"1T('f "lHG ">-I9"n '>lIT).! q~.CT 7(::; )-::J ~1-l1,1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA PETE WILSON, Governor Mar 23, 1992 .t. 'o~\ MAR 1992 :..~ '" Received OJ CDIwunity DevelOpmtfll A ~ Department <.., V '" 09,( q,V $,( ....<0 l!>lelZn\.Q GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH 1400 TENTH STREET .ACRAMENTO, CA 95814 DIANA RICHARDSON CITY OF CHULA VISTA 276 FOURTH AVENUE CHULA VISTA, CA 91910 Subject: ROHR F & G STREET MASTER PLAN SCH # 92021067 Dear DIANA RICHARDSON: The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named environmental document to selected state agencies for review. The review period is closed and none of the state agencies have comments. This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. . Please call Torn Loftus at (916) 445-0613 if you have any questions regarding the environmental review process. When contacting the Clearinghouse in this matter, please use the eight-digit State Clearinghouse number so that we may respond promptly. Sincerely, ~~/ ~hristine Kinne f A~ting Deputy Director, Permit Assistance . )()Alt( . . . MAIL TO: City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Attention: Diana Richardson fC': 0 tl, i1i 'D' Lr Annette J. Evans, Clerk l..!:U FEB 2 1 1992 By 9t'1.'AA-t OE TV NOTICE OF PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Rohr F and G Street Master Plan NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Chula Vista is considering a recommendation that the project herein identified will have no significant environmental impact in compliance with Section 15070 of State CEQA guidelines. A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (finding of no significant impact) and the Initial Study, which supports the proposed findings, are on file in the Chula Vista Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910. These documents are available for public review between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Anyone wishing to comment on the proposed Negative Declaration should provide their written comments to the Chula Vista Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910. This proposed finding does not constitute approval or denial of the project itself; it onlv determines if the project could have significant environmental impact. Projects which could have significant impact must have an Environmental Impact Report prepared to evaluate those possible impacts in compliance with Section 15064 of State CEQA Guidelines. If you wish to challenge the City's action on this Negative Declaration in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised in written correspondence. For further information concerning this project, including public hearing dates, please contact Diana Richardson at (619) 691-5047 . This notice is required to be filed with the County Clerk's office for a period of not less than thirty (30) days. ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: 567-010-07,26; 567-022-01,16,17,28,30,31,33,35,36; 571-330-17 (a portion of) PROJECT LOCATION: Bordered by Lagoon Drive, Bay Boulevard, G Street, F and G Street Marsh PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Master Plan over 35 acres for Rohr Administrative Commercial, Research, and Light Industrial Uses DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY: Redevelopment Agency, City Council INITIAL STUDY NO.: 92-18 DATE: :rILED III TRJil 0 ll'FIOE OF THE COUNTY CLERR: SAN DIBGO mI7llITr OJL ffB 2 1 1992 . February 13, 1992 .l'OS'l'ED ,.ttl 21"l . m ~ " 1992' . C) 07 -Lj ~ RltTURNJlD TO AQImCT :~~~~";D;;:OHRTX'!'J /-. DEPUTY q(C'1i1'A-t-~~ . . . . MINUTES OF A SCHEDULED REGULAR MEETING Resource Conservation Commission Chula Vista, California 6:00 p.m. Monday, March 9, 1992 Conference Room 1 Public Services Building CALL MEETING TO ORDER/ROLL CALL: Meeting was called to order at 6:03 p.m. by Chairperson Hall. City Staff Environmental Review Coordinator Doug Reid called roll. Present: Commissioners Ray, McQuade, Kracha. Absent: Johnson, Ghougassian. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The approval of minutes was postponed until a quorum to vote on the minutes was present. 1. Martin Miller, Planning Department, requests RCC review the Historical District Report. He introduced Pat Crowley, AlA, to make the presentation of the study for the concept of Heritage Row, Heritage District. Of the four options, he recommends the creation of an historical district by use of the planning zone. A task force will also be created for input. It is requested that RCC review and comment on one or more of the alternatives and report at the next meeting. (Fox arrived at 6:15 p.m.) APPROVAL OF MINUTES: It was moved and seconded (Fox/McQuade) to approve the minutes of the meeting of February 24, 1992 with one correction under No.1, paragraph 2, third sentence to read: "Athena Bradley further stated there will not be a trash-to-energy burning plant in the RMD zone." Motion passed, 4-0-1 (abstain: Ray). 2. Review of Rohr Master Plan Negative Declaration 15-92-18. John Ray was excused from discussion due to conflict of interest as he is a Rohr employee. Diana Richardson, who prepared the initial study, presented an overview of the project. Others present to answer questions included the project manager from the City, Starboard Development, project planner, architect and City traffic engineer. Fox - questioned the impact of traffic circulation, the acceptable level of service and mitigation measures taken to comply with threshold standards. It was explained that all mitigations will be adequately met to an acceptable level of service. The use of glass and ledges on the west side of the building will be used to assist the wildlife in that area. McQuade - questioned the noise level from freeway traffic, view, size and location of the 90' building. A model of the site was exhibited to indicate the location of the main building and to answer questions as to how it relates to the others on site. Hall - regarding an exchange of park land, the Board was shown a map indicating the part being removed and how it relates to the street alignment. ), O-Lj ? . . . Page 2 . . It was moved by Fox, seconded by Kracha to rescind the previous motion to deny approval of the Negative Declaration because of lack of information; motion passed 4-0-1 (abstain: Ray). It was further moved by Fox, seconded by Kracha, to recommend adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration; motion passed 441 (abstain: Ray). A special thanks was given to Rohr and those present who clarified and answered questions for the board. (John Ray returned). 3. Duane Bazzel, Planning Department, presented the Salt Creek Ranch Water/Air Report. The transit corridor will include bus service and a temporary .Park & Ride" within the project, subject to approval of the Parks and Recreation Department. A small commercial area is being recommended on the adjacent Rancho San Miguel property. Reclamation facilities will be located on the Otay Ranch. It is noted that Staff worked with the developer on the project. McQuade questioned the 1.4 million gallons of water expended per day. Disapproved of the increase in water and traffic. It was moved by Fox, seconded by Ray to recommend approval of the Salt Creek Ranch Air Quality and Water Conservation Plan; motion passed 4-1 (no: McQuade). Staff will further provide the Growth Management Plan Report to RCC as it pertains to Water/Air Quality reports. 4. Public Hearings on Draft ErR's: Fox remarked on the RCC holding public hearings on ErR's. Kracha commented that RCC should not have to review EIR's because of unnecessary duplication of effort, as others within the City already review them. According to the ordinance, it is not necessary. Fox recognized it is still under their purview to call public meetings. Kracha requested that for an agenda item next meeting, the city attorney and director of planning explain the necessity of reviewing EIR's. It was suggested Will Hyde, who began the Environmental Conservation Commission, and perhaps others who authored and supported the original commission be invited. It was MSUP (Ha1lIFox) to table this item to the next meeting with possible speakers available for explanation. 5. Fox questioned when the flooding item will go on agenda. Doug Reid reported that the Engineering Dept. is presenting a report on the flood problems, specifically on G Street. c2tJ~J/7 " . . . ~ , . Page 3 He further reported that the Deputy Director for Public Works have no plans to convert or upgrade city vehicles to natural gas as the cost is excessive. Police vehicles years ago, however, used alternative fuels. 6. Items for the Planning Commission Agenda for the meeting of March II, 1992 were reviewed and included the following: . Public Hearing PCM-91-04, Salt Creek Ranch SPA Plan: No action by Commission. . CEQA Findings, Salt Creek Ranch SPA: No action by Commission. . Tentative Subdivision Map, Salt Creek I Condos: No action by Commission. . CUP PCC-92-30: No action by Commission. . Draft of City Council Sign Modification: The draft was too restrictive; no action by Commission. STAFF REPORT: Schedule of regular meetings for the year was handed out. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Fox - 2nd request for the flood report on G Street to go on agenda. John Ray - recent absences were due to work conflicts. McQuade will be absent next meeting. Kracha - The working group for Economic Development Commission says that some Project Area Committees for redevelopment districts (Otay, Montgomery, Sweetwater, etc.) were supposed to be implemented for three years. Some have been in place for 15 years and are given a one year phase-out. ADJOURNMENT: It was MSUP (Ray/Fox) to adjourn. The meeting was adjourned by Chairperson Hall at 8:44 p.m. Respectfully submitted, EXPRESS SECRETARIAL SERVICES Barbara Taylor c2f)~L/?J ~--"~-"~"~'''_'''''''''''''''-'J '.. ."""~,,,,.~_~;II)~,;,~~~~,,,,,,,k.~"~~"W"""~WC>:*"i"'<_~':JI\"",,,",'l'>0"""'l';~'l>'''''i',,,-'/.'H'l'\':,;~'~.'T4""- . . B M~ Pa3G . ;2tJ-Jll mitigated negative declaration . PROJECT NAME: Rohr F & G Street Master Plan PROJECT LOCATION: The site is bounded by F Street) Bay and the existing Rohr building construction at 850 Lagoon Drive) Boul evard, G Street, (Building 1 under ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 567-010-07, 26; 567-022-01, 16, 17, 28, 30, 31, 33, 35, 36; 571-330-17 (portion) PROJECT APPLICANT: Rohr Inc. CASE NO: IS-92-18 DATE: February 12, 1992 A. Proiect Settinq The project area is largely developed with existing Rohr buildings on the west and south sides of the site, and other businesses on the east side of the site. Two major easements traverse the site, the SDG&E right-of-way (for overhead power 1 i nes), and the SD&AE Railroad. Rohr is currently developing an office building (Building 1) and associated parking on the west side of the site. West of Building 1 is the F & G Street Marsh, a portion of the Sweetwater Marsh National Wildl ife Refuge (NWR). To the north is an approximate IOO-acre undeveloped upland parcel (the .Midbayfront), and beyond that, the majority of the NWR. East of the site is the 1-5 freeway, and to the south the Rohr campus continues. . B. Proiect Descriotion The Master Plan project plan includes seven buildings totalling 655,000 square feet over 35.2 acres. Elements of the Master Plan are: An LCP amendment over 23 acres, i ncl uding 455,000 square feet of building area. A separate parking plan (370 spaces in 4.3 acres) for the SDG&E right-of-way. A re-alignment of Bay Boulevard. The vacation of a piece (0.05 acre) of Tidelands Avenue. The vacation of G Street as a public right-of-way. (It will remain a private circulation feature.) Three additional floors are proposed to be added to the south parking garage,. which is currently under construction. Please see the foll owi ng graphi cs whi ch vi sua lly descri be the proposed Master Pl an elements. .JtJ-~tJ ~Ift. -.- ....-...;~~ --::. - - - - city of chula vista planning department environmental review .ectlon 01Y Of CHULA VISfA < , r 0 , " g . , 0 i 0 ~ 0 8 0 . 8 . - - . g , . ~ ~ ~ <11 ~ ~ 8 ;~'! . 8' , 8' 0 0' ~'.nzz , o . .:;?",':: o;~~ g 0' ~ "0 ~~~~ "0 ~..........; <Dr> ._ :;J::~...; . 0 > . z . 0 ; ~'i . . .. . . '. . . .. , G;= < -' . i!i~ .~ .i. I.:! <(.. . a:: .; . ~j ~.. ~: < ; " "- o. r;" r "e<~ ; :!; a: << !.i,i .coo!! ~~<(~ i;j~ ; . r <r "F ~ w . 1''"< .. ~~g~ :i:!g~ ~ii...: i:Vi...... . a: .... . f,,<r i:g! JilIii:... 0 ~ :!: ., . ~~H ;i~u::: oiillii:a.. " ~ .. 0 0 . c a: ::E 0 .; u '" . . I if; . > ; <0 Ii )^,l:IO N009V1 Ff" I ! ~ ~ I . I I I I . ~ ~ ~ ~ :; : ~ g ~ :; ;;:l':::: .. g g - I = 1 0 III , ! i I . - . . ! " I: . . > I ~ lH [3i. ~ . '. '.'" ..... .." ..... g:;: :::: ~ , o . I , :1tJ-S~ , . . . . I . . ~ z w :> o ~ o ~ z z :> < 0: < ~ : z: Q. w :::E o 0 I- .... a: ...J Q; ~ a E' '0<;;-- ! . . ~ , . I ; . ~ I : I I . ~ ~ ~ g 00 g,; ~ .,;"alU ,..,.-"'.., <c__,..; . g g ~ :' 0:': .;:; ",<nO'" ",..,"'- ~ .. ...,<f<( '"",i:;, '" . . .. Cl'" i..:~ .(: ~-~ ~ ",<> i ; II~r I~I~ ~:~~ ~ 0 J~g~ ~~o! ~~<~ z ~ ft~: ~~~i ~~~~ 1 : . ~~ ~ < ... ...: g ~ ~ ~ In ~ 1,1 ~. I.r .' 'MIlOO NOO!)"" - ,-- H H H . ..U l~ ~ l I fll \\ IU I i , ;< () --D . ;; , t. "- & . <f g ~ "" ..,'" Cl "".,'" ,,' " o a 0 ~ ~ '" . . ; j f~j 2 . ~ . " . . . < Q. , o ~ -' . z "" -' Q. ; Z ~ 2 o ...!;( ?: ~.J a: .::> . 0 :r W a: o ::.:_ a: 0 0 , I ~ i ! I , I I I . I __ " _ ~ 3^IIfCIoIOO!).. I 1 I III = .._= III .... Ill< II; ... . - u a: ~ ~ ~ .: , ::E , ~ ~ ~ ~ '" '" .... ~ o "" ... u "" i!J ~ ::> ~. ~ ~ f o . p:: , . ,. , -- ...... ".-':': .- . 0'" ..,. "t. ., . 1"-' .51 "_ t;6j,><' U & '~'ti.'l;.;2~ , ,~ ::R' ...<l "', -,. '-,."" ~"~., .f;'. pO. z,. .. Z !~'", '" zf~~i ~!':~ i~P ri~ !; ~ i~rtR! i~o ~;II~ll~i-: Iii1 ~.iH i:~ i Jil~l~E ~~ 'f' .,~" ill rB z,o Z .. tP I' ! I);' i:'~i f; ~ !.P fa i 1:',;3 !.t ihlH t:lisl'l I~h h! Iii r I;hi~ hi ..jls! j. ul~ .,. IJ!. !I;!!: .n i UHf;i!lil IIjl l~:. itj I i:h~i Jlj i Iml! Il!!lll I!l! i ~!! I !h 1 i I ililllr ' Ii! ~ I ni1j: i W!1 J IHiJ S iLl I :ill !l s !il:jii I !lJ j li1zl1 < lA5i . I:.fl " ll~l d lu . h . !d!"~, d M i ..:.,- .:,".j .,'<"'(:. .-::,." , ,/1 .' ,'! : , / ./ I ., .I .,'i ,,' / ! .. ./ i / " ~ ;) ,,~- i .I . ., i .' ; . I, ) . .' .{ ",/.l/ / , /; . it ! 'r '-, / ~ ...')' -:. . 0 '0 .' . / . .( -,. .:...: --:--~ . ...... ,/ '~crflOOOY1 :i " " , ; ; '.; \~ i.l ., '11/ -(:. }1'. "/" .'.: . '~ . '.. . . . . ~. '... , . = o . .' , l ."_. .......... \ '. I '~,- - \.-- t" .\ ..-' -.-'" . \ . U31US 0 d.tJ -5~ ;.",.. , '" :l-.H~ ,. , ~B!j !r!;~ i.i,. ~zz~, h" IIWI ,I!l I' ft} z d~iI .t 'I!'! f "I'!~ ! iJil ~ fit!! '. :{- :;;1 (,'. 'i " " . ' ~I,~' .' :~ : '1:4 i~ " , J . . ~-, III :\f,' ,,- ,II II:,:: ~ "_ J "". '. '= :; ~ ~ J if ~ , ! f '1 u : p. , .c 1 ! ,j .,., ! . '" " z lI~ UJ j. Hi H ~ ~ 8 . i Ii,hi , ~ il 0; I, . I zl j ,l "' <II .. ~ 1? 'h it! "~h!~ H u i!; c Ij el. l:l ~ . (Ii 0: .! !, PI . ~ is. u "' g J i .i. J :::> 0 . _~ t. ~;1 .. .. " <.J ~ ~ 8- 1 J ,!j t~ Jil j IttfiJl filiI !lj ~ ~ ~ o · ." fliJi ~ J~ ~d f huh! .1111 e>::: J j 20~5~ I ill!![ j ).' I. 1 .. ," ~ ..1' , I- "___' ...;. t-::::-- ~ , , I ------ ! I , I .1 I" i L ~ ~ . ~ -..~ , ;~ .1- , I I , ) '" EXISTING BUILDINGS EXHIBIT . FOR .F. AND .G. S TREE TS LCP AMENDMENT\MASTERPLAN AREA . . BOULEVARD SAY DEt.fO 6600 BUl..DING TO RE...AIN DEW 263"0 SO FT III > II: Q I l5 o o -c oJ FOUR BUl.Ott<<iS ARE TO BE DEt.lOLJStE:D AREAS SHOWN ARE THE BlADING 'fooTPRItW DEt.fO 12330 SO T /' - ~~ I- III ~ I- eD o DEt.fO 20090 SO FT c2tJ- 57 PROPOSED TIDELANDS .REA = APPROX 0.05 A VENUE V ACA TION ACRES PORT DISTRICT TIDELANDS AVE TIDELANDS AVE U S F VI S ROHR CORPORATiON . /. ~~OO'./ ~- It ROHR INDUSTRIES ROHR CORPORATION S D G a E S D G a E S D a A E RAILROAD S D a. A E RAILROAD . TIDELANDS AVENUE V ACA TlON EXHIBIT c2t~~S% . PROPOSED STREET DEDICATION <TYPICALl TOTAL AREA = APPROX 0.5 ACRES BOULEVARD PROPOSED STREET VACATION <TYPICALl TOT AL AREA = APPRO X 1.3 ACRES INTERSTATE - n:: o RADOS BOTHERS . C V R A a S P T C RADOS BOTHERS S D a A E RAILROAD z CJ o <!l <<: --l $ D a A E RAILROAD $ D G a E S D G a E /' - .~' . BAY BOULEVARD / LAGOON DRIVE DEDICA TlON & VACATION EXHIBIT dO-5j . . . ROHR CORPORATION ROHR INDUSTRIES ROHR CORPORATION S D G a E S D a A E RAILROAD ROHR INDUSTRIES BAY BOULEVARD PROPOSED G STREET VACATION AREA = APPRO X 1.0 ACRES S 0 G a E S D a A E RAILROAD ROHR INDUSTRIES INTERSTATE 5 I- W W 0:: I- <1l (!l /. ~:Oo'" ~- " G STREET VACATION EXHIBIT c2{!)-(P 0 -2- . The Rohr Building 1 under construction on the west side of the site and two parking structures were analyzed in the Envi ronmenta 1 Impact Report for the Rohr Office Complex. This Final EIR (FEIR) was certified by the City Council that it was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This certified FEIR contains relevant i nformat 10n for the proposed Master Pl an project, and 1 s hereby incorporated by reference. The Master Plan project development would occur over an anticipated period of 5 years, from 1992 to 1997. The anticipated schedule is as follows: Area A: Buildi ng 1 Building 2 Area B: Building 1 Area C: Building 1 Area 0: . Building 1 Area E: Bui ldi ng 1 Building 2 C. Compatibility with ZoninQ and Plans Completion - 10/15/92 Completion - 6/1/93 Completion - 6/1/93 Completion - 10/1/94 Completion - 10/1/95 Completion - 10/1/97 Completion - 10/1/97 The proposed Master Plan is compatible with the City's land use designations in the Local Coastal Program (LCP), which is the guide to land use and zoning for this portion of the City. However, the building height of one of the Master Pl an buildings (94 feet) exceed the 44-foot height limit in this area. Also, the floor area ratio (FAR) which establ ishes density, is exceeded in the LCP amendment area of the Master Plan. D. Compliance with the Threshold/Standards Policy 1. Fire/EMS . The Threshold/Standards Pol icy requi res that fi re and med i ca 1 un its must be able to respond to calls within 7 minutes or less in 85% of the cases and within 5 minutes or less in 75% of the cases. The City of Chula Vista has indicated that this threshold standard will be met, since the nearest fire station is one mile away and would be associated with a 4 minute response time. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Policy. c2(J-0/ -3- . The Fire Department requires their service capabilities. this report. 2 . Po 1 ice mitigation measures in order to maintain These measures are i dent ifi ed 1 ater in The Threshold/Standards Policy requires that police units must respond to 84% of Priori ty 1 calls wi thi n 7 mi nutes or 1 ess and ma i nta in an average response time to all Pri ority 1 calls of 4.5 minutes or less. Pol ice units must respond to 62% of Priority 2 calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time to all Pri ority 2 calls of 7 mi nutes or 1 ess. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Policy. The Police Department requires adequate access into the site, which is being provided from F Street, Bay Boulevard, and G Street (which is open only to emergency vehicles because it is proposed to be a private circulation feature). 3. Traffic . The Threshold/Standards Pol icy requi res that all intersect ions must operate at a Level of Service (LOS) "CO or better, with the exception that Level of Service (LOS) "0" 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 may 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. In order to achieve the requirements must implement mit igat i on measures. later in this report. 4. Parks/Recreation of the Threshold Policy, Rohr These measures are ident i fi ed 5. The Threshold/Standards Pol icy for Parks and Recreation is 3 acres/l,OOO population. The proposed project is not relevant to this Pol icy, as it refers to parks east of 1-805. However, Rohr wi 11 be required to mitigate this impact to a level below significance. Two options for mitigation, among others are to pay a fee to the City to mitigate the loss of a portion of the one-acre park located on the northwest corner of Bay Boulevard/Lagoon Drive, or to landscape a 300 square foot area on the east side of Bay Boulevard. Drainage The Threshold/Standards Pol icy requires that storm water flows and volumes not exceed City Engineer Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary improvements consistent with the Drainage Master Plan (s) and City Engi neeri ng Standards. The proposed project applicant must prepare a hydrological/drainage study to show effectiveness of the proposed drainage facilities. The applicant will work with the City to ensure that Threshold Standards are met. . c)1) ..- t ,}- -4- . 6. Sewer The Threshold/Standards Policy requires that sewage flows and volumes shall not exceed City Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary improvements consistent with Sewer Master Plan{s) and City Engineering Standards. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Policy. 7. Water The Threshold/Standards Pol icy requi res that adequate storage, treatment, and transmission facilities are constructed concurrently with planned growth and that water quality standards are not jeopardized during growth and construction. The proposed project applicant must coordinate with Sweetwater Authority to plan and develop necessary water infrastructure facilities. The City relies on Sweetwater Authority for the orderly planning of such facilities. E. Identification of Environmental Effects An initial study conducted by the City of Chula Vista determined that the proposed project could have one or more significant environmental effects. Specific mitigation measures are required to reduce these effects to a level of less than significant. . With implementation of these measures, potentially significant environmental effects will be avoided or reduced to a level below s igni fi cant. Preparat i on of an Envi ronmenta 1 Impact Report wi 11 thus not be required. This Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with Section 15070 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Specific mitigation measures have also been set forth in the Mitigation Monitoring Program which is attached as Addendum "A". The following impacts have been determined to be potentially significant and are required to be mitigated to a level of less than significant. A discussion of each of these potentially significant impacts from the proposed projects follows. 1. Earth No soils/geotechnical information exists for 20 out of the 35 acre site; until such information is provided, impacts remain unknown and, thus, potentially significant. Though it is not expected, groundwater may be. encountered during foundation excavation, posing a potentially significant impact to foundat i on support, and to water quality from th is groundwater discharge. 2. Air . Rohr maintains that Master Plan area employees would merely be transferred from the adjacent Rohr campus. However, due to the proposed increased density of the site, there may be a net increase in the total number of employees, though thi s number .-2IJ -t? . . . -5- may be minor. Vehicle emissions from new project-related trips would incrementally contribute to the basinwide (cumulative) significant air quality status, and incrementally exceed the emissions projected by the State Implementation Program Revisions for this air basin. Construction dust would incrementally contribute to regional (cumulative) violations of inhalable dust standards. 3. Water Any increase in Citywide incremental new demand on (cumulative impact). 4. Plant. Animal Life net consumption of water is an the regions scarce water resource Impacts to the off site resources of the F & G Street Marsh and the San Diego Bay could occur from: urban runoff contaminating water quality of the wetland and Bay, intrusion of light from the six-story building and G Street building into the wetland, increased human presence in the vi c i nity and adjacent to these resources, and upset of the exi st i ng balance of compet itors, predators, and prey, and the associated indirect impacts to the Belding's Savannah Sparrow and Light-footed Clapper Rail. 5. Noise Construction of the Area E buildings may create significant noise to the sensitive avian resources of the F & G Street Marsh. The unknown nature of the research uses over the south and west sides of the site is potentially significant, as some research and/or limited manufacturing may be noise producing. Noise from 1-5 may significantly impact employees of the building along Bay Boulevard, or employees in the upper floors (5th and 6th levels) of the six-story structure. 6. Liaht and Glare The sensitive resources of the F & G Street Marsh could be impacted by lighting of the building southeast of the Marsh. ~O-Ic,--/ -6- . 7. land Use Inconsistencies with the local Coastal Program, including of the proposed project height (one 94-foot building in a 44-foot height limit) and density (based on Floor Area Ratio) are considered significant. 8. Natural Resources The project construction and operation would incrementally increase the regional demand on natural resources (cumulative impact) . 9. Risk of Uoset The unknown nature of the research/l imited manufacturing uses poses potentially significant impacts from the possible use of hazardous materials. 10. Transoortation/Circulation Project traffic would significantly (cumulatively) impact the following mitigations and street segments: Intersections . E Street/I-5 SB Ramp/Bay Boulevard E Street/I-5 NB Ramp E Street/Broadway F Street/Bay Boulevard/lagoon Drive Seqments Bay Boulevard, F Street to E Street E Street, Woodlawn Avenue to Broadway E Street, Woodlawn Avenue to Broadway H Street, Woodlawn Avenue to 1-5 II. Public Services Project development could significantly affect the services of the City's Fire Department, would indirectly increase the burden on the School District's capacities, and would directly remove a port ion of a one-acre park located at the northwest corner of Bay Boulevard/lagoon Drive. 12. Human Health Possible use of hazardous materials - see No. 10 above. . Building in areas containing known contaminated soils and/or groundwater creates a potenti~lly significant human health hazard. c1/)~b~ .. It .. -7- F. MitiQation necessary to avoid siQnificant effects Specific project mitigation measures are required to reduce potentially significant environmental impacts to a level of less than significant. These mitigation measures are to be made conditions of project approval, as well as requirements of the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program (Addendum nAn). I. Earth As plans are submitted for the 20-acre portion of the site, soils/geotechnical investigations must accompany these plans. Recommendat ions must be incorporated as determi ned appropri ate by the City's Engineering Department. Construction dewatering may be required prior to foundation excavation if the water levels intercept construction areas. Temporary construction dewatering would be implemented in accordance with the 1990 report recommendations (WCC), and compliance with the Regional Water Quality Control Board directives regarding discharge of temporary dewatering wastes will be required. 2. Air The project must participate in Rohr's Transportation Control Measure Program, including: ridesharing, and van pool incentives alternate transportation work scheduling for off-peak hours When the City adopts its own emission reduction program (subsequent to SANDAG/APCD PI an adopt i on), Rohr must implement any additional relevant requirements. Dust control measures as required by APCD (maintaining adequate soil moisture and removal of soil spillage), and limits in construction hours (allow construction between 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.) and prohibiting construction truck queuing. 3. Water The applicant must implement any water conservation requirements of Sweetwater Authority, and must agree to no new net increase in Citywide water consumption by the payment of any water offset fees, or other conservation program the City has in place at the time of building permit issuance. ,)t}-t~ .. .. . -8- 4. Plant. Animal Life a. The buffer area between Building 1 and the F & G Street Marsh was required by the Rohr Office Complex FEIR to establish vegetation identified by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). These measures are currently being implemented and monitored. The fence along this buffer must also be extended to the south (Area E), to prevent human access from this area into the Marsh. The fire access road there limits the opportunity to establ ish vegetation on the Marsh side of these buildings. The USFWS requests that native plants be used throughout the Master Plan area, rather than the proposed heavy use of non-natives. b. The project should continue to be a participant in a predator management program for the Chula Vista Bayfront region to control domestic predators as well as wild animal predators. Should this program not be established prior to issuance of the grading permit for any portion of the Master Pl an area, Rohr must coord i nate with USFWS to determi ne the extent of participation and the necessary timeframe for predator management. The USFWS recommends contracting with the Department of Agriculture Animal Damage Control program to provide the predator management services. c. Fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides utilized within the landscaping areas of the project must be of the rapidly bi odegradab 1 e vari ety and must be approved by the Envi ronmenta 1 Protection Agency for use near wetland areas. d. All landscape chemical applications must be accomplished by a person who is a state-certified applicator. e. Open garbage conta i ners shoul d be restri cted and all dumpsters must be totally enclosed to avoid attracting avian and mammalian predators and scavengers to the area. Garbage should be hauled away as often as possible. f. The 94-foot building must utilize non-reflective glass on the west side and bold architectural 1 ines which are readily observable by birds. The glass which was approved for Building 1 will be used on this building. g. No extraneous ledges upon which rap tors could perch or nest can be included on the western side of the proposed 94-foot building. Ledges facing the west should not exceed two inches in width or should be sufficiently sloped to avoid perching. Additionally, the roof crests which are exposed to the wetlands must be covered with an anti-perch material such as Nixalite. A commitment to correct any additional problem areas should be obtai ned shoul d heavy incidence of perchi ng be observed on the buildings or in landscaping materials. c1iY -t 7 . .. .. -9- h. Outside lighting must be directed away from marsh areas or reflecting faces (windows) of the western side of the proposed building. Lights should be 1 imited to the minimum required for security on the western side of the proposed building. 5. Noise Biological Monitor must survey the Marsh area subject to potential construction noise; depending on the resources present and their location, the monitor may impose time limitations on construction. Any building with noise-generating uses will be designed to meet state and local noise standards. The Bay Boul evard buildi ng and the 5th and 6th floors of the 94-foot building will be designed to meet the City requirement for the interior noise levels. 6. liqht and Glare The last measure of Section 4 requires that outside lighting be directed away from marsh areas, and that lights be limited to the minimum required for security. 7. land Use Consistency will be created only by approval of the lCP amendment. 8. Natural Resources Energy efficient building design is required by law. The applicant should additionally include energy efficient lighting and appliances in every building where practically feasible. 9. Risk of UDset If hazardous materials are used for any site use, permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be achieved. Achievement of these permits is required prior to issuance of occupancy permits for each building where such materials would be used. 10. TransDortation/Circulation The applicant must provide the following physical improvements by the time of project completion (anticipated 1997): E Street/Bay Boulevard/I-5 SB Ramp intersection: Restriping and signal modification c1o-t.Y -10- . E Street/I-5 NB Ramp: Signal modification Bay Boulevard/F Street/Lagoon Drive: Reconstruct intersection I n add i t i on to these improvements, the app 1 i cant must pay a fee to the City which is proportional to the project traffic contribution to other impacted intersections and street segments. Th i s fee will be determined prior to approval of the Development Agreement. 11. Public Services The Fire Department has certain fire prevention/protection requirements. Rohr will coordinate with the Fire Department to determine and implement the exact requirements for each building or area. Other Comments: All proposed areas will be required to meet the requirements for fire flow and fire hydrants in accordance with Appendix IliA and IIIB of the Uniform Fire Code. Any other fire apparatus roads in excess of 150 ft. that dead end are required to have a turn around for fire apparatus. . Existing above-ground power lines on Bay Blvd. (west side) must be relocated underground as they present a hazard to fire fighting operations. Mitigation for indirect impacts to schools is achieved typically through payment of school fees or participation in a Mello-Roos Conununity Facilities District. The applicant will be required to provide mitigation to reduce impacts to a level below significant. The determination of the type and amount of mi t igat ion necessary wi 11 be made duri ng preparati on of either the Development Agreement or the owner part i ci pat ion agreement. Mitigation must be accepted by the District's prior to the issuance of building permits. The app 1 i cant must either create a park across the street from the existing City park (the City owns land across the street where this would be possible), or pay a fee to the City (to be negot i ated with the Park and Recreat ion Department) to mi t igate the loss of a portion of the City park. 12. Human Health Prior to, or concurrently with submittal of detailed project plans for each area of the Master Plan with known contamination, proof of completion of existing required remediation must occur. Site assessment must occur for other areas of the Master Plan not previously assessed for such contamination, and where the potential exists for human health impacts due to the type and amount of . 02CJ~~ ! -11- construction necessary. Site assessment procedures and any remediation must follow the procedures outlined in the County of San Diego Site Assessment and Mitigation Manual (January 1992), and Regional Water Quality Control Board Directives. G. Findinos of Insionificant Imoact Based on the following findings, it is determined that the project descri bed above will not have a s igni fi cant envi ronmenta 1 impact and no environmental impact report needs to be prepared. With implementation of all biological mitigation measures, the project will not significantly affect natural biological resources. Cultural resources will not be significantly impacted. The project has the potential to achieve short-tenn environmental goals to the disadvantage of 10ng-tenn environmental goals. No short term goals wou1 d be di sadvantaged by project development. land use proposed by this project is consistent with long term planning goals of the City. The project has possible effects which are indiVidually limited but cumulatively considerable. As used in the subsection, .cumu1ative1y considerable. means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects. Cumulative impacts to transportation/circulation and natural resources, including water, would occur with project development and for the life of the project. With implementation of mitigation measures, the projects incremental contri but ion to these cumu1 at i ve impacts would be mitigated. 4. The environmental effects of a project will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. . . . 1. The project has the potential to substantially degrade the Quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal cODlDunity, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 2. 3. Human health hazards could occur from soil. Implementation of mitigation hazards. known contami nated water and measures would avoid these ~o~?O -12- . H. Consultation 1. Individuals and Oraanizations 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 Gave, Fire Marshal Captain Keith Hawkins, Police Department Martin Schmidt, Parks and Recreation Department Diana Richardson, Community Development Dept. Hans Giroux, Air Quality Consultant Torsten Kruger, Hazardous Materials Consultant Martin Kenney, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Chula Vista City School District: Kate Shurson Sweetwater Union High School District: Tom Silva Applicant's Agent: Starboard Development Corporation 1202 Kettner Blvd. Fifth Floor San Diego, CA 92101 ~ . 2. Documents Chula Vista General Plan (1989) Title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (1989) Chula Vista Bayfront local Coastal Program (amended 1989) Rohr Office Complex Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR #90-10) Available for review at City of Chula Vista Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010. 3. Initial Studv This environmental determination is based on the attached Initial Study, any comments recei ved on the Ini t i a 1 Study and any comments received during the publ ic review period for the Negative Decl aration. Further i nformat ion regardi ng the envi ronmenta 1 revi ew of this project is available from the Chula Vista Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010. Mcin~ ~~ I'^- ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR EN 6 (Rev. 12/90) WPC 4911H . Jo~? / "'_~--'-'~~"''''''''''''''''''''''''''~~--''',,",. .. ", y.. ... _ .' ~...~~!!!-':;l'1I1'M':w.""'<.';r--N:"'-;~~>i"'-40/:~"l'i''''',!/;''''~''''''''''~l'''S;;o:':; . 13 lCUlk- Par~ . . cJ{J- 702 . . . ATTACHMENT A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM ROHR MASTER PLAN In accordance with Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code, the Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) would occur upon approval of the proposed project. The MMP consists of defining actual mitigation actions to be taken, monitoring their implementation, defining the schedule for their occurrence, and verifying their implementation. The following issue areas have mitigation measures which must be implemented: Earth Air Water Plant, Animal life Li ght and Gl are land Use Natural Resources Risk of Upset Transportation/Circulation Public Services Human Health The attached checklist will provide the documentation necessary for the proper implementation of measures. The Environmental Review Coordinator (ERC) of the City of Chul a Vi sta has the authority to des ignate the Mit igat i on Comp 1 i ance Coordinator, who will prepare the implementation procedures, and who will be responsible for monitoring implementation of measures. The ERC will also have final verification authority for the proper implementation of measures. WPC 4902H )0- ? J . . . MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING CHECKLIST PROJECT NAME: Rohr F & G Street Master Pl an in accordance wi th Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code FILE NO.: IS-92-18 EARTH Mitiaation Measure As plans are submitted for the 20-acre portion of the site, outside of the Building 1 and 2 area, soils/geotechnical investigations must accompany these plans. Recommendations must be incorporated as determined appropriate by the City's Engineering Department. Proiect Phase When plans are submitted for any portion of the balance of the site (outside the Blda 1 and 2 areal. Resoonsible Citv Deoartment Engineering Department Mitiaation Measure In the event construction dewatering is required prior to foundation excavation as a result of the interception of water levels with construction area, temporary construction dewatering shall be implemented in accordance with the 1990 report recommendations of Woodward Clyde Consultants, and in compl iance with the directives for the Regional Water Qual ity Control Board regarding discharge of temporary dewatering wastes. Proiect Phase During construction of Buildina 2 and associated oarkina aaraaes; during construction of anv Master Plan buildina which interceot aroundwater. Resoonsible Citv Deoartment Engineering Department AIR Mitiaation Measure The project must participate in Rohr's Transportation Control Measure Program, including: ridesharing, and van pool incentives alternate transportation work scheduling for off-peak hours When the City adopts its own emission reduction program (subsequent to SANDAG/APCD Plan adoption), Rohr must implement any additional relevant legal requirements. elf!) - 7~ . . . Project Phase Post construction of any part of Master Plan Area. Resoonsible Citv Deoartment Planning Department MitiQation Measure The Developer shall comply with any appropriate dust control measures required by APCD (e.g., maintaining adequate soil moisture and removal of soil spillage), and any appropriate limits on the hours of construction (e.g., allowing construction between 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.) and prohibitions on construction truck queuing. Project Phase Construction of any part of Master Plan area. Resoonsible Citv Deoartment Planning Department WATER MitiQation Measure Developer shall comply with all applicable legal requirements of Sweetwater Authority, City of Chula Vista, regarding water consumption. Project Phase , At the time of Building Permit issuance for any building in Master Plan Area. Resoonsible Citv Deoartment Building Department PlANT/ANIMAL LIFE MitiQation Measure 1. The buffer area between Building 1 and the F & G Street Marsh was required by the Rohr Office Complex FEIR to establish vegetation identified by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). These measures are currently being implemented and monitored. Success of this area must be evaluated, based on establishment of at least 6 of the 9 species used in the hydroseeding effort, and 85 percent of the site covered with these species. Container plants may be required if hydroseeding is not successful. -2- ;W-?~ . . . 2. The fence along this buffer must also be extended to the south (Area E), to prevent human access from this area into the Marsh. The fire access road there 1 imits the opportunity to establ ish vegetation on the Marsh side of these buildings. 3. The USFWS requests that native plants be used throughout the Master Plan area, rather than the proposed heavy use of non-natives. Proiect Phase Parts 1 and 3 currently being implemented; Part 2 - concurrently with start of construction for Area E. Resoonsible Citv Deoartment Planning Department MitiQation Measure The proposed project shall continue to participate in a predator management program for the Chula Vista Bayfront region to control domestic predators as well as wild animal predators. In the event that this program is not establ i shed pri or to issuance of a gradi ng permi t for the proposed project. the Developer shall coordinate with the United States Fish and Wildlife ("USFWS") to determine the extent of participation and the necessary timeframe for predator management. The USFWS recommends contracting with the Department of Agriculture Animal Damage Control program to provide the necessary predator management services. Proiect Phase Throughout construction and the life of the Master Plan Area. Resoonsible Citv Deoartment Planning Department MitiQation Measure Fert il izers, pesticides and herbi cides utili zed wi thi n the 1 andscapi ng areas of the project must be of the rapidly biodegradable variety and must be approved by the Environmental Protection Agency for use near wetland areas. All landscape chemical applications must be accomplished by a person who is a state-certified applicator. Open garbage containers should be prohibited outside and all dumpsters must be totally enclosed to avoid attracting avian and mammalian predators and scavengers to the area. Garbage should be hauled away as often as possible. -3- c2()-? 6 Proiect Phase ~ Throughout construction/landscaping, and the life of the Master Plan Area. Resoonsible Citv Deoartment Planning Department MitiGation Measure The 94-foot building contemplated by the proposed project shall utilize non-reflective glass on the west side and bold architectural lines which are readily observable by birds. The glass which was approved for the building contemplated by the certain BF/OP No. 3 Owner Participation Agreement between the Agency and the Developer shall be used on the building contemplated by the proposed development. No extraneous ledges upon which raptors could perch on or nest shall be included on the western side of the 94-foot building contemplated by the proposed project. Any ledges facing the west shall not exceed two inches in width or shall be sufficiently sloped to avoid such perching. Additionally, any roof crests wh i ch are exposed to the wetlands shall be covered with an anti-perch material, such as "Nixalite". Additionally, the north roof edge of Rohr Buil di ng 61 will be covered wi th anti-perch materi a 1, such as "Nixal ite". The Developer commits to use its best efforts to correct any additional problem areas which may be caused by a heavy incidence of perching observed on the proposed improvements or in landscaping materials. ... Project Phase During construction of BuildinG 2, and during life of same. Resoonsible Citv Deoartment Planning Department MitiGation Measure All outside lighting in connection with the proposed project shall be directed away from marsh areas or reflecting faces (windows) of the western side of the building contemplated by the proposed development. All lights shall be 1 imited to the minimum required for security on the western side of the proposed building. Proiect Phase During construction of Buildina 2 and Area E. Resoonsible Citv Deoartment Planning Department . -4- 02C-77 NOISE . Mitiaation Measure A biological monitor shall survey the marsh area subject to potential construction noise; depending on the resources present and their location, the monitor may impose time 1 imitations on construction if construction occurs during the nesting season. Proiect Phase Prior to, and during construction Buildina 2 and Area E. Resoonsible Citv Deoartment Planning Department Mitiaation Measure Any building to be constructed as a part of the proposed project that has noise-generating uses shall be designed to meet applicable state and local noise standards. Proiect Phase During project design-for building in the Master Plan Area which would house noise-generating uses; submitted with project plans. tIIa Resoonsible Citv Deoartment Engineering Department Mitiaation Measure The 5th and 6th floors of the 94-foot building contemplated by the proposed project shall be designed to meet applicable City of Chula Vista requirement for interior noise levels, which is a maximum of 45 decibels. Pro.iect Phase During project design for Buildina 2 and Bav Boulevard buildinas; submitted with project plans. Resoonsible City Deoartment Engineering Department . -5- )J/-- ') g/ . . . LIGHT AND GLARE Mitiaation Measure As stated above, outside lighting shall be directed away from marsh areas, and said lights shall be limited to the minimum required for security. Proiect Phase During construction of Buildina 2 and Area E. Resoonsible Citv Deoartment Planning Department LAND USE Mitiaation Measure The LCP amendment proposed in connection with the project shall have been approved. Proiect Phase Prior to issuance of any permit for LCP area. Resoonsible Citv Deoartment Planning Department NATURAL RESOURCES Mitiaation Measure Energy efficient building design is required by law. The Developer shall include energy efficient lighting and appliances in the building contemplated in this proposal where practically feasible. Proiect Phase During design for any building in the Master Plan Area; submitted with project pl ans. Resoonsible Citv Deoartment Engineering Department -6- cld~?1 . . . RISK OF UPSET Mitioation Measure If hazardous material s are used in connection with the proposed project, permits from the appropriate regulatory agency permits shall be obtained. Such permits, if necessary, shall be required prior to issuance of any occupancy permits for each building where such materials would be used. Project Phase Achievement of permits to occur prior to issuance of occupancy permits for any building in the Master Plan Area which would use hazardous materials. Resoonsible Citv Deoartment Planning Department TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION Mitioation Measure E Street/Bay Boulevards/I-5 SB Ramp intersection: Restriping and signal modification. E Street/I-5 NB Ramp: Signal modification. Bay Boulevard/F Street/Lagoon Drive: Reconstruct intersection. Payment of fees to be determined by Development Agreement for cumulative impacts to othe area intersections. Proiect Phase All intersection improvements to be completed by completion of Master Plan development. The Bay Boulevard intersection would be constructed at same time as Bav Boulevard buildinos construction. The other intersections to be completed when Bav Boulevard or G Street buildinos are constructed,' whichever occurs last. Fees to be paid as determined by Development Agreement. Resoonsible Citv Deoartment Planning Department PUBLIC SERVICES Mitioation Measure The Developer shall comply with the Fire Department's fire prevention/protection requirements. The Developer shall coordinate with the Fire Department to determine and implement the exact requirements for each building or area. -7- )() -6V . All proposed areas sha 11 be requi red to meet the requi rements for fi re fl ow and fire hydrants in accordance with Appendix IlIA and IlIB of the Uniform Fire Code. Any future apparatus roads in excess of 150 ft. that dead-end shall have a turnaround for fire apparatus. Proiect Phase Prior to issuance of Building Permit for any building in the Master Plan Area. Resoonsible Citv Deoartment Fire Department Mitioation Measure Existing above-ground power 1 ines on Bay Blvd. (west side) must be relocated underground as they present a hazard to fire fighting operations. Proiect Phase During construction of Bav Boulevard buildinos. Resoonsible Citv Deoartment Fire Department Mitioation Measure tit The Developer shall pay the State-mandated school impact fees. Project Phase Prior to issuance of Building Permits for any building in the Master Plan Area. Resoonsible Citv Deoartment Building Department Mitioation Measure The applicant must either create a park across the street from the existing City park (the City owns land across the street where this would be possible), or pay a fee to the City (to be negotiated with the Park and Recreation Department) to mitigate the loss of a portion of the City park. Proiect Phase During construction of Bav Boulevard buildinos, and prior to issuance of occupancy permits of these buildings. Resoonsible Citv Deoartment Parks and Recreation Department . -8- dV~'i? I . HUMAN HEALTH MitiQation Measure Prior to, or concurrently with' submittal of detailed project plans for each area of the Master Pl an wi th known contami nat i on, proof of comp 1 et i on of existing required remediation must occur. Site assessment must occur for other areas of the Master Plan not previously assessed for such contamination, and where the potential exists for human health impacts due to the type and amount of construction necessary. Site assessment procedures and any remediation must follow the procedures outl ined in the County of San Diego Site Assessment and Mitigation Manual (January 1992), and Regional Water Quality Control Board Directives. Pro iect Phase Site assessment and/or proof of remediation to be submitted with any plans for Master Plan area outside of the area containinQ BuildinQ 1. 2. and associated QaraQes. Resoonsible City Deoartment Planning Department tit WPC 4936H . -9- dV r zr)-, ~A).{ ~L..t. If\EfoK I I/'J Cl rO KM City of Chula Vista MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT o Compliance o Noncompliance DATE: I REPORT NUMBER: I MONITOR: WEATHER CONDITIONS: DISCIPLINE: MONITORING PROJECT/lOCATION: C PLAN NO.: 0 0 0 MITIGATION MEASURE: " COMPLIANCE: o Acceptable o Unacceptable o Follow-up "Required OBSERVATIONS: RECOMMENDATIONS: BY PARTY RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFICATION (RV): REPORT APPROVAL (MCC): REqlPT BY: Signature: Date: Time: City of Chult1 Vista Environmental Review Coordinator (ERe) COMMENTS/ACTIONS: " COPY/ISSUED: DMCC o DEVELOPER o DEVELOPER.S CONTRACTOR o OTHER .10-8'3 . BltU11L p~ . . cl()-6f APPLICATION CANNOT BE ACCEPTED UNLESS SITE PlAN IS FOLDED TO FIT INTO AN 8-1/2 X 11 FOLDER FOR OFFICE USE INITIAL STUDY Case No. Deposit Receipt No. Date Rec'd Accepted by Project No. . A. BACKGROUND City of Chu1a Vista Application Form 1. PROJECT TITLE F&G Street Master Plan 2. PROJECT LOCATION (Street address or description) Property bounded by Lagoon Drive, Bay Boulevard, "G" Street and (continued...] 3. Assessors Book, Page & Parcel No. BRIEF PROJECT DESCRIPTION Master Plan for. area and F /.G Streets. See a.ltached. description. , between Bav Bculevard . 4. Name of Applicant Rohr Industries Inc. Address Foot of "H" Street, P.O. Box 878 Phone 619-691-2678 City Chura Vista State CA Zip 92012-0878 5. Name of Preparer/Agent Starboard Developmpnt rnrrnr~t;nn Address 1202 Kettner Blvd.. Fifth Floor Phone 619-231-6700 City San Dieqo State CA Zip 92101 Relat ion to App1 icant Develooer ITlJrnkpy Rllilrlpr 6. Indicate all permits' or approvals and enclosures or documents required by the Environmental Review Coordinator. a. Permits or approvals required: --- General Plan Amendment ~ Design Review Application ___ Public Project --- Rezone/Prezone ___ Tentative Subd. Hap ___ Annexation --- Precise Plan ~ Grading Permit ___ Redevelopment Agency --- Specific Plan ___ Tentative Parcel Hap ___ O.P.A. --- Condo Use Permit -1l Site Plan & Arch.Review ___ Redevelopment Agency --- Variance ___ Project Area Committee D.D.A. --- Coastal Development Use Permit ~ Other Permit Coastal Development an'd Building Permit b. Enclosures or documents (as required by the Environmental Review Coordinator) . -1l Grading Plan Arch. Elevations ~ Parcel Hap -2L Landscape Plans ___ Precise Plan ___ Tentative Subd. Hap ___ Specific Plan ___ Improvement Plans ~ Other Agency Permit ~ Soils Report ,.,-- or Approvals Required ___ Hazardous Waste Assessment ~ HYdrOlogical Study ___ Biological Study ___ Archaeological Survey Noise Assessment XX Traffic Impact Report ..2L Other WPC 9459P -6- Sewer Study J.. D- ~ Site Plan xx - Reports being submitted separately. B. .fBQEQSED PROJECT 1. land Area: sq. footage 1,531,550 SF or acreage 35.2 acres If land area.to be dedicated, state acreage and purpose. ~ 2. Complete this section if project is residential. a. Type development: Single family Two family Multi family Townhouse Condominium b. Total number of structures c. Maximum height of structures d. Number of Units: 1 bedroom 2 bedrooms 3 bedrooms 4 bedrooms Total units e. Gross density (DU/total acres) f. Net density (DU/total acres minus any dedication) g. Estimated project population h. Estimated sale or rental price range 1- Square footage of structure j. Percent of lot coverage by buildings or structures k. Number of on-site parki~g spaces to be provided 1. Percent of site in road and paved surface ~. - 3. Complete this section if ~rojec1 is commercial or industrial or mixed .I!.a . a. Type(s) of land use Office buildinq B-2 occupany b. Floor area See Attachmenl A Height of structure(s) See Attachm<=nt A c. Type of construction used in the structure Type II FR and Type II NR, per Uniform Building Code 1988 and 1991 (continued.. .) . d. Describe major access points to the structures and the orientation to adjoining properties and streets Buildinas (Area Al - Main access from "F" Street with curb cuts i'):ttol.tir>;Jed.. :1 e. Number of on-site parking spaces provided 1,910 surface llnd structured f. Estimated number of employees per shift 2.58L . Number of shifts One (I) Total 2,582 g. Estimated number of customers (per day) and basis of estimate -L- h. Estimated number of deliveries per day ~ WPC 9459P -7- ;Jj) Yb . . . i. Estimated range of service area and basis of estimate Not applicable. j. Type/extent of operations not'in ,enclosed buildings None. k. Hours of operation 7: 30 am - 5: 30 om Mondav throus;Jh Fridav. 1. Type of exterior lighting Hiah intensity discharae (continued...) 4. If project is other than residential, commercial or industrial complete this section. a. Type of project b. Type of facilities provided c. Square feet of enclosed structures d. Height of structure{s) - maximum ,e. Ultimate occupancy load of project f. Number of on-site parking spaces to be provided g. Square feet of road and paved surfaces h. Additional project characteristics C. PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS \ 1. If the project could result in the direct emission of any air pollutants, (h!drocarbons, sulfur, dust, etc.) identify them. Not applicable. 2. Is any type of grading or excavation of the property anticipated Yes. (If yes, complete the following:) a. Excluding trenches to be backfilled, how many cubic yards of earth will be excavated? No excavation reqllir..d b. How many cubic yards of fill will be placed? qo.OOO cubic yards. C. How much area (sq. ft. or acres) will be graded? 11.0 acres d. What will be the - Maximum depth of cut 0' Average depth of cut 0' Maximum depth of fill 7' Average depth of fill 4' . WPC 94S9p -8- y;- );''"h c2. () ~ If? . v 4. Describe all energy consuming devices which are part of the proposed project and the type of energy used (air conditioning, electrical appliance, heating equipment, etc.) Normal office space type B-2 occu anc related devices (II hts. air condition in . data s stems. UPS s stems. Normal office HVAC and electrical continued.;. 5. Indicate the amount of natural open space that is part of the project (sq. ft. or acres) None. 6. If the project will result in any employment opportunities describe the nature and type of these jobs. ~onstruction emo'ovmenf o ortunities shall be enerated in t e short term ( con mued... J 7. Will highly substances site? No. 8. How many estimated automobile trips, per day, will be generated by the project? 6,380 ADT's. flammable be used or potentially or stored explosive materials .or within the project 9. Describe (if any) off-site improvements necessary to implement the project, and their points of access or connection to the project site. Improvements include but not limited to the following: . new streets; street widening; extension of gas, electric, and sewer lines; cut and fill slopes; ap~ pedestrian and bicycle facilities.: .-. D. DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Street west of thp railroarl tr"rk" to th.. wP"tprn bounrlary of thp pr'ljpct. 1m rovements include but no limited to the follow in : 1m rove "G" 1. GeoloGv Has a geology study been conducted on the property? Y..s See (If yes, please attach). Woodward-Clyde Consultants report: Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation. Rohr "F" Street (continued...J Has a Soils Report on the project site been made? Yes. See (If yes, please attach) Woodw~rd-pyde Consultants' report: . Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation. Rohr "F" Street (contmued... J 2. Hvdro10Gv Are any of the following features present on or adjacent to the site? Yes. (If yes, please explain in detail.) a. Is there any surface evidence of a shallow ground water table? Woodward-Clvde Consultants' aeotechnical (continued. .'.1 b. Are there any watercourses or drainage improvements on or ~ adjacent to the site? There are no watercourses (continued... J WPC 9459P -9- ),o-~ . . . . WPC 9459P c. Does runoff from the project site drain directly into or toward a domestic water supply, lake, reservoir or bay? No. d. Could drainage from the site cause erosion or siltation to adjacent areas? No. The proposed proiect desian (continued...) e. Describe all drainage facilities to be provided and location. Subiect to hvdrolo<;1v analysis orepared hy Rick Engineering and attached herein. their 3. Noise a. Are there any noise sorces in the project vicinity which may impact the project site? No. 4. BioloGV a. Is the project site in a natural or partially natural state? No. b. If yes, has a biological survey been conducted on the property? Yes (Please attach a copy). No c. Describe all trees and vegetation on the site. Indicate location, height, diameter, and species of trees, and which (if any) will be removed by the project. No sianificant veQetation located currently on site. 5. Past Use of the Land' a. 'Are there any known historical or archeological resources located on or near the project site? There are no known historical resources on or np;:Ir thp ~itp. For c:nrrohnr~tivp inform~tinn c;;;.p.p p::lgPc;. l! thrn"gh 7 of Woodw~rrl- (contini U:lon ) b. Are there any known paleontological resources? See discussion in Woodward-Clyde Consultant's report: "Hazardous Substance Site Assessment. Rohr Industries "F" Street (continued. . .) c. Have there been any.hazardous materials disposed of or stored pn or near the project site? No. d. - What was the land previously used for? See Attachment R -10- clC ~ '2 J 6. Current land Use a. Describe all structures and land uses currently existing on the project site. See Attachment B. --. b. Describe all structures and land uses currently existing on adjacent property. North "F" Street (Laqoon Drive) South "G" Street East Bay Boulevard West u.S. Fish & WilEllife Preserve 8. 7. Social a. Are there any residents on site? (If so, how many?) No. b. Are there any current employment opportunities on site? (If so, how many and what type?) No. Please provide any other information which may assist in the. evaluation of the proposed project. A Master Plan phasino schedule.. is attached as Exhibit "e". -., -., WPC 9459P -11- JO --; {J . . . E. CERTIFICATION I, Not applicable or Owner/owner in escrow* I, )6IJV Ian M. Gill, Senior Vice President Starboard DeveloDment CorD. Aaent for Rohr Industries, Inc. Consultant or Agent* HEREBY AFFIRM, that to the best of my belief, the statements and information herein contained are in all respect~. true and correct and that all known information concerning the project and its setting has been included in this application for an Initial Study of possible environmental impact and :any enclosures for attachments thereto. DATE: \1-. It-. "h *If acting for a corporation, include capacity and company name. WPC 9459P .,2(/- C; ) -12- LJ ""'" STARBOARD STARBOARD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 11/20/91 City of Chula Vista Application for Initial study A.2 eastern boundary of U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife "F/G" street Marsh. This Master Plan Consists of the following components: A.3 o 35.2 acre Master Plan Area including LCP Amendment Area and SDG&E Parking Area. o Bay Boulevard re-alignment o Tidelands Avenue vacation o G Street vacation -., The Master Plan, LCP Amendment, and SDG&E Parking Area will be processed concurrently as part of this project. The Master Plan (see attached map) consists of 35.2 acres including seven buildings totaling 655,000 square feet, two parking structures and assoc~ated landscape improvements. The LCP Amendment, an element of the Master Plan ('see attached map) consists of 23 acres including 455,000 of building square footage, two parking structures and associated landscape improvements. The SDG&E Right of Way, an element of the Master Plan (see attached map) consists of 4.3 acres with 370 parking spaces. The percent landscape is 18% B.3.c code as applicable parking facility. Building (Area B) - Main access from Bay Boulevard. Building (Area C) - Main access from Bay Boulevard and "G" Street. Building (Area D) Main access from Bay Boulevard. Buildings (Area E) - Main access from "G" Street. B.3.d -- 1202 KETTNER BOULEVARD, FIFTH FLOOR, SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92101-3338 1619J 231-6700 FAX 1619J 2::-:31-.79G9 ~!J-7~ . B.3.I downlighting limited to the site itself. Lighting on western side of property will be directed away from Refuge and will be shielded to minimize effect of light on wildlife. C.4 system yet to be defined. C.6 with security and grounds maintenance needs over the long term. D.1 D.2.a . D.2.b D.2.d 5.a 5.b . Property (No. 8853050Q-SI01) dated May 13, 1988. (Report being submitted separately.) Property (No. 8853050Q-SI01) dated May 13, 1988. (Report being submitted separately.) report cited above states (page 4), "...the stabilized groundwater table at the site appears to range from about elevation +5 to +7 feet" {MSL}. Examination of the detailed topographic map of the site indicates depth to the groundwater table over most of the site is on'the order of six to twelve feet. In the limited areas of the site where groundwater table is likely to be on the order of one to three below the ground surface. For additional information on groundwater table, \see page 19 and Figure 2 of Woodward-Clyde Consultants' report: ' "Hazardous Substance contamination site Assessment, Rohr Industries "F" Street" (No. 8853050Q-SI01) dated May '13, 1988. or drainage improvements on the site. An area of tidal salt marsh ("FIG" Street Marsh) is situated west of ,the site. The eastern margin of the marsh typically is 100 to 150 feet west of the property boundary. An isolated pocket of non-tidal marsh vegetation (totaling less than one-tenth of an acre) is present in the extreme northwestern corner of the site. incorporates features and safeguards which minimize this potential for siltation both during the construction phase and thereafter for the life of the project. Clyde Consul tants report: "Hazardous Substance Contamination Site Assessment, Rohr Industries, "F" Street" (No. 8853030-RP01) dated May 23 1988, which summarizes the history of the site from 1928 to present based on a study of some twenty historic aerial photographs. (No. 8853050Q-RP01) dated May 23, 1988, (being submitted separately) . ,Jt)-c;) ~ ~ TIlE CITY OF Cl '!LA VISTA PARTY DISCLOSURE '. 11.TEMENT .latement of disclosure of certain ownership interests, payments, or campaign contributions, on all mattet~ vhich will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council, Planning CommissIon, and all (l(her ....... ,fficial bodies. The following information must be disclosed: List the names .of all persons having a financial interest in the contract, i.e., contractor, SUbcontractor, material supplier. Rohr Industries, fnc.. a Delaware Corporation ~~ If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals ownin& more than 10 % of the shares in the corporation or ownin~ any p<:rtnersl'Jp interc~t in the partnership. -.Not applicable. .-, - .- ~ If any person identified punuant to (1) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of eny person serving as director of the non-profit organization Or as trustee or beneficiary or t.'lJstor of the trust. Not applicahle. lliive you had more than S25<J worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months? Yes_ No g If yes, please indicate person(s): ~---~- ~ Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants or independent contractors who you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter. Ian Gill - Starboard Development Art Spllnn>n - Rohr IndlJ~tries. Inc. --.-- Have you and/or YOtlt officers or agents, in the aggregate, contributed more then $1,000 to a Counci1member in the current or preceding election period? Yes _ No L If yes, slate which Councilmember(s): n2ll is defined as: ".tny individual, firm, CX>-palTMrSh/p, joint W71tUn!. auoclalion, .fodal dw.. frattinuU organiza;um, rporatIon, uttlt4,InIn, ~,lY"dlctlU, th14lUldtJlryOIMrCCUJUy, cilylUld COIllltry, city, munlclpaUty, district or othupolhlCdl bdMsion, or any other group or wmblnation acIng", a unit. " 'QTE: AUach additloaol pqeo .. nee.....ry) 7 ate:. ~.z-..,..,/,,-< /t: /9'/ ( R04IES, INC. . -= -"" .,~ '<:~(J?--f2a..-" .d(\~gnature of cOQ.tractor/applicant * Not to Our knowledge. E1'o.;.ne. K. Mill..'>. AM;~.t:al1-t Se..VLe.:t.MI{ -..- _. ."~. ---', Print or type name of contractor/applicant -" 1l3\A,DISCLoSB.TXT] :20-1t-( 1? ,_',~ _;~ ATTACHMENT "A" . Item 3b Height of Floor Area structure (Sa. Feet) (Feet) Area A Building 1 245,000 41 Building 2 125,000 94 Area B Building 1 60,000 44 Area C Building 60,00 44 Area D Building 80,000 44 . Area E Building 1 60,000 44 Building 2 20,000 50 . November 25, 1991 ../ .1(J-7'~ Area A Area B Area C Area D Area E November 25, 1991 ATTACHMENT "B" Existinq Uses Agricultural activity previously on site. Two (2) warehouse structures with associated office space (approximately 80,000 square feet.) Industrial facility (38,560 square feet). Temporary trailers (15,000 square feet) that would be removed. Vacant. Cogeneration facility, one (1) 11,500 square foot industrial building; two (2) 9,900 square feet each industrial buildings. Jj) -5 & -, New Uses Corporate office buildings for Rohr Industries including parking structures. Corporate office building and associated surface parking for Rohr Credit Union. Expansion of existing 38,560,000 square foot industrial building with one story, 21,440 square foot shell. Research and development buildings with associated surface parking. - Commercial office building with associated surface parking. -, . EXHIBIT "c" ROHR MASTER PLAN PHASING SCHEDULE AREA A: Building 1 Completion - 10/15/92 Building 2 Completion - 6/1/93 AREA B: Building 1 Completion - 6/1/93 . AREA C: Building 1 Completion - 10/1/94 AREA D: Building 1 Completion - 10/1/95 AREA E: Building 1 Completion - 10/1/97 Building 2 Completion - 10/1/97 . JO-~7 ......, ROHR MASTER PLAN PHASING SCHEDULE AREA A: Building 1 Building 2 AREA B: Building 1 AREA C: Building 1 Completion - 10/15/92 Completion - 6/1/93 Completion - 6/1/93 -... Completion - 10/1/94 AREA 0: Building 1 Completion 10/1/95 AREA E: Building 1 Building 2 Completion 10/1/97 Completion 10/1/97 -... .JO - ?y YS-5ce . G. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Case No. rs-qZ- (e, 1. Drainaae a. Is the project site within a flood plain? NO. If so, state which FEMA Floodw~ Frequency Boundary ~/~ b. What is the location and description of existing on-site drainage facilities? SU~E.1="l.O'" TO '[PH 9r~€~rC't.r--""l.\ h<',vE) AND 7n'G"~ . c. Are they adequate to serve the project? NO. If not, explain briefly. A~~~-=~ =~~ 'P?At,..\ ~ MO W~~"AU~_ ______ _w,_ _ ~-IN~) IN ~ -ro Cot-(Pl-'( wrTlt t:.c#!1rAL- ~~(oo.Lo;;,. d. What is the location and description of existing off-site drainage facilities?~JPFAq: F/-DwAr...co-l6 t.\&Q:N ~".. Wm/~"1?:> ."u___ lI.t ~ 'l>r~17...Y. ~ ><r.r t.J. r. SrILEEr WHICH Ift.-TIMA-TFlf 1>15C.J'~~ W 40vJ D/Q:;o ""'I'. e. Are they adequate to serve the project? Nc->. If not, explain briefly. ~ W~;;;:"-::~ ~n:;;~% A.a<.I ~ ~--'l DIZ.Jv"E. #I II _ J __.l!:'A~ QvAWry 6rplc-TO(i!:e.'& IN O!ZJ:>E/Z. ~ ~Ft-t' yv,T"/f Cc~ fZC&uLAnoJJ.s. 2. Transoortation a. What roads provide primary access to the project? l P'''Ot..J T.:>/ZIVE AND BAY &ut...E:VA1ZD . b. What is the estimated number of one-way auto trips to ~e generated by the project (per day)? ~~ .4~ c. What is the ADT and estimated level of service before and after project completion? Before After A.D.T.~ "~lfIE-~31D ~ZJ1!JI/E.- q;t~ AAY So~v~- tq~ gs,Y8?VU:V'.A2n- (2..130 L.O.S. !JE",-rl DZtVl;: - 1..L>~'fA II t.~.!'~l DfZJlJ'E...- ~"EfI (tlfSsE. ~ g,..y SO"'urv~ L...o; \t~" S4y St1()UEt/~- 1.-e>S" E" ) 9fiI..DW. If the A.PI.T. or L.O.S. is unknown or not applicable, explain briefly. ~ A . · . d. Are the primary access roads adequate to serve the project? If not, explain briefly. N~=::~~NC(..(..l~ IN:;:'}::; ANt:> faEAL.t&.lJJtJflflJ.r",: -rHIE __ __ _ IN. FtZ __ ~~ne ~""-~Tl!!D -neAFFlc. AIJO -rt> ""'lEer- c-fiY of CilvL-A 11Sr1J. i1f1ZI!~ ST;A~J1:l'.P.z:>$. *- /oJC7T"E: AFt"E:-{Z. IMPf!OVE/vfE1.J-r"!> 'TV LAbco"/ ~VE AND 8/l,y gtOL.~VAF>J;:> 1W 'TIff. Affl,.J ~I /.S.V~S -oF-f!:E~VICE ~ J3cI71f ~ WPC 9459P WtU- 1'E "A ". . -14- ;2tJ /'7'1 3. Soils b. Ys -50B Case No. IS.qZ-IB ~ e. Are there any intersections at or near the point that will result in an unacceptable level of Service (lOS)?Y~. If so, identify: location ~AY t'ii'::VLEV~ f, ~~ l>::~~ . LOS IS Cumulative l.O.S. ItE~€VE'::t ~D/tfAY'A,Af_~S _...;..d.i IMFf<bVCM~ A-JZE. I PE":P I "T1ff!. ~ T?> Mlru;AT7!!: N~rlf/E. Is there any dedication required? y~. ~A1~~ If so,_ please specify. ~ ~lVE N-lP~"'" BCxJ~A~ ~ ",:CJ<:;~p ~ IN.~ ~J-1E~L ~ 1>6 Ct..A'?n:r ~r I'~L':TO/Z?/~_C_l/,--L.Y._ 'FFIGIEN.T ~ICA;-n~ WIt.L-"8e f/:~1l.f;:D IZ> MEE?r :ruLL.-WIDrH ~~ OF ~/D Is there any street widening required? YE~. ~~ If so, please specify. LA€.ca-l =/I/E4 BA':;~:~>V~=~ ~~c-r Al-'f:o ~fbf~TD ~ND "l!;"~~~To_ ~_'____N ~LJN~ Are there any other street improvements required? ~~. If so, please specify the general nature of the necessary improvements. CV1Z8.?;(YTT~tZl-G(=W4U<:.. ?~=- U~IN.,",. ~,~ ETc.. . . 'I f. g. h. a. Are there any anticipated adverse geotechnical conditions on the project site? IJD. If yes, specify these conditions. IJ/A . .-, c. Is a soils report necess~ry? NO. ~ f'F<t>V,!:lF-'n WIT'Ji Af'FLtCAT/o..t. 4. land Form 1 '10/. ....... 30~ a. What is the average natura slope of the site? ~~ ~ (~ 5. fu!iH 50/0 b. What is the maximum natural slope of the site? /0 Are there any traffic-related noise levels impacting the site that are significant enough to justify that a noise analysis be required of the applicant? No. 6. Waste Generation How much solid and liquid (sewage) waste will be generated by the proposed project per day? Solid 1'3,'00 IA!>/I:lI>.Y liouid' 51 ,b40GMJ,.Of.l~/ow 0'15" Et>v....) What is the location and size of existing sewer lines on or downstream from the site? 84 ~ MEr/ib :Nt'>MI S;S,Dt.J MAli.) W#ICH "8r~7'S ~r A+lD ~u:N$ ~rrH rn "'0'3;_. --., Are they adequate to serve the proposed project? Y'~. WPC 9459P -15- 020 ~ / tTO . . . YS-5~ Case No. I5....qZ-/B 7. Remarks Please identify and discuss any remaining potential adverse impacts, mitigation measures, or other issues. WPC 9459P ! /3/?~ Date City En neer r Representative cJ,O - /C) J -16- Case No. /..5-?2~/Y ...... H. FIRE DEPARTMENT I. What is the distance to the nearest fire station? And what is the Fire Department's estimated reaction time? Maximum diStance is one mile. Estimated reaction time is four minutes. 2. Will the Fire Department be able to provide an adequate level of fire protection for the proposed facility without an increase in equipment or personnel? Yes. 3. Remarks t??~ Fire Marshal 12/31/91 Date - \. ...... JlJ"j o,+- WPC 9459P -17- Case No. /-".. /2 -/.;' ~ H-I. PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT . . 1. How many acres of parkland are necessary to serve the proposed project? " . 2. How many acres of developed parkland are within the Park District of this project as shown in the ParksLand Recreation of the General Plan? (If applicable) ~~ Service. Element 3. What are the current park acreage requir ments in the Park Service District? (If applicable) 4. Is project subject to Parks & Recreation Threshold requirements? If not, please explain. 5. Are existing neighborhood and community parks near the project adequate to serve the population increase resulting from this project? Neighborhood ~ Community Parks ~ 6. If not, are parkland dedications or other mitigation proposed as part of the project adequate to serve the population increase? Neighborhood ~ Community Parks ~ 7. Does this project exceed the Parks and Recreation Thresholds established by City Council policies? ~ 8. To meet City requirements, will applicant be required to: Provide land? Pay a fee? 9. Remarks: kAtYBr ye.~ ~ ~~'~,.. . - ~ .. C7""~ ~.~,<<i'1- ~~. Parks an Recreation Director or Representative 2. . '? ..:u- Date ).0-/0) WPC 9459P -18- -- February 3, 1992 TO: Diana Richardson, Contract Environmental Planner FROM: Martin Schmidt, Landscape Architect RE: ROHR MASTER PLAN: 35.2 ACRES,"F' STREET@ BAY BLVD. This is an interesting project that is creating a unique situation. The realignment of Bay Blvd. to the north of "F' Street will be demolishing an existing City Park. In reviewing the submitted documentation, no mention was made of the existing park land use, or the landscaped open space on the northeast corner of the same intersection. In light of the fact that this is an improved and existing park and open space, an analysis will need to be done to determine what the existing acreage is for both sites, and what the remaining acreage would be, if this plan were approved. Because the park is being reduced in size, and the open space has an existing rai~way -., track running through the site, this proposed realignment of Bay Blvd. generates an impact so extreme that the park site may not be useable. If this is the case, then !Rohr Industries may be responsible for the total cost of the land, including improvements, based on the City's Park Development Fee Schedule. I suggest that you schedule a meeting between the Parks and Recreation Department and Community Development to discuss this issue initially. Based on the what is determined at that meeting, then subsequent meetings with Rohr Industries and Starboard Development representatives will eventually need to be pursued. In any scenario, however, the Parks and Recreation Department will have to be involved in any decision regarding the park, open space and the landscaping at the intersection, because the area is maintained by the Open Space Maintenance District. Please keep me informed and provide as much lead time as possible to schedule and meetings. cc: Jess Valenzuela, Director of Parks and Recreation Jerry Foncerrada, Deputy Director of Parks Joel Chew, Open Space Coordinator """" 20//0,-/ . CHULA VISTA FIRE DEPARTMENT BUREAU OF FIRE PREVENTION PLAN CORRECTION SHEET Address ROHR INDUSTRIES MASTER PLAN Plan File No. IS 92-1~ecker Horsfall Date 12/31/91 Type Constr. ? Occupancy various No. Storiesvarioualdg. Area various The following list does not necessarily include all errors and omissions. PRO\LWE- -AIID -SHOW- -ON. ~-AN-:- - -- COM/tENTS: Area A, Bldg 2: 1. The required fire flow cannot be determined until type of construction is known. 2. The fire department has not received plans for Building 2 for plan check as yet. 3. Building 2 will be required to be fire sprinklered, have a fire standpipe system, and must comply with Chapter 18, Sec. 1807 of the Building Code. In addition a 4IIt fire pump will be required. Area A, Existing South Parking Structure: 1. Plans have not as yet been checked for the proposed addition to the south parking structure. Area B, Building 1: 1. Fire sprinklers will be required. 2. A fire standpipe system will be required. 3. Fire flow cannot be determined until the type of building construction is determined. 4. Access to the west side of the building is blocked by the proposed center island on Lagoon Drive. Area C, Building 99: 1. The proposed addition to building 99 will require a fire sprinkler system. . 2. Fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150' which dead end must be provided with a turn around for fire apparatus. FPB-29 ;20//!J~ CHULA VISTA FIRE DEPARTMENT BUREAU OF FIRE PREVENTION -.., PLAN CORRECTION SHEET ROHR INDUSTRIES MASTER PLAN (continued) Address Plan File No. Chec ke r Date Type Cons tr. Occupancy No. Stories Bldg. Area The following list does not necessarily include all errors and omissions. P ROV-I -DE- .AtHr -5tt{)W- -{}N- 'Pt:Aft:- - - 3. A property line exists on the access road between building 99 and the proposed building at Area D. A permanent easement for fire access would be required in the event either building is sold to another party. Area 0: This proposed 80,000 sq. ft. building will be required to be fire sprinklered and if three or more floors will be required to have a fire standpipe system. Area E. Both buildings will require a fire sprinkler system and again, if three or -- more floors will require a fire standpipe system. Other comments: All proposed areas will be required to meet the requirements for fire flow and fire hydrants in accordance with Appendix IlIA and IIIB of the Uniform Fire Code. Any other fire apparatus roads in excess of 150' that dead end are required to have a turn around for fire apparatus. Existing above ground power lines on Bay Blvd. (west side) must be relocated under- ground as they present a hazard to fire fighting operations. ...., FPB-29 JO~/{J;;' BOARO OF EDUCATION SEPH O. CUMMINGS. Ph.D. LARRY CUNNINGHAM SHARON GILES PATRICK A JUDD GREG R. SANDOVAL SUPERINTENDENT JOHN F. VUGAIN, Ph.D. . . CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT 84 EAST "J" STREET. CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910 . 619425.9600 EACH CHILD lS AN INDIVIDUAL OF GREAT WORTH December 20, 1991 L:.l 2 j 91 Ms. Diana Richardson community Development Dept. city of Chula vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 RE: Initial study - Rohr Master Plan, LCP Amendment and SDG&E Parking Plan IS-92-18 / FA-555 / DP-894 Bay Blvd./"F" street Dear Ms. Richardson: Thank you for providing a copy of the Initial Study for the Rohr Industries Master Plan. commencing in July, 1990, through December of that year, the District provided comments and requested adequate mitigation for a 211,500 square foot office complex at the Rohr facility. We were unaware that further expansion of the Rohr Complex was contemplated, and that the project under consideration was only part of the first phase of a 650,000 square foot master plan. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not permit a large project to be segmented, as this makes it difficult to assess and quantify cumulative impacts. It is unclear why the first phase of this master plan was reviewed as a separate project. If any additional development is contemplated for the Rohr facility, it should be included in the master plan and analyzed at this time. The magnitude of the proposed project will have significant impacts on elementary facilities in Chula vista. Since amending a Local Coastal Plan constitutes a LegiSlative Act, Yost v. Thomas (1984 36 Cal.3d 561), based on recent court decisions (Mira, Hart and Murrieta Valley), the city of Chula vista must consider school adequacy and can condition project approval to provide adequate mitigation. The District requests that the city require full mitigation for impacts to school facilities~ This could be in the form of participation in a Mello-Roos community Facilities District (CFD), or other form of acceptable full-reimbursement mitigation. Building 1 of Area A (211,500 square feet) did not involve a legislative act, and, therefore, the District was limited to collection of developer fees. Since no permit has been issued for this building, it would seem appropriate, and the applicant has the option, to include Building 1 of Area A in the total project mitigation. 02V-/O? December 20, 1991 Ms. Diana Richardson Page 2 RE: Initial Study - Rohr Master Plan, LCP Amendment and SDG&E Parking Plan """"l The information provided indicates construction is proposed for vacant land, as well as replacement of existing structures with new and/or expanded facilities. In order to quantify impacts on school facilities, additional data is required. It is unclear from the information submitted whether the total project consists of 655,000 square feet (11/20/91 Starboard Application), or 650,000 square feet (Attachment A of Initial Study). Assuming the total master plan consists of 655,000 square feet, less the 211,500 square feet of Area A, 443,500 square feet remain, not 455,000 as shown on the Starboard Application. It's unclear what is included in the application for an amendment to the LCP. The plan also indicates removal of 15,000 square feet of temporary trailers. Several years ago when these trailers were installed, the District agreed not to charge developer fees since the use was temporary. It was agreed that they would be removed and replaced by permanent structures which ~ would then be subject to school mitigation. It should be noted that in calculating square footage for school mitigation, State law does not provide for demolition "credit" for anything other than a single family home, and then only when it is destroyed as the result of a natural disaster and is replaced in kind. As stated above, to adequately quantify impacts this project will have on school facilities, additional data is required. The District utilizes a formula for assessing a "fair share" for school impacts to non-residential development. Once the necessary information is provided, this can be calculated. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, ~Sh.~ Kate Shurson Director of Planning and Facilities KS:dp cc: Carl Kadie Tom Silva John Linn Ian M. Gill 4:rOhr-mas ..... c2()~JoY . Sweetwater Union High School District ADMINISTRATION CENTER 1130 Fifth Avenue Chula Vista, California 91911-2896 (619) 691-5500 Division of Planning and Facilities DEe 1 9 91 December 16, 1991 Ms. Diana Richardson City Chula Vista Community Development Department 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Dear MS.Richardson: He: Proposed Rohr L.C.P. Amendment/Master Plan IS-92-18/FA-555/DP-894 . Thank you for the Notice of hritial Study for the proposed Rohr Master Plan and Local Coastal Program Amendment. The proposed expansion of the Rohr Complex will have an impact on the Sweetwater Union High School District. As a major business in the south bay area Rohr will offer a wide range of employment opportunities. As indicated in the Initial Study, approximately 2,582 employees are expected to be housed in the new facilities. It is anticipated that many of these new jobs will be filled by individuals moving into the region. The new households will undoubtedly require education services of the district. To mitigate the additional demand on classroom space, the Sweetwater Union High School District will require school impact fees to be paid in accordance with the adopted developer fee program. These fees will be required prior to issuance of buildi ng permits. . If you have any questions or .require additiol1al information, please feel free to call me at 691-5553. "~A- Thomas Silva Assistant Director of planning TSlmI ec: Kate Shurson - Chula Vista City Schools . ,)ll ~/ t/; ~ -- M. f:: .M L. .~ -- ;~ LO OL ~O ;g e~ -~ - .- M. . t.: u_ e_ -0 M .i'~ .; ;:: I~ ..~ t;" - g3 ~ 8~ Iii -.I So!! - , \, ... -;L" Or oe- o . ~i ~... -...c>O e=~L:; . M'f _ e .l!: L_ o....~......! c__o.,. ~g'~_<lo- ~.:~~O~ _'" c:'P._ g,~...~~~ .; 0"'... - ~o c" ... -115...-:: -_ 0_ ...... II:: . ':~S- ~o_. ... 411 .. 1Cl.Ji!' ... .. 6.!-:ji~': ..: 1- u ~ ...:~ ..: \ \, I =.;~ ." ~-: e 'r &.- t.5 e:. .- Q.- ...... ...:~ ~ ..~= ~-~ .UM r- ~"S!'... 0..... o _ t.i ~ . M '= = ..... ~MO . . u-o .. L--t ;: I'": l:II &~ '1:= toe..... w__... .;. ~ to -I =..1 :tit &E= ......- oo=. ;!!- . c .. ., - .;..;.. :: .. o- f) - M. e" 0" ";;L M- -. I~ . ~i .... o c o -- .- -. _L co .- _L M. ~- ". ~" I '>/ - X :; .. ... _ 0 =, ~ .- c _ .M -- .. ~: .5 ~-:; - - \1 - M .. o 1l -c_ .- .. .L _ " - -.. M ~e -co 0__ .~~ _ut ~..... feO -.. ~...::: .0- .. ~ - - -i... ....:...! 0__ .- eL. OD -t- - . - - ~"'iI - _L_ COU \, M . l!' . ~ .. L o e ~ t . 8. I . ~ - ;; .: . - ;; .; M ~I I -. M~ -- c I... UO . ir ;vi: . ~ o ~ . l; .. o II -- -- rx.. ~~ Qu... .. . . M _ LM "- Be..... .I~ ~~. -i~ L " o ~ L_ -. . M_ L -.... e" t :; ".... "Oc e L -g; -- ._ L ~U. CD~ _L_ ~-- u". "<0 -/ J{) \, I I "C 0_ .... <00 . c_ -c ." ~! E~ .- L . c_ O. _L fo. o~_ M ... ~........ 00 :: -f :E:: ~.. C_'" __ L ~-" Uo.M 1 \, \, I I - - -;; E ;; .: ;C . .; \ . :;; . e o i ~ ~ o ... o c o - t u . ~ ~ .; .D I ~I 11 " f <0 L o ..- ~M 0.. .L .." Ii :I... = c_ -t . ... fi: till .; ... o I l;: .. o : .. " o u . ~ - N ~ ~ u . - - . c o " . L " <T t iJ ~ ~ o -- M -.. c. 0_ -. -" . ~1l _0 -- c... .; 0. ~ ~ - .. ~ '" - \1 I \ I . L . M L ! e . :: .... o- S' l!'! ;:. :g. 0_ "g . C> N . i . _ M_ _ e_ 2 ~~ E "::I -u J 4:i 0. 1:- ::! .8' -- _ "'0 - .. :; -t:- ~:: =-t; i.~ -...- -0. ~c.: -0_ --. .-.. ....- "M ~i n:; .,; AIlIIJor.) 0. .. ~ - .. ~ 1! . . - .r. .! - ~ .: .; ..: . ~I ,,>, \, I ~I ~I I '>1 \1 \I I I I I I I I I I ~I I ~ .:~ ~~ ...~ ~.- .. :: . ... ~. . ~ . 0 . ;; .,,_.01: . ~I - j i ~ _.'0"- - -- y_=- c . ~ - !:ii.! ~- --> - e ~ - . -. ~ Ox :-lI ~ > ~ Q. -" . i: ~- - u~ .! . ~. ~. ~ .. .z.;... ~ > t~ e o . "1 .... l!' . :: . . - - . ~ . ,...~~== lil5 - . '" ! j. ~ ~ j . -~ . ~&.iI:i_ I .:: . .- 0 ~ ~l!' - - ~ ~.. . ~ l!' -- &-~ N U ~_c--;- . el;. . :;:~ . . ~... -'Xi ,d - . eo: - :a. - .. ....-. . ~ .. .. . ~e "=1:1 .... - 0_ . i - g~ . .. Oe -- ! ;; .. ~ .:....'i~.=: . ...: . ..-- -.. - 0 - . ." ~'E~ ~ . eO- g:;; t. - - ... o.:~ ~ Ot .. ~ ~ . ~~o~ -. . .- . .. ;; ~i ...Ii . -~ . ..:; __a ~~ ~.. ...-..- . ~ . --" 0_ 0 - ~-...; ... - :: ~- ;;_:J -- -. " - .. O~ - - ~ .; . --- -.- r.- ..- . :~ l!t _l! uu ~c'E:;:; ~&; :r-~ - ~ .- ~ ... .." ;; o. ,. . 'il;. :; .:...:at~ .,,-- --.. -- u Q.> .~ .-- .e~ c:c:...... o!'i :. .. . ~!~ .. uo_ 0 .~. -...QO ~- -; .; u - ~ - ~ . -:;''8 l!"~ ~ j ~ . ..; .; ... .; ..; -0- . ~- . ~ ~Q. ~" .. ..; ..; ~ .; '.. ::: '" . l;:' ,. '\1 1 \1 '\1 ~I ~I '->1 '\1 I ~I I ~I I I I .. ... "0'" . 1-&'" -.. 0_ .- . ...~ ". .. . C >>00.. 0 - ~ 1'0 eo -. --. eo _~e - .- o. ~~ .~" . ~-- . .. e~e~ I. -.. 0 . - . ..- ... ~ 1.A.l;. . -0- .-lIe .. .'V 4: ~ t:~ ~- O'...'M . -.. u . g... & 0 - f~ - -~ 01. ~... . r... ii ~ ~ ..... .... - ~ ! O.llf:.o.a ",. " ~o . -- o. .. .._0 -:;: - - :'E.... " --- ~r..t . .. e o..!_ "1 - I. -- c.. - . - _.0 lE - .~ -. "'E- :J-.llf:.':: if I:.. ~ .:..1 :1'-.- - 0 0._ . -I.-~ . e- ~ I.~ ... - N - UUI_ .- i ;2. ...= ! E.. -i. . e .. .If i.: : !I _D. -.... !l !~1 . --- .. . .._Ii IltA. i'li -~:~ ..Ii .= . ".e-:: ..- -i. ,;1 !._~ 1.lt J! .. .0- :t~ 5.0 1!- .l!.....~ .0 o .Ii . .. It... ..~:: .. ~.. .0 . .. ... . Ot .-. ... i!d~ . 0_ - . 0-" - _te e~ I'l; ..... eo - ."n II: - ..:::1 ::=1 ;; -j- -. -. ~I .1 ~:: L!' JIi-! .~ .a E! Ii .t:::~= .!;~ f 'I- jii l!'. ..;: -1;1 i. e-- = ,--.. - - ~..n _:tll. . --.. _1_'" ... ... Sic: -. ti~ --~ -... .;5- eM .;:-=~ :; iA. ~eo ClI.._..... CO " -. uo_u __c.. - . Ii ..; .; ..: .;. .. .: ~ .; ... .; ..; .. '" ~ - .. c20---)/ I ~ ,>, ""'>1 '---) , ~I I ~I I I I ~I I \, '\" '\, I - ... . .. ..... "'"' ... -~ ~ - l!'- ll' ~. . "' .. 0"''' Ie .. :!~ ~~ . _ll' o_ M . ;,; "C.. - "' 0. ! --'0.... ~ ~ ~::;; - 0 ~ ~ ~'Ju.~ ':i'l! M E~ 0 ~k . o. - .~ ;; 0 i ... .. . O;:;:;-.! ..~t i .. . . . ~ .c...'Z.. . _0. - -~ M ~:::'I.ci ..'O ;; . l!'1 ::0 . ,. "' "' - .. i 0. .. ~ . ..... .-8 .- -... i. - - - M ."Ai 4_~ ::. 0 ! 0.__ M_a -~ ,. _co I~O&-= !.; &:c e. - -::-e .. =1 . c - . ..:: 4 .;'1 ..i . - - __ _M ~.a ! .. M. .. . .. .... 0.. A. 'O- t . ;; ~... 0':"''':' .M .. M_ .J u_ t. ~ 'tC- .. .. ...- .M JE i~!;"" .: &-:= J!ll- !~ .. "c I=- - M 4_ 4 .1 - ~.. M,. ..-f - -~ .: - ::r:l - Eo; Iii ! ..- cll - =i~~! ::!i .. .... - j ;; . -ill' -. M _M - i~ .: -- Mill I: ... - - _t1~ -~ - - I~ 4. Il_ . . . ....:!::f '"'.. a';: _4 ::. :;1:: -- .. M_ .. -=.:I~: _c ::... I: -- ... liX. -. .. I ..... ....! -. ell -- ._~ tl; ': e' f' "I: ~::: _M ~"a .g ~ - r I_ I: I!:;; MC :!H ~:: ~ - ill . ..... .... c".au~ ::1.... 'l!'C .1: ::~ ,.~ - -C ... ..... C"4 E~ - 4__ 1'-': ... -.. --- MX. ,.- .M_ ~e _M M ll:: ,;;:g ~t .: .. .: ... -~ .. .... .: ... .; ,; -. .,; 2 - ~ ::: 0. .. ~ . .. lC '" c20 ~)/.J- . j 0: i. ;; ... . -. .. .~ 0_ ~ L ... . Jo" '::i:i~::.~IOOO~~ .. --.... - I -:2:2 :i...r_~.: _.~-- I t-..o..c ..r..." ..... Q. 0.. _... ...-....e; c:w.... ':~...tt o.!~ 0 .. --fE --....... 0 --..c ......... :;':~':Q _~o~:;::: "'O"~'::""f...:;. ~ ..c ...... "0..._ g. ... ....-:: .. .Q.~~~:;.... u..c,a ..::.......... 0 .-:t"'.o. '2 .....'- .., .. "'''-..r A.~........ e. ......;: ~ .!'i to A"'O..O'" "_0 .::c 11'.,:: 'E....:: '" "'I ..----.. c....~_ .._ .......c.-u... ..c ~ f::':':.~ lei: g'~... t .. __"':1". __.OA .A a...._ .. __ ~oc"&o::t_ .'i........... .s...oiI:.....u.......o i i ;;; ! j - ;; \., "':.I!! :~.!~ --~.o.-r .. ::.--: 'i:'i Ii ._..~ -01'...._ t &"0': ~I'" _..-._~ .f C >~. ..c... c - ...! - ~ - .:: e.'O:;: :;..:.,-_>:L :II ..c....o...c -~ i."~=_ u" DO cLu_ . --..... .., _; A.i'~ e.... ~ _... a..:S--=:cs_ .e .-~lou"l!! ..c'5:; OZ..! -.~e-::..cc--:'" 8- :;::t .~;: g-~ 0_ c ..c.. 0 c -~.-.'V__ ..; ">1 1i~~~t:..:~.:: i'" lii.~ _....c: .. ... o. _..;_o.~...! ~~.! ~:.e i.~ i :;'5;: .-~t...~~_:; : ~ .etO. .. ....:II ....1::. .Ill:. g:;: ...u... ...~l,Ii;-~~ ~_ -~..o -,~ ~~... 0_ ......o..c...- .......~....... u . a__..... .... 'i. ....a-c ~-~ ...Et-::: ... '::t:'::u.c ;: _.~.._- - j_.. "c 8 0 a. _01ClO ~. ~"C:l"::_ . U a... o.a...... v '>1 "'>/ I -- . --- ~::; go ac- I!~.! e.: _ -:JlI::JO" >-~- c ~ .. v .;~t :;::ci ~ 0_ ~- ~ ....._..0 ~.t:... 00&: .- ...u." A_. U 'i. :: . - ~.. ." -..."~ v... ....~ -. >... 8.....,- ... ~ ':' ..; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ l< .'" . \, \, \ \ , '\, , ~I ~ I \, I ~ lir ~I,,;~ c... ..v . - - -"'- r~ 0;; - _0 ~ ~ g- _v_ ~! --- ~...~ --.. -~ - ~ >.- ~.. .. ..- ~'f~ ~ r: c ~ ~v ~ >~.., =c . "i t e::; -~ cc- .., . - _v ~ ~- _0- - - ~ ~ .- H. & - ~. -~ -~ C~.! I._v .~ - .. e~ .~_ tC_ ~ ~ - "'- .- r ~. . -=~=I g. ~v -. ..v & -f ... v . - ;; ~"'v "'~- ~~ :a....; ~~ ..u.! -- e ~ -..- -- .- ... -. 8.~:::5u -.c t. 0;; .. ~ ::- ~ &..~ "4.1': . . . _N .., >- t~,;; ~~ :! e~.....~ .. e--_ .=~= . J! ~~& ...:o~ ~-~ 'it N ~ "':::...01. _.:..&:~ . ~ i .~ ..... :: -.,. -... :O~ .I~oio J!I-. -~ ... -..- -u - .-- fli . ..;....a ='i.!i --~ .. .. i .-.. .. - &'.00 f-t: &-u - -- . ~::c - - . ~ ...J!~ "''E -.;= , ...... - E,....,1i e..t -':i-tl- . .. . ~ e. ..- ....- . =c-l" - - .- . ... . :I - .. . gi: I' ::: -. "'It ._lir: J!-- ~ I.:!..&: t'" ao... . "::::0 .I:a ..... - J!~ ~:-::= ..I.:! -~- ~'" -....- __a ~- - -~ - ~c_ .~ '1:'" . i~t .I ..-- __u ...... ..c i ..~ 8i ZJ "'c. _ e8:-8:- -".&f . -" __a t~c =:::~~ =i:t~ 8 "'- --~ .. 1.1 --0-. -Ill!' i =1: ;;t& ji...~'i -= 8'- a..... '" .... J:1 c"'. j-= .. ".II. -- - . ... .I..oe.. .n, lJ . ..; J ..; .. 0: :! ~ .; ~ . N '" ~ . ... ~ cAe // ) - III. Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency.) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.......[ ] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a signif.icant effect in this case because the mitigation lIeasures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION WIll BE PREPARED...................................................[~] I find the proposed project HAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required........[ ] Fe kJJk> "1 S, /q'12 Date U -1l~- ~~-. Signature Eh~cm .. '. IV. SUMMARY OF ISSUES For ~1 ~Uli~ list all significant or potentially significant impacts identified in the Initial Study checklist form. Ear-f1- ! Ih~: ~u.. ! 6./M.t. ,.Ala.}.. a.u,.Jkl~ ~_ tJ;ti~ ~!V;l~~~ ~O/~:!~ 1X:: 11..Af'J,r;,'A.J . A(,.A.iJJ:h~) I V. APP Name I"'-..s /'11.. G..u..L 5~~~ TANCE OF. MITIGATION MEASURES S. SffHIoP.. i\~ Title ~ J., '\1- Date - t\~fl\ .., IJ5J'C ~r. \i>R. f~ Tt>l <:.. . I ,)U~//L! """,,.. "........ M. DE MINIMIS FEE DETERMINATION ~ (Chapter 1706, Statutes of 1990 - AS 3158) _ It is hereby found that this project involVes no potential for any adverse effect, either individually or cumulatively on wildl1fe resources and that a .Certificate of Fee Exemption" shall be prepared for t~is project. ~ It is hereby found that this project could potentially impact wildlife, indiVidually or cumulatively and therefore fees in accordance with Section 711.4 (d) of the Fish and Game Code shall be paid to the County Clerk. . . ~ ~110 i'- Environmental Review Coordina or Rb. 5'. J 9 f 2.. , Date .,1()-//5 WPC 9459P -29- DISCUSSION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM ROHR .F. AND .G. STREET MASTER PLAN I. Earth An "Update Geotechnica 1 Invest igat i on for the proposed Rohr Industries Office Complex" (September 7, 1990) was prepared for Area A. This study was used to prepare the Certified Final EIR for the Rohr Office Complex, which is hereby incorporated by reference (pages from this EIR applicable to this Initial Study are attached). A "Report of Confirming Foundation Investigation- (July 3, 1991, attached) was prepared for a portion of the proposed project area. Other reports or Confirming Foundation Investigation will be prepared for industrial buildings in the Master Plan when they are proposed for development. The six-story office building, and north and south parking garages were included in the 1991 report (as well as the Phase I building already under construction). The balance of the lCP amendment area and Master Pl an area has no soi 1 s or geotechni ca 1 ana lys is. The conclusions of the 1991 report are that the proposed six-~tory building and parking structures may be supported on spread footings establ i shed in properly compacted fi 11 or natural formational soil s. Recommendations are included to avoid potential impact, and must be implemented. liquefacation potential for the six-story bUilding and parking garage area was considered low by the 1991 report. Based on the 1990 report, the site could be subject to violent ground shaking in the event of a major earthquake; however, this hazard is common to southern Cal ifornia, and the effects of shaking can be minimized by structural design and construction consistent with current building codes; and engineering practices. Groundwater may be encountered during foundation excavation posing a potentially significant impact to foundation support, and to water quality from groundwater discharge. Construction dewatering may be required prior to foundation excavation if the water levels intercept construction areas. Temporary construction dewatering would be implemented in accordance with the 1990 report recommendations, and compliance with the Regional Water Quality Control Board RWQCB directives. - - Since no soils/geotechnical information exists for the balance of the lCP Amendment and Master Plan areas, the potential for impacts ~ rema in. As pl ans are submitted for these area, soil s and subsurface geotechnica 1 invest igations must accompany these plans. Recommendations must be implemented as determined appropriately by the City's Engineering Department. ,Jp-))J 2. . . . Air The Air Quality analysis included in the certified FEIR for the Rohr Office Complex is hereby incorporated by reference. It includes relevant existing conditions/background information for the project area (pages are attached). Two types of potentially significant impacts would occur with project development: 1) emissions from vehicular traffic, and 2) construction related emissions. Additionally, until actual uses are known for the proposed research and industrial buildings, the potential for hazardous emissions exist. Vehicular Traffic The major project-related air quality concern is the emissions from project-related vehicular traffic. Rohr maintains that project area employees would merely be transferred to this site from other areas in the Rohr Campus, anti thus, no new emissions would occur. However, based on the fact that the density of this portion of the Rohr campus is being increased, there does remain a potential for some additional vehicle trips, though the number of net new trips may be minor. Ant new emissions generated would incrementally contribute to the basin-wide (cumulative) violation of clean air standards. The contribution is thus considered significant. Indirect project sources also contribute to this cumulative impact. These impacts include increased fossil fuel combustion in power plants and heaters, boilers, stoves and other energy consuming devices, and emissions from construction vehicles. Regarding consistency with the local plans (and, thus, the State Implementation Plan revisions - [SIP] 1982), the LCP amendment area exceeds the floor area ratio (FAR) anticipated by the LCP. This results in more trips than projected by the SIP, and thus, more emissions than included in the basin-wide estimates. This is considered to incrementally burden the already regionally (cumulatively) significant basin-wide impacts. Vehicle activity in the parking garages would create emissions that are "trapped", potentially resulting in a carbon monoxide "hot spqt". Cal iforni a OSHA requi rements incl ude venti 1 at ion in each mult i -s~ory garage structures. No other mitigation is necessary beyond the state requirements. Construction Related Emissions The clearing of existing on-site uses (demolition, clearing :of debris), the excavation of utility access, the preparation of foundations and footings, and building assembly would create temporary emissions of dusts. Typical dust lofting rates from construction cJ{}-'J/7 -2- activities average 1.2 tons of dust per month per acre disturbed. Much of ths dust is comprised of large particles that are filtered by ~ human breathing passages, and settle out rapidly on nearby surface. Though most of the dust settles out in this manner, the smallest particles remain suspended throughout their travel through the air basin. Construction dust is, therefore, on important contribution to regional (cumulative) violations of inhalable dust standards. To mitigate the cumulative (significant) vehicular and construction impacts, the project, since it incrementally contributes to these impacts, must implement the following measures: 1. Participate in Rohr's already established Transportation Control Measure program. The program is for Rohr employees and includes: ridesharing and vanpool incentives alternate transportation incentives (trolley transit use) work scheduling for off-peak hour travel When the City adopts its own emission reduction program (subsequent to SANDAG's and APCD's Plan adoption), then Rohr must implement relevant requirements from this program, as well as their own. 2. Implementation of dust control measures during construction as required by the APCD. Such measures include maintaining adequate soil moisture as well as removing any soil spillage. ' 3. Construction and gradi ng pl ans must 1 imit the hours' of construction to between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. to reduce amounts of construction emissions, and construction truck queuing must be prohibited. """" 3. Water The certified FEIR for the Rohr Office Complex contains relevant water information of the proposed project, and is hereby incorporated by reference (relevant pages from the report are attached). Additionally, the City Engineering Department submitted comments regarding the proposed project (see Engineering Department routing form) . The Master Plan area has been hydrologically analyzed in Rick Engineering "Drainage Study, Rohr's Corporate Facil ity" (1990). The project site will drain into two separate areas - the detention basin west of Building 1, and the existing drainage system which includes G Street. The Grading Plan shows appropriate drainage improvements to accommodate the proposed drainage. - -3- JO-/l,( . . . Groundwater in the project area is not considered beneficial for any use other than groundwater recharge. Project construction would incrementa 11y affect groundwater recharge by pavi ng port ions of the site not already covered over with urban development. Surface water runoff would correspondingly be incrementally increased. The detention basin on the west side of the existing Rohr building (under construction) will allow for some ground water recharge. Groundwater quality in the project area is poor, with documented areas of contamination by hazardous substances. Section 17 of this Discussion reports on the groundwater quality of the project area. Surface water runoff would carry with it the oil, grease and other so 1 vents from roads and parki ng areas associ ated with the project. The storm drain system and detention basins being constructed for Area A and proposed throughout the Haster Plan area are considered adequate to prevent significant impacts from runoff entering into the adjacent F and G Street Harsh of the Sweetwater Harsh National Wildlife Refuge and the San Diego Bay. Construction impacts could be significant, and could occur from exposed soils entering into the adjacent wetland and Bay environments. To prevent this impact, measures requiring a barrier system and berm for the existing Rohr building (under construction) are required as part of this project. In summary, maintenance of a barrier system and berm which were placed between the Rohr property and the wetl ands must occur. Thi s barrier system and berm must be extended around the southwest side of the wetland when thi s area (G Street building) is developed. When the drainage diversion system is completed, the portion of the barrier system/berm adjacent to' the existing Rohr building may be removed if the drainage requirement for the balance of the site do not specify it. This then requires completion of the study prior to its removal. Regarding water consumption, any increase in net consumption of water in the City of Chula Vista is an incremental demand on the regions scarce water resource (cumul at i ve impact). In order to mi t igate thi s impact, the applicant must implement any water conservation requirements of Sweetwater Authority (water district), and must agree to no new net increase in Citywide water consumption by the payment of any water offset fees, or other conservation program the City has in place at the time of building permit issuance. 4., 5. Plant. Animal life Relevant biological information is contained in the certified FEIR for the Rohr Office Complex and is hereby incorporated by reference (relevant pages attached). The natural biological resources of the project site are limited as most of the site has been altered by urban development and/or degraded by its proximity to such. Thus, no on-site biological resources would -4- dO~J 17 be significantly affected by project development. However, impacts to the off-site resources of the F and G Street Marsh and the San Diego -. Bay could occur: 1) urban runoff contami nat i ng water quality of these wet land and Bay resources, 2) intrusion of light from the six-story building and G Street bUildings into the F and G Street Marsh, increased human presence in the vicinity and adjacent to these sensitive resources, and 3) 4) upset of the exi st i ng balance of compet itors, predators and prey, and the associated indirect impacts to the Bedings Savannah Sparrow and light-footed Clapper Rail. In order to reduce these impacts to a level below significant, the following measures (excerpted from the incorporated FEIR) must be implemented: a. The buffer area between Building 1 and the F & G Street Marsh was required by the Rohr Office Complex FEIR to establish vegetation identified by the U.S. Fish and Wildl ife Service (USFWS). These measures are currently being implemented and monitored. The fence along this buffer must also be extended to the south (Area E), to prevent human access from thi s area into the Marsh. The fi re access road there 1 imits the opportunity to establ i sh vegetation on the Marsh side of these bUildings. The USFWS requests that native plants be used throughout the Master Plan area, rather than the proposed heavy use of non-natives. b. The project should continue to be a participant in a predator management program for the Chula Vista Bayfront region to control domestic predators as well as wild animal predators. Should this program not be established prior to issuance of the grading permit for any portion of the Master Plan area, Rohr must coordinate with USFWS to determine the extent of participation and the necessary timeframe for predator management. The USFWS recommends contracting with the Department of Agriculture Animal Damage Control program to provide the predator management services. -.,. Fertil izers, pesticides and herbicides util ized landscaping areas of the project must be of biodegradable variety and must be approved by the Protection Agency for use near wetland areas. d. All landscape chemical applications must be accomplished by a person who is a state-certified applicator. c. within the the rapidly Envi ronmenta 1 -., -5- 20-/20 . 6. . . e. Open garbage containers should be restricted and all dumpsters must be totally enclosed to avoid attracting avian and mammalian predators and scavengers to the area. Garbage shoul d be haul ed away as often as possible. f. The 94-foot building must utilize non-reflective glass on the west side and bold architectural lines which are readily observable by birds. The glass which was approved for Building 1 will be used on this building. g. No extraneous ledges upon which raptors could perch or nest can be included on the western side of the proposed 94-foot building. ledges facing the west should not exceed two inches in width, or be sufficiently sloped to prevent perching. Additionally, the roof crests which are exposed to the wetlands must be covered with an ant i-perch materi a 1 such as Ni xa 1 i te. A convni tment to correct any additional problem areas should be obtained should heavy incidence of perching be observed on the buildings or in landscaping materials. h. Outside lighting must be directed away from marsh areas or refl ect i ng faces (wi ndows) of the western side of the proposed building. lights should be 1 imited to the minimum required for security on the western side of the proposed building. Noise Noi se would be created by the project duri ng construct ion, but the long term office and research uses are not expected to generate noise. Vehicular traffic associated with the project will also create noise. Project area employees on the east side of the site may be exposed to significant noise from 1-5. 1. Construction-related noise Noise from construction of. the proposed project will be created, however, there are presently no sens i t i ve urban receptors of thi s noi se (houses, schoo 1 s, hospitals, etc.). Even so, construction will be limited to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. As the certified FEIR for the Rohr Office Complex stated (pg. 5-1), the nearest sensitive (biological) receptor is the F and G Street Marsh which will 'now be blocked by the existing Rohr building (Building 1 - under construction). The buildings proposed for Area E may create significant noise during construction to the sensitive resources of the F & G Street Marsh. The biological monitor must survey the marsh area prior to development of this area, and, depending on the wildlife resources present, may impose time limitations on construction to avoid the nesting and/or breeding season. 2. long-term office and research uses - Office and research uses would not generate significant noise. However, limited manufacturing is allowed in this zone and could include -6- J.!/~/.2 I noise-generating uses. If such uses were proposed for one of the Master Plan area buildings, the building will be designed to ~ comply with all local and state standards for noise. 3. Vehicular traffic noise - Project-related traffic will largely travel along lagoon Drive, Bay Boulevard to E and H Streets, and to 1-5 from E to H Streets. Again, no sensitive receptors are located along these routes. As stated in the certified FEIR for the Rohr Office Complex (pg. 5-1), "The nearest sensitive receptor is the F & G Street Marsh which is located west of the proposed [now under construction] structure. As all parking and ingress/egress would be focused on the eastern half of the site and noise would be blocked by the structure itself, impacts would not be significant.. This remains true for the Master Plan area. Consistently, the bUilding proposed south of the F & G Street Marsh would also act to block vehicular noise. 4. Noise from 1-5 - Noise from 1-5 may significantly impact employees of the buildings along Bay Boulevard, or employees in the upper floors (the 5th and 6th levels) of the 6-story structure; otherwise, all buildings will be blocked from the 1-5 noise. These buildings will be designed to meet the City requirement for interior noise levels. 7. liQht and Glare The proposed Master Plan development is an office and research ~ complex. Use of the facility would occur largely during daylight hours and would not require full night time lighting. However, ~ight security lighting would occur. There are presently no urban 'uses around the site which would be affected by this lighting. The six-story building is not expected to have security lighting from its upper floors. However, the sens i t i ve resources of the F & G Marsh could be impacted by lighting from the building southeast of; the Marsh. To reduce this impact to a level below significant, the last measure of Section 5, Animal Resources, requires that outside lighting be directed away from marsh areas, and that 1 ights should be 1 imited to the minimum required for security. 8. land Use The existing lCP designates the project site for Industrial Business Park over most of the site, and Industrial General along G Street. The lCP Specific Plan allows (among others) for Industrial Business Park: Administrative CORlDercial, Research and Development Commercial. It allows for Industrial General (among others): Research and Development CORlDercial. The types of office and research uses proposed for the project area are consistent with the lCP. The lCP requires a floor area ratio of .50 for Industrial Business Park and Industrial General; with the exception of Area A, the project is ~ -7- clO-/)~ . 9. . 10. . consistent with this requirement. The LCP requires a height limit of 44 feet; with the exception of Building 2 (94.5 feet), the site plan is consi stent. However, the stated i nconsi stenci es with the LCP are considered significant. Mitigation is required to reduce any environmental impacts created by these inconsistencies (discussed throughout the report in other sections), and to create consistency with the LCP. Consistency is created by amending the LCP, or changing the project. This project proposes amendment to the LCP for these reasons. Thus, mitigation may be achieved by City and Coastal Commission approval of the proposed LCP Amendment. Natural Resources Any development wi 11 increase the rate of use of natural resources including timber, minerals (sand and gravel) and fossil fuels (water was discussed in Section 3). The rate of use depends on the type of development. The proposed Master Plan development would incrementally increase the demand on all these resources. The use of timber and minerals is a one-time use during construction, and mitigation of the use of the resources occurs at the production level with replanting of the timber and conservation of sand and gravel areas. However, the use of foss il fuels for energy wi 11 occur throughout the 1 i fe of the project, and the project contributes to the long-term cumulative impact on these resources. In order to reduce the incremental impact to a level below significant, the development must include energy conserving building design, lighting and appliances. Such design is required to an extent by law, however, the applicant should include energy efficient lighting and appliances in every building where practically feasible. Risk of Uoset Ri sk of upset occurs with the presence of hazardous materi a 1 s. The proposed research and limited manufacturing uses may include such materials, depending on the actual activity of each building. The presence of such materi a 1 s is cons idered a potent i ally s i9ni fi cant impact. In order to reduce this potential impact to a level below significant, permits for the use and disposal of such materials. is required. Achievement of these permits is required prior to issuance of occupancy permits for each building in which hazardous materials are used. Demolition of existing structures also presents a risk of upset, depending on the materials present in the structure to be demolished. Standard requirements for demol ition will avoid this risk; demol ition permits are issued by the Building and Housing Department. The applicant will be subject to Building and Housing Department and Fire Department requirements for demolition. No other measures for demolition are necessary. -8- )J}~/::(,J 11, 12. Population. Housina The proposed Master Plan is not directly affecting population or housing as it would be building uses consistent with those anticipated by the LCP. Additionally, Rohr claims that even though the proposed buildings would be new, the employees would simply be transferred from adjacent older bUildings on the Rohr Campus. Thus, there would not be created a significant demand on housing by this project; at most, there would be an incremental demand placed on area housing by new Rohr employees. 13. Transportation/Circulation A traffic study was prepared, and is attached, for the proposed Master Plan project (see Final Technical Report, Rohr Office Complex, Phase II, Feb. 1992). .-, The conclusions of this study are that the following intersections and street segments would, at the time of project buildout, be operating over their design capacity resulting in unacceptable Levels of Service. These intersection and street segments would be affected by vehicles associated with development of the entire Master Plan area: Project Contribution to Growth in PM Park Hour Traffic Intersections and Street Seaments Intersection .-, E St.jBay Blvd. E St.jl-5 NB Ramp E St.jBroadway Bay Blvd.jF St.jLagoon Dr. 39% 32% 7% 44% Seaments Bay Blvd. - E St. to F St. ESt. - 1-5 to Woodlawn ESt. - Woodlawn to Broadway H St. - 1-5 to Woodlawn 27% 1% 1% 1% Any project contribution to an intersection which does not meet Threshold Standards of the City is considered to incrementally contribute to a cumulatively significant impact. Mitigation is necessary to reduce incremental impacts to a level below significant. Feasible mitigation for each intersection and segment is shown below. The applicant's responsibility for each measure is also shown, and consists of either providing the actual physical improvement, or providing a fee (to be determined) which would represent a proportional contribution to the intersection or segment improvement. Implementation of mitigation measures will be phased correspondingly with Master Plan phased development, and ultimately will be completed by project bUildout (anticipated 1997) in order to reduce impacts to a level below significance. .-, -9- .2() .0/.2 '--f . . . Intersections & Street Seqments Mitiqation Req'd Intersection E StjBay Blvd Restriping and Signal Modification Signal Modification E St/I-5 NB Ramp ESt/Broadway Reconstruct Intersection Bay Blvd/F St/Lagoon Dr Reconstruct Intersection Seqments Bay Blvd-E St to F St Upgrade to Class II Collector Upgrade to 4-lane Major Upgrade to 4-lane Major Upgrade to 4-lane Major E St-I-5 to Woodlawn E St./Woodlawn to Broadway H St/I-5 to Woodlawn * Applicant's ResDons i bil itv Actual Improvement Actua 1 Improvement Fee Actua 1 Improvement NA* Fee Fee Fee It is the opinion of the City Traffic Engineer that the Bay Boulevard segment will operate satisfactorily at the projected buildout average daily traffic (8200 ADT) , especially with the intersection improvements at either end. It is possible to convert the existing class III segment to class II simply by removing parking along the east curbline (the west curbline already prohibits parking). With removal of curb parking, striping to create 3 continuous lanes could occur. This would increase the roadway capacity from 7500 ADT to 12,500 ADT. Because of the hardship created by the removal of curb parking, and since the buildout ADT is slightly greater than the existing capacity, it is recommended that traffic conditions be monitored, and that parking removal and restriping occur when deemed appropriate by the City Traffic Engineer. 14. Public Services a . fl.I:g Fire service capabil ities will be significantly impacted by the proposed Master Plan (see Fire Department routing form). The Fire Department has certain requirements for each building in order to reduce this impact to a level below insignificant. Rohr will coordinate with the Fire Department to determine and implement the exact requirements for each building or area. -10- cJo--- Jc25 Other Comments: All proposed areas will be required to meet the requirements for fire flow and fire hydrants in accordance with ~ Appendix IlIA and IlIB of the Uniform Fire Code. Any other fire apparatus roads in excess of 150 ft. that dead end are required to have a turn around for fire apparatus. Existing above-ground power lines on Bay Blvd. (west side) must be relocated underground as they present a hazard to fire fighting operations. b. Pol ice Police service can be maintained as long as access to the Master Plan Area is maintained along G Street, as well as Bay Boulevard and F Street. G Street will be a private street, but will be able to be accessed from Bay Boulevard. c. Schools See 1 etters submitted by Chul a Vi sta El ementary School Di stri ct and Sweetwater Union Hi gh School Di stri ct. Both representat i ves of each District state that the proposed Master Plan will create impacts on school facilities. Any impact on an overburdened District is considered significant. Mitigation is achieved typically through payment of school fees or participation in a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District. For the proposed Master Plan project, the applicant will be required to provide mitigation to reduce impacts to a level below significant. The determination of the type and amount of mitigation necessary will be made prior to issuance of building permits. ~ d. Parks Master Plan development includes (and requires for adequate circulation) the improvement of the Bay Blvd./Lagoon Drive/F Street intersection, including its relocation a short di stance to the west. The relocation will significantly impact an existing one-acre park on the northwest corner of Bay Boulevard/Lagoon Drive. This one-acre park is used largely for parking and as a landscaped entry into the Bayfront area. A portion of this park (approximately one-third) will actually be removed for roadway realignment. Mitigation must occur when the intersection improvement occurs, which is anticipated by 1997. Rohr must provide mitigation acceptable to the City. Two options, among others, for mitigation could include creating parkland on the east side of Bay Boulevard across the street from the existing park (the City owns 300 square feet of 1 and here, or by payment of a fee, to be negotiated with the City at the time plans are finalized for this improvement. ~ -11- cJ,i) - /..2t e. Public Facilities . The City's General Fund would pay for standard facility maintenance including roads. Rohr will be improving Lagoon Drive to City Circulation Element requirements, as well as providing mitigation in the form of other roadway improvements. f. Other Governmental Services This study has addressed impacted governmental issues. 15. EnerQV See No.9. 16. Thresholds With adherence to standard engineering and building requirements, and implementation of all required mitigation measures, the Threshold/Standards Policy would be met. Human Health 17. . The project itself is not expected to create a human health hazard, unless on-site uses were to generate hazardous emissions. The project is largely office and research uses, however, research or light manufacturing may involve the use of a hazardous material. Anytime a hazardous materi a lis used and di sposed of, its presence creates a potentially significant human health hazard. However, in order to use such materials, the user must obtain permits from the County Hazardous Materials Management Division (HMMD) , the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and/or the Air Pollution Control District. Permits require the safe use and disposal of such materials, mitigating potential impacts to a level below significant. Thus, before use of hazardous materials occurs, the user must obtain relevant permits from state and/or regional permitting agencies. The project site is known to have contaminated groundwater and soil s in certain locations. Remediation activities are presently occurring in these areas to eliminate the contamination, and coordination for these activities involves the County HMMD and RWQCB. Building in these areas prior to completion of required remediation would create a potentially significant human health haza(d. Thus, prior to, or concurrent with submittal of detailed project plans for each area of the Master Plan with known contamination, proof of required remediation completion must occur. Proof would occur by written verification from the appropriate regulatory agency. Additionally, prior to submittal of project plans for areas not previously surveyed for contamination, and if there exists a potential for human health impacts due to the type and amount of construction necessary, . -12- c211 ~/,2 ? completion of an assessment of the site must occur, following the Site Assessment and Mitigation Manual (County, 1992), and RWQCB ~. directives. Implementation of these measures will reduce impacts to a level below significant. 18. Aesthetics Information regarding aesthetics occurs in the certified FEIR for the Rohr Office Complex, which is incorporated by reference (relevant pages are attached). As stated and shown photographically by that report, views to the site are limited and/or distant from all existing surrounding land uses. This is due to the adjacent Rohr facilities on the south, the 1-5 freeway on the east, and the undeveloped Mid-bayfront area on the north. Additionally, the existing Rohr building (under construction) on the west, limits views to the site from the west. Development of the Master Plan area would, for the majority of the site, not substantially alter visibility to or from any area. In fact, redevelopment of some portions of the site (the eastern and southern perimeter) is considered to be an aesthetic improvement. The biggest consideration regarding aesthetics is the 94-foot, six-story building just east of the Rohr building under construction. A high-rise structure is not planned for this area by the 'LCP, requiring an LCP amendment (see Section 8). Nearby building heights would consist of the 42-foot building under construction, the 44-foot building proposed at the southwest corner of the Master Plan area; and the existing 73-foot Rohr building south of the F & G Street Marsh. This building would be 21 feet taller than the tallest existing building (the 73-foot, building south of the F and G Street Marsh). Its design, however, is slender. By comparison to the Rohr building under construction, it is approximately one-quarter the length of the existing building. A tall slender building usually appears much less massive than lower, bulkier bUildings. Also, its height would act as a contrast, and would break up the monotony of the height of the rest of the 42 to 44-foot buildings. Overall, its presence will be noticeable, but not considered significant. The design of the building will be subject to the Design Review Committee, whose recommendations will be considered. ~ 19. Recreation An office/research park does not place a high demand on recreational opportunities, though there is some demand from employees who desire to recreate during their lunch break or before or after work. Additionally, Rohr claims that the employee of this Master Plan area will be transferred from the adjacent Rohr campus, and would not be new users of facilities. The Master Plan location is ideal for picnicking, walking, running, and bicycling due to its proximity to the bayfront and bayside parks. No significant impact is, therefore, expected to occur to recreational facilities of the City. --. -13- ,)0//.2 7' . . . 20. 21. WPC 4907H Cultural Resources The certified FEIR for the Rohr Office Complex stated that no significant impacts would occur to cultural resources, and rel ied on an archaeological survey prepared for the Mid-bayfront area, including undeveloped portions of the project site. The potential for resources located in the developed portion of the site is low. Mandatorv FindinQs of SiQnificance a. With implementation project will not resources. Cultural of all biological mitigation measures, the significantly affect natural biological resources wi 11 not be signi ficantly impacted. b. No short term goals would be disadvantaged by project deve 1 opment. land use proposed by the project is cons istent wi th long term planning goals of the City. c. Cumulative impacts would occur to transportation/circulation and to natural resources, including water. With implementation of mitigation measures, the projects incremental contribution to these cumulative impacts would be mitigated. d. Human health hazards could occur from known contaminated water and soil. Implementation of mitigation measures would avoid these hazards. -14- :20~J:21 -, ~ XCf.~PT5 FeOM ~ Rohr Office Complex Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR # 90-10) SCH # 90010623 . -.. Prepared for: City of ChuIa VISta Environmental Review Coodinator 276 Foruth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 92010 Prepared by: Keller Environmental Associates, Ine. (KEA) 1727 Fifth Avenue San Diego, CA 92101 20 - / } 0 ~f~ ~ '------ ~~~~ - -- ---- ...... February 1991 CllY OF CHUlA VISTA ,,_ .".~.....,."..~~H,~~~~~"''''~<'''~:-I'f''o''M~,'-\>l:.'IO'''"',t''1'1''''''O~-'' . . 6/{1n1S p~~ . ;2t?-/3f . . I I 'e I 1 3.0 ENVlRONMENTAL IMPACf ANALYSIS 3.1 DRAlliAGE/GFOlTNDWATER/GRADING The following discussion is based on several technical reports prepared for the Rohr project, the latest of which are contained in Appendix B. Rick Engineering completed a report entitled Drainage Study, Rohr's Corporate Facility (May 14, 1990) and Woodward-Clyde Consultants prepared the Update Geotechnical Investigation for the Proposed Rohr Industries Office Complex, Southwest Comer of "P" Street and Bay Boulevard (Jtlly 21, ~RlsmRsri;w; 1990). EXISTING CONDmONS Drainage The 11.6-acre project site is located near the eastern shoreline of San Diego Bay, south of the mouth of the Sweetwater River. A salt marsh, the "F' & "G" Street Marsh, exists just west of the site, but the site itself is typically higher in elevation, varying from 8 to 20 feet above mean sea level (MSL). The project site slopes gently to the southwest and approximately 75 percent of the area is covered with vegetation, primarily grasses and small palm trees. There are no drainage facilities onsite, so all runoff flows overland. Runoff from the site flows south to an off-site swale located within the existing Rohr facilities, just north of Building 61 (located southwest of the project site). From this swale, runoff flows west into the "F' & "G" Street Marsh at the southwestern edge of the project. The existing storm drain system in the area includes a 42" reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) located in "G" Street, just south of Building 61, which connects to a 54" RCP that conveys flow into the salt-marsh. An 84" RCP is located in"H" Street that conveys additional storm flows from the existing Rohr facilities into the bay, south of the project site. Both of these facilities are near capacity. 3-1 90-14.009 tl/09 /90 c2;) ~ /302 . ~:'.. ,." , I I I I I I I I I Groundwater - The site is located in the coastal plain adjacent to southeast San Diego Bay and within the Lower Sweetwater Hydrographic Sub-unit. Groundwater in this sub-unit is designated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) as having existing beneficial uses for municipal, agricultural and industrial service applications. The groundwater underlying the site is beneficial primarily for groundwater recharge applications. Borings to locate and monitor groundwater were undertaken by Woodward-Clyde Consultants (}y~9) in March 1988 and in March and April of 1989. Groundwater was encountered in all wells and the measured depth to groundwater varied from 5 to 16 feet below the surface. The groundwater gradient flows to the southwest, similar to the existing topography. {\.i#YI~J:fo(~lji;:i?Y9q;~~.pprt;H;~~{d()1J~'.....~1ll:istanqe..(G9W<i,riJi11a~ion;.Site Assessmeni" (revised August 4; 19S5)indicates that groundwater on . the site has been impacted. Wee installed fourmonitoririg wells on the Rohr site, and obtained water sa~plesi!lea~h O!tbeJ(lurw~!Is;:VV at~rsal!1pl~ . (rOl!1 tilree. of tbe four \VeUspossessed ~(lIice~t.~~ti9i#j9f,lti,~!ypi9~gjEQ~;cryg)~SJ~;';S~~....~()~P'!i#l~s..th~..~W995....~~ti9ri.JeveI of$.mici'og~p~i'liter{ i,Jgz!Ilqri#i~@~Wa,ieJ.#{!!ld4~iJs. - Soils and Geologic Units and Site To.vography Elevations on site vary from 8 to 20 feet MSL and slope gently from the northeast to the southwest. The site is underlain by the Bay Point Formation (a Pleistocene age Marine Terrace deposit) which consists of medium dense to very dense, silty to clean sands with interbeds of silt and clay. A surficial soil is present that consists of a silty sand topsoil layer overlaying a clayey sand to sandy clay residual soil layer. The topsoils were found to be up to 2 feet thick and the residual soils up to 4 feet thick. The sandy ponions of the Bay Point Formation soils are suitable for use at finished grade without remedial measures. The clayey ponions of the surficial soils are moderately to highly expansive and should not be used at finished grade. The residual soils are also slightly expansive. Excavation can be accomplished with light to heavy ripping using heavy- duty excavating equipment. ~ 3-2 9O-l4.00911/09/90 ,J(}-/;J] . . . Soft, unconsolidated, compressible estuarine "bay" deposits appear to encroach across the westerly site boundary near the northwest and southwest corners. Loose, porous slope wash soils may exist in the topograpliic low near the center of the southerly site boundary. IMPACTS Drainage Site hydrology poses three potential constraints to on-site development in the Bayfront area: . Flooding of low-lying areas from tidal highs, resulting from extreme barometric lows, combined with wind-driven waves . Flooding associated with exceeding the capacity of existing storm drain facilities . Contribution of contaminated runoff into the sensitive "F" & "G" Street Marsh The site itself is located on relatively elevated land, east of the extremely low-lying marsh. The building pad is proposed for 13.2 feet MSL Along the western property boundary, a 5 to 6 foot high berm is proposed between the Marsh and the detention basin. The conditions necessary to create on-site flooding include extremely low barometric pressure combined with high velocity wind-driven waves. Given the extreme conditions necessary to generate such flooding, the elevated condition of the site, and the protective berm, this potential impact is considered remote. The existing 42" RCP located near Building 61 in the Rohr facilities is currently operating near capacity. If overtaxed by contributions from the proposed project, flooding could occur. Because the detention basin and flow conveyance facilities have been designed to accommodate the additional flow given the worst-case lOO-year flood event, the potential impact is regarded as less than significant. Development of the site with an office complex would result in paving and otherwise covering. a major portion ar the eniting l'i.~~ ground surface, thereby reducing infiltration and ultimately resulting in increased runoff. Also, the constituents of the runoff would be altered. With the creation of a paved lot, oil, grease, and other solvents from 3-3 J.O-/3Lj 90-14.(J()9 11/09/90 fI I . . . . . . . I I I I I . I I . automobiles would join storm runoff. If this runoff is uncontrolled and allowed to flow in the existing pattern, this contaminated runoff would enter the sensitive "F' & "G" Street Marsh, which is regarded as-a potentially significant impact. ~, As part of the project, a stonn drain system and detention basin is proposed to prevent stonn runoff from entering the Marsh. The stonn drain system would consist of a series of inlets and pipes to convey all the water from roof drains and parking areas into the proposed detention basin. This basin would be located to the west of the office complex, adjacent to the marsh. Before discharging into the basin, the water would be filtered through a cleansing system consisting of a triple box with baffles serving to trap suspended grease and heavy metal particles. The baffle box and basin would be cleaned 9n~ each x~i'i;;ii~[rS!!;!!m~ October. During dry weather periods, from May to October, flows would be retained within the detention basin and reduced by evaporation and percolation. During the October maintenance period, the stop gate would be removed and winter stonn flows would be conveyed out of the detention basin. An 18" RCP would carry site flows south to the existing 42" RCP near Building 61. ......., The detention basin has been designed to accommodate 2 acre-feet of water, which is the 1 DO-year stonn event. Because the existing 42" RCP is approaching capacity, the conveyance system has also been designed to maintain the water surface elevation in the detention basin equal to, or below, the IOO-year hydraulic grade line. This design is intended to allow gradual draining to the existing system, without flooding. As currently proposed, the stonn drain system and detention basin would capture all contaminated runoff, remove the grease and heavy metals and divert the runoff away from the Marsh. With implementation of the storm drain system as designed, there would be no adverse impacts to the Marsh from contaminated runoff. . Groundwater The presence of groundwater affects both the construction and design of foundations for structures if the foundations are located below groundwater level. Subterranean slabs and --.. 3-4 90-14.009 11/09/90 d-O~/}~ !J tJ tit I I , I . . other foundation elements located below groundwater levels experience buoyant forces which can result in uplift pressures. Special precautionary measures to restrain the slab from lifting must be incorporated into project design. The presence of a high groundwater table also results in saturated soils. Saturated soils, without remediation, are aR ~.Y {';-:'~:'~;"h': .gqY~ffi~'Iif!$~'RYPQig~ID:IR9..l1Bgm~YP$\@Y unacceptable material for building support and fill. As eurreRtl)" propasee, ReRe sf tBe projeet structures waule require deep feuRdatioHs. Bases eR a re'lie'.\' ef tBe prelimiHary graaiHg plans, RS greuHsvlater would be eHemlHtered duriHg projeet gradiHg; Be'lie'ler, tBere is tBe pateHtial for grllsiHg te eHeauRter saturated soils af the Bay deposits. Bases 8ft a prelimiftary review af the site, Bay deposits ';,'ere iaeRtifies iR the Rarth'llest llHa sautBvle:;t eaTHers af the site. Bnsee aft a revie'u af tBe gradiHg pleas fDr the site, the deteatioR basia may eReraaeh 8a these depesits, thereby requiriag remedial gradiHg. OtherVlise, the rest 'l,'ould remaiR iR its eurreRt state. If saturated soils are eReOllHtercd durin;:; graEling, then this soil must be dried and se watered prior to use ns fill. ;g>>:9l?~t1S~mr9QtH!S~~!~;F!:!I~!!mi1!!QJ?9~~.~.~~98MtI~m9B~i1~x~I.Qi!i~H.j>>;tm~g~pw18pg ~thp.w$n~;~g2E,~I~~t!g~gt~,;QgBg.g;~;!~.~~,:!2.rtJjs;n2rtn~fIY@;D9~gH!9~tlyp~tgID8 ~tn1~~~JI1;P~MY!11Ylffi.~lili.mb~rlrt\fplltJfID.&jL~mB~t\Jj1tli!,~~!ttl*fiPl9pg~M~;i!!iiil~ ~1IR9F.:t~g;J&q;!~R[~~gl,pr&IliB!i'2IiJ1jt491WIRrgmIqetf,;;1~Eyt~lY!inf:;E9nm~!~m1';~~Y:;19!nt rgr&YP~!ffl.9M~iI~,tnlJ~lpgnBm.tR!iqgMRg;S!iY8Y!m;R!;~j~tit~Sl~1;~~j "f'h%f9rm~!~gH~!~gA~9t9pins!~y.~Bgijt9m%~gBfqi~ng~.f~~~IpqrBgp~9.f:!q~~9j.!Jn%t!y ~~gi,~~lf8E$~iti%Jmi~l!i!'~;iRYiYit~9~:i~Ei1ijSh'~mlp.E!~~ls;~l~~ilig~qlm~f~m~ lt~Him'J!ilD!f@jtlii"_I*~~1ia.W$ljl%~lm.:liiIHBtll~;; ""j~lsfii~IElL.1f4RSi'8Riitl1f11P&iLf!lii_t!Rl!1Iq2tJ.~l.ng:filmtg ~9X~1~Ril1f9R~JEmB5i!mM!!!\IL~l1WBXi9.$flY1&:~~mlflP:l~p:U~jlat:~HPml!~iJl;~r9i1[S~ ~lm.l;egBitqynutig~.14I?,~~ijy.Dl:jf_..I!~mJrllplB~!tit~ll~~ lt9D_elA11~~~~.~~lae_lDIq)~~.@n9 m..."".Wil'Y".t~"fimiWm'b~~iWWf"'l<1'al.. . .~,:,,;:..~~~~~~~ _...;.~~.....:..:& ...>:;:>>>w~"'<< .. ~~.............' .~ llk.___1j .. 3-5 90-14.009 11/09/90 c20~)36 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Deslgl1,criteTiaar~pioVided.' in theJu1.y 1990 ~9~d.w~d-9yde(;onsultaJ:it~repoit for f()l,tri9#9P~g~isq;~itp.c;01i$~d~rati()i(~i!lggiveil!gy#ti~iiQ~#lthegro~!lqV@i~ihll)le;an:d q~&hml$;d~:;i~;gl~2;Br9Yms9fQr;jsJ?9im:t~tiJiFP2ij;;9~y{~t;rfug;U~~t~gi2Y~#t~ - fl~Il'&l!ii1UlIjSL~~lIlIL.iiII~Jfml!i Soils and Geologic Units and Site To'po~phy '(''ll('O,).><Cte P Construction of the office complex would involve grading to prep.!!.. e Ii fiat pad for SllFfaee parkin~~~l>uilding ~~ Approximately 11.2 acres would be graded and the .., ..,-................ remaining 0.4 acre would remain in its natural condition. After grading to prepare the site, elevations would vary between Hl aReI 13 ~mg;!g feet, except in the detention basin where elevations would vary between 6 and 12 feet. The building complex would sit at an elevation of 13.2 feet MS4\;mg;;p~~g;pi1S\9g~~~N}Y9ij!Q~!~A!!~f\~1~y~~!gn.9!~;~ gn9~%r~~.~tgfln$HRrtlj~rlymg~qRtft~!!y.PAAlS!Hg~!m9fgr~~l!~~p~9fiy~ly. A total of 18,500 el:lBie yarels sf Cl:It alla fill wSl:Ild bc gellerated aad graaiag "'''()\;Ild be Balaaeea ell site. The ffiWaffil:lffi depth sf eut aad fill ',vslIld be 6 feet, ,",,<lth the a"lerage depth apprslfiffiatel)' 2 feet. - ~1;f!iJi1ii~12rg~ilYli1i\YAtI~!:mID.l1tJBt!Uli;}Y{lm9.1p,il~~~itg~i:mg;\iRP!~m~llY~i!1!QQ 9HP!~.r~I~9:f:;imRql*IQH!HiPl\is9Mjr.~1!!91;g~Y~RR;!f~;m9H9~~Qgr~g.~$!!i~$;m;mmllm 9%R1Qi~j~PfiH~ffm!i9lMH;~~1,l!i~~!~nHrl~~!!~}I.m$l!y~!yiiffitlj~m@y~r~g$iFlj~ng%IH gr'iiq~Qfiipp;rq~miirlE!Yg;flE~;; There is the potential for impacts to the Marsh if surface runoff carries silt and sediment into the marsh during grading. This is particularly problematic if grading occurs during the winter months when the heaviest rains occur, and this is considered potentially significant. Also, on-site soils are identified as compressible and expansive, and are not acceptable m . WH, mItt.~.~lllll for structural support, thus, potentially creating significant'impacts to structures. As previously discussed, there is the potential that saturated soils may be encountered during grading. Bay deposits have been identified in the westerly site boundary, and loose porous slopewash soils have been identified in the topographic low near the center of the southerly site boundary. -. 3-6 9().14JJ09 11/09/90 ,)c- /J 7 L 1. .. 2. 3. , I I. [: ! . Ii , . . i .. i ./l < . MITIGATION MEASURES 19$1!1~B&t~gmiiiH9-;..~RWiJmH~!p~.Rt~m~gJiR@S9gfgms~jWi~!:itm~1,~!}!~1~!~~~ ~!lm.mI.lfB.fI'm..mm~pjl~111~;~i{!lpml~lI'mH$m:~liii~~llR.it!mI.~l ilmPiPl~iI_'PlQ~,..~'m!lW]JlD~'I,glrl\Q;_B$9ggil~g.gfjlgiiJl .. '_'~li"~mi1t'_a'~~~~'=>>'^'~'"'~-" ."'- , .. . ". ...... ...... K"'" , . ...u u '~n;'~"""""~"'"'_i' u. ,"'~. .~~. .~:;." .,'.1.. ":;oM;.JL.r .:."...- ~":~\it :%:<<~ .*:.:L~;~dbih::J,;L*;,-r~LJ\~f:~g;~Ut~i,~~gr!*, Drainage Potential significant impacts to drainage resulting from project construction and operation include contaminated runoff into the "F' & "G" Street Marsh, and potential flooding of low lying areas. Inherent in the project design are measures, listed below, that would ensure that all runoff from the site is captured, cleaned and diverted away from the sensitive "F' & "G" Street Marsh, and that runoff would be detained during storm conditions: minimum storage capacity of 2 acre-feet a cleansing system at the point(s) of discharge into the detention basin to capture grease, heavy metals and other contaminants a regular maintenance schedule to service the cleansing device j.)yf~~~Y~?r at the eful ef the ElFy seaseR (:!Y!'g~;~~ October) . ........ ..... .. ....... 4. a conveyance system from the detention basin to the existing Rohr facilities that is capable of delivering flows under the lOO-year flood conditions without flooding Also, development must comply with all applicable regulationsiil~8gH91PB,;ig!~ established by the Environmental Protection Agency as set forth in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements for storm water discharge. Groundwater ISoils and Geologic Units Potentially significant impacts were identified: (1) to the Marsh from grading, and (2) to structures from compressible, expansive, and/or saturated soils. Mitigation measures 4, 5~ ~!B!:J;t ftflEJ-9 would reduce Marsh impacts to a level below s~gnificant. Mitigation measures J, 2i~m1g~ ftOO-3 would reduce structural impacts to a level below significant. 3-7 JO~/3?: 90-14.009 11/09/90 1. The "Update Geotechnical Investigation...." (Woodward-Clyde Consultants, 1990) must be reviewed and approved by the City's Engineering Department. All recommendations contained within the study must be implemented by the applicant. This measure must be made a condition of project approval, and must be included (or referenced to) on the Grading Plan. -.... 2. Engineered fIlls and/ or .~l'. ~t~ctural eleDlents that encroa~h into areas overlain by bay deposits ~E;;~l!i~;:~~~\IDt~Si[~q~ will require some form of subgrade modification to improve the support capacity of the existing soils for use in ultimately supporting additional engineered fill and/or structural improvements. Soil improvement may include partial or total removal and recompaction, and/or the use of surcharge fills to pre-compress saturated bay deposits which exist below the groundwater table; or foundation elements must be designed to extend through these soils into competent bearing formational soils. 3. If encountered, roadways, embankments, and engineered fills encroaching onto existing compressible bay deposits will likely require subgrade modification to improve the support capacity of the existing soils and reduce long-term, post-construction settlement. Soil improvement would likely include partial or total removal and recompaction, and/or the use of surcharged fills, to pre-compress saturated bay deposi ts. 4Hr - -. :'"-,".w.w~ ~; If project grading occurs during the winter season, the special provisions contained in Section 87.19.07 (Grading and Drainage) of the City of Chula Vista Bayfront Specific Plan must be implemented, and these must also be included (or referenced to) on the Grading Plan. ~t To eliminate the possibility of silt and sediment entering the Marsh, a barrier system must be placed between the property and the wetland prior to initiation of grading and remain until the drainage diversion system is in place and operating. This measure must be included on the Grading Plan. if To prevent grading impacts to the wetland, a protective berm must be constructed along the entire western boundary of the. site, avoiding the wetland. During construction of this berm, the City must retain a biologically trained construction monitor to observe grading practices and ensure the integrity of the wetland. To guarantee that the berm itself does not introduce sedimentation into the wetland, the western slope of the berm must be --.. 3-8 )0- /3'} 9O-I4,(J09 11/09/90 . . . hydroseeded and/or covered with plastic sheeting. This measure must be included on the Grading Plan. ANALYSIS OF SIGNIFICANCE The project site currently drains via overland flow to the "F' & "G" Street Marsh. With project development and reduction in surface permeability, the amount of flow would increase. The resultant drainage would contain potentially harmful contaminants and would result in potentially significant impacts to the Marsh. As part of the development, a drainage system is proposed to capture, clean, and divert drainage away from the Marsh. This diversion and detention system would mitigate impacts to below a level of significance. Silt and sediments could enter the Marsh during construction and be carried with site drainage after construction. Recommended measures, including placement of a construction barrier, development of the westerly berm, revegetation of the berm's west side immediately after grading and compliance with all city LCP requirements for grading during the rainy season, must be implemented to reduce the potentially significant impacts to a level less than significant. Saturated, expansive, and/or compressible soils may be encountered, potentially creating impacts to structures. Remedial measures as outlined in the 1990 Woodward-Clyde Consultants report, and as listed in the mitigation measures, would reduce these impacts to below a level of significance. 3-9 9O-U.OO9 11/09/90 J.!)-/YO RESPONSES TO COMMENTS -. State of California. Department of Conservation - Office of the Director Cl Comment acknowledged The following is provided as a summary of geologic conditions for the project site. GEOLOGY Existing Conditions The present-day configuration of the southern California coastline can be said to have had its early beginnings during Cretaceous time (120 to 85 million years ago). At that time, the southern California Batholiths intruded into existing Triassic and Jurassic-age strata, causing uplift to the east, and subsidence to the west where the deposition of marine sediments has continued through the last 60 to 80 million years. The project site lies within the San Diego Embayment Graben, a structural block down-dropped between the La Nacion fault zone (two to three miles east of the site), and the "San Diego Bay faults" (one to two miles west of the site). The San Diego Bay faults are generally believed to be a southerly extension of the Rose Canyon fault zone, described below under "Seismicity and Geologic Hazards." The formation of the San Diego Bay is directly related to the downward displacement of the San _ Diego Embayment Graben. Seismicity and Geologic Hazards The major San Diego and southern California fault systems form a northwest-southeast trending regional structural fabric, generally parallel to the San Andreas fault zone, which extends over land from the Gulf of California to the Bodega Basin north of San Francisco Bay. Structural geologists relate movement along the San Andreas and associated fault zones (at least for the past five million years), to movement along the boundary between the North American and Pacific tectonic plates. As a result, the southern California region is subject to significant hazards from moderate to large earthquakes. Ground shaking is a hazard everywhere in California. Fault displacement of the ground is a potential hazard at, and near, faults. Tsunamis, earthquake-induced flooding, and liquefaction are all potential hazards in the San Diego Bay area. The fault zones nearest the site which are mapped as "active" are the Coronado Banks and the Elsinore fault zones. The nearest fault zone currently classified as potentially active is the Rose Canyon fault zone. The California Division of Mines and Geology is currently considering certain segments of this fault zone as active, I although this information has not yet been published by the State. '-' ,)0 - J Lj ( 90.14 01/.!5/91 r-. II " - - . . . . , . . . RESPONSES TO COMMENTS The coastal zone of San Diego, including the areas along the periphery of San Diego Bay, is currently assigned to UBC Seismic Zone 3. Based on recent information from the Structural Engineers Association of San Diego, strong consideration is being given to changing coastal San Diego from Zone 3 to Zone 4. Coronado Banks Fault Zone The Coronado Banks fault zone is located offshore from San Diego, approximately 10 miles southwest of the project site area. It appears to be part of a discontinuous zone of faulting which includes the Palos Verdes fault near Los Angeles, and which extends southeastward beyond the Mexican border (Greene et al. 1979; Legg and Kennedy 1979). The total length of this fault zone is estimated to be approximately 130 miles and it is likely to be a strike-slip fault. Because of its mapped geologic displacements, one-half of total fault zone length was used as tl)e length of surface rupture in order to estimate a maximum credible earthquake of surface wave magnitude (Ms) 7. Offshore from San Diego, the Coronado Banks fault zone is near an area where the epicenters of numerous local magnitude (Md microearthquakes (ML 2.0 to 3.4) have been plotted. The Coronado Banks fault zone may be associated with an Ms 6-1/4 earthquake during a typical lOO-year period. Elsinore Fault Zone I I The Elsinore/Laguna Salada fault zone (approximately 40 miles northeast of the project site area) is the nearest likely onshore source of a large earthquake. This fault zone is generaIly characterized by strike-slip displacement. The total length of the fault zone is approximately 255 miles; however, geologic displacements are relatively discontinuous and sinuous compared to those of the other major active faults. Therefore, it appears likely that the Elsinore fault zone would rupture in Shorter segments (as a proportion of total length) than the other major active faults in the region. The general tectonic environment and expression of geologic displacements along the Elsinore fault zone suggest that it may be subject to a maximum credible earthquake of Ms 7-1/2, which would be associated with a length of surface rupture of approximately 80 miles. The epicenters of numerous smaIl earthquakes of ML 3.0 to Ms 5.0 are located near the fault, suggesting that an Ms 7 earthquake is likely to occur on the Elsinore fault zone during a typical lOO-year period. I Rose Canyon Fault Zone I II The most significant fault zone near the project site area is the Rose Canyon fault zone, which is currently classified as potentiaIly active. This fault zone has been generally considered to exhibit no geologic displacement in the last 11,000 years (Ziony 1973); however, some smaIl earthquakes and microearthquakes have epicenters on or near traces of the San Diego Bay faults (Hileman 1979; Simons I ;2 () -.j Y d.- 90-14 01/25/91 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS -... 1979). A series o( these earthquakes occurred in 1985 and 1986. Moreover, evidence of displacement on the fault during the last 11,000 years has been reportedly discovered (Abbott 1989) near downtown San Diego, and at a site in Rose Canyon. Consequently, it may be advisable to consider the hypothetical earthquake hazard from the Rose Canyon fault zone. It appears reasonable to conclude that an Ms 6-1/4 earthquake could occur during a typical100-year period. Seismic Hazards Ground shaking likely to occur during the anticipated life of the development would affect uses on the site. Bay muds tend to magnify the effects of ground shaking by amplifying the intensity of movement caused by earthquaKes. Ground surface accelerations and site period (the frequency of oscillation) would be likely to vary somewhat across the site. Liquefaction is a potential hazard in all areas underlain by water-saturated sandy soils. Within the site vicinity, portions of the fluvial (Qal) deposits encountered in the low-lying areas are considered moderately susceptible to liquefaction. . Additionally, relatively clean sands were encountered within the formational soils at depths of 11 to 26 feet below existing ground grade. Although considered relatively dense in nature, these clean sands may be susceptible to liquefaction during severe """ ground shaking. Tsunamis and earthquake-induced flooding are also potential hazards within the San Diego Bay, and a sufficient length of water surface exists within the bay to cause earthquake-induced flooding within low-lying areas. Seismic hazards are potentially significant. However, standard required design criteria and conventional engineering techniques can be implemented to reduce the risk. Some risk would always remain due to the uncertainty of future seismic events. Site-Specific Investigations Woodward-Clyde Consultants (WCe) has prepared two geotechnical reports pertinent to the subject site: a preliminary geotechnical investigation dated May 13, 1988, and a more recent update geotechnical investigation, released July 24, 1990, and revised September 7, 1990. These reports address potential constraints due to seismic and liquefaction hazard. Refer to these reports for additional details on these geologic hazards, and recommendations for mitigation. Any specific design details intended to mitigate potential geologic hazards would be incorporated into the grading plan, as specified by mitigation measures contained in Section 3.1. '""" I c20-/cj] 90-14 01/25/91 . 3.2 BIOLOGY The following information is summarized from a study prepared by Pacific Southwest Biological Services (PSBS) describing the existing biological conditions on the site and the potential impacts associated with development of the proposed office complex. The complete report is contained in Appendix C. The site was surveyed six times between July and September, 1989, and again in July and August, 1990, by biologists from PSBS. The site surveys were focused on verifying a previous vegetation map (Sanders, 1989), and examining the current status of the wetlands. In addition to these field investigations, data collected during previous studies of the site and surrounding area were utilized to provide seasonal information regarding distribution and use patterns of the various sensitive species known to occur within the study area. Primary among these other studies are two biological technical reports prepared for the Chula Vista Midbayfront LCP Resubmittal NO.8 (PSBS, 1990a and 1990b). Other surveys are listed in Appendix C. . EXISTING CONDmONS . The site has a long history of agricultural use. Much of the wetland area around the "F' & "G" Street Marsh has been filled in the recent past. Dumping of trash has been common practice in the area and vegetable fields were historically treated with pesticides. Recent studies have identified the presence of residual low concentrations of DDT and DDE in the surface soils of the site (Woodward-Clyde, 1990). The remnant fields currently support stands of Russian Thistle and Five-hook Bassia. Trash dumping continues to occur in areas along "F" Street; however, a recently installed guard-rail along "F" Street has limited this action somewhat. Botanical Resources . . . Vegetation The historically high levels of agricultural use has resulted in disturbance of the majority of the uplands within the Rohr site. Naturally vegetated laiuls of the site are limited to the existing brackish marsh and small riparian grove along the western boundary of the site. 3-10 90-14.00701/24/91 2t}/) '-iL/ I L i' 400 Feet L o 200 " , '. '. ~: .!. I , i I b.'! , . I f . ! i i r - L. r' j L [ , 7- .. Vegetation and Sensitive Itesources ' :: .J-o- /'15' Figure 3-1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . ~ . Adjacent to the western edge of the property lies the coastal salt marsh of the "F' & "G" Street Marsh (Figure 3-1). Although the previous agricultural use of the site is not a direct benefit to most of the marsh species, the presence of weedy plants along the wetland periphery indirectly benefits marsh species by allowing unrestricted movement between foraging areas, by providing a buffer from human-associated activities and by providing many species with forage (seeds) and cover. Disturbed Fields The predominant vegetation within the Rohr parcel consists of disturbed fields dominated by weedy plant taxa including Russian-Thistle (Salsola australis) and Five-hook Bassia (Bassia hyssopifolia), Short-pod Mustard (Brassicageniculata), and Sweet Fennel (Foeniculum vulgare). Also present are several exotic grasses including bromes (Bromus spp.), Slender Oats (Avena barba/a), and Bermuda-Grass (Cynodon dactylon) which occurs extensively along the lower portions of the site. Riparian Grove A small grove (0.14 acre) of young Sandbar Willows (Salix hindsiana) occurs at the far southwestern corner of the site and straddles the boundary between the Rohr property and the adjacent National Wildlife Refuge. This stand is quite young and may be expanding based on previous reports which mapped its location approximately 100 feet west of the Rohr property line (Sanders, 1989). While the dense growth of the grove precludes most understory plants, species associated with the fringes of this vegetation include Tree Tobacco (Nico/ianaglauca), Bermuda Grass, Saltgrass. Curly Dock and Telegraph Weed (Heterotheca grandijlora ). Brackish Marsh Brackish Marsh occurs within a small swale at the northwestern corner of the site. This area, formerly a portion of the "F' & "G" Street Marsh, was historically isolated by the deposition of fill and is now fed by freshwater runoff from the adjacent fields and fill area. This area supports such alkaline tolerant species as Southwestern Spiny Rush (Juncus acutus), Saltgrass (Distich lis spicata) and Curly Dock (Rumex crispus). Also present in this drainage swale is an abundance of Bermuda Grass (Cynodon dactylon) and Johnson 3-11 .;w-/t/b 9O-U.OO70J/Uj91 . ~ I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I ,. I Grass(Sorghum Izalepense), Other species such as Cocklebur (Xantlzium stmmarium), Curly Dock (Rumex crispus), Sea-blight (Suaeda californica), Goosefoot (Chenopodium mura/e), and Dallisgrass (Paspalum dilatatum) are also represented in this area. This area has retained the wetland soil characteristics associated with its salt marsh origin and vegetation diversity appears to be limited both by competition for primary space as well as soil salinities. ........ Coastal Salt Marsh The "F' & "G" Street Marsh located just west of the property boundary is dominated primarily by Pickleweed (Salicomia virginica), but also include a diverse assemblage of subordinate elements including Annual Pickleweed and Glasswort (Salicomia bigelovii and S. subterminalis), Arrow-grass (Trigloclzin man'tima), Saltwort (Batis maritima), and Sea. lavender (Limonium californicum). At higher elevations, unvegetated salt panes are common. Vegetated areas in these locales include Salt-cedar (Monanthochloe littoralis), Saltgrass, Alkali-weed (Cressa tnail/ensis), Sea-blight and Alkali-heath (Frankenia salina). Numerous tidal channels meander through the adjacent marshlands, both increasing the complexity of the dominating mid-marsh habitats and providing unique resources for fish and invertebrate fauna. Along the channel meanders and in low-lying bench areas near the larger tidal channels, vegetation is dominated by Cordgrass (Spartina foliosa). Within the upper fringes of this marsh the uncommon California Sea-blight (Suaeda esteroa) occurs. .-., , Flora Fifty-one plant taxa were observed on the Rohr property area (see Appendix C, Table 1). Of these, 36 are non-native weeds, and an additional 9 are opportunistic natives typically associated with disturbed or successional habitats. The large number of non-native plants is due to the extensive prior agricultural use and the high level of disturbance which has occurred in the area. The sensitive Southwestern Spiny Rush and California Sea-blight (Suaeda esteroa) are also present. Sensitive plants are discussed in more detail in the Sensitive Biological Resources section of this report. '") 3-12 JP/L/7 9<J.UOO701/?4/91 ~ I' f: [" I u r ! . j, ~ ! . L ! L J ] 1i . , , Zoological Resources General Wildlife Habitat The primary wildlife habitat occurring on the Rohr site is disturbed fields. Minor elements of Brackish Marsh and Willow Riparian Scrub overlap the western boundary from the National Wildlife Refuge. Also considered in the proposed site development were the Coastal. Salt Marsh habitats of the adjacent "F' & "G" Street Marsh as the proposed development may result in off-site impacts. Disturbed Fields Disturbed uplands occupy over 99 percent of the site. These areas are typically characterized by dense weedy vegetation and narrow dirt roadways. Weed abatement activities occur on an infrequent basis as ordered by the Chula Vista Fire Department. The fields are occupied by an abundance of rodents and lagomorphs including the California Ground Squirrel (Spennophilus beecheyi), Botta's Pocket Gopher (Thomomys bottae), Desert Cottontail (Sylvilagus audubonii) and Brush Rabbit (S. bachmani). Raptors were observed to forage extensively over the open fields with the predominant use being by the American Kestrel (Falco spQ/Verius) and Northern Harrier (Circus cyaneus). This pattern of heavy raptor use was observed throughout the Midbayfront region (Pacific Southwest Biological Services, 1990b). Seed-eating birds, including numerous finches (Carduelis and Carpodacus spp.), Mourning Dove (Zenaida macroura), and a variety of sparrows, make use of the fields while insect gleaners utilize the fields, shrubs and trees. The few scattered Acacia and palm trees and tall shrubs are important structural elements in the upland habitats which provide singing, foraging, and sentry points to numerous avian species. Brackish Marsh These marshlands exhibit several characteristics similar to those of the salt marshes; however, the wildlife species making use of these areas differ sufficiently from that of the classical salt marsh areas to warrant separate consideration.. The Brackish Marsh areas of the Rohr property are limited in extent and support extremely short-lived seasonal surface 3-13 ;2j}' ) <j~ 90-14.00701/2'/91 . ~ I I I I I I It I I I I I I I ,. I water. These areas are visited during the rainy season by herons and egrets, Red-winged Blackbirds (Agelaius plzoeniceus) and song sparrows (Melospiza melodia). Because brackish .marshes do not receive regular tidal flushing, they lack the macro-invertebrates and fish found in the salt marsh habitats. Most of the vertebrate species utilizing these areas rely on the seasonal productivity of marshes. Mammals found in association with these areas are similar to those observed or expected in and around the salt marshes. These include the Raccoon, California Ground Squirrel, and a variety of small rodents. Stands of Saltgrass occurring in this wetland harbor the sensitive Wandering Skipper (Pan oquin a errans). - Riparian Grove The small grove of Sandbar Willow located at the southwestern site boundary supports limited wildlife activities. These trees a~e.densely growing seedlings and clonal divisions typically associated with emerging riparian habitats. The small size, low stature and monospecific nature of this area limits its value as a distinct community. During the course of the survey, avifauna detected in this grove. were limited to Song Sparrows, House Finches, and Lesser Goldfinches. An unidentified mediulIl-sized mammal was also present in the thicket. As this grove matures it would be expected to attract substantially more use by wildlife. - Coastal Salt Marsh Coastal Salt Marsh wildlife habitat is coincident with the distribution of salt marsh vegetation (Figure 3-1). Characteristic species of these habitats include the Belding's Savannah Sparrow, which occurs as two resident pairs in the "F' & "G" Street Marsh, the Willet (Catoptroplzorus semipalmatus), the Marbled Godwit (Limosafedoa), the Great Blue Heron (Ardea herodias) and the Long-billed Curlew (Numenius americanus). Along the fringes of the marshlands, terrestrial mammals including the Desert Cottontail (Sylvilagus audubonii), California ground squirrel (Spennoplzilus beeclzeyi), and Botta's Pocket Gopher (Tlzomomys bottae) forage on the lush marsh plants; also present in these areas is the sensitive Wandering Skipper Butterfly (Panoquina errans). Restricted circulation at the "F' & "G" Street Marsh plays a great role in limiting the diversity and productivity of this marsh relative to other marshes in the Sweetwater Marsh complex; however, this area does provide supporting refuge, foraging grounds and spawning -, 3-14 fJO.U.OO701/24/91 ;!.O-F(7 . [ r l j , L [ . . [ , L r' L ,- i ] :iJ . -, grounds for numerous species more typically associated with open water or shoreline areas of the bay and coastal areas. The tidal channels, creeks, and even frequently exposed portions of the marshes are utilized as spawning areas and nursery grounds by numerous coastal fish and invertebrates. A diverse and abundant community of resident invertebrates persists in the salt marsh habitats as well. Most notable are the concentrations of California Horn Snails (Cerithidea californica), Fiddler Crabs (Uca crenulata) and Yellow Shore Crabs (Hemigrapsis oregonensis ). Resident bivalves and tidal channel polychaetes (marine worms) and crustaceans are generally restricted to the tidal channels near Marina Parkway. Fauna Amphibians Only a handful of amphibians are expected to make use of the Rohr site and these would be restricted to the wetland areas on the western boundary of the site. They include the common Pacific Treefrog (Hyla regilla), Slender Salamander (BatradlOseps spp.) and Western Toad (Bufo boreas). Because of the marine influence of the wetlands on the site, amphibian activities are expected to be extremely low. No sensitive amphibians are expected to occur on the property. Reptiles Five reptilian species have been noted on the Rohr property (see Appendix C. Table 2). These include such common species as the Southern Alligator Lizard (Gerrhonotus multicarinatus), the Western Fence Lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis) and the Common Kingsnake (Lampropeltis getulus). The high degree of disturbance would be expected to limit the potential for other species. No sensitive reptiles would be expected to occur on the Rohr site. 3-15 ~{/ -/ Y'O 90-/4.110701/24/91 . I I I I I I II I I I I I I I ,. I B.inh - Fifty-seven avian species have been observed or reported from the Rohr property (see Appendix C, Table 2). In addition, a host of other birds which would not be expected to make use of the site have been observed as fly-overs or within the adjacent "F' & "G" Street Marsh. Some of these birds reflect migratory movements of passerines and/or incidental transitory occupancy by other species. A variety of the species noted are all but extirpated from the Chula Vista Bayfront region, although they occur more frequently at interior locations. Eleven raptors, and four species of owl have been recorded in the northern Chula Vista Bayfront in recent years (Pacific Southwest Biological Services, 1990a). Of these, nine raptors and all four owls have been observed to forage over the Rohr site at one time or another. There has been an apparent decline in usage of the area by several of these species over the past few years. Notably, these include the Northern Harrier (Circus cyaneus), Red- shouldered Hawk (Buteo lineatus), Black-shouldered Kite (Elan us caeruleus) and American Kestrel (Falco sparverius) (Merkel, pers. obs.). These declines are probably related to the reduction of prey (including Desert Cottontail, California Ground Squirrel, and Pocket Gophers) associated with the more frequent and intense management of field habitats in the Bayfront. There has been an increase in the activities of the endangered Peregrine Falcon, an event undoubtedly related to the 1989 successful nesting of the species on the Coronado Bridge, the first in San Diego County for over 40 years. Other raptorial birds have maintained an apparently stable level of incidental occurrence in the Bayfront region as migratory movements and wide' home ranges carry them over the Rohr site. Raptor nesting in and around the Bayfront is limited to that of the common Red-tailed Hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), the American Kestrel, the Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularis) and possibly the Red-shouldered Hawk; however, none of these rap tors nests on the Rohr site. .-. Also nesting in the area are Common Ravens (CONUS corax), Scrub Jays (Aphelocoma coerulescens) and Loggerhead Shrikes (Lanius ludovicianus); three semi-raptor-Iike species which constitute important predators in the area. Burrowing Owls have been known to nest on the steep banks of the northern Bayfront, throughout the disturbed lands on Gunpowder Point, and on the "0" Street Fill. Efforts to eradicate owl nesting on the "0" Street Fill, ...... 3-16 c2tl-/;i/ 90-/4.00701/24/91 . f' I [i , ! r ~ ~ i ..; . j . near the California Least Tern Nesting Colony, have been fairly successful, and currently nesting burrowing owls are a fairly uncommon sight in the Bayfront (E. lichtwardt, K Merkel, pers. obs.). This species is, however, more commonly seen on the Chula Vista Wildlife Reserve Island. Several sensitive birds occur in the Bayfront but do not occur on the Rohr site. Where potential for impacts to these species exist, the species are discussed. Breeding pairs of the state-listed Belding's Savannah Sparrow are known to be present within the "P & "G" Street Marsh. Also of concern are potential impacts to marshlands where the re-establishment of light-footed Clapper Rail populations might be possible. These and other sensitive avian species are discussed separately within the text of the Sensitive Biological Resources Section of this report. Avian flight activities in the area have been investigated previously (Pacific Southwest Biological Services, 1990b) and the results of that study have been incorporated into the current study. From October 1989 through April 1990, an intensive field study was conducted to determine the levels and patterns of avian flight activities over the Chula Vista Midbayfront -- including the project site (Pacific Southwest Biological Services, 1990b). This study focused on the movements of waterbirds and raptors within the region. The study documented extremely low levels of flight activities within the Rohr parcel for all shorebirds, wading birds, waterfowl and terns. On the average, the numbers of birds within these groups which were observed to pass through the study site fell well below one bird flight per hour for all elevation ranges combined. For gulls, an average of over 330 flights per hour crossed the site, of which between 12 and 24 occurred at levels below 50 feet and could potentially be affected by the proposed project. Raptor activities were predominantly present along "P Street and within the fields located on the site. More restricted use of the site was made by the Northern Harrier which foraged widely over the Bayfront. Other raptor activities were more or less incidental to the site, as has been previously discussed. Mammals Fourteen mammalian species were detected on the site (see Appendix C, Table 2). Of these, all are common to San Diego County. Notable among the native species are the 3-17 ;2(} - /S:J- 90-14.007 01/24/91 . I I I I I I at I I I I I I I ,. , infrequent occurrences of large mammals such as the Coyote (Canis latrans) and the Gray Fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus). In addition to the native species occurring on or in the vicinity of the site, five introduced or domesticated species also occupy various areas within the Bayfront and its immediate vicinity. These include the naturalized Virginia Opossum (Didelphis virginianus), the human-associated Black Rat (Rattus rattus) and House Mouse (Mus musculus), and the Domestic Dog (Canis familiaris) and House Cat (Felis domesticus). The introduced species tend to be the most destructive of the mammalian predators. These species account for the majority of the mammalian predation on avian nest colonies, sites, young, and adult birds throughout the Chula Vista Bayfront area. No sensitive mammals are expected to inhabit the project area. - Sensitive Biolo~cal Resources Sensitive Habitats Coastal Salt Marsh While Coastal Saltmarsh communities do not occur on the Rohr site, the presence of such areas within the watershed of the property is a concern. Such habitats are naturally limited, highly productive ecological systems which persist at the interface of marine and terrestrial systems in sheltered bays and estuaries. The pattern of intermittent drying and saltwater inundation creates a situation favoring holophytic (requiring saline soil) vascular plants tolerant of frequent inundation and soil anoxia (absence of oxygen). Such conditions also favor marine algae and invertebrates resistant to stresses due to the intermittent drying. The regular tidal exchanges of nutrient rich seawater promotes high primary productivity and provides the basis for an important detrital based food web. - The salt marshes of the "F' & "G" Street Marsh are home or provide important habitat to several sensitive species including a state-listed endangered species (Belding's Savannah Sparrow). In addition to playing host to sensitive species, saltmarsh communities provide important nursery grounds and foraging areas for a host of other organisms including fish, terrestrial and marine invertebrates, and birds. These areas are important to the continued survival of several non-nesting migratory bird species as well, providing food, shelter and resting habitats. ...... 3-18 90-14.00701/24/91 -1j}//53 . f - r f L i. f- 1 " f' .. .' 1. L C l> ~ ;~ " . i-: I. (,; 1/ These coastal wetlands have suffered a tremendous decline in the recent past due to both direct and indirect impacts. Development and agricultural pressures have lead to the filling of such areas, marine development has led to the dredging of these areas, and watershed development has led to the introduction of numerous contaminants, modified the erosion and accretion patterns, and greatly altered the freshwater hydrologic character of most coastal wetlands. It is estimated that over 7S percent of the coastal wetlands in California have already been lost and the future of the remaining wetlands is tenuous at best (Marcus, 1989). Due to the high value of these systems and the rapid losses they have undergone, almost any impacts to these systems would be considered significant. In addition, in most cases such impacts would be subject to permitting requirements of various federal, state and local entities outside of the CEQA review process. Brackish Marsh These habitats are frequently associated with estuarine or drainage systems which receive freshwater input but which maintain an alkaline condition due to either saline soils or evaporative concentration of runoff which is rich in salts or alkalide minerals. Within the potential impact area (both on and off site), these areas are limited in quantity to a small swale supporting 0.16 acre of highly degraded habitat which has been heavily infested with Bermuda and Johnson grasses. With the tremendous coastal development which has occurred over the past several years, many of these area have been lost or highly modified. Unlike the larger brackish marsh located north of "F' Street, this marsh supports no substantial seasonal surface water and receives only a limited amount of seasonal use by avifauna. It does, however, exhibit high potential for enhancement and could be improved by the activities within the adjacent NWR. . . Riparian Grove Riparian wetlands are a naturally limited habitat which has been heavily impacted by agriculture, urbanization and hydrologic development. These areas tend to be extremely productive and support a high faunal diversity. 3~19 9O-14JJ0701/14/91 2/) / )S-~( - I I I I I I It I I I I I I r ~ On the Rohr site, riparian habitat is represented by a small portion (0.007 acre) of a recently emergent willow grove which extends onto the adjacent "F" & "G" Street Marsh for a total size of 0.14 acre. Plants, though dense, appear to be stunted by limited water availability and lower fringes of the grove support a variety of dead trees with an understory of newly emergent Sandbar Willows. These trees were most probably killed by saltwater intrusion during recent (1986-present) drought conditions. This grove is of low stature and lacks a diverse faunal association. -, Sensitive Plants Prior disturbances of the majority of the area is probably the reason for a lower rare plant density. Table 3 (see Appendix C) lists sensitive plants known in the region. Plants marked with an asterisk indicate those that might have been found on site prior to disturbance. Currently, the only plants considered to be sensitive that Occur on the site are Southwestern Spiny Rush and California Sea-blight. The status of these species follows. Spiny Rush (Juncus acutus var. sphaerocarpus) listing: Status: CNPS List 4 Apparently stable. R-E-D Code 1-2-2 State/Fed. Status -- None - A small population of spiny rush is found Within the small swale located at the northwestern boundary of the Rohr property near "F' Street. While this stand represents the largest stand of Juncus within the Chula Vista Bayfront, it is of negligible size relative to other wetlands found throughout the plant's range. Populations of this size are not generally considered to be significant or of consequence to the overall survival of the species; however, Rohr Industries have committed to maintaining this population in its current state. California Sea-hli~ht (Suaeda esteroa) Listing: Status: CNPS List 4 R-E-D Code 1-1-1 Declining. More information needed. State/Fed. Status -- None Suaeda esteroa seems to be presently expanding into peripheral upland areas adjacent to undisturbed areas of Sweetwater Marsh. The population on the Rohr site is fairly small and is not independently significant; however, this population could be enhanced through careful management. .-. 3-20 .JtJ - /5;S' 90-14,110701/24/91 - l. I L r' L L i L f' l, " ~ 'l' '" . Sensitive Wildlife Few sensitive animals occur or have the potential for occurring within the project boundaries; however, sensitive animals which occur outside the boundaries may be affected by development of the project. For this reason, sensitive wildlife from the surrounding area are discussed, with their sensitivity status and on-site status, in Appendix C, Table 4. Species warranting additional consideration are discussed below. Agency listings include the California Department of Fish and Game, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the San Diego Non-Game Wildlife Subcommittee. Light-footed Clapper Rail (Rallus longirostris levipes) listing: CDFG (1977, 1988) - Endangered USFWS (1986) - Endangered SDNGWS (1976) - Special Concern Everett (1979) - Threatened The light-footed Clapper Rail is one of the most endangered birds in the United States with only 277 pairs found in a 1984 survey of California marshes (Zembal and Massey 1985). Recent estimates for the Sweetwater Marsh complex are 5 pairs. Status: This federally-listed endangered bird occurs in the "E" Street and Sweetwater marshes. It is likely that this bird will begin to be found in Vener Pond as well, due to the continuing conversion to saltmarsh. The"F" & "G" Street Marsh has been historically utilized by this species; but several recent investigations have failed to locate any birds in this area, The degraded conditions and high level of disturbance at this site may preclude the presence of this species. California Least Tern (Sterna antillarum browni) listing: CDFG (1977, 1988) - Endangered, Fully Protected USFWS (1986) - Endangered Everett (1979) - Threatened Breeding colonies are limited in extent, and fledgling rates are highly variable and recently very low, primarily due to heavy predation from domestic cats, dogs, horses, ravens, crows, and small raptors. Off-road vehicles have also had deleterious effects on the nesting areas. Status: This species forages over the open water along the Chula Vista Bayfront and nests on the "0" Street Fill area. Formerly, the Least Tern was a fairly common forager over Vener Pond; however, this pond is returning to salt marsh and the birds are now infrequent here. The bird is only an infrequent forager within the tidal channels of the "F" & "G" Street Marsh and does not utilize the site. 3-21 9O-UOO701/24/91 d()- /5b . I I I I I I It I I I I I I I ~ I Northern Harrier (Circus cyaneus) Listing: -.., Status: Audubon Blue List (Tate 1986) Everett (1979) - Declining Remsen (1980) - 2nd Priority This raptor has declined as a breeder in southern California due to loss of habitat. The Northern Harrier frequently forages over the site but does not nest on site or within the immediate area. Pere~rine Falcon (Falco peregrinus) Listing: CDFG (1988) - Endangered USFWS (1986) - Endangered This falcon has declined as a breeder in California due largely to the use of DDT. Status: Since DDT has been banned, their number has increased in California (Cade 1982). Peregrines have been observed on the site as migrants. A pair of Peregrines nested this year under the Coronado Bridge and may forage as far south as the site and the salt works. These falcons are often associated with bodies of water; the presence of the Sweetwater Marsh complex and San Diego Bay mudflat areas may attract them to the site as a foraging ground. -. Lon~-billed Curlew (Numenius americanus) Listing: Audubon Blue List (Tate 1986) USFWS (1986) - Category II This species is considered down in numbers by many observers; however. it is still a fairly common wintering species along the coast in San Diego County. Status: Found in low numbers within all of the saltmarsh habitats of the bayfront. this large marshbird is infrequently observed in the "F" & "G" Street Marsh -- possibly as a result of lower productivity and higher disturbance levels than the other bayfront wetlands. Beldin~'s Savannah Sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis be/dingi). Listing: CDFG (1977, 1988) - Endangered USFWS (1986) - Category II SDNGWS (1976) - Special Concern Everett (1979) . Threatened The 1986 census estimated 2,274 pairs in 27 marshes in southern California. Eight marshes have populations of 100 pairs or more, comprising 75 percent of the total. The upper marsh habitat is rare in southern California, being the easiest to fill and claim for land uses. Extirpations have Occurred in at least three locations in the last 10 years. Sixty-three percent of the marshes -- Status: 3-22 9O-J4.1XJ7 01/14/91 c20 ~!5} , [ . i. n f- I; " L r' . I f L u i I. n tJ "1 .. . 1: ~ contammg 40 percent of the individuals are in private ownership. Development proposals exist for several of these marshes; continued planned restoration activities and public acquisition are needed. One hundred forty-five pairs are known from the Sweetwater Marsh complex (Zembal et aL 1988); up from 74 pairs foUnd in 1977. With only 2.4 percent of the total marsh area. considered, Sweetwater Marsh hosts a density of 2.3 pairs per hectare and 5.2 percent of the state's total number of Belding's Savannah Sparrows. The Belding's Savannah Sparrow inhabits salt marsh areas below the confluence of Nestor Creek and the Otay River. It has also been observed on sparsely vegetated levees within Western Saltworks. Surveys conducted in the spring of 1990 place the resident "F' & "G" Street Marsh population at two pairs (Pacific Southwest Biological Services, 1990b). This is below the site's presumed carrying capacity; it is believed that disturbance and predation are the principal factors limiting population levels at this location. IMPACfS Development of the project would result in the construction of a three-story office complex and surface parking to cover the majority of the site. The project applicants have incorporated a number of measures into the project to minimize biological impacts and enhance the quality of buffers between the project and sensitive wetland areas. These include (Sadler 1990): · Control of runoff and sediment during the construction of the projectiiiiiI over its life ...... · Enhancement of the weedy buffer area . Expansion of wetlands along the western boundary of the site in conjunction with site drainage improvements Where these proposed measures serve to reduce impacts associated with the project, they are specified in the mitigation section. Specific measures proposed by the project applicant include Mitigation Recommendations No. 1 through No.5. The following impact analysis assumes implementation of all proposed measures. 3-23 r:20 ~ )5'V' 90-14.00702/01/91 . I I I I I I It I I I I I I I ~ I Drainage and Water Quality Impacts The proposed project would modify the existing drainage patterns within the Rohr property in a manner that would divert surface drainage from the site away from the various wetland areas located to the west. Instead,. this drainage would be directed through a series of filters and a vegetated swale prior to directing discharge into existing storm drains. The amount of runoff flowing into the "F" & G" Street Marsh from the project is relatively inconsequential; however it constitutes the major surface watershed for the brackish and riparian wetlands present both on site and within the adjacent refuge lands. -., Decreased Freshwater Input It is anticipated that the proposed project would result in a decrease in surface water discharge from the site to all existing wetland areas. This discharge is currently very minor due to the loose and highly permeable soils found on the site, the small drainage basin, and the lack of well-defined drainage courses. On- and off-site potentially disrupted watershed basins for the various wetlands include 9.3 acres to the 0.14 acre willow riparian grove; 3.3 acres to the 0.16 acre brackish marsh; and, 2.1 acres to the "F" & "G" Street Marsh. Impacts to the watershed of the brackish marsh and "F' & "G" Street Marsh are expected to be minor due to their limited contribution freshwater input makes relative to groundwater and tidal sources. The loss of seasonal freshwater input to the riparian grove would be expected to result in a reduction in extent and vigor of this grove, but would be unlikely to result in the complete elimination of this stand. The losses and degradation anticipated could include from 0.05 to the entire 0.14 acre, including 0.007 acre of direct grading losses. Loss of the amount of riparian grove on site (0.007 acre) would not be considered a significant impact. Impacts to the portion of the 0.14 acre willow riparian grove on NWR would, however, constitute a significant adverse effect. ~ Contaminant Discharie Identified with the development of residential, commercial, or other human high use areas, is a corresponding increase in the presence of automobiles, fertilizers, pesticides and other human-associated practices and products. Features such as irrigation and development- related impermeable surfaces create additional amounts of freshwater runoff, thus providing effective means to transport any human-associated byproducts. -- 3-24 90-1<.00701/24/91 JO~Jf'1 - r' , . L r . I j ,- L . I L [' " , L g 1 ., a . .. Gasoline and petroleum residues, particularly from automobiles, are associated with streets and parking areas. These products are typically derived from a slow and regular process of vehicle emission and engine dripping composed of the less toxic fractions of fuels, as the more toxic fractions vaporize very quickly. Nevertheless, the potential level of disturbance caused by such chemicals draining into the Marsh is considerable. The fact that these chemicals are not easily broken down, and further, thafthey are not water soluble, allows these products to persist in a more-or-Iess original state as they are transported by freshwater runoff to downstream wetlands and waterways. Once in the wetlands, these pollutants can have a wide range of effects upon resident organisms. These effects range from behavioral responses such as emigration from, lack of immigration to, or modified utilization of polluted areas; to reduction of growth rates and reproductive success, increased susceptibility to parasitism or disease, and in the extreme case, death of respective organisms, species, and/or replacement of representative dominant species by more pollutant resistant species. Hydrocarbons have been identified as effective inhibitors of chemoreceptors (nerve endings or sense organs sensitive to chemical stimuli) which may further inhibit an organism's abilities to locate food, detect predators, or identify potential mates. The use of fertilizers and pesticides by local residents also holds potential for altering the diversity and abundance of the organisms occupying the Marsh. Fertilizers supply one or more nutrient sources which are normally limiting to maximum plant growth; typically nitrogen (in the form of nitrate, nitrite, ammonia, or urea), phosphorus (in the f?rm of phosphate), sulfate, "B" vitamins and trace metals. The consequences of these excessive nutrients entering wetlands or waterways will be an accelerated eutrophication (the process of producing an environment that favors plant over anirnal life) of the system. Under minimal input conditions, there would be a promotion of the growth of plants in excess of that which would be possible under the normally nitrogen-limited conditions prevailing within the wetlands (Zedler, Williams and Boland, 1986). In an extreme case, oxygen levels in the water can be so reduced that the result is a massive die-off of the fish and invertebrates. The large amounts of decaying organisms also promote excessive bacteria . growth which further unbalances a marsh habitat. Another possible consequence of the influx of excessive nutrients into the Marsh is that it may allow plant species, which normally would be unable to compete with the normal environmental dominants, the ability to out-compete and displace resident species. A 3~25 90-14.00701/14/91 ~] :2tJ~JJO II . I I I I I I It I I I I I I I ,. I change in the flora would result in the alteration of the representative fauna inhabiting the wetlands. Many organisms are intricately tied to a particular plant for food, shelter, or to fulfill requirements for reproduction. Loss of a particular plant or suite of plants may' therefore foster the elimination of the expected fauna of an undisturbed wetland system. --- Influx of pesticides into wetlands or waterways through freshwater runoff can also have devastating effects on the Marsh community. The effects can be manifested in the outright death of organisms or impacts such as loss of reproductive success. While the historic examples of DDT on avian reproduction are unlikely to be repeated, they remain classic examples of potential hazards. Despite these concerns, the fertilizers and pesticides used today are generally safer in terms oi"their consequences to untargeted species, and application methods have advanced to the point that their use by qualified horticulturists allow them to be used more safely than in past years. Used properly, there is generally low likelihood of such compounds reaching the wetlands and waterways in quantities which could prove significantly deleterious to wildlife, or to the point where the balance within the marsh might be upset. - Sediment Accretion and Erosion As indicated, the proposed project would alter the existing drainage patterns and surface flow volumes on the Rohr parcel. These changes could potentially lead to increased erosion within the uplands and deposition of sediments within the lower wetland basins. While sedimentation and erosion are natural occurrences and even required for the development of coastal wetland systems, the rate of sedimentation experienced by coastal systems has been drastically altered by human activity. Agricultural activities, urbanization, stream channelization, and construction activities have all served to increase erosion and sediment transport rates throughout the drainage basins feeding coastal wetlands. This . increased rate of erosion has led to a corresponding increase in sedimentation rate within alluvial portions of the drainage system. These areas are characteristically the wetlands. Deposition of sediments within coastal wetland areas has been identified as a critical problem in numerous portions of southern California, including the nearby Tijuana Estuary (Zedler et al., 1986). Even the Sweetwater Marsh has been heavily impacted by sediments transported from upstream areas. Most recently, the joint I-S/SR-S4 freeway/flood control .-........ , 3-26' 9O-14.1X1701/24/91 c2{l- )6 ! - , , . I r! r' Ii , . i f' , ~ . 1 j. L F i L H ~ .. > ;1; jj channel project has introduced heavy sediment loads into the river and the marsh system (Merkel, pers. obs.). Both gradual and rapid sediment depositional patterns are active in most areas. Construction Impacts The coristruction phase of the proposed project has the potential for the greatest impact to . the natural systems, is likely to lead to the most rapid changes in sediment transport, and has the highest potential for effecting a change in the local water quality as it relates to biological resources. Such changes have already been discussed and include increased potential for changes in the pattern of erosion and deposition and potential for both elevated turbidity levels in the bay and releases of toxins from the construction area into the surrounding wetlands. The project applicants have proposed the implementation of silt fencing, sandbagging, and erection of a protective berm with a suitable capacity to hold site runoff. The drainage swale is to be constructed early in the site grading to serve as a large capacity desiltation basin. These measures would function to control sedimentation and erosion resulting from natural rainfall events. In the event that substantial construction de-watering is required, however, containment of silts and suspended sediments would be required. It is unknown whether these measures would be capable of adequately controlling sedimentation from these sources, although suitable control capabilities exist through partitioned basins and stand-pipe drains. For this reason, impacts of the project on sedimentation and erosion are considered to be significant and mitigable. Wildlife Resource Impacts The proposed project would alter the character of the "F' & "G" Street Marsh region in a variety of ways, including increasing human presence in the area and converting habitat areas. Approximately 11.5 acres of disturbed open field habitat would be converted to 9.4 . acres of urbanized land and 2.1 acres of enhanced upland and wetland habitats. The 800- foot long and 42-foot high structure would be located on the project site. This building would be isolated from the majority of the existing wetlands by a minimum 100-foot buffer zone, and would be set back a minimum of 50 feet from the.boundary of the NWR (the "F' 3:27 90-14.00701/24/91 elf) -j" J- - I I I I I I It I I I I r I I ~ & "G" Street Marsh). For most of its length, the building would be over 200 feet from the eastern boundary of the Marsh. -., Avian Fliehl Patterns Because of the proximity to areas of high waterbird use, disruption of flight patterns was considered to be a major concern associated with the development of the open lands of the Bayfront. Prior investigation in an adjacent parcel addressed this issue and determined that development of a higher intensity than is proposed for the project site would not result in significant adverse impacts to avian flight patterns (Pacific Southwest Biological Services, 1990b) with the exception of raptor activity and broadly defined gull flight corridors. In the case of raptors:building placement is considered secondary to the loss of foraging habitat usage which would result from development of the site and general human encroachment. This point is discussed below. Because of the overriding issue of habitat unsuitability for raptors under developed site conditions, impacts to raptor flight activities are not considered to be significant. - For gulls, flight patterns appear to be regional in nature and not specific to any set \ corridors. Further, numerous studies have cited the structu're avoidance behavior of gulls wherein they tend to fly around or rise over impediments. Collisions with structures by this group have been reported to be extremely low. Under the currently proposed project, gull flights would also be little affected. Although reported collisions with structures have been extremely low, the use of reflective glass on large windows and the resultant resemblance of the glass to open sky or water can lead to inflation in the mortality of numerous bird groups, including a host of waterbirds. Because of this, sites located adjacent to highly reflective water with structure orientation towards the west, could encourage collision impacts if reflective glass were used on the buildings. In the absence of such reflective materials in the proposed project, collision impacts would be insignificant. -- 3-28' 9O-J4.00701/24/91 .2tJ'/{} - fi ! . , . , .. , I . Human/Pet Presence Impacts The construction and continued presence of the proposed project could result in a variety of negative impacts on the quality of the adjacent NWR and could decrease the use of the area by both resident and migratory avifauna. Development of the area would reduce the snoreline buffer zone and make the wildlife area more prone to the long-term impacts associated with habitat dynamics. Large stands of habitat can withstand minor disturbance and still sustain a population which is large, healthy, and diverse enough to ensure the long-term survival of the species in the area. Deleterious edge effects and fragmentation caused by roads and development in such areas can make some species much more vulnerable to local extinction (Soule & Wilcox, 1980). $1lgHgBi!~;[~ii.smegJiiagtm~;il~,j;~H,9IfipsgH!tqlHg;j.!ffi9ng!~[~9SHfllHlliRfP)SS!f the presence of a large number of people in the area could eventually lead to site degradation by humans and human associated animals, primarily domestic dogs and cats, which inevitably find their way over, through, and under even well-tended and mended fences. Insimilar habitats on Delaware Bay researchers found that only 30 percent of the shorebirds present remained undisturbed on a beach when human activity was allowed (Burger, 1986), Dogs not only flush birds along shorelines, but are also prone to swimming or wading to otherwise isolated nesting areas and can accidentally or intentionally destroy nests. Secretive rails are very sensitive to human presence and, if not killed, will leave a site if disturbed regularly. Such is likely to have been the case at the "F' & "G" Street Marsh (Jorgensen, pers. comm. 1988). In the bayfront, it is not uncommon to see persons with multiple dogs turn their animals loose to chase birds. Feral dogs and apparently abandoned animals are als~ quite common in the area. Domestic cats have been found to be major predators in some suburban residential areas. One study estimated that domestic cats in Britain account for over 70 million deaths to small vertebrates annually(Churcher and Lawton, 1989), thirty to fifty percent of which are birds. . Although the proposed development would not result in the direct increase in domestic animals associated with residential development, human activities, including providingJood and shelter for wandering and/or homeless animaJ~, ...Hltend to result in increased densities of domesticated animals. Adverse effects of the increased densities of these animals could include losses of small shorebirds, the Belding's Savannah Sparrow, and 3-29 c1IJ -/if 1 9O-UOO701/24/91 . I I I I I I It I I I I I I I ,. I juveniles of all species from the "F' & "G" Street Marsh. Indirect impacts of enhanced pet and human associated predator attraction to the area are considered significant. -... The increase in human activities on the site would be expected to lead to little if any disturbance of existing wetland habitat usage, however it could potentially affect the values of future enhancement efforts on the eastern boundary of the NWR. As designed, the project has limited access on the western side of the proposed building to low lying patio areas within the central portion of the building. These patios are to be buffered from direct view of the adjacent marsh lands by mounds supporting native scrub vegetation. Properly implemented, this design would provide suitable buffering of wetland habitats from human disturbance associated with the proposed project. The potential impacts of increased human activities normally associated with a project in such a sensitive environment are considered to be adequately mitigated by the proposed project design. A beneficial impact is that it is probable that the presence of the professional center project would decrease the amount of vandalism, illegal dumping and habitat degradation. Illegal off-road vehicle use of the project area would also be eliminated with site development. -, Alteration of Predator/Competition/Prey Rei:imes Of primary concern for this issue is the generation of food and/or trash which will attract opportunistic scavengers, such as Common Ravens, a variety of gulls, European Starling, Black Rats and Virginia Opossum; all of which are known as aggressive predators/ competitors. Their increased presence could adversely impact the more sensitive species in the area. The effects of non-native plants used in landscaping designs may also serve to attract predatory or competing birds and mammals; however, the landscape materials proposed for the project (Wallace, Roberts and Todd, 1990 as cited in Sadler, 1990), are considered to be compatible with the region and of minimal concern with respect to providing predator habitats. The proposed office building itself, however, would be located adjacent to the buffer zone for the NWR and would have the potential for creating both real and perceived threats of predation. Such structures may provide suitable hunting perches and nest sites for avian .-.~. 3.30 90-14.00701(24/91 ./ dO~Jft,)7 . ! I' l' r - , - u r - l_ r' i .) . I I L [ , L I cr .. ~.-.. r:": ~ predators such as the American Kestrel, Red-tailed Hawk, and Common Raven. All of these species have keen vision and are effective hunters both from perches and on the wing (D. Grout, pers. comm.). Under the project development plan. the proposed 42-foot high building encroaches as close as 50 feet to the NWR, with a set-back from existing sensitive wetlands of approximately 250 feet. In the case of coastal locations such as the Chula Vista Bayfront, it has been suggested that buildings of 4 stories or higher provide effective predator perches for Peregrine Falcons which normally opt to hunt from the highest available structures (P. Bloom, pers. comm.). In the case of the project proposed l~ 44-foot building, however, Peregrine Falcons are not expected to be among the raptors using it as a primary perch as they would probably focus on the existing nearby, and higher, Building 61 (approximately 73 feet). Regardless of the issue of real threat, the proposed structure was also evaluated as a perceived threat that would result in avoidance of the area by birds frequently sought by avian predators. Habituation (development of tolerance through prolonged exposure) to predators and predator-like objects has been demonstrated in some avian species (Schleidt, 1961 and Hinde 1954a, 1954b as cited in Morse 1980), but in other instances, birds confronted with changing stimuli or new stimuli tend to be slower to habituate or in some instances wrongly habituate and are more readily preyed upon. The results of non- habituation to unreal threats can also have serious consequences on prey species. A species which spends much of its time reacting to "ghost-predators" is re-allocating time that could be spent on other behavioral requirements. Morse (1980:133) noted that: A prey species that must spend most of its time foraging, as often happens during winter or the breeding season, could be excluded from an area even if it was rarely taken by the predator. Harassment by the predator [or a "ghost-predator"] could have an effect on the size of the prey population similar to that which would be caused by actual predation, although the predator population would gain nothing. _ Shalter (1975, 1978) has examined the habituation of members of the family galliformes (e.g., coots and rails) and flycatchers in the field and has determined that habituation results where stimuli are static in position. The threshold beyond which birds will significantly alter - their use patterns as a result of building placement and asso<;.iated stimuli is highly variable. Types of structures, extent and type of associated human activities, and the avian species 3-31 c2tJ-) iP? 90-14.00701/24/91 . I I I I I I It I I I I I I I ,. I considered, all play key roles in determining the impacts of building placement. Some "human resistant" birds such as Killdeer, Mallards and a host of gulls may not vacate the area under even the most intense development. Other birds, which are highly sensitive to human intrusion, may completely disappear from the area with even minor development. Still others maYlllodify their behavior in proximity to the structures to. a deg~ee resulting in detrimental effects. - Belding's Savannah Sparrows have been found to readily abandon egg incubation when nests are approached (A. White, 1985 pers. comm.). The effects of buildings, bridges, or other large Structures in the absence of human activities have not been well studied, however, there is indication that these features may play important roles in bird behavior. The general lack of avian nesting adjacent to the Rohr Building 61 bordering the "F' & "G" Street Marsh is believed to be the result of both real and perceived threats of predation; however, in the absence of any predator controls in this area, these factors are not readily separable. Based on the information available, and an examination of "height:bird distance" ratios for nine large bayfront structures, an attempt was made to identify patterns of avian use in the vicinity of structures. The lack of pre-structure bird utilization and behavior data, the wide diversity of habitats adjacent to the structures, and the lack of control over non-structure associated disturbances all limit the applicability of this comparison, For lack of ll)ore comparable examples with both pre-project and post-project quantitative data, however,this information has been used in this analysis and prior analyses (Pacific Southwest Biological Services, 1990a). Figure 3 in Appendix C identifies the results of the site examinations conducted. - The results of this study indicated that for tall buildings (e.g., over 50 feet), a constant 0.6 height:distance ratio appeared to hold true. When buildings were lower in stature (e.g., 30- 50 feet), the patterns appeared to breakdown and structure encroachment was less of a factor in determining bird usage. Gulls and more disturbance tolerant species were found to uniformly range closer than would be dictated by strict adherence to the extrapolated ratio, and some more intolerant species would engage in active behaviors (i.e., foraging, '. ,', ,,' .:. . "',- -i -..,. .': , _ , .'.... v ',_.'- ,____,;,_,A~..,.'~..," '_.'_ display) within this range<;however, few observations were made of species engaged in such non-wary behaviors as loafing. --"\ 3-32 Jt}- J if; 7 90-14.110701/24/91 - ; , " . " ~ ~ l ] . ". . ~ a Applying the 0.6 height:distance ratio to the proposed project indicated that perceived threats might be expected within the swale and buffer zones of the project site as well as low utility uplands of the NWR, but these threats would not be expected to extend into the sensitive wetland areas (see Figure 3-2). The extent to which the proposed development would manifest true predator threats is difficult to determine, but is of high concern due to the potential for losses of endangered species from the NWR marshlands. For these reasons, impacts of the project on the existing balance of competitors, predators and prey are considered to be significant. Alteration of Habitat Use Areas The proposed project would result in the ~limination of approximately 11.6 acres of overgrown fallow agricultural fields. This area would be replaced by approximately 9.5 acres of developed lands and 2.1 acres of native succulent sage scrub and seasonal freshwater wetlands. There is expected to be a decrease in open field associated species and an increase in urban affiliates such as House Sparrows and Rock Doves (domestic pigeons). Such conversions could result in both losses of prey species and encroachment impacts to foraging raptors. Due to the limited extent of similar coastal habitats, and the high diversity and numbers of raptors utilizing the undeveloped areas of the Chula Vista Bayfront, the loss of the site for raptor foraging would be considered an incremental adverse effect of the project. By itself, this loss would not be considered significant due to the existing availability of the remainder of the Bayfront uplands which support high raptor use. The development of this area would, however, incrementally contribute to the significant cumulative erosion of these resource values. Threatened and Endangered Species While the Rohr property does not support any federal- or state-listed endangered species, . those which occur in the vicinity and have the potential for being impacted by the proposed project have beenC()nsidered in..this analysis.. The Light-footed Clapper Rail, California :.:,", ;,.;;,.'...1:. .':'_'_1,. .':.......'...'..... -("0'" " . : Least Tern,' arid Peregrine; falcoIl,all pmy both federal~ and state-listed endangered species status. The Belding's Savannah Sparrow is state-listed as endangered but does not carry federal threatened or endangered status. The following section serves as a summary of . 3'3~ c20~/~~ 90-14.00701/24/91 r ' expected impacts to these species. Detailed analysis should be reviewed in other portions of this report. ~ I California Least Tern (Sterna a:ntillarum browni) I' ~ . r r j . " L. r' l_ ~~ : ~ 1 , ;. The California Least Tern occurs seasonally within the Chula Vista Bayfront and is a nesting species on the "D" Street Fill north of the Rohr property, and on the Chula Vista Wildlife Island south of the Rohr site. This species forages along the shallows of the San Diego Bay shoreline and (infrequently) has been known to forage into the marshlands of the "F" & "G" Street Marsh. This species is opportunistic in nature and is resistant to disturbance away. from the nest site. This species is not expected to be impacted by the proposed project. Light-footed Clapper Rail (Rallus longirostris levipes) The tight-footed Clapper Rail is a resident of the "E" Street and Sweetwater Marshes and was historically a resident of the "P' & "G" Street Marsh. This species is rather secretive in nature and tends to avoid areas of high or even moderate levels of human activity. Nesting is typically accomplished in areas of high marsh hummocks or low lying upland fringes. Nests are often susceptible to flooding and mammalian and reptilian predation. Adults and young alike are susceptible to avian predation. During periods of extremF tides, Clapper Rails are forced into upland fringes or onto floating/emergent debris: where disturbance and predation threats are magnified. -, Because the Clapper Rail is not currently a resident within the "P' & "G" Street Marsh, the effects of increased predator abundance resulting from the proposed project would not be expected to lead to direct impacts to this species. Instead, an indirect result of the project would be to further reduce the potential for ever re-establishing Clapper Rails in the "P' & "G" Street Marsh. This impact is considered to be significant and rnitigable. Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus) The Peregrine Falcon is a skilled avian predator which tends to hunt fromhlgh perches and, ,-; . ,;,; .":' .o;,;.'{,'";'-I\,:;;'"j l.J;tt:-, ..,,\;,;.;.~ .1;>"",.-,_, primarilYdakes birds in'f1ight!"This species is fairly 'tolerant of human activities and has been successfully introduced into urban areas--preying primarily on pigeons. During 1989, the first successful San Diego County nesting in a 47 year period oCcurred on the Coronado """"\ 3-34 10 ~ / k ! 9O-l4.00701/14/91 . I I I I I I II I I I I I I ~ I Bridge. Marshland and expansive mudflat areas found in south San Diego Bay attract peregrines due to the abundance of waterbirds. Due to the relatively low stature of the proposed development, it would not be expected to provide perching sites 'or potential nesting habitat for this species. The loss of open field habitat resulting from the proposed project would not be expected to substantially affect this species. For this reason, no significant impacts to this species are anticipated. Beldin~'s Savannah Sparrow (Passerculus sandwicltensis rostratus) The Belding's Savannah Sparrow is a resident bird of all of the salicornia dominated salt marshes found within the Chula Vista Bayfronl. Twopairs were found to be active in the "F' & "G" Street Marsh during the 1990 breeding season. This number is well below the carrying capacity of the habitat and it is expected that disturbance and predation are the principal factors acting to limit population size in this area. This species, like the Clapper Rail, has been characterized as being relatively secretive in nature and rather susceptible to human and pet impacts. Approaches to the nest site may lead to nest abandonment or accidental nest damage (A. White, pers. comm. 1985, Zembal et aL 1988). Also similar to the Light-footed Clapper Rail, the Belding's Savannah is susceptible to predation at or near the nest by mammals, reptiles, and wading birds such as the Great Blue Heron. The proposed project would be expected to have significant impacts on this species through the enhancement of predator activities, including those of domestic cats. This impact is mitigable. Construction Impacts The construction of the proposed project will involve substantial earthwork, de-watering, lInd building construction. This project is expected to generate considerable noise and increased human activities for an extended period of time. While evidence suggests that continuous or repetitive noise has little effect on avian activities (Pacific Southwest Biological Services l .... ,', ',':' "', '.. , 1987a, b, and F; Dooling 1982; Dooling et aL 1971; Awbrey et al.1980; Awbrey pers,. co~m. 1986), inconsistent noise or noise associated with visual stimuli may have cumulative impacts on avian behavior. 3-35 J{)// 70 90-14.007 01/24/91 r i I , . I L i r' f L. r' .~ " J T I Human activities within the development area are likely to be extremely high during the construction phases. Limiting work areas under such conditions is often times difficult and "wandering" contractors may cause substantial damage without recognizing their impacts. This is especially true during avian nesting seasons when birds are establishing nests through the actual fledgling of young. ~ MITIGATION MEASUREs Potential impacts of the proposed project have been identified in the preceding section. Many of these impacts may be lessened or mitigated to a level of less than significant through the project design itself. Some of these measures(1-5) have alTt~ady been discussed " .- <....' '-,. ,. , or proposed through a variety of interactions between the developer, the City and the EIR consultants. These are stated below where they are of value in off-setting or minimizing potential for impacts of the proposed project. Potentially significant impacts resulting from project construction and/or operation include: . Loss of freshwater input to the 0.14 acre riparian grove located in part on adjacent NWR lands (mitigable through implementation of Mitigation Measure No.7). .., · Contamination of the Marsh by parking area and street runoff (mitigated through the incorporated project design element of silt and grease traps [Mitigation Nos. 2 and 3] and through Mitigation Measure Nos. 11 and 12). . Modification of increase in the rate of sedimentation within alluvial portions of the drainage system (mitigable through the incorporated project design element [Mitigation Nos. 2, 3 and 4] of silt and grease traps and the desiltation basin, construction of the applicant-proposed berm, and presence of a "biologically aware" construction monitor [Mitigation Measure No.6]). · Impacts of enhanced pet associated predator attraction to the study area, and human presence (mitigable through implementation of Mitigation Measure . Measures Nos. S, 9, 10, 13 and 17). . Impacts to the existing balance of competitors, predators and prey (mitigable throUghimplem~ntation of Mitigation Measures Nos.S, 9, 10,13, 14 and 16). '.,' . . An incremental contribution to cumulative losses to raptor foraging areas (no mitigation proposed).- ') 3~36 9O-J.l.OO702/01/91 -10-/71 . I I I I I I " I a I I I I I ,- j · An indirect impact to the light-footed Clapper Rail by reducing its potential for re-establishment in the "F' & "G" Street Marsh (mitigable through implementation of Mitigation Measures Nos. 8, 9, 10, 14, 16, 17). · Increased disturbance to, and predators of the Belding's Savannah Sparrow (mitigable through implementation of Mitigation Measures Nos. 8, 9, 10 and 13). " Recommendations: 1. The proposed project must include a buffer of restored native scrub vegetation between the building and the adjacent NWR lands. This buffer must be ,isolated from human intrusion and should further be implemented with swales and mounds as designed to reduce visual impacts from activities occurring on the patio areas. 2. All post-construction drainage must be directed through large volume silt and grease traps prior to being shunted into the freshwater detention swale. The trap(s) placed on line(s) entering the detention basin must be triple- chambered. 3. The silt and grease traps must be maintained regularly with thorough cleaning to be conducted in late September or early October and as needed through the winter and spring months. Maintenance must be done by removal of wastes rather than flushing, as is unfonunately often the case. :City inspections of these traps must be conducted, possibly through the mitigation monitoring program, to ensure that maintenance is occurring as required. 4. Desiltation basins large enough to handle storm water runoff must be maintained during the construction phase sothat no silts are allowed to leave the construction site. Construction and planting of the drainage swale early in the project grading phase would assist in this measure. In addition, construction de-watering should be directed into a basin with a filter-fabric, gravel leach system, or stand-pipe drains, so that clear water is released from the site through the regular desiltation basins. 5. Landscape plant materials to be utilized in the project area must be from the lists provided by the developer. Should species substitutions be desired, these must be submitted to the City landscape architect for review. Plant materials which are known to be invasive in salt and brackish marshes such, as Limonium or Carpobrotus species, or those which are known to be attractive as <lenning, nesting or roosting sites, for-predators such" as Washingtonia. or ", Cortilderia, must be" restricted from use. ' '..," 3-37' c2f) ~ / ? c:L 9O-U.1XI701/24/91 10. A full time enforcement staff of two or more officers should be funded by revenues generated by the project and other development within the Bayfront, or by other funding mechanisms, to conduct the predator management program, ensure compliance, issue citations, and conduct routine checks to ensure maintenance of other mitigation requirements (i.e., silt/grease trap maintenance, etc.). Such officers should work closely with the USFWS in enforcement issues as they relate to Federal Reserve Lands. Officers should have training in predator control and should possess the necessary skills, permits and authority to trap and remove problem predators. It. is . recommended that these officers be accountable to a multi-jurisdictional . agency/property owner advisory board setup to .oversee reso~ce protection "., .,. of the ~ntire midbayfront carea,;'Thc''midbayfrontarea is thafarea within the '. ". boundaries of the Sweetwater River, Bay Bouievard, "G" Street, and the San Diego Bay. The juriSdictions/property owners which should be included' in this board are the City of Chula Vista, the San Diego Unified Port District, 7. 1; L r" l . L. I ~ " "" .. 6. A ''biologically aware" construction monitor must be present for all phases of grading and installation of drainage systems. The monitor must be employed through the City and would report directly to a specific responsible person in the Engineering, Planning or Community Development Department if construction activities fail to met the conditions outlined or should unforeseen problems arise which require immediate action or stopping of the construction activities. This monitor must continue monitoring on a reduced basis during' actual outside building construction. ,-" Re-establishment of 0.14 acre of riparian vegetation within the on-site drainage swale must be accomplished to mitigate the hydrologic isolation and direct impacts of the project upon the 0.14 acre of willow riparian grove straddling the NWR border. Management of the riparian grove to retain wildlife resources must be coordinated with the National Wildlife Refuge Manager regarding maintenance. .Vegetation types must be included in the Landscape Plan with sandbar willow the principal species used in this habitat area. Human access to marshlands and buffer areas must be restricted through vegetation barriers and rails around the patio areas. Additional human/pet encroachment must be restricted through fencing and native vegetation on mounds along the western property boundary. The project should be a participant in a predator management program for the Chula Vista Bayfront region to control domestic predators as well. as wild animal predators. This program should utilize the Connors (1987) predator management plan as a basis, but should be" tailored to fit the needs. of the proposed development. This plan should include the use of fines as an enforcement tool to control human and pet activities. The plan shquld be comprehensive and should include management of predators within the adjacent NWR as well as the proposed development areas. """ , '1 3"38 SJO.U()()702/01/91 ~() - /73 . I I I I I I II I t I I I I ~ I the Bayfront Conservancy Trust, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the California Department of Fish and Game, Rohr Industries, and the owner of the majority of the Midbayfront Uplands (Chula Vista Investors). 11. Fertilizers, pesticides and her~icides utilized within the landscaping areas of the project must be of the "rapidly biodegradable variety and must be approved by the Environmental Protection Agency for use near wetland areas. 12. All landscape chemical applications must be accomplished by a person who is a state-certified applicator. 13. Annual funds to be paid by Rohr into an assessment district set up by the multi-jurisdictional/property owner advisory board should be designated for the purpose of trash control, repair and maintenance of drainage facilities, fencing, the predator control program and mitigation programs for the project. 14. Open garbage containers should be restricted and all dumpsters must be totally enclosed to avoid attracting avian and mammalian predators and scavengers to the area. Garbage should be hauled away as often as possible. 15. Buildings should utilize non-reflective glass and bold architectural lines which are readily observable by birds. A film glass manufactured by 3M or a suitable substitute are recommended. 16. No extraneous ledges upon which raptors could perch or nest can be included on the western side of the proposed building. Ledges facing the west should not exceed two inches in width. Additionally, the roof crests which~ are exposed to the wetlands must be covered with an anti-perch material such as Nixalite. A commitment to correct any additional problem areas should be obtained should heavy incidence of perching be observed on the buildings or in landscaping materials. 17. Outside lighting must be directed away from marsh areas or reflecting faces of the western side of the proposed building. Lights should be limited to the minimum required for security on the western side of the building. ANALYSIS OF SIGNIFICANCE To minimize the disturbance factors associated with construction, the project applicant has proposed a variety of measures to control construction associated disturbances including silt fences, work area delineation, desiltation basins, and construction monitors to control human activities and ensure implementation of other mitigation measures. The inclusion of the above recommendations would mitigate the expected impacts of proposed project 3-39 -2 [J ~17~/ 9O-U,IXl701/U/91 construction and operation, and human encroachment to a level of less than significant at the project level if properly implemented and well-enforced. These recommendations would .-, also mitigate the potential impacts of the project to drainage and water quality, as these issues relate to biological resources. . ' " '" ", I One significant' cumulative impact remains which is the incremental loss of raptor foraging habitat. No mitigation is possible for this impact. ... .-. 1 , .(., P'.F'" L'" ) 3-4Ct 90-14.00701/24/91 .20 -/7.5 . i -, . ~ i ! ~ ,e 33 AESTIIETICS/VISUAL OUALITY EXISTING CONDmONS The project site for Rohr Industries is located within the City of Chula Vista approximately 1,400 feet from the' coastline of the San Diego Bay. A small area of tidal wetlands is included within the southwestern boundary of the site. The project area consists of a relatively flat and uniform upland that is currently undeveloped but has been historically used for agricultUre. Because of the relatively open nature of the project area, the project locale can be seen from numerous off-site locations (see Figure ~3). Current vegetative cover includes tumbleweeds aild immature palm trees (see Figure 3-4, photograph A). The project site is located within the Midbayfront subarea of the Chula Vista Bayfront Local Coastal Program (LCP) (refer to land use section and existing certified LCP [1985]). The surrounding landscapes are diversified in character and include the San Diego Bay and open space to the west and north, respectively, and industrial warehouses (Rohr) to the south (see Figure 3-4, photograph A). Immediately adjacent to the eastern site boundary are transmission towers, railroad tracks, a parking lot and additional Rohr buildings; further to the east is a. mix of urban residential/commercial uses across Interstate 5 (1-5). Several restaurants are located to the northeast, along Bay Boulevard, which have open to partially obstructed views of the project site (see Figure 3-4, photograph B) including thei Soup Exchange, EI Torito, and Anthony's. Elevation and existing vegetation contribute to the visual buffer between these uses and the project site. The proposed project site is visible from a number of public viewing locations including 1-5, Bay Boulevard, Bayside Park, "F Street, the ChuIa Vista Nature Interpretative Center, a small city park at "F Street and Bay Boulevard, as well as a number of dispersed residential development. The project site is currently visible from the northern end of Bayside Park, located to the southwest, ala distanCe of approximately 0.5 mile from the site (see Figure . . :. . ":~' . '.<',:. " .- ;,. " '.,'. j.'. . ,,' ,. . .. . .. " ,'.' .-I:'~'. '_ - ~". '. .)- 3-5, photograph c). ViewS of the site are possible from along 1-5 southbound between 24th ..street and"E~ Street (see Figure ~5, photograph D). Unobstructed views are also possible ,,/-"',::'o.i.'~ 'f::";',,;:: ;,;:_,'4;';0-:,:::-,~, ; ",-:;.::.. " "-' --~.,; ,'-.'-.:,:,:',:~;::')h,~-':,-':r:<:'\ -,0;';":>,:,: . from the Q1u1a~~,l':'Iatur~Interpreuve qnter 10?tedapprg~E~~~Y,9~ImiIe from the site (see Figure 3-6, photograph E)." " '" 3-41 ro.UOOB 01/14/91 02t/~)? k ~ Rohr llui1djnr;f -. ", , i" i) A. Southern view Of site from "F" StreeL -- -, B. <" -- SoiliiiWest vieWfidin 1fi:'l;ffi#iiIi;ivii.'!~,,, ;-~ -.., ,)tJ- /7 ? Figure 3-4 . ! ( : [j r- b " '-" " . 1 ) ~ , '. With respect to residential areas, the project~ite can be seen from the Jade Bay mobile home park, the Park Regency Apartments and from a condominium complex located along Woodlawn Avenue. Views from both the Jade Bay mobile home park and the upper stories of the unnamed condominiums; located along Woodlawn Avenue approximately 0.8 mile northeast of the site,. are intermittent in nature. Apartment windows with southern exposures on third~d fourth story levels would have the best possible views towards the site (see Figure 3-6, photograph F and Figure 3-7, photograph G). Existing views from the Park Regency Apartments, approximately 0.3 mile east of the site, are partially obstructed by existing buildings, vegetation, the elevation of 1-5 and a bordering stand of eucalyptus trees along the freeway. q >''''","" '" Due to the proximity of the project site to the San Diego Bay, some views toward the site are of high scenic interest. Views to the site from restaurants, a hotel and a small public park to the northeast are open. Distant views to the San Diego Bay from these locations are also generally open. Views to the north from the site are unobstructed (see Figure 3-7, photograph H). Intervening industrial buildings, warehouses, and 1-5 partially obstruct views from south and east of the site, and those structures dominate the landscape .character in these directions. IMPACTS Project Visual Characteristics The office complex is proposed to be a total of 245,000 square feet, and a height of 42 feet. The height and square footage of the office building for this site are in conformance with the density, square footage, and height standards set by the City of Chula Vista LCP. Exterior construction materials will include plaster and stone with earthtone colors. No reflective glass will be used on the west face of the bl1ilding., Glass specifications for the other sides of the building have not been determined.'; ;-< . . , ,~n the interest of protecting the 0.4 acre area of the tidal~e~dsgocated()n the southwest .. '.....-.. - . _ ,~<_, ,: .... -',' , c ..-,:, "'.,-.:- .... ......., ",',,'" -,-; ':",:"1'" '....'-., ,"'.', ':., .. :.,-"" ',,:, .....cJ portion of the site) from polluted surfacewatei'runoff,.theoffice btiilding'is proposed to be .. '-,.' . - :." .. '-, .".~... ,'_ '... '~":" ..... _,'-',,_.__ ',._ ...e...." ..:>." ........ '_"'-,'.. ,', placed between th~ marsh area and .the projeCt parking lot. In addition, a dirt berm and fence are proposed between the building and the NWRto limit human encroachment into . the NWR. The berm is proposed to be approximately 5 to 6 feet high and would extend 3-42 iJO.l4.008 01/24/91 ;2.O-"I'JY ; ,,; ......., <.~~ G. Southwest view from condominiums located at Chu1a VISta StreetjWoodlawn Avenue. ,..l' - . .,-.,::'~ ',"'0 '., "~';"'""";""";'~',"1:T.,'7; _."",:~ "..,~ " 1 .j c',.,bi'1i.111- N6~tii~),f'eti,m,8~~'B~~linS~w'~(lbM:;q from projectSite. . ....... , ~ j 11 .J ~ ." TI ~ dO -/7 7 Figure 3-7 . I I I I I I II I I I I I I ~ I the entire length of the site's west boundary. The proposed fence is 6 feet high, chain link in construction and would be positioned near the toe of the west-facing slope of the berm. A water retention basin would be provided between the building and the marsh buffer. The buffer ar~a would be landscaped with upland coastal sage scrub. . ,J!... The p~rking lot is proposed to be east of the building, adjacent to the existing transmission towers, and would provide 730 spaces. (Rohr Industries has estimated a need for 705 parking spaces for its employees - see Traffic Section.) Exterior lighting would consist of high intensity discharge down-lighting and would be limited to illuminating the project site only. Lighting on the western boundary of the site would be directed away from the natural tidal wetlands to minimize the effect of light on the wildlife. Landscaping planned for most of the site includes scrubs, groundcover and canopy trees. The parking area would be divided into four separate "rooms" of landscaped areas to help reduce its elongated appearance. Along the western boundary in the vicinity of the berm, landscaping would be made up of upland coastal scrub to blend with the nafural environment. . Along "F' Street, landscaping would consist primarily of trees to reduce visibility to the site. All landscaping for the project would be in conformance with the,City of Chula Vista Landscaping Manual. "F' Street is defined as a "gateway" to the Bayfront area, and is therefore an area of high visitation and visual importance. Proposed improvements to "F' Street include two entrances for ingress and egress, installation of curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and a bike lane. Rohr Industries would be responsible for upgrading the southern half of "F" Street from the centerline to the site boundary. Road improvements are required for conformance with Class I Collector Road standards as well as standards set in the LCP Circulation Element (Section 19.86.01). VISUal Sensitivi\}' The visual effects of the proposed project depend upon the degree to which the project complements the existing Rohr facilities and proposed Midbayfront development in terms :." " .' , ,;,. ,'~ :'-n ~.'({ . ". ',' . " of architectural design and mate'rials,"and whetherihe project would have any adverse effects on existing scenic views from public viewing locales and residential neighborhoods. The building by itself, could result in an adverse visual impact due to its size and form; 3-43 2iJ- / 'YO 90-14,008 01/24/91 however, the existence of other large buildings in the area reduce the significance of the proposed project. The proposed building is 42 feet (in conformance with the City of Chula "'" Vista's height regulations) as compared with the adjacent existing Rohr building height (Building 61) of 73 feet. In addition, the proposed earthtones would blend with the visual characteristics of the existing Rohr building. The proposed project consequently would be complementary to the existing development and would contribute to the cumulative visual change of the area from undeveloped land to industrialjbusiness park development. The proposed project would be visible from the northern end of Bayside Park (located approximately 05 mile southwest of the site). The primary scenic amenity of the park is San Diego Bay, while the area immediately to the east is existing vacant, disturbed land. The proposed office building would be partially obstructed by the existing Rohr buildings to the south, and views beyond the site are already currently developed. Given the planned landscaping and visual characteristics of the area, views from Bayside Park to the site would be altered, but impacts are not considered significant. " Views range from open to partially obstructed along 1-5 between 24th Street and "E" street. While the proposed facilities would be visible to southbound travellers, the project would ") not block any existing scenic views. In addition, the presence of the existing Rohr building . · to the south, and the transmission towers to the east would result in the new structure blending with existing facilities. Further, planned landscaping would effectively screen views of the site to southbound freeway travellers. Visual impacts are considered neither adverse nor significant. J From the small public park, Days Inn Hotel, Soup Exchange, El Torito and Anthony's restaurants just northeast of the site, open views of the site and partially obstructed views of the San Diego Bay are possible. The proposed building and landscaping would oqstruct Bay views from portions of these locations, however, due to the small amount of the 'views that would actually be affected, no significant change in the existing views would occur. Thus, project level impacts to these types of viewers are not considered significant. ] From the Jade Bay mobile home park and adjacent unnarnedcondominiums, located . .: -, .I;'~." ....: . .'- , ";' -, approximately 0.8 mile northeast of the site, the proposed project would be Visible; but the new building would be substantiany smaller in scale than tho existing Rohr buildings to the east and south. In addition, proposed landscaping along "F' Street would further buffer the ) > 3-44 c/ ) d-.(}-/61 90-14.008 OI/N/91 . FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT. ROHR OFFICE COMPLEX - PHASE II TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS . Preoared Em: City of Cbula Vista Preoared b JHK & Associates 8989 Rio San Diego Drive, Suite 335 San Diego, California 92108 . February 1992 , c2f) -/7:2- ~ TABLE OF CONTENTS - , 1. ~ INTRODUCTION I-I Background 1-1 Report Organization and Scope 1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS 2-1 Project Setting 2-1 Planned Improvements - ., 2-6 Roadway Level of Service Standards 2-7 ANALYSIS OF EXISTING TRAFFIC 3-1 Roadway Segment Capacity Analysis 3-1 Intersection Capacity Analysis 3-1 TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION 4.1 Year 1997 Land Use and Traffic Data 4-1 Buildout Land Use and Traffic Data 4-6 --., TRAFFIC AND PARKING ANALYSIS 5.1 Intersection Traffic Conditions 5-1 Street Segment Traffic Conditions 5-1 Parking Analysis 5-6 MITIGATION 6-1 Intersection Mitigation 6-1 Street Segment Mitigation 6-9 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. APPENDIX A - Intersection Capacity Analysis: Existing Conditions APPENDIX B - Intersection Capacity Analysis: 1997 No Project APPENDIX C - Intersection Capacity Analysis: 1997 With Project APPENDIX D - Intersectio~ Capacity Analysis: , 19,;n With Project and Mitigation ;.~ ~\ d,;, ;. , ~ ;2j) ~ /8'3 - ---~--- . Filmre . 2-1 2-2 2-3 2-4 3-1 3-2 4-1 5-1 6-1 6-2 6-3 6-4 6-5 . LIST OF FIGURES Project Location Project Site Plan Study Area Existing Year 1991 ADT Existing Street Classifications Existing Year 1991 Intersection Lane Geometry Trip Distribution Buildout Street Network and ADT Summary of Proposed Mitigation Measures E StreetlBay BoulevardlI-5 SB Ramp Intersection Mitigation E Street/I-5 NB Ramp Intersection Mitigation E StreetIBroadway Intersection Mitigation F StreetlBay Boulevard/Lagoon Drive Intersection Mitigation ,- ~ tfJ- /S'1 ~ 2-2 2-3 2-4 2-5 3-2 3-5 4-5 5-3 6-2 6-3 6-4 6-5 6-6 Table 3-1 3-2 3-3 4-1 4-2 4-3 5-1 5-2 5-3 5-4 6-1 6-2 LIST OF TABLES -. f.a.u Roadway Capacity and Level of Service Standards Existing Year 1991 Roadway Segment Levels of Service Existing Year 1991 Intersection Levels of Service Existing Project Site Trip Generation Future Project Site Trip Generation Net Project Site Trip Generation Year 1997 Intersection Levels of SelVice Buildout Street Segment Levels of Service Project Contribution to Daily Street Segment Traffic Parking Analysis Year 1997 Intersection Levels of Service With Mitigation Project Contribution to P.M. Peak Hour Intersection Traffic 3-3 3-4 3-7 4-2 4-3 4-4 5-2 5-4&5 5-7 5-8 6-7 6-8 - .-., jlJ-)Yf . 1. INTRODUCTION The pUIpOse of this study is to analyze existing and future traffic and circulation conditions adjacent to the proposed Rohr Industries office complex. This introduction describes the proposed development and outlines the contents of this traffic analysis report. BACKGROUND The project site is located in the City of Chula Vista, California in the southwest comer of the intersection of Bay Boulevard, and UF" Street/Lagoon Drive. The project includes several office and industrial buildings to be built as part of a Master Plan for the Rohr Industries office complex. REPORT ORGANIZATION AND SCOPE This report begins with a description and analysis of existing traffic conditions. Land use and trip generation for the proposed project is then presented, followed by a description of the trip distribution procedures. Future conditions are then discussed, and the report concludes with . recommendations for mitigation measures along roadways in the area of the project site. ;;,!. .,.; -..," ,~~ : ;:.;rL" ;~:,J.'J,' . ".; i: ,~' . I-I c2.jJ -' / %? 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS -, The proposed Rohr Office Complex Project is located in the Chula Vista Bayfront as illustrated in Figure 2-1. Figure 2-2 shows the project site which is bounded to the north by "F" Street, to the east by Bay Boulevard, to the south by existing Rohr facilities, and to the west by wetlands. In addition to the development shown in Figure 2-2, the project also includes vacation of land on "G" Street, Tidelands Avenue, and in the Bay Boulevardf'F' Street/Lagoon Drive intersection area. No traffic impacts are considered to occur as a result of these dedications of land. PROJECT SETTING The study area and proposed circulation system surrounding this project, shown on Figure 2-3, is within the Mid-Bayfront Planning Area between "E" Street and "H" Street Study area intersections include "E", "F", and "H" Streets with Bay Boulevard, "E" and "H" Street at 1-5, Woodlawn Avenue at "E" Street, and Broadway at "E" and "F" Streets. The intersection of Woodlawn Avenue and "F' Street was also studied, but only to determine the need for signalization. Figure 2-4 shows average daily traffic (AD1) volumes on the existing network in -.. the study area. The volumes shown were taken from the City of Chula Vista Traffic Counts dated December 18, 1991. Most of the traffic generated by the project from locations outside Chula Vista will access the site via the 1-5f'E" Street interchange. "F" Street will provide the primary access to the site for trips originating in Chula Vista. A roadway construction project is currently underway to improve the "E" Street interchange with 1-5 and to provide access between "E" Street and SR 54. The completion of this project is assumed for the analysis of existing traffic conditions. Interstate 5 Interstate 5 (1-5) is an eight-lane freeway in the vicinity of the Bayfront area. It extends southward to the California-Mexico Border and to the north through downtown San Diego, providing interstate travel through California, Oregon and Washington. An interchange between I- S and State Route (SR) 54 is currently under construction just north of the I-5f'E" Street interchange. When this interchange is completed, the existing interchange configuration and traffic volumes will be altered substantially. These improvements are described in the discussion of planned improvements. .-., 2-1 :20~/Y7 City of Chula Vista .,:. L4"." .V4 . '-, NATIONAL CITY ~8 s'! S..-\8 t" ." III '" .. o Q. ~ :n .. '< ~ ' .. " " .~ "lC -s ... ... :il ... ,S I"~. ;;,! .. :5 .!l .. ~ .. :5 [* af it c I z . . .. . . . . . u ,~ I ~ ~ ~ z .. ~I i 'I i '1 J '. i '. j I I I "' .v~ ~g ~ . ~~ ~ . it I~.ft i :~ .q:~ ..s~ ..S~ &~il . --.; H.ft ft._ ft. ..;._ ft . .. z ; .. c ~ ::> ...J 0 lL oJ ..... 'i f !: a: K "' . JJJ' JJJ' JJJ' JJJ' JJf' Jff' · . a: .. . I 2 :I: .. . fJI! fJI! fJI! fJI! fJI! fJI! ! 0 c .. ~ a: ::Ii . " . ~ . oJ ci "' .: ~ S .;" , ~ ' ~ I . . I ;" It' ~f lh r..t II @~ I !:~ Ut ft I ,.,;,- I ".' Mi 0:':; - . I . 1 , . .,.,,;,;,':::;;..............-.._..-_.......-... :t?:t::'?{):~})::\:::::::' ::::::::)@):::::f::jr';::::::."> y~ ;;;,:.;. I , ..,:,.:.,-,.,.,.,-,.,.,:,:,.,.,., '::,:"":',::';',':- :..........:,:~,:.:, ;',';;' .;.:.,." ......-.. ';"":"'/::;:-. ::@:;:;:~::::;:~H{ ~@~:~~t(@M "'W" .,.,,,.,.,.,.... ~N .s .; .. :; }1 ..c ~J UM _ .h, o ...~;; BI Ug ~ ; IH III . . .-----, - = " III ~i It i' .. i I I. , ",::.:::-:.:.,.:.,.:. 'V_' ;':;:';:':';;;";:':"'._;.",,_:.;. '.;.;.,.; :;;:;~~ ,,:::;:~ *, .,'5,;; r* ~ I't: "" t.~~ i1~ ill '" IIn.u.'w.O.I......" x w.; ..J c.. - .... - - W '" ";;j ~. -;; C < I I . I c1{}.':7h . . , ~ ~ t: G: a ==8 --w- ::.:~~ ..,..~.... ::::- == ---~ 0:::::"__ ._........"...,.-...:_~,.":':-:::' 2-3 City of Chula Vista .... ..,...,.....w...,,,..,..~.,,...w....... ."....... ".. :..'.:.:.r.;.';.':i.',:.~,:_:.:;'".":.:;',:.',:!~,:.~.:'.:.;.;~.~.~::.;~,;.I.:'f:,~.:.~.'.::r:.:.r,:.~.'.:,;t.:;.,.:.'.-:.'.'.t...:{,:.~:1.:.',t.:.~,::.~;t.:'.$:j*-iW.{.::.j..,t.~.%1,l~.:~1%@tMW..t;1@lM&mffH}Mm.::::m:: ~..::%(:tJ:f&1$t.:m&E;.~*ffi;W~jk:~i.ihi)i .".. ~",",'~<.->" .<. "."_". "''''~'' .,.......,..~.. .. "....... :fiflttMt#t1J&MW:lttttM@N:Mlf . ------------- ---------- E Street I ~ I I " I I ~ I I '0( ~ I I .!!! I I "tj I () I ~ I F Street I I I ~ I !l! .., I .! .! r-------- ~ I '" l! ell ~ I I .! ~ .s; I I <I:l I I G Street I I .. I '" " I I ~ I '0( . I I ~ I I OJ I '6 I () I I ~ H Street I I ------------ --.- ...... N .., .! l! ~ .! .s; I Street '" ~ ." OJ e <I:l J Street ,~......;...,...,.."'~""~."'"....-""'......,'P /'" ,... ... ___"O'} LEGEND . . Key Intersection Study Area Boundary ROIIR OFFICE COMPLEX PHASE II Traffic Impact AnalJsis 'm ;:'>';' City of Chula Vista $~~.{t...::.~~.,..;;;~.. :.r%,.~ ~(.~~:. J.J,:':'w':'~~"~", ~ ;r;;;Yi:..j.~:}.. .:.,j~ .:~ .; .~ ":. ..,~~. . , ..~w;;::~mfm.'f~mtft -, 144.0 ..... N 27.4 26.8 E Str99t ~ ~ "l; 6.4 ~ ,!!! 3.4 6.3 1 9.2 F Str99t 4.3 l! II) ~ .! ~ J!! ell e 138.0 .! ~ .s 'Xl G Street .. '" ~ "l; - ~ ,!!! "l5 0 6.5 ~ 27.8 27.8 H StrB9t 135.0 II) .! J!! e .! .s I StreBt '" ~ ." IV e 'Xl J Stf99t 141.0 LEGEND XX.X Average Deily TraffIC (in Ihousands) Source: City of Chula Vista Traff"lC Counts (Traffic Flow Report, December 18, 1991). ~i~t -,>:-, $:'.:~ :~t~ it :.:.;.:. :~:;::t,~:.:::; :-:.;.;-:.z.:.:-:. ..<H:.:.'..... . "E" Street "E" Street is a four-lane collector street with an east-west orientation. It extends from its current western terminus at Bay Boulevard to an interchange at 1- 805. In the study area, "E" Street is designated a four-lane Major Road in the City's General Plan. "F" Street "F' Street is a four-lane collector street with an east-west orientation. It extends from its current terminus in the tidelands area west of Bay Boulevard to Hilltop Drive in the middle of Chula Vista. The Circulation Element of the General Plan designates "F" Street as a Class I Collector between Broadway and Marina Parkway. "H" Street "H" Street is a four-lane collector street with an east-west orientation. It extends from its current terminus at the Rohr Industries gate to east of Interstate 805. The portion of "H" Street in the study area is designated as a six-lane major road between Bay Boulevard and Broadway in the General Plan. . Bay Boulevard Bay Boulevard is a two-lane collector street with a north-south orientation. Currently Bay ! Boulevard begins at the 1-5f'E" Street intersection and continues south along the Bayfront tI)rough Chula Vista. It is designated as a Class II Collector in the General Plan. Broadway Broadway is a four-lane collector street with a north-south orientation. It extends from the National City limits south to the south San Diego city limits. Broadway is a major element in the west Chula Vista circulation network. Broadway provides continuous north-south travel just east of 1-5. Broadway is designated as a four-lane major road in the General Plan within the study area between "E" Street and "H" Streeet PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS Planned improvements to the transportation network include reconfiguration of the northern portion of the 1-5 interchange at "E" Street and completion of State Route (SR) 54 north 'of i'E" . Street A realignment of the intersection of Bay Boulevard, "F' Street, and Lagoon Drive is also . under design. 2-6 c2{P~J9~ State Route 54 State Route 54 is currently under construction and will provide a major link between 1-5 and 1-805 and areas east of 1-805. "E" Street currently carnes a relatively high amount of through traffic between 1-5 and 1-805, and the completion of SR 54 is expected to reduce the amount of through traffic on "E" Street by approximately 15 percent .-, "E" Street/l-S Interchange Reconfiguration A construction project is currently underway to reconstruct the southbound ramps on 1-5 at "E" Street The southbound off-ramp would be realigned to end at the existing intersection of "E" Street and Bay Boulevard. The existing southbound on-ramp would remain in place, and an additional loop ramp from westbound "E" Street to southbound 1-5 would be added in the northwest quadrant of the interchange. This reconfiguration would eliminate left turns at the existing southbound on-ramp from westbound "E" Street Bay Boulevard would remain as the south (northbound) approach to the newly constructed intersection. but access to Bay Boulevard north of "E" Street would not be provided at this intersection. Additional improvements to the northbound ramps at the "E" Street and 1-5 interchange will coincide with completion of the SR 54 and 1-5 interchange. A direct ramp from SR 54 to the southbound 1-5 ramp will merge with the southbound 1-5 to "E" Street ramp, and the northbound ramp from "E" Street will diverge and connect with the northbound 1-5 to eastbound SR 54 ramp. This will provide direct access to SR 54 from "E" Street without requiring merges on the frec;way. The "E" Street/I-5 interchange reconfiguration has been assumed to be in place for the analysis of existing traffic conditions. -- Bay Boulevard/F Street/Lagoon Drive Intersection Realignment This project is currently under design. Proposed improvements include relocating the intersection slightly to the west and widening of Lagoon Drive to a width of 78 feet west of Bay Boulevard. This intersection will require a signal to operate adequately upon full occupancy of Phase I of the ROM Office Complex development, and signalization was assumed for the analysis for existing traffic conditions. ROADWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS Analysis of study area roadways and intersections was carried out using the following guidelines for levels of service: " . Intersections were considered to operate adequately if Level of Service D or better was maintained during the peak ho~. - 2-7 c2V-)'lJ . . . .. :;'~' . For planning analysis of street segments, roadway conditions were considered to be adequate if Level of Service C or better was maintained on an Average DlIily Traffic basis. ; Where the standards described above were not met, mitigation was consld;;-edtobe necessary. >t,' 2-8 JJ)- FFI 3. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING TRAFFIC -, TIlls chapter presents the existing traffic operational conditions and Levels of Service (LOS) of all project area major intersections and roadway segmentS. The impacts of the project will be directly determined from the comparison between the existing and future Levels of Service. ROADWAY SEGMENT CAPACITY ANALYSIS Detennination of the LOS of roadway segments involves the comparison of the Average Daily Traffic volume to the LOS C capacities. Figure 3-1 and Table 3-1 summarize the existing network volumes (by segment) and the LOS capacities by roadway class, respectively. City standards call for the use of LOS C capacities as the analysis base. For each facility, a ratio of the existing volume and LOS C capacity is calculated and used to determine the actual LOS based on Table 3-1. It is important to understand that the volume to capacity ratio at LOS C capacity simply yields an indication of the roadway's capacity in relation to the City's standards. The V/C ratio is not a direct indication of the physical traffic carrying capabilities of the roadway. -..., Table 3-2 summarizes the existing Average Daily Traffic (AD1) volumes, roadway class and desired segment capacities of the facilities in the project area. The corresponding LOS for each , facility is also presented in this table. INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS Turning movement counts for the major intersections in the study area were conducted to determine the existing volumes at these intersections. For the intersections along E Street, existing turning movements were assumed to include the impact of the I-5ISR 54 improvements which are now under construction. The turning movements were based on the Rohr Office Complex Phase I Traffic Impact Analysis (JHK & Associates, April 1991). The turning movements at all other locations were based on counts conducted by JHK & Associates in the Fall of 1991. Figure 3-2 illustrates the intersection lane configurations used for the capacity analysis. - 3-1 :10- /75 City of Chuta Vista :~;;~:/ :iftrEt1gWWfmIM#rlf@flaHMXmmtHtjltjtfnitimWtfJm;~ttm&~.ti%f.1.ttl~~7,;.;.t%-llif1t~~"'T'r" . - . I . I \ \ . --~-- . ~! !l!1 II> .!!. .t! ~I ~ ~i ~ CZl. I . I i i i _;..i \ \ \ \ . II> to! .J! Ii i~ i I ; . . i I ! ;; " ~ i . ROHR OFFICE CO;\IPLEX PHASE II Traffic Impact Anal~'sis ,llgure3.1.... ..... ;2.l)~J9(,. " '. '. ~~vr~c~~~i.i . "ii > . Me: .-. , .~ .-,. .. ..... .. ......;.....;....... .... '.;..'..- .... - . .. - ~ "'. .". . .. '... ..' '.... ' . ",. :;. ":::::'::-:.:-:::::'::::.:.:.:.::::~,,:.:...:.:.:.:~:~::.., - '.' ...... . . I . - -- - .-. .-- - - - - -- .--1. - - ~;rcWt.. _. __ ~j I t. I "tl · . . ~I I .9!. I 1lJ II ~. I -------l---------e . II II II . & i !l II !l II !! E . . I . !I . . . I . I H SUBBI .---._1_._._........ . . . I Ii I . = ~ ~ "t ~ .9! ! . .m!~WiWnilWM :;:::;::;:::::~:=::~: .;.:.:.:.:.:.:<.:.:, ..A N FStrBBl G SU9Bt I StrBBl . I ~I ;1:- "2= ~I · J Stf99t -----...... LEGEND l, " ~l,ane Major --' - - -. Class I Conector ---- Class II Co/Ieclor Class III conector Table 3-1 ROADWAY CAPACITY AND LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC Functional Class Freeway (8 LN) Freeway (6 LN) Freeway (4 LN) Expressway (6 LN) Prime Arterial (6 LN) Major Street (6 LN) Major Street (4 LN) Class I Collector Gass IT Collector Class ill Collector A 64,000 48,000 32,000 52,500 37,500 30,000 22,500 16,500 9,000 5,600 Level 01 Service B 99,200 74,400 49,600 61,300 43,800 35,000 26,300 19,300 10,500 6,600 C 130,560 97,920 65,280 70,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 22,000 12,000 7,500 D 153,600 115,200 76,800 78,800 56,300 45,000 33,800 24,800 13,500 8,400 - E 160,000 120,000 80,000 87,500 . 62,500 50,000 37,500 27,500 15,000 9,400 Notes: 1. Levels of Service are not applied to residential streets. since their primary purpose is to serve adjacent property and not to carry through traffic. 2. Levels of Service normally apply to facilities which carry through traffic between major trip generators and attractors. .- Source: City of ChuIa Vista Street Design Standards, SANDAG Guidelines, JHK & Associates. 3-3 ~tJ-J1? -~ : ~'-'-' Souri:e:~""-Existing ADT dllta was derived from City of Otula Vuta TraffIC Counts (December 18, 1991). . . . .; 't""'" '''~'~:f~'~:~~~~~~~~-:' ..... '~':'i" '::;.~;t"~f*;;h:",;'<"'il';,,;,..;lA,;i.':':',, ': Table 3-2 EXISTING YEAR 1991 ROADWAY ~EC;l\W1T~~"l:9~,f.lf.~i.' ",.. ," :; .:;. .;,....~,O;f>-$J;:'-ri':'~:..'::~-:..,,:., ,0.,' >,:_.__:~<<: , '.' .. ","..' "',' '.',' "" .. :'. ".~:<.? :,.,.",.,' "~'",;, j. -,..." .,' /LOS cl ... -'"- - Planning' Level V/e2 Actual Capadty .... ADT Existinl . Conditions Ratio LOS 12,300 ~OOO 0.56 A 27,400 22,000 1.25 E 26,800 22,000 1.22 E Street Segment "E" Street Bay Blvd./I-S I-S/Woodlawn Ave. Woodlawn Ave./Broadway "F" Street West of Bay Boulevard Bay Blvd./WoodIawn Ave. Woodlawn Ave./Broadway 4,300 6,300 9,200 22,000 22,000 22,000 0.20 0.29 0.42 A A A "H" Street Bay Blvd../I-S I-S/Broadway 6,500 27,800 22,000 22,000 . 0.30 1.26 A F Bay Boulevard "E" S1.f'F" S1. 6,400 7,5OQ 0.2$ IS 3,900 7,SOO 0.52 A 3,300 7,SOQ q,'M: A .. ,. l "F" St.f'H" St. "H" St./"J" St. Notes: 1. Currently the City of Otula Vista plans for LOS C operating C9mijQOPS as /I. mininwpJ . '. . . for all Circulation Element facilities. 2. The vie ratio is based on the capacity of the roadway selffiCnt.~ LOS <;:. Thu.$, it ~ye,s an indication of the roadway's carrying capacity in relation to the City's 11lil)imJp;ll standards. It is not indicative of the actual (functional) Capacity of the ~way. '," '-","1" , . _ ~. .",~-,,""'J -. '. ",--"--,~"",,~.,, .. 3-4 ~{)./)9~ -", ..- -~......u ..LII........ WMlt1&?1t@MfiM@i1"M1t1MilliKEfiHW;@FTTi@limXM1XMmf@lfX&ittK'1lWMHXmmmtWllliMmBWil@X2liPZiWJ&:fi1lfSlttt;;mmtt ......., ... N ~ ~ ~ '<( ~ ,!l1 "0 0 ~ F Street 1:! ~ '" .!!! l!! ;, ~ 0 ~ CO ~ l!! .s G Street CI> ;, c:: ~ --. '<( ~ ,!l1 "0 0 ~ H Street ------- {Street '" ~ 'tJ '" e CO ;'....N';.~ . J Street ...,~ . ..\ ,. ."..." ,:'{. 1ft'V,; r~! .~'lY1!~ ~f' )(:.'-"e Keylntersecdon LEGEND ROIIR OFFICE COMPLEX PHASE II Traffic Impact Analysis .. . .... .,. ....".~.,.,., -"""':'>:"':<""'''~' ...............".:.,.,.~:.:.:~.,.~,.: ~ ~~- 3-5 . . . Levels of Service for the study area intersections, based on the respective volumes and capacities, were detennined using the operational analysis procedure for signalized intersections as outlined in the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual. This technique uses 1800 vehicles per hour per. lane (vphpl) as the maximum saturation volume of an intersection. This saturation volume is adjusted to account for lane width, on street parking, pedestrians, traffic composition (Le. % trucks) and shared lane movements (Le. through and right turn movements originating from the same lane). The results of the analysis are presented in Table 3-3, supporting data for this table can be found in the Appendices. clv/02tJP 3-6 Table 3-3 _ EXISTING LEVELS OF SERVICE YEAR 1991 CONDITIONS _.'..~ ~ t, t.., ,. . _,,'_ Intersection "E" St/I-5 SB RampsIBay Blvd "E" St/I-5 NB Ramps "E" St/Woodlawn Ave "E" St/Broadway "F' St/Bay Blvd/Lagoon Dr "F' St/Broadway "H" St/Bay Blvd "H" St/I-5 SB Ramps "H" St/I-5 NB Ramps Level of Service A.M. Peak P.M. Peak Hour Hour C C B C D B B B B E C B D D B B C C -. ~ J,O-20 / . 3-7 . . . 4. TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION Project Traffic impacts were analyzed in terms of two scenarios: buiIdout traffic conditions and traffic conditions at full occupancy of the project. Full occupancy of the project was assumed to occur in 1997 based on project phasing plans. The trip generation and distribution of these two scenarios of traffic is described in this chapter. YEAR 1997 LAND USE AND TRAFFIC DATA The analysis of 1997 conditions was conducted using the following assumptions:. . Existing traffic was assumed to grow by 2% per year from 1991 to 1997. This growth was assumed to take into account traffic generated by proposed developments in the area such as Scripps Hospital and the expansion of the Chula Vista Mall as well as growth in miscellaneous smaller projects and through traffic. . In addition to the 2% per year growth, the traffic expected to be generated by the Rohr Office Complex - Phase I Development was added as part of the total 1997 traffic forecast. . Trip generation for the project site was conducted by determining the future trip generation of the project site and subtracting out the estimated trip generation of existing buildings on the site. This analysis is documented in . Tables 4-1, 4-2, and 4-3. Trip generation rates were based on San Diel!o Traffic Generators, January 1990. In order to be consistent with the Rohr Office Complex - Phase I analysis, the corporate headquarters trip generation rate was used for the office components of the development. If the site were ever to revert to multiple ownership, an increase in traffic would be expected and a traffic impact study would be reconunended. . Trip distribution for project traffic was based on the traffic impact analysis for the Rohr Office Complex - Phase I Traffic Irripact Analysis as shown in Figure 4-1. 4-1 ~a---c2{}~ Z o - Eo< -< Eo< a:: Zr.:l r.:lZ ;:!;r.:l l:l.CI Ol:l. '""- r.:la:: ....>Eo< ..,j.r.:lr.:l ... ~ Eo< --- ..Q-CI:l 01 r.:l Eo< Eo<CI:lU -<r.:l ::r::.... l:l.O a:: a:: ::l:l. OCl a::z - Eo< fa ~ r.:l l: l; ~I .cuo,&: :;ll.=E- o ." I =~ "'". .. ..CI. ~ 0 = o"C c-gll.=E- =... ... .. p:. ~ o ~gO'I~ o ~ H ~I. ~ ~ ~ ~.~ o ~~o~l:e ~ ~~~~I o ~ " 0 "I' o ~~o~l. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -= g .;1 0 ~ -.:t' 0 ~I ::::: ll.=t: M _ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I ~;I 0 ~ ~ 0 ~I ~ ~~11 0 ~ ~ ~:;.; =:CI: _ ~C ;n- S ~~I I ~ ~i '. .,.:. -Oft}, '~I " ;" ~ ,~" ''",V. '-"/ ~ iMI!1 :; ,g~'8>-g ~ bO ~ _ _ < < t%l U Q Ltlj 3 ~ , ." I ., ;) ... .. "'I ....CI. 4101: ll.=E- ... .., ~:g ll.= ~"'l; ~I c.. _ .cuo.. :;ll.=E- o ." I a..:. .. ~ .. ..CI. ... 0 CII c- ..... "= .. call. E- =... ... co .. ll. ;:e < . JI - - " ~ if .J4 'Cl i l '" 8 8 .!!l i '-' ~j '" '0; ,., ~ tl a ,5 o IE g - ~ if .a o l><: " -5 -, <'l , ..". "., .5 'R '0 ::l U .5 ~ ~ < ~ . c: ~ ,- 0\ 5 i~ ~ ~ .... 8 Oil <'0 ~~ '" c: - !J o :1!' '5 '3 ... 8 !::: 'Cl .::: -, ci- ~ JO/20 .J ~ .. vi "... , l::"'tl - " " ~ r::'S' - '" Q, ..... a::: S II) - - =:1: ... $ - '-0 - on - ., ~ - '" - 0 gj . ......... - 00 .... 00 - on ==1- f o~ .M ~I ... 'g... .. ~I ~ N \2; [ :1.=- '" '" '" N .. OUO... - - ::0 ....ll.:l:1- , j ~ .. - ", ... "~ 'Cl .. .. .. C ~ .. !Il6 ~ ~ ~ tI! ~ ~ 0 " 0 ~ 0 ~ 8 ~ .... - - - - c ... "~ ..... "" ~, ~ . =.s- 00 0 00 ~ - :g .. .. ~ .. 00 '" on - "~ ll.:l:1- - on .. i :z ... .., ~, .. ~:6 tI! ~ tI! tI! tI! - 0 on on ~ .... N 1i - ll.:I: - - - - E- .5 E-< 'Cl " 0.:: :zCl:: ;.:.r ... (I) .... \.:1\.:1 OCll:::aQ. '" 0 ..., ,.... r; :;:z .::t Q,) 01: - '" on - - - on ... Q..\.:I :;ll.:l:1- ~ Ot.:l 0 f. ...lQ.. -=... ~ ~I .l: \.:1- l"l>Cl:: 0 .. '" - 00 ~ on ;:!; ~ . \.:I E- = 0.0- '-0 00 .... '" - ., ,.Q u=... - - on . :Q\.:I ~ ..ll. I- -= :I: M - .5 , -_E- ... 'V .c__ !Il11 -g ca \.:I CI'.l .. ~ ... E-CI'.lE- ~ ~ ~ tI! tI! tI! = a; a; a; a; a; a; u <u ,. .5 :::\.:1 < .. Q...... .. ~ Cl::~ ..... "" ~, < =... 00 0 ..., 8 0 - :::Q.. ell 0.- 00 '" on - ,.... ~ ":I: .. - - on 0\.:1 ll. I- Q::Q:: ... .., ~l . c ~ ~ ~ ~ tI! a; .~ ;;J ~~g on on - '-0 - '" g E- ll.:I: - - - - - i"! ;;J r- ~ "" 0 ~, N -... ." ~ ~ $ N - lij a ~~ <'i '" 0). ..... 0 ... .... ..., . " o II 00/ ...: ...: I <'g .~ '" .; .; ...: ...: ...: ..., ~~ ...- .; .; .; .. 1--- g g @ .. .. ~ ~ ~ ~... . '" c =~cc: ... - - . ~ .... 0- 0- ... - - 00- -- 00- 0 Qt:l - - 00 - " ~~ l!!' "~I g ~ 0 0 0 :a 8 & 0 'S ..... "l r.;jui ;q g g 0 ... .... ~ ... 00 - 8 !::: cld5 'a .. 4:! '" N., ~ .~ . ;J ., ..ce ., go " ~ I~ ~ ... !::: ~ .. '" .. .... ... ;; :g 0 g .. 0 oS ., > ...l ~8 .:2& ~~()1 .. on ., <1i . ~I !:! u < Q:l U 0 Ul ~ is 1S.g, '" e - N 0.- Table 4.3 --- ROHR PHASE II DEVELOPMENT NET PROJECT SITE TRIP GENERATION Number of Trips AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Trip Generation Scenario Daily Total In Out Total In Out Future Project Site 3,912 571 514 57 565 64 501 Existing Project Site 958 122 98 24 167 53 114 Net Project Site Trip 416 Generation 2,954 449 33 398 11 387 --- " --- 4-4 - o /)-c2. tJ~ d-V/ ' City of Chula Vista ffC::i:liHlli1.%liiff.-;m*,:&<<'-""'" ._.tff4lliM%lillm]til1Entr-MjHrum.:&{Iilit!k1J~.tW:::~aw1ID;k,*~dillllliMi1gt%tmt%@'.;-" . fjk~~t.rM . E Stroot Q) 75%t " c: ~ <C ~ ,,!!! "1j 0 15% ~ - F Stroot "2 !l! It) -! .l! " ~ 0 ~ co ~ .l! .so G Street 10%t Q) " c: ~ . <C ~ ., 'is 0 ~ H Street ...... N It) .l! ~ ~ .l! .so I Street f ., e CO J Stroot . LEGEND XX % Percentage of Project - Generatea Traffic ROHR OFFICE COMPLEX PHASE II Traffic Impact Analysis :.~~:,::::t~~::~m:::::::::;5;::"':::::~:t'@::t.::;W:M~:;{~:::{:~:~~:::~:W:~:::::::::::~ .ii1[;.:~~i;i;;ik:;;:~~' -, Eig~'~~11~;:;~ ;~;$~~~<t~i~i~~ ~:1i\i~l~ .\~A"~'>:~B;i~fII~:: ~tl[[m~~[U~r@ ~: ,~', ,. ,'.v>,.~ {,_ ~:W6jpi~ !t.fQf?!M~ ,', :~'"~l~>~)\~~/1 '1 ~i::'; .. TRUfDIS'''''''fBi::mrrA','H'/', .c"",^ ",,"vY<<;~""",.',. ~^,.';r Ii ftI#f,::;:;:::::....1: " ::';:~" M;I::!;~tr~'.,," .n- ,~' ~,;::(\?';.,,^.:,.t,v i.........::{< ~ ~""'... , ;:;:::::;::?::;~::::::::: ..,. :. -.:: :'::" :::~::::- :., ...... ..~, ,.,.,. ,. -., .,.;. ,.;. '.,.", ". ':'::" ": :"':::": ',':' :'::: '::,:,: ,:;:: :":'.~..'. ': ':';',:, '::,' -:::,',: ':;:~;"':;;~;;' :':: :;,:: ',:, ::';:,' ".;:'.::'" ,::': ::': ,;:,:;:;,:,., :':: '::;:'::'=;': :,;::::: '::::,:::, :;',:,': :,: -::::':'~:': .;... :.,.., .t1_~ C" BUlLDOUT LAND USE AND TRAFFIC DATA The Buildout Scenario was based on the analysis conducted for the Rohr Office Complex _ Phase I Development. However, the additional traffic generated by the Phase n development was added' to the Buildout Traffic forecasts to determine the impact of the Phase n Project. This analysis was based on Average Daily Traffic according to the Cityof Chula Vista's standards for roadway segments. ~ ~. ~. 4-6 J.lJ"" ~ tJ ? . . . .... ."~,~ . ".... . . . S. TRAFFIC AND PARKING ANALYSIS Presented in this chapter are the analysis for the traffic conditions in 1997 with and without the project. Also. presented is analysis of buildout with project impacts. The intersection geometrics used for the analysis are those that currently exist, with adjustments to these geometrics were only made to account for on-going roadway improvement projects. INTERSECTION TRAFFIC CONDITIONS The results of the intersection capacity analysis for 1997 conditions (with and without the proposed project) are shown in Table 5-1. The need for mitigation measures is indicated for the following intersections which will not achieve Level of Service D in either the A.M. or P.M. peak hours. . "En StreetlBay Boulevardll-5 SB Ramps "En Street/I-5 NB Ramps "En StreetIBroadway Bay Boulevard/'F' Street/Lagoon Drive . . . Proposed mitigation measures are discussed in the following chapter. Although not shown in Table 5-1, signal warrant analysis was conducted for the intersection of "F' Street and Woodlawn Avenue. This intersection is not expected to warrant a traffic signal under 1997 conditions with the project and no mitigation is necessary at this location. STREET SEGMENT TRAFFIC CONDITIONS Figure 5-1 shows Average Daily Traffic forecasts for Buildout Traffic Conditions with the proposed project. Also shown in Figure 5-1 are the proposed Circulation Element Street classifications. Table 5-2 shows that Buildout Traffic levels can be accommodated by the proposed street classifications. However, a comparison to the existing street segment classification olTJap shown in Figure 3-1 indicates the need for upgrading the following street segments: . Bay Boulevard, E Street to "F' Street "En Street, 1-5 to Woodlawn Avenue "En Street, Woodlawn Avenue to J,Jroadway -.., Table 5-1 YEAR 1997 INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE Intersection "E" St/I-S SB Ramps/Bay Blvd "E" St/I-S NB Ramps "E" St/Woodlawn Ave "E" St/Broadway "F' St/Bay Blvd/Lagoon Dr "F' St/Broadway "H" St/Bay Blvd "H" St/I-S SB Ramps "H" St/I-S NB Ramps Level of Service Without Project A.M. Peak P.M. Peak Hour Hour With Project A.M. Peak P.M. Peak Hour Hour c c c C D B B B B F C C D D B B C D c C B .c F B B B B F E B E F B B C D -- -., )0-;)01 5-2 City of Chula VISta . . ii \ \ "'------- " \ a a " \ s " \ a \ \ !i S i I ; ;; i I >.,5 ~i "l!:= [IS =: Cl...~ ca;; .~ ~ ~~ -a 5 5 :; a Project Slte- . o I o I 8.3 \ \ o - -1''' - 7.0 i 1:!o ~! ~ ~I ~ o ~ ~I -5: o I i i 7.1 i i L09.8 ___ 111I \ \ o \ ,., l~ oJ! J If!. o ~ I oS i o I i 7.1 o I o ROHR OFFICE COMPLEX PHASE II Traffic Impact Analysis . ."c.;.;::::",.:::::_,::;::/",,:::::::::;::::::::::;::,::::,;::,;:::::;::;;:;,=:::::':':;,:::::::.::::'" A N II II II us II. ":-"r~...___._I_ _ _ ~~".t. _ _ __ . II !I 22.0 I ~ol E "' a o 1\ il E J!!. I ~! I - - - - - - ~- - - - - - - _ _ L.2~E!"..!..._._ II 11.5 12.4 II II II II II ;; " i . ii 5 ;; !! !! GStreet " i ;; IE II a ;; ;; il a E !! II = H Street lII..m........~..ww...........1 Ii 1\ " i " i " ;; !! !!l " i ! I Street ! ~ "' i ,!!! -g ~ ......1U1II 36.1 -... ! ii ! 1;-1 d ca= ,U II J Street j---------- II II !!l ! ----- LEGEND Four lane Major Class I ColI'lClDf Class II CoIIeclor Class III CoIeclor Average Daily Traffic (in thousands) ---- XX.X .;.;.::.:,'.,.::..,...,..:.,..,......:..;..'_.. ',.:.".._ .-n.......:........'._.,._,__.;_.,.,..',.,...,.,_..._.:_",_::.:',_._._,_'" > . . .. . ..,figW"e5~1 .... ;:;;';':::;::';;'::':'::'-;;--";':":;':';:-':;'",,,;:",:.::,,;,;:,:'.-;.".:'--;..:<":":';":':""-;'::<':'::;::,-::,<;<,::;:<,::,\(,:-..:,,;,;-;:::::;:-::,,:::, ..... BUILDOUTSTREETNETWORK . ..ANDAVEKAGEDAlJY1'RAl'lflC.... .. ,_1 ..11 ""..--".......---- ". ..-.-..'-,"",-,-,., ".'-',"'-,', ,.:. .;.:-..-'...-,.,--..-..-......:--......-...-...-,... '.' .,..---,.--,-....,..,.-,.,-.....,.-...-, -...-.'..-...,.-......,.....-.....,.-,.,.......,..-,-.-. , , "-"""""'-'-"""',',',' ':;-:-;-'::">-':':-":":';':"::-'-:';.-;,;.-.;:,:::-',:-:,.-",-",-,:"",.- .:: ._._-...,._-....._._.-,.,..,..-,.,..._...,_...,.-,.,-.._,..,,_...-..... .... · . .......;. ...;J..)...tl... ... ;.;-::>;.:::::::":; <,'./ ::::~>-"::::":",:::.,:;: ':;:~~: ..-",-.;.-:'-.,.--.---'......---.-,,-...... ....- -.. ,~~~~ .; -.., ... = ;"'GO'O'O OGS ~S~=="_~ ~.- 0::== :>< z z z :>< :>< z '0;'-=;..,"''0 g e g'GO"i< = ~ Cl: 8'Cl: =:I ~ 8 U - - ;;.. ~ Cl: -< -< -< -< U -< -< ~ l;I} r.... ~! 0 a.. a- 0 - a- (<) N \0 or: \0 '<I: 00 ..... (<) l;I} ... ~ ;;.. ~j ..,. - - 00 0 - '" ~ '" ..,. ..,. ..... a- (<) a- ... <'t q - N ..,. 0 0 <'I ~ 00 ..... r-: <'i' 'l5 <'i' r-: ....... . - N <'I on Z ~ ~ ..,. , :.; ..... .c ~'a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.~. \0 \0 \0 0 \0 \0 ..... l;I} - a- a- <'I a- \0 ..... ._ C) <'I <'I <'I ~ <'I N ..,. ~ '0" <'i' - ~ ~ 'Ollot ~ -< Cl: ~ ...<'1 l;I} U 00 ..... ..... 00 ..,. ..... 00 ~ (<) ..,. ..,. (<) a- \0 ~ ;;:l 0 ..... 00 (<) - r-: '-q 0 'l5 'l5 'l5 0 'l5 ~ ..... Q - <'I N ... - ;;:l =:I 'fIII4 OJ) ~.... u=-"'= 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- QI-y o. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 tI)=;'-~'O" q q 0 0 0 0 0 o C GO c.= N N <'i' 0 0 0 <'i' ...~...~= ~ - - (<) (<) (<) N llot U=:I 0 B B - I) I) j C) 9 9 ~ < < ~~ - &'; ~ ~~ -<&'; -- -- - - ! ! -.. ~I) 81) 1)1) '3 {J'3 ~ b~ gg 0 ,.!g~ 1ao "'''' "'''' '" '" lXl g:g 8~ ~lXl >. 0>. ~~ ~p ,~~ ....... :2~ ~~ :2~ lXl lXl~ E-olXl ,),tJ~ c2) / , . . . ~ 'l:l .. ::l .5 - c o U ~ r..l U - > ~ r..l tI.l "" o tI.l ..J r..l > r..l ..J f-o Z r..l :::; ~ r..l tI.l f-o t.l t.l ~ f-o tI.l f-o ;;l o Q ..J ..... ;;l = N . III .. :Q os f-o - c C ~"'l:l~ =.00 ~S~CC._~ ;;a. ~.- 0:= 'l:l;:'= ...'l:l os 0 C" :-;..- C o....-~o ~ E'~=r..lU - ~ ~~ ~J ~~~ .2.~. .-= 0 ~.. 'l:lg. -< _N U 'fIIII4 b4) ~..... Uc--= .- ~.u 0 tI.l C ;:. os'l:l. o C .. c.= ,,!!..J 01 = -g. U= j : z -< N .,., '<t" 0\ "': .... .... ~ o .,., q .... .... o o o C'i N $a u -< ~f ~8 ~a5 z < r-- .,., 0\ ~ C'i .... '<t" .... '<t" .,., M o C'i .... o o o C'i N ~. $a i (; .... = o = ~ ...,., t:Q,..:. z < M M .... o 00 a\ \0 \0 N .,., M .,., a\ 0\ .,., o v5 M o o o <:5 M o o o <:5 '<t" ~ . -< ~ .. $a~ Ii :2~ ~ >- bll .S ,.; c..>. .~ td ::: (.) St - -'" 'i :M ~ e - it u ~ 'i oS t: e '() u. Iii u~ oS .- S ...... ~ .." 0 Cl, .. c" ""::: 0 C,) - "::::2'-'" .g e <<lc U .- 'tl .g :a .S u .~ U ~ .E -uefJ,,-, E '0' ~ <<l ::> d: '60 a .5 ..... _ u C 4J .- m 's i :i.s .. p.. ,<:: '- '" ... t-< 0 d.c . GJ '" 0 U > C AJ "z= O....CI)m .." u q u .- oS ..... :e 'tl c a t> ~ -:: t,) C - 0 bll 0 c c c -z:: ~ U) .." :e 6il';:: e!"O 4,)- 8. .. '" o.,g ~l"; U - ~ v.l -5 'i o .~ e B -:ou'" ..s<-58 CIl 0 I.f-.l t:: ~ Z ~'2 .... < - ';::l p... CI,) 'u t: tj e d Vj .- 0 ~ ~ > .t:: ~ U -3 ~ oS u ..c .. c oS U goo .....i~ o & '" 0 ~ u .. ".::l .- t.;:;l .c d ~ f! .~ e oS f-o .g .s ~ 5 e ~ cl~ .~ 8 t:Q ~ ~ - N M .,., , .,., U o 0\ 0\ 00 o v5 M o M ;1ft - c2 /~ The project's contribution to traffic increases is identified in Table 5-3 for street segments where improvements have been identified. In cases where traffic is forecastedJo decrease between 1991 and Buildout Conditions, the project's contribution has been dermed as the contribution to total Buildout Traffic. Mitigation is discussed further in the following chapter. ~ PARKING ANALYSIS Table 5-4 summarizes parking supply and demand for the project site based on the proposed site plan and the City's parking standards. A shortage of 143 parking spaces is expected to occur if the site is developed as proposed. Potential solutions to this expected shortage include revision to the site plll,l1 or a requirement by the city that the owner of the site provide space for additional parlcing if it becomes necessary. -'\ :':, , ~;", """" 5-6 ;2,tJ ~c2 ).3 . Table 5-3 PROJECT CONTRIBUTION TO DAILY TRAFFIC ON STREET SEGMENTS WHERE IMPROVEMENTS HAVE BEEN PROPOSED General Plan Project Buildout Increase in Contribution Existing Traffic Traffic, to Increase in (1991) With 1991 to Project Traffic, 1991 Street Sel'ments Traffic Proiect Buildout Traffic to Buildout Bay Blvd., E 5t to F 5t 9,800 8,254 1 2,216 27%1 E 5t, 1-5 to Woodlawn Ave 27,400 26,490 1 296 1%1 ESt, Woodlawn Ave to Broadway 33,600 22,031 1 266 1%1 . H St, 1-5 to Woodlawn Ave 27,800 36,089 8,289 30 1% . 1 Traffic is forecasted to decrease betweeo 1991 and Buildout conditions and the project's contribution is calculated compared to total Buildout Traffic, rather than the traffic increase from 1991 to Buildout c2tJ ~;2 ) j/ 5-7 -"' Table 5-4 PARKING ANALYSIS ,.-\ ,'" -'i, Parking Ratio per 1,000 sq.ft of Size Develooment1 Spaces Spaces Aua Land Use (so.ft.) Reouired Provided A Office 370,000 3.3 1221 1095 B Office 60,000 3.3 198 185 C Industrial 60,000 1.25 75 57 D R&D 80,000 3.3 264 116 E Industrial 11,000 1.25 14 83 Office 85,000 3.3 281 - F ----- 0 76 SDG&E ----- Q 22.8. Total 2,053 1,910 1 Source: City of Chula Vista Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements. - ..20 - J /5' 5-8 . . . ,,",,~ .. 6. MITIGATION Chapter S of this report identified roadways and intersections which would not operate within .the City's standards for Levels of Servi~e under either 1997 or adopted General Plan Buildout conditionS. This chapter'p~()p<>~s.~ti;tion measures which could be implemented to bring the affected roadways and intersections into conformance with City standards. INTERSECTION MITIGATION Figure 6-1 shows a summary of mitigation measures proposed for intersections in the study area. More detailed descriptions of proposed mitigation measures are shown in Figures 6-2, through 6-S. Proposed intersection mitigation measures include the following: . "En Street!Bay Boulevard/I-S Southbound Ramp: Restriping of the northbound approach to provide a leftlright lane and a right turn lane and installation of a right turn arrow for northbound right turns. . . "En Street/l-S Northbound Ramps: Installation of a right turn arrow for northbound right turns.' . "En Street!Broadway: Widening of the northbound approach to provide two left turn lanes. (Figure 6-4 also shows a double left turn lane for the southbound approach because it would probably be logical to provide consistent northbound and southbound sections, although this is not technically required for project mitigation.) . "F' Street! Bay Boulevard/Lagoon Drive: Widening to provide a left turn lane, through lane, and right turn lane on the northbound, southbound, and eastbound approaches. It should be noted that widening of the "F' Street bridge will not be required for this project. However, the project will contribute traffic to the bridge, and consideration should be given to inclusion of this project in any assessments which may be required for bridge widening in the future. If the proposed mitigation measures are implemel1ted, all intersections in the study area . ".' '1" would be expected to operate at Level of Service D or better and, therefore, meet the city's standards for peak hour intersection operations. Table 6-1 documents the expected intersection Levels of Service with and without mitigation. Table 6-2 shows the' project's contribution to total traffic growth between 1991 and 1997. 6-1 d.fJ~.1/~ City of Chula Vista [@tWlftw;.millfiJk~~a:;:~S:W:l%Mm&lMWtrriEimmttititJ@'fMMJt>>t~Jt0%@,~"'1ttWlti&tWitl%1~killig@@~tWmm.ft%ltJf;*tJ&@ifif2mt=~JWm Restripe Nonhbound Lanes and Add Nonhbound Right Turn Arrow ~ Signalize Intersection and Add Right Turn Lanes on Northbound, Southbound and Westbound Approaches ~ 1! !l! .J!! => .g ~ <n Ii) .! .!!l ~ .! oS ,'. ...... N Add Nonhbound Right Turn Arrow -""\. EStreet to => :s ,. '" ~ ,!!! ." o ~ , Add Nonhbound Left Turn Lane ,~:; ,,-\., < >;; F Street G Street to => ~ '" ~ .. '6 o ~ .-, H Street I Street '" ~ 't> .. e <n J Street ,j ~h ,." t~"' .~. ,~:. ~ ::., 'F (. '''';-., ",' ,- -'-,.'.' ROHR OFFICE COMPLEX PHASE II Traffic Impact Analysis . ~",' ""'" ----- '~;,":':,:~~.:,>:?:::~: 6-2 , City of Chula VISta " '"= . .-5 S8 Ramp .... N ~ l l Install Right Turn Arrow .~: I f >( . t -r Restripe to Allow Right Turns Existing Access Drlve(Future Marina Parkway) E Street E ... > GI '5 o III >- ... III I"-~ ( ( ;-, :;:;:\l':';;'. ,: .,~.~ . City of Chula Vista '".;~ .y~.,;:..L . ,~,'>+i~...~' '. :;:::Y..:<'<;~"$:}.;$;:.:;;.,;;.;JtE --- A N Install Right Turn Arrow I r 1(\ --------- --------- 0( --------- )0 --------- )0 -y E Street r II 1-5i",BR.amp -, . , . I I - I ~ I - I II) w I I .tll /;j ----- ~ --- ~ ~z . ill I I [1 ~::* 1M Ml I ~t -c: - .;:=--- G 1=J .tll I I I I I I d .OL ~ ~ s '" ;> " '.. ,"'" ;'. "" "- " 6-5' . I I I I I I - ~ Ci) w L - --.- >- .OL! e III - ~ .~. .._~.,---,'-...-~~-~ ,-" ,A~<'~ )j) >- ! CD e III c o ;: '6 c o o c ;: CIl ~ ','.(' c o ;: Cll ~ - ::s " Gl CIl o c- o .. a. jti'II!~ll .:,..;sf.K.~..."~:O", @$.~K:~1~[~~!~ t$[~~f41~l ' IC:II~J. V...'d'Jif..;t ~ltl'.\.D.".......1 \lla'."alt4' City of ChuJa Vista ~~~~1fu1i~.;,"; ~..m~' ;sm~'.:..:-.v .4,~ .,..~ . ,. . ~ "'~f*W '" M .. f:: M .. """ Q .. Q .. c. .. ... .. .... N , " Proposed Cwbline with Cwrent I " . /CityofChula VISlaDesign. . I 'K ~ Widen Roadwa 10' to Provide Mitigation .. " .3 .. ... = I l i 1( 'L::: 12' 34' 10' ~ [;J ...c: 12' 78' 12' ~ r- Install Traffic 22' -.. Signal ). Lagoon Drive F Street I I i =:I ( ;;: .. E /"" '" .. > .. CD .. :; 0 ... "J ... GI ... ... ... >- ~ "t "t ~ ~ '" '" ... GI ~ ~ \ . Proposed Curbline; with Current Ci of Chul. Vislll Design Widen Roadw. 10' to Provide Mitigation -, 6-6 . . . . . Intersection "En St/I-5 SB Ramp/Bay Blvd "En St/I-5 NB Ramps "En St/Broadway "P' St/Bay Blvd/Lagoon Dr Table 6.1 YEAR 1997 INTERSECTION . LEVELS OF SERVICE WITH MITIGATION Level of Service Without Mitigation With Mitigation , ~ ',. AM Peak PM Peak' AM Peak PM Peak Hmu: Hmu: Hmu: Hmu: c c C F F E E F C D C D D D D D J.. {J - J..:l :;L 6-7,." ~ Table 6-2 PROJECT CONTRIBUTION TO 1997 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC AT INTERSECTIONS WITH MITIGATION PROPOSED Project 1997 Increase in Contribution Existing Traffic Traffic to Increase in (1991) With 1991 to Project Traffic, 1991 Intersection Traffic Proiect 1.2.2.Z Traffic to ]997 "E" StII-5 SB RamplBay Blvd 1805 2610 805 314 39% "E" StII-5 NB Ramps 2931 3846 915 297 32% "E" St/Broadway 3781 4328 547 37 7% "F' St/Bay Blvd/Lagoon Dr 1350 2248 898 398 44% .~ ~, 6-8 c2C ~ :22 J . It should be noted that the project contributes only a minor portion of traffic to the "E" Street/Broadway intersection. However, some improvements will be needed at this intersection in order to maintain Level of Service D operations at the full development of the project site. Therefore, itis recommended that this intersection be improved when Ilecessary by the City and that the Cityan~.t11e site' owner come to an agreement as to the share of cost of the proposed . . ..::. *.,~.,.-..-._. -.-"" improvements which should be contributed as project mitigation. STREET SEGMENT MITIGATION In Chapter 5, an analysis was conducted of street segment traffic conditions. This analysis was based on adopted General Plan Buildout conditions plus project traffic. Street segments were identified where improvements to the existing roadway would be required to meet the City's standards for Average Daily Traffic levels. Based on this analysis the following roadway improvements were indicated: . Improvement of Bay Boulevard from "E" Street to "F' Street to a Gass II Collector. Improvement of"E" Street, from 1-5 to Woodlawn Avenue to a Four Lane Major Street. , Improvement of "E" Street, from Woodlawn Avenue to Broadway to a Four Lane Major Street. Improvement of"H" Street, between 1-5 and Woodlawn Avenue to a Four Lane Major Street. . . . . None of the above improvements are considered necessary to avoid a significant traffic impact caused by the project. Rather, it is recommended that the street segments listed above be monitored by the City and that improvements be made as necessary. The City may wish to rtXJ.uire a fee from the owner of the site to help offset the cost of street segment improvements. However, it should be noted that in the case of the "E" Street and "H" Street improvements, the project contribution is very small (1%). In the case of the Bay Boulevard improvement, the effective cross-section of a Class II collector street could be achieved by removal of parking with no ,widening rtXJ.uired and very little cost involved. Therefore, it may be considered more desirable for the City and the owner of the site to consider the Bay Boulevard improvement as a low-cost improvement which will be entirely the responsibility of the City. . 6-9 :J.(J-:: ~i ~ L:2J S620 Friars Road RICK ENCINEEI{INC COMPANY S~lll J)iq.~() Calilomia 'ill 10-2596 -- (6191191-0707 FAX, (6191 291-4165 February 20, 1992 Ms. Diana Guass Richardson c/o City of Chula Vista 263 Fig Avenue Chula Vista, California 91910 Dear Diana: As discussed in our meeting yesterday afternoon, the purpose of this letter is to clarify Rick Engineering Company I s "Drainage Study for Rohr Corporate Facility" dated May 14, 1990. The purpose of this report was to provide a feasibility study for storm drainage for the Rohr Building #1 site (15.5 acre site). To determine a feasible method to drain the Building #1 site, we had to analyze the surrounding drainage basins. The 15.5 acre Building #1 site and the "RISI Parcel" (southwest corner of :"F" ""'\ Street and Bay Boulevard) were considered as one basin in the analysis. The Bay Boulevard Parcels east of the 15.5 acre site :and south of the "RISI Parcel", as well as a portion of Rohr prope,rty south of the 15.5 acre site were. analyzed as a second basin (the "G" Street system). These two basins were delineated on the exhibits included in the referenced study. It is important to note here that the 35 acre "F-G Street" LCP Amendment Area includes the 15.5 acre Building #1 site as well as approximately 20 acres of the "G" Street basin analyzed in the study. We can infer from the study (Page 5 and Appendices A and B) that .' the "F-G Street" LCP Amendment Area has adequate dralnage facili ties. Finally, because runoff from the "RISI Parcel", Lagoon Drive, and the 15.5 acre Building #1 site is detained, the remainder of the "F-G Street" LCP Amendment Area has capacity to drain to the "G" Street pipe system. I hope this explanation is helpful in:relating the study to this specific area. J. Sincerely, " .. '-t';] !(,:(\;~:~rt ~Jij ~H' RI~NGINEE.RING COMPANY /~~ ~j 4Jj~~[h v ~ \ John D. Goddard, Jr. -. .2 (J -, :L25' .. ~ . . . . Ms. Diana Guass Richardson February 20, 1992 Page 2 cc: Al deBerardinis - Starboard Development Pam Buchan - city of Chula vista ;Jo ~2 :20 DRAINAGE STUDY FOR ROHR'S CORPORATE FACILITY Prepared for: Rohr Industries Job Number 11325 May 14, 1990 ~.l' ,'- ~- (_~'i Dennis C. Bowl' RCE 32838; Expir ~ <, i' ~1 ~ Prepared By: RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY WATER RESOURCES DIVISION 5620 FRIARS ROAD SAN DIEGO, CA4IFORNIA 92110 (619) 29'1-0707 -. -. -" :J..fJ /cJ:l 7 , ... TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction . . . . . . 1 Figur~ 1: Vicinity Map . . . ~. . . 2 Hydrologic Criteria and Methodology 3 Explanation of the Rational Method 4 Hydrologic Results 5 APPENDICES A. Rational Method Computer output lOa-year Storm Event B. Pressure Analysis lOa-year Storm Event System 200 without proposed site " ... MAP POCKETS 1. Alternative I 2. Alternative II 3. Rational Method Drainage Map i"'~r-:.:i': '\;:' ["r ;;',~ i;"> "; :',:{":{F ";),', . d.. 0 - ;;2.2 r: INTRODUCTION -." This report presents a feasibility study for the drainage of Rohr Industries', proposed corporate building. wi thin Chula Vista's Mid-Bay Front area. The' project site is located south of F street, west of Bay Boulevard, north of existing Rohr facilities, and east of the San Diego Bay in the City of Chula Vista (see Figure 1). Currently, the site is flat with approximately 75% vegetative cover consisting of annual grasses. Runoff from the site flows overland to a swale north of Building 61 located wi thin the existing Rohr facilities. Runoff then flows west to a salt marsh at the project's western boundary. ...,~ Proposed conditions will consist of a corporate building and a parking lot on the 15.5-acre site. Drainage of the site'is a major concern, due to the nearby salt marsh. Two alternatives have been proposed to drain the site. -." The first al ternati ve requires discharging runoff from the proposed site to the existing 42-inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) storm drain system. This system is located along G street between Bay Boulevard and Marina Parkway. A portion of the the runoff currently flowing in this system will be re-routed to an 84-inch RCP storm drain system. This 84-inch system is located within the Rohr property, south of H Street (see Map Pocket 1). r'~ . I; .... The second alternative requires on-site detention of the 100-year discharge from the proposed project. This detention facility will decrease the proposed 100-year discharge within the 42-inch Rep storm drain system along G Street to levels at or below current conditions (see Map Pocket 2). - 1 )0 -.2rJ I . . HYDROLOGIC CRITERIA AND METHODOLOGY Desian Storm: Land Use: soil TYPe: Runoff Coefficients: .... . Rainfall Intensitv: Pi l:. . l09-year storm event. Industrial development. Soil types used for this analysis were determined to be hydrologic soil group "0" as outlined in. the Soil Conservation Service's Soil Survey for San Dieao Countv. The runoff coefficients or "C" values used in this study were based on criteria presented in the City of Chula Vista Drainage Design Manual. A coefficient of 0.9 was used for the analysis. The rainfall intensity used in this analysis was based on the criteria presented in the County of San Diego and the City of Chula vista Drainage Design Manuals. 3 c2iJ - :2'50 , EXPLANATION OF THE RATIONAL METHOD COMPUTER PROGRAM - Hydrology for this study uses a computerized version of the Rational Method. The " computerized Rational Method Program is a computer-aided design program where the user develops a node-link model of the watershed. This program can estimate conduit sizes needed to accommodate design storm discharges. The node-link model is developed by creating independent node- link models of individual interior watersheds and linking them together at various confluence points. The program allows up to five streams to confluence at anyone time. stream entries for the confluence must be made sequentially until all streams are entered. The program has the capability of performing calculations for eight hydrologic processes. These processes are assigned code numbers which appear in the printed results. The code numbers and their meanings are as follows: CODE 1: CODE 2: CODE 3 : CODE 4: CODE 5: CODE 6: CODE 7: CODE 8: ""'" Confluence analysis at a node Initial sub-area analysis Pipeflow travel time (computer estimated pipe size) Pipeflow travel time (user specifies pipe size) Trapezoidal channel travel time street flow analysis through a sub-area User specified information at a node Addition of sub-area runoff to mainline ""'" 4 :10/;1.3 J . ~. . r~ .. u . HYDROLOGIC RESULTS The existing 84-inch. RCP . storm drain system along H street (Alternative I) will not have sufficient capacity to convey any increased runoff caused by diversion as described above. A proposed system from G Street to the 84-inch RCP would function under pressure and cause flooding within the Rohr property. The only feasible way to drain the site is through the existing storm drain system along G Street (Alternative II). This storm drain system operates under pressure for the lOO-year storm. In order to drain the proposed site, an on-site detention basin is required to attenuate the lOO-year peak discharge and maintain adequate capacity within the existing G street system. The lOO-year hydraulic grade line (HGL) was calculated for this system under current conditions. The analysis indicates the system is in pressure flow with the HGL below the existing ground surface. By maintaining the water surface elevation in the detention basin equal to or below the HGL in the 42-inch RCP, the proposed site can be drained to the existing system without flooding the existing Rohr property. The rational method computer output is located in Appendix A and the pressure analysis is located in Appendix B. The Rational Method Drainage Map is located in Map Pocket 3. The results of a preliminary detention analysis indicated that the storage volume required for the on-site basin was approximately 2 acre-feet. This basin will detain runoff entering the salt marsh during a lOO-year storm event keeping flows at current levels. 5 .JJJ -;)3.2. The storm drain system within the project site consists of a __ series of inlets and pipes which convey all the water from roof drains and parking areas to the proposed detention pond. This pond is located between the proposed building and the salt marsh. Before discharging into the pond, the water is filtered through a cleansing system consisting of a triple box with baffles. This system will trap suspended grease and heavy metal particles. The cleansing system will require annual maintenance each October. Maintenance will consist of mechanicallY-draining the basin. Winter flows will be conveyed out of the detention area by an lS-inch RCP and discharged into the existing G street storm drain system. The existing system will then discharge runoff into the salt marsh. ~tt Dry weather flows will be retained within the basin by the use of a stop gate. This stop gate will be placed within the IS-inch RCP headwall at the southern end of the basin in May and removed in October as part of the maintenance program for the site. This mechanism will prevent dry weather flows from entering the salt marsh. All flows that are retained - will be reduced by evaporation and percolation. Historical data for eighty years of record indicate a mean total monthly precipitation for this area of San Diego of less than one-half of an inch per month. The low precipitation and warmer temperatures .during these months will provide a sufficient evaporation rate to prevent a wetland area from forming in this pond. ~ ..; ,....., i'_.. - 6 .:2()~2J3 . tr SEWER STUDY FOR "F" AND "G" STREETS MASTER PLAN AND LCP AMENDMENT - "G" STREET BASIN i , PREPARED FOR: ROHR INDUSTRIES i.. Job Number 11679 . December 4, 1991 l Prepared By: . RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY 5620 FRIARS ROAD SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92110-2596 (619) 291-0707 ... d2f) - J '31 --. TABLE .OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 ANALYSIS PROCEDURE.............................................. 2 RESULTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 PEAKING FACTORS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 CRITERIA FOR VERIFYING ADEQUACY OF EXISTING GRAVITY SYSTEM.......3 ADJUSTMENT FACTORS CALCULATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 SEWAGE FLOW CALCULATIONS................................. ...5 _ 6 ,- I. APPENDICES A. ADS METERED SEWER FLOW AND CALCULATION OF AVERAGE DAILY FLOW. --. B. CVDS 18 C. CITY OF SAN DIEGO SEWAGE DESIGN MANUAL (FIGURE 2) GENERATION RATES. D. NORMAL DEPTH AND VELOCITY FOR CIRCULAR PIPES CALCULATIONS. , MAP POCKETS 1. WEST AND PORTION OF EAST BASIN SEWER STUDY MAP. 2. PORTION OF EAST BASIN SEWER STUDY MAP. ~ .-, ;JjJ / d, ]~ . . I L [ ,. ri' I;' ... t"; . ... INTRODUCTION THIS REPORT PRESENTS A STUDY OF THE IMPACT TO THE EXISTING SEWER SYSTEM IN BAY BOULEVARD AND "G" STREET BY THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTIES BOUNDED BY LAGOON DRIVE, BAY BOULEVARD, "G" STREET AND THE "F"I"G" STREETS MARSH. ROHR INDUSTRIES ARE PROPOSING THE DEVELOPMENT AS "F" AND "G" STREETS MASTER PLAN AND PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CURRENT APPROVED LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM (L.C.P.) AS AMENDED APRIL 1989. THE SEWAGE BASIN CONSISTS OF TWO MAJOR SUB-BASINS THAT CONFLUENCE AT A METERING FACILITY AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF "G" STREET AND THE SD&AE RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY. IN THE CHULA VISTA BAY FRONT . THE AFFLUENT FROM THE METERING FACILITY IS DISCHARGED INTO A 78" RCP METROPOLITAN SEWER DISTRICT INTERCEPTOR SEWER. ONE BASIN (WEST BASIN) LIES WEST OF THE SD&AE RAILROAD IN THE CHULA VISTA BAY FRONT (MAP POCKET 1). THIS BASIN FLOWS TO A PUMP STATION IN "G" STREET APPROXIMATELY 1300 FEET WEST OF THE METERING FACILITY. THE PUMP STATION AFFLUENT IS PUMPED EASTERLY UP ,"G" STREET TO MANHOLE CONFLUENCE WITH THE SECOND BASIN PRIOR, TO ENTERING THE METERING FACILITY. THE SECOND BASIN (EAST BASIN) LIES EAST OF THE SD&AE RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY (MAP POCKETS 1 AND 2). THIS BASIN GRAVITY FLOWS TO THE MANHOLE CONFLUENCE UPSTREAM OF THE METERING FACILITY. 1 .:20" ;J.3& -, ANALYSIS PROCEDURE THEORETICAL AVERAGE DAILY FLOWS (ADF) WERE DETERMINED FOR THE WEST AND EAST BASINS AND SUB-BASINS, WITH ONE WEST SUB-BASIN METERED FLOW PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA. THESE FLOW RATES WERE COMPARED TO AND ADJUSTED (ONLY EXISTING THEORETICAL FLOWS WERE ADJUSTED) BY A WEIGHTED ADJUSTMENT FACTOR, TO EQUAL METERED ADF THROUGH THE SEWER METERING FACILITY. THE METERED ADF IS CALCULATED IN APPENDIX "A", FROM DATA SUPPLIED BY THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA. A PEAKING FACTOR WAS THEN APPLIED TO THE ADJUSTED ADF TO DETERMINE IF THE EXISTING GRAVITY SYSTEMS IN BAY BOULEVARD AND "G" STREET MEET CITY OF CHULA VISTA DESIGN CRITERIA. RESULTS - PEAK FLOW NORMAL DEPTH CALCULATIONS INDICATE THAT THE EXISTING GRAVITY SYSTEMS, LINES A, B, D, F, AND G, HAVE CAPACITY. PEAK FLOW VELOCITY CALCULATIONS INDICATE THAT THE EASTERN PORTION OF LINE A, AND LINE C, F AND G HAVE VELOCITIES WITHIN ALLOWABLE PARAMETERS. CALCULATIONS INDICATE THAT THE WESTERN PORTION OF LINE A AND LINED HAVE VELOCITIES LESS THAN THE MINIMUM ALLOWABLE OF 2 FEET PER SECOND. ~ 2 :20 ~;2 J 7 . . '- ... . PEAKING FACTORS THE PEAKING FACTORS USED IN THIS STUDY RELATE PEAK FLOW TO AVERAGE FLOW AND VARIES BASED ON THE POPULATION SERVED: REFERENCE TO C.V.D.S. 18 (APPENDIX B). CRITERIA FOR VERIFYING ADEOUACY OF EXISTING GRAVITY SYSTEM THE FOLLOWING DESIGN CRITERIA WAS USED TO ANALYZE THE EXISTING SYSTEMS. A) THE ALLOWABLE DEPTH OF FLOW TO DIAMETER (D/d) RATIOS FOR PEAK FLOWS WILL BE AS FOLLOWS: PIPE SIZE ALLOWABLE Did 12 INCHES AND LESS GREATER THAN 12 INCHES .50 .75 B) "n" FACTORS FOR VITRIFIED CLAY PIPES: PIPE SIZE "n" < 21" . 013 ~ 21" .012 C) D) THE MINIMUM ALLOWABLE FLOW VELOCITY = 2 FEET/SECOND. MINIMUM ALLOWABLE FLOW VELOCITY = 12 FEET/SECOND. SEWAGE GENERATION RATE = 80 GAL/POP/DAY THE E) LAND USE DENSITIES WERE TAKEN FROM THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA SUBDIVISION MANUAL AND THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO SEWER DESIGN MANUAL, FIGURE 2, (APPENDIX C). 3 ='2Cl- .2 3 g' ~, ADJUSTMENT FACTORS CALCULATIONS ADF FOR METERING FACILITY (APPENDIX A) = 2.285 MGD 2.285 MGD = 3.535 CFS TAKE PEAK DESIGN FLOWS AND DIVIDE BY PEAK/AVG RATIO TO GET ADF LINE "B" (PG 5) .36 PEAK FACTOR = .15 CFS LINE "E" (PG 6) 9.57 PEAK FACTOR = 6.55 CFS LINE "A" (PG 5) .44 PEAK FACTOR = .19 CFS (NOT TO BE ADJUSTED) 6.89 CFS LINE "A" + ADJUSTED LINE "E" AND "B" SHOULD EQUAL METERED ADF ADJUST THE TWO LINES ("E" & "B") ACCORDINGLY 6.89 - 3.54 = 3.35 CFS (DIFFERENCE) WEIGHTED ADJUSTMENT FACTORS: .15/(.15+6.55) = .0224 (3.35) = .075 (LINE B) 6.55/(.15+6.55) = .9776 (3.35) = 3.275 (LINE E) '"' NEW ADJUSTED VALVES ARE LINE "B" = .15 - .075 = .075 CFS LINE "E" = 6.55 - 3.275 = 3.275 L MULTIPLY BY NEW PEAK FACTOR FOR PEAK DESIGN LINE 2 FLOW (PDF) LINE "B" PDF = .075 (2.66) = 20 CFS (SEE PG 5) LINE "E" PDF = 3.275 (1.60) = 5.24 CFS (SEE PG 6) CHECK .19 + 0.75 + 3.275 = 3.54 CFS ~ ADF 3.535 CFS r , ~ L ""'" 4 ;)0--;23; - . . . ATTACHMENT II Bayfront Project Area Recording Requested By: > > > CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY> 276 Fourth Avenue > Chula Vista, CA 92010 > > > > CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY> 276 Fourth Avenue > Chula Vista, CA 92010 > > (Space Above This Line For Recorder) When Recorded Mail To: BF/OP NO.4 OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT ROHR, INC. THIS BF/OP NO.4 OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is entered into by and between the CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, a political subdivision of the State of California (hereinafter referred to as the "AGENCY"), and ROHR, INC., a Delaware corporation (hereinafter referred to as the "DEVELOPER"). Recitals WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER desires to develop certain real property within the CHULA VISTA BAYFRONT REDEVELOPMENT Project Area which is subject to the jurisdiction and control of the AGENCY and located within the Chula Vista Coastal Zone which is subject to the regulations and requirements of the certified Chula Vista Local Coastal Program; and, WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER has proposed the construction of a 125,000 sq. ft., six-story building which will require an amendment to the certified Local Coastal Program (proposed LCP Amendment No. 10); and WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER has presented plans for the development to the CITY OF CHULA VISTA Design Review Committee; and, WHEREAS, said plans for development have been recommended for approval by said Committee; and, S032\STARBOARO\OYNER.AGT c20~21o WHEREAS, the AGENCY hereby approves the development proposals as submitted by the DEVELOPER; and, - WHEREAS, the AGENCY desires that said development proposal be implemented and completed as soon as is practicable; and, WHEREAS, the effectiveness of Sections 8 of this Agreement is contingent upon the Coastal Commission's approval of proposed Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 10. Agreement NOW, THEREFORE, the AGENCY and the DEVELOPER agree as follows: 1. The foregoing recitals are incorporated into this Agreement. 2. The property to be developed (the "Property") is commonly described as 850 Lagoon Drive, Chula Vista, California. A legal description of the Property and a map depicting the location of the Property are attached hereto as Exhibit" A " and by this reference incorporated herein. 3. The DEVELOPER covenants, by and for itself, its heirs, executors, administrators and assigns and all persons claiming under or through it, the following: A. That the Property will be developed in accordance with the AGENCY approved development proposal ("Development") attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and on file with the AGENCY's Secretary as Document No. BF/OP #4. - B. To apply for building permits for the Development within one (1) year from the date of this Agreement and to commence construction of the proposed development within one (1) year from the date of issuance of the building permits. In the event that the DEVELOPER fails to apply for said building permits within said one (1) year period, the approval of the DEVELOPER's development proposals shall be void and this Agreement shall be void and of no further force or effect. C. That in all deeds granting or conveying an interest in the Property, the following language shall appear: "The grantee herein covenants by and for itself, its heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, and all persons claiming under or through it, that there shall be no discrimination against or segregation of, any person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, national origin or ancestry in the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure, or enjoyment of the premises herein conveyed, nor shall the grantee itself or any persons claiming under or through it establish or permit any said practice of .....'It., SD32\STARBOARD\OYNER.AGT 2 Ji) , JJI / . discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number use or occupancy of tenants, lessees, subtenant lessees, or vendees in the premises herein conveyed. The foregoing covenants shall run with the land. " D. That in all leases demising an interest in all or any part of the Property, the following language shall appear: "The lessee herein covenants by and for itself, its heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, and all persons claiming under or through it, and this lease is made and accepted upon and subject to the following conditions: That there shall be no discrimination against or segregation of, any person or group of persons, on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, national origin, or ancestry, in the leasing, subleasing, transferring use, occupancy, tenure, or enjoyment of . the premises herein leased, nor shall the lessee itself or any persons claiming under or through it, establish or permit any said practices of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number or use, or occupancy of tenants, lessees, sub lessees , subtenants, or vendees in the premises herein leased." . E. That there shall be no discrimination or segregation of the type described above in connection with the development or use of the Property, as provided herein, and that any contracts entered into with respect to the development or use of the Property shall contain a provision substantially similar to the foregoing obligating the contracting party and successor or assignee to refrain from any such discrimination or segregation. 4. The DEVELOPER agrees that if either the AGENCY or the CITY OF CHULA VISTA proceeds to form a Special Assessment District for the construction or maintenance of parking facilities, common areas or other public facilities which benefit the Property subject to this Agreement, that the DEVELOPER hereby waives any right it may have to protest the formation of said Special Assessment District; provided, however, that (i) said waiver shall be limited to the DEVELOPER's interest in the Property legally described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and shall not apply to any other real property in which the DEVELOPER may have an interest, and (ii) the DEVELOPER shall have the right to participate in the formation of any proposed Special Assessment District. Said waiver shall not preclude the DEVELOPER from protesting the amount of any assessment on said Property. . 5. The DEVELOPER agrees to contribute one-half of one percent ('h of 1 %) of the building valuation of this project to a pool of funds to be used at the discretion of the AGENCY, in consultation with the DEVELOPER, in creating and funding significant works of art in accordance with the Bayfront Fine Arts Policy, as said S032\STARBOARD\OUNER.AGT 3 ..2 0 ~..2. Lj :z Policy is in effect on the date hereof; orovided, however, that the DEVELOPER'S contribution may, at the DEVELOPER'S option, be made in the form of an on-site feature reasonably approved by the AGENCY as an alternative to said cash contribution; orovided, further, that if said alternative feature is not reasonably approved by the AGENCY by the time that an occupancy permit for the proposed development is requested by the DEVELOPER, then the DEVELOPER shall be required to make said contribution in cash. -, 6. The DEVELOPER agrees to accept the attached conditions and mitigation measures imposed by the AGENCY as described in Exhibit "C" attached hereto. 7. The DEVELOPER agrees to maintain the Property in "first class condition and repair. II A. DUTY TO MAINTAIN IN FIRST CLASS CONDITION. The DEVELOPER shall, at the DEVELOPER'S sole cost and expense, maintain the Property and all improvements thereon in "first class condition and repair." If the DEVELOPER fails to maintain the Property in "first class condition and repair," the AGENCY or its agents shall have the right, after written notice to the DEVELOPER and the DEVELOPER's failure to correct any deficiency specified in said notice within 30 days after the DEVELOPER's receipt of said notice, to go onto the Property and perform the necessary maintenance. The cost of said maintenance shall become a lien against the Property. The AGENCY shall have the right to enforce this lien ....... either by foreclosing on the Property or by forwarding the amount to be collected to the Tax Assessor who shall make it part of the tax bill. The DEVELOPER shall promptly and diligently repair, restore, alter, add to, remove and replace, as required, the Property and all improvements thereon to maintain or comply with this Agreement as specified above, or to remedy all damage to or destruction of all or any part of said improvements. Any repair, restoration, alteration, addition, removal, maintenance, replacement and other act of compliance under this Paragraph (hereafter collectively referred to as "Restoration") shall be completed by the DEVELOPER whether or not funds are available from insurance proceeds or subtenant contributions, and the DEVELOPER shall place said improvements in the condition existing immediately prior to the date of said damage or destruction. B. FIRST CLASS CONDITION DEFINED. "First class condition and repair" means Restoration which is necessary to keep the Property and the improvements thereon in efficient and attractive condition, at least substantially equal in quality to the condition which exists when the condition(s) in attached Exhibit "B" are completed. 8. The AGENCY agrees: ....... S032\STARBOARO\OYNER.AGT 4 c10 -,)1/3 . A. To cause the demolition and clearance of all buildings and improvements located on certain real property commonly known as "Shangri-La" and depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit" A ", which real property is owned by the Agency and located at 965 and 968 Lagoon Drive (F Street). The AGENCY agrees to refrain from modifying the leases of said real property or to otherwise extend the term of said lease. The AGENCY further agrees to cause said demolition and clearance to be accomplished with due diligence and at the earliest date legally and practically possible, after all tenants have vacated said real property. The AGENCY presently anticipates that said demolition and clearance will be completed on or before the end of August, 1993. B. To recommend to the CITY OF CHULA VISTA to initiate the vacation of certain interest "G" Street as depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit "A", and to initiate the proceeding to convey certain portion of Tidelands Avenue as depicted on the map attached hereto on Exhibit A to DEVELOPER. Any such vacation and conveyance shall be accomplished in an as is basis. Developer shall hold City and AGENCY harmless with respect to condition of any property being conveyed or vacated. . C. To participate in the costs of the development and permit fees which are required in connection with the property or which will benefit the Property and the Bayfront Redevelopment Project Area (the "Reimbursable Costs"). Said participation shall be financial and shall be in an amount not to exceed $737,000 and shall be in the form of reimbursement. The AGENCY shall promptly deposit into a Capital Improvement Project account established by the AGENCY tax increment received by the AGENCY on account of the development contemplated by this Agreement, Owner Participation Agreement BF/OP No.4 between the AGENCY and the DEVELOPER following the completion of said Development including but not limited to Building 2; provided however that such deposit shall not include any amount Agency is currently legally required by law to be set aside from such tax increment. If by January 1994, Building 2 has not been completed, Agency shall have no further obligation to reimburse any additional tax increment. As and when amounts are deposited by the AGENCY into said Capital Improvement Project account, the AGENCY shall reimburse the DEVELOPER for Reimbursable Costs within thirty (30) days after the date that the DEVELOPER presents to the AGENCY documentation reasonably satisfactory to the AGENCY demonstrating the DEVELOPER's expenditure of said Reimbursable Costs; provided, however, that the AGENCY shall not be obligated to reimburse the DEVELOPER for more than $737,000 of Reimbursable Costs. The DEVELOPER agrees: . SD32\STARBDARD\OWNER.AGT 5 ,;2(J -.2 LJ tj A. To demolish in a manner reasonably acceptable to AGENCY and City existing Rohr Building No. 77 located on a parcel owned by the DEVELOPER located adjacent to, and south of, the 11.5-acre parcel, as depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit" A ", to accommodate the provision of ingress and egress from said 11.5-acre parcel to "G" Street. Demolition shall be accomplished prior to issuance of occupancy permit for Building No.2. -, B. To enter into an agreement between the DEVELOPER and the AGENCY and/or the CITY OF CHULA VISTA which meets CITY/AGENCY requirements for the use of the adjacent SDG&E parcel for parking for the proposed project, as provided in condition no. lA in Exhibit "C" attached hereto. C. To paint existing Rohr Building No. 61 in a manner and color scheme mutually agreeable to the DEVELOPER and the AGENCY. Painting shall be accomplished prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for Building No.2. 9. The AGENCY and the DEVELOPER agree that the covenants of the DEVELOPER expressed herein shall run with the land. The DEVELOPER shall have the right, without prior approval of the AGENCY, to assign its rights and delegate its duties under this Agreement. 10. The AGENCY and the DEVELOPER agree that the covenants of the DEVELOPER expressed herein are for the express benefit of the AGENCY and the CHULA VISTA BA YFRONT REDEVELOPMENT Project Area as the same now exists or may be hereafter amended. The AGENCY and the DEVELOPER agree that the provisions of this Agreement may be specifically enforced in any court of competent jurisdiction by the AGENCY and CITY. -, 11. The AGENCY and the DEVELOPER agree that this Agreement may be recorded by the AGENCY in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, California. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DATED: By: Tim Nader, Chairman -', S032\STARBOARO\OUNER.AGT 6 ;2C / c215 . . . NOTARY: Please attach acknowledgement card. WPC I299H Bayfront SD32\STARBOARD\OYNER.AGT ROHR, INC. By: Ronald M. Miller Vice President and Treasurer 7 ;J[J".21 ~ """" -, """" J-f)---21) 7 . . . EXHIBIT A OF ATTACHMENT II EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION Being portions of Quarter sections 162, 163, 171 and 172 of Rancho De La Nacion, according to said Map thereof No. 166, in the City of Chula Vista, County of San Diego, State of California, said portions described in total as follow: Beginning at the Southeast corner of Parcel 10e of Record of survey 11749 on file in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County; thence along the Easterly line of said Parcel 10e and its Northerly prolongation North 17.56' 51" We~t 944.94 feet to the Southerly line of Lagoon Drive (formerly "F" Street); thence along said southerly line North 72.03'09" East 682.72 feet to a point on the Westerly right-of-way of the San Diego and Arizona Eastern Railroad right-of-way; thence along said Westerly right-of-way South 17.46'57" East 1238.72 feet to the Northerly right-of-way of "G" street (80.00 feet in width); thence along said Northerly right-of-way North 72.06' 17" East 404.13 feet, to the Westerly right-of-way of Bay Boulevard; thence along said Westerly right-of- way South 18.01'22" East 80.00 feet to the Southerly right-of-way of "G" street; thence along said Southerly right-of-way South 72.06'17" West 404.67 feet; thence North 17046'57" 20.04 feet; thence South 72013'03" West 60.00 feet; thence along a line which is 80.00 Westerly and parallel with the Easterly line of Quarter Section 172 North 17.46'57" East 351.98 feet to a point on the Easterly prolongation of the Southerly line as said Parcel 10e; thence along said Easterly prolongation South 720 II' 55" West (Record South 72.11'52" West) 620.00 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 16.022 acres (Rohr (SDG&E (G Street 11.51) 3.74) .77) )Jj ~ )J!c/ -. ~ ~ ;Jj) - ). t/ c; . EXHIBIT "A" of ATTACHMENT II ;: ~l ' r " .. ;~,?,'(~~: T; ':;;;~_~x:=;~~~~:;,~3~?,~:~:~~;j~;~~jli~liliiii:i$: ~;';#B~Ul;;~~it.~~~~~i:~.~~l~:)t~~ '> " i;, "'t' t. D ~ '( '" vJ"5'3w...i5",<<~;::",)/&~,,,Nr4-\.-* ~ ,>} '% \.:_ 0'"' ';:'''''\ ~~-'t:'__"y_....,%...",........:LL~~,' ~f! 1;'~' -.....J:&/::".... . ., .., '~....:..---- =,.. .....e{=:- ~ ~-~--;, -:, /" '" ,---1rl~ ' ...-- -_.- r' , . ~ ~ ,,^ ._~ ' i'.y.~ 1nJ;:'; --"~~ ~ ~f L"-J., cr' L,~/ vP:1 ----:v1" ~1b/~7{,..0gl: _}- _____--"" ::'\.i: . ~"; ~ ~ / It -; f? ,;:0'1-:. jf:::S I ,J.- ,.-::-- , ! "-~ r3----~ ~!1 /c::::;1~-\ \ ~ 1/!1 ~,Q/tf.' li'h.~""""",,,,"-::-~""r~ r~-~v~~ y-1t 'vr J \~-~~ :/ ' .F "'Y""''t,~ ( __-","P,:! ~- ~_'I V _/ ~......,.- ~ .......-/' t.~-r:,v v, '\::~ ,-~,l f.;i... ;;."< . ..,0"'"- ~ ---~ /" './ i"N.>......'): ,,- ,," ~ ~-"'-'>~ < ~ ...'0./ ",,>,,_./~\n"'" ~~/"~'" 1 / r f /,-...',* ,~",,~ /' "'--.... "",v 1./', <l~<::- /~<^",t~ /*1 ,=' ~.......x-r~ ; t/ P-- / Ji/ r """t ~~-A "~~7/-:" i ::. ,",1 /. ~~. "'""",,- ~ /' v/';:. ~ l/~' ." -..~v~ ~ .~ - ^-- ----~ / ~ '" ~<.-~,.. _",o-"'-:,'i _ ~. '!./ ""'if ..... t/ ~~ ~-~ l.'<-,~..r , ~ ~ 3: ~~~~l~/ V' i 1j~~ \Qf?i .::-..#~ r -.", ~ :~)..JL '~Ltt~" , ""1) ~ v, ';' ;,1', } .""......-_ .t:z,Yf .~ "c ,_0:~~i8,ll" :~~,>::L-,1jf.Zi.t.l.;, '.'.._....T . ~~;;::w.-.';g~IVll\ "'''. ",?,~"t~ ~\~ ,~/J1 ~ ':\\\ t,: ~~-,,:,_~~, .'(_~---, ,/ 1 ;':,= ? \\\\ ~~ "I~: "'-\ T~\ "'~r.u~~~____.".,....,.._ ...-..~-.,.-~""'''-/- "'} > "" "I "V"",,;,/ -".~.."- ',l", ',' '\, d 1 \ i tf. ~ t~ 7"-"') \ ~ ~" " .,~----- /~-; -~'<"-"',"",,, /'^>, t ~\\ <...../ ~,""h 1 ; << f '\ ~ /" ........'''''-.''' f i~ ;...,........"...... 'i f \\\\ tit 1 ~t f i 1 "- "'---';c(\ /"'<'''W'-"'-'_/--'' 'v$"...M C~; \. ~ \,f,' ~ ",~". P'Ji',f ..----J G ....-...../'\ ,//"<,, f!--~#\.o; :\l">-,< ;.-;~:~>,,_J!l r~/ ,v:-d.~ '''''---Y..::/ 1--"---"--.""" _ _.__.____/~~...A~ ,..,,," 7( \\1 ~-, ,.-.k!~! ~~~,-~- -,' '" '^--..--'--- ,./. / " \. "~ ' , ;N' , , .~~.7'%~""" ~". - '-..... f! . " -:~"' , , , ~ . SC4 ,. 1.E:: /, _ ~OO' ).o~~C -, ....... ....... dU/cJ5? . EXHIBIT "B" of ATTACHMENT II SAN DIEGO BAY '",Ii ,,'~' ""~, 0ElIIlUT1OIl ~ 1'.,.,llt<<l ni >~/~~~I ; ~! it[ f ~ t~..- T;::~'- ::c ','" ;,~>",=,"" PROPOSED " VACA TIOff OF; -G .STREEt". ........ -. -.. dO -' J5J . . . i liL It -~ul . . i i . . . . c----~---=~__ 0 z z < ...J a: n. 3 :c w 0 t: I ; a: (J) I . I -.-... I ~ ti ... ~! ~ ~ a. " t: ~ ~ c ~ . . , I :. ~ .. is g .. EXHIBIT "B" of ATTACHEMENT II . I C\J ~ ~ ,... - ~ ,... -l li- ce .0.. <( . .. I . . ;LtJ~c15r -.. -... .......... c2tJ /025~ . - . -~ ---0 ---0 . ~ ~ ~' ~ :> w --' W I- en --0 <( co '0' ::: o \ L !!, Ii I II!j' j . t I i h ,j 98,_ 'I" Iii i hi 11 . <3 I i ~ u ,", . i .. 1 Ie . ~~ @"" ~ e..... . ~.: 'r l lLl a il 'ld ~ ~ .. ion : I I !! i I ~ !! ! ~ i ~ I I I ! i i 1 1 ; ~ I !i ! I ! ~ ~ ; ~ i i ~ ~~ ...,@ '0 z i ~ , - ~ ; j ! i i ~ 1 !88\ ! ! i ell i P ::l11.,HHHI~ b d 111'1 z!:.el;il! > E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ -<#> z ~ :> w --' W I- en w 5: c <i- ~ .l l' J. l' @-- r i' ~~ '- f- ,~---= --- ---1__: , . , ,~ - f ....... I I I, Iii ~lnd !..! Ii Z II", l i! ~ ~ i sflil.! n:lll!! l!, i i I Ii i pill iL!!! ii~!~ih 0000000000000 EJ &-- z @--- .. .... .. >- .. " z o !:i i:: .... .. lD Q = @-- 0- &- 0- G)-- 4- , ;:~ ~i j, z , ,0 , - ___.I ... "Ii-: : .::;, .. '.... :.. :" ,t- '''' :0 ,z .., ..--. ., '" :.. '''' : 0( b ,,, , , . l:a: .. l"~ , :> - 'o~ r'\ : . :1 ~ ~ Ii i i i ) ~ ~ . , . a i ; ; ; :: ;. i. i. i. n j. o o 8 0-- 0-- @-- (;)-- 0-- .-. , , , , " , , , , , , .., , , , , , .1 t.=::\ I --, w---- :~I , , , , , , , , , , .. ':z --: z : 0 : z : ~ u: ;: i ~ .J ~ u: : ! : nl > I III : > '.. ~,.... :.. : ..I I III ~ .... I" - :z: : III --:... .. : t- OOl . I :) : 10 '.. ',0 C\....- :<1( :. ~. I __: . 111I I III ." III : III I 0 I " : " j' q : j : · "t -1 : :}: " I a I : " ~:: z : z :: : :z: ..J" I .. ~ ~ .. ~Ii i-I I -Ii :lll~ 0--1) i I I' )1 ~i ~II i j I'~I): ~ i ; . ~ ; ~ i ; i ; ; ~ a ; . ~ .. :: ;.nni.i3,. 35ia15i.",. ;.i.;ai.i3j, dO~ 2~c;'7 0- 0---- ' 0- 0-- 0-- . <) i - ~ . ;1. .' '.[ , . ! I 11 ': H ;: U ,I " :, , ' i 't i ~ . I, !: i .. . I: z ~ c:J()~~5~ ~I in .1 1; ~ j j ;1 .a i ! ! ~ : ~~J ; l "' .. ~ I~d. ! IL L o u c .0, U U . ~._j Ii i ~H I!n ! d! iW , Ifl ! ih J i '.If l i ili I b i .n ~'!if - . -III! I I 11. "'"ili I l' it :J! -! l 10 il !; f J. ! if HI P I 'h U HI I J m !~ ,ili! .~ PI'" ,ll. ljlil .'l d ~.. i hi .t 0 M III: II . , ! , ! it dU if lIl, ., ;:-'. I . I J <) <) Ji OW.. J 0 illWd ~a )O/,)Y/'I t '- .1 t I r ........, '" -. . ~ 1 E , ~ . 1 I ~ " ~ p I --:----=~~_~~_~ '~-""(l) ~f I I II ===------==------i'< , -I 1, i I ---,--_. -. -- -- ......... ~: . j -JI =~-~c~=_:_ ~ ~ __ ",' & .. i ~:._t '.,"'" . _ -- :. j lr ,I LJ 7 ~ :<;J:;~ x ~ ii,' x_ ,o<:d" '-Aeg -- ...., j ---- 1008 ~~ G .,; to i. ~ - ., ~ f) ; ! 1 l, lll,l[' , j I !h m I1dl "/ \. ~ . 'r ' r Ii f"i Il ! ~,j Ii fl . { fi :1 fh {I I, :::: ' '. If r!lf If ti ~ ^ / !f, :111 jl 1 il . 11J \!H 'f ~ Ii i Id I Iffi 1 Id Ii u & II 0 I! 10 10 s ;;; ! jIr i Jifl I if i I!I ~ ! 0 1 j '111 < Illl. H . tis e<: ~ , ^ , io , --.../~ I ~__ . , , ~ , ~ lX x~ i . 5 , I ~ ~ " x ^ X , . ) ... . '" '" )1 x , \ ~ '. " / L..-- - ~ ~ , . , '" --.J_ '" , ~ ~ , , ~ / ~ " S~3~~C ~~l)~~d 00 . X ~ - - - -." -, .2(/ ~ .2& I EXHIBIT "c" of ATTACHMENT II . Exhibit "C" Conditions of Approval 1. Unless otherwise specified below, the following conditions must be satisfied by the DEVELOPER prior to the issuance of a building permit for the 6-story building contemplated by the proposed development, and shall be deemed satisfied upon the issuance of such building permit: A. The DEVELOPER shall sign and record a parking agreement between the CITY OF CHULA VISTA and the DEVELOPER, which agreement shall (i) supersede and replace, effective upon the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the improvements contemplated by the proposed development, that certain Agreement Between the City of Chula Vista and Rohr Industries, Inc. re Potential Use Restriction on Office Space, as required by BF/OP No.3, (ii) provide for one (1) parking space per each three hundred (300) square feet of gross floor area of office space existing on the Property in accordance with the requirements of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, and (iii) be on such other terms and conditions as .are reasonably satisfactory to the CITY OF CHULA VISTA and the DEVELOPER. B. The DEVELOPER shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Chula Vista Municipal Code and other state and local laws. . C. The DEVELOPER shall supplement the development proposal to include a pedestrian access between the easterly plaza area of the proposed 6-story office building and the central portion of the SDG&E parking facility. D. The DEVELOPER shall supplement the development proposal to include landscaped focal areas at the terminus of the proposed driveways accessing the SDG&E parking facility via the westerly Rohr office complex parcel. E. The DEVELOPER shall supplement the development proposal to include specific size information for all new plant material which is proposed to be installed along "G" Street, which information shall be submitted to the Landscape Architect for the CITY OF CHULA VISTA for final review and approval. F. The DEVELOPER shall supplement the development proposal to include a fully dimensioned and detailed landscaping planting and irrigation plan for the SDG&E parking facility, which plan shall be submitted to the Landscape Architect for the CITY OF CHULA VISTA for final review and approval. . G. The DEVELOPER shall supplement the development proposal to include a plan for a 12-foot-wide landscaped median within the proposed "G" Street entrance, or other enhanced landscape plan for such entrance as may be reasonably satisfactory to the CITY OF CHULA VISTA and the DEVELOPER. The final landscape plan for such proposed entrance between Bay Boulevard and the south access to Rohr's l1.5-acre parcel shall be ;2tJ -;L?;2 SD134\WP5D\STAR\ROHR\COND.OFAPP implemented in connection with the proposed project no later than January 31, 1994, unless otherwise agreed by the AGENCY and the DEVELOPER. - H. Unless otherwise agreed by the AGENCY and the DEVELOPER, the DEVELOPER shall submit to the Landscape Architect for the CITY OF CHULA VISTA a comprehensive landscaping master plan and schedule for the implementation thereof at the time that a master plan for the DEVELOPER's entire Chula Vista campus is submitted to the AGENCY for its review. I. An amendment to the Certified Local Coastal Program to allow an increase in F.A.R. to .75 and to increase building height limitation to 95 ft. on the project site shall be approved by the City of Chula Vista and the California Coastal Commission prior to issuance of a building permit for the proposed Building 2. J. The DEVELOPER shall incorporate into the proposed project and addendum thereto the following mitigation measures set forth in Mitigated Negative Declaration No. IS-92-18, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program associated therewith: 1. Earth A. In the event construction dewatering is required prior to foundation excavation as a result of the interception of water levels with construction areas, temporary construction dewatering shall be implemented in accordance with the 1990 report _ recommendations of Woodward Clyde Consultants, and in compliance with the directives of the Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding discharge of temporary dewatering wastes. 2. Air A. The proposed project shall participate in the DEVELOPER's Transportation Control Measure Program, which includes: · ridesharing, and van pool incentives; · alternate transportation; and · work scheduling for off-peak hours. B. When the City adopts its own emission reduction program (subsequent to and consistent with the SANDAG/APCD Plan adoption), Rohr must implement any additional relevant legal requirements. C. The DEVELOPER shall comply with any appropriate dust control measures required by APCD (e.g., maintaining adequate soil moisture and removal of soil spillage), and any appropriate limits on the hours of construction (e.g., allowing construction between 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.) and prohibitions on construction truck queuing. -.., S0134\UPSO\STAR\ROHR\CONO.OFAPP 2 020~,)?3 . 3. Water A. The DEVELOPER shall comply with all applicable legal requirements of Sweetwater Authority and the City of Chula Vista re: water consumption. .4. Plant. Animal Life A. The proposed project shall continue to participate in a predator managementprogram for the Chula Vista Bayfront region to control domestic predators as well as wild animal predators. In the event that this program is not established prior to issuance of a grading permit for the proposed project, the DEVELOPER shall coordinate with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service C"USFWS") to determine the extent of participation and the necessary timeframe for predator management. The USFWS recommends contracting with the Department of Agriculture Animal Damage Control program to provide the necessary predator management services. B. Any fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides utilized within the landscaping areas of the proposed project shall be of the rapidly biodegradable variety and shall be approved by the federal Environmental Protection Agency for use near wetland areas. . C. All landscape chemical applications used in connection with the proposed project shall be accomplished by a person who is a state-certified applicator. D. No open garbage containers located outside shall be permitted,and all dumpsters shall be totally enclosed to avoid attracting avian and mammalian predators and scavengers to the project area. All garbage shall be hauled away as often as reasonably possible. E. The 94-foot building contemplated by the proposed project shall utilize non- reflective glass on the west side and bold architectural lines which are readily observable by birds. The glass which was approved for the building contemplated by that certain BF/OP No.3 Owner Participation Agreement between the AGENCY and the DEVELOPER shall be used on the building contemplated by the proposed development. . F. No extraneous ledges upon which raptors could perch or nest shall be included on the western side of the 94-foot building contemplated by the proposed project. Any ledges facing the west shall not exceed two inches in width or shall be sufficiently sloped to avoid such perching. Additionally, any roof crests which are exposed to the wetlands shall be covered with an anti-perch material, such as "NlXalite." Additionally, the north roof edge of Rohr Building 61 will be covered with an anti- perch material, such as "Nixalite". The DEVELOPER commits to use its best efforts to correct any additional problem areas which may be caused by a heavy incidence of perching observed on the proposed improvements or in landscaping materials. )f)/)~)I S0134\YPSO\STAR\ROHR\COHO.OFAPP 3 G. All outside lighting in connection with the proposed project shall be directed away from marsh areas or reflecting faces (windows) of the western side of the building contemplated by the proposed development. All lights shall be limited to the minimum required for security on the western side of the proposed building. ......, 5. Noise A. A biological monitor shall survey the marsh area subject to potential construction noise; depending on the resources present and their location, the monitor may impose time limitations on construction if construction occurs during the nesting season. B. Any building to be constructed as a part of the proposed project that has noise- generating uses shall be designed to meet applicable state and local noise standards. C. The 5th and 6th floors of the 94-foot building contemplated by the proposed project shall be designed to meet applicable CITY OF CHULA VISTA requirement for interior noise levels, which is a maximum of 45 decibels. 6. Light and Glare A. As stated above, outside lighting shall be directed away from marsh areas, and said lights shall be limited to the minimum required for security. 7. Land Use --., A. The LCP amendment proposed in connection with the project shall have been approved. 8. Natural Resources A. Energy efficient building design is required by law. The DEVELOPER shall include energy efficient lighting and appliances in the building contemplated in this project where practically feasible. 9. Risk of Upset A. If hazardous materials are used in connection with the proposed project, permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies shall be obtained. Such permits, if necessary, shall be required prior to isSJlal1ce of any occupancy permits for each building where such materials would be used. ~ SD134\WPSO\STAR\ROHR\COND.OFAPP ../ 2() " J- t-;; 4 . 10. Public Services A. The DEVELOPER shall comply with the Fire Department's fire prevention/protection requirements. The DEVELOPER shall coordinate with the Fire Department to determine and implement the exact requirements for each building or area. B. All proposed areas shall be required to meet the requirements for fire flow and fire hydrants in accordance with Appendix IlIA and I1IB of the Uniform Fire Code. Any fire apparatus roads in excess of 150 ft. that dead end shall have a turn around for fire apparatus. C. The DEVELOPER shall pay the state-mandated school impact fees. . . J, (J -d ty SD134\YPSO\STAR\ROHR\COND.OFAPP 5 - - -, ~(J /al~7 ., ATTACHMENT II I . EXHIBIT "A" of ATTACHMENT III SITIE iRI1lAP OIF lCP AlMJlEND~IENT ARlEA !: i: ~ " .~ ,., . '-".-',-- ----- - ;]n-]; ~ s:: '" ' fr'- t~.;; .~_~~~ .,.- ,~- f "? ,I .<_-"'_"""~,'-4_,,o''''=' I..~'-i---~..--<-_,_~,.t ~: ~ / I ~'. .,~ < """, ~ / /'1" :;)f, ~.~~~r~1~ ~'~,' /'w ,{'Y~ /,1{j.r........~b:ir'T"'-s2!./ i! ;! //.-1/1/"'1 ? 4:,:]'V/ "'-.._-c~_Vl' ~~;71~~~J~ ~;.. ~~r,> :-:'\~ .... _{:~:~~~fr~1/":)'~:i~3'/"- !,.~.~;:;:'7<t-,~ ~.;; . (v~', 1 r: ':~-::~""~-"r - ~, .. '-... ;=:- ~~- 'r'~_H---6 "!-<"'--''''-~:'.,^",-v, :<'''>='7''<r--''f"'J~ ~;.::' \.- ~ ...t~:....>/" ~~G*t~~~:~~~-,j~~~>;7~~~f~;~===~"-~~.~~:~~~~~c .:~~i.i.l~~." ~-- / 1: ...."..,..____J~--""^----~ /----- _",__ ~ .--/..,/ .~O~--: \,(, -~iq'~~ ~~~~,~: . (( ,> ,/ < " . ,,0,_ _.__:J"~:"":~>""".;<~:;;>:::, .. ~ ?=i:=:~::- ~/ ~-;~/ ~~>J 2::~:;:~~j~Jj~ ,""---~'~'~'-:-~'=,=-~:=-~'-- ..~.___.____A_ /" __~- .;' ~}_i~:~:~~J\ t ~~=:~~::==~:=~w~""-- _-.--.- -,. :--~~... _.~~- ./ /, ;./;. :' /' >~ \.{; ,..'7...... '..':;::.-.--.......... -'.,,_ _ _----- ---- H_~ ~...../ :~ ,\(( ,j.,,,..i. ~ ~h ( ~~ _::-_______ ___ ~_~-~- -y-~- .----- /1 kJ { ~l " ,~- jii ~,'-< '""""-...-. --~ -'-~ _ _ - '" ...~'~ ,,,/r' ~l~../ \ ';~ ~ F--' t r~~: . ~ _ ~__..:~~-' ':;" / ~ // "'i_ .-Y.\.^ m.';.-: "*^"~~."""""""',,-,~,-,,,-"*t':';~ ......')"<'\.--) .. ~ fl~--::-- :;t _. l' -......,......, 1.....'\'................~"-...~,, . '_-....._..,/r/-. "", ., _~~ __.._A ,\ '\. '... _ "'-,...:'-' ~,_-"", ~ ~ 1'- .' A" jn\. {HI i ._ ~. '-../ ~: ,{ ....... ~._---~-~ ,:-..^--~" '----. /"iJ ..~;",' ~I' ~~, ;' __)'~, ,C~;(\/ :--_.-"~-~~21e~kjd:::;;\\~~1~ I <0,',-'-<,;'\,_~,;,,(.,...'L?..: ~~."."~(_ _~........ ~l/ ____ '~ <,., ~ ~2~1Lr~~._ ~~-,,~ l l ~ '-.."',,-----.' /.-....--"- \~~ \j\ , i , SC4' ~ '-("/', ~oo' -... - - ;2j -.) t1 . EXHIBIT "B" of ATTACHMENT III Upland Resources. This land use designation includes the remaining upland habitat areas included within the Environmental Management Zone. These are: (1) the Least Tern Reserve; and (2) the upland revegetation zone on Gunpowder Point. No uses are permitted on the Least Tern Reserve except for minor scientific or educational uses. The Upland Revegetation Zone on Gunpowder Point will be accessible to pedestrians but not improved for specific uses except passive recreational uses and minor scientific or educational uses. Allocation: 14.9 acres (1.9 percent). Parks. A series of community or neighborhood parks to be used for recreation would be established throughout the Bayfront. Limited parking would be provided at several of the parks, and all-would be linked via a continuous, publicly accessible pedestrian system. Allocation: 38 acres (4.8 percent). DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY The proposed intensity of development is based on height limitations, parking requirements, on-site open space or landscape provisions, traffic capacity, and economic feasibility. The intensity' of development consequently varies by land use type. . 1. Height Limits. The recommended building heights for the Bayfront are indicated in Figure 5. The prevailing height limit is four stories throughout most of the Bayfront. This limit allows for extensive open space and landscape provisions without exceeding the traffic capacity of the proposed circulation improvements. There are areas in which the height limit varies from prevailing provisions, calling for both lower and taller height recommenda- tions, due to program requirements, environmental management objectives, or physical form and appearance objectives. These variances include the following: Gatewavs. To achieve a "gateway," or sense of entry to the Bayfront and relate it to the existing new development along Bay Boulevard, the areas immediately adjacent to the E Street and J Street bridges are recommended to stay between one and two stories. Gunpowder Point Hotel. The permitted height of the hotel structure is six to eight stories. up to twelve stories will be permitted conditionally if substantial public open space amenities are included in the development program. (See also Environmental Management section and Form and Appearance section.) ;2j ~ .2 70 111-8 - - - Jt) ~ c2 7 I . I I .~-- I I I I I I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ II . i\ \\ \ \ \ \ \ t, \ '-'-'-, , \ ; I \ i\ __ \ ~ I um=:-.---1 \'--~ _Uh_'___ __mmmL__u___ J-- ) . - \ -,I L1 . --...: J,o~j ~ ill~Fm\ L()i=!~ C i WC/)<( UJcn !~, . ! a::;:o:: I- " ! ~._! .) G<(8 zCJ: Ii' l . i LL....Io:: " i i '['].' L'- . .;;20. UJ - ;. I ~-.. _J_~ --- j 0....1 ~UJ roil ,r7m--- - ~ ~ J: ai' ','~fJ'1Il:J~m ~ oC! ~ ~nmrn () ()~ ] . .1illiJjiI ...J UJC . .... ~J~OI g a:::d . D I:.;J ...J ffi rn ..' ~IIII ......~~~~ ':H_~ r~j . . hl!!lJtJ .'~~ . ['I ,i i td~ ~ - I: ,i nm ffi~~I~. u : I. II . **'" ! ~~j ,I f __, ; ; * // . rnrn~1 ~;_ Db $ I ; rn~{H'~ rn I (tJaj t :~ r!i, [j':J ulrJllU I h_ r... ~-:.~' ,D." 'F--=-~::- - , .' , .:J I' . 'FJ~ .~ l~L4 III ; -; ji ., 111-10 x x '" '" f- f- '" '" '" '" (/) (/) I , c:: c:: ~ I .2 .2 'x ~ :a ~ ro~ c -g ~ii 0 0 ~()() ~u - - o ~ .~ .~ _0 0 0 en g; <1l Q) Q)~ /is (Ii E E E :J ~ :J .5 _ E )( x .- m m x ::;: ::;: ~ ~ ~ >. B .8 a (/) CJ) en '" ..;- III II ~ a lri ro ai ~ u ~ Q) CD (/) ~- '" ox Q) f-Q) (I) Olf- , -~ ill (') Q) (I) >, ~~ 0'" U.c c::'" .QU :!::'Q) "0> c::-- 0- U~ 0. - ~ .~ Q) ()- Q).5 0._ (1)< '" '" (I) . ..;- ~ c:: o += :0...... c:: a o . U~ ~~ () Q) 0 nQ) (I)(/) ~ ~. ~ ...... .J-fJ ~;2 ').3 . TABLE 2: PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY DEVELOPABLE ACRES DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY Subarea I--D Street Fill Residential Commercial--Marine-Related Commercial--Marina 73.5 19.0 21.1 :1:6.0 15 to 30 du/acre FAR 0.25 NA Subarea II--GUnpowder Point commercial--Hotel/Conference 40.8 14.0' FAR 0.52 Subarea III--Midbayfront Residential Commercial--Office/Park and Specialty Retail Commercial--Highway-Related Industrial Business Park Landscaped Parking 99.0 18.1 44.7 15 to 30 du/acre FAR 0.55 15.2 21.0 FAR 0.25 FAR O. 57 Bonus provisions' Subarea IV--Industrial Area Commercial--Highway-Related Industrial/utilities Landscaped Parking 26.2 3.1 14.2 8.9 FAR 0.25 Per Existing Zoning4 Bonus provisions' . Subarea VI--outparcels Industrial 18.8 18.8 Per Existing Zoning4 du/acre = Dwelling units per net acre of developable land. FAR = Floor area ratio or ratio of gross building area to net developable land area. NA = Not applicable. Marina: An allowance of approximately 6.0 acres site is made for a recreational boating marina or a small commercial marina repair and storage facility. This area does not include upland support facili- ties covered by the marine commercial designation. 2 26.8 acres of upland area are excluded for purposes of establishing permitted FAR. 3 Bonus provisions: Increased development is proposed on parcels adjacent to the areas where long term provisions are secured to utilize the ROW for parking and parking areas are landscaped per prevailing standards. 4 Existing Zoning: Intensity of use does not vary from existing Chula vista zoning code. . M-.2?b/ III-II 5 Transfer of development rights shall be permitted to allow a FAR of .65 in portions of the office park area north of Marina Parkway with a reduction of FAR on parcels of equal size in the office park area south of Marina Parkway to .35 to maintain an overall FAR of .5. ........ 6 In the event additional land area is gained for development of properties located at the northeast and southeast corners of Bay Boulevard and "J" street by covering adjacent drainage channels, the onsite FAR and setbacks may vary in accordance with Special Condition #3 (Sec. 19.85.01) and Appendix C of the Bayfront Specific Plan. !l?:j;gnkN -... ........ ..-/ ,),() -;L 7~ III-11a ~'~m~:I , 'I. ,~ k-~~l ] [Jlu.'J : ~III~ " EOl'!;!!lIJq - ~~ulfllij m~J ~-~ 118 L,III,,!I2::::::J 511f. EliliH5B~ ~N E~ I:'. i II ~___". >-u .-. 0 ~ ..~ (;5; II~ <O~ hijl I' '.= []& /! .....,~.. _ t::iJ.... ~__~ Y,: I rn'1:Wi 81:;0' ij~1~: I - ';c" 1 ,.1 r:!l .!_L,~ ~{~ ~if ,~~.:c/.-;;-~ ~~fi ! .: ~!-:-~. ~f~-r=:j, I ~li:f~J.:.:1-:"" ,$, 'nlii"oIE' "ll"J"""",",.l t. .l:....:~. "1.:-_ L...,~l.: 1."~::3 /; . I I , I I I I I I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \1 . \1 \\ I \ \ \ \ ~, - , \ '-"-'-,- \ ; I \ i\ \ ' .\ - ----.... - \'< _.__.::::.::::.=-..J...___.....L__._, \} , 1[--- ___'n' ,,- : ,- ~ -..-. -- '----)-'--, ~-~._--------_...:~-----:-----~~-~-- , r- ) !- . -.J' , I \ \ \ ! I 'I I \ L~ " \.', , " .- .j ',' . -~ - - --....../ '--...--- O? N ~ ~ ..... CI) 0...(1)<( J:..J ~~8~~ 58: WI- O..J :I:Z ~GO ~Z() 0- 00 ..J..J <(- 0::::> gal CO" 0,,, r"= ~- i~ ~H ~~ I/) ] ~ ~ q a l!) ui - - <Q <Xl X X '" '" OJ cri l- I- ~ .E .E d cj '" Q) c: c: (f) (f) 0 ~ <lJ '" :;:: <lJ '" '6 '6 (f) (f) c: c: I 0 0 U U '" .,. <lJ <lJ d d '" <lJ Z Z C/) (f) c: c: I I 0 0 :;:: :;:: E E 'g '6 ::> ::> c: .~ E 0 0 x X U U '" '" a; a; :::;: :::;: '5 '5 ~ '" 0 ';t c. .... "<t (f) (f) ~ - <lJ <lJ - ** * .. ~ - ., '" - o (') ~ ~ ~ - - " ., 2 '" - "<t l!) "<t l!) ~ ~ E E ::> ::> E E 'x 'x '" '" :::;: :::;: >- >- ~ ~ 0 0 - - (f) C/) "<t l!) I I E ::> E 'x '" :::;: >- ~ o - C/) N * Cii~ *c *~ ., .2: Q; ~ c. ~ ., - .E ~..c ~ .QJ (;jJ: z_ .,'" .c2 - ~l!) o"<t -0 Cii- ~c. 0::> 1-"0 0>2 C~ .- E ~~ .22 Q) >0- <( .~ ... ~, ""\ -. J;rJ~,2 ?7 . TABLE I DEVELOPMENT INTENSrTY AND SITING Minimum Lot Area (s.f.) Residential Density Front Yards Exterior Side Yards Side Yards Floor- Area Ratio Usable Open Space per Res. d.u. Residential 3,500 15-30 d.u./acre 15 (0 400 Commercial: Office Pork 7,000 10 10 0.51 Commercial: Highway Related 5,000 10 0.25 Commercial: Marine Related 3,000 10 0.25 Commercial: Specialty Related 10,000 20 10 0.25 Commercial: Hotel 20,000 50 30 0.5 Industrial: Busine;sspark 10,000 30 15 20 0.5 Industrial:"General 20,000 20 15 20 0.5 1 Transfer of development riqhts shall be pennitted to allow a FAR of .65 in portions of the office ark north of Marina Parkwa with a reduction of FAR on arcels of e ual size in the office park area south of Marina Parkway to . 5 to maintain an overall FAR 0 .5. 2In the event additional land area is qained for development of properties located at the northeast and southeast corners of Bay Boulevard and J Street by coverinq the ad"acent draina e channel the on-site F.A.R. and setbacks ma var in accordance with s ecial condtion #3 sec. 19.85.01 and a endix C. 3 Soecial FAR standard for the site between F & G Street Marsh and SOG&E ROW in accordance with Special Condition #4 (Sec. 19.85.01) and Appendix D. . TABLE 2 PERMITTED SIGNS (See also Boyfront Sign Program) land Use RESIDENTIAL . . . . . COMMERCIAL: OFFICE PARK . . . . . COMMERCIAL: HIGHWAY RELAlED . . . . . COMMERCIAL: MARINA RELATED . . . . . COMMERCIAL: SPECIALTY RETAIL . . . . . COMMERCIAL: HOlEL . . . . INDUSTRIAL: BUSINESS PARK . . . . . . . INDUSTRIAL: GENERAL . . . >>-J- 7<1 / 23 DEVELOPMENT -- Section 19.85 The following provisions shall regulate the lot size, floor area, height, coverage, setback, and useable open space, density, intensity, and physical form of development within the Bayfront area. Section 19.85.01 - Building Height The maximum heights of buildings shall be controlled by Map 2, Building Height Controls, and shall be measured in stories or feet, whichever is less: Two-story maximum - 22 feet. Four-story maximum - 44 feet. Five-story maximum - 55 feet. Eight-story maximum - 88 feet. Twelve-story conditional - a maximum of 132 feet, provided that the increase in height above 88 feet can be shown to produce a visually and environmentally superior solution for a visually prominent and resource-sensitive location, and which adheres to the following standards: ........, a. Linear slab or cruciform design shall be avoided in favor of a stepped building form. b. The building shall enclose a south facing public outdoor space. Special Condition #1 - a maximum height of 70 feet is allowed within 400 feet of the intersection of "E" Street and Bay Boulevard in the southwest corner of such intersection. An architectural focal point such as a tower or other vertical form reaching a height of (up to) 70 feet shall be permitted in the office park north of Marina Parkway subject to site and design review to consider and protect pUblic views from Marina Parkway to San Diego Bay. This vertical element will be a visual landmark identifying the core area of the Midbayfront. Special Condition #2 - A maximum height of 44' is allowed in the northwest quadrant of Bay Boulevard and "E" Street, provided that said structure is at least 400' north of "E" Street and does not contain more than 20% of the allowed FAR for the total site. Specific Condition #3 - A maximum building height shall be 45 feet provided specific site development plans are recommended by the Chula ........ Vista Design Review Committee and approved by the Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency based on guidelines listed in Appendix C. J/J ~ ;) 7; - 24 - . - section 19.85.02 - Residential Density The minimum residential density shall be 15 dwelling units per acre, and the maximum residential density shall be 30 dwelling units per acre, provided, however, that such measurements shall be taken in the aggregate for larger parcels permitting the transfer of unused density on internal developed areas to other portions of the site. . . )0/.2[50 - 25 - - , -., -, :20- 2'91/ . 1IIIIilrlll~I'liil~111_lfilllilllrillr_fRN~~~]t~~11~B jljt M~rs1iY: . . 1f} -.2!f2- 1 --, ~ --, J[I/ .).x3 ATTACHMENT IV . Recording Requested by: CITY CLERK When Recorded, Mail to: CITY OF CHULA VISTA 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, Ca. 91910 No transfer tax is due as this is a conveyance to a public agency of less than a fee interest for which no cash consideration has been paid or received. Declarant [Space above for Recorder's use only] . Parking Agreement Between the City of Chula Vista and Rohr, Inc. re Potential Use Restriction on Office Space This Parking Agreement (" Agreement") between the City of Chula Vista, a chartered municipal corporation ("City"), and Rohr, Inc., a Delaware Corporation ("Rohr"), dated April 7, 1992 for the purposes for reference only, and effective as of the date last executed by the parties, is made with reference to the following facts: Whereas, the real property which is the subject matter of this Agreement is commonly known as 850 Lagoon Drive, Chula Vista, California, and is legally described as set forth on Exhibit A, incorporated herein by reference ("Property"); and, Whereas, Rohr is the owner of the Property; and, . Whereas, Rohr proposes to improve the Property with a 245,000 square foot office building and a 125,000 sq. ft. administrative/corporate office building, two parking structures and miscellaneous collateral improvements, all of which are more particularly identified in the following Owner Participation Agreement documents on file in the Office of the City Clerk: BF/OP (BayfrontlOwner -1- )J)- d-. <6 i Participation) No.3 and No.4 ("Project"); and, Whereas, the City's Municipal Code, Zoning Chapter, Section 19.62 currently requires that a project of the size and scope of Rohr's proposed Project have 1233 off-street parking spaces; and, """'\ Whereas, the Project as proposed by Rohr permits only 971 parking spaces, so that the site is deficient in parking by 262 spaces ("Deficient Spaces"); and, Whereas, San Diego Gas & Electric Company ("SDGE") is the owner of a 15 acre parcel of property ("SDGE Parcel") which is diagrammatically represented in the map attached as Exhibit C, adjacent, in part, to Rohr's Property; and, Whereas, on February 21, 1981, Rohr entered into a lease agreement ("Parking Lease") with SDGE by which Rohr, their employees, invited guests and visitors may occupy the SDGE Parcel for the purpose ("Parking Purpose") of parking (and ingress and egress thereto) their vehicles on the SDGE Parcel for so long as they are visiting Rohr at the building on the subject Property; and, Whereas, said Parking Lease had a 5 year term prior to its expiration and contains 4 five (5) year options to renew; and, " Whereas, the City is willing to permit the oversized Project with the proposed parking on the terms and conditions herein stated; NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto do hereby agree as follows: ,-, 1. Duty to Keep Lease Current and in Full Force and Effect. Rohr shall keep the Parking Lease, which is the subject matter of the Parking Lease ("Rohr Office Building Required Spaces Portion"), current and in full force and effect for the term thereof. 2. Duty to Use Good Faith and Best Efforts to Renew Parking Lease Upon Expiation. Rohr shall use good faith and best efforts to renew, on terms and conditions satisfactory to Rohr and SDGE, the Parking Lease with SDGE, or at least the Rohr Office Building Required Spaces Portion, at such time as it is scheduled for, or may be, canceled or terminated. 3. Duty to Provide Alternate Parking Satisfactory upon Cancellation of Parking lease. 3.1. Alternate Parking Area. As used herein, "Alternate Parking Area" shall be designed and improved to permit parking spaces equal to or greater than the Deficient Spaces, in the close or immediate vicinity to the Property. ,-, -2- c2.tJ-2?3 . . . 3.2. Duty. In the event that Rohr, despite the exercise of good faith and best efforts, is unable to continue the right to occupy the SDGE Parcel for the Parking Purpose, Rohr shall use good faith and best efforts to obtain the right to occupy for the Parking Purpose of an Alternate Parking Area which has been submitted to, and has been approved by, the City, by and through their City Manager, or his or her designee. In the event that Rohr secures the Alternate Parking Area, this Agreement shall terminate and be of no further force and effect. 3.2.1. Without limitation of the City's remedies, upon the failure of Rohr to use good faith and best efforts to obtained an approved Alternate Parking Area shall be grounds for requiring, after notice, Rohr to implement "Office Area Use Reduction Duty", hereinbelow described. 3.2.1.1 Office Area Use Reduction Duty. " 3.2.1.1.1 Identify Specific Area Within Building 1 or Building 2 as Shown on Attached Exhibit B, Site Plan, for Reduction of Use. The Area within such buildings on the Property which is the subject matter of this Section is a maximum of 78,600 square feet (300 square feet X deficient number of parking spaces) ("Potential Reduction Area"). 3.2.1.1.2 Duty. Rohr agrees, for its successors and assigns, including lessees, that if the Parking Lease is no longer available for the Parking Purpose for any reason whatsoever regardless of fault, and, within 90 days after written notice from the City to Rohr, Rohr has not provided an Alternate Parking Area according to the terms of this Agreement, Rohr shall, upon written demand by the City, terminate any usage except pedestrian circulation, storage, and retrieval and deposit therefrom, of the Potential Reduction Area. (This Duty shall be herein referred to as the "Office Area Use Reduction Duty. ") 3.2.1.1.3 Record Agreement Giving Successor Lessees or Purchasers or Lenders Notice of Potential Reduction of Use. This Agreement shall be recorded upon execution of the parties. 3.2.1.1.4 Contain Provision in Subleases. In the event that Rohr shall lease or sublease all or a portion of the building which contains the Potential Reduction Area, the lease or sublease shall contain a provision notifying the prospective tenant that some or all of the area of the lease may be subject to termination on exercise of the City's rights under this Agreement. -3- 2J/;L~? 3.3 Burden Touches and Concerns Land; Binding on Successors. The burden of this covenant touches and concerns the Property, and as such is binding upon the heirs, successors, and assigns of Rohr as if they had entered into this Agreement directly and enforceable by the City as benefiting any and all land adjacent thereto, or in the vicinity thereof owned by the City, including but not limited to the public rights of way which both parties acknowledge would be substantially impacted as a result of the loss of the Deficient Spaces. -.. 4. Miscellaneous. 4.1. Proof of Title. Rohr shall provide proof, satisfactory to the City, that it has fee simple absolute title to the Property; and that this Agreement has been recorded prior to interest of any subsequent purchaser, lessee, or lender except for the interest of a purchase money lender but then not to the extent that it is in excess of the purchase price of the land at the time of Rohr's purchase of the fee interest. 4.2. Attorney Fees. In the event that litigation is necessary to enforce any of the provisions of this agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and costs. 4.3. Notwithstanding any provision in this Agreement to the contrary, (i) in the event the City's -.. Municipal Code is hereafter amended or otherwise changed to permit less than or equal to 1233 parking spaces for the Project, the Duties herein imposed on Rohr shall be suspended during such time as said Code permits less than or equal to 1233 parking spaces and (ii) this Agreement shall become effective only upon Rohr's occupancy of Building 2 as shown on the Site Plan attached as Exhibit B, and, upon such effectiveness, this Agreement shall automatically replace and supersede that certain Agreement Between the City of Chula Vista and Rohr, Inc. re Potential Use Restriction on Office Space entered into pursuant to BF/OP No.3 Owner Participation Agreement between Rohr and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista. Now therefore, the parties hereto, having read and understood the terms and conditions of this agreement, do hereby express their consent to the terms hereof by setting their hand hereto on the date set forth adjacent thereto. [END OF PAGE. NEXT PAGE IS SIGNATURE PAGE.] --- -4- )(J.--.2 8') . Signature Page for Agreement Between the City of Chula Vista and Rohr, Inc. re Potential Use Restriction on Office Space D~ed: April 7, 1992 CITY OF CHULA VISTA By: Tim Nader, Mayor Attest: Beverly Authelet, City Clerk . Approved as to Form: Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney Dated: April 7, 1992 ROHR, Inc. By: Ronald M. Miller, Vice President and Treasurer . By: Richard W. Madsen, General Counsel Secretary -5- )j)~;L7i Exhibit A: Exhibit B: Exhibit C: EXHIBITS LIST Legal Description of Rohr Property. Site Plan Map showing SDGE Parcel. .....,...:. -, [PB,IROHR6] -, -6- ,;2 () ./ c2 Yi . . . EXHIBIT "A" OF ATTACHMENT IV That portion o~ Quarter Section 172 of RABCHO DE LA lfACION, in the City of Chula vista, county of San Diego, state ot callfo~ia, aooorcU~ 1:0 Map 'thereot No. 166 tilOC1 1n the Office of the County Reoorder of San Diego county, being more particularly described as ~ollows: BEGINNING at the Sout:heast corner of said Quarter Section 172 as ~own on Record of Survey 9039 on file in the Office of the Reoorder of said county, thence along the Easterly boundary of said Quarter Section North 17'46157. West 332,01 feet (Record North 17'471118 West 332,00 feet)' thence leaving saie! Easterly boundary along the Southerly ~oundary of saie! Record of Survey 9039 and its Easterly prolongation, South 72'11'56" West (Record Sout:h 72'12'12" West) 170.02 feet to the Southeasterly corner_of Record of survey 9039 and the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING of this description; thence continuing South 72'11'56" west 1333.57 feet (Record 1333,46 feet), thence continuing along the boundary of said Record of survey North 66'56'39" west 73.95 feet (Record North 66'56'55" west 73.94 feet); thence South 84'48'01" West 339.66 feet (Record South 84'47'56" west 339.69 feet); thence North 38'00'20" west 326.14 feet (Record North 38'00'25" West 328.06 feet): thence North 31'19'51" West 217.16 feet (Record North 31'19'5610 west 216.96 feet); thence North 72'03'09" East (Record North 72"03'22" East) 703.95 feet; thence North 17'56'51" West 299.96 feet (Record North 17'56'36" West 300.00 feet), thence North 72'03'09" East 1182.26 feet (Record North 72'03'22" East 1182.05 feet); thence South 17'46'57" East 946,30 feet (Record south 17'47'11" East 946.06 feet) to the TRUE POrNT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion lying Westerly of the Easterly line of Parcel 10E as shown on Record of survey No. 11749, recorded August 10, 1988, in the Office of the county Recorder of San Diego County, and the Northerly prOlongation of said Easterly line. JjJ-,)JO <:> z a: I o a: z <{ -.l (L W l- (/) i ~ I s ..... ....,.... 1 ..ILl . . I EXHIBIT "B" of ATTACHEMENT 1i . / (\J ~~ ...... .-.. - ~ ...... ~-l cr. .0... <( ~ ~ ~ " :. ~ -, . -. """", i ~ ~ ... ~ ~ ~ ~ 1L ~ t: I I ~ I ~ ~ . . - . . I . en --~-- ;20-';11 . ~ l '" - '" , o . ~ I '" . "' <l 8 '" .[ j j i! ! ! ~ : ;:;~~ I ~ d, ~ fL L is.. ,,- "'., t c ~ . ~ Ii I ~H IIi! . ! til i Ill' j I .' ,1!1 , ~ I' 'Ill i li! i II il · U I II> ~~! if h~. ~{, m 1- i ~j II! f fi :1; " \ ~ "'9 ! i l H ,'! rl I' .E' . I ! ;1 W, p III II HI II 'U lll{iil S h "__ ) lu d! Jlil v.J r 0i ~ tn ~ o ()<! ., o 0 .n I) fjj" I I) , fHttlrl C:0'Q H )..0 - 02 'I J... . ~o EXHIBIT "C" TO ATTACHMENT IV " .1 ~!\ J 1 . ! : i . i . .1 I I . r > I I \ I ) I I (t>.- '" """'" -. """'" )j)-21} . . . ATTACHME1H V MINUTES OF A SCHEDULED REGULAR MEETING Resource Conservation Commission Chula Vista, California 6:00 p.m. Monday, March 9, 1992 Conference Room 1 Public Services Building CALL MEETING TO ORDER/ROLL CALL: Meeting was called to order at 6:03 p.m. by Chairperson Hall. City Staff Environmental Review Coordinator Doug Reid called roll. Present: Commissioners Ray, McQuade, Kracha. Absent: Johnson, Ghougassian. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The approval of minutes was postponed until a quorum to vote on the minutes was present. 1. Martin Miller, Planning Department, requests RCC review the Historical District Report. He introduced Pat Crowley, AlA, to make the presentation of the study for the concept of Heritage Row, Heritage District. Of the four options, he recommends the creation of an historical district by use of the planning zone. A task force will also be created for input. It is requested that RCC review and comment on one or more of the alternatives and report at the next meeting. (Fox arrived at 6:15 p.m.) APPROVAL OF MINUTES: It was moved and seconded (Fox/McQuade) to approve the minutes of the meeting of February 24, 1992 with one correction under No.1, paragraph 2, third sentence to read: .. Athena Bradley further stated there will not be a trash-to-energy burning plant in the RMD zone." Motion passed, 4-0-1 (abstain: Ray). CD Review of Rohr Master Plan Negative Declaration IS-92-18. John Ray was excused from discussion due to conflict of interest as he is a Rohr employee. Diana Richardson, who prepared the initial study, presented an overview of the project. Others present to answer questions included the project manager from the City, Starboard Development, project planner, architect and City traffic engineer. Fox - questioned the impact of traffic circulation, the acceptable level of service and mitigation measures taken to comply with threshold standards. It was explained that all mitigations will be adequately met to an acceptable level of service. The use of glass and ledges on the west side of the building will be used to assist the wildlife in that area. McQuade - questioned the noise level from freeway traffic, view, size and location of the 90' building. A model of the site was exhibited to indicate the location of the main building and to answer questions as to how it relates to the others on site. Hall - regarding an exchange of park land, the Board was shown a map indicating the part being removed and how it relates to the street alignment. ;2t)~ 29;} Page 2 ~ It was moved by Fox, seconded by Kracha. to rescind the previous motion to deny approval of the Negative Declaration because of lack of information; motion passed 4-0- I (abstain: Ray). It was further moved by Fox, seconded by Kracha, to recommend adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration; motion passed 4-0-1 (abstain: Ray). . A special thanks was given to Rohr and those present who clarified and answered questions for the board. (John Ray returned). 3. Duane Bazzel, Planning Department, presented the Salt Creek Ranch Water/Air Report. The transit corridor will include bus service and a temporary .Park & Ride" within the project, subject to approval of the Parks and Recreation Department. A small commercial area is being recommended on the adjacent Rancho San Miguel property. Reclamation facilities will be located on the Otay Ranch. It is noted that Staff worked with the developer on the project. McQuade questioned the 1.4 million gallons of water expended per day. Disapproved of the increase in water and traffic. """'. It was moved by Fox, seconded by Ray to recommend approval of the Salt Creek Ranch Air Quality and Water Conservation Plan; motion passed 4- I (no: McQuade). Staff will further provide the Growth Management Plan Report to RCC as it pertains to Water/Air Quality reports. 4. Public Hearings on Draft ElR's: Fox remarked on the RCC holding public hearings on BIR's. Kracha commented that RCC should not have to review EIR's because of unnecessary duplication of effort, as others within the City already review them. According to the ordinance, it is not necessary. Fox recognized it is still under their purview to call public meetings. Kracha requested that for an agenda item next meeting, the city attorney and director of planning explain the necessity of reviewing BIR's. It was suggested Will Hyde, who began the Environmental Conservation Commission, and perhaps others who authored and supported the original commission be invited. It was MSUP (Hall/Fox) to table this item to the next meeting with possible speakers available for explanation. 5. Fox questioned when the flooding item will go on agenda. Doug Reid reported that the Engineering Dept. is presenting a report on the flood problems, specifically on G Street. -, J.{) -c275 . MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF DESIGN REVIEW COMMIT ~IaM , March 23 1992 4:30 p.m. A. ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Cha person Gilman, Vice-Chair Spethman, Members Flach and Galchenko STAFF PRESENT: Associate Planner Luis Hernandez Assistant Planner Amy Wolfe Senior Planner steve Griffin Senior Community Development Specialist Pam Buchan Housing Specialist Alisa Duffy Rogers B. PRESENTATION OF PROJECTS 1. DRC-92-35 Rohr Office Buildinq 850 Laqoon Drive 6-Storv Office Buildinq Staff Presentation . Assistant Planner Amy Wolfe introduced the project, noting that the proposed project site is located on the south side of Lagoon Drive, west of Bay Blvd., within the Mid-Bayfront Specific Planning area and Bayfront Redevelopment area. Ms. Wolfe stated that the development proposal includes the construction of a six-story office building, the addition of three parking levels onto a previously approved two-level garage structure, improvement of the SDG&E easement parcel to the east of the Rohr property, and upgrading of the existing landscaping improvements along the easterly half of "G" Street. . Ms. Wolfe reminded members that the committee had previously approved the development of a three-story office building and two parking structures on the Rohr site; these facilities are currently under construction. She described the relationship of the proposed structures with the remainder of the Rohr complex, and reviewed the proposed parking, circulation, and landscaping of the plan presented. The architecture was described as high-tech, projecting a progressive a~d stable corporate image. The aSYmmetrical configuration of the office building is staggered, and incorporates both curvilinear and rectilinear forms, with building materials that match those of the previouslY approved three-story office building. The proposed garage design integrates concrete spandrel profiles similar to those utilized on the main office buildings with spandrel recesses. Ms. Wolfe informed members that staff recommended that the ;lP -)c; ~ DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE -2- MARCH 23. 1992 -. committee approve the proposal subject to recommendations listed in the staff report and contingent upon approval of a LCP amendment, and forward a positive recommendation to the Redevelopment Agency. Committee Questions Chair Gilman asked why staff found a floor area ratio of 75% acceptable? senior Community Development Specialist Pam Buchan responded that this figure would be consistent with the proposed LCP amendment. Ms. Buchan stated out that the overall site can support this FAR and height, and that much of the square footage included in the FAR is taken by the parking structure, which was essentially non-functional area. She pointed out that the new building would be a landmark building, that the proposal is a substantial improvement to the existing site, and that this building would provide an interesting focal point for Rohr industry. Member Flach asked if the SDG&E property was included in the site square footage? Ms. Buchan responded that it was. Member Flach stated that there were reports mentioned in the EIR which had not been furnished. Member Galchenko asked if ~. Rohr could be required to landscape the entire site as a part of this proposal? Ms. Wolfe advised that a master landscape plan was generally requested for an entire site so that as incremental portions of development occur, the landscaping required for the overall project will be achieved. Applicant Response Ian Gill, Senior vice President of Starboard Development Corp. representing Rohr, pointed out that this presentation was for fifteen acres within the overall thirty-five acre Rohr site. In response to questions, Linda Zubiyati, Project Architect, advised that the materials on the sample board were more representative of the colors to be used. She stated that the parking garage had been revised, after working with the Planning Department, to provide more articulation and relieve the horizontal massing. Mr. Gill stated that the current proposal was an attempt to balance Rohr's needs with environmental concerns and the needs of various public agencies involved. He pointed out that the tones of the proposed buildings will match the surroundings, and noted that the existing Rohr building is itself 75 feet high. Mr. Gill added that he would like to have the required 12' median referenced by staff condition "g" deferred until circulation studies were completed to allow for alternatives. ""'" o2IJ~~<j ? . DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE -3- MARCH 23. 1992 Committee Discussion Member Spethman asked if the Coastal permit had been approved? Gill responded that it had not yet been approved. Chair Gilman noted approval of the building design; member Spethman noted that the proposed height was not as startling given the existing 75' high building. Member Flach asked if the spandrel texture would match the existing building textures? Ms. Zubiate stated that it would. Member Galchenko asked if tall trees could be used to hide the garage staircases? Landscape Architect Kathy Garcia advised that mixed plantings would be used, including both wide canopy trees and tall trees. She also noted that design modifications were desired for the entry of building- one, including the addition of trees to tie the two buildings together and the deletion of pavers and expansion of the use of exposed aggregate at the plaza area. Member Flach asked about the ledges for the balconies? Mr. Gill responded that the surfaces would be sloped, and would be subject to a mitigation monitoring and reporting program. . Motion by Gilman to recommend that Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-92-18 be adopted. Member Flach raised the possibility that insufficient water might be available in the future, and asked if this had been considered? Mr. Gill responded that Rohr was installing significant upgrades to water service along Lagoon Drive, and that Rohr had been working with the water authority to ensure that all requirements were met. MSC (GilmanjSpethman) (3-1, Flach opposed) to recommend that Mitigated Negative Declaration 15-92-18 be adopted. (Member Flach's negative vote based on the failure to provide reports referenced in the document) . Motion (Gilman) to recommend approval subject to staff conditions with certain modifications. In discussion, Mr. Gill requested deferral of condition "h" until the overall master plan for the Rohr site had been evaluated; members felt that a master landscape plan had been postponed before, and should be addressed at this time. Mr. Gill pointed out that a master landscape plan would require the cooperation of various property owners, and was not a realistic venture until land uses had been established. He added that Rohr had shown a good faith effort by beginning this process. After further discussion, a satisfactory amendment was arrived at. J{)/;2 7~ DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE -4- MARCH 23. 1992 ~ MSUC (Gilman/Spethman) (4-0) to recommend adoption of DRC-92- 18 subject to the conditions listed in the staff report, with the following modifications: f - add "defer final design for G Street until after traffic studies for the master plan have been completed, with plans to come back to staff for approval. h - add "the time element for the submittal and implementation of the landscape master plan shall be negotiated with the Redevelopment Agency in conjunction with the Owner Participation agreement". i-deleted j - deleted add k - parking structure design approved as presented at the meeting. add I - plaza paving approved as proposed by applicant, with seeded aggregate finish. 2. DRC-92-32 "L" Street Familv Housinq 588 "L" Street 16 Apartment Units Staff Presentation - Assistant Planner Amy Wolfe presented the project, which consists of the demolition of an existing office building and the construction of 16 townhomes within 3 two-story structures. A conditional use permit has been approved by the Planning commission to permit this mUlti-family development in the Office Commercial zone in which the subject site is located. The site development plan proposes the placement of the townhomes units along the perimeter of a central courtyard area, and includes a play area, landscaping, and a parking facility for 33 vehicles. This proposal also addresses issues and suggestions raised by a subcommittee of the Design Review Committee, and staff recommended approval of the project subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. Applicant Response cliff Largess of the County Housing Authority commended Senior Planner Steve Griffin for his assistance on this project. Committee Discussion Member Galchenko asked if the existing mature pine tree at the northeast corner of the site could be saved? Mr. Largess responded that this would be looked into. Galchenko also noted that the six foot wall around the project created a tunnel and blocked views, stating that he would like to see -., ~tJ- ;21; . . . UNO~r:."\':7';? If, r '\0 P?,G'l P,'ii;C: ~ .' -~ ,"';'''~=\:!t-- t;~ f",'.~c J I~'.d;r~. r.;; r,-",~.; "'.'_j;J u I. ~- , 111 I;i ~~t:~,"-i~~ blW w.c !is 'Iiii~ Il.i. ..:......::.:..... IJRJ.JFr - "' EXCERPT FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF 3/25/92 ITEM 3: . PCM-92-1O: CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT #10 TO THE CERTIFIED LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA - Rohr COIporation Sr. Community Development Specialist Buchan, assisted by Environmental Facilitator Richardson and Consultant Gary Cinti, gave the background of the project and a description of the LCP Amendment. It was noted that the Negative Declaration for this project had been circulated for 30 days with the State Clearinghouse review closing on .the previous Monday. Comments had been received from the U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service, State Public Utilities Commission, and Chula Vista Elementary School District which were included in the Commission's packet. Ms. Richardson stated the CEQA process had been completed in accordance with State policies and the CEQA requirements. Commissioner Decker, referring to page of the Negative Declaration, asked how many parking spaces would be added. Mr. Cinti answered that the south parking garage would add 387. Commissioner Decker asked if the applicant could be asked to zeriscape landscaping. Ms. Richardson replied that the applicant had prepared landscape plans for the site, and much of the landscaping was drought tolerant as required by the City's Landscape Architect and by the U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service. Commissioner Decker said he was curious if the Fire Department would require extra equipment. Ms. Richardson stated the reply from the Fire Department was that all requirements were met. Vice-Chair Casillas noted that in the list of positive factors, additional taxes to be generated was not listed. Ms. Buchan answered that there would be a I % base tax increment in the redevelopment area. Once the redevelopment was dissolved, the City would receive considerable taxes. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Ian Gill, Senior Vice President of the Starboard Development Corporation, 1201 Kettner Boulevard, SD 92101, representing Rohr Industries, commended the Community Development Department for their leadership role in the process. He endorsed staffs recommendation to adopt the Negative Declaration and send forward a recommendation to Council to approve the LCP Amendment. . Vice-Chair C~.i11~. asked how they planned to keep predators off the roof. Mr. Gill explained that non-reflective glass would be used to discourage birds from flying into the building, and on any potential perching surfaces a slope was added to discourage perching. The ledges surrounding the roofs of all the buildings would be treated with a product to deter perching. >>-' J${? No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. ~ MSUC (Decker/Tuchscher) 6-0 (Commk~ioner Fuller absent) that based on the Initial Study and comments on the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration and addendum thereto, imd that this project will have no significant environmental impacts and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Addendum thereto, and Mitigation Monitoring Program issued on 18-92-18; and recommend that the City Council adopt a resolution approving the proposed LCP Amendment as presented. Commissioner Tuchscher commented that he was very pleased to see Rohr's continued commitment to the community as a member of the community, and hoped Mr. Gill would carry that message to Rohr management. ~ - c10-;JtJ I . . . 8 6194785310 APR- 3-92 FRI 17: 05 COI1lIIJNITY DEVElOPI1ENT FAX NO. 6194765310 P.02 RESOLUTION 1246 RESOLUTION 0J:l THE REDJSVELOPlYmNT AGENCY OP TIm CITY OF CJlULA VISTA ADOPTING MITIGATED NOOATIVE DECLARATION IS--92-18 AND ADDENDUM THEREI'O AND MmGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM; APPROVING OWNBRPARTICIPATION AGREEMBNT BP/OP4 WITH ROHR INe. TO CONS'I'RUcr AN ADMINISTRAT1VPJCO~ORATB OFfICE BUILDING. A 'I'HRE2-S'rORY PARKING STRUCl'URE EXPANSION, AND PR01ECI' PARKING ~ ADIACENT snOkR RIW: AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATION OF $110,000 TO TIm BAYFRONT FINE ARTS ACCOUNT, COMMITJ'INO $737.000 OF FUrORE TAX INCREMENT FROM TIm DEVELOPMENT TO BE REMBURSED TO ROAR INC. FOR DEVELQPldENT . AND PERMIT Flill OPP.SEr; AND RECOMMENDING THAT THE ern COUNCIL APPROVE AMENDMENT NO. 10 TO THE CERTIFIJID LOCAL COASTALPROORAM AND BA YFRONT SPECIFIC PLAN. APPROVE A l>ARKING AGREEMENT TO ALWW OFF-5lTBPARKlNGWlTmNTHE ADJACENT SDO&E EAS5MENT, AND INITIATE 11fB VACATION 01' !ol'ORTION OF G STREET AND THE CONVEY ANCB OF A PORTION OF TIDELANDS AVENUE THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF mE CITY OF CIIULA VISTA does hereby teSOIw lIS follows: WHEREAS. the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista has wnsidcred tile information in Mitlgaled Negative DecllU'ation 18-92-18 and addendUln thereto and the Mitigation Monitoring and ReportIng Progmm tor the proposed project; and, WHEREAS, the RedevelopmetJt Agency of the Cily of Chura Vista has reviewed Roht's proposal 10 construct a 125,000 sq. ft. adminiSlfa(lvclcorporate office building and three-level parking structure expansion at 850 Lagoon Drive and to develop landscaped parking within the adjacent SDG&B easement. WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chura Vista lw considered Rohr'. request for the Agency to participate financially by provUling reimbursement of certain development and permit rees; and, WlIEREAS. the Redevelopment Agency of the City or C1tuIa Vista bas reviewed Owner l'artieipalion AareetnGllt BF/Ol' No. 4111\d the projoot proposal plant and c:OlIditlons of apprnvRI attached thereto. NOw. TIIEREFORE, DE IT RESOLVED that the Redevelopment Agency of the City of ChuIa VISta as follows: The Redevelopment Agency hereby: 1. Adopts Mitigated Negat1ve Declaration 15-92-18 and lI11dwdl1m thQl:to and Mitigation Monitoring and Rcportln& progxami and. ..).,0 - J {) ;;2 l'l II 17148510739 SMRH NEWPORT BCH 04/03/92 16:56 002 61947653111 APR- 3-92 FRI 17:05 COIlIIUNI TY DEVELOPI1ENT FAX NO. 819476&310 P.03 ....... . 2. AWmVCI Owner Pattldpati01l Aueement BP/Op No. 4 with Rohr Inc., ftIed in lhe Om4:Q of the Secretary to the ~elIt A~ as cIocnment nlUDber RACO-OS-92 togllther with IUOh techrIioal ChanIlIl8, claril'lcallon8 and <XIITeCtlOl\ll as JlllI)' be approved by Ag~cy GcIleral Connell; and, 3. Aulhm:lie approprlatlon of $110,000 to the Bilyfront F"me Arts account I'rol1'lthe unappropriated balance of the BayfrontlJ'own Centre Bond fund at the dme It buUdlne permit for Buildlna 2 Is Issued; and, 4. Oommlls $737,000 offimae tax iDerement from thedevclopment tobordtnbursed to Robt Inc. for 4eve1opmc:nt and permit fee off-act In aCCOl"daneo with Owner PartIcipation A&reeJnent BPIOP No.4; 1lDd, " :Recommends that lb. City Council approve Amendment No. 10 to the c:erlifle4 Local Coestal ProJ:l'Ml and Bayfront Specific Plan, approve a parking agreement 10 allow oIf- aite perk!n& within the adjacent SDO&!> easement, and Initiate thll vacation of a portion of 0 - Street and conveyance ot a partiM of TIdelands Avenue. 6. Authorizes the Executive Director of the AlleRCy to execute the Owner partic:ipation A;rc:emcnt BP/Op No, 4 IlDd any aS$DCiated doc\lJlltl1tS. Presented by: 0~~~ Chris Salomone, Bxcculi.ve Sccrctaty and Community Development DIrector ApptOVecI as to form by: ....... Bruce M. aoopard Agency Oencral Counsel Kennet Agency -. .2tJ ~ } C '] 8 171485113739 SMRH NEWPORT BCH 134/133/92 16:57 1303 a 61'347653113 flPR- 3-02 FRI 17:06 COl1I1UIIITY DEVELOPMENT FnK NO. 8104765310 P.04 . RFSOWTION / ~513 RESOLUTION 01' THE CITY COUNen. OF TJJB CITY' OP CHULA VISTA ADOPTJNO MmGATED NEOATlVB DECLARATlON JS-92-18 AND ADDENDUM TREltETO AND MlTIOA'I10N MONlTORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM; APP.RO'VlNO ~~. 10 TO TH5 CBR:l'll'JI:lO CHOLA 'VISTA LOCAL COASTAL PRQGR.4.M AND BAYFROl'IT SPECIFIC PLAN; -'tJT1IORlZING SUBMlTIWL OP SAID AMENDMENT TO TJJB CALI'FORNIA COASTAL COMMISSIONi ENTERING INTO A PARKING AClRHBMENT WITH ROHR INC. TO AUDW OF'F..srm PARkING wmuN THE ADIACBNT SDO&B BASEMENI'i AND DIRBCI'ING STAPP TO INITIATB THE VACAnON OF A PORTION OF 13 STREET AND CONVEYANCE OF A PORTION OF TIDELANDS A VBNUB 'I'HE CITY C<roNCIL OF THE CITY OF CIlULA VISTA does hereby resolYO as foIlows: . WHERUS. on March 25, 1992 \lie Planning Commiuion of \lie City of CIIn1. ViSla c:onducll;d a pubJ1c hCllrini lD consider Amendment No. 10 lD \lie Certified Local CoIJlaJ. Program and Baytront spee1tIe Plan and "l'l'lOve the proposed LCl' AmCl\dmOftt No. 10; IUId WHEREAS, the City Co\lnci1 of tho City of Chula Vista. has considered the Information in lbo Mitigated Negative Dec1ara1ion IS-92-18 and addendum thereto and the Mitigation Monitorial and Rcport/nJ Prolltalll Cor the proposed project: and, WHEREAS, ..... City Council of Ihe City of Chula Vista. COI1duoted a public hearlDI on April 7, 1992 and COI15idcre4 Amendment No. 10 to the C~lficd ChuIa Vista t.oca1 Coast Permit; IIId 'WHEREAS, !he CIty of Chuta ViII2 intendl to "!A'ry nu' 1M co.erti(ted Chula Vista Local Coastal Proanun in . marmer c:onsIslenl witlllhe California Coaslal Act. NOW. TIIEREFORE, DE IT RESOLVED thal from the !al;ts pRsented to the City QI...",u, It.. Cu",u:J1 11M ~ lllat Am............llofo. 10 to the C..ua..I T.....t ('Nt""l Ptognun II consistent with lhe City of Chula Visla CJenera1 Plan and IImt the pubtlc necessIty, CODvc:nknce, lencral ~f\'l supports Amendment No. 10 to the Certified Local Coaslll1 Program. BE 1T Ji'OR11IER. RESOLVED that tho City COunoit of tho CIty of Chula Vista heNby: 1. Adopts )fltlp~ Nqative Declaration 18-9248 and IddcndlDl1 thereto and Mltipllon MOllltorinS IIId ~ Propm; a.nd, . c20~JtJr 8 17148510739 SMRH NEWPORT BCH 04/03/92 16:58 004 B 61S4?65310 APR-- 3-92 FRI 17:40 comuNITY DEVELOPMENT FAX NO. 6194766310 P.02 -. 2. Appnm:s the proposed Amendment No. 10 to the CatirlCd Chula Vista Local Coasta11'mgmm. 3. Aull1Drl7a submittal at laid Amendlllc:llt ND. 10 IDd Iha MiIigBted Neglllive DeclarallOll IS-92-1B and addeadum lhereto BDCI tho MiliaatlOll MlII1ilOrlllJ BDCI ReportlrJg PfOCtum to the CalIfornia Coastal CommissIon as an amendment that win take c1Tect aUlOmallcaUy upon Commission approval. 4. AJIPl'OWI the Parldnl A,lreement (or the development of Buildillg 2 at 850 Lagoon Drive to be execullld with Rohr Inc. a ClOp)' of which II on file In the Office of the City Clctk, mgcthet with lOCh ta:hnica1Il~, clmifi~ion.s, BDd IlOmlClions as may he appmvcd by tht City Atlomcy. PutthllO', the Mayor of tho CltI of ChuIa V1slIl it .'dhomed to execulD said agreement and any .unntaflld dOClllllellts. ~. Provided Rohr perfonllllhe obligation. under the OWner Partloipation Agreement BFJOP4 heretofore approved by the Redevelopment A&Cflcy to construct Building 2 - development II cb:rlbed in Exhibit B of said Owner Part\clpallon Aareernent, directs staff to Wtlatc vacation of City's interest over a portion of G Street IllCI initiate ~lngs to convey a portion of Tidelands Avenue as dOJoribccl in EdUbit A of said Owner Pnclpalion AJt'eelnent which vacation and conveyance mall be on such lenns as City and Atelley deems appmp~. -. Presented by: ~ Approved as to form bf: Chris Salomone, Community Devc10pmelll Dinlctor Bruce M. Boogaard CIty Attorney -. ------ ,).0 -' :; tJ)7 B 17148510739 SMRH NEWPORT BCH 04/03/92 16:58 005 II 61'34765318 APR- 3-92 FRI 17:07 001IlUN1'I'V DEVELOPtlENT FAX NO. 6194765310 P.06 . RE'SOLtmON / t. 5'7 if RESOLUTION OF 'rHH CITY COUNCIL OF TBB CITY OF CRULA VISTA ADOPTIN() MmGATED NBGA'1lVB DJ3CLARAllON lS-!I:Z-18 AND ADDENDUM mER.ETO AND MmGA1l0N MONrrORING AND RBPORTING PROGRAM AND ISSUING COASTAL DEVELOPMBNT PERMIT NO. S7 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 1'HREiS-S'.l'ORY PAllX1NG STRUC1URB EXPANSION AT ll~ LAGOON DRlVB AND DEVELOPMENT OF LANDSCAPED PARXING WITHlN ADJACENT SDG&B EASEMBNI' mE ern' COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CIIUI..A VISTA does hereby resolve u follows: WDEREAB. the ell)' 0( ~ Viat1. Local Coaslll1 Proglllll1 (LCP) lias been certified by tho c.ntbmia. C4)astaJ Commission; and, WHElU!:AS, sald LCP includes COaslal Development pmee4ures determined by lho CommissiOll IQ be legally adequate for the Issuance of Coastal Development Permits and the City of Chula Vista baa assumed permit authority or the Chula Visla Coastal Zone; and. W)lRJUI:AS, . publlG healin, wu duly IIlXIced and COIld'....kvl nn Apn1 7, 1992, in . accordance witb IBid procedures; and, WJlFJlE4S, the City CO\lI'lcil of the Cily of CluJa Vista baa reviewed and considered lhe infOTlllllion~ed In Miliptcd Nc;cativc Decluadon 15-92-18 and Addendum thereto and Mldpdon UoniIQrinJ and Reportllll Propm.. WDEllEAS, the Cily Councl1 of Ule City or Chula VlSla, III "approvlna authority,. bas Ievlewed the Rohr Inc. proposal for the eanSlnlCllon of .. duee-Jevel parking structure expansion at 850 Legoon DrIve and development of a 1and5l:llped parking within adjacent SDO&B casement. NOW, TJIJtR.EFORE, BE IT RESOLVED thatlllc Cily CWlIcil of the City (If Chula VIsta: A. Adopts 1111~ Neaative DecJaraIioa lS-92-18 and addendulII thereto and Mhls.tlft" Uo~ Mcf llopootins Pr"8ftll': and, B.. The City Couao1l of tho City or Quia VlIla finds that state and ~ollll Inle!pJtlive au1de1lna have been revIcwod and tho p1YlpCIICd project IIu beeII found to be In conformance with the public __ and public recreational policIes of CIapIec 3 of tile PllbUC Reaoun:ea COCIct. l'urGlClI". l/lllIIlC1 un IIII' I\4IvwJrIC n...uu._, dIU Bulle Jao. ,p1V1'OW to eonllruol a tbreHove1 partina structure Clqlanslon at 850 J "I""" D1iYe and to deve.top IandSC8pQd par1dnJ within a4jaeenl SDG&n asementlIIIbjecl10 conditions set forth In Exhibit . J-()r JOb ft 17148510739 SMRH NEWPORT BCH 04/03/92 16:59 006 II 6194~10 APR- 3-92 FRI 11:08 COl1MUNITY DEVELOPMENT FAX NO. 6194786310 P.07 -. C of Owner PartiOipallon Apwmcnt BF/op .. h=tofcm: approved 111 the JedIlVeIopmcnt. .A.1l....~y. to f"ouDd tc> "" 0.....1.""0& with tht, ~JCd Clwla VISta r.......l COIIIll:iIl 'PmJl1'llm' I. The pro.Jeo:t wm pmvidc the mlml.... nt on-aile and a4iacc:nt vehicle pII'\d~ apaces (throuah an qteoment wllh the City of C1mla Vi""') to meet tbtl vchk:lc parkin. requIrements set forth In the certified LCP. 'lbe project Is II minImum or one-lhird of a miI6 from !be Bay', thorellne and pubDc coulal park 1aIId. W1t118dequa1l:: air-street vehicle patidllJ JIlU'Iid\XI by the development and Ihe aitc., substandal distance from Ihe bay'. shOl'tllne. no ad_ impact on pul.llie BCCellIIo Ihe coast line Is expected to ocCl/r. 2. Tho project lite I, located adjacent to !be FIG Street Marsh. However, Building 1 belng QOnlltIllCled on tho weslem portion of !he project site wIll provIde a baniu between lhe wetlands and the parldnl Itnlcture to be Joc:'.ted on the eastern portion or lhD aile. In IICCOfdance with Mitigated Neaative DecIaradon JS-92-18, mitigation measll1'ell wIll be 1I11plemented to ensure that Ihe bulldlnJ and associatccl activities will Dol adVCI:lcly cffcct the adjacellt wetllllld habitat. . :3. Jnaressfearen via G Street will direct a Ialie portlofl of on"tile traffIo to Bay Boulevard and away fl'Olll1.a&ooll Drive. Also public illl!)rOvemenlS to be lllcotpOra\cd into the prOject wnI proVide an Increm\lll\ll1 Increase towmd improved _I to (;OQlal n:sou=s. 4. The ptoject site la d\l4i~ted tor IIIdu.trlal Bulin... Pltk 1l1ld u.n. The pUking IltuCt\IJe f'ot adlllinistralivclcotpllr21e omces related 10 the industria1land use adjacent to the south I. in conformance with th;: c:crtified LCP land UIO element. - BE IT FtlR'lHER RFSOLVED that the City Council hereby approves Coaslal Development Permit No. YI. Pre.lented by~ Approved as to Corm by; ~~~~Q CItrill Salomone, Community Development DiIeclor ~ Bruce M. Boogaard CIty Attorney a:\apr1zptlJObrAdisk 4/1/92 -- c2 tJ- 3tJ? , ......, ....., r~ ,=;:(J//~- ~../ File No. 41- r -1'. 'c<- , PUBLIC HEARING CHECK LIST CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING D~TE .y I 1 \ o,q 2- SUBJECT r ,.......J ~J V ~ LOCATION SENT TO STAR NEWS FOR PUBLICATION BY ~. BY HAND: BY MAIL ~/2S /0.2.. , PUBLICATION DATE MAILED NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS NO. MAILED Legislative Staff, Construction Industry Fed. PER GOVERNMENT CODE 54992: 6336 r.rppnwich Drive. Suite F. San Dieqo 9212: LOGGED IN AGENDA BOOK :::,. / 2 ~ / '1"2- COPIES TO: Administration (4) ~ Planning / Oriqinatinq D~vr_. Engineerinq ~ Others: City Clerk's Office (2) ~.. ", POST on Bulletin Boards .3--/2.. '$.-/0, 2.. Special Instructions: . J :r CC 2(J-3o~ Rev.S/88 ~V?- :---A::-: .....,;::-"=~~ ..............~~ ~~~- CllY OF CHULA VISTA OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK TELEFAX COVER LEITER Telecopier No. (619) 425-6184 DATE: 3/20(Q:2- TO: Star News Legal / Julie FAX NO: (619) 426-6346 FROM: ~\ ~c.-:., ~r~ SUBJECT: \)~ \\.e..4'.J~ Y'\Qj;..~ (:, TOTAL NO. PAGES (including cover): 2- PUBUCATION DATE: ~Qk.J- 2$ J \qq2- ((J.J) If all pages are not received, please call Lorna @ (619)691-5041. ~ ............." 0- ~ "'~~., ~) ~ <.Jh.-"l.... - - 1:;:-9.. . -.J) ~ ~ --r- a..-.P 4'~ ..k. r ..... ~ -:... '~p J u-J....9 h-.. ~..\..4 2. s +t- '\ ~cu....L ~ . ~::t:.~ ;)j}-:; d ') 276 FOURTH AVE/CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910/(619) 691-5041 , NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL for the purpose of considering: Coastal Development Permit: Construction of three-story parking structure and development of 3.7 acres of SDG&E right-of- way as a parking lot at 850 Lagoon Drive. city Council action may be appealed within ten days to the Calfiornia Coastal Commission. If not appealed, Council action will be deemed final, and Coastal Development Permit issued. For further information contact the community Development Department 691-5047. If you wish to challenge the City'S action in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the city Council at or prior to the public hearing. SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL on Tuesday, April 7, 1992 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, at which time any person desiring to be heard may appear. DATED: March 19, 1992 Beverly A. Authelet, CMC City Clerk ~jJ-;J Jtl ******************************************************************************************************** * ' P,OI * , * TRANSACTI ON REPORT * * MAR-20-91 FRI 13:00 * 1 * * DATE START RECEIVER TX TIME PAGES TVPE NOTE * * * * MAR-20 12:59 STAR NEWS LEGAL 1'31" 2 SEND COM,E-4 * * * ******************************************************************************************************** 20-J) I ******************************************************************************************************** * . . P,OI * , * TRANSACT! ON REPORT * "* MAR-20-91 FRI 15:17 * $ * * DATE START RECEIVER TX TIME PAGES TYPE NOTE * * * * MAR-20 15:16 4266346 1'19" 2 SEND OK * * * ******************************************************************************************************** ;<v/ J/;2 NOTICE OF A PUBUC BEARING ~ NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held by the Planning Commission and City Council of the City of Chula Vista for the purpose of considering an amendment to the certified Local Coastal Program of the City of Chula Vista. The proposed amendment will provide that a single building up to 95 feet in height will be permitted within the Industrial: Business Park land use designation, subject to special review and development standards, to create a landmark building as a part of the Rohr corporate facility. In additiQn, within the Industrial: Business Park land use designation, the amendment will allow a F.A.R. of .75 subject to special conditions. The Planning Commission of the City of Chula Vista will hold a Public Hearing on this amendment on March 25, 1992, at 7:00 P.M. and the Chula Vista City Council will hold a Public Hearing on this amendment on April 7, 1992, at 4:00 P.M. Both Public Hearings will be held in the Chula Vista Council Chambers, Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue. An initial study, IS-92-18, of possible significant environmental impacts has been conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator. A mitigated negative declaration has been recommended to the Planning Commission and City Council and is on file along with the initial study in the Community Development Department. All interested persons are invited to appear and be heard at the hearing. If you wish to challenge the City's action on the amendments in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearings described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission and/or City Council at or prior to the public hearings. Any petition to be submitted to the Planning Commission must be submitted to the Planning Department no later than 5:00 P.M. one day prior to the date of hearing. Any petition to be submitted to the City Council must be submitted to the City Clerk no later than 5:00 P.M. one day prior to the date of hearing. Copies of the proposed Local Coastal Program amendments are available at the Community Development Department, 263 Fig Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910 and at the Chula Vista Public Library, 365 F Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910. For further information, please contact Pamela Buchan at the Community Development Department, 691-5047. ~J~~ hris Salomone Community Development Department (G:llcpIOhrg) Ul declare undor penalty of perjury that I am em:')!o::'od by iJw Cit'j of Chula Vista in the O~?:::e (,.;. ';:he Cit~( Ci'"H;'; an-;:.t tha~ ; !Jostod t' iD .-:'::-r:':-'f;'~',:r:.:i~c on the G~;BoUn Bcz:-u at "q "'''l7;~Vl;/3 "'Jil;:!;p cn' "., City Ha'l on t' ,.:, 'j ~ 9 ,9 ~_ SiGNE; . t;;! c~~- -2!J~J'/r '../ ,/ File No. '>'i' PUBLIC HEARING CHECK LIST CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING DATE ~~ 'I \\~I\d- SUBJECT ~"',"'-"'~~ ~ ~~rt ~~ t V~~~ LOCATION 7JJ' ~~'^~ \:-0",,01 \ SENT TO STAR NEWS FOR PUBLICATION B 2>-\ \\\""d-- MAILED NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS ~ ~~~ NO. MAILED Legislative Staff, Construction Industry 6336 r,rppnwich Drive. Suite F. San Dieqo BY MAIL PUBLICATION DATE PER GOVERNMENT CODE 54992: Fed. 9212; LOGGED IN AGENDA BOOK ?\~\L\J.- , COPIES TO: Administration (4) ~ Planning Oriainatina D"I?l- _' ~';\;v00v*"~w.l~"'~/ ''--y EngineerinQ Others:~~, ~ ~ \ \ City Clerk's Office (2) POST on Bulletin Boards ?:o V, \ 0,).....-- " \ Special Instructions: , J CC J-() ---J /5 Rev.S/88 ,"". , ~ ~~~ :::..,.~ ~ ~~ - - -- ,,' .' ,../ ellY OF CHULA VISTA OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK TELEFAX COVER LETfER Telecopier No. (619) 691-5171 DATE: ~ \'0 \ ~6- TO: ~~ - StQ>J'- \;~'\<''''0S. FAX NO: k.\d.\:' - 1031\'-0 FROM: ~ \J ~t~ - ~t\ ~~~') ~~ TOTAL NO. PAGES (Including Cover): d If all pages are not received, please call (619) 691-5041. ~, ,..~ ~~) ID \Jv"'\ v~ -W~4-' ~~\JLJ,-, \)J~ J \\(~J) a,\ \~ JL \\\1': - ~X-S :20-:;IH 276 FOURTH AVENUE/CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 92010/(619) 691-5041 d\ 1}\lY\G--- .. NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held by the Planning Commission and City Council of the City of Chula Vista for the purpose of considering an amendment to the certified Local Coastal Program of the City of Chula Vista. The proposed amendment will provide that a single building up to 95 feet in height will be permitted within the Industrial: Business Park land use designation, subject to special review and development standards, to create a landmark building as a part of the Rohr corporate facility. In addition, within the Industrial: Business Park land use designation, the amendment will allow a F.A.R. of .75 subject to special conditions. The Planning Commission of the City of Chula Vista will hold a Public Hearing on this amendment on March _~5>-J922.. at 7:00 P.M. and the Chula Vista City Council will hold a ~ Public Hearing on this amendment on April_7LI992"at 4:00 P.M. Both Public Hearings will be held in the Chula Vista Council Chambers, Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue. An initial study, IS-92-18, of possible significant environmental impacts has been conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator. A mitigated negative declaration has been recommended to the Planning Commission and City Council and is on file along with the initial study in the Community Development Department. All interested persons are invited to appear and be heard at the hearing. If you wish to challenge the City's action on the amendments in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearings described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission and/or City Council at or prior to the public hearings. Any petition to be submitted to the Planning Commission must be submitted to the Planning Department no later than 5:00 P.M. one day prior to the date of hearing. Any petition to be submitted to the City Council must be submitted to the City Clerk no later than 5:00 P.M. one day prior to the date of hearing. Copies of the proposed Local Coastal Program amendments are available at the Community Development Department, 263 Fig Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910 and at the Chula Vista Public Library, 365 F Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910. For further information, please contact Pamela Buchan at the Community Development Department, 691-5047. ~~~ Chris Salomone Community Development Department (a:\lcplOhrg) ..20~3 )7 '-", Ffle No. . "{" ',"", ; \~"./ /' ';' /" 9; '"/_j~'/'-' I (,/ tor , PUBLIC HEARING CHECK LIST J CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING DATE (1r") \C\q~ . SUBJECTj\.ihu..- h ~ ...., OU*~:....J- -HlO ~~ 6t.~ ~.;:I'~ LOCATION ~ ~ 1I~ SENT TO STAR NEWS FOR PUBLICATION BY ~BY HAND: BY MAIL / I ~Co . PUBLICATION DATE ,9;).;}. qJ. =-\ ~ MAILED NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS NO. MAILED Legislative Staff, Construction Industry Fed. PER GOVERNMENT CODE 54992: 6336 r,rppnwich Drive. Suite F. San Dieqo 9212; LOGGED IN AGENDA BOOK d/.JO(q&- COPIES TO: Administration (4)/ Planning/ Oriainatina D~nr_. Engineerinq ~. Others: City Clerk's Office (2) ./ POST on Bulletin Boards cd Ide, (q;}- Special Instructions: , J :;.... CC :2{J <? / '6' Rev.S/88 NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY OF DRAFf AMENDMENT #10 TO Tllli CITY OF CHULA VISTA CERTllflliD LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM FOR PUBLIC REVIEW NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a draft of a proposed amendment to the certified Local Coastal Program of the City of Chula Vista is available for review at the Community Development Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California 91910. The proposed amendment will provide that a single building up to 95 feet in height will be permitted within the Industrial: Business Park land use designation, subject to special review and development standards, to create a landmark building as a part of the Rohr corporate facility. In addition, within the Industrial: Business Park land use designation, the amendment will allow a F.A.R. of .75 subject to special conditions. The Planning Commission of the City of Chula Vista will hold a Public Hearing on this amendment on March 25, 1992, at 7:00 P.M. and the Chula Vista City Council will hold a Public Hearing on this amendment on April 7, 1992, at 4:00 P.M. Both Public Hearings will be held in the Chula Vista Council Chambers, Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue. An initial study, 15-92-18, of possible significant environmental impacts has been conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator. A mitigated negative declaration has been recommended to the Planning Commission and City Council and is on file along with the initial study in the Community Development Department. All interested persons are invited to appear and be heard at the hearing. If you wish to challenge the City's action on the amendments in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearings described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission and/or City Council at or prior to the public hearings. Any petition to be submitted to the Planning Commission must be submitted to the Planning Department no later than 5:00 P.M. one day prior to the date of hearing. Any petition to be submitted to the City Council must be submitted to the City Clerk no later than 5:00 P.M. one day prior to the date of hearing. Copies of the proposed Local Coastal Program amendments are available at the Community Development Department, 263 Fig Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910 and at the Chula Vista Public Library, 365 F Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910. For further information, please contact Pamela Buchan at the Community Development Department, 691-5047. ~~~ Chris Salomone Community Development Department (a:llcpIOhrg) ;2(l~;J /1' . ~V?- iiJ!I!iij; ~~~;E CllY OF . CHULA VISTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT February 19, 1992 S ta r-News 835 Third Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91911 SUBJECT: Legal Notice Enclosed is a copy of the CITY COUNCIL public hearing notice regarding: Notice of availability of draft amendment #10 to the City of Chula Vista Certified Local Coastal Program for public review Please publish this document on Saturday, February 22, 1992. Also, please forward a proof of publication notice, as well as the invoice to the City Clerk's Office, Attention: Lorna Rosa. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Yours truly, ~ Pamela R. Principal Development Specialist PRB/ss Enclosure f\' . ~~l.o~~' ~.~~ . )(J - ;J,;LO 276 FOURTH AVE/CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 91910/(619) 691-5047 BOARD OF EDUCATION JOSEPH D. CUMMINGS, Ph.D. LARRY CUNN INGHAM SHARON GILES PATRICK A. JUDD GREG R. SANDOVAL SUPERINTENDENT JOHN F. VUGRIN, Ph.D. CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT - \) l.Q..,,,,,,---1o 84 EAST "J" STREET. CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910 . 619425-9600 EACH CHILD IS AN INDNIDUAL OF GREAT WORTH April 7, 1992 Honorable Tim Nader, Mayor Members of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency City of Chula vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula vista, CA 91910 RE: Rohr Master Plan - Local Coastal Plan Amendment Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council: Please enter Rohr Master for hearing Redevelopment this letter into the hearing record for the Plan - Local Coastal Plan Amendment, scheduled before the Chula vista City Council and Agency on April 7, 1992. We wish to raise a procedural question as to whether use of an addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration is appropriate. Although section 15164 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines authorizes addenda to EIRs without public review for minor technical changes after the EIR has been recommended for approval, we find no authority in the law authorizing an addendum to a mitigated negative declaration. Even if authority analogous to section 15164 existed with regard to preparing an addendum to a negative declaration, the addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration in this case would fail because (1) the Mitigated Negative Declaration had not been recommended for approval by the Planning commission at the time the addendum was issued and, (2) the addendum does not constitute a minor technical change and raises important new issues about the significant effect on the environment (i.e., no impact on schools). On December 20, 1992, the District commented on the Initial study for this project (copy attached), which stated that the project will result in the need for new or altered governmental services in the area of schools. Based on the fact that a 211,000 square foot office expansion was approved for the Rohr site in 1990, we were also concerned about project segmentation. Due to the magnitude of this project, and the significant impacts it will have on school facilities, the District requested that the City require full mitigation for school impacts. 10, 1992, the District provided comments on the Negative Declaration, noting that, although school facilities were identified in the Initial On March Mitigated impacts on JtJ- 3..2/ April 7, 1992 Honorable Tim Nader, Mayor Members of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency Page 2 RE: Rohr Master Plan - Local Coastal Plan Amendment study, adequate mitigation was not attached). The letter assessed impacts mitigation in the form of participation financing. provided (copy and recommended in Mello-Roos On March 23 and 24, 1992, we received correspondence from city staff (copies attached), informing us that "Rohr has stated that they will use all of the Master Plan buildings for existing employees who currently work in other areas of the campus. This changes the assumption made in the Initial study that an indirect generation of students could occur from new employees of the Master Plan area. Based on Rohr's statement, all personnel would be relocated, thus avoiding this potential impact. Therefore, no mitigation is required." It was also stated that the entire Master Plan area is included in this proposal in order to prevent the piecemeal planning mentioned previously by the District. The Rohr correspondence cited above, dated March 25, 1992 (copy attached), one day after the city's stated receipt of same, states that " this building and all future Rohr buildings planned for the 35 acre masterplan will exclusively house employees relocated from other existing buildings on our campus. These buildings will then either be demolished or recycled for use by other existing employees as part of our continuing effort to improve efficiency and consolidate staff functions to achieve the full benefits of co-location. This relocation of personnel will result in no new job creation at Rohr or the generation of any additional student enrollment and therefore no need for any additional school facilities." The comment regarding all 35 acre masterplan again segmentation. future buildings planned for the raises the issue of project The District schools, the with regard as well as addendum was disputes Rohr's position on the impact on findings in the mitigated negative declaration to the impact of the new facilities on schools, the existence of and the method by which the prepared. d()~3 .2d- April 7, 1992 Honorable Tim Nader, Mayor Members of the city Council/Redevelopment Agency Page 3 RE: Rohr Master Plan - Local Coastal Plan Amendment The District has no assurance that the existing buildings will be demolished, that they will not be leased to another user, or that additional (new) Rohr employees will not be located there. There is no mechanism in the law for assessing new occupants of these buildings for school impacts; the only opportunity is at the time new construction is proposed. If Rohr's contention regarding no new jobs is true, and if the existing buildings will be demolished or used to house existing employees, we agree that payment of state-authorized developer fees will be adequate. * However, in order to preserve our rights should either of these conditions not prove to be the case, the District wishes to enter into an agreement with Rohr and the city which assures that 1) if the existing buildings are leased or sold; or 2) if the total number of Rohr employees on the site exceeds what it is at the present time, annexation to CFD No.5, or equivalent full cost reimbursement as determined by the District, will be required. A draft agreement (copy attached) was prepared and presented to City staff and Rohr's representative last week. We respectfully request that approval Plan Local Coastal Plan Amendment include the following conditions: of the Rohr Master be conditioned to 1. In the event the existing buildings which are to be vacated by employees relocating to the new facilities are occupied by new tenants or additional Rohr employees not currently housed at the Rohr site, annexation to CFD No.5, or equivalent full cost reimbursement as determined by the District, will be required; 2. In the event the total number of employees at the Rohr site exceeds , annexation/mitigation as described above will be required; and 3. These conditions shall be included in the mitigation monitoring program for this project. * It should be noted that, since the Rohr site is located within a redevelopment project area, for which the District does not have a tax increment revenue sharing agreement, our tax base for this property has been frozen since 1974, the time the redevelopment boundary was established. We do not realize any additional property tax due to increased valuations/assessments for this property over the years. with development of Rohr's master plan, assessed valuations for the site can be expected to dramatically increase, no portion of which will come to the school district. c1o- 3;23 April 7, 1992 Honorable Tim Nader, Mayor Members of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency Page 4 RE: Rohr Master Plan - Local Coastal Plan Amendment The District is willing to accept Rohr's assurances that no additional employees will be housed on the site. We simply ask that these assurances be put in writing in the form of an agreement. The attached draft agreement guarantees Rohr's statements relative to impacts on student enrollment, and assures that these impacts will be fully mitigated, should they occur as a result of implementation of this project. Thank you for your consideration. 7:rohr-cc ~~~2f BOARO OF EOIJCA TION JOSEPH D. CUMMINGS, Ph.D. LARRY CUNNINGHAM SHARON GILES PATRICK A. JUDD GREG R. SANDOVAL SUPERINTENDENT ..oHN F. VUGRIN, Ph.D. CHUIA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT 84 EAST "J" STREET . CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910 . 619425-9600 EACH CHILD IS AN INDIVIDUAL OF GREAT WORTH December 20, 1991 Ms. Diana Richardson Community Development Dept. City of Chula vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 RE: Initial study - Rohr Master Plan, LCP Amendment and SDG&E Parking Plan IS-92-18 / FA-555 / DP-894 Bay Blvd./"F" street Dear Ms. Richardson: Thank you for providing a copy of the Initial study for the Rohr Industries Master Plan. Commencing in July, 1990, through December of that year, the District provided comments and requested adequate mitigation for a 211,500 square foot office complex at the Rohr facility. We were unaware that further expansion of the Rohr Complex was contemplated, and that the project under consideration was only part of the first phase of a 650,000 square foot master plan. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not permit a large project to be segmented, as this makes it difficult to assess and quantify cumulative impacts. It is unclear why the first phase of this master plan was reviewed as a separate project. If any additional development is contemplated for the Rohr facility, it should be included in the master plan and analyzed at this time. The magnitude of the proposed project will have significant impacts on elementary facilities in Chula vista. since amending a Local Coastal Plan constitutes a Legislative Act, Yost v. Thomas (1984 36 Cal.3d 561), based on recent court decisions (Mira, Hart and Murrieta Valley), the City of Chula vista must consider school adequacy and can condition project approval to provide adequate mitigation. The District requests that the City require full mitigation for impacts to school facilities. This could be in the form of participation in a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) , or other form of acceptable full-reimbursement mitigation. Building 1 of Area A (211,500 square feet) did not involve a legislative act, and, therefore, the District was limited to collection of developer fees. Since no permit has been issued for this building, it would seem appropriate, and the applicant has the option, to include Building 1 of Area A in the total project mitigation. dO-32~ December 20, 1991 Ms. Diana Richardson Page 2 RE: Initial study - Rohr Master Plan, LCP Amendment and SDG&E Parking Plan The information provided indicates construction is proposed for vacant land, as well as replacement of existing structures with new and/or expanded facilities. In order to quantify impacts on school facilities, additional data is required. It is unclear from the information submitted whether the total project consists of 655,000 square feet (11/20/91 Starboard Application), or 650,000 square feet (Attachment A of Initial study). Assuming the total master plan consists of 655,000 square feet, less the 211,500 square feet of Area A, 443,500 square feet remain, not 455,000 as shown on the Starboard Application. It's unclear what is included in the application for an amendment to the LCP. The plan also indicates removal of 15,000 square feet of temporary trailers. Several years ago when these trailers were installed, the District agreed not to charge developer fees since the use was temporary. It was agreed that they would be removed and replaced by permanent structures which would then be subject to school mitigation. It should be noted that in calculating square footage for school mitigation, state law does not provide for demolition "credit" for anything other than a single family home, and then only when it is destroyed as the result of a natural disaster and is replaced in kind. As stated above, to adequately quantify impacts this project will have on school facilities, additional data 1S required. The District utilizes a formula for assessing a "fair share" for school impacts to non-residential development. Once the necessary information is provided, this can be calculated. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, M~s\.~ Kate Shurson Director of Planning and Facilities KS:dp cc: Carl Kadie Tom Silva John Linn Ian M. Gill 4:rohr-mas clvo-J2? BOARO OF EOUCA TION JOSEPH D. CUMMINGS. Ph.D. LARRY CUNNINGHAM SHARON GILES PATRICKA.JUDD GREG R. SANDOVAL SUPERINTENDENT JOHN F. VUGRIN. Ph.D. CHULA VISTA ELEMENfARY SCHOOL DISTRICT 84 EAST "J" STREET . CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910 . 619425-9600 EACH CHILD IS AN INDIVIDUAL OF GREAT WORTH March 10, 1992 Mr. Chris Salomone Director of Community Development City of Chula vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 RE: Local Coastal Plan Amendment - Rohr Master Plan Dear Mr. Salomone: On December 20, 1991, the Chula vista Elementary School District commented on the Initial Study prepared for the Rohr Industries Master Plan. A copy of that letter is enclosed. There is still some question as to whether the current plan represents the entire master plan for the Rohr site. Since the California Environmental Quality Act does not permit a large project to be segmented, as segmentation does not permit assessment and quantification of cumulative impacts, any additional proposals for this property should be incorporated into this application. In reviewing the mitigated Negative Declaration, I note that the Initial Study correctly states that the project will result in the need for new or altered governmental services in the area of schools. However, the mitigation requirements listed on page 10, No. 11, do not adequately define how this mitigation is to be achieved. We have consistently stated that payment of State authorized developer fees alone falls far short of meeting facilities needs created by this project, and recommended participation in Mello-Roos financing or other alternative full-reimbursement mechanism. Mitigation requirements for other public services are clearly spelled out, based on the identified project impacts. School mitigation should be similarly specific. Based on the proposed 650,000 square foot Master Plan, assuming the use to be Corporate Office (single user), 1,685 new jobs can be anticipated, 949 of whom will reside within the District, forming 935 new households. The District's student generation rate is 0.3 stUdents/dwelling unit; therefore, 281 new students can be anticipated from implementation of this project. Participation (CFD) No. facilities. percent of the District's Community Facility District would fully mitigate impacts to school Non-residential users are assessed 16.67 the rate for residential development, a in 5 c2v~ 3:27 March 10, 1992 Mr. Chris Salomone Page 2 RE: Local Coastal Plan Amendment - Rohr Master Plan proportion consistent with the State's authorized developer fee split. The current base tax rate for CFD No.5 is $ .157/square foot, and the tax commences when building permits are issued. utilizing the taxing formula and the phasing schedule in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the first year's tax for Area A, assuming all permits were issued in the same year, would be approximately $9,684. I hope this provides additional clarification as to the mitigation requested by the District. We ask that this information be incorporated into section F, page 10, No. II, of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, to fully define mitigation necessary to reduce impacts to school facilities to a level of insignificance. If you have any questions, please contact me. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. sincerely, Mz. ~~\JV'.- Kate Shurson Director of Planning & Facilities KS:dp cc: George Krempl Laura Romano Carl Kadie Tom Silva Ian Gill John Linn .,Jo~ )2r;r ~~~ =~.:.~ .-....:~~--..; ~~~~ c.v. .fLt'A ",. SCH RtcOVtgOL Q/Sf. P MAR 25 7992 'LANNING & F DtPARfJA ACIt/nts ", tNr CllY OF CHUlA VISTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT March 23, 1992 Dear Ms. Shurson: Enclosed is an Addendum prepared for the Rohr F & G Street Master Plan Mitigated Negative Declaration. If upon review of the Addendum you would like to comment on this Addendum, please do so prior to the Redevelopment Agency meeting on this project scheduled for April 7 at 4:00 p.m. Sincerely, A~ov ~- Diana G. Richardson Environmental Facilitator DR:ag [AOIA,PolO.LTR) DISKtrl cc: Martin Kenney, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Kate Shurson, Chula Vista Elementary School District Debra Lee, CA Coastal Commission Tom Silva, Sweetwater Union High School District Planning Dept., San Diego Unified Port District Arthur O. Sellgren, Director Real Estate and Development Rohr Industries Ian Gill, Starboard Development Corporation .1-0-.32 ( 276 FOURTH AVE/CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 91910/(619) 691-5047 ADDENDUM TO NEGATIVE DECLARATION ROHR F & G STREET MASTER PLAN (15-92-18) The environmental review procedures of the City of Chula Vista allow the Environmental Review Coordinator (ERC) to prepare an addendum to a Negative Declaration or Environmental Impact Report, if one of the following conditions is present: I. The minor changes in the project design which have occurred since completion of the Final EIR or Negative Declaration have not created any new significant environmental impacts not previously addressed in the Final EIR or Negative Declaration; 2. Additional or refined environmental data available since completion of the Final EIR does not indicate any new significant environmental impacts not previously addressed in the Final EIR or Negative Declaration; and 3. Additional or refined information available since completion of the Final EIR or Negative Declaration regarding the potential environmental impact of the project, or regarding the measures of alternatives available to mitigate potential environmental effects of the project, does not show that the project will have one or more significant impacts which were not previously addressed in the Final EIR or Negative Declaration. This addendum has been prepared in order to provide additional information and analysis concerning project impacts. As a result of this analysis, the basic conclusions of the Negative Declaration have not changed. With implementation of mitigation measures, impacts are deemed to be less than significant for the proposed project. The minor change which has occurred in the project description is the identification of the source of employees to be housed in the Master Plan buildings. The Negative Declaration previously assumed that there could be some new employees in the Master Plan area, however, Rohr has submitted correspondence to the City stating that all employees in the Master Plan area would be transferred from existing buildings in other parts of the Rohr campus. The only issue area which is changed by this new information is that of schools. Originally, it was determined that an indirect generation of students could occur from the proposed development, based on a worst case assumption that there would be new employees in the Master Plan area. This assumption, based on the Rohr correspondence, is invalid. Because all employees will be existing employees transferred over from the adjacent facilities, no indirect generation of students would occur, thus, no impact to the school districts would occur. Consequently, no mitigation would be required beyond the state-mandated fees collected for all new non-residential development. PC/F22 d~~3C ~ ~ ft.. ~ ~~~~ .......--~- C,V.ElEM sc . HOOl RECEIVED O/.ST. MAR 2 6 1992 PLANNING DEPAR~~i~~'TlES CllY OF CHULA VISTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT March 24, 1992 Ms. Kate Shurson Chula Vista Elementary School District 84 East J Street Chula Vista, CA 91910 Dear Kate: Since you last spoke with our staff regarding the Rohr Master Plan project, and subsequent to my receipt of your letter regarding the same, I have received a letter from Rohr which clarifies Rohr's use of the Master Plan buildings. Rohr has stated that they will use all of the Master Plan buildings for existing employees who currently work in other areas of the campus. This changes the assumption made in the Initial Study that an indirect generation of students could occur from new employees of the Master Plan area. Based on Rohr's statement, all personnel would be relocated, thus avoiding this potential impact. Therefore, no mitigation is required. Also, I would like to clarify that Rohr presently intends to build only Building 2 of the Master Plan area (as well as the accommodating parking). However, they have included the entire Master Plan area in this proposal in order to prevent the piecemeal planning you mentioned. If you have further comments please submit them to me prior to the Redevelopment Agency meeting on the project scheduled for April 7 at 4:00 p.m. Si~~ Chris Salomone Community Development Director DR/bb [C:IWP51 ISALOMONEILE'ITERSISHURSON.L TR] c1lF 7;J / 276 FOURTH AVE/CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 91910/(619) 691-5047 DODD DODD ROHR ROHR INDUSTRIES, INC. POST OfFICE BOX 878 CHUlA VISTA. CAliFORNIA 92012-0878 (619) 691-4111 . TELEX: 69-fQ38 March 25, 1992 Mr. Chris Salomone Director of Community Development Department city of Chula vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Re: Rohr Office Complex Subject: Local Coastal Plan Amendment - Rohr Master Plan Dear Chris: We were recently made aware by our Development Manager, Starboard Development Corporation, of correspondence dated December 20, 1991, and March 10, 1992, submitted to you by Kate Shurson of the Chula Vista Elementary School District. This correspondence was generated in response to the Initial Environmental Study and subsequent Negative Declaration associated with our LCP Amendment and Masterplan for approximately 35 acres between "F" and "G" Streets, Bay Boulevard and the u.S. Fish and wildlife's "FIG" Street Marsh property. The School District's opinion expressed in these two letters is that payment of the state mandated non-residential school fees alone, currently $0.26/square foot of habitable space for the proposed buildings, will not provide adequate financial mitigation to offset the cost of the additional student facility need created by our relocation. The District is therefore requesting an alternative and significantly more expensive solution for Rohr, namely annexation to an existing Mello Roos District CFD No.5. As its justification, the School District references a statistical formulaic approach which relates household generation, to job creation provided through commercial development. This formula approach was proposed in a special study report dated March 12, 1990, "School District Development Impact Fees: Relationship between New Non-residential Development and Student Enrollment" prepared by Sourcepoint and commissioned and funded by several South Bay school districts, including Chula Vista. It is our understanding that the existing state legislation which enabled collection of development fees on non-residential 01 0 - .J;J .,.2-.. buildings required school districts to demonstrate a clear project specific nexus to justify even collection of the $0.26/square foot fee. As a good corporate citizen of Chula Vista, Rohr chose not to challenge collection of the state mandated fees, a total of $63,700 attributed to our Design and Engineering Office building currently under construction, even though we felt no clear nexus had been demonstrated. Furthermore, this building and all future Rohr buildings planned for the 35 acre masterplan will exclusively house employees relocated from other existing buildings on our campus. These buildings will then either be demolished or recycled for use by other existing employees as part of our continuing effort to improve efficiency and consolidate staff functions to achieve the full benefits of co- location. This relocation of personnel will result in no new job creation at Rohr or the generation of any additional student enrollment and therefore no need for any additional school facilities. The approval of the 35 acre masterplan, including anticipated building types and projected timing of construction, has been a key element to maintaining Rohr's economic viability and a continuing commitment to Chula Vista. Chris, as you are aware minimizing the lead time for planning entitlement and also the cost of these planned buildings is essential. We really appreciate your role on behalf of the city in helping us achieve our goals thus far. While we sympathize with the School District's desire to augment their existing funding sources, we see no justification for the request as it relates to our plan and we would appreciate your conveying this information to Kate Shurson, Director of Planning and Facilities of the School District. sincerely yours, #- t:f Arthur O. Sellgren Director Real Estate and Development AOS:mct cc: Ian M. Gill, starboard Development Corp. Diana Richardson, city of Chula vista c2iJ~ 3)3 AGREEMENT 1. PARTIES AND DATE This agreement is made and entered into this day of , 1992 by and among the city of Chula vista Redevelopment Agency (the "Redevelopment Agency"), the City of Chula vista (the "city"), Rohr Industries ("Rohr"), and the Chula vista Elementary School District (the "District"). 2 . RECITALS 2.1 Rohr has proposed including seven buildings parking structures and facilities"); and to develop an area of 35.2 acres totaling 655,000 square feet, two associated landscape (the "new 2.2 Rohr legislative construct the has requested that the City undertake the act of amending the Local Coastal Plan in order to new facilities; and 2.3 The District has development in the District on schools; and determined that new commercial boundaries will result in an impact 2.4 The District has determined that collection of developer fees required pursuant to Government Code section 53080 et seq. and Government Code section 65995 et seq. ("developer fees") alone will not provide full mitigation for the impact on schools resulting from the new development; and 2.5 Rohr has agreed to pay developer fees for the new facilities; and 2.6 Rohr has stated that since Rohr is relocating employees from an existing facility (the "existing facilities") to the new facilities and the existing facilities will only be occupied by existing employees currently located at the Rohr site, full mitigation would not be required since there would not be a significant impact on schools; and 2.7 The construction stated in 2.6 addendum to of the new above; and the negative declaration for the facilities supports Rohr's position 2.8 The District disputes Rohr's position on the impact on schools, the findings in the mitigated negative declaration with regard to the impact of the new facilities on schools as well as the method by which the addendum was prepared for the mitigated negative declaration; and eJ-v- JJL( 2.9 Under the law, the District may only collect impact fees on new development; the law does not permit the District to collect fees or obtain mitigation on already existing structures. Therefore, the District would not be able to collect impact fees on the existing facilities if those facilities are leased by Rohr or become occupied by Rohr or another entity so that the increased density impacts schools; and 2.10 The District needs assurances from Rohr that the new facilities will not generate so many new employees in the District boundaries that there will be no significant impact on schools. Rohr must assure the District that it will provide full mitigation to the District if it leases out the existing facilities after employees are relocated to the newer facilities or takes any other action, including hiring or relocating of additional employees to the site which would result in an impact on schools; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, the parties hereto agree as follows: 3. TERMS AND CONDITIONS 3.1 Rohr agrees that it will provide full mitigation to the District in the event that the existing facilities are occupied by new tenants or additional Rohr employees not currently housed in the existing facilities, or the total number of employees at the Rohr facility exceeds For purposes of this agreement, full mitigation shall mean annexation to Community Facilities District #5 or payment of the cost of impact of the additional employees or occupants of the new and/or existing facilities as determined by the District. 3.2 The approval of provide full described in included in facilities. City agrees to include as a condition of its the Local Coastal Plan Amendment that Rohr agree to mitigation to the District under the circumstances section 3.1 above and that these conditions be the mitigation monitoring program for the new 3.3 costs in litigation the City's Rohr agrees described in The District will not attempt to collect mitigation excess of the developer fees and will not commence challenging the negative declaration or challenging approval of the Local Coastal Amendment as long as to provide full mitigation under the circumstances section 3.1 above. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this agreement to be executed on the date first above specified. >>~~ THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ATTEST: By By Title THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ATTEST: By By Title ROHR INDUSTRIES ATTEST: By By Title THE CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT ATTEST: By By Title e2IJ <1'3;' council Agenda statement Item:~ Meeting Date: April 7, 1992 Item Title: Report responding to Council referral of request from Mr. Fred Dufresne of Otay Lakes Lodge Mobilhome Park, for a determination of the right to arbitrate, and request for modification of mobilhome park rent control ordinance to require notice of rent increase to incoming and outgoing tenants. Submitted by: Bruce M. Boogaard, city Attorney Agenda Classification: ( ) Consent (XX) Action Item ( ) Public Hearing ( ) Other: 4/5ths Vote: ( ) Yes (X) No On March 4, 1992, Mr. Fred Dufresne of Otay Lakes Mobilhome Lodge authored a letter (Exhibit A) to the City Council complaining (1{ that the city has impermissibly denied Affected outgoing TenantsY of the ordinance-based right to arbitrate an April 1, 1991 rent increase in excess of CPI effective upon sale of coach as the result of a mediation, and (2) requesting a modification of the mobilehome rent control ordinance to require notices of rent increases and the right to arbitrate be given to both incoming and outgoing tenants. On March 17, 1992, the City Council referred the matter back to the City Attorney for investigation and report back to the city Council for the March 24, 1992 meeting. This Report responds to that referral. 1. "Affected outgoing Tenants" is a defined term in this report intended to describe the tenant in the process of marketing their mobilehome ("Home") for sale and who has been served with a notice from the Owner that the Owner intends to increase the rents to their new buyer. The new buyer, who will now be required to enter into a ground lease with the Owner at the increased rents shall be referred to herein as the "Affected Incoming Tenants". As applied to the Dufresne case, there were 14 Affected Outgoing Tenants which were given notice of rental increase on sale of their Home on or about April 15, 1991 by the Park Owner. omhp2.wp April 2, 1992 Al13 re Dufresne Complaint Page 1 ;2. /- / Conclusions of the citv Attornev. I. Since this referral to the City Attorney, the Yee case was decided (April 1, 1992). This Office has prepared a separate legal assessment of the decision and its impact on rent control ordi- nances in general, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B. I believe the Yee decision will require this city, and all other cities, to more clearly evaluate the following with regard to its mobilehome rent control ordinances: What is our purpose in regulating pad rents? Does government have a legitimate state interest in having such a purpose? Are we achieving our purpose? ("Regulatory Taking Issues") The Yee Case should require us to refer our entire mobilehome rent control ordinance back to the Rent Review Commission to address these Regulatory Taking Issues. In the meantime, the Yee Case did not, in andof itself, render any aspect of our ordinance invalid. Therefore, although it should be reviewed to address the Regulatory Taking Issues, it is appro- priate to assume that our ordinance is constitutionally valid, and that Mr. Dufresne's rights thereunder should be seriously evalu- ated. II. As regards to Mr. Dufresne's first point on the issue of the continued right to arbitrate, it is the City Attorney's conclusion that the 14 Affected Outgoing Tenants who participated in, or had the right to participate in, the mediation, did not lose their right under the ordinance to arbitrate the rent increase. III. The majority of the 14 affected outgoing tenants who still have a stake in the outcome should be entitled to continue the arbitration. However, the City Attorney believes there is some question of their interest or desire to arbitrate. So far, only Mr. Dufresne, who no longer has any standing to assert a violation of the ordinance, has complained about not having the right to arbitrate. He should no longer be permitted, on his own or as a representative of his parents, to prosecute an arbitration. If a majority ("Required Majority")Y of the 14 Affected 2 . This number would be Affected outgoing Tenants, no longer have a stake in determined by taking the original 14 and removing from the group, those which the outcome because they have now sold (continued... ) omhp2 . wp April 2, 1992 Al13 re Dufresne Complaint Page 2 ;J.J-~ outgoing Tenants who still have a stake in the outcome (sometimes called herein "The Remaining Group") express in writing their desire to arbitrate the April 1, 1991 rent increase, they should be permitted to continue with the arbitration. The author asked Mr. Dufresne to assemble a list of those wishing to arbitrate, and present same to the City Council at the April 7, 1992 meeting if such a Required Majority can be mustered. If he is unable to do so or fails to do so, the Staff should make a special effort to notify the original 14 Affected Outgoing Tenants ("Original Group") of the continued existence of their right. If no request to arbitrate is made by the Required Majority in 30 days, the matter should be deemed terminated, and the mediated rent schedule should be implemented. If the Required Majority still desire arbitration, the right to arbitrate should be diligently prosecuted to avoid the contention that they waived their rights. IV. The second point raised by Mr. Dufresne is that the ordinance should be amended to require notice of the right to arbitrate the increase be given to the Affected Incoming Tenant (receipt for which notice should be acknowledged in writing, and a copy of both of which should be provided to the Affected Outgoing Tenant, the association and the city). It is a valid point, and it is the recommendation that the matter be referred to the Commission. V. As a result of this assignment, the city Attorney has compiled some other recommendations ("Other Proposed Recommendations") for clarifying parts of the Mobilehome Rent Control ordinance as follows: 1. clarify the standing issue--should an affected tenant which is given a right to arbitrate be permitted to continue to exercise that right if they have no further benefit from the outcome? 2. Clarify that a rental increase can only be arbitrated one time, not once by the Affected Outgoing 2. ( . . . continued) their Home according to a contract which gives them no further interest in the rents charged to the Affected Incoming Tenant. Thus, if 8 of the original 14 Affected outgoing Tenants have sold their coach without right to get an additional amount depending on the result of arbitration, the "Remaining Group" who would still have the existing right to either consent to the new rent schedule or demand arbitration would be the remaining six, and the majority of them ("Required Majority") would be able to bind the Remaining Group. See Section 9.50.070 (A) and (H). omhp2 . wp April 2, 1992 Al13 re Dufresne Complaint Page 3 .21:3 Tenant, and once again by the Incoming Tenant. 3. Clarify the extent to which a "group" receiving a rental increase notice can individual members. of Tenants bind the 4. Clarify the standards for determining the permissible limits on rental increases in excess of CPl. Currently our ordinance permits a "just and reasonable return on the property" to be considered. Does that mean his investment in the property or the value of the property? Recommendation: 1. Deem that The Remaining Group's right to arbitrate exists if they can demonstrate, within 30 days, that the Required Majority express the desire to continue the arbitration. 2. If the Remaining Group can get the Required Majority to exer- cise their right to arbitrate, direct staff to assemble an arbitration regarding the rent increase. 3. Deem that Mr. Dufresne's original principals, his mother and father, are no longer a member of the Remaining Group, and no longer have standing to assert for themselves the right to arbitrate the April, 1991 rent increase upon sale of Home. (Mr. Dufresne is entitled to act as a representative of a le- gitimate member of the Remaining Group, but such represen- tation should be shown in writing.) 4. Direct the Mobilehome Rent Review CommissionY ("Commission") to re-evaluate our rent control ordinance in its entirety, and to provide a report thereon, and include in that evaluation and report comment on the following questions: A. The Regulatory Taking Issues: (a) what is our purpose in 3. Note that the recommendation is not to the Mobilehome Issues Committee. According to my information, the Mobilehome Issues Committee was an ad hoc committee formed by the local community members, not the City, to whom the City has subsequently offered some staff report (agenda, minutes, etc.) and has been used as a "sounding board" for the city. It is not an official committee of the city. They are not in our conflict of interest code. They don't have to file economic disclosure statements. They are not bound by the Brown Act. They are not readily active. For this reason, we should not refer to them consideration of this ordinance for advice, but if they reorganize, we should solicit their input. omhp2 . wp April 2, 1992 Al13 re Dufresne Complaint Page 4 02)~'1 engaging in rent control; (b) does our purpose serves a legitimate governmental interest; and (c) is our rent control ordinance narrowly drawn to accomplish such purpose or purposes? B. Should we amend the ordinance to require a written notice of the right to arbitrate be given to the Incoming Tenants, receipt of which is to be acknowledged by the Incoming Tenant, and copies of all of which are provided to the Outgoing Tenant, the City, the association, and other Incoming and outgoing Tenants affected by contemporaneously issued notices of rent increases? C. Should the city Attorney's Other Proposed Recommendations set forth above and as contained in this report be instituted? Boards and Commissions Recommendation: None. Time constraints imposed by Council does not permit consultation. This report contemplates a substantial referral to the Commission for consultation and advice. Backaround. The Park and the Owner. The Otay Lakes Lodge ("Park") is a mobilehome park in Chula vista on Otay Lakes Road about a mile east of its intersection with Telegraph Canyon Road. It has approximately 200 spaces ("Spaces") which it rents to tenants ("Tenants") and the Tenants are required to provide their own mobilehome (also referred to herein as "Home"). The owner of their Park, or their representative, is a Mr. Richard Kelton, ("Owner") with offices in Santa Monica. He is represented by a Mr. Terrance Dowdall, Esq. Our Rent Control Ordinance. Chapter 9.50 of our Municipal Code regulates mobilehome rents by allowing tenants, if they desire, to arbitrate rent increase disputes if the annual increases are in excess of the CPI index. This "complaint driven" rent control procedure, applicable even on sale of a Home, represents an philosophical position somewhere between no rent control (an unregulated market) and an ordinance that strictly limits rents to specific amounts based on permitting the Owner to earn a reasonable return on his or her investment.~ 4. It is also observed that it is a Pad Based, Tenant driven system because the Tenants have the right to request arbitration (continued... ) omhp2 . wp April 2, 1992 Al13 re Dufresne Complaint Page 5 -- :2J-~ Rent increases which are the subject of an arbitration request would then be subject to reduction in arbitration based on fac- tors~ which are to include consideration of an amount necessary to produce a "just and reasonable return on the owner's property". We have a quasi-vacancy control provisionY which subjects rent increases on sale of a Home to the same procedural require- ments and the same right to arbitrate. Thus, in addition to giving the Affected outgoing Tenant the right to arbitrate, we also give the Affected Incoming Tenant the right to arbitrate. However, the ordinance does not specifically put the duty on the Owner to give the Affected Incoming Tenant notice of his right to arbitrate the new rent. By the time he may otherwise find out about the right to arbitrate, the 30 day period within which to request arbitration may have lapsed. The Grouo Power Conceot section 9.50.070 (A) of our ordinance, creates the concept of a group power--that the majority of the tenants affected by a rent increase may bind the individual minority members of the group by their consent to an increase ("Group Power"): 4. (...continued) about increases as to their particular space. An Owner driven system, such as the sUbject of the Escondido suit in Yee, lets the Owner apply for rent increases for the entire park, and in that context, all pad rents are considered, and the Owner's return on his investment can be fully considered. While we have only had two requests for arbitration in the years that our ordinance has been on the books, both have been ineffective. Our ordinance theoretically permits each tenant, or group of contemporaneously noticed Tenants, in each park to request arbitration when an excessive rental increase is given. If a reasonable return on the Owner's investment is to be an element of justification in each such arbitration, it would be unnecessarily repetitive and complex, in each such case, to demonstrate the Owner I s return, when different pad's in the Park may be paying different rents, but only one or a small group is at issue in the arbitration, and then to show the impact of a single pad's rent increase on the Owner's overall return. 5. I believe the Supreme Court is prepared to require written articulation of these standards a matter which is part of the referral to the Commission. 6. It does not say rents on sale are controlled, but rather that they are subject to arbitration. omhp2 . wp April 2, 1992 Al13 re Dufresne Complaint Page 6 ;2)-/, "A. In any situation where the space rent increases in a twelve (12) month period exceed cumulatively the percentage increase of the consumer price index, as reported by the Bureau of Labor statistics for the most recent twelve (12) month period preceding the rent increase notice, the following procedures shall apply unless the owner receives written consent to the increase from more than 50% of the soaces affected bv the notice of increase. The owner must file the original of the written consent with the Community Development Department and notify the residents that this has been filed." This Group Power concept needs further definition other than by City Attorney interpretation, and it is being recommended for referral to the commission.Y until this can be accomplished, I have to interpret the provision to mean that the Group Power is one that exists throughout the dispute resolution process~ but should apply only to those who have a continuing stake in the controversy, and therefore continues to shrink as the Original Group sells their Homes without recourse. This means that, as persons sell their 7. Was it the intent that the group of "Noticed Tenants" should be able to bind the members thereof throughout the duration of the "space rent review" process ("Durational Group Power Concept")? Or is it intended to be a "one time exercise of group power" that is exercised to trigger, for the benefit of all affected tenants, the individual privilege of subsequent space rent review ("single Incident Group Power")? If Durational Group Power, do those wishing to consent to the proposed rents ("Consenting Tenants") have to participate in the "space rent review process"? If the Consenting Tenants can be excused from the process, is the Durational Group Power only exercised by the remaining non-consenting Tenants ("Objecting Tenants")? Was it the intent that the group could also bind the incoming tenants? 8. Subsection (H) of Section 9.50.070 further provides that: "In the event that the owner reduces the rent increase to the applicable CPI, or more than 50% of the affected residents agree in writing to settle the dispute, the arbitration process automatically terminates." This seems to imply that the power of the group was intended to extend throughout the process. omhp2 . wp April 2, 1992 Al13 re Dufresne Complaint Page 7 :2/- '/ Homes at prices which they are content with, and without recourse to getting a higher coach price after arbitration of the Space Rent, they no longer have a stake in the outcome of the arbitra- tion, and should, by principles of estoppel and standing, be deemed to have lost their right to continue to participate in the arbitration. The Affected outaoina Tenants. On or about April 15, 1991, the Original Group (i.e., the or- iginal 14 Affected outgoing Tenants) had their Homes up for sale. The Owner gave the Original Group a notice of rent increase in excess of CPI, one of whom was Sandra Kearns/Keller of Space 92. Ms. Keller's vacancy rental increase was 41% over her then current rent at a time when CPI was at 6%. A copy of the Keller Notice is attached hereto as Exhibit c.V The 14 Affected Outgoing Tenants, apparently through the representation of Ms. Keller,.!.QI sought to arbitrate the rent increase, and filed a timely request to arbitratelV 9. Please note that the notice is given under protest reserving to the Owner his right to declare the City's ordinance unconstitution- al because of its vacancy control provisions. 10. There was a question in my mind as to which of the 14 Affected outgoing Tenants exercised their right to arbitrate. They appar- ently did not file a written request to arbitrate. However, Ms. Keller and four or five other tenants collectively deposited $250, the required deposit, and it appears that the Owner believed that all 14 Tenants did, and were represented by Ms. Keller, by virtue of the fact that his profferred settlement agreement, and some correspondance, sought to bind all 14 Tenants. 11. Under section 9.50.070 (B) and 9.50.065 (A), the right to arbitrate had to be exercised within 30 days after the Notice is properly given. omhp2 . wp April 2, 1992 Al13 re Dufresne Complaint Page 8 -'.J-g/ The Diversion to Mediation. After the 14 Affected outgoing Tenants requested arbitration, and paid the required arbitration fee~, but before it could be heard, on or about June 20, 1991, the AAA, through the person of Tracey Sherman, Director of Education and Development, offered the parties a new AAA option of "mediation" (See Exhibit D). This was apparently done on the request of Mr. Kelton for mediation.LV The Groundrules Established Prior to Mediation. As explained in the AAA letter of June 20, 1991 (Exhibit D), "Mediation is VOLUNTARY and NON-BINDING. .. .and either party can dispense with the mediation at any time. Negotiations are furthered by the Mediator, but any settlement is fashioned by the parties and counsel. The optimum and most common outcome of mediation is a MUTUALLY AGREEABLE SETTLEMENT of all issues." It appears~ that about early July, 1991, Mr. Kelton requested mediation in lieu of arbitration. On July 17, as demonstrated in Exhibit E, the City's Community Development Department specified, as part of the rules: " .. Both parties also must agree to continue with arbitration if mediation is not successful. Although undated, the written admonition of the rules of this particular mediation prepared by the AAA provide, as shown on Exhibit F: "If the parties reach an agreement, the mediator will prepare a memorandum recording that understanding which may then be submitted to the parties' personal attorneys for incorporation into a formal agreement, or reduced at their agreement to a formal arbitrator's award." The written admonition (Exhibit F) engaged the "Commercial 12. 25% of the costs of the first day of arbitration has to accompany the filing of the request with the City's Community Development Department. The fee was $1,000 in this case, $250 of which was paid by the Affected Outgoing Tenants. Ms. Keller paid more than 1/14th of her pro rata share, and did so with the claim that she was representing the said 14 tenants. 13 . Staff expressed concern and caution as to the use of the mediation process in lieu of arbitration, and advised the Tenants that it could not be required under our ordinance. 14. Source: A letter from our Community Development Department staff person assigned to Mobilehome rent issues, dated July 17, 1991, attached as Exhibit E. omhp2 . wp April 2, 1992 Al13 re Dufresne Complaint Page 9 c2) -? Mediation Rules of the AAA," which, at rule 14, indicate as follows: "14. Termination of Mediation. The mediation shall be terminated: (a) by the execution of a settlement agreement by the parties; (b) by a written declaration of the mediator to the effect that further efforts at mediation are no longer worthwhile; or (c) by a written declaration of a party or parties to the effect that the mediation proceedings are terminated." Furthermore, it appears that the Mediatior provided a verbal admonition at the commencement of the mediation that any decision reached would be of a non-binding nature.XV Apparently, both parties agreed to such rules.~ The Mediation Event. The mediation took two days. The first was held on July 26 and the second was held on August 2, 1991. Both days were held before the AAA-assigned Mediator, Ms. Dina Feldman-Scarr. Not all of the 14 Affected Outgoing Tenants were there both days. In fact, Mrs. Keller (Space 92), Mrs. Dufresne (Space 110) and Mrs. Cookson (Space 165) were the only ones there both days; Mr. Velazquez (Space 145) was there on the second day; and 10 of the 14 did not show up either of the two days.tv All parties believed that Mrs. Keller was representing all 14 Affected outgoing Tenants throughout the entire process, and that however the matter may have been concluded with regard to Keller would be binding on all 14 Affected outgoing Tenants. At the mediation, City Staff advised Mr. Kelton that any settlement agreement arising from the mediation would only be applicable to the Affected Tenants, not other non-participating Tenants. Mr. Kelton advised that he intended to apply the results of the medation agreement "across the board." Staff advised Mr. Kelton that other Tenants would have the right to arbitrate. 15. Source: Community Development Department staff. 16. The file contains Ms. Keller's July 23, 1991 concurrance in the rules. The Owner's signed concurrance is not in the file. 17. Source: an interview. Staff member's recollection, about March 19, 1992, in omhp2 . wp April 2, 1992 A113 re Dufresne Complaint Page 10 ;V-JCJ Was a Consensus Reached at the Mediation Meetino? StaffllV, the Staff of the AMID, the MediatorW, and the ownerW believed a consensus was reached as a result of the mediation. Mr. Dufresne, representing his mother, indicates a month later that he does not even believe a consensus was reached: "We ended the [mediation] meeting saying that Mr. Kelton, should write up what he expected and we would determin [sic] if it would be wise of us to sign. The meeting ended with uncertanties as to our rights, because of coversation [sic] made while the Medeator [sic] was not present."W It is my factual opinion that a consensus was in fact reached, but as you will see, the consensus was non-binding until reduced to an executed settlement agreement. On or before August 5, 1991, the Mediator prepared an MOU, attached as Exhibit G, which provided that the parties would trans- form the consensus into a settlement agreement. The Owner was to redraft the MOU as a settlement agreement, and was to send it to the 14 Tenants for their signatures. Post Mediation Reiection of the Mediated Consensus. Apparently, the Park Owner took a long vacation immediately following the mediation, instructing the Park Managers, Mr. Harry 18. See Staff letter to file, attached as Exhibit 19. See Letter of Tracey Sherman, of the AM, dated August 2, 1991, attached as Exhibit _, congratulating the parties "on reaching a settlement during your recent mediation." 20. See mediator probably the official Memorandum of Understanding prepared by the contemporaneously with the second day of mediation, August 2, 1991, attached as Exhibit 21. The Owner commenced setting the new rents in accordance with the mediated results. See rent increase to a Mr. and Mrs. Heinrich, Space 103, dated August 13, 1991, indicating "an agreement was reached." The Heinrich I s were not one of the 14 Tenants. The owner, by giving this rent increase notice to someone other that the 14 Tenants, attempted to apply this mediated result to all selling Tenants, which is probably the key reason that the mediation effort collapsed. 22. See Mr. Dufresne's september 17, 1991 letter attached as Exhibit omhp2 . wp April 2, 1992 Al13 re Dufresne Complaint Page 11 ,(/~// and Marion Brown, as to how to implement the consensus in the interim.W The Browns, on August 13, 1991, gave the Tenants in space 103 (the Heinrichs), not represented at the mediation table as one of the 14 Tenants, a rent increase effective on sale according to the mediated rent schedule. See Exhibit H. It clearly purported to apply to all Tenants the mediated rent schedule, regardless of their presence at the mediation. It further attempted to revoke Non 14 Tenants I right to arbitration: "There will be no Arbitration Meeting." The Heinrich's orally complained to Mr. Dufresne that Mr. Dufresne had no right to surrender the Heinrich's right of arbitration,~ a fact with which Mr. Dufresne readily agreed in his letter of August 24, 1991 denying the mediation results, and demanding the continuation of arbitration. See Exhibit I. When Mr. Kelton returned, on or about September 6, 1991--one month after the mediation--he offered a written settlement agree- ment, attempting to reduce the mediated result to an agreement. See Exhibit J. Mr. Dufresne, in his letter of September 17, 1991, attached as Exhibit K, again explains his reasoning for rejecting the mediated consensus: That Mr. Kelton was attempting to include all Tenants within its ambit, not just the 14 Affected outgoing Tenants. He again rejects the settlement offer and demands arbitration and requests the Owner to provide specific information at such arbitration. Was the Consensus Bindina on the 14 Affected outaoina Tenants? It is my legal opinion that, based on the explained ground- rules and the understanding of the parties, such consensus was, until it was reduced to a written settlement agreement signed by all parties, not binding or enforceable, and could be retracted by either of the parties for any reason without consequence. 23. In his letter of September 6, 1991, Mr. Kelton acknowledges instructing the implementation of the settlement agreement. 24. Our rules provide that if 50% of the spaces affected by the notice of increase consent in writing to the increase, there is no right of arbitration. See section 9.50.070. This rule, however, does not bind persons who were not part of the Original Group of noticees. omhp2 . wp April 2, 1992 Al13 re Dufresne Complaint Page 12 J./~/,,2 Subseauent Activities. Upon the request of the Affected outgoing Tenants for renewal of the arbitration effort after what they saw as the failure of mediation, staff re-initiated the arbitration process through the AAA. The AAA contacted the parties to re-establish the arbitration schedule. On or about September 27, 1991, Mr. Dowdall, attorney for the Owner, obj ected to the "re- insti tution" of arbitration proceedings, seeking to avail the Owner of the mediated rent schedule, and the non-binding agreement reached thereat. On October 9, 1991, our Office urged the proper preparation of such an agreement apparently believing that the objectionable condition was the secrecy provision.~ Mr. Dufresne's Standina to continue with Arbitration. Mr. Dufresne currently resides at the Park but not at the space, No. 110, which was the subject of the April rent increase. He participated in the mediation/arbitration process as a represen- tative of his mother's and father's Home. In February, 1992, Mr. Dufresne sold his parent's Home at a price which was $10,000 lower than his aSking price. He feels that the Space rent charged for the space on which the Home was located contributed to driving down the price. That Home has now been sold to persons who have bought the Home and are paying the rent according to the mediated schedule. Mr. Dufresne admits that he has not been able to contact the new buyers, and accordingly, he does not represent them. Neither Mr. Dufresne, nor his parent's estate, will benefit now from a reduced rent charge which may result from arbitration. Mr. Dufresne feels that he should be entitled to arbitrate on the basis of principal. Grouo Consensus Issue At the time of writing this report, it is unclear which of the Original Group still has a remaining stake in the outcome of the arbitration. The Park Manager has represented to Staff that seven 25. This was not the case. The objectionable prov~s~on was the implied condition that the settlement agreement would apply to all 200 Tenants. Nevertheless, it was clear that the mediated result would only apply to the 14 Tenants, and not to all Tenants. omhp2 . wp April 2, 1992 Al13 re Dufresne Complaint Page 13 -2/-/3 (7) of the original 14 Affected outgoing Tenants have sold their Homes to Affected Incoming Tenants on the basis that the rents to the Affected Incoming Tenants would be at the "mediated rent schedule" . Due to the fact that the Owner is represented by an attorney, I was limited in my ability to verify this information due to the ethical rule prohibiting contact with an attorney's client. The Owner's attorney reported in a March 24, 1992 letter that, while the Owner, Mr. Kelton, desires to provide direct evidence to the Council, a "majority have assented to the terms of the accord [mediation], whether or not formally reduced to a single integrated settlement agreement executed thereby. The subsequently executed rental agreements, the reduction of the rents by my client, the addition of the amenities which were agreed to, and the form some did in fact execute are each and all a testament to the meeting of the minds reached by the parties. . . ." As a result, I suspect that there are only a few signatures, if any, on the proposed Settlement Agreement. While I give this report little credence in light of my request for hard, physical evidence, Mr. Dufresne himself reports, as of March 30th, that he is having trouble getting the agreement of the Home owners to assert the request to arbitrate. I therefore suspect that there may be a problem in getting a cohesive group that has standing to exercise their right to arbitrate. Conclusion as to the Investiaation This, therefore, is the state of the investigation at this time: The right of the Affected Outgoing Tenants to arbitrate was not lost, it did not lapse, and it did not expire. It is still alive if they desire to exercise it. However, no one should be required to engage in an idle act. It should therefore be a condition to the exercise of the right to arbitration that the parties have a continued interest in the outcome. While I can not determine that there is still a cohesive group that still has standing to pursue arbitration, I have asked Mr. Dufresne to get the written consent of the remaining Group together if he can assemble same by the City Council meeting. If he can not do so by that time, and the City Council agrees with the recom- mendations in this report, it should be incumbent upon us to send written notice to the original Affected outgoing Tenants advising them of their continued right to arbitrate the rental increase if omhp2 . wp April 2, 1992 Al13 re Dufresne Complaint Page 14 ;;. /-1'/ they desire to do so. Unless they can demonstrate within 30 days after we give such notice that the Required Majority of the Remaining Group still desire to arbitrate the April, 1991 rent increase, it is my recommendation to deem the arbitration terminated by consensus of the group, and the mediated rents should be deemed to be in effect for the 14 Affected spaces. In the event that a qualifying group can establish their right to continue with the arbitration, and desire to do so, they should do so forthwith with the arbitration. Reconsideration of the Rent Control Ordinance The City Attorney has also reviewed the Mobilehome Rent Control Ordinance in light of Mr. Dufresne's contention that incoming and outgoing tenants are not being given notice of the right to arbitrate excess rent increases. This review has produced several concerns which the City Attorney has with the Rent Control Ordinance, identified above in the Recommendation section of this Report, and does not need repetition at this point. I would strongly recommend that our Commission evaluate such issues in a manner that permits mobile park Owners and Tenants the opportunity to observe and participate in the discussion. Fiscal Impact: We can anticipate the costs of staff and Committee time in participating in the arbitration, and the possible costs of litigation, and in making revisions to the Rent Control Chapter. omhp2 . wp April 2, 1992 Al13 re Dufresne Complaint Page 15 .2 j.. 5 jell-I? Exhibit List to Al13 Exhibit Letter A. March 4, 1992 letter from Mr. Fred Dufresne of Otay Lakes Mobilhome Lodge complaining to the city Council. B. Legal assessment of the Yee Decision and its impact on rent control ordinances C. A copy of the Keller Notice of rent increase. D. June 20, 1991, letter from the AAA, through the person of Tracey Sherman, Director of Education and Development, offering the mediation option. E. Letter dated July 17 from the Community Development Department specifying that both parties must agree to continue with arbitration if mediation is not successful. F. Undated, written admonition of the rules of this particular mediation prepared by the AAA. G. Mediator-prepared MOU H. August 13, 1991 notice of rent increase on Space 103 (the Heinrichs), effective on sale according to the mediated rent schedule. 1. August 24, 1991 letter from Mr. Dufresne denying the mediation results, and demanding the continuation of arbitration. J. September 6, 1991 proposed written settlement agreement from Mr. Kelton. K. September 17, 1991 letter from Mr. Dufresne explaining his reasoning for rejecting the mediated consensus. omhp2 . wp April 2, 1992 Al13 re Dufresne Complaint Page 16 :V-I? From the Office of the city Attorney City of Chula vista Memorandum From: April 2, 1992 Bruce M. Boogaard, city Attorney Date: To: San Diego County City Attorneys cc: Honorable Mayor and councilmembers City Manager Community Development Director Re: The Yee decision, and its impact on our Rent Control Ordinances The U.S. Supreme Court decided the Yee Case this date, a copy of which is attached. I think that it is important that we start discussing the consequences of the Yee decision as soon as possible. Here is my impression: In order to constitute a taking sufficient to constitute a duty to pay compensation under the Fourth Amendment ("Compensable Taking"), there has to be either a physical occupation of the land ("Physical Taking") or a deprivation of use for policy reasons that, out of regard for principles of fairness, require the cost to be borne by the public in general as opposed to singling out the property owner to bear such cost ("Regulatory Taking") . The Yee Court holding dealt only with what constituted a Physical Taking, and entirely avoided, for reasons which I speculate on herein, the issue of whether a rent control ordinance with vacancy control provisions may constitute a "Regulatory Taking". The Court only defined when a Physical Taking is deemed to have occurred. The occupancy of the Owner's land has to be a compelled occupancy. If the Owner has to have the freedom to get out of the pad renting business, the occupancy is not compelled. In the case of mobilehome parks, the tenants are the only ones occupying the Owner's land, and it is with the Owner's consent and invitation that they do so. yee2.wp April 2, 1992 EXHIBIT B Analysis of Yee Decision Page 1 02 I-I r If the Owner were unable to get out of the business of renting "pads" to mobilehome tenants despite having tried, and were forced to accept sub-market rents, and were not permitted to exclude transferrers as tenants, the Court indicated that there may be a Compensable Physical Taking.' While the Court pretends to not address the Regulatory Taking aspect of a vacancy control rent control ordinance, they repeatedly observe that such an ordinance permits only a transfer of wealth between the Owner and the Existing Tenant, a fact the obvious consequence of which is that the legislative enactment misses the alleged state interest in providing a supply of affordable housing. They note the following at various points: "This effect might have some bearing on whether the ordinance causes a regulatory taking, as it may shed some light on whether there is a sufficient nexus between the effect of the ordinance and the objectives it is supposed to advance. [citations omitted] But it has nothing to do with whether the ordinance causes a physical taking." As to the fact that an Owner can not choose its incoming tenants, the Courts again note: Again, this effect may be relevant to a regulatory taking argument, as it may be one factor a reviewing court would wish to consider in determining whether the ordinance unjustly imposes a burden on petitioners that should' 'be compensated by the government, rather than remaining disproportionately concentrated on a few persons.. . . The Court refused to address the Regulatory Taking issue. Not because it wasn't ripe, but because they, themselves, limited the issue for which they granted review--"Did the court below err in finding no physical taking?"! They so limited their review because there was no conflicting lower cases on the issue of Regulatory Takings, only Physical Takings! The unresolved question still remains as to whether a mobilehome rent control ordinance with vacancy control provisions constitutes a Regulatory Taking--that is, a deprivation of use for policy reasons that, out of principles of fairness, require the cost to be borne by the public in general as opposed to 1. This may be a caution to cities that we should not combine rent controls with exclusive zoning of park sites unless we are prepared to suffer a Compensable Taking judgment. yee2.wp April 2, 1992 Analysis of Yee Decision Page 2 ,; /-/1 singling out the property owner to bear such costs. Hence our policies reasons for a rent control ordinance, be it with vacancy control or decontrol, become critical to our liability to an Owner for a Regulatory Taking. If we have rent control in order to preserve the existing supply of affordable housing2--a social cost--we have to identify what principles of fairness and equity exist that require the park Owners, as opposed to the public generally through the liability of their government, to bear that social cost by limiting their ability to capture market rents? We must also be sure that our ordinance accomplishes its stated purpose. If our goal is to preserve affordable housing units, we can not just control the rental side of the equation and allow the tenant to profit therefrom, because the result is that the new tenant pays more for a mobilehome that its value without the pad! On the other hand, if we have rent control as a form of consumer (Tenant) protection against "price gouging," it may be perfectly appropriate to single out the Park Owner for regula- tion. But then, there may be no justification for vacancy con- trol because the incoming tenant will know all components of the rental/purchase equation--his mobilehome price and payments and the pad rents. 3 I do not see the Yee case as anything of a v~ctory for mobilehome tenants or cities. The Yee case does not resolve our concerns about liability under a compensable Regulatory Taking for rent control ordinances--in fact, it aggravates them. Did the supreme Court do us a disservice by not ruling on the regulatory taking issue? Definitely not! 2. If we have a legitimate interest in preserving the supply of affordable housing in our city, we should also be interested in controlling mobilehome resale prices as well as rents! 3. It appears to me that such policies have to be more than mere recitals in the preface to a rent control ordinance. It has to be embodied in the manner in which we protect the Tenant. Price gouging does not occur if a reasonable, not excessive, return on investment is permitted. yee2.wp April 2, 1992 Analysis of Yee Decision Page 3 .;J. /-.lO To the contrary, I see the decision as a warning4 from the Supreme Court to cites that they should really reconsider their policies behind rent control! If they had addressed the Regulatory Taking claim, and ruled that cities with ordinances which have as their alleged purpose the preservation of affordable housing, but did not control mobilehome resale prices, such ordinances would work a Regulatory Taking on the Owner, it could have serious financial consequences across the country, damages for which may be measured by the lost monthly increment between market rents and controlled rents, plus interest, for every pad which is so restricted for the period of time that it has been restricted! Rather than visit such a liability on the cities across the nation without warning, I believe they were giving us a courtesy warning5 that we should not use the power of government to 4. At one point, the Court refers to the argument that a rent control ordinance deprives the Park owner from all reasonably use of the Owner's land, by saying: The argument, while perhaps within the scope of our regulatory taking cases, cannot be squared easily with our cases on physical takings." At another point, in commenting on the fact that a mobilehome rent control ordinance causes a transfer of wealth from the Owner to the outgoing tenant, but not the incoming tenant, the Court comments: This effect might have some bearing on whether the ordinance causes a regulatory taking, as it may shed some light on whether there is a sufficient nexus between the effect of the ordinance and the objectives it is supposed to advance!" The point is, even if it is fair to make the Owner bear the cost of maintaining a supply of affordable housing units (i.e., not a Regulatory Taking), and we have a legitimate interest in preserving the supply of affordable housing in our city, we should also be interested in controlling mobilehome resale prices as well as rents on sale! We don't and neither does any city's rent control ordinance known to this Office. 5. They also gave cities sufficient time to "clean up their act." As to a physical taking which may be compensable, they said that a complaining park owner would have to "run the gauntlet" of trying to change the voluntary park use to a (continued... ) yee2.wp April 2, 1992 Analysis of Yee Decision Page 4 ~/-;l.1 transfer wealth from a group which is not as politically represented to one that is, at least without expecting to pay for it. I will look forward to hearing your opinion. 5. (...continued) different use, and fail, before a physical occupation claim would be compensable. As to a Regulatory Taking, the time it will take for a case to be at a conflict stage in lower courts is the amount of time the Court has given the cities to correct its ordinances. yee2.wp April 2, 1992 Analysis of Yee Decision Page 5 ~/~~ JOHN K. YEE, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. CITY OF ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA No. 90-1947 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Argued January 22, 1992 Decided April 1, 1992 ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT Syllabus The Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause generally requires just compensation where the government authorizes a physical occupation of property. But where the Government merely regulates the property's use, compensation is required only if considerations such as the regulation's purpose or the extent to which it deprives the owner of the property's economic use suggests that the regulation has unfairly singled out the property owner to bear a burden that should be borne by the public as a whole. Petitioners, mobile home park owners in respondent Escondido, California, rent pads of land to mobile home owners. When the homes are sold, the new owners generally continue to rent the pads. Under the California Mobilehome Residency Law, the bases upon which a park owner may terminate a mobile home owner's tenancy are limited to, inter alia, nonpayment of rent and the park owner's desire to change the use of his land. The park owner may not require the removal of a mobile home when it is sold and may neither charge a transfer fee for the sale nor disapprove of a purchaser who is able to pay rent. The state law does not limit the rent the park owner may charge, but Escondido has a rent control ordinance setting mobile home rents back to their 1986 levels and prohibiting rent increases without the City Council's approval. The Superior Court dismissed lawsuits filed by petitioners and others challenging the ordinance, rejecting the argument that the ordinance effected a physical taking by depriving park owners of all use and occupancy of their property and granting to their tenants, and their tenants' successors, the right to physically permanently occupy and use the property. The Court of Appeal affirmed. Held: 1. The rent control ordinance does not authorize an unwanted physical occupation of petitioners' property and thus does not amount to a per se taking. Petitioners' argument-that the rent control ordinance authorizes a physical taking because, coupled with the state law's restrictions, it increases a mobile home's value by giving the homeowner the right to occupy the pad indefinitely at a sub-market rent-is unpersuasive. The government effects a physical taking only where it requires the landowner to submit to the physical occupation of his land. Here, petitioners have voluntarily rented their land to mobile home owners and are not required to continue to do so by either the City or the State. On their face, the laws at issue merely regulate petitioners' use of their land by regulating the relationship between landlord and tenant. Any transfer of wealth from park owners to incumbent mobile home owners in the form of sub-market rent does not itself convert regulation into physical invasion. Additional contentions made by petitioners-that the ordinance benefits current mobile home owners but not future owners, who must (publication page references are not available for this document.) purchase the homes at premiums resulting from the homes' increased value, and that the ordinance deprives petitioners of the ability to choose their incoming tenants-might have some bearing on whether the ordinance causes a regulatory taking, but have nothing to do with whether it causes a yeel.wp April 1, 1992 Page 1 Yee Decision, April 1, 1992 ~J-~3 physical taking. Moreover, the finding in Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp., 458 U.S. 419, 439, n. 17-that a physical taking claim cannot be defeated by an argument that a landlord can avoid a statute's restrictions by ceasing to rent his property, because his ability to rent may not be conditioned on forfeiting the right to compensation for a physical occupation- has no relevance here, where there has been no physical taking. Since petitioners have made no attempt to change how their land is used, this case also presents no occasion to consider whether the statute, as applied, prevents them from making a change. Pp.5-11. 2. Petitioners' claim that the ordinance constitutes a denial of substantive due process is not properly before this Court because it was not raised below or addressed by the state courts. The question whether this Court's customary refusal to consider claims not raised or addressed below is a jurisdictional or prudential rule need not be resolved here, because even if the rule were prudential, it would be adhered to in this case. Pp.11-12. 3. Also improperly before this Court is petitioners' claim that the ordinance constitutes a regulatory taking. The regulatory taking claim is ripe for review; and the fact that it was not raised below does not' mean that it could not be properly raised before this Court, since once petitioners properly raised a taking claim, they could have formulated, in this Court, any argument they liked in support of that claim. Nonetheless, the claim will not be considered because, under this Court's Rule 14.1(a), only questions set forth, or fairly included, in the petition for certiorari are considered. Rule 14.1(a) is prudential, but is disregarded only where reasons of urgency or economy suggest the need to address the unpresented question in the case under consideration. The Rule provides the respondent with notice of the grounds on which certiorari is sought, thus relieving him of the expense of unnecessary litigation on the merits and the burden of opposing certiorari on unpresented questions. It also assists the Court in selecting the cases in which certiorari will be granted. By forcing the parties to focus on the questions the Court views as particularly important, the Rule enables the Court to use its resources efficiently. Petitioners' question presented was whether the lower court erred in finding no physical taking, and the regulatory taking claim is related to, but not fairly included in, that question. Thus, petitioners must overcome the very heavy presumption against consideration of the regulatory taking claim, which they have not done. While that claim is important, lower courts have not reached conflicting results on the claim as they have on the physical taking claim. Prudence also dictates awaiting a case in which the issue was fully litigated below, to have the benefit of developed arguments and lower court opinions squarely addressing the question. Thus, the regulatory taking issue should be left for the California courts to address in the first instance. Pp.12-17. 224 Cal.App.3d 1349, 274 Cal.Rptr.551, affirmed. O'CONNOR, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which REHNQUIST, C. J., and WHITE, STEVENS, SCALIA, KENNEDY, and THOMAS, JJ., joined. BLACKMON, J., and SOUTER, J., filed opinions concurring in the judgment. JUSTICE O'CONNOR delivered the opinion of the Court. The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment provides: ' '(N)or shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.' , Most of our cases interpreting the Clause fall within two distinct classes. Where the government authorizes a physical occupation of property (or actually takes title), the Takings Clause generally requires compensation. See, e. g., Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp., 458 U. S. 419, 426 (1982). But yeel.wp April 1, 1992 Page 2 Yee Decision, April 1, 1992 ,),1-,), L/ where the government merely regulates the use of property, compensation is required only if considerations such as the purpose of the regulation or the extent to which it deprives the owner of the economic use of the property suggest that the regulation has unfairly singled out the property owner to bear a burden that should be borne by the public as a whole. See, e. g., Penn Central Transp. Co. v. New York City, 438 U. S. 104, 123-125 (1978). The first category of cases requires courts to apply a clear rule; the eecond necessarily entails complex factual assessments of the purposes and economic effects of government actions. Petitioners own mobile home parks in Escondido, California. They contend that a local rent control ordinance, when viewed against the backdrop of California's Mobile home Residency Law, amounts to a physical occupation of their property entitling them to compensation under the first category of cases discussed above. I The term ' 'mobile home' , is somewhat misleading. Mobile homes are largely immobile as a practical matter, because the cost of moving one is often a significant fraction of the value of the mobile home itself. They are generally placed permanently in parks; once in place, only about one in every hundred mobile homes is ever moved. Hirsch & Hirsch, Legal-Economic Analysis of Rent Controls in a Mobile Home Context: Placement Values and Vacancy Decontrol, 35 UCLA L. Rev. 399, 405 (1988). A mobile home owner typically rents a plot of land, called a ' 'pad,' , from the owner of a mobile home park. The park owner provides private roads within the park, common facilities such as washing machines or a swimming pool, and often utilities. The mobile home owner often invests in site-specific improvements such as a driveway, steps, walkways, porches, or landscaping. When the mobile home owner wishes to move, the mobile home is usually sold in place, and the purchaser continues to rent the pad on which the mobile home is located. In 1978, California enacted its Mobilehome Residency Law, Cal. Civ. Code Ann. s 798 (West 1982 and Supp. 1991). The Legislature found' 'that, because of the high cost of moving mobi1ehomes, the potential for damage resulting therefrom, the requirements relating to the installation of mobilehomes, and the cost of landscaping or lot preparation, it is necessary that the owners of mobilehomes occupied within mobilehome parks be provided with the unique protection from actual or constructive eviction afforded by the provisions of this chapter.' , s 798.55(a). The Mobilehome Residency Law limits the bases upon which a park owner may terminate a mobile home owner's tenancy. These include the nonpayment of rent, the mobile home owner's violation of law or park rules, and the park owner's desire to change the use of his land. s 798.56. While a rental agreement is in effect, however, the park owner generally may not require the removal of a mobilehome when it is sold. s 798.73. The park owner may neither charge a transfer fee for the sale, s 798.72, nor disapprove of the purchaser, provided that the purchaser has the ability to pay the rent, s 798.74. The Mobilehome Residency Law contains a number of other detailed provisions, but none limit the rent the park owner may charge. In the wake of the Mobilehome Residency Law, various communities in California adopted mobilehome rent control ordinances. See Hirsch & Hirsch, supra, at 408-411. The voters of Escondido did the same in 1988 by approving Proposition K, the rent control ordinance challenged here. The ordinance sets rents back to their 1986 levels, and prohibits rent increases without the approval of the City Council. Park owners may apply to the Council for rent increases at any time. The Council must approve any increases it determines yee1.wp April 1, 1992 Page 3 Yee Decision, April 1, 1992 ~NS to be ' 'just, fair and reasonable,' , after considering the following nonexclusive list of factors: (1) changes in the Consumer Price Index; (2) the rent charged for comparable mobile home pads in Escondido; (3) the length of time since the last rent increase; (4) the cost of any capital improvements related to the pad or pads at issue; (5) changes in property taxes; (6) changes in any rent paid by the park owner for the land; (7) changes in utility charges; (8) changes in operating and maintenance expenses; (9) the need for repairs other than for ordinary wear and tear; (10) the amount and quality of services provided to the affected tenant; and (11) any lawful existing lease. Ordinance s 4(g), App. 11-12. Petitioners John and Irene Yee own the Friendly Hills and Sunset Terrace Mobile Home Parks, both of which are located in the city of Escondido. A few months after the adoption of Escondido's rent control ordinance, they filed suit in San Diego County Superior Court. According to the complaint, ' '(t]he rent control law has had the effect of depriving the plaintiffs of all use and occupancy of (their] real property and granting to the tenants of mobilehomes presently in The Park, as well as the successors in interest of such tenants, the right to physically permanently occupy and use the real property of Plaintiff.' , Id., at 3, P 6. The Yees requested damages of six million dollars, a declaration that the rent control ordinance is unconstitutional, and an injunction barring the ordinance's enforcement. Id., at 5-6. In their opposition to the city's demurrer, the Yees relied almost entirely on Hall v. City of Santa Barbara, 833 F. 2d 1270 (CA9 1987), cert. denied, 485 U. S. 940 (1988), which had held that a similar mobile home rent control ordinance effected a physical taking under Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp., 458 U. S. 419 (1982). The Yees candidly admitted that' 'in fact, the Hall decision was used (as] a guide in drafting the present Complaint.' , 2 Tr. 318, Points & Authorities in Opposition to Demurrer 4. The Superior Court nevertheless sustained the city's demurrer and dismissed the Yess' complaint. App. to Pet. for Cert. C-42. The Yees were not alone. Eleven other park owners filed similar suits against the city shortly afterwards, and all were dismissed. By stipulation, all 12 cases were consolidated for appeal; the parties agreed that all would be submitted for decision by the California Court of Appeal on the briefs and oral argument in the Yee case. The Court of Appeal affirmed, in an opinion primarily devoted to expressing the court's disagreement with the reasoning of Hall. The court concluded: ' 'Loretto in no way suggests that the Escondido ordinance authorizes a permanent physical occupation of the landlord's property and therefore constitutes a per se taking.' , 224 Cal. App. 3d 1349, 1358 (1990). The California Supreme Court denied review. App. to Pet. for Cert. B-41. Eight of the twelve park owners, including the Yees, joined in a petition for certiorari. We granted certiorari, 502 U. S. (1991), to resolve the conflict between the decision below and those of two of the federal Courts of Appeals, in Hall, supra, and Pinewood Estates of Michigan v. Barnegat Township Leveling Board, 898 F. 2d 347 (CA3 1990). II Petitioners do not claim that the ordinary rent control statutes regulating housing throughout the country violate the Takings Clause. Brief for Petitioners 7, 10. Cf. Pennell v. San Jose, 485 U. S. 1, 12, n. 6 (1988); Loretto supra, at 440. Instead, their argument is predicated on the unusual economic relationship between park owners and mobile home owners. Park owners may no longer set rents or decide who their tenants will be. As a result, according to petitioners, any reduction in the rent for a mobile home pad causes a corresponding increase in the value of a mobile home, because the yeel. wp April 1, 1992 Page 4 Yee Decision, April 1, 1992 ,)./-.2. /p . mobilehome owner now owns, in addition to a mobile home, the right to occupy a pad at a rent below the value that would be set by the free market. Cf. Hirsch & Hirsch, 35 UCLA L. Rev., at 425. Because under the California Mobilehome Residency Law the park owner cannot evict a mobile home owner or easily convert the property to other uses, the argument goes, the mobile home owner is effectively a perpetual tenant of the park, and the increase in the mobile home's value thus represents the right to occupy a pad at below-market rent indefinitely. And because the Mobilehome Residency Law permits the mobile home owner to sell the mobile home in place, the mobile home owner can receive a premium from the purchaser corresponding to this increase in value. The amount of this premium is not limited by the Mobilehome Residency Law or the Escondido ordinance. As a result, petitioners conclude, the rent control ordinance has transferred a discrete interest in land-the right to occupy the land indefinitely at a sub-market rent-from the park owner to the mobile home owner. Petitioners contend that what has been transferred from park owner to mobile home owner is no less than a right of physical occupation of the park owner's land. This argument, while perhaps within the scope of our regulatory taking cases, cannot be squared easily with our cases on physical takings. The government effects a physical taking only where it requires the landowner to submit to the physical occupation of his land. "This element of required acquiescence is at the heart of the concept of occupation.' , FCC v. Florida Power Corp., 480 U. S. 245, 252 (1987). Thus whether the government floods a landowner's property, Pumpelly v. Green Bay Co., 13 Wall. 166 (1872), or does no more than require the landowner to suffer the installation of a cable, Loretto, supra, the Takings Clause requires compensation if the government authorizes a compelled physical invasion of property. But the Escondido rent control ordinance, even when considered in conjunction with the California Mobilehome Residency Law, authorizes no such thing. Petitioners voluntarily rented their land to mobile home owners. At least on the face of the regulatory scheme, neither the City nor the State compels petitioners, once they have rented their property to tenants, to continue doing so. To the contrary, the Mobilehome Residency Law provides that a park owner who wishes to change the use of his land may evict his tenants, albeit with six or twelve months notice. Cal. Civ. Code Ann. s 798.56(g). Put bluntly, no government has required any physical invasion of petitioners' property. Petitioners' tenants were invited by petitioners, not forced upon them by the government. See Florida Power, supra, at 252-253. While the' 'right to exclude' , is doubtless, as petitioners assert, ' 'one of the most essential sticks in the bundle of rights that are commonly characterized as property,' , Kaiser Aetna v. United States, 444 U. S. 164, 176 (1979), we do not find that right to have been taken from petitioners on the mere face of the Escondido ordinance. Petitioners suggest that the statutory procedure for changing the use of a mobile home park is in practice' 'a kind of gauntlet,' , in that they are not in fact free to change the use of their land. Reply Brief for Petitioners 10, n. 16. Because petitioners do not claim to have run that gauntlet, however, this case provides no occasion to consider how the procedure has been applied to petitioners' property, and we accordingly confine ourselves to the face of the statute. See Keystone Bituminous Coal Assn. v. DeBenedictis, 480 U. S. 470, 493-495 (1987). A different case would be presented were the statute, on its face or as applied, to compel a landowner over objection to rent his property or to refrain in perpetuity from terminating a tenancy. See Florida Power, supra, at 251-252, n. 6; see also No11an v. California Coastal Comm'n, 483 U. S. 825, 831-832 (19B7); Fresh Pond Shopping Center, Inc. v. Callahan, 464 U. S. 875, 877 (19B3) (REHNQUIST, J., dissenting). yeel.wp April 1, 1992 Page 5 Yee Decision, April 1, 1992 .2/ -~ 7 . On their face, the state and local laws at issue here merely regulate petitioners' use of their land by regulating the relationship between landlord and tenant. "This Court has consistently affirmed that States have broad power to regulate housing conditions in general and the landlord-tenant relationship in particular without paying compensation for all economic injuries that such regulation entails.' , Loretto, 458 U. S., at 440. See also Florida Power, supra, at 252 (' 'statutes regulating the economic relations of landlords and tenants are not per se takings' '). When a landowner decides to rent his land to tenants, the government may place ceilings on the rents the landowner can charge, see, e. g., Pennell, supra, at 12, n. 6, or require the landowner to accept tenants he does not like, see, e. g., Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States, 379 U. S. 241, 261 (1964), without automatically having to pay compensation. See also pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins, 447 U. S. 74, 82-84 (1980). Such forms of regulation are analyzed by engaging in the ' 'essentially ad hoc, factual inquiries' , necessary to determine whether a regulatory taking has occurred. Kaiser Aetna, supra, at 175. In the words of Justice Holmes, ' 'while property may be regulated to a certain extent, if regulation goes too far it will be recognized as a taking.' , Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon, 260 U. S. 393, 415 (1922). Petitioners emphasize that the ordinance transfers wealth from park owners to incumbent mobile home owners. Other forms of land use regulation, however, can also be said to transfer wealth from the one who is regulated to another. Ordinary rent control often transfers wealth from landlords to tenants by reducing the landlords' income and the tenants' monthly payments, although it does not cause a one-time transfer of value as occurs with mobile homes. Traditional zoning regulations can transfer wealth from those whose activities are prohibited to their neighbors; when a property owner is barred from mining coal on his land, for example, the value of his property may decline but the value of his neighbor's property may rise. The mobile home owner's ability to sell the mobile home at a premium may make this wealth transfer more visible than in the ordinary case, see Epstein, Rent Control and the Theory of Efficient Regulation, 54 Brooklyn L. Rev. 741, 758-759 (1988), but the existence of the transfer in itself does not convert regulation into physical invasion. Petitioners also rely heavily on their allegation that the ordinance benefits incumbent mobile home owners without benefiting future mobile home owners, who will be forced to purchase mobile homes at premiums. Mobile homes, like motor vehicles, ordinarily decline in value with age. But the effect of the rent control ordinance, coupled with the restrictions on the park owner's freedom to reject new tenants, is to increase significantly the value of the mobile home. This increased value normally benefits only the tenant in possession at the time the rent control is imposed. See Hirsch & Hirsch, 35 UCLA L. Rev., at 430-431. Petitioners are correct in citing the existence of this premium as a difference between the alleged effect of the Escondido ordinance and that of an ordinary apartment rent control statute. Most apartment tenants do not sell anything to their successors (and are often prohibited from charging' 'key money' '), so a typical rent control statute will transfer wealth from the landlord to the incumbent tenant and all future tenants. By contrast, petitioners contend that the Escondido ordinance transfers wealth only to the incumbent mobile home owner. This effect might have some bearing on whether the ordinance causes a regulatory taking, as it may shed some light on whether there is a sufficient nexus between the effect of the ordinance and the objectives it is supposed to advance. See Nollan v. California Coastal Comm'n, supra, at 834-835. But it has nothing to do with whether the ordinance causes a physical taking. Whether the ordinance benefits only current mobile home owners or all mobile home owners, it does not require petitioners to submit to the physical occupation of their land. The same may be said of petitioners' contention that the ordinance amounts to yeel.wp April 1, 1992 Page 6 Yee Decision, April 1, 1992 :u ~ .;J.. 8'" . compelled physical occupation because it deprives petitioners of the ability to choose their incoming tenants. [FN1] Again, this effect may be relevant to a regulatory taking argument, as it may be one factor a reviewing court would wish to consider in determining whether the ordinance unjustly imposes a burden on petitioners that should ' 'be compensated by the government, rather than remain[ing] disproportionately concentrated on a few persons.' , Penn Central Transp. Co. v. New York City, 438 U. S., at 124. But it does not convert regulation into the unwanted physical occupation of land. Because they voluntarily open their property to occupation by others, petitioners cannot assert a per se right to compensation based on their inability to exclude particular individuals. See Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States, 379 U. S., at 261; see also id., at 259 (' 'appellant has no 'right' to select its guests as it sees fit, free from governmental regulation' '); pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins, 447 U. S., at 82-84. Petitioners' final line of argument rests on a footnote in Loretto, in which we rejected the contention that ' 'the landlord could avoid the requirements of [the statute forcing her to permit cable to be permanently placed on her property] by ceasing to rent the building to tenants.' , We found this possibility insufficient to defeat a physical taking claim, because , 'a landlord's ability to rent his property may not be conditioned on his forfeiting the right to compensation for a physical occupation.' , Loretto, 458 U. S., at 439, n. 17. Petitioners argue that if they have to leave the mobile home park business in order to avoid the strictures of the Escondido ordinance, their ability to rent their property has in fact been conditioned on such a forfeiture. This argument fails at its base, however, because there has simply been no compelled physical occupation giving rise to a right to compensation that petitioners could have forfeited. Had the city required such an occupation, of course, petitioners would have a right to compensation, and the city might then lack the power to condition petitioners' ability to run mobile home parks on their waiver of this right. Cf. Nollan, 483 U. S., at 837. But because the ordinance does not effect a physical taking in the first place, this footnote in Loretto does not help petitioners. With respect to physical takings, then, this case is not far removed from FCC v. Florida Power Corp., 480 U. S. 245 (1987), in which the respondent had voluntarily leased space on its utility poles to a cable television company for the installation of cables. The Federal Government, exercising its statutory authority to regulate pole attachment agreements, substantially reduced the annual rent. We rejected the respondent's claim that' 'it is a taking under Loretto for a tenant invited to lease at a rent of $7.15 to remain at the regulated rent of $1.79.' , Id., at 252. We explained that 'it is the invitation, not the rent, that makes the difference. The line which separates [this case] from Loretto is the unambiguous distinction between a ... lessee and an interloper with a government license.' , Id., at 252-253. The distinction is equally unambiguous here. The Escondido rent control ordinance, even considered against the backdrop of California's Mobilehome Residency Law, does not authorize an unwanted physical occupation of petitioners' property. It is a regulation of petitioners' use of their property, and thus does not amount to a per se taking. III In this Court, petitioners attempt to challenge the ordinance on two additional grounds: They argue that it constitutes a denial of substantive due process and a regulatory taking. Neither of these claims is properly before us. The first was not raised or addressed below, and the second is not fairly included in the question on which we granted certiorari. A yeel.wp April 1, 1992 Page 7 Yee Decision, April 1, 1992 ~/~, . The Yees did not include a due process claim in their complaint. Nor did petitioners raise a due process claim in the Court of Appeal. It was not until their petition for review in the California Supreme Court that petitioners finally raised a substantive due process claim. But the California Supreme Court denied discretionary review. Such a denial, as in this Court, expresses no view as to the merits. See People v. Triggs, 8 Cal. 3d 884, 890-891, 506 P. 2d 232, 236 (1973). In short, petitioners did not raise a substantive due process claim in the state courts, and no state court has addressed such a claim. In reviewing the judgments of state courts under the jurisdictional grant of 28 U. S. C. s 1257, the Court has, with very rare exceptions, refused to consider petitioners' claims that were not raised or addressed below. Illinois v. Gates, 462 U. S. 213, 218-220 (1983). While we have expressed inconsistent views as to whether this rule is jurisdictional or prudential in cases arising from state courts, see ibid., we need not resolve the question here. (In cases arising from federal courts, the rule is prudential only. See, e. g., Carlson v. Green, 446 U. S. 14, 17, n. 2 (1980).) Even if the rule were prudential, we would adhere to it in this case. Because petitioners did not raise their substantive due process claim below, and because the state courts did not address it, we will not consider it here. B As a preliminary matter, we must address respondent's assertion that a regulatory taking claim is unripe because petitioners have not sought rent increases. While respondent is correct that a claim that the ordinance effects a regulatory taking as applied to petitioners' property would be unripe for this reason, see Williamson County Regional Planning Comm'n v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City, 473 U. S. 172, 186-197 (1985), petitioners mount a facial challenge to the ordinance. They allege in this Court that the ordinance does not I I 'substantially advance' , 1 a I . 'legitimate state interest' , , no matter how it is applied. See Nollan v. California Coastal Comm'n, supra, at 834; Agins v. Tiburon, 447 U. S. 255, 260 (1980). As this allegation does not depend on the extent to which petitioners are deprived of the economic use of their particular pieces of property or the extent to which these particular petitioners are compensated, petitioners' facial challenge is ripe. See Keystone Bituminous Coal Assn. v. DeBenedictis, 480 U. S., at 495; Agins, supra, at 260. We must also reject respondent'S contention that the regulatory taking argument is not properly before us because it was not made below. It is unclear whether petitioners made this argument below: Portions of their complaint and briefing can be read either to argue a regulatory taking or to support their physical taking argument. For the same reason it is equally ambiguous whether the Court of Appeal addressed the issue. Yet petitioners' regulatory taking argument stands in a posture different from their substantive due process claim. Petitioners unquestionably raised a taking claim in the state courts. The question whether the rent control ordinance took their property without compensation, in violation of the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause, is thus properly before us. Once a federal claim is properly presented, a party can make any argument in support of that claim; parties are not limited to the precise arguments they made below. Bankers Life & Casualty Co. v. Crenshaw, 486 U. S. 71, 78, n. 2 (1988); Gates, supra, at 219-220; Dewey v. Des Moines, 173 U. S. 193, 197-198 (1899). Petitioners' arguments that the ordinance constitutes a taking in two different ways, by physical occupation and by regulation, are not separate claims. They are rather separate arguments in support of a single claim-that the ordinance effects an unconstitutional yeel.wp April 1, 1992 Page 8 Yee Decision, April 1, 1992 ~/~3~ . taking. Having raised a taking claim in the state courts, therefore, petitioners could have formulated any argument they liked in support of that claim here. A litigant seeking review in this Court of a claim properly raised in the lower courts thus generally possesses the ability to frame the question to be decided in any way he chooses, without being limited to the manner in which the question was framed below. While we have on occasion rephrased the question presented by a petitioner, see, e. g., Ankenbrandt v. Richards, 502 U. S. (1992), or requested the parties to address an important question of law not raised in the petition for certiorari, see, e. g., Payne v. Tennessee, 498 U. S. (1991), by and large it is the petitioner himself who controls the scope of the question presented. The petitioner can generally frame the question as broadly or as narrowly as he sees fit. The framing of the question presented has significant consequences, however, because under this Court's Rule 14.1(a), ' '[o]nly the questions set forth in the petition, or fairly included therein, will be considered by the Court.' , While' '[t]he statement of any question presented will be deemed to comprise every subsidiary question fairly included therein,' , ibid., we ordinarily do not consider questions outside those presented in the petition for certiorari. See, e. g., Berkemer v. McCarty, 468 U. S. 420, 443, n. 38 (1984). This rule is prudential in nature, but we disregard it ' 'only in the most exceptional cases,' , Stone v. Powell, 428 U. S. 465, 481, n. 15 (1976), where reasons of urgency or of economy suggest the need to address the unpresented question in the case under consideration. Rule ~4.1(a) serves two important and related purposes. First, it provides the respondent with notice of the grounds upon which the petitioner is seeking certiorari, and enables the respondent to sharpen the arguments as to why certiorari should not be granted. Were we routinely to consider questions beyond those raised in the petition, the respondent would lack any opportunity in advance of litigation on the merits to argue that such questions are not worthy of review. Where, as is not unusual, the decision below involves issues on which the petitioner does not seek certiorari, the respondent would face the formidable task of opposing certiorari on every issue the Court might conceivably find present in the case. By forcing the petitioner to choose his questions at the outset, Rule 14.1(a) relieves the respondent of the expense of unnecessary litigation on the merits and the burden of opposing certiorari on unpresented questions. Second, Rule 14.1(a) assists the Court in selecting the cases in which certiorari'will be granted. Last Term alone we received over 5,000 petitions for certiorari, but we have the capacity to decide only a small fraction of these cases on the merits. To use our resources most efficiently, we must grant certiorari only in those cases that will enable us to resolve particularly important questions. Were we routinely to entertain questions not presented in the petition for certiorari, much of this efficiency would vanish, as parties who feared an inability to prevail on the question presented would be encouraged to fill their limited briefing space and argument time with discussion of issues other than the one on which certiorari was granted. Rule 14.1(a) forces the parties to focus on the questions the Court has viewed as particularly important, thus enabling us to make efficient use of our resources. We granted certiorari on a single question pertaining to the Takings Clause: ' 'Two federal courts of appeal have held that the transfer of a premium value to a departing mobilehome tenant, representing the value of the right to occupy at a reduced rate under local mobilehome rent control ordinances, constitute[s] an impermissible taking. Was it error for the state appellate court to disregard the rulings and hold that there was no taking yeel.wp April I, 1992 Page 9 Yee Decision, April 1, 1992 ..2/~JI under the fifth and fourteenth amendments?' , This was the question presented by petitioners. Pet. for Cert. i. It asks whether the court below erred in disagreeing with the holdings of the Courts of Appeals for the Third and Ninth Circuits in Pinewood Estates of Michigan v. Barnegat Township Leveling Board, 898 F. 2d 347 (CA3 1990), and Hall v. City of Santa Barbara, 833 F. 2d 1270 (CA9 1987), cert. denied, 485 U. S. 940 (1988). These cases, in turn, held that mobile home ordinances effected physical takings, not regulatory takings. Fairly construed, then, petitioners' question presented is the equivalent of the question' 'Did the court below err in finding no physical taking?' , Whether or not the ordinance effects a regulatory taking is a question related to the one petitioners presented, and perhaps complementary to the one petitioners presented, but it is not' 'fairly included therein.' , Consideration of whether a regulatory taking occurred would not assist in resolving whether a physical taking occurred as well; neither of the two questions is subsidiary to the other. Both might be subsidiary to a question embracing both-Was there a taking?-but they exist side by side, neither encompassing the other. Cf. American National Bank & Trust Co. of Chicago v. Haroco, Inc., 473 U. S. 606, 608 (1985) (question whether complaint adequately alleges conduct of racketeering enterprise is not fairly included in question whether statute requires that plaintiff suffer damages through defendant's conduct of such an enterprise). Rule 14.1(a) accordingly creates a heavy presumption against our consideration of petitioners' claim that the ordinance causes a regulatory taking. Petitioners have not overcome that presumption. While the regulatory taking question is no doubt important, from an institutional perspective it is not as important as the physical taking question. The lower courts have not reached conflicting results, so far as we know, on whether similar mobile home rent control ordinances effect regulatory takings. They have reached conflicting results over whether such ordinances cause physical takings; such a conflict is, of course, a substantial reason for granting certiorari under this Court's Rule 10. Moreover, the conflict is between two courts whose jurisdiction includes California, the State with the largest population and one with a relatively high percentage of the nation's mobile homes. Forum- shopping is thus of particular concern. See Azul Pacifico, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles, 948 F. 2d 575, 579 (CA9 1991) (mobile home park owners may file physical taking suits in either state or federal court). Prudence also dictates awaiting a case in which the issue was fully litigated below, so that we will have the benefit of developed arguments on both sides and lower court opinions squarely addressing the question. See Lytle v. Household Manufacturing, Inc., 494 U. S. 545, 552, n. 3 (1990) (' 'Applying our analysis ... to the facts of a particular case without the benefit of a full record or lower court determinations is not a sensible exercise of this Court's discretion' I). In fact, were we to address the issue here, we would apparently be the first court in the nation to determine whether an ordinance like this one effects a regulatory taking. We will accordingly follow Rule 14.1(a), and consider only the question petitioners raised in seeking certiorari. We leave the regulatory taking issue for the California courts to address in the first instance. IV We made this observation in Loretto. , 'OUr holding today is very narrow. We affirm the traditional rule that a permanent physical occupation of property is a taking. In such a case, the property owner entertains a historically rooted expectation of compensation, and the character of the invasion is qualitatively more intrusive than perhaps any other category of property regulation. We do not, however, question the equally substantial authority upholding a State's broad power to impose appropriate restrictions upon an owner's use of his property.' , 458 U. S., at 441. yeel.wp April 1, 1992 Page 10 Yee Decision, April 1, 1992 ;./ ~ ;1.2.. .... I We respected this distinction again in Florida Power, where we held that no taking occurs under Loretto when a tenant invited to lease at one rent remains at a lower regulated rent. Florida Power, 480 U.S., at 252-253. We continue to observe the distinction today. Because the Escondido rent control ordinance does not compel a landowner to suffer the physical occupation of his property, it does not effect a per se taking under Loretto. The judgment of the Court of Appeal is accordingly Affirmed. FN1. strictly speaking, the Escondido rent control ordinance only limits rents. Petitioners' inability to select their incoming tenants is a product of the state's Mobilehome Residency Law, the constitutionality of which has never been at issue in this case. (The State, moreover, has never been a party.) But we understand petitioners to be making a more subtle argument-that before the adoption of the ordinance they were able to influence a mobilehome owner's selection of a purchaser by threatening to increase the rent for prospective purchasers they disfavored. To the extent the rent control ordinance deprives petitioners of this type of influence, petitioners' argument is one we must consider. JUSTICE BLACKMUN, concurring in the judgment. I agree with the Court that the Escondido Ordinance is not a taking under this Court's analysis in Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp., 458 u.s. 419 (1982). I also conclude that the substantive due process and regulatory taking claims are not properly raised in this Court. For that reason, I, unlike the Court, do not decide whether the regulatory taking claim is or is not ripe, or which of petitioners' arguments would or would not be relevant to such a claim. JUSTICE SOUTER, concurring in the judgment. I concur in the judgment and would join the Court's opinion except for its references to the relevance and significance of petitioners' allegations to a claim of regulatory taking. U.S., 1992 Yee v. Escondido , No. 90-1947 yeel.wp April 1, 1992 Page 11 Yee Decision, April 1, 1992 .11.J;:J /).1- 'II . . NCYrlCE - RENT INCRfASE: IN EXCESS 01' CPI ...--..- II' YOU DO NC11' TAKE ACnON TO ARBITRATE: IN 11 "].'ItiELY MP.NNER, TillS U1C1lf'.!ISf: StUlI,f, fiE AUTOMATICALLY En'E:Cl'l VI': UNN THE SIIl.E 01:' YOUR M013ILEHOl1E 'J'IIis statement of increase exceeds the current annual rate of t.he Consumer pdce Index (CPI). The CPI is 6 'I; and this increase is 41 t of yuur cuut'ut. rent, Under the City's Municipal COde, the outgoing or the incoming resident are entitled to file ior arbitration with the Ci ty' s Community Development [lepartment. In order to arbitrate, you lCIust place an arbitration deposit. of $ ** with the City's Community Development Department within thirty days of the date this notice is served on you oc the date of execution of a purchase contract on the mobilehome. If you do not place the deposit, you forfeit your right to arbitrate the cent iucrease. If you are low income (below $13,000-15,000 eligible to receive assistance for part ot the the City's Conuflunity Development Department. regarding drbitration or need morc information, 691-5047. ** Arbitration amount unavailable at this time. per year), you may be cost of arbitration from If you have questions you can call the City at The Owner of the mobile home park also wishes to advise you that it believes that the City Ordinance is in violat.ion of the State ~nd Federal Constitutions insofar as it seeks to regulate rent increases affecting incoming residents to the Park. Therefore, this notice is given the mobile home park its rights proceedings thereunder, and any State court the Owner may elect its constitutional rights. to you reserving to the Owner of to contest the Statute and all result thereof, in any Federal or in order to secure the benefit of 4-15-91 TO: SANDRA KEARNS/KELLER #92 The new space rent upon the selling of your coach is $ 475. per month. An arbitration meeting between Richard Kelton and owners of mobilehomes currently for sale will be held on APRIL 25, 1991 at 3:00 P.M., in Park Clubhouse. Respectfully, ~ ~cr~~ROWN OTAY LAKES LODGE MANAGERS EXHIBIT c .)./-:1'/ ~ ARBITR!lflON . MEDIATION ,......, I'\IVlCnl\.AN Mtsl rRATlON (\ ASSO~.ATION 525 "COO s_. Suite <<JO San Diego. California 92101 (619) 239-3051 FAX' (619) 239-3807 Dennis L. Sharp Regional V.,. President DISPUTE RESOWTION TRAINING . MINI TRIAL . FACT-FINDING . ELECTION SERVICES . Dear Parties: "The American Arbitration Association has a new service to offer parties to certain a~bitrations. In those cases where the parties agree, the AAA will appoint a me~i<<tor to work with the parties as a part of your settlement discussions. The mediator has been trained by the AAA in techniques to aid the parties in your efforts to settle. The benefits of mediation are that the settlement is worked out by the parties, not imposed by an arbitrator. The process is inexpensive: there is no additional administrative fee charged by the AAA; the only additional expense is compensation for the mediator. The major features of our mediation services are the following: 1..) Mediation is an extension of a negotiation process with one vital addition... the mediator. By using special technique~ and the' CONFIDENTIALITY of the process, the mediator helps the disputants negotiate further without losing their bargaining positions or credibility. The mediator functions as a sounding board, translator, catalyst, reality tester, an option floater...but never a judge or the decision-maker. our mediators are drawn from a specially compiled panel of experienced, respected neutrals. The mediator's background will vary with the subj ect matter of the dispute. For insurance claim disputes, for instance, the mediator is a highly experienced attorney who utilizes hisjher understanding of current legal and business practices. 2.) Mediation is an OPEN DISCUSSIoN. The client is an informed, active participant in the negotiation process. --...].), Mediation is VOLUNTARY and NON-BINDING. A mediator has no authority to compel the parties to agree, and either party can dispense with the mediation at any time. Negotiations are furthered by the mediator, but any settlement is fashioned by the parties and their counsel. The optimum and most common outcome of mediation is a MUTUALLY AGREEABLE SETTLEMENT of all issues. 4.) Mediation is .USER FRIENDLY. and ENTICING. No special knowledge or training is needed by the disputants/counsel beyond negotiation skills. The parties/counsel retain control over the process and the outcome. Adjudicative processes can be avoided. Relationships can be preserved. 5.) Mediation is SPEEDY; and SAVING TIME SAVES MONEY. preferable to taking a chance waiting for trial. results in a settlement within one day. If you would like to learn more about our mediation services, please feel free to contact me. Please note that your participation in a mediation conference would not delay your arbitration hearing. Early settlement is The mediation process usually Sincerely, r/.M_vr oJ 1u-4ANJ/'- IIracy L. Sherman Director of Education and-Development EXHIBIT D Date: Lo-';?O,..<tl a:A1_' 80st0n. CharI<<It. C!licagol Clnc:lINlII QtWIand. Dallal- OllMlr' G.'den elly' HMIDrd' HonokIIu' HaUSlOn 'ICansasC~r .LMAttg..... MiIrnI. MinlltlPOlil' NaJwlIIt. NewOdtw.. Hft''ttlriI .... '20 tCOlIIVy' Odlndol Pfld...IpIlia' PhoeniJ: .PiUsbutgIl'WLaktClIy' SlnOltgo' San Fral)Cisco I SIn_ 'SlnJulOlSUtsII'ScriltI:wt .SOuIllf"IIfd' Stl.Guil' SrrIClllt1Wuhklgtan. D.C.' WhittPlalnl . )./-;If' .------------. -. . - - - - - -.- \-"4 . , ^.AA CASE NUMBE:I""""\ 73-199-02941'""\ T .' At the request of the parties set forth below, the ~erican Arbitration Association has agreed to conduct a mediation of the controversy between tnem and to appoint a mediator. The mediator will provide mediation services to the parties on an impartial basis. The Commercial Mediation Rules of the AAA shall apply. The mediator and the parties acknowledge that this procedure is a negotiation for the purpose of compromising or settling a disputed claim. Therefore, the parties agree that the provisions of California Evidence Code Sec. 1152 and 1154 will apply to any communication, conduct, statements, or information transmitted in. the course of this mediation. As a part of our agreement to mediate, the parties agree to be bound by the California Evidence Code Section 1152.5 (a) and (b) which states: (a) (1) Evidence of anything said or of any admission made in the course of the mediation is not admissible in evidence, and disclosure of any such evidence shall not: be compelled, in any civil action in which, pursuant to law, testimony can be compelled to be given. (2) Unless the document otherwise provides, no document prepared for the pUrpose of, or in the course of, or pursuant to, the mediation, or copy thereof, is admissible in. evidence, and disclosure of'any such document shall not be compelled, in any civil action in which, pursuant to law, testimony can be compelled to be given. . Subdivision (a) does not limit the admissibility of evidence if all persons who conducted or otherwise participated in the mediation consent to its disclosure. (b) It is up to the parties themselves to negotiate their own agreement. If the parties reach an agreement, the mediator will prepare a memorandum recording that understanding which may then be submitted to the parties' personal attorneys for incorporation into a formal agreement, or reduced at their agreement tO,a formal arbitrator's award. The mediator's fees are $ 50.00 plus any costs incurred. Both parties will advance sums for the mediator's fee as requested by the American Arbitration Association. The parties acknowledge that they are jointly liable for the mediator's fee and expenses. The parties understand that there is to be no refund of the AAA's arbitration administrative fee should the mediation or later negotiation result in a settlement of their dispute. .' Sandra & John Keller (Name of Party) Hr. Richard Keltonl Otay lakes Mobile Home (Name of Party) (Signed by) (Signed by) (Title and~ate) Dina Feldman-Scarr (Name of Mediator) (Title and Date) American Arbitration Association (Signed by) By Administraror (Date) (Dare) ,,2./~ .J? \l\ . . "j ~~~ ~ ..o;:.....;:::-~ OlY OF CHULA VISTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT July 17, 1991 Mr. Richard Kelton 2716 Ocean Park Boulevard suite 3006 Santa Monica, California 90405 Ms. Sandra Keller Mr. John Keller 1141 Gaucho Place Escondido, California 92029 After speaking with Tracy Sherman from the American Arbitration Association (AAA), I learned that Mr. Kelton has proposed to resolve the rental dispute at Otay Lakes Mobile Home Park by mediation instead of arbitration as Chapter 9.50 of the Chula vista Municipal Code requires. The City Ordinance does not authorize mediation, as it did in the past. However, the City would like to see the parties take any reasonable action which will result in this dispute being resolved. If both parties to the dispute do decide to mediate, the city requires that both parties agree to the following conditions. Both parties must agree to the exact process for mediation. The mediation does not have to be conducted through AAA. Instead, the City has in the past used civic minded citizens to resolve similiar disputes, and this process would be cost free. Both parties also must agree to waive the time limits required by the City's dispute resolution process. Both parties must agree to continue with arbitration if mediation is not successful. Finally, both parties must set a deadline for the end of mediation so that arbitration can continue if necessary. These conditions must all be agreed to. in writing prior to the beginning of mediation. EXHIBIT E . ).1' 31 . . In addition to the above listed conditions, Mr. Kelton should pay for the mediator if AAA is used. This requirement is necessary since the city does not require mediation, and Mr. Kelton is requesting it. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me at (619) 691-5047. sincerely, ~ ()/h ~ Alisa Duffey Rogers Community Development Specialist . ..},/- 3tr CITY OF CHULA VISTA e e/LC-c Ie{' ek' :c( 2j ( . .,/ I I Ola,! elaked eloJge 1925 OTAY LAKES ROAD . CHULA VISTA, CALIF. 91913 TELEPHONE 421-82.50 August 13,1991 Space # MR. & MRS. 103 James Heinrich Dear Residents: On July 26,1991 and August 2,1991, mediation meetings were held between OTAY LAKES LODGE owner,Richard Kelton, Mobilehome owners and City of Chula Vista representative, Mrs. Rogers, regarding space rent to new buyers. After much deliberation and consideration for all concerned par- ties, an agreement was reached. Rent to new buyers has been lowered according to space sizes. The rent for your space when sold will be $ 410.00 per month to the new buyer. There will be no Arbitration Meeting. We hope this information will help clear up this matter for you. Sincerely yours, ;; f.h'~:J-- 1,- 'TY)CL\.U,,- ,J.).'L",.<.u'"'-- HarriJand Marion Brown Managers OTAY LAKES LODGE EXHIBIT H ~/-.3i N ~ ,....0 " "- ",0 ,. , . C:3 . ~8: 0 ~ ~:? , ~ , ~ :113 0 ::ij; . . ~ 0 z1l. , o~ De~r tracy Sherman, \ j)'" ,~ ~ pl' ~ y. \ \ ~ 0 to'..): '^ I \ .J' oAiJ- . (i-IJ3\~ VQ ~ ~~.\\) / ?- '1~V)( Reference Ollr conversation 0 Aug. 26, 1991. We are sorI7: 0 infom you that Richard Kelton, has tailed to use the conqJ tions set forth in th MediaUo!l meeting.l b)!e1n hat he. -FOod c.Jlib . provide'us~ ( the 14 tennants) a wrl ten docUlllent of the rocedings for our sighned approval, by an ap-.>ropriate <'..at.e. er more he is using our decision to enforce other t,naant ren s to increase at the Slllll6 levels without the right to arbbtrate. T s is not our legal right to do this, and therfore -eeRie the mediation ec1s1on. We wish to persue this action at arb ration on the prese date that we set in the event of disagre8lllllnt A letter to the city of Chula Vista will be se continuing the arbotratio on Sept 26 1991 as per such date that is convi t with your schedual. Aug. 24, 1991 Re; 73~99-o294-91 T S~a & Jolm Keller Frederick Dufresne -and Mr. Richard Kelton! otay Lakes Mobil Hane Park & American Arbitration Xssociation Tracy L. Sherman 525 "0" S.treet Suit 400 San Diego Calif. 92101-5278 Richard Kelton 2706 Ocean Park Blvd. Santa Monica, Calif. 90405 .t'~ vJ' , requesting reement, or at o ..}:iV incerly. Fre<ie~ck D~remu!~". -----:e ) /J.;, - ;" j . ~k'es' " 02 Chula Vist~, Valif. 91 y .) /-'/tJ . EXECUTIVE OFFICE . l!yfJ ~ (~ 2716 OCEAN PARK BLVD., SUITE 3006 SANTA MONICA, CAUFORNIA 90405-5207 PHONE (213) 396-4514 FAX (213) 399-0062 September 6, 1991 Mr. and Mrs. John and Sandra Keller 1141 Gaucho Place Escondido, CA 92029 SEP 1 2 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Keller: In connection with your filing the request for arbitration and your participation in the mediation proceedings, you stated that in reaching the mediation settlement you were acting on behalf of yourself and the other individuals who had authorized you to so act for them. I was gratified that we were able to reach a mediated settlement of this matter. While I was away, upon my instructions, the settlement agreement was implemented_ Among other things, as you know, one buyer of your mobile home was permitted to occupy your old space at the reduced, agreed upon rental. Now that I have returned from my vacation, I am enclosing the documents in furtherance of this settlement_ I would appreciate your signing and returning the agreements with your signature in the spaces for yourself as well as your signing the agreement for the other individuals that you represented. //" Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely yours, OTAY LAKES LODGE, INC. By,?1dl Richard Kelton Vice President-Secretary RK:km Enclosures cc: M/M Harry Brown/Otay Lakes Mobile Home Park (w/o enclosures) ~. Alisa Duffey Rogers/Chula vista Community Development Ms. Tracy Sherman/American Arbitration Association (w/o enclosures) ~/- 0/1 EXHIBIT .0- . . SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ----~---,--"--- Otay Lakes Lodge, Inc. (the Park) has previously given written notice to the renters of the fourteen spaces herinafter set forth of a proposed increase in the rent for each space in the event that the coach is sold and a new resident occupies the space. Since this rent increase exceeds the current annual rate of the consumer price index, plus pass throughs specified in City of Chula Vista ordinances, the parties desire to enter into the following agreement as to the new rent for these 14 spaces so as to avoid any arbitration or litigation as to whether these prices are otherwise allowable under any applicable ordinances of the City of Chula Vista. Attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference is a Memorandum of Understanding (Memorandum) resulting from a Mediation Proceeding. THEREFORE: A. The parties understand and agree that the rent structure specified in the Memorandum shall apply to the spaces listed below upon the following conditions: 1. The new rent shall become effective at such time as the space is occupied by a new occupant on or before January 31, 1992. The rent will be increased 3%, plus the amount of all pass throughs as defined in the City of Chula Vista ordinance No. 2451, if so occupied between February 1 and July 31, 1992. This rental agreement shall not apply to any occupancy change after July 31, 1992. 2. The parties understand and agree that the space designations refer to the size of the mobile home which can be accommodated on the space, not to the nature of the home presently on the space. 3. The new occupant must qualify under and agree to all of the other standard rules and pay all of the other standard charges of the Park. B. Except as expressly provided in this Settlement Agreement, the parties affirm their Agreement to Mediate, which provides that Evidence of anything said or of any admission made in the course of the mediation is and shall remain confidential and subject to the provisions of California Evidence Code Section 1152.5 (a) and (b), which states: .)./- Jj..2 , . . (a) (1) Evidence of anything said or of any admission made in the course of the mediation is not admissible in evidence, and disclosure of any such evidence shall not be compelled, in any civil action in which, pursuant to law, testimony can be compelled to be given. (2) Unless the document otherwise provides, no document prepared for the purpose of, or in the course of, or pursuant to, the mediation, or copy thereof, is admissible in evidence, and disclosure of any such document shall not be compelled, in any civil action in which, pursuant to law, testimony can be compelled to be given. (bl Subdivision (a) does not limit the admissibility of evidence if all persons who conducted or otherwise participated in the mediation consent to its disclosure. C. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, all of which together shall constitute a single Agreement, and shall become effective upon execution by the Park and when tenants representing any eight of the below listed spaces shall have returned executed copies hereof to the Park. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed by the following: OTAY LAKES LODGE, INC. By: ~~/ gLA ;/, j ~.- Ric ard Kelton. -1 Vice President-Secretary 9~ -9' Date Tenants of the following spaces: Sp~ce # Siqnature Date 98 Mr. and Mrs. Rudy Reyes 10 Mrs. Virginia Bush ..21-J/J , . 19 Mr. and Mrs. Henry Gil I 41 Mrs. Augustine Lee 51 Mrs. Bea Richardson 83 Mr. and Mrs. George Lockmier 92 Mrs. Sandra Keller 110 Mrs. Dufresne 145 Mr. Miguel Velazquez & 154 Mr. Brian Barrows 163 Mrs. Edna Palmer 164 Mr. John Hagood 165 Mrs. Jennye Cookson 168 Ms. Marian Morehouse .)/-'1,-/ . . , . . . MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING In the Matter of the Arbitration between SANDRA & JOHN KELLER AND MR. RICHARD KELTON/OTAY LAKES MOBILE HOME PARK CASE NUMBER: 73-M199-0294-91 T Sandra & John Keller, along with the thirteen other tenants (hereinafter referred to as Claimants) and Richard Kelton/Otay Lakes Mobile Home Park (hereinafter referred to as Respondents) agree that Respondents will insure that the horseshoe pit is repaired and maintained. Also, the "players" section of the shuffle board court shall be covered by September 13, 1991, or within six (6) weeks of Respondents obtaining the requisite building permit. Parties agree to the following monthly rent structure as to future tenants: "A" lots (double lot with view) $425.00 per month. ~ "B+" lots (double lot with no view situated on corner) $410.00 per month. "B" lots (double lots with no v~ew, not on a corner) $400.00 per month. "CO lots (single lots and double lot number 10 on the approach) $375.00 per month. "D" lots (single lots on the approach to the Park, 40' or less in depth (such as lot #8) $340.00 per month. ~/-~~ . . . Sept. 17, 1991 Re-73-Ml99-0294-91-T Mr. David Kelton Owner Mr. Richard Kelton Mng. Otay Lakes Mobil Home "ark Margery M. Girbes Housing Coordinator City of Chula Vista Jo3 '- I fj~J - r~vV\} .J ~ t~ 3 ~ vy,.. Dea~h~:' i;h:~~~once to Mr. Kelton's V' J I ; The reason for my letter of Aug. , 1991, was not beca of the r/~/" delay, but due to the fact that n lees were sent out instruction 'VfU~- by Mr. Kelton to his Manager to end the revised re increases to the ./ VL'I'-;; peaple in uhe park, which in uded other tennant that were not part ~ ~~ of the settlement agreement. ~e, as the ori . al parties, had no right to include them as a part of this agreeme . We had made no motion at ~he meeting that anyone else would invoved. /1-"''1/ Then after recieving Mr. Kelton' etter of se"tlement, we were convinced that we could not and uld not agree to the se"tlement. Due to ehe fact that addition conditions that were never brought up or discussed in the meeting. If tnese conditions were put to our aproval at that time, NO agreement would have been discuss~d. We ended the meeting saying that Hr. Kelton, should write up what he expected and we would determin if it would be wise of us to sign. The meeting ended with uncertanties as to our rights, because of coversation made while the Medeator was not nresent. Mr Kelton, indicated he could rr~ise rents to .hat ever eh wanted to and could hold the u~ in court for years. Not understancting ALL of our rights in this matter Wp ended the meeting. We were unable to have Mr. Dexter Goody, a member of the Mobil Home Rent Board of Calif. to be nresent, to advise us)(. ~~. Kelton, refused his nresence in the meeting. Reasons being that he was not a resident in the nark. We were allowed no legal assistance or advisery council at the meeting. Yet ~~. Kelton, was acting, or so indicted as the atterney and management for the owners, an unfair condition in our minAfter reading the agreement, we feel that we could not under good faith to all tennents of the Otay Lakes Mobil Home Park, sign the agree- ment. We have decided , after counciltation to return to arbotration. If y~. Kelton, does not feel that I qualify to do so, then ~s. Keller hasa agreed to nroceed in behalf of the NEd tenn6nt, and the rest of the group. This does not say that I do not have the right to do so. Ms. Tracy Sherman Director of Education ~ Develonment Americ"n Arbi tration AS30ciation 525 "C" Street Suite # 41)0 San Diego, Calif. 92101-5278 EXHIBIT K ~v 1Y~ ?>'~" ~ 'tq ..2)- '1~ . . . The City of Chula Vista, has diligently provieded to Mobil Home tennents an ordinance, to ~rotect us as citizens of Chula Vista, against th se types of reno increases. We should NOT by-pass the la~as it stands. Which may. at sometime cause a r.[l;j~ which would cause us to lose our r~ghts. 4___----- When Mr. Kelton appears at the arbitration, we will require that he show us the SaMe informatioL that would be required to show the ci ty. A. Profit and Loss Statements for 5 Years. Otay Lakes Lodge only. B. Detail Distribution document. C. All rent increases to tennents, from the begining of the CPr ruling. Reason for this request is that we can not find anyone that ever recieved a notice that rents were greater then CPI and had the right ~o arbitrate. Thank you for your time and patience. Resectfully, F ederick Dufresne i( 7tf1t1L~ , l~ d-1-'1? rp CXTY COUNCXL AGENDA STATEMENT IDM .;. 2.... MESTING DATE. 4/7/92 SUBMITTED BY. Ordinance ~~ending Chapter 2.31 Municipal Code relating Review Commission to DA~nges and corrections City Attorney~ of the Chu1a Vista to the Mobi1ehome Rent make certain technical ITEM TITLB. 4/5th. vot.. Yes__No X In May, 1991, when the City Council recognized by ordinance the Mobi1ehome Rent Review Commission, it was recommended originally to have seven members. At the last minute, there was a change made to reduce the number of voting members from seven to five. However, other sections of the ordinance wherein reference was either made or implied that the Commission had seven members was not corrected. This ordinance amendment proposes to correct those collateral references. In addition thereto, it is the recommendation of the City Attorney to amend the ordinance to require that ex-officio members have no interest in a mobi1ehome park, either as a tenant, or owner or manager. This is proposed in order to avoid the inherent conflict that a tenant or mobi1ehome park owner will have in reviewing either a specific rent review case or matters of general policy. RECOMMENDATION. Adopt the attached ordinance. BOARDS/COMMISSION ACTION. N/A DISCUSSION. 1. One such collateral reference in the current ordinance is to the initial terms of voting members. In order to achieve a staggering of the terms of office, the initial terms of the commissioners are less than the full four year term. However, seven initial terms were provided for and it needs to be corrected to only reference five initial terms. 2. Originally, the ordinance proposed that the appointment of voting members to initial terms was to occur not later than the third month after the initial appointment of the seventh voting member. Since there are only five voting members, this reference needed to be corrected. 3. Finally, consistent with our practice of defining a quorum to be a majority of the members on the commission, we specified in the original ordinance that four voting members would constitute a quorum. Now that the number of voting members has been reduced from seven to five, three voting members constitute a quorum, and the attached ordinance makes this correction. In addition to these technical corrections, one substantive change is being recommended by the attached ordinance. Currently, no voting members may be tenants or owners of a mobi1ehome park. However, the Council is required to appoint one ex-officio member who is a tenant and one ex-officio member who is a park owner. Since ex-officio members may participate in deliberations, but may not vote, in order to avoid a most likely conflict of interest that both a tenant and a mobilehome park owner will have in a site specific rent review case, or in ,1..) - / general policy matters, language is being proposed by the attached ordinance that will require ex-officio membership in the commission to have no interest in a mobilehome park, either as a tenant, owner, manager, or agent or employee of either. Such persons will be left to participate as general members of the public where they can freely attempt to influence the deliberations without exposure to criminal prosecution. As a result of this change, the Council may wish to consider, independent of staff's recommendations here+with, the removal of ex-officio membership entirely. FISCAL IMPACT. Negligible C:\A113~ 2.31 MHRIlC J.:l~.2 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item ..u Meeting Date April 7. 1992 Ordinance .15'P J Amending Section 2.56 of the Municipal Code relating to purchases of supplies, services and equipment. Resolution 1~~~Adopting proposed policy on consultant and other services. SUBMITTED BY: Budget Manager~ (4/Sths Vote: Yes___ No~) REVIEWED BY: city Manage~ At the July 23, 1991 City Council meeting, Council requested a report on the City's use of consultants and service contracts. This report was discussed by City Council on October 18, 1991- During Council discussion, it was determined that a City Council subcommittee be established to address the issue of consultants and service contractors more in depth. The Council subcommittee included Councilmembers Leonard Moore and Shirley Grasser Horton. The subcommittee has met with staff and is proposing the approval of revisions to the Municipal Code, the establishment of a new Council policy, and some modifications in city procedures for determining the need for consultants, consultant monitoring and hiring practices. ITEM TITLE: Council Specific issues addressed within the proposed documents are the use of a cost comparison worksheet to compare costs of proposed consultant or service contractor to city staff, establishing pre- qualification lists for frequently used services, expanding advertising, encouraging a 10% retention or reserve of total contract amounts to be completed until the final work has been accepted, and regular notification to the Council when the total fiscal year's payments to one service provider exceed $100,000. RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution and place the ordinance on first reading. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A DISCUSSION: The City of Chula vista has historically used contracts for services when existing City staff did not have the special expertise or equipment required to complete a particular service, was subject to time constraints or it was determined to be more cost effective to hire a service contractor than to use existing city staff. Generally, the need for outside service contractors is determined during the budget review process. Departments submit ,;23~1 , ,l I Item J.J Meeting Date April 7. 1992 their budgets requesting funding within professional or contractual service accounts. The budget review of any department request focuses on justification provided by the department which clearly demonstrates the need for the requested service. Should a department be requesting to replace a traditionally contracted service with a request for a city staff position, the cost benefit of this change is thoroughly analyzed during that department' s budget review, and findings are presented and reviewed by the Budget Manager, Assistant/Deputy City Managers and the City Manager prior to bringing that request forward to Council. Since we must be concerned about the cost effectiveness of providing any city service, those services which will be needed on a very limited basis or one-time only services related to a single project are typically not recommended to be replaced with permanent City staff. citv Council Consultant Subcommittee When the city Council Consultant Subcommittee was established, the first meetings were used primarily to review existing city procedures in the use of consultants and service providers, review other cities' procedures and determine the type of product to be developed. The procedures for obtaining services and supplies are governed by Chapter 2.56 of the Municipal Code titled Purchasing System. The Subcommittee reviewed this section of the Municipal Code and is recommending several changes (Attachment A). Municipal Code proposed Changes The current Municipal Code includes an exemption from the competitive bidding process for selection of architectural, engineering, environment, land surveying, construction proj ect management, and other professional consultant services. Recommended to amend this code is an additional statement that the use of competitive bidding for services will be invoked when it is in the interest of good government. The primary changes recommended are: 1. Cost comparison analysis. All contracts for services exceeding $5,000 which are anticipated by any Department Head shall first be analyzed in terms of cost effectiveness of having the proposed service completed by in-house staff versus the cost of the outside services. The department shall be responsible for completing a cost comparison worksheet (see Attachment B) which shall be evaluated by the Budget Manager and/or Revenue Manager. The .,2J-J.. Item d-:J Meeting Date April 7. 1992 cost comparison worksheet will walk a department step by step through the tasks to be performed, the duration and frequency of a project, evaluating in-house employees' abilities to perform the task, evaluating possibility of some combination of contract services and city staff, specialized training and expertise required, and source of funding for the project. The actual cost comparison takes into account the City's full cost recovery rate to assess the true impact of hiring addi tional City staff. This is compared to the service contract cost which may require adjustments to find true cost if the contractor will be requiring substantial city staff support or work from on-site locations. 2. city advertisement, pre-qualification and letters of interest All requests for services estimated to be in excess of $10,000 shall be advertised through respective professional societies and publications in newspapers of the appropriate circulation. The purchasing Division shall be responsible for maintaining lists of interested firms along with their statements of qualifications for services. The city Manager will annually determine which services are to be of such frequency during anyone fiscal year that it would be appropriate to establish a pre-qualification list at the beginning of the fiscal year from which all future uses of that service would be drawn throughout the fiscal year. The concept of pre-qualification lists for services which will be used frequently during any fiscal year could provide savings in city staff time spent advertising, evaluating and obtaining appropriate contractors. 3. Selection Committees An additional change recommended for the Municipal Code is the content of the selection committees required for all service contracts over $10,000. For contracts between $10,000 and $25,000, a Department Head or designee and one or more staff members are currently required to perform the duties of the selection committee. The committee makeup is recommended to be changed to two staff members serving along with the Department Head or designee as the selection committee. In cases where the contract is in excess of $25,000, the city Manager currently shall appoint a 3-5 member selection committee. The proposal is to change the selection committee to three or more qualified persons in order to allow for seating the most appropriate members on the selection committee whether they are employees or outside members. The .,23- ;J Item :2. :1 Meeting Date April 7. 1992 selection committees are also being recommended to have the option to augment any list with an additional recruitment for service providers if they feel that the list provided them is not appropriate or too few potential service providers have applied. council Policy To augment the proposed changes to the Municipal Code, a council policy (Attachment C) is also recommended to be established to cite specific Council concerns and how staff will address these concerns. The general philosophy of this proposed policy is that periodic high citizen demand for services and heavy workloads do not necessarily justify increasing permanent staff to meet those periodic demands. It is recommended that City manager use forethought, planning and good judgement to determine the optimum staffing levels with the appropriate cost effective complement of outside consultants of other service providers. Key concerns include the following: 1. Cost comparison evaluations. 2. Implementation of pre-qualification lists. 3. Expanding advertising. 4. A 10% retention on those contracts in excess of $10,000. 5. City Council will be notified at any point during a fiscal year when a contract is recommended for approval, regardless of cost which will result in a total fiscal year's payments exceeding $100,000 to anyone service provider. Local/Minoritv/Women Business Enterprise The Council Subcommittee questioned the City's current practices regarding preferences or advantages to prospective contractors who operate in Chula vista or are minority or women-owned businesses. The city does not provide any preference to minority or women-owned businesses except when required by a project being funded by the Federal Government. Use of Federal Aid to Urban (FAU) or other government funds must be done in accordance with Federal guidelines mostly for requiring a percentage of subcontractors to be minority or women-owned firms. When calculating the total cost of a bid, if the vendor is within Chula vista we do look at the return to be gained by the elimination of the 1% local sales tax, although no real preference is given to the local firms. ,).;1- if Item ,,2 J Meeting Date April 7. 1992 The City Attorney's office has reviewed the issue extensively and has concluded that it would be extremely difficult to legally implement such a policy (Attachment Dj. Those local agencies, city of San Diego and county of San Diego, which do have minority and women business enterprise programs have done so under Federal consent decree to rectify past discrimination claims. In order for Chula vista to implement such a policy, we would first be required to perform a complicated study to prove past discriminations against minority and women owned businesses, or, to demonstrate financial hardships faced by local businesses as a result of being located in the city or region. The process of publicly claiming that we had discriminated in the past could unnecessarily expose the City to potential lawsuits. Attached is a copy of the Attorney's legal opinion. GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL The Council Subcommittee was concerned that City staff had clear directions regarding all aspects on contracting for services. Upon approval of the proposed Municipal Code changes and the new Council pOlicy, staff will begin the preparation of a "how-to" manual to guide staff through the required procedures for determining the need for contractual assistance, approval process and processing requirements. FISCAL IMPACT There will be no direct cost associated with the action. B:\(A113)\CONSULT .Ai3 ':<3-.5' Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. ANORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING SECTION 2.56 RELATING TO PURCHASES OF SUPPLIES SERVICES AND EQUIPMENT The City Council of the City of Chula Visat does ordain as follows: Section following section of 2.56 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code are herby ammended to read: 2.56.010 Established-Purpose. Pursuant to Section 1110 of the Charter, there is established a centralized purchasing system for city epartments, offices and agencies, in order to establish procedures for the purchase of services. supplies and equipment, to secure for the city services. supplies and equipment at the lowest possible cost commensurate with quality needed, to exercise positive fmancial control over purchases, to clearly define authority for the purchasing function, and to assure the quality of purchases. (Ord. 1197 ~1 (part), 1969; prior code ~2.501). 2.56.020 Purchasing agent-Appointment.Powers, duties and authority. The director of finance shall appoint, in accordance with Section 507 and subject to the civil service provisions of the Charter, and the prior approval of the city manager, a purchasing agent who shall be in the unclassified service as provided in Section 500 of the city charter, and such deputies as may be necessary. The purchasing agent shall be the head of the purchasing division of the finance department and conduct a centralized purchasing system and shall have the power, and it shall be his duty, to purchase or contract for all supplies, materials, equipment and contractual services needed by any and all departments of the city in the manner provided for herein. The purchasing agent shall have the authority to: A. Negotiate, purchase and obtain supplies, contractual services and equipment used by the city in accordance with city and state law and such rules and regulations as are prescribed by the director of finance subject to the review of the city manager or by the city council; B. Act to procure for the city the needed quality in supplies, services and equipment at least expense to the city: includin" aualitv used or surolus furuiture and eauioment. C. Discourage uniform bidding and endeavor to obtain as full and open competition as possible on all purchases and sales; D. Prepare and recommend to the director of fmance rules and regulations governing purchase of supplies, services and equipment for the city and amendments thereto as necessary; E. Keep informed of current developments in the field of purchasing, prices, market conditions and new products, and secure for the city the benefits of research done in the field of purchasing by other governmental jurisdictions, national technical societies, trade associations having national recognition, and by private businesses and organizations; F. Prescribe and maintain such forms as are reasonably necessary for the operation of the purchasing system and other rules and regulations; G. Prepare and adopt a standard purchasing nomenclature for city departments and suppliers; 151 ,)3 - (, (R 11191) H. Prepare, adopt and maintain a vendors' catalog file. Said catalog shall be filed according to materials and shall contain descriptions of vendors' commodities, prices and discounts; I. Exploit the possibilities of buying "in bulk" so as to take full advantage of discounts, and establish written policies for inventory management in size of purchases; J. Recommend the transfer of surplus or unused supplies and equipment between departments as needed and the sale of all supplies and equipment which cannot be used by any department or which have become unsuitable for city use and the scrapping or surveying of unsaleable surplus items; K. Exercise propriety review over all purchases and make such recommendations to the director of finance as shall seem in his discretion to be appropriate. (Ord. 1891 U (part), 1980; Ord. 1197 ~1 (part), 1969; prior code ~2.502). 2.56.060 Purchase order required-Encumbrance of funds. Except in cases of emergency, or if excepted by the aolmiBiolrat>"8 .lli..r city manager under a du1y adopted administrative regulation and through the use of prescribed forms, all purchases shall be made by purchase order issued by the purchasing agent after authorization of the fmance officer, certifying: A. That there is to the credit of each using department concerned a sufficient unencumbered appropriate balance in excess of all unpaid obligations to defray the amount of such order; B. That such order is provided for in the budget of the using department or has been approved by the city council by resolution; C. That in the case of the purchase of capital equipment and assets or services, if not provided for in the budget, that the same have been first approved by the city council by resolution. (Ord. 1197 U (part), 1969; prior code ~2.506). 2.56.120 Formal contract and bid procedure-Compilation of bids and recommendations. Following the opening of bids, the purchasing agent shall compile all of the bids and submit them to the a...l_:-:~t:rati,,(,8 et=Rsaf city manaszer. together with a recommendation as to which bid he considers best, taking into consideration the recommendation of the department head involved, the amount of money bid, compliance with specifications and responsibility of bidder. In determiuing the responsibility of the bidder, the purchasing agent will be guided by, but not limited to, a consideration of the following factors: A. The experience of the city in dealing with the low bidder; B. The experience of other governmental agencies known to the purchasing agent in their previous transaction with the low bidder; C. Knowledge of the quality and fitness of the product offered by the low bidder, substantiated by reports of using departments within the city or other governmental agencies; D. Options to renew contracts for continuing purchases at the same bid price, in those circumstances where price increases are expected or have been experienced in the past. (R 11191) 152 .23-? The a~-:_:"lrati.,. sm..r citv mono"er shall forward the compilation of bids and his recommendation with respect to an award to the city council; provided however, that the purchasing agent may reject any or all bids or the bid for anyone or more commodities or contractual services included in the proposed contract if he determines that the public interest will be served thereby. (Ord. 1197 H (part), 1969; prior code ~2.507(5)). 2.56.170 Open market procedure.Bidding not required when. A. Purchases of supplies, services and equipment of an estimated value in the amount of twenty.five thousand dollars or less may be made by the purchasing agent in the open market without observing the formal bidding procedure prescribed in Sections 2.56.070 through 2.56.160. For such contracts in excess of sixteen thousand, but for twenty-five thousand dollars or less, the purchasing agent shall obtain the City Manager's approval. However, informal bidding shall be required, and whenever practible, be based on at least three bids and shall be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder submitting in all respects the best bid. The purchasing agent shall keep a record of all open market orders and the bids submitted in competition thereon, and such records shall also be open to public inspection. B. Exceptions: In any of the following instances, the purchasing agent may dispense with the requirements of informal bidding: 1. When the estimated amount for the commoditv involved is less than two thousand five hundred dollars; 2. When the commodity can be obtained from only one vendor; 3. When the commodity being purchased is required to match or be compatible with other furnishings, materials or equipment presently on hand and the purchase is made from the manufacturer or supplier who supplied such other furnishings, materials or equipment and the total amount of the purchase does not exceed three thousand dollars; 4. When for 13r.f<lGsi.aal CSA!1l11tiag services for $10,000 or less, the contract shall be awarded on the basis of demonstrated competence and prBfessisaal qualifications at fair and reasonable fees. 5. When a particular type or make of commodity, furnishing, type of material, or equipment has been standardized by the city by order of the a"-:-:~tratil"" smo.r citv manaller or by the city council after receipt and award of bid. (Ord. 2369 ~2, 1990; Ord. 1197 ~ 1 (part), 1%9; prior code ~2.508). 2.56.180 Emergency purchases-By purchasing agent permitted when. In case of an emergency which requires immediate purchase of supplies, materials, equipment or contractual services, the aA-:-:~kaw.. eflis8F city m~n;:r,aer may authorize the purchasing agent to secure in the open market at the lowest obtainable price any supplies, materials, equipment or contractual services, regardless of the amount of the expenditure; provided however, that a full explanation of the circumstances of such emergency shall be entered in the minutes of the council and shall be open to public inspection. (Ord. 1197 U (part), 1969; prior code ~2.509)). 153 (R 11/91) ,}.. '3"8'" 2.56.210 Requisitions for purchases-Approval required. The requisitions for all purchases must be subscribed to by the purchasing agent and the a~-:-:.lrali>'. efHeel:. denartment head. SF ta@ir a~' aBtAeri2i1B 9.8In1"9& SF FOpF9s8atati-,'es, ailS. or by the finance officer, as provided in Section 2.56.060 or their duly authorized desilroee or reoresentatives. iPF9'.iaoa, h9....o;.r, that ia tAss, iBfitaaees ":Aiere tag 8EiYmBt09 ameUBt iao,'sh'ea is 18&6 tra- w'~ lwadi'ag aeUa;s, tile a..l_:-:At:Jaw'o arResr ROBEl Bet EiHBSea1?e t8 tAe FBElmsitieR6, aaQ tB8 a..l-:-:~kaQu9 IlFS9SQlH'8 ma~'IUBvia8 fer tAB gl:-:-atisR sf tH FOE(WomORt. The duty of the finance officer shall be to affirm the availability of funds as provided in Section 2.56.060. Provided further, in the absence of or inability of the purchasing agent to act, his duly authorized ~ de<i""ee shall perform the duties of the purchasing agent under this section. (Ord. 1197 ~1 (part), 1%9; prior code ~2.512)). 2.56.220 Exception-Selection of architectural, engineering, environmental, land surveying and construction project management professional services...aad. "lll.F professional consultant services and other services. A. Exemption. .1. Pursuant to Chula Vista City Charter Section lOll, and as required by Government Code Sections 4525, et. seq. with regard to architectural, engineering, environmental, land surveying and construction project management professional services, all prewssieaal seRslJltiag services provided to the City by contract are exempt from the competitive bidding requirements of Sections 2.56.070 aRa 2.~~ .179 herein. 2. Notwitbstandinll the above stated exemotion from the comoetitive biddinll reauirement. the ourchasinll allent mav reauire comoetitive biddinll when the services reauired are more of a technical nature or involve little orofessional iudllIDent and the ourchasinll allent determines that reauirinll bids wauld be in the oublic interest. B. Definitions. For purposes of this Chapter, the following terms have the follawing meanings: 1. "Architectural, engineering, environmental, and land surveying services" includes those professianal services of an architectural, engineering, enviranmental, ar land surveying nature as well as incidental services that members af these professions and those in their employ may logically or justifiably perform. 2. "Construction project management" means those services provided by a licensed architect, registered engineer, or licensed general contractor which meet the requirements of Government Code Section 4529.5 for management and supervision of work performed on state construction projects. 3. "Environmental services'! means those services performed in connection with project development and permit processing in order to comply with federal and state environmental laws. C. General Procedures. Anv deoartment head desirinll to enter into a contract for outside services whose estimated cost exceeds $5.000 shall first analne the cost effectiveness of havinll the orooosed service comoleted in-house versus the cost for outside services. All contracts for prefe.oieaa! eeRBl!lang services shall be negotiated on the basis of demonstrated competence and prefeBoieRaI qualifications for the services required, and at fair and reasonable fees. Contracts for pF.fosoieaal services for $10,000 or less ~ may be awarded by the Purchasing Agent pursuant to Section 2.56.170 BA. If the estimated cost of such services are in excess of $10,000 but for $16,000 dollars or less, the contract ~ may be 155 (R 11J91) ...2 3-i awarded by the Purchasing Agent, after compliance with the procedure therefor specified hereafter. If for in excess of $16,000 but for $25,000 dollars or less, the contract 5I>aIl, mav be awarded by the Purchasing Agent, after compliance with the procedure therefor set forth hereafter, and with the approval of the City Manager. If the estimated cost of such services exceeds $25,000 dollars, it shall be awarded by the City Council, after compliance with the procedures specified tll..rooor hereafter. Contracts for environmental services, regardless of amount, shall be negotiated by the Environmental Review Coordinator in accordance with the procedures in Sections 2.56.220-240 and Sections 6.5.2 and 6.6 of the Environmental Review Procedures, and awarded by the City Manager or designee. (Ord. 2369 ~4 (part), 1990; Ord. 2310 ~1, 1989; Ord. 1821 H, 1978; Ord. 1197 ~1 (part), 1969; prior code ~2.513). 2.56.230 Exception. Outside Services C9R.lIItIlRts Selection Process. A. ReglStrotlOD and Notice. 1. Public announcemeDt of all projects of an estimated cost in excess of $10.000 requmng architectural, !lngineering, environmental, land surveying, COnstruCtiOD project managemeDt, or other jlrel'essieRoI .e...aItiBg services shall be made by the City through Dotice to the respective professional societies and by publicatioD in a newspaper of go....oI aoorooriate circulatioD. The DOtice shall invite service oroviders .e...aIt....16 to submit lette.s of inte.est for specific projects. ID ana1vzinll wo.k reauired for the oominu vear. deoartmeDt heads shall be reauired to categorize services in terms of tvoe and size of oroiect so as to maximize ooteDtial oarticioatioD bv small business eDterorises. 2. In addition, said notice shall encourage sellnallillg liFms service oroviders to submit statements of qualifications and performance data annually for registration and reference purposes. 3. Statements of qualification and letters of interest shall be kept on me in the Purchasinll Division and periodically updated. 4. Annuallv the City Manaller shall review tvoes of services reauired in the following fiscal vear and determine for which tvoes of services ore-aualification lists would be aoorooriate. B. Selection Committee. 1. For projects where jl.el'esnieRoI e9RnalliRg fees for services are estimated to be in excess of $10,000 but less than $25,000, the responsible department head or designee and _ !IDLor more staff members shall perform the duties of the Selection Committee. If fees are estimated to be $25,000 or more, the City Manage. shall appoint a Selection Committee of three or !!!Q!!;. aualified oersons W/9 :&l8IBBST ~818Bti8R Ce--:tt88. 2. When a proposed project is initiated, the Selection Committee shall review all m..... service oroviders currently registered and on file with the City to determine those m..... service oroviders best qualified for the services desired. Selection Committees shall also have the ootion to augment the list with an additional recruitment for service oroviders. if there is no aoolicable list. or no or too few potential service oroviders. However. if a ore-aualification list was oreoared in accordance with A.4. above. the deoartment head shall attemot to negotiate a contract with the service orovider ranked No.1 on the ore-aualification list. (R 11}91) 156 ,)..3'" /CJ 3. The Selection Committee shall choose a minimum of three interested firms for personal interviews to discuss anticipated concepts and the relative utility of alternative methods of approach for furnishing the required services. The Selection Committee shall evaluate and rank the firms based upon criteria established in advance by the City, incluclinu. but not limited to. the cost comoarison between service orovider and citv staff. A list containing the ranking information will be sent to the responsible department head. 4. The responsible department head shall negotiate a contract with the firm ranked No.1 by the Selection Committee at a price determined to be fair and reasonable to the City. The agreement shall derme the conditions of the contract scope, work plan and schedule, costs, fee, method of payment, duration, insurance, and indemnification. 5. If the department head is unable to negotiate a satisfactory contract with the first ranked firm, negotiations shall be formally terminated. 6. The department head shall then undertake negotiations with the second ranked firm. This process shall continue until a satisfactory contract is negotiated. 7. If the list of qua1if1ed firms is exhausted without a contract being negotiated, the Selection Committee shall choose additional fIrms and the process shall continue until a satisfactory contract is negotiated. 8. Small businesses, as defined by the State Director of General Services, shall be extended maximum participation in the process. C. Award of Contract. 1. All awards for 80B&uIQag contracts negotiated pursuant to this ~ section shall be made in accordance with Section 2.56.220. (Ord. 2369 H (part), 1990; Ord. 1891 fil (part), 1980; Ord. 1197 fil (part), 1969; prior code fi2.514). 2.56.250 Supplies, materials and equipment no longer used-Disposition procedure. A. General Procedures. All using departments shall submit to the purchasing agent at such times and in such form as he shall prescribe, reports showing stocks of all supplies, materials and equipment which are no longer used or which have become obsolete, worn out or scrapped. The purchasing agent may transfer such stock to another or other departments, which have need for and can use it. The purchasing agent, with the approval of the aa"..;,yslrali>'@ .lIis.r citv manager. shall also have the power to sell all supplies, materials and equipment which have been unsuitable for public use, or to exchange for, or trade in the same on new supplies, materials and equipment. Any such sale, exchange or trade-in shall be made to the highest responsible bidder, in accordance with the applicable procedures established in sections 2.56.070 through 2.56.160 or Section 2.56.170 hereof; provided further, that the purchasing agent may transfer such supplies, materials and equipment when the estimated amount involved is less than fIve thousand dollars to approved civic or social organizations with the approval of the city council, upon the recommendation of the a..l-:-:~kaW~ st=Ss9r city manaaer in those cases where it is deemed by the city council that such a disposition of property would best serve public interests. In the case of scrap or survey items having no estimated or appraised value and which have 157 ,2J-I/ (R 11191) not been desired by any civic or social organization, the purchasing agent may dispose of such items in any manner he deems appropriate, keeping full records of such disposition. It is further provided that such surplus personalty which comes within the provisions of Sections 2.56.070 through 2.56.160 or Section 2.56.170 may be disposed of by the purchasing agent by negotiation after bidding requirements have been followed and such surplus material has not been sold. B. Special Procedures for Disposition of Library Materials. The city librarian shall submit to the purchasing agent in such form as he shall prescribe, reports showing used, damaged or unneeded library materials and indicating disposition thereof. The librarian may, at his discretion, donate such materials to the Friends of the Chula Vista Public Library for such book sales as they may desire, or he may offer such materials to any bona fide charitable or nonprofit institutional organizations serving primarily the interests of the city. If at any time the librarian chooses to dispose of such materials other than as provided herein, he shall follow the general procedures set forth hereinabove. (Ord. 2369 ~3 (part), 1990; Ord. 2310 St, 1989; Ord. 1821 ~1, 1978; Ord. 1197 ~1, 1969; prior code ~2.513). (R 11/91) 158 .23-1.2. /~-:U) Attachment B Cost comparison Worksheets Contract Consultants and Services vs. In-House Staff The following forms are to be used for comparisons of the cost of hiring consultants or contracting for services to the cost of using in-house staff. Please answer the following questions and complete the attached Cost Comparison Worksheet. If you have any questions regarding these forms, please contact the Revenue Manager. GENERAL: 1. Describe the task(s) to be performed. 2. What is the expected duration of the project/service (number of weeks, months, etc.)? 3. How frequently does the city need to do this project/service (times per month or year, times per development, etc.)? 4A. Are there any in-house employees who could perform the task? What classification of employee(s)? 4B. If there are such employees, why wouldn't they be utilized in this situation? ;1.3....);5 4C. If such employees would not be used due to workload, what work would be displaced if the task were to be performed in-house? . , 40. If workload is a factor, could staff of lower classification be hired to handle extra work so that staff of higher classification could concentrate their time on the task? Explain. 5. Would the project take more or less time for in-house staff versus a contractor (e. g. consul tant has pre-prepared boilerplate materials, software, etc.)? 6A. Are there any qualitative reasons to choose either a contractor or in-house staff (e.g. expertise, knowledge of city operations, special liability issues)? Explain. 6B. Is the project or service separable into parts, some of which could be performed by in-house staff? What would be the benefits/drawbacks of dividing the task? 7. Is there any special training to be provided by in-house staff? this training? that would be required for the service What would be the cost implication of ,;< 3-1'/ 8A. Are there any special capital items or materials required or additional expenses that would be incurred for the city to perform this task? Explain. 8B. If the city were to perform this task, what impacts would on the life expectancy/capacity of city equipment? Would additional annual maintenance, or new purchases be required? this have upgrades, Explain. 9. How would this task be funded? What fees or reimbursements might offset these expenditures? Answer for both contract and in-house performance. CONSULTANT/CONTRACTOR AGREEMENT: 10. Base Contract Cost: 11. Method and terms of payment. 12. If the term of the agreement would be for more than one year, what provisions apply to COLA or CPI increases? .J.J- /.5" 13. Applicable rates (including travel, word processing, hourly or daily charges, clerical support, meeting attendance, sales tax, etc.), estimated units per rate, and resultant costs (e.g. five trips from LA @ $50/trip = $250.) TYPE OF CHARGE RATE ESTIMATED UNITS TOTAL COST 14. Performance guarantees (e.g. withholding unsatisfactory work, termination of contract, etc.) of payment for 15. Is conSUltant/contractor: Licensed to do business in the city? Subject to FPPC conflict of interest designation? If so, in which disclosure category should they be required to file? (circle one) Category 1: Category 2: Category 3: Investments (A, C-2) and sources of income (D,E, F,H-l,H-2,H-3). Interests in real orooertv (B,C-l). (You need only disclose real property which is located in whole or in part within or not more than two miles outside the boundaries of the City or within two miles of any land owned or used by the city). Investments (A, C-2) interests in real orooertv (B,C-l) and sources of income (D,E,F,H-l,H-2,H- 3) subject to the regulatory, permit, or licensing authority of the department. (You need only disclose investments in business entities and sources of income which do business in the City of Chula Vista, plans to do business in the city, or has done business in the city wi thin the past two years. In ".2:1 -/ " category 4: category 5: category 6: category 7: addition to other activities, a business entity is doing business within the City if it owns real property within the city). Investments (A,C-2) in business entities and sources of income (D,E,F,H-1,H-2,H-3) which engage in land development, construction, or the acquisition or sale of real property. Investments (A,C-2) in business entities and sources of income (D,E,F,H-1,H-2,H-3) of the type which, within the past two years, have contracted with the City of Chula vista (Redevelopment Agency) to provide services, supplies, materials, machinery, or equipment. Investments (A,C-2) in business entities and sources of income (D,E,F,H-1,H-2,H-3) of the type which, within the past two years, have contracted with the designated employee's department to provide services, supplies, materials, machinery, or equipment. Business oositions (G). (You need only disclose positions of director, officer, partner, trustee, employee, or any position of management in organizations or enterprises operated for profit). 16. Additional Comments: Note: If a draft agreement is available, please attach a copy. ;1.3-/7 city of Chula vista contractor vs. In-House Cost Comparison Worksheet CONSULTANT/CONTRACTOR COST BASE RATES Base Contract Cost Hourly Rate Estimated Actual Hours Additional Rates (Aggregate Cost) Total Base Cost FCR BASED COSTS* Contract Monitoring/ Support Costs SUBTOTAL (Base + Support Costs) OTHER Supplies, Furniture, and Equipment Business License Tax Other Applicable Tax CPI, COLA, Annual Cost IN-HOUSE COST BASE RATES Full-Time Equivalent Employee Hourly Wage Estimated Actual Hours Total Base Cost FCR BASED COSTS Division FCR Factor (w/citywide Overhead) SUBTOTAL (Base x FCR Factor) OTHER supplies, Furniture, and Equipment Other Applicable Tax MOU or Annual Cost TOTAL COST ====================================================================== * For monitoring and support costs, see attached worksheet. .2:1-/8" ~ ! ... .. u oil. t; ...- .. o ". ::N':l I Ii ~"f p; ~ ~ J! L~-II .. .- ~ .. " . 0 ! l: :I _ u.- ~ Ii _ u "5 "'s .. ... u.. i J ! ~ .~ I " .. l: .c .. ... ~ ~ l; .~ i 1 "!l .. ~l~ ,,~ ~ ,.. " " .. " !. 1I .~ .. !L ~ .. .. .. - u .. " - " ... - ... ... o ... o .. i .. ..... ~ .;: o .. .." i " .. .. ~ .. t~ .. 0 ... o .. !l i l! .!~".-s u i .~ '; ~ .. ~ :l~~ GI u 0 ::II jt"1d ~ i ~ ... .....- ,-~~ .. I ~ o .. " .. ~ .. Ii u ~ o .. ii .. "5 ~ u .. " .;: .!CIDU u .; .. .. ~ 8' ll. .. !l " .. :;; o .. .; .. .. ~ 8' ~ Q. .. !l " .. :;; o .. .. c .. .. !' = U) ~ ~ - ~.!! o ::I _ en .<;~.8u.8 I u .... ~ .... .c 1'<; 1 .... " .. .- "" .. i.';!'; E !' &.. 'Z ... ., 'Z 0 9!: 0 1: .. ~ I !!' .- I! .- " '- ~.!.~~'8~ :: 'S 'i: .. .;: ii !l.lii .: .. ~;:Q.Ii.!:1i u c -s.-....l... ~..1l.~_.~ as ~ > 0 ~ 0 ...io~ca .:! L. i:.... --.... .0._0....0 .. ... :l!!=.! U !t! CIll ... )I! ... lii~i~ sQ.~~.cl :~~t:..i... > -- ... -- ... - L. ::::II ~ IIll L. l!l ~ ~ .. g, ~ co en u en Q ..... ~ .;: o .. s c CD U lE Ii .. " ~ !. .. ~ ... ... ~~ " ..... .. .. p, ~ ~ ..... .- ~ ~ .. ~ .. ... " ... i _ 0 !I- .. e- ... ~ o ... .. i .. .. .. " .. ~ ~ il : .. !l u .. .. o ... 11 ~ .~ .. .! ... .. .. " .. ,. ~ II .. .. !l u "5 ... ~ .. " ~ .. .: is ~ 1 .. ~ .. ... .. l! " .. .. .;;; .. ... .. " 'E .c II ~ '" .;: ~ .. ..... ~ ~ o .. 's lE .. .. " .. ~ ~ il : ~ i ... - ..2.3'" 17 .. lii .. "5 ~ 'i .~ .. " .. ~ .. .. c .8 ~ " .. .. C) .. !l u .. .. o ... 11 ~ 1 .. .! ... .. .. " .. ,. ~ ~ " .. .. .. !l u - "5 ... .. .. " .. ~ ~ il : .. ~ i ... N .. c .. .. "5 ~ u 'i Ii .. " " ~ .. .. c .8 ~ u .. .. C). .. .. o u - " .. o ... 11 ~ .~ .. .! ... .. .. " .. ,. ~ ~ II .. .. .. o u "5 ... .. .. " .. ~ ~ il : l: ,. o i ... .... .. .. o u " .. o ... 11 ~ .~ .. .! ... .. c " .. "5 l! o u ..... " c o .. u " ~ .. .. c .. .. " .. ,. ~ ~ o II .. .. .. o u .8 ~ " .. .. co - "5 ... . CONSULTANT/SERVICES COST COMPARISONS DEPARTMENT/DIVISION FULL COST RECOVERY without citywide Overhead FACTORS with Citywide Overhead # ------------------------------------------------------------------------- GENERAL 1. 55399 1. 93887 CITY ATTORNEY 150 2.44485 2.82973 CITY CLERK 159 1.55399 1. 93887 ADMIN/COUNCIL 210 1.55399 1.93887 PAPE 212 1. 55399 1. 93887 INFO SYSTEMS 213 1. 55399 1.93887 WORD PROCESSING 214 1. 55399 1. 93887 PUBLIC INFORMATION 215 4.12258 4.50746 PERSONNEL 245 1. 55399 1. 93887 COMM. DEVELOPMENT 260 2.98938 3.37426 ECON. DEVELOPMENT 261 4.24303 4.62791 FINANCE 400 1.55399 1. 93887 PLANNING 600 2.55820 2.94308 NONDEPARTMNTAL 720 1."55399 1.93887 POLICE 1000 2.39830 2.92998 ANIMAL CONTROL 1100 2.16078 2.69245 FIRE PREVENTION 1230 2.60062 3.13229 FIRE SUPPRESION 1240 1.91811 2.44978 BLDG - PERMITS 1300 2.62380 3.00868 BLDG - CODE 1300 2.25595 2.64083 BLDG - COMM. 1300 1. 96726 2.35214 ENG-DESIGN 1420 2.36991 2.75479 ENG-ADV PLAN/SEWER 1421 2.40099 2.78587 ENG-LAND DEV. 1422 2.12614 2.51102 ENG-CONSTR INSPECT 1423 2.32419 2.70906 ENG-GIS 1425 3.08192 3.46679 ENG-TRAFFIC 1430 2.49728 2.88216 ENG-SIGNAL/LIGHT 1431 2.37151 2.75639 PW-TRAFFIC .1432 2.31329 2.69816 PW-STREETS 1440 2.02686 2.41174 PW-TREES 1450 2.41687 2.80175 PW-SEWER/LIFT ST 1460 2.16519 2.55007 P/R ADMIN. 1511 1.89205 2.27693 P/R PARKS 1520 2.53840 2.92328 P/R RECREATION 1522 2.45876 2.84364 LIBRARY 1600 2.23218 2.61706 C & R 1470 2.13214 2.51702 PARKING METERS 2300 1. 55399 1.93887 TRANSIT 2350 1.78997 2.17485 BCT 4150 1. 55399 1.93887 --2;1-..20 Attachment C COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF CHULA VISTA SUBJECT POLICY NUMBER EFFECTIVE DATE PAGE Consultant or Other Services 10f2 ADOPTED BY: I DATED: Background The City may from time to time require the services of an outside consultant or other service provider to provide a cost-effective supplement to existing City staff and/or obtain expertise not available within city staff. The general philosophy is that periodic high citizen demand and heavy workloads do not necessarily justify increasing permanent staff to meet periodic demand. Council and City Management should use forethought, planning, and good judgement to determine the optimum staffing level with the appropriate, cost-effective complement of outside consultants or other service providers. PUl:pose The purpose of this policy is to establish a standard approach to determining the need for consultants and other service providers and to ensure that when a need is determined that the best service provider is selected at a reasonable cost and within a reasonable time frame. This policy shall be followed in implementing the contracting procedures in Municipal Code sections 2.56.170 and 2.56.220 et seq. Policy The City Manager shall follow the policy of careful consideration and structured review prior to initiating any contract for consulting or other services. The Council is primarily concerned with five aspects of the consultant hiring, use and monitoring. First, that a cost comparison be completed for each request to use outside services to compare the cost of the contract services to the equivalent cost for in house staff. Second, that pre-qualification lists be established for those services which are likely to be used frequently during any given fiscal year. Third, that the process of advertising for consultants be expanded to generate the highest number of qualified respondents. Fourth, that in all cases possible a 10% retention be included in contracts for services which will be retained by the City until final acceptance of the services. Fifth, and finally, that the Council receive regular notification from the City Manager on contracts which, if approved, would place the total fiscal year's payments to that service provider in excess of $100,000. ...2J~ I COUNCIL POLICY CITY OF CHULA VISTA SUBJECT POLICY NUMBER EFFECTIVE DATE PAGE Consultant or Other Services 20f2 ADOPTED BY: I DATED: Implementinl! Procedures The City Manager will implement an administrative procedure covering the following areas: 1. Cost Comparison Evaluations During the annual budget review process each Department's continuing and proposed use of outside services to accomplish required work shall be evaluated based on a standard cost comparison formula when the contract services are expected to exceed $5,000 during the fiscal year. The resulting calculations shall be reviewed by the City Manager or his/her designee prior to beginning the contracting process. 2. Pre-Qualification Lists At the beginning of each fiscal year, the City Manager shall determine the need and frequency for outside services which cannot be met by City staff. Those services which will be required on a more regular basis shall be recommended to be filled by creating a list of qualified providers at the beginning of the year from which to fill city wide fiscal year needs. 3. Expanded Advertising Department Heads, in conjunction with Purchasing, shall access all appropriate forms of media when advertising for consultant or other services with an anticipated cost in excess of $10,000, in order to obtain the highest number of qualified respondents. 4. Contract Retention of 10% Department Heads and/or Purchasing Agent shall attempt to negotiate a 10% retention clause to be included in all consultant and other service contracts with an anticipated cost in excess of $10,000. The 10% of the contract amount will be retained by the City until final acceptance of the services. 5. Council Notification The City Manager shall notify City Council when any contract recommended for approval, regardless of cost, will result in total fiscal year payments exceeding $100,000 to one service provider. .,,2 :J'- ..22. Attachment D FROM: January 27, 1992 John GOSS, City Manager Dawn Herring, Budget Officer AI:/" ~IRich Rudolf, Assistant City Attorney . DATE: TO: ATTN: SUBJECT: City Contract Preferences for Disadvantaged Business Enterprises Dawn Herring has requested an update on my January 31, 1989 memorandum to you relating to a preference for local business enterprises (LBEs), which would also address the current state of the law with regard to women business enterprises (WBEs) and minority business enterprises (MBEs). CONCLUSION Our analysis of the case law leads to the conclusion that it is possible to enact an ordinance which will provide public contract bid preferences for MBEs, WBEs and LBEs, and pass constitutional muster. However, the Privileges and Immunities and Equal Protection Clause hurdles are formidable, and require a substantial administrative record providing facts justifying the conclusion Chula vista has historically discriminated, and the preference program is narrowly tailored to remedy that historic discrimination. DISCUSSION The 1989 memorandum primarily concerned itself with the decision of the Federal Ninth Circuit of Appeals in Associated General Contractors of California. Inc. v. citv and Countv of San Francisco (1987) 813 F.2d 922, petition dismissed, 110 S.ct. 296 (1989). In that case, the Court upheld San Francisco's 1984 ordinance favoring WBEs and LBEs, and invalidated the provisions favoring MBEs, and ruled that all bidding preferences with regard to contracts in excess of $50,000 were in violation of the San Francisco City Charter provision requiring all such contracts to be given to the "lowest reliable and responsible bidder". Since my memorandum, the United States supreme Court considered a similar minority set-aside plan in citv of Richmond v. J.A. Croson ComDanv, 488 U.S. 469 (1989). Although the Supreme Court confirmed that municipalities could employ race-conscious remedies to redress discrimination in certain circumstances, the Court struck down the racial set-aside plan adopted by the city of Richmond, Virginia, in that case. Following the Ninth Circuit decision in Associated General Contractors of California, SUDra, (AGCC I), and the Croson decision from the United States supreme Court, San Francisco amended its ordinance and Charter. The Charter change authorized the Board of Supervisors to increase or decrease the competitive bidding threshold, and an ordinance enacted pursuant to that ;;. 3" ;J.. J John Goss January 27, 1992 Page 2 Charter authority increased the bid threshold ordinance to $10,000,000. Contracts below that level would be subject to the new bid preference system adopted by a 1989 ordinance. LBEs, WBEs and MBEs have a five percent bid preference, rather than the set- asides mandated the 1984 ordinance. In Associated General Contractors of California. Inc. v. Coalition for Economic Eauitv and citv and Countv of San Francisco (1991) F.2d ,91 Daily Journal DAR 15128, the Federal Ninth Circuit Cour"'t'"""of Appeals affirmed the Federal District Court's denial of a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of San Francisco's ordinance, concluding that the plaintiffs had not shown a substantial likelihood of success on the merits. The plaintiffs did not challenge the WBE and LBE portions of the 1989 ordinance. Generally, these cases involve challenges under the Federal Constitution relating to the Commerce Clause, the Privileges and Immunities Clause, and the Equal protection Clause. In White v. Massachusetts Council of Construction Emolovers, 460 U.S. 204 103 Supreme Court 1042 (1983), the United States Supreme Court upheld an executive order of the Mayor of Boston requiring that at least 50% of all jobs on construction projects funded in whole or in part by City funds be filled by bona fide city residents. The court concluded that the administrative regulation did not run afoul of the Federal Commerce Clause because Boston was acting as a "market participant", rather than as a "market regulator". However, that case did not consider application of the Federal Privileges and Immunities Clause. The following year in United Buildina and Construction Trades v. Mavor of Camden 465 U.S. 205, 104 S.ct. 1020 (1984), the United States Supreme Court held unconstitutional in violation of the Privileges and Immunities Clause, a city ordinance establishing a good faith goal of 40% local residents for developers and contractors where ever there was City money to be expended. The Privileges and Immunities Clause analysis is a two-step inquiry. First, the court must decide whether the ordinance burdens a privilege and immunity protected by the clause prohibiting discrimination against out-of-state residents. The local hire provision of the Camden ordinance was of the prohibited type because it hindered the formation, purpose or development of a single union of the United States. The fact that Camden was merely setting conditions on its expenditures for goods and services in the market place, did not preclude the possibility that those same conditions (valid under the Commerce Clause) violate the Privileges and Immunities Clause. ;l. 3 - ..2 'I John Goss January 27, 1992 Page 3 The second prong of the test is whether there was a substantial reason for the difference in treatment resulting in discrimination against citizens of other states. Non-residents must be shown to constitute a peculiar source of the evil at which the ordinance was aimed. As is the case currently in many California cities, the City of Camden contended that its ordinance was necessary to counteract grave economic and social ills such as spiraling unemployment, sharp decline in population, dramatic reduction in businesses located within the City, erosion of property values, and depletion of the city's tax base. Although the court prefaced its conclusion with the comment that states (including cities) should have considerable leeway in analyzing local evils and prescribing appropriate cures, the court remanded the case to the New Jersey Supreme Court for further proceedings, since there was an insufficient basis in the record to analyze whether the alleged reasons in fact existed and whether the degree of discrimination bore a close relationship to them. As reported in my 1989 memorandum, in AGCC I the Ninth Circuit found that the reasons asserted for discrimination in favor of local business enterprises did exist and that the 5% preference for such local businesses was reasonable. We emphasized in our 1989 memorandum that it was theoretically possible to establish an LBE bid preference, but it might prove to be very difficult to attain in practice. Our emphasis is echoed in the 1991 Ninth Circuit decision involving the 1989 San Francisco ordinance. From an Equal Protection point of view, the court's analysis of the MBE provisions of the San Francisco ordinance would be equally applicable to a WBE program. First, the level of judicial review for such a program would be the highest possible, that of "strict scrutiny". This means that any city ordinance applying a race or sex conscious remedy without a race-or sex-based injury, must serve a compelling state interest and must be narrowly tailored to further that interest. According to the majority in the Croson case, a city has a compelling interest in redressing both discrimination committed by the municipality itself and discrimination committed by private parties within the municipality's legislative jurisdiction, as long as the municipality in some way perpetuated the discrimination to be remedied by the program. Mere infusion of tax dollars into a discriminatory industry, may be sufficient governmental involvement to satiSfy that prong of the tf1lst. However, mere recitation by the city of a remedial basis for its racial or sexual classifications was entitled to little or no weight by the courts. In the absence of a factual record and findings by the city, allegations that .,.2;J- .2..5' John Goss January 27, 1992 Page 4 discrimination existed in the industry will be treated as conclusory and have little probative value. Similarly, the city cannot justify its ordinance based on Congress's finding of discrimination in a particular industry. The Croson majority required that states and local agencies use their own fact finding processes to establish the presence of discrimination. in their own bailiwicks. Looking at the San Francisco 1989 ordinance, the Ninth Circuit found that the record disclosed that the board made detailed findings of prior discrimination in construction and building within the city's borders. The city held more than 10 public hearings and obtained numerous written submissions from the public and used those as a basis to find that city departments continued to discriminate against MBEs and WPEs and continued to operate under the "old boy network" in awarding contracts, resulting in disadvantage to the MBEs and WBEs. The city's findings were sUbstantially based upon a study commissioned by the city and prepared by BPA Economics Inc. The study indicated large disparities between the award of city contracts to available non- minority businesses and to MBEs. The study found that the available MBEs received far fewer city contracts in proportion to their numbers than their available non-minority counterparts. The study found that disparities between the number of available Asian, Black, and Hispanic owned locally based firms and the number of contracts awarded to such firms was statistically significant and supported an inference of discrimination. The city's findings were also based on numerous individual accounts of discrimination. The Ninth Circuit found that it was unlikely the plaintiff would prevail on the merits at trial, and accordingly denied a preliminary injunction against enforcement of the city's ordinance. In so concluding, the court noted that the 1989 ordinance only applied to resident MBEs, not non-resident MBEs; and the record indicated that San Francisco was likely to demonstrate a strong basis in evidence supporting its decision, in contrast to the sparse foundation for Richmond's findings of discrimination. The court stated the public entity didn't have to convince the court of its liability for prior unlawful discrimination in order to justify a race conscious remedy, but only a firm basis for concluding that affirmative action is warranted. Finally, the court concluded that the 1989 San Francisco ordinance was "narrowly tailored". The court stated that the program was instituted either after, or in conjunction with, race neutral means of increasing minority business participation in public contracting; it avoided the use of rigid numerical quotas, and it :l.:]' .2.~ John Goss January 27, 1992 Page 5 was limited in its effective scope to the city and county's boundaries. The ordinance contained no goals, quotas or set- asides, but a more modest system of bid preferences. The preference only applied to minority groups found to have previously received a lower percentage of specific types of contracts than their availability to perform such work would otherwise suggest, and were limited to companies who were economically disadvantaged, thereby preventing the preferences being used to obtain windfalls. Accordingly, although the Federal Constitutional limitations will allow public contract bid preferences for MBEs, WBEs and LBEs, they provide significant hurdles which can only be passed on the basis of a substantial administrative record including facts justifying the conclusion that the city has discriminated historically and that the program is narrowly tailored to rectify that historic discrimination. Additionally, the city is providing some affirmative action for some disadvantaged business enterprises where the city expends federal or state money whose expenditure is conditioned upon compliance with such affirmative action programs (e.g., Caltrans DBE program for state and/or federal supported highway projects, CDGB block grant expenditures for construction and certain housing programs.) Although most of the provisions of the Public Contract Code relating to the letting of contracts for public works are not applicable to charter cities (Public Contracts Code 520160, 52061; Pile Drivers' Local Union No. 2375 v. city of Santa Monica (1984) 198 Cal.Rptr. 731), there are portions of the Public Contract Code applicable to Redevelopment Agencies which authorize or require opportunities for training and employment for lower income residents of project areas with regard to any redevelopment project contract in excess of $5, 000 involving grading or construction (Public Contracts Code 520688.2 and 520688.3): c: \Lt\looa1 bMldUlg ;2.3-,.2 7/;'3-'2.1 : i; RESOLUTION NO. / ~575" RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADOPTING PROPOSED COUNCIL POLICY ON CONSULTANT AND OTHER SERVICES WHEREAS, at the July 23, 1991 Council meeting, Council requested a report on the City's use of consultants and service contracts; and WHEREAS, during Council discussion, it was determined that a Council subcommittee be established to address the issue of consultants and service contractors more in depth; and WHEREAS, the Council subcommittee included Councilmembers Leonard Moore and shirley Grasser Horton; and WHEREAS, the subcommittee has met with staff and is proposing the approval of revisions to the Municipal Code, the establishment of a new Council policy, and some modifications in city procedures for determining the need for consultants, consultant monitoring and hiring practices. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city Council of the City of Chula vista does hereby adopt the propo d Council Policy as set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and nc porated herein by reference as if set forth in Dawn Herring, Budget Manager Presented by C,\n\cooauhpotioy ~ 3-'1/ COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item:~ Meeting Date: April 7, 1992 Item Title: Ordinance No. ~.5't'~ Adding section 2.58.060 to the Chula vista Municipal Code regulating the payment of prevailing wages for contracts let by the city. Resolution No. 1J.5'/{' - Announcing the Council's Intent to Award the Bids on the Fifth Avenue Project, Naples to orange, on the Basis of the Bid Alternate A, without Requiring the Payment of Prevailing wage. Q.]) Bruce M. Boogaard, city Attorney ~ ~ John P. Lippitt, Public Works Director~ Reviewed by: city Manage9" Agenda Classification: Action Item Submitted by: 4/5ths vote: ( ) Yes (X) No The proposed ordinance will elevate our existing policy on the payment of prevailing wage, now contained in Resolution 12493, to the level of an ordinance, thereby clarifying that the Council is not waiving any of its home rule authority granted to it by the State Constitution as a charter city. The proposed resolution will create a condition of ripeness that will permit opponents to our determination not to pay pre- vailing wages on the Fifth Avenue project to litigate that issue prior to our having become contractually obligated to the bidder to whom the project is let. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the attached Ordinance which permits maximum flexibility to the city in deciding whether to pay the prevailing wage rate on public projects. BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: None. Not applicable DISCUSSION: wages8.wp April 2, 1992 Al13 re Fifth Avenue project Page 1 c:J., 1-1 Labor Code section 1770 et seq. purports to require a public entity to pay prevailing wages on public works projects. A chartered city is not required to pay prevailing wage rates for projects which are "municipal affairs," and do not conflict with significant Legislatively established policy (matters referred to as "statewide concerns") unless required as a permissible condition of state or Federal funding. I have opined in the attached Legal Memorandum that the city is not required to pay prevailing wages in connection with the Fifth Avenue project. A recent case on this subject suggests that a charter city may waive its home rule authority to pay prevailing wages. The attached Ordinance is designed to make it clear that the council has not waived, and does not waive, such power. On May 20, 1986, the city adopted Resolution No. 12493 (copy attached) limiting payment of the prevailing wage to projects required to have the prevailing wage due to their funding by state or Federal programs. The attached Ordinance adds Section 2.58.060, further elevating the policy determinations inherent in Resolution No. 12493, by limiting, as a matter of ordinance, the city's duty to pay the prevailing wage on city public works projects which are a city's municipal affair only where: 1) required by Federal or State grants; 2) there is a conflicting "statewide concern" otherwise requiring the payment of prevailing wages; or 3) the prevailing wage is authorized by the city Council. The Ordinance better conforms to current law and should benefit the city by reducing project costs. The reasons for adopting the attached ordinance is to raise the policy choice of not requiring the payment of prevailing wages, except where required to do so, to the level of an ordinance. As such, it will make it clear the council does not waive the home rule authority that a charter city has with regard to its choice not to have to pay prevailing wages. An explanation of the law in this area, and the reasons for this exercise of authority are more fully set out in the Legal Memorandum attached hereto. The project which brings this matter to the public agenda is the proposed improvement of Fifth Avenue, between Naples and Orange. The legal issue is whether a local road project funded with Trans Net funds is a municipal affair protected from intrusion wages8.wp April 2, 1992 Al13 re Fifth Avenue Project Page 2 .).1./. J.. by the state Legislative requirement for the payment of prevailing wages. The legal issue is a matter of first case impression in this state, and although I am thoroughly convinced that it is a correct interpretation of the law in this area, if this Office is wrong with regard thereto, I would like that determination made prior to subjecting the low bidder to a Division of Labor Standards enforcement action, and his employees, and the employees of his subcontractors, to the payment of a lesser wage than that to which they are legally entitled. Thus, in order to make this issue ripe for litigation if any party so desires,Y in advance of having to become contractually bound to the lowest bidder, I request that the Council adopt the attached resolution announcing their intention to award the bid on the basis of Bid Alternate A (without the payment of prevailing wage) to the lowest responsible bidder, reserving the right to the fullest extent of the law, to waive any bid irregularities. Fiscal Impact: If the city is able to avoid the payment of prevailing wages, as regards the Fifth Avenue Project, there will be a savings of about $50,000, or about 6%, based on the difference between the low bidder's submittal of Alternate A and Alternate B. If the same ratio of savings can be expected throughout the Local Road Portion of the Trans Net funding scheme, the City may be able to generate a savings of $1,200,000, or get $1,200,000 more in the way of road improvements accomplished for the same money. 1. The attorney for the second lowest bidder, Errecca, Inc., under the prevailing wage bid, Bid Alternate B, has represented that they may desire to contest my determination that the City does not have to pay prevailing wage on this project. The attached resolution is intended to make such a lawsuit ripe for determination without actually having to award the bid. wages8.wp April 2, 1992 Al13 re Fifth Avenue Project Page 3 J.tfJ LEGAL MEMORANDUM ce: Honorable Mayor and councilmembeil ~ Bruce M. Boogaard, city Attorney~ John Goss, City Manager John Lippitt, Public Works Director John Rea, Chief Counsel, Department of Industrial Relations Jeff Blease, RUdick, Platt, victor & zuccaro, Attorney for Ericca, Inc. Caves Construction TO: FROM: DATE: April 1, 1992 Application of the Municipal Affairs Doctrine to the requirement to pay prevailing wages on the 5th Avenue road improvement project. RE: I. ISSUE PRESENTED Is the contractor ("Contractor") to whom the City of Chula vista ("City") lets a bid on its Fifth Avenue road improvement project between Naples street to Orange Avenue ("Project") in the City of Chula vista required to pay prevailing wages to employees retained to do work on the Project? II. CONCLUSION No. The Project is an improvement of a Road which has local transportation significance only. Funds to pay for the Project is coming exclusively from that portion of Trans Net funds ("Local Trans Net Funds") earmarked for local road projects. No condition is imposed by the Trans Net Legislation or the San Diego Association of Governments ("SANDAG") Ordinance 87-1 that recipient cities pay prevailing wages in conjunction with pUblic works projects which use said Local Trans- Net Funds. Although the Trans Net taxing scheme may involve a wages3.wp April 1, 1992 Legal Memo re Prevailing Wages Page 1 ,)1-1/ source for funds which are generated extra-territorial, it has no significant social policy attached to it sufficient to constitute a "statewide concern" exception to the Municipal Affairs Doctrine; but even if it had, the "statewide concern" necessary to vitiate the Doctrine of Municipal Affairs in this case must relate to the policy reasons for requiring the payment of prevailing wages, not for imposing the tax. It does not. The law requiring the payment of prevailing wages on public works projects has specifically been held by the California Supreme Court to be a matter which is not of sufficiently significant social policy to be a "statewide concern." The Charter of the city of Chula vista exerts full "home rule" authority granted by the State Constitution under the Municipal Affairs Doctrine. The City asserts the full benefits of this Doctrine in this case, and has since 1986, where by resolution it declared its intent to pay prevailing wage only if required as a condition of a state or federal grant. An ordinance has been introduced and is soon expected to become effective, clarifying and elevating this policy to a legal mandate codified in the city's municipal code. Accordingly, it is my opinion that the Municipal Affairs Doctrine exempts the City's contractor for this Project from the requirement that it pay prevailing wages to employees working on said project. II::r:. FACTS A. The prevailina Waae Law. The State adopted Labor Code section 1771 et seq. requiring the payment of the prevailing wage on public works projects: Except for public works projects of one thousand dollars ($1,000) or less, not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for work of a similar character in the locality in which the public work is performed, and not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for holiday and overtime work fixed as provided in this chapter, shall be paid to all workers employed on public works. This section is applicable only to work performed under contract, and is not applicable to work carried out by a public agency with its own forces. This section is applicable to contracts let for maintenance work. The statute applies to direction and supervision "improvement work done under the of any political subdivision or wages3.wp April 1, 1992 Legal Memo re Prevailing wages Page 2 e2l/~ ~ district thereof." Labor Code section 1720. B. The Road. Fifth Avenue is a two lane road ("Road") with at grade intersections. It starts at Orange Avenue, in the City, and ends at the Chula vista Shopping center, also within the City (See Map, attached as Exhibit "0"). Fifth Avenue is not a through street and serves intra-city traffic only (See Map, attached as Exhibit "0"). There is no direct access to any freeways or expressways. The Road runs through a single family residential neighbor- hood, the house lots adjacent to which have an average of 50 to 100 feet frontage. The driveways of the homes exit directly on to Fifth Avenue. The general practice among the residents along Fifth Avenue for entering their respective lots is to drive head first into their driveway, and to exit by backing their cars out onto Fifth Avenue. The Road no longer serves even as a north-south inter-city thoroughfare because in the mid 1980's the City closed the Road a three blocks north of the segment herein in question in order to permit the expansion of a shopping center. The City classifies its streets basically on the basis of capacity to handle traffic volume. We have nine categories of streets, from the highest volume street, known as an "expressway", ranked first, to the lowest volume street known as an "industrial road", ranked ninth. The Road is currently designated as a Class III Collector Street, ranked seventh. It is designed for 7,500 Average Daily Trips ("AOT") with access to and for residential communities (See Street classification designations, attached as Exhibit "E"). The street currently experiences anywhere from 1,550 to 5,800 AOT. (See AOT listing, attached as Exhibit "F"). C. The Proiect. That portion ("Road Segment") of the Road which is the subject matter of the Project (hereinbelow defined) is from Naples Street to Orange Avenue. The Road Segment is located within the heart of the City. (See Aerial Photograph, attached as Exhibit "B" i and Photos of Fifth Avenue, attached as Exhibit "C"). The Road Segment is currently about 42 feet wide, and has no curbs, gutters or sidewalks. The City proposes to construct street improvements on the Road Segment consisting of the following: removal of existing appurtances, excavation and grading, asphalt concrete paving, installing curbs and gutters, sidewalks, driveways, ramps, sewer laterals, drainage ducts, street lighting, signals, stairs, wages3.wp April 1, 1992 Legal Memo re Prevailing Wages Page 3 ~'I-~ fencing, mailboxes, water service connections, traffic control, and additional related work (See Plans and specification, attached as Exhibit "A"). The road improvements are well within the City and are intended to serve intra-city traffic and commerce. The planned improvements will upgrade the street from a Class III, ranked seventh, to a Class II Collector Street, ranked sixth, designed for 12,000 ADT (See street classifications, attached as Exhibit "E"). The street will have two-way center turn lanes at intersections to circulate local traffic from intersecting streets. The width of the street will increase by approximately 10 to 12 feet on each side. Thus, the Project, both before and after the improvement, is of a road which has exclusively a local transportation signifi- cance. D. The Fundinq Source. The Project is being funded exclusively with that portion of Proposition A Funds (also known as "Trans Net Funds") earmarked for local road projects. Proposition A Funds are those funds from the proceeds of a 1/2 percent increase in the sales tax ("Sales Tax Rider") applicable in San Diego County only. The authority for the imposition of the Sales Tax Rider arose from Public utility Code sections 132000, et seq., and Proposition A, which passed November 3, 1987 (see Funding, attached as Exhibit "G"!!). The State Legislature adopted Public utility Code section 132000, et seq.,EI which did not impose a statewide sales tax increase. Rather it was enabling legislation which gave the local residents of San Diego County the opportunity to tax themselves in order to pay for local transportation facilities: "(b) It is in the public interest to allow the voters of San Diego County to create the San Diego County Regional Transportation Commission so that local decisions can be implemented in a timely manner to provide improvements to the transportation system." (emphasis added) Public utilities Code section 132000(b). 1. The bid is $856,000 and Exhibit G shows that only $802,000 is available. The difference will be transferred in from another project funded with Local Road Portion Funds. 2. This was a local, SANDAG sponsored bill, sa 361 (Deddeh). wages3.wp April 1, 1992 Legal Memo re Prevailing Wages Page 4 -2'/- ? In turn, the local voters, not the state Legislature, adopted Proposition A at the ballot box in November, 1987, thereby choosing to tax themselves, and breathe economic life into the San Diego Regional Transportation commission. Pursuant to the Public utilities Code scheme, the Board of Directors of the San Diego Association of Governments, a local board consisting of elected representatives from each of the San Diego County city and county governments ("SANDAG"), serves as the San Diego Regional Transportation Commission ("Commission").~ After the adoption of proposition A, and pursuant to its authority, the Commission adopted Ordinance 87-1, attached as Exhibit H, which approves the Expenditure Plan dividing the total "pie" of revenues generated by the Sales Tax Rider into four groups: (1) the first $1,000,000 per year is applied to bicycle facility improvements; and the balance is divided equally between (2) highway improvements; (3) public transit improvements; and (4) local street and road improvements ("Local Road Portion"). The ordinance, at section 2 (D), defines the purpose of funds dedicated to the Local Road Portion: . .These revenues will be used to repair and rehabilitate existing roadways, to reduce congestion and improve safety, and to provide for the construction of needed facilities. Each local agency will prepare a listing of the projects proposed for funding through the measure with public participation required. section 3 (C) sets forth the distribution formula for the Local Road Portion. Annually, each city gets $50,000, and the balance is distributed, 2/3rds based on population and 1/3rd based on maintained street mileage. section 3 (C) (4) establishes that a City's Local Road Portion of "Funds shall be expended in accordance with the following priorities: a. to repair and rehabilitate roadways; b. to reduce congestion and improve c. to provide for the construction facilities. existing safety; of needed Thus, while a city's Local Road Portion of Trans Net Funds may have originally arisen from a specific retail transaction in a 3. Public utilities Code section 132051. wages3.wp April 1, 1992 Legal Memo re Prevailing Wages Page 5 ..2 '1- r City, the funds are commingled in a manner that make it impossible to determine the source as being purely within the City. No condition is imposed either by the enabling legislation, the ballot Proposition, or the enacting SANDAG ordinance that recipient cities pay prevailing wages in coniunction with public works projects funded by Proposition A Funds.Y E. The Charter Authoritv The city of Chula vista became a charter city in 1949, and has exercised its constitutional grant of power to govern as to munici- pal affairs by Section 200 of its Charter, which provides as fol- lows: Sec. 200. Powers of citv. The City shall have the power to make and enforce all laws and regulations in respect to municipal affairs, subject only to such restrictions and limitations as may be provided in this Charter and in the Constitution of the State of Cali- fornia. It shall also have the power to exercise, or act pursuant to, any and all rights, powers, privileges or procedures, heretofore or hereafter established, granted or prescribed by any law of the State, by this Charter, or by other lawful authority, or which a municipal corporation might or could exercise, or act pursuant to, under the Constitution of the State of California. The enumeration in this Charter of any particular power shall not be held to be exclusive of, or any limitation upon, the generality of the foregoing provisions. The City exercises the full aspect of its constitutional grant of such "home rule" authority as to any activity it engages in, including but not limited to the level of wages it chooses to pay on public works projects that are municipal affairs. In 1986, after and in reliance on the Vial decision, the City exercised its municipal affairs authority in the arena of prevailing wages by Resolution No. 12493, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit I, which rescinded a prior resolution, No. 7532, requiring the payment of prevailing wages. It provided that the city should pay prevailing wage only when required as a condition of the funding source: 4. In addition to the Ordinance 87-1, enacted by SANDAG, imposing the sales tax without imposing the duty to pay prevailing wage, the General Legal Counsel confirmed that SANDAG does not require the payment of prevailing wage, and it is left to the determination of the individual charter city. wages3.wp April 1, 1992 Legal Memo re Prevailing Wages Page 6 .;.J.j- ? "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that projects which are required to have the prevailing wage schedule due to their funding by State or Federal programs, the booklet entitled "Equipment Rental Rates and General Prevailing Wage Rates", published by the State of California shall be used for said projects." IV. ANALYSIS A. The Municipal Affairs Doctrine--home rule. Article XI, Section 5 (a) of the California Consti tution provides: "It shall be competent in any city charter to provide that the city governed thereunder may make and enforce all ordinances and regulations in respect to municipal affairs, subject only to restrictions and limitations provided in their several charters and in respect to other matters they shall be subject to general laws. City charters adopted pursuant to this Constitution shall supersede any existing charter, and with respect to municipal affairs shall supersede all laws inconsistent therewith." When a charter city accepts, by the language of its charter, the privilege of controlling its municipal affairs, it is said to have accepted the "home rule" privilege. See Murphv v. Piedmont (1937) 17 Cal. App. 2d 569, 62 P. 2d 614. By the provisions of Section 200, quoted above, the city of Chula vista availed itself of the home rule privilege and exerted to the fullest extent the power granted to it by the State Constitution. See Moraan v. city of Los Anaeles (1920) 182 Cal 301, 187 P. 1050; Civic Center Association v. Railroad Commission (1917) 175 Cal. 441, 445, 166 P. 351, 353; citv of Pasadena v. Charleville (1932) 10 P. 2d 745, 746. This authority permits a charter city's ordinance and regulations of municipal affairs to have the same force and effect of legislative enactments~ and subject only to restrictions contained in its charter and the State Constitution. In essence, as to municipal affairs, a charter city takes its authority to govern from the California Constitution, the same authority by which the Legislature secures its power to legislate. The fact that both entities take their power from the same source, 5. Article 11, section 3 (a) of the state constitution provides: "The provisions of a charter are the law of the state and have the force and effect of legislative enactments". wages3.wp April 1, 1992 Legal Memo re Prevailing Wages Page 7 .2. 'I-It) the state judiciary is left to resolve disputes in the exercise of conflicting power. B. Does the citv's Charter soecificallv Permit the pavment of Minimum Waaes on Public Works proiects? No. But the California Supreme Court, in the case of Pasadena v. Charleville (1932) 215 Cal. 384, 10 P.2d 745 held that it was not necessary that the charter specifically legislate on the subject. In order to remove the city's municipal affairs from the control of general laws it is sufficient if the city has availed itself of the ["home rule"] offer extended to it by the Constitution as amended in 1914 and has incorporated in its charter an acceptance of the privilege tendered [citations omitted]. Where in the one case the charter specifically legislates upon the subject it is deemed a grant of power; and where, on the other hand, the charter in general terms accepts the offer extended by the Constitution, the enumeration of powers is unnecessary and the general language of the acceptance becomes a limitation of the power of the city and is all-embracing so far as the removal of the municipal affairs of the city from the control of the Legislature is concerned [citations omitted]. Thus, the City's Charter could have a specific provision requiring the payment of market wages in its public works projects, but it is unnecessary because the City's charter has accepted the offer of "home rule" authority granted by the constitution. C. When Is An Activitv of a Charter citv a Municioal Affair? After reviewing a multitude of cases regarding this subject, cited herein, it is this author's evaluation of the Doctrine of Municipal Affairs that there are two separate analysis occurring by the Courts, sometimes in an overlapping manner that makes it first appear as a single concept. First, the Courts look to the basic activity itself to discern if there are extra-territorial aspects or consequences to the activity. If there are no extra-territorial consequences, it is a "municipal affair". Second, however, the CoUrts consider if the purely intra-territorial activity has an impact on a Legislatively established policy to which the courts, not the Legislature, attach a high level of significance.~ If so, 6. In california Federal v. Los Anaeles (1991) 283 54 Cal. 3d 1, 812 P.2d 916, rehearing denied, Cal. Rptr. 569, the California (continued. . . ) wages3.wp April 1, 1992 Legal Memo re Prevailing Wages Page 8 ,}I./-/I the Courts impose the Doctrine, abrogating the to govern its affairs. "statewide concern" exception to the city's constitutional grant of authority This elevation of legislative policy to "statewide concern" necessarily has to be with the Courts, not the Legislature, since, in this area, the Legislature and a Charter city are of equal sta- ture. There would be no "check and balance" if the Legislature could unilateral defeat the authority constitutionally granted to a Charter City simply by declaring that its policy implicit in every piece of legislation could rise to the stature of a "state- wide concern". The Vial court, citing Bishoo v. citv of San Jose (1969) 1 Cal 3d 56, 61-62, 81 Cal.Rptr. 465, 467-68 said: "Deciding whether a particular ordinance deals with municipal affair or [read: "and is not a"] a subject of statewide concern is judicial, not a legislative function." Because the Courts do not invade lightly into the power distributed by the Constitution between a charter city and the State Legislature, they have chosen not to opine in the abstract when a particular matter is of sufficient significance to be of a "statewide concern". This gives rise to the rule that the issue of determining a "municipal affair" and a "statewide concern" is decided on a case-by-case basis. See Bishoo v. citv of San Jose, suora, 1 Cal.3d at 62, 81 Cal.Rptr. at 468; California Federal v. Los Anqeles. suora. The California Supreme Court has already struck this balance in the arena of local road improvements and the payment of prevailing wages therefore. D. Local Street Imorovements Have Been Firmlv Held to Be a Municioal Affair. The law in California is well established that the improvement of local streets is a municipal affair, and ordinances of a charter city with regard thereto take precedence over conflicting state 6. ( .. . continued) Supreme Court calls it the "correlative dimension of the 'municipal affairs' doctrine, namely those conditions under which the obverse proposition applies and the Legislature constitutionally may sup- plant charter city measures with its own enactments": 'The phrase "statewide concern" is thus nothing more than a conceptual formula employed in aid of the judicial mediation of jurisdictional disputes between the charter cities and the Legislature, one that facially discloses a focus on extramun- icipal concerns as the starting point for analysis." wages3.wp April 1, 1992 Legal Memo re Prevailing Wages Page 9 ..2'-1- /:;. law. In Raisch v. Mvers (1946) 27 Ca1.2d 773, 167 P.2d 198 the California supreme Court was called upon to decide whether a Code of Civil Procedure provision which would have resulted in the extinguishment of lien was superior or subordinant to a local ordinance of a charter city which did not extinguish the lien. Applying the Municipal Affairs Doctrine, the court held that the local ordinance supercede the contervailing state law: The improvement of streets and the collection of the costs therefore are municipal affairs. Admittedly San Francisco being a charter city, its charter supersedes state law in this field, and the provisions of a street improvement ordinance 'adopted pursuant to the authorization of the charter have the same sanction and the same effect that they would have had if incorporated in the charter itself.' [Citations omitted] And ordinance provisions relating to such municipal affairs will prevail over general laws inconsistent or in conflict therewith. [Citations omitted] Id. at 201 (emphasis added). The california supreme Court came to the same conclusion in citv of Walnut Creek v. Silveria (1957) 47 Cal.2d 804, 306 P.2d 453, 457. Here, in the context of a validation proceeding for a bond issue, the Court held that street improvements were a municipal affairs: The improvements to be made in the instant case consist of covering Walnut Creek which traverses the business area so that it may be used; to provide new streets, to extend non- through streets, to widen other streets, in order to provide adequately for the greatly increased traffic circulation in the commercial area. There can be no auestion that the proposed improvements fall within the definition of municipal affairs as that rule is set forth in the decided cases. [Citations] (emphasis added) Finally, in Perez v. citv of San Jose (1951) 107 Cal.App.2d ~62, 237 P.2d 548, the city constructed road improvements includ- ~ng, a dividing strip, traffic signals, and lighting. The roadway was part of a state hiahwav route and all but $15,000 came from state funds. The court held the expenditure of funds on the road improve- ments had a municipal purpose despite the fact it was part of a state highway: San Jose and its inhabitants receive a special benefit, as wages3.wp April 1, 1992 Legal Memo re Prevailing Wages Page 10 J. L/~ 1.1 compared with the rest of the state, in the improvement of the Alameda within city limits. It facilitates local as well as through traffic. The lighting, the signals, and the general safety advantages of the improvement are for the benefit of the local citizens as well as others. There could be no pos:ible :uestion that this improvement on anv other city str;e~ wo ld be a municipal purpose. The fact that this city str e is also a state hiahwav makes it no less a city street and makes its improvement no less a matter of city concern. Id. at 553 (emphasis added). The Fifth Avenue Improvements located between Naples street and Orange Avenue in the city are sUbstantially less of a statewide concern than the state highway in the Perez case. The Road Segment, the Road and the Project have, and after the Project is completed, will still have, virtually no extra-territorial significance--it is a facility which functions primarily to allow local property owners access to their homes. Its improvement is therefore strictly a municipal affair of the city of Chula vista. E. The Choice Not to Pay prevailina Waaes Does Not Elevate a Municipal Affair into a statewide Concern. As indicated, despite the fact that the basic activity in which a charter city engages is clearly a "municipal affair", the courts balance the power of the Charter City against the power of the State Legislature by creating the exception to the Municipal Affairs Doctrine, called "statewide concern", where some related aspect of that activity impacts a Legislatively-established policy to which the Courts have attached a high level of significance. When the Courts--not the Legislature--attach such a level of significance to a Legislative policy, they advance the argument that the activity is of a "statewide concern", thereby subjecting the Charter city's home rule authority to various legislative enactments that implement the important state policy. This "statewide concern" argument has been applied cautiously by the Courts because it has the attendant consequence of negating a charter city's constitutional grant of power over "municipal af- fairs". It has been done, for example, (1) in areas where a char- ter city sought to impose traffic regulation on city streets in conflict with the vehicle codeV, (2) where a charter city 7. Ex parte Daniels (1920) 183 Cal. 636, 192 P. 442, 21 A.L.R. 1172, wherein it was held that the speed limit at which automobiles might be driven was a matter of general state concern and therefore the State Motor Vehicle Act was controlling over a city ordinance (continued. . . ) wages3.wp April 1, 1992 Legal Memo re prevailing Wages Page 11 ;J. 'I"' ) '-/ attempted to require the registration of criminals residing within its limitsA.', (3) in certain public agency labor relations mat- tersV, and (4) the right to tax financial institutions.liV However, numerous California Courts have specifically ruled that the payment of prevailing wages was not a Legislative policy of such a high level of significance that it would become a "statewide concern". The most significant of these is our Supreme Court's decision in citv of Pasadena v. Charleville (1932) 215 Cal. 384, 10 P.2d 745 (overruled on other grounds, purdv & Fitzpatrick v. State of california (1969) 71 Ca1.2d 566, 585-86, 79 Cal.Rptr. 77). The city manager refused to sign a contract for the construction of a fence around a city owned and operated reservoir because it did not require the payment of prevailing wages. The court held: 7. ( . . . continued) providing a less rate of speed. In pipolv v. Benson (1942) 20 Cal.2d 366, 125 P.2d 482, the court held that the regulation of traffic is a statewide concern. 8. In Abbott v. citv of Los Anaeles (1960) 53 Cal.2d 674, 681, 3 Cal.Rptr. 158, 349 P.2d 974, a Charter city's municipal criminal registration act was held to be invalid because it was preempted by state and beyond charter city's constitutional powers. 9. The right to join a union was held to be a "statewide concern" in Professional Fire Fiahters. Inc. v. citv of Los Anaeles (1963) 60 Cal.2d 276, 292, 32 Cal.Rptr. 830, 384 P.2d 158. The Supreme Court held that a charter city was subject to the requirements of a state statute prohibiting cities and others from infringing upon the right of fire fighters to join a union because a consistent statewide policy regarding general rights and obligations of labor and management was a matter of statewide concern. In Baaaett v. Gates (1982) 32 Cal.3d 128, 185 Cal.Rptr. 232, 649 P.2d 874, the Court held that the public safety officers' procedural bill of rights was a matter of "statewide concern". In People ex reI. Seal Beach Police Officers Assn. v. citv of Seal Beach (1984) 36 Cal.3d 591, 205 Cal.Rptr. 794, 685 P.2d 1145, the Court held that the "meet and confer" requirement of Government Code was a matter of "statewide concern", and had to be complied with before proposing a charter amendment concerned with terms and conditions of public employment. 10. California Federal v. Los Anaeles (1991) 283 Cal. Rptr. 569, 54 Cal. 3d 1, 812 P.2d 916, rehearing denied. wages3.wp April 1, 1992 Legal Memo re Prevailing Wages Page 12 ;J. L/ -I>' The hiring of employees generally by the city to perform labor and services in connection with its municipal affairs and the payment of the city's funds for services rendered to the city by its employees in the administration of its municipal affairs is not subject to or controlled by general laws [citations omitted]. The charter of the city contains full provisions for the doing of the proposed work by contract or by force account and for payment therefor from municipal funds. xg. at 747. The Charleville Court was suspicious of the purported state- wide interest of the Legislature represented by the "prevailing wage law": The foregoing statute does not purport to fix or provide for the fixation of the wage to be paid under all employment contracts, public and private. . . . The obvious purpose of the statute is to prescribe conditions upon which the statute will permit work of a public character to be performed for it or for public agencies of the state over which the Legislature may constitutionally exercise control. . . . The necessity for or the desirability of the statute now under discussion are of legislative concern. The judicial question is: Where rests the power to enact it so as to make it binding on the city of Pasadena? The answer must be that such power rests only in the people of the state through the Constitution or in the people of the city by or under the authority of its freeholders' charter. In other words, if the Legislature was sufficiently concerned, i. e., to a level of "statewide concern", that all employees be paid a sufficient wage, it could have legislated it, and still can legislate it, for private sector "works" as well as public sector "works".1!I It does not do so through the minimum wage laws. It could have attempted to make it applicable to "force account" work, but it does not do that either. Rather, it chooses to single out itself and its political subdivisions which it can control under the general laws of the state to require the payment of prevailing wages on contracts let to public bid. It could not, and still may not, control the purely local public works contracts of a charter city. 11. Article 14, section 1 of the state Constitution provides: "The Legislature may provide for minimum wages and for the general welfare of employees and for those purposes may confer on a commission legislative, executive, and judicial powers." wages3.wp April 1, 1992 Legal Memo re Prevailing Wages Page 13 .,2'1~/~ The California Supreme Court case of Sonoma County Orqaniza- tion of Public Emolovees v. County of Sonoma (1979) 23 Cal. 3d 296, 152 Cal. Rptr. 903, recognized the continuing validity of its Charleville holding, citing it for the proposition that "salaries of local employees of a charter city constitute municipal affairs and are not subject to general laws. Although the Sonoma case represents a different attemf,t of the Legislature to control wages paid for public services,lY i.e., that of city employees as opposed to the wages of private sector employees doing public works, the result was the same that the State could not present a sufficient interest in controlling the wages to be paid by a charter city on an exclusively municipal affair. Our own Fourth Appellate District reiterated the continuing validity in Vial v. city of San Dieqo (1981) 122 Cal.App.3d 346, 175 Cal.Rptr. 647. In Vial, the charter city of San Diego abolished its prevailing wage schedule and permitted payment of prevailing wages "only when required by Federal or State grants and on other jobs considered to be of State concern. . . ." Id. at 347. The court held: The prevailing wage law, a general law, does not apply to the public works projects of a chartered city, as long as the projects in question are within the realm of "municipal affairs" [Citation]. The expenditure of a city's funds on such projects and the rates of pay of the workers whom it hires to carry them out are municipal affairs. [Citation] li. at 348. The court upheld the city's resolution because it limited itself to projects of municipal concern. The Fourth Appellate District, in Div. of Labor Standards v. Ericsson Inf. (1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 114, 270 Cal.Rptr. 75 wherein, 12. In Sonoma, the Legislature attempted the inverse--to lower public service wages rather than increase them as in the Prevailing Wage Law. They attempted to prevent cities from giving a pay raise to its employees greater than pay raises granted to state employees, by conditioning the receipt of Proposition 13 "bail-out funds". The Legislative purpose was to "allow essential local government services to be maintained at a higher level than would otherwise be the case, and will promote full employment and prevent layoffs, and that the limitation of local employee salaries is designed "to alleviate the current fiscal crisis created by the passage of Proposition 13 .and to provide for maintaining essential services which would otherwise be lost." As in the case of the Prevailing wage Law in Charleville, the Supreme Court rejected the social significance attached to the purported statewide concern in Sonoma. wages3.wp April 1, 1992 Legal Memo re Prevailing Wages Page 14 ,j.tf-/7 in connection with a telephone installation contract at a University building on the UCSD campus, it gratuitously, and unnecessarily, offers the following obiter dicta: We conclude the protection afforded private sector employees working on public projects is a matter of statewide concern and accordingly the public works prevailing wage laws are applicable to the university. Id. at 124. However, Ericsson is significantly different from our situation in the following regards: 1. Ericsson involved a state university, not a charter city. The University of California does not have the "municipal affairs" doctrine rooted in Article 11, section 5(a) of the Constitution. It has a "university affairs" doctrine, rooted in Article 9, section 9 of the State Constitution, which declares that the University of California is a public trust subject to the control of the Regents, "with full powers of organization and government, subject only to such legislative control as may be necessary to insure the security of its funds and compliance with the terms of the endowments of the uni versi ty and such competi ti ve bidding procedures as may be made applicable to the university by statute for the letting of construction contracts, . . ."W 2. In Ericsson, the Fourth Appellate District did not overrule its own prior decision, rendered nine years earlier, in Vial. Rather it distinguished Vial on the grounds that the University did not attempt to avail itself of the "home rule" privilege--it contractually required its contractor to pay prevailing wage! In essence, the Constitutional grant of power was not exercised as it was in Vial, and as it is in our case. 3. By distinguishing Vial, rather than overruling Vial, it recognized the continuing validity of Vial, and its predecessor cases. 4. Under the doctrine of stare decisis, an appellate court 13. Unlike a charter city, the University of California is constitutionally obligated to comply with legislatively-imposed competitive bidding procedures. A greater explanation of this "university affairs" doctrine is explained in San Francisco Labor Council v. Reaents of Universitv of California (1980) 26 Cal. 3d 785,788, 163 Cal. Rptr. 460, 608 P. 2d 277). wages3.wp April 1, 1992 Legal Memo re Prevailing Wages Page 15 J L/~/g/ can not reverse, and did not purport to reverse, the holding of two prior decisions of the California Supreme Court holdings that the Prevailing Wage Law is not a matter of "statewide concern". See Auto Eauitv Sales. Inc. v. Suoerior Court (1962) 56 Cal. 2d 450, 20 Cal Rptr 321. 5. Further, the city contract, if the non-prevailing wage bid is accepted by the Council, will not provide for payment of the prevailing wage, contrary to the University contract in Ericsson, which did, and this clearly impacted the decision in Ericsson. 6. Ericsson relies on O.G. Sansone Co. v. Deoartment of Transoortation (1976) 55 Cal. App. 3d 434, 458-460, 127 Cal. Rptr. 799, to discern a "statewide concern" since the legislation itself offers no policy justification. The Sansone case, itself, notes: "Little has been written in judicial opinions concerning the purpose of the California legislation", and ironically de~ends on the policy behind the federal Davis-Bacon legislation.W One would think that the Legislature could offer in the codified legislation, a policy justification for its existence that could be used to elevate it to a matter of "significant social policy". If anything, Ericsson introduces the concept of "waiver" of constitutionally granted power. To the extent that the University could have asserted a "quasi-municipal affairs" doctrine, it clearly waived that right in the contract. Ericsson, who had contractually agreed to pay the higher wage, and submitted his bid on the basis of that promise, was simply trying to increase his profit margin--not exercise a constitutional power on behalf of the University. Denying Ericsson was not a denial of the University's power to control its own internal affairs. Unlike Ericsson, the City has a charter provision availing itself of the privilege to govern its municipal affairs.!V The Charter provision is consistent with the Charter adopted in Charleville, which Ericsson acknowledges is sufficient to reserve municipal authority. See Div. of Labor Standards v. Ericsson Inf., suora, 221 Cal.App.3d at 124, footnote 17. The author is also mindful of repetition of these policy statements transformed as State Legislative policy, in the February 2, 1992 California Supreme Court decision in Lusardi Construction Comoanv v. Aubrv, 92 Daily Joural D.A.R. 2409, involving a hospital district--a political subdivision of the power granted to the State of California. No aspect of the Municipal Affairs Doctrine/state- 14. 40 U.S.C., section 276a, et seq. 15. The language is set forth above. wages3.wp April 1, 1992 Legal Memo re Prevailing Wages Page 16 .2'-/-/i wide concern analysis was or could have been evaluated in that case. As a political subdivision of the state, it was bound to follow the prevailing wage legislation.~ F. Did the citv of Chula vista waive Its Riqht to Govern its Internal Affairs as to the policv of pavinq prevailinq Waqes? No. The City's Charter grants the City the right to govern its municipal affairs: The city shall have the power to make and enforce all laws and regulations in respect to municipal affairs, subject only to such restrictions and limitations as may be provided in the Charter and in the Constitution of the state of California. It shall also have the power to exercise. or act pursuant to. anv and all riqhts. powers. privileqes or procedures. heretofore or hereafter established, granted or prescribed by any law of the state, by this Charter, or by other lawful authority, or which a municipal corporation miqht or could exercise. or act pursuant to. under the Constitution of the state of California. The enumeration in this Charter of any particular power shall not be held to be exclusive of. or any limitation upon. the qenerality of the foreqoinq provisions. Article II, section 200 (emphasis added). In 1974, the Council, acting under the mistaken apparent belief that it was required to pay prevailing wages for public works contracts let to bid, by the operation of Labor Code section 1770, et seq., adopted Resolution 7532, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit J, identifying the prevailing wages rate schedule it would use on its public works projects. In 1986, the City Attorney advised the Council that, due to the home rule provisions of its municipal charter, it was not required to pay prevailing wages on public works projects, and the 16. This case stands more importantly for the proposition that our contractor can be held liable to the State for the payment of pre- vailing wages if we are wrong in our determination of applicability of the prevailing wage law, and that we may be required to indemnify the contractor for that liability. We sought to protect against an adverse, upside risk, by requiring the alternate bids. Upon an adverse resolution to this issue, our liability to the contractor will be limited by the Alternate B Bid. wages3.wp April 1, 1992 Legal Memo re Prevailing Wages Page 17 eJ. 0/' :LP city Council thereupon, by the adoption of Resolution No. 12493, copy attached as Exhibit I rescinded Resolution No. 7532, declaring its intent to pay prevailing wage only if required as a condition of a state or federal grant. An ordinance has been introduced and is soon expected to be- come effective, clarifying and elevating this policy to a legal mandate codified in the City'S municipal code. 2.58.060 Payment of Prevailing Wages No contract shall require payment of the prevailing wage schedule unless: A. The prevailing wage is legally required, and constitutionally permitted to be imposed, by Federal or state grants; or, B. The project is considered by the Council to not be a municipal affair of the City; or, C. payment of the prevailing wage is authorized by resolution of the city council. payment of the prevailing wage schedule if authorized hereunder, shall use the pertinent rates published by the state of California. G. Can the Source of Funds for a Municipal Affair Elevate it to a Statewide Concern? No. An extraterritorial source of funds has never been held to strip a charter city of its home rule power. The dispute resolution procedure articulated herein, and referred to as the Municipal Affairs Doctrine/statewide concern analysis, was never designed to so casually disregard the constitutional source of a charter city's power to govern. In order to strip a charter city of this constitutional grant as to a project that is entire local in nature, there has to first be a conflict between a city action and a contrary state law. The dispute is then resolved based on the conflict. No court has ever proposed that you look to the source of funds, and if it is extra-territorial to the charter city, that you subject the city to each and every state legislative enactment. The funding source itself would have to be a statement of Legislative policy of such a high level of significance that a charter city's constitutional grant of power should be abrogated-- and then, only as to the asserted policy. Such is not the case here. For example, the significant social policy considerations-- i. e., "statewide concerns" -- inherent in the Trans Net taxing scheme wages3.wp April 1, 1992 Legal Memo re Prevailing wages Page 18 )..'1 ~ .2.1 would be relevant in the context of a competing ordinance from the city of Chula vista providing that retail transactions in the City would not bear the addition 1/2% sales tax. Such was the case in the Committee of Seven Thousand v. sUDerior ct. (1988) 45 Ca1.3d 491, 247 Cal.Rptr. 362. The Legislature passed Section 66484.3 authorizing Orange county cities, such as Irvine, to impose development fees for the construction of three "transportation corridors", described as "high-speed, high-volume, controlled-access facilities. . .planned for eventual incorporation into the state highway system." Opponents of the roadways sponsored an initiative in the city of Irvine which would have required a referendum vote before imposing or collecting any such fees. Thus, there was a conflict between a proposed city ordinance and the state law, and the issue as to the authority (of the people) to legislate as to a "municipal affair" was joined. Obviously, the court held that the legislation was part of funding a corridor-specific, intramural, regional transportation system that was to be eventually incorporated into the state highway system, and therefore, was of a statewide concern. But Seven Thousand represented a conflict between a state- sanctioned funding scheme for a transportation facility and a countervailing local impediment to that funding scheme. The Municipal Affairs Doctrine/statewide concern issue comes into play in such a conflict and it was necessarily resolved by saying that the charter city's countervailing impediment conflicted with a statewide concern. In our particular circumstance, we have no conflicting impediment to the Proposition A/Trans Net Funding scheme. We appreciate the voters providing us with a source of local road improvement dollars, and intend to take the fullest advantage of it. Even if such a conflict existed, it could not bootstrap all general laws into a binding obligation on a charter city exercising its home rule authority. The description of the facts alone in Seven Thousand are enough to distinguish this case without significant further com- ment. Suffice it to say that nothing in Seven Thousand imposed the duty to pay prevailing wages on charter cities, and nothing in Seven Thousand imposes the rule that an extraterritorial source of funds abrogates a charter city's power to govern its internal affairs. In fact, because the State Law related to the collection of development fees for inter-city development, the funding source in Seven Thousand was entirely local in nature! Seven Thousand is totally consistent with the conflict- wages3.wp April 1, 1992 Legal Memo re Prevailing Wages Page 19 ..2 '1- ..2.2 resolution function served by the "statewide concern" concept, and does not address the conflict between a state prevailing wage law and a contrary public works project by a charter city. As a second case in point exemplifying that the statewide concern has to relate to a conflicting exercise of power by the city, the charter city of Los Angeles's attempt to tax financial institutions was held to be invalid because of the significant statewide policy to the contrary. See California Federal v. Los Anaeles (1991) 283 Cal. Rptr. 569, 54 Cal. 3d 1, 812 P.2d 916, rehearing denied. However, this is not the case before us. The city is not proposing a countervailing funding scheme, or an impediment to the Trans Net Funding scheme. There is nothing in the Trans Net Funding scheme that endorses a social policy that recipient agencies should pay prevailing wages! As noted above, the "statewide concern" argument is cautiously applied by the Courts when, despite a particular activity being a purely local, purely intra-territorial matter of a charter city, it has certain aspects which negatively impact an established Legislative policy to which the Courts have attached a high level of significance. Here, the funding source is the Local Road Portion of Trans Net Funds. There is no statewide policy or concern attached to such funds. As shown above, the generation of Trans Net Funds was enabled, not mandated, by a state law that was conceived locally, carried by local legislatures, limited by its words to apply only to San Diego county, and implemented locally by the adoption of the County measure, Proposition A. If it were of "statewide concern", the State Legislature would have required it to apply, at a minimum, throughout the State--not haphazardly permit a region to tax themselves if they wanted to, and apply the proceeds, as they saw, fit, to local or regional road systems, or bike paths! Our office is aware of the San Diego city Attorney's Memorandum dated January 18, 1990 ("Memorandum"), a copy of which is attached as Exhibit K, concluded to the contrary--that the use of Proposition A funds for street improvements creates a "statewide concern." With all due respect to my esteemed colleague's office, I believe the analysis errs. The memorandum cites certain "public interest" policy statements in creating the financing scheme and the mandatory duty of the commission to impose the tax if adopted at an election. She emphasizes some of the "countywide" uses to which the funds would be put, explained in the ballot argument, and that the State Board of Equalization will be called upon to collect wages3.wp April 1, 1992 Legal Memo re Prevailing Wages Page 20 ~J./ "'.2;] and distribute the tax. Nothing in her analysis points to any significant Legislatively-established social policy associated with the funding scheme sufficient to abrogate the constitutional power of a Charter city to govern its municipal affairs, especially as to the right to permit contractors to pay market wages. The Memorandum is really suggesting that an extra-territorial source of the funds is sufficient to abrogate the Municipal Affairs Doctrine to the extent that all, not just judicially determined highly significant, state-established policy--including prevailing wages--takes precedence to the city's right to govern its municipal affairs. But if this were the case, Chula vista would not even be able to use the property tax revenues of its general funds to build the Project. After the passage of Proposition 13, the taxes generated from a specific parcel of property are not paid directly to the city. They are collected from property taxpayers allover the County by the county Tax Collector and redistributed to the various taxing agencies based primarily on an agency's taxing effort between 1975 and 1978. It would be impossible to determine that the source of property tax revenues paid to a city's general fund is purely within the city. Yet, a rule that the use of property tax revenues to conduct a municipal affair abrogates the Constitutional grant of power to charter cities and would have the ultimate affect of rendering useless the entire constitutional provision--a fact which the Courts have never recognized.LV Thus, it is this author's op~n~on that the source of funds does not determine the applicability or non-applicability of the Municipal Affairs Doctrine, especially as it may be overridden to require the payment of prevailing wages. Not one case cited by the Memorandum held that the receipt of extraterritorial funds transforms an otherwise municipal affair 17. Our Charter permits us to determine the winner of a City election on the basis of securing a clear majority winner, and we may require a run off election to accomplish this. Cases immemorial recognize that how a charter city conducts its elections is clearly a municipal affair. Yet we use property tax funds to pay for such elections, and these property tax revenue are now clearly extra-territorial. Are we now required to determine our winner on the basis of a plurality--the means set forth in the Elections Code applicable to all general law cities? until one can say that extra-territorial funding sources can require that, they can not be heard to argue that use of an extra-territorial funding source such as Trans Net dollars requires a charter city to comply with the Prevailing Wages Law. wages3.wp April 1, 1992 Legal Memo re Prevailing Wages Page 21 .J. L/-;L'-/ into a "statewide concern". Even more significant is the failure to address the line of cases applyin~ the Municipal Affairs Doctrine to the prevailing wage statute.llV The remaining cases cited by San Diego fail to even address street improvements, much less the prevailing wage. The case Wilson v. city of San Bernardino (1960) 186 Cal.App.2d 603, 9 Cal.Rptr. 431 held that the formation of a water district is a statewide concern, subject to state law. city of Santa Clara v. Von Raesfeld (1970) 3 Cal.3d 239, 90 Cal.Rptr. 8 held that a city's financial contribution to a regional water pollution control facility was of statewide concern. Finally city of Pasadena v. Chamberlain (1928) 204 Cal. 653, 269 P. 630 held that the Metropolitan Water District Act was valid because it involved statewide concerns. These cases all address regional water interests which are vital statewide interests, unlike improvements in a local roadway. conclusion We recognize that this area is beset with emotion by those who have a financial stake in the award of the bid, or groups who have accepted the concept that most public agencies, despite whatever desire it may have to operate efficiently and economically for the benefit of its taxpayers, has been obligated by the State Legis- lature to pay more for its local roads than the free market would require. The countervailing side to such argument is that, in the absence of the prevailing wage requirement, the city may be able to help stimulate some of the small business contractors locally situated, build more roads and actually employ more workers in the long run than if it were obligated to pay prevailing wages. But regardless of the emotion and possibly policy choices a charter city may make in this regard, for the reasons stated herein, this Project is a municipal affair that involves no aspect of "statewide concern" relating to the payment of prevailing wage. It is therefore my opinion that the city of Chula vista does not have to require its successful contractor to pay prevailing wages to the contractor's employees on this project. 18. Only the Com. of Seyen Thousand v. superior ct. cited above bears any relationship to street improvements and funding authority conflicts. As discussed above, is inapposite in this case. wages3.wp April 1, 1992 Legal Memo re Prevailing Wages Page 22 )'/-.2.5 /M~1 Resolution No. /~~;7~ Resolution of the city council of the city of Chula vista Announcing the Council's Intent to Award the Bids on the Fifth Avenue Project, Naples to Orange, on the Basis of the Bid Alternate A, without Requiring the payment of Prevailing Wage. Whereas, the City has requested bids on a local street improvement project, to wit: Fifth Avenue, orange to Naples; and, Whereas, the city has requested bidders to submit bids on two alternating basis, Alternate A of which did not require the payment of prevailing wages, and Alternate B of which did require the payment of prevailing wages; and, . Whereas, the city believes, on the basis of legal advice from its city Attorney, that it is entitled to award the bid for the project on the basis of Alternate A, that is, without requiring the contractor or its contractors to pay prevailing wages to its employees working on the project; and, Whereas, the City desires that if litigation is to ensue over the issuance of such bids, that such litigation should be instituted by writ of mandate, or injunction, prior to becoming contractually bound to the awardee; and, Whereas, the city Council does hereby pass this resolution in the belief that, by doing so, it will make the matter ripe for judicial determination if any; Now, therefore, the city Council of the City of Chula Vista, in exercise of the city's constitutional authority of a charter city with home rule powers, does hereby announce their intention, two weeks hence, to award the bid for the Fifth Avenue Project, Orange to Naples, on the basis of Bid Alternate A, without requiring the payment of prevailing wage, and that it intends to pay for said construction contract primarily with the use of Trans Net funds. Works rved ~ t 0:1) Bruce M. Boog City Attorney Submitted by: wagesB.wp April 2, 1992 Reso re Prevailing Wages Page 4 .At/-l'1 \.i '1'0: FROM: cc: DATE: RE: LIST OF ATTACHED EXHIBITS Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers Bruce Boogaard, City Attorney John GosS, City Manager John Lippitt, Public Works Director John Rea, Chief Counsel, Department of Industrial Relations Jeff Blease, Ruddick, Platt, victor & Zuccaro, Attorney for Ericca, Inc. April 1, 1992 Application of the Municipal Affairs Doctrine to the requirement to pay prevailing wages on the 5th Avenue road improvement project. The following is a list and description of attached exhibits to the City's Memorandum regarding payment of the prevailing wage dated April 1, 1992: Exhibit A: Exhibit B: Exhibit C: Exhibit D: Exhibit E: Exhibit F: Exhibit G: Exhibit H: Exhibit I: A copy of the contract documents and plans for the Fifth Avenue Project. A copy of an aerial photograph of the Fifth Avenue Project. A copy of photographs depicting the Fifth Avenue Project. A copy of a map showing the entire span of Fifth Avenue, including the project site. the street Design Standards Policy the capacity for streets within the A copy of classifying city. A copy of the Traffic Flow data for the city showing the number of Average Daily Trips experienced at the Fifth Avenue Project site. A copy the Fifth Avenue project budget. A copy of San Diego Transportation Improvement Program Ordinance and Expenditure Plan 87-1. A copy of the City's Resolution No. 12493 restricting the payment of the prevailing wage. ,;,2/-.31 Exhibit J: Exhibit K: A copy of the city's Resolution No. 7532 adopting the prevailing wage pursuant to Labor Code section 1773. A copy of the city Attorney of San Diego's Memorandum of Law dated January 18, 1990. o<'1~J":;" ~~f? ~ ,- - .~ - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - ~~ -- CllY OF CHUlA VISTA CONTRACT DOCUMENTS FOR: IT1 o o FIFTH AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN NAPLES STREET AND ORANGE AVENUE IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CA THIS IS HQI A FEDERALLY ASSISTED CONSTRUCTION PROJECT THIS IS A FEDERALLY ASSISTED CONSTRUCTION PROJECT UNDER THE COMMUNITY BLOCK GRANT H.U.D. PROGRAM THIS IS A FEDERALLY ASSISTED CONSTRUCTION PROJECT UNDER THE REVENUE SHARING PROGRAM EX~IBIT ol'-j-J3 if T , PART 2 ~ SPECIAL PROVISIONS 2-01 WORK TO BE DONE The work to be done consists of construction of street improvements in Fifth Avenue between Naples Street and Orange Avenue in the City of Chula Vista, California. The. project involves removal and disposal of existing improvements, excavation and grading, asphalt concrete paving, processed miscellaneous base, installing curb and gutter, sidewalk, cross gutter, protection and restoration of existing improvements, driveways, pedestrian ramps, sewer laterals, survey monuments, various drainage structures, drainage pipe, street lighting, masonry walls, relocation of traffic signal, stairs, chainlink fencing, pedestal mailboxes, water service connections, traffic control, and other miscellaneous work shown on the plans. Various utility companies will be relocating their facilities during this Contract. Refer to Section 6-7 of Part 1 and Section 2-32 of these Special Provisions The work to be done is shown on Chula Vista Drawing Numbers 91-609 through 91-623 and cross sections. 2-02 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS AND STANDARD DRAWINGS The Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (1988) commonly referred to as the "Green Book", San Diego Regional Supplement Amendments, 1989 & 1990 supplements, Chula Vista Standard Special Provisions, Regional Standard Drawings, and Chula Vista Construction Standards, all as adopted by the City of Chula Vista are made a part of the Specifications. All provisions applicable to the work to be performed in accordance With these drawings and Special Provisions of this project shall apply whether specifically referred to herein or not. References to these Standard Specifications have been made in the Special Provisions. These references apply directly to the work the Contractor is to perform. 2-03 REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL OF EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS All existing improvements required to be removed by construction of the new work shall become the property of the contractor and shall be removed and disposed of in accordance with the provisions of Section 300-1 of the Standard Specifications and as shown on the plans. Compensation for removal and disposal of excess material, pavement, concrete, slabwork, walls, fences, trees, roots (18 inches below finish grade) etc. is considered included in the contract price paid for "Removal and Disposal of Existing Improvements". 12 .). L./ - .Jl-l / 2-04 EXCAVATION AND GRADING All excavation and grading necessary to obtain the finished grades as shown on the plans and cross-sections and for installation of the various improvements shall be done in accordance with Section 300 and 301 of the Standard Specifications, Regional Supplement Amendments, applicable standard drawings, and project plans. It is estimated that there is approximately 7,100 cubic yards of cut and 1,650 cubic yards of fill. The City makes no guarantee as to the accuracy of these numbers. Contractor is responsible to verify. Excess material shall become the property of the contractor and shall be removed from the site. The cost of this work is considered included in the contract price paid for "Excavation and Grading". 2-05 SAW CUTTING Saw cutting of existing concrete prior to removal will be required at most locations and shall be in accordance with section 300-1 of the standard Specifications. The amount of total saw cutting could vary from that shown on the proposal. There will be no adjustment in the unit cost bid for this item as permitted in Section 3-2 of the Standard Specifications. Full compensation for all labor and equipment required shall be considered included in the contract unit price paid per lineal foot for "Saw Cutting" and no additional compensation will be allowed therefor. 2-06 PAVEMENT REMOVAL, SUBGRADE PREPARATION AND PLACEMENT OF ASPHALT CONCRETE IN OVERLAY AREAS As shown on the plans, there are portions of the existing street that requires only an asphalt concrete overlay. Within these areas, the Engineer may indicate that certain areas need to be removed. The exact extent of this is unknown. This section is intended to describe how the work is to be performed and a means of paying for it. Portions of the street pavement within the overlay areas are to be removed as directed by the Engineer. The precise areas of removal will be marked out by the City prior to the Contractor starting work. The existing pavement sections varies in thickness throughout the project. If an existing pavement thickness is greater than four (4) inches when removed it shall be replaced in like thickness. All areas removed shall be prepared to receive a minimum of 4 inches (measure from existing surface) of asphalt concrete on existing base and sub-base material. The areas of removal will vary in widths and lengths. The areas may only be 2' wide and 2' long. All asphalt concrete shall be in accordance with section 2-08 of these Special Provisions. 13 ~ '1-35 ,.-....-.-.- ~ . ~f I n ~ " I ~ ,/ i " If), .' ,f ,c. 'E. ., ' , ._:~.....,--~~~: "~'-~i-'~.~':; ...' ~........, ....;.~~ NSTALL WELL.,: -.. . >10NUMENTS 5' '- c. Off ',CENTER .. T_,.,f"...,-, '" 3r:,.,...,...".,.-~.'",,_' 'Mi' .~.. ~""A053 -FIFTH AVE' '-, #__,,..~,;:"~~:""-<:';;':7" ~_..c~~>._~""'~~~~. . IT~., 0" :"'=: ,;c:-.~::~-',:ii!' .,'':G-;=;2!90:0{) ,"'..-"'""".....-':: ,;I,i:. -. "G ... .. "'" "~I' ~.::'" ~ ... ~".'. (...,....- ~. .;,.:__ ~.Ei: ..::~. ..:~~::~r:: .~:;:j.~~-;~,~;;;C <~~:',~~,<~~.;:' ':J:r.~~B~50 'Y-};IPSV:;~~'S.. ":';" ~'t-:~ -. :;~:~'f"2 --i-__ ~ ---- .... i. -t~' ; ! f i I . :/ . r <i ,- I to i If) ~ ! + N r t:: 1'1) I . r . <t t- en I i : -i , ~~~~~: --- _.___ --1__-.:._._....__.... 1 ~\ \.~ It ~ . Q ... ::) 0(1) 0 ... ... ~~ ~Z ..J Z 40 . (I) <( ::) ~ LLU I'- LU LU ~ ..J. ULU . CD > Z..J fIlCD (1)(1) II? tf'l <[ 0 U "'~Q; U- lL Q; lD L Ul ~ LJ LUu >~ (\J (\J Il. ... CI: " t!? LU.., N Il.F ~ tf'l 0 l<. LU <[ a:W==== :(\JlD _::E=,...., 0 foofll' ,:., tf'l Z l<.LULU_ <IS cn::.;tf'l ::::,# ci. Il. <00 >-d I-' ':"N 0: ":40 fooZ (I) ,.-: O~ .L-J X o. I!! <ON 0 W x ~ + ::E W ;;;0 618 -210-57' - . ci 111301 ~~It; , " . (: " /~( I' :I ., EXHIBIT ,~ k' ',; .'" ~.. .. "ii/ " if I i ,_ _ w.o. NO. AO-o~O OF CHULA- VISTA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT D'rawing No. .., I ,IMPROVEMENTS ON -FIFTH AVENUE 91-622 t. eN NAPLES 'STREET ~~,~~RAN~~~A~:::i;~h'" 2 'f15_~! t::-;';'eF''-''''''''';c:.:i,';,',,~, ,w;;:---;;;;;;"-~-:-"":~7*:ir:..i:':tf.:~;:'iJ..;j..~E 4f.:,;._~.,Tr' "1-n..:",,_r , f . .-.q . II OU- i) .ZO W "> 0.:-,8 - - n:lJJ lJJ ~' .0:: X " . -"ti~ !oJ :r _ 0 xj2 ~ ~ w _ QI -('.I l\l U,J'" a::V wQ. w~ o::(/) Q.W ~w friO:: 3~ Q.~ ~ _l!I~ -: I ':- (5) 3/0 'Ip eC a: Cl \I- o \oJ Cl o \oJ I I I ~~ ~ -,.- '" .,.~~".;,;::,~' ....,*- -- .0.... ~eD -0 XI- (/)- ~~ g~ -on . ti x w \ ii3i WW oa: -11.I . ~eD [' -~~ '\ ~ - - --- --.:::-.....---.--- . , --'-\ ~ ,~ ~ ~ J .t. "'l' , , I \!) I , I \ 618-210~58 {!TIg Drown B UH Plans Ptepored U'ndet ~;t.II~' 00t8 R.C.E. ~ I '0 \ If: a:: ,- ffi 0 I~ ~ ti ~g ~ ...J a: i3 Q; ~ ~ n: -,.., r: ~~ !12 .Cl , eD X I- r: o !oJ (/) -G,;J -1f) )( - "W x -H !oJ 0 q It) - . !:+: Gl r C\l CheckedB SUp/:vijiOn 10 /$ 9/ No. 18631 Of , , , .- "'-0' ... !oJlJJ, , ;::!'...._ 0 ct(/) 0 o::uo:: 0 ~3~ ~ ctw...., -.^ ~a:o'- 'W r: tieD !12 -12 >< ,x .w_ w l:' \I)' ~ol i~~ 10 .n: ,..,u~ -to ~Ul ~ux , . ~w ct .... (/)- W a: ~ ~ \ ii \!) -II) n. II ~, 3/4'\P PM ~ < r..; ~~ r:ui! (/)m= xr-- w.F I- t ,~ .-~" ~~~~. A'~ ~ ,~ ~-_.'" -S~~ ,.... ';;l .~~~^~. ':; EOGE\)~ ..~:t~~k=='~ .:,..-+~.~.;,;~;~ _", _'.-_r.:;.,.....:Jr'f J< ...~.. ~ ......oi '~', ;~.z:r:~~:s.:~:;.~.E,...~~ ,.........- ~,~.". ._-, ~:_;-=,:~.:,:...:-:~'!':~_F :.: ~ --~ .:...';":; X .... IVERLA.YlNG -~"7::;:~'--:--:+;"Q~;"'~'_:' ",::~: co ~.- .... ~"'_ ..,..".......,..,., .,.." -.:t:. . . ~ .J ,,".cENTJRLlNE. _5.,'.'> '.'-; --" ,<<'\, -;::"'- 9 .51802640 E -., ~~-' ..'-. " ,,,,' ':I.O....~..'.' .. r"';,~"'''''' ...___ '.l.!) .;J. .~... - " ._-.;..._:...-A.-;;../~;~-".;.;~;. >\.; ~~. ...,- . oiJJ .__":'a ::;'il;--:"~.30'r 5".;;:. ._i.:.t-~.~_:_~." ;t'--:-f~I~'HP... ::-..!: .'.. ~.,;:"':,-,',>, ' :_~, _ _ __ -,J, .' .-=.~ 'f~ -..-_._;;;,':;" ',,~ "L'K--.~..,:."-l'-;''''''':~,.~.~_:~:-:: ,.' --";.' - . ~"' .-..-~ ':.... :"~::'~<_.:!:-t:J;<;~;;~?;;""~~(::;-~~: ~ EDGEe ',cAND '\: -- ------.----- -- " . ---- ,r-- . r -. CURB RETURNS o ~ DELTA IUS I 2 3 90000'42". 90000' 08" 89059'52" r ,~ ~J~ LENt: 30' 25' 25' 47,13 39.2 39.2~ Enoin t j 'i '1 '" , ~~~... ";i;' , ,,'." - ~; I . ~t .,., A f. , . , 1 A 'I $ ,~ , ...;1 i ~ ,.. , , t: rl~ '-:; INDEX TO SHE 162-1137 .4 162":\143 . . .L 158-\137 . ' 158:17431 , ,,\ 154-1737 1&4 -I74~ .f . " , . ,. , , '~'. . , ~ ScOIt of PhOto: 1-.200" ',;' , . '. . . ':::;~ Dote of Photo: May 2.t: ~N'i.oAE~ , '. Ill'!! 6>" ~fc;~1.e.1~j~jsi,.~:.S:$Ui'.' ~,',~~~~..,;: " .' I',. , ,~ t:. .- . , ~: t t- , ~!, ~,' r , !' ,,~ " 0" f :;.- ~,' i;. ~. : \ , l i i f I I ". . .> ~ ~~ " ",,' f , t .' '. *\40 r ,j, ." .~ .' ~~+@ \"~~ il.Jl-i/~ ';'"~_:.c... -~\ .:li.:....;;,.;i. ..:: L,.::.:.,~~J&.-~1:: "l.~'>-'::~:"J~~~~__"";':...,",,-~~,~~ ~i.'j :--~'L'~. )/gz F/F7/-I At/e. ':.o:-..,..,.~__...~ " ",:::.-,~~~ C-c', r s W CLJJ'iv",?' "I' N'f1/'LEs sr.I /1FTff APE, ., _0 c: -- ..~.,.;~ .. "::...;..... ~.--:- . ,'~... z,_/,~~.. _._~""'.." .i~~~~~" -,_ " (t. f~ ~ . ~,. n -----,.' - .- -;~ l -::..~>-.. ~ ',' ... .. - ,- '-. f. c~. f_ . o',',NE ~q< ,- , ~f;.F/FrH AV/:'f ~"~~~'~~~,ax~ ~r. EXHIBIT C-- ;1,'1-'1/ - .- ~ ~ ,0 ~ > I~ ~ .-&-- ,./ --- - BELLE ~.... ~ LIS oil L~t <:J :! ;>: ~ ... w ~ BELVIA iANITA .. ... EXHIBIT D tD r- c ,.: III ..2'1-~ . > ... IN en ~ c ~ ... ~ :!:;At ... <l. ".J I;, . tl'. " ~ . . I I THE CITY OF/CHULA VISTA I I CALIFORNIA - . I . STREET DESIGN STANDARDS POLICY = EXHIBIT ~ .:2 '1-L/J '. 6. CLASS II COLLECTOR STREETS Design ADT Minimum design speed Curb-to-curb Ri ght-of-way Maximum grade Minimum curve radius 12,000 30 mph 52' 72' 10% residential zone 300 I wi th 4% supere 1 eva ti on to 450' wi th no superelevation Class II collector streets with two-way center turn lanes serve primarily to circulate localized traffic and to distribute traffic to and from arterials, major streets and Class I collectors. Class II collectors are desi gned to accol!1ll1odate two 1 anes of traffi c, however, they carry lower traffic volumes at slower speeds than Class I collector streets. This type of facility provides access to properties and circulation to residential neighborhoods.' Minimum distance between centerline of intersections shall be 250 feet. Deviation from this minimum distance requirement may be approved by the City Engineer only if it can be demonstrated that left turn demands do not create an adverse traffic condition. I - I - I I I I J 1 - Access to and from this Class II collector street from abutting properties shall be permitted at locations approved by the City Engineer. Parking on this facility shall typically be allowed. However, parking at critical locations may be denied as deemed appropriate by the City Engineer. If a bi ke 1 ane is to be provi ded in conformance wi th the Bi cyc1 e E1 ement on thi s C1 ass II facil ity and parking is. to be retai ned, an additi ona 1 10 feet of right-of-way will be required to allow for a 10-foot widening of the roadway cross section. With approval of City Engineer, in developed areas, no widening is required except at approaches to intersections as per Exhibit "A". Approaches shall be designed as per Exhibit "G." Further modifications may be allowed to this standard as a result of the existing and projected traffic volumes. It LANDSCAPED BUFFER AREA EASEMENT 72' It 5.5' 10' 26' 26' LANDSCAPED BUFFER AREA 10' 5.5' EASEMENT 4.5' 5.5' 5.51 e' 13' 10' 13' PARKING 2% - =-- 2% 2% - PARKING It. e' CLASS II COLLECTOR ! * than 5:1 may be acceptable as determined by the Landscaped slopes greater Director of Planning. . . 10/12/39 -8- i!i ,;; '1- '1'1 . . . . i . . . - I . I . - - I I - - I - ~ I - I - I I . .. 7. CLASS III COLLECTOR STREETS Design ADT 7,500 No. driveway access to. single-family hemes. 5,000 with driveway access to. single fami 1y hemes 30 mph 40' 60' 12% 300' with 4% supere1evatien to. 450' with no. supere1evatien. Supere1evatien is en1y all ewed I'/here there are no. resi denti a1 driveways taking access and is appreved by the City Engineer. Class III ce11ecter streets also. circulate 1eca1ized traffic as well as distribute traffic to. and frDm arterial sand Dther cDllectDrs to. access residential areas. Class III cDllectDr streets accDmmDdate lDW vD1ume levels and the use Df this facility as a carrier ef thrDugh traffic ShDUld be disceuraged by its design. No. driveways to. single-family residential hemes are permitted except in areas where the traffic vD1ume dDes nDt exceed 5,000 vehicles per day. Hewever, access to. CDmmDn driveways serving planned residential deve1Dpments are all Dwed. Minimum distance between centerline ef intersectiDns shall be 250 feet. Deviatien frDm thi s mi nimum di stance requi rement may be apprDved by the City Engineer Dn1y if it can be demDnstrated that 1 eft turn demands do. nDt create an adverse traffic cDnditiDn. Minimum design speed Curb-tD-curb Ri ght-Df-way I.lax i mum grade Minimum curve radius Parking Dn this facility shall typically be all Dwed. HDwever, parking at critical lDcatiDns may be denied as deemed apprDpriate by the City Engineer. If a bike lane is to. be prDvided Dn this Class III facility and parking is to. be retained, an additiDna1 10 feet Df right-Df-way will be required to. a11Dw fDr a 10-fDDt widening Df the rDadway crDSS sectiDn. It It LANDSCAPED BUFFER AREA EASEMENT 50.' 20.' 4.5' I 2% I It. LANDSCAPED ~BUFFER AREA 5.5' 5.5 EASEMENT / 20;' /'" .f" ~ ~2;1 MAX) "-!:5:1 MA~/ 5.5' 5.51 20.' ?-~. 2% ~77--r ~ /5:1 MAX..! 4.5' 20/0 CLASS "' COLLECTOR ~ * Landscaped slo.pes greater than 5:1 may be acceptable as determined by the Director of Planning. I 10/12/89 -9- .,2'1- J/.> ~L . j --- ~ 'I i I ;i 1991 '. TRAFFIC CITY OF CHULA FLOW VISTA '. Counts taken through December 18. 1881. EXHIBIT -E_ .,11/ II ~-7't, , --7 / / . NEW OLD COUNT COUNT STATION STATION STREET .illI m.a. .illi .m9. 1m. 1992 FIFTH AVENUE (cont'd) 36 * Moss-Naples Sts. 5800 2640 N.C. 4930 N.C. 37 * Naples-Oxford Sts. 5220 N.C. 4380 N.C. 4840 38 * Oxford-Palomar Sts. 4550 3550 N.C. 3740 N.C. 39 * Palomar St.-Orange Ave. 1660 N.C. 1590 N.C. 1550 ALBANY AVENUE 91 * Orange Ave.-Main St. 1770 1710 1760 N.C. 1750 ... ANITA STREET 354 * "I-5"-Industrial Blvd. 1400 1890 2220 N.C. 1510 355 * Industrial Blvd.-Broadway 4190 N.C. 5650 N.C. 4760 356 * Broadway-Hermosa Ave. 3990 N.C. N.C. N.C. 4720 357 * Hermosa-Third Aves. 2380 N.C. 2720 N.C. 2940 BAY BOULEVARD 160 BB E-F Sts. 5560 6400 9750 N.C. 6380 01 DO F-G Sts. 3900 N.C. 4470 N.C. 4300 161 * G-H Sts. 3440 N.C. 3730 N.C. 3940 02 * H-I Sts. 2740 3460 N.C. N.C. 3340 162 * I-J Sts. 3270 3930 3720 N.C. 4290 03 GG J-K Sts. 3680 N.C. 3780 N.C. 3150 163 * K-L Sts. 2890 N.C. 4470 N.C. 3370 04 HH L-Palomar Sts. 3900 4840 N.C. N.C. 2860 05 * Palomar-Anita Sts. 940 N.C. 1440 N.C. 2160 BEYER WAY (See Third Avenue) BON IT A ROAD lJ.e,. 216 E8 First Ave.-E St. 5450 N.C. 4510 N.C. ~ 217 E7 E St.-"I-805" 29720 N.C. 30100 . 38620 34400 218 1B "I-805"-Plaza Bonita Rd. 43020 N.C. 44550 N.C. 43560 398 * Plaza Bonita Rd.-Randy Lane 29260 N.C. 35310 N.C. 32420 219 * Randy Ln.-Willow St. 27160 N.C. 29160 N.C. 31080 220 KK Willow St.-Allen School Rd. 27280 N.C. N.C. N.C. 31900 221 E9 Allen School Rd.-Otay Lakes 24370 27420 28310 N.C. 26670 222 3B Otay Lakes Rd.-City Limits 21500 26670 N.C. N.C. 24110 BRANDYWINE AVENUE 159 * East Orange Ave.-Sequoia St. 1900 N.C. 2690 N.C. 3290 137 104 Sequoia St.-Otay Valley Rd. 2160 N.C. 2380 N.C. 2945 WPC 3403E -3- .;! i ~ ~~? Revised 12/17/91 '" ... ~ "'... "'~ 0" '" "'... 0'" ~... o ... . .. .... '" "'''' ... '" "'0 ~. o ..'" ...0 n... C'" zoo "'.. ...'" , 3'" .0 - z. ,.. "'. ...n 1I::r '00 V 00 '" ....... . '" ... '" ... ~ " ".."'r" W ;II:Ilt,ItUltooO O~C .. "'''' ...."".....CID O_OCD -lIO......... . '" .... ... '" - o 00 ...",Z "'...- o z "''''''' "'~ .0' ...... ...e .n... -0. oz.. V. .......... 0'. 3'" 0.'" "'-'" lOZ .,'" Z"O .... _00 ..., .'" em -.... '" ... ... . ... ... ... .."'~ 0.... ........ . . . ........ .....'" 0.... "'''' .... .... . . ...... .... .... .. ...... ..... 00 .... ...'" . . ..."'... .."'... "''''0 , '" . ... .. .. ~ ~ ....~ "''''... . . . ..."'... .."'~ ..."'... ~~ .... .... . . "'... ~~ .... ...... . . ...~... ..."'... ......0 '" ... ~ ..... 00 ...... .. 0'" ...'" 0'" ... o II: .. . - ...... "'0 . z.... ",. .. 0'" "'... .... . ...n _e oZ z'" ... ",,, .e ....n '" ... "'- o ..Z .. o .. '" n ... '" '" .... ~ "'... "'0 o ... "'... 0'" ~... '" .... '" '" n o "'Z ...'" ... ..... ~ 0' .. ...... n.. CO z... "'0 ...'" , . 3.. .. ~ Z- , .. ... ...0 .. ,.... '" '" .... '" ... ~ --clO'NN "...t.It~ OwoC' .. ..'" ...."."".0 owoo .....0........ . '" .... :r .., ...., . .. n",m 0'" e '" .."'... ... ~. "0 ..- ......3 en.. zo", ozo ".. v: c: 0...00 '3 n3'" c...z 0>-... "'Z'" , ..'" "'... OF .., ..'" nm ....... '" '" ... '" ... .. . .. o '" '" ~ ....... ~.... . . . "'..'" "'.... ......0 ... ... ... ... . ... ... ........ "0'" .. ... ... "'- '" ... . .. .. '" ~ ......'" ~...... . . . .."'... ....... ..~... '" '" ... ... . . ... ... '" .... ~ ~ ... ... . . ... ... "'.... "0'" '" '" ... ... ~ . ~ .eN ..(IN .0 W '.ow ... .. ... '" .coD ..om 0"0 '0' CD 0..... iO..... '" '", .... ... .. .- o ... oZ ...- .Z ..'" e.. .:r .... ....- '" - .. C ..... "'. 0" .. "'e "... ....... "'.... '" .. .. o '" ... ~ ... ~ .. .. :. '" .. '" '" o '" .. '" o ... .. '" ~ o '" .. .. '" o '" .. .", ... ~ 0 ~ ... . ~ ... ... '" .. o .. II: o !om ....Z :,..- "Z : '" 'c- ,. '....0 ....... "'. .... '.. e ... :01 l~~ ,n-c ... 'VI '" o ~ ... o ... . ... '" '" '" o .. ... '" .. ... EXHIBIT &. . ~ o . '" ... '" ~ ... ... . ... .... '" .~ ... .. '" '. '" ... ~ ",'", "'''' '" '" ... ~ "'VO''''.... "'0\11.0 0...0 .. ..'" ....0......., ~~~e . '" .... ... " . e "' ..."'. '" .... . 0 z"'.. "'~. ..oz 0"'" "'...'" ...n .0... ...zo -'" 0...0 Z,>< 3'" ~!:i ....ZO 00' "''''Y' ...... .. .. . .., C"'_ "003 ......... ... e ..."'... "'... '" "'... "'... 0'" '" ... - 3 .. e "'3 ... ...' 0'" '" ,. eo> ... ..... '" m 0> z.... ...e ..0' tc .,,: . . ...... "'0 '" 0" z ...'" ...... ...'" .. ' ... - '" ... '" ...... o..~ ",,,,,,, . . . ....... ...~~ ....'" .. '" ... ... ...... "'''' .... . . ...... ...... ...... '" o ... .. ...... .. CO ~~ ... . '" o ... .... ...... . . ~~ .... "'''' '" ... '" . .. '" ... ... '" .. ...~'" . . . ~...o ........ CP".N'" ...~ "'''' ...... . . .... ...... 00 "'''' ...... ...... . . ...... "'''' "'''' '" ... ~ ~O'O'o :lDOO... 'O"'W .. .... ....00.0 '0"''''''''"' ,.....00.... . 0> ,.... '" o . '0 II: . ........ "'" ..... .... ..."'... "'''0 "0 "'- ..... . o. -...'" Z-'" "'0. Z o '" ...",,,, ........ C....c ",mz _",,,, ... ... .... ..e on ..... .. ... ... '" .w,..."'" -\IIN'" '....0... ..."'... . . . ~...... 000 000 '" '" "'...'" "'...... "'0... . . . "'0'" oeo 000 .....N .....'" "''''.. ......... . . . "''''... ....0 "''''0 .. '" '" . . ... ... o 0 o '" .... "'0'" . . . 0"'''' "'0'" .0' ...., .0 .... "'0'" .. .. .. 0"'''' ...0"- .....'" .... "0" . . . ....~ "'..... "''''0 .....'" ......... ........ "'..... -. .. .. .\oIlNW "''''0 ....~ ',;;,1.. , . ~IfY . ,"'"' .I!l'!,,, '" ... ~ "'DO'NO Jl:\IO\3l'" 0"'0 .. ..'" -4 0\11 <D owoo ....0........ ... ... .... 0 1 II: , .. . .... ...'" ........ . 0 z'" "'~z "0'" 0.... ......... ......'" .0'" ...z - "'.. 0...... Z'C 3'" :""'.. :I .-'" ....zz "',... "'.. ...'" "'V:I[ "". ..,... C....o .."'z "'....'" ... ... ..... VI lIC "'... "'.... "'0'" ....0 ....... . . . "'..... ~o~ 000 '" ~.. ~o~ ...... ....0 . . . ~~o \A.'OW "'0'" .. .. ~ o ... '" .. .. ... ... . . .. .. ... ... ... ... ~ ~ ~ ~ '" ... . . ... '" .. .. ... ... ~ .. '" . .. .. o ~~ "'0'" ...... ........ . . . o~'" ..0" ,"0'" :...- ,.",=~oJ .. '" ~'" e.. Zoo nn ... 00 moo ..'" "'n .. 0; ...... ..- "'e "'Z ... .. '" o .. , ... ...0 0' 00 "'. m.. ...", o ..'" C- O'" "'- .... .... .... .... e3 om COZ mo ..... o .. ~ . o ... '" .., '" I "" , 3' !il ..., " , 00 >< .... "00 'Z "'0 0- ,... oe ...'" ~ ..'" .. , o , .. , " ..., 0' , , 0' ..., o e ..... z'" n... C. 3Z 0>0 ~ .. '" . .. .. o ...e ...z ....'" ...z zn "'0 003 .. , ... . .. .. '" .. . o .. n ... .. o ... " " o .... ... c .... ... . '" ... ... ... 00 3 00 Z ... ...0 0'" 3 ..n .... ".. m_ 0'" . ...... - ...- ,,3 .. .'" CO ...e ,,00 o .... -'" ~e ... "'00 _n e'" z ",00 >< .. '" Z o ... z o ) . , .; '" z n .. 0 m 3 .. 0> ... o o m 7- o - Z .. '" . Z o 0 ... ... ... ... o 0 .. '" ... ... '" '" '" '" .. m ~ .. ... '" C '" o o .. .. . '" '" 00 ) ... .. ~ .. .. .. .. .. .. ~\ \ ------ '" ... ... '" ... ... ... ... ... ... '" ... - - - - - - - .. .. .. .. .. I' ~ ~ ... ... , ... ... ... ... "0 ~ ~ ~Vl 0'0'''''"'0' "'0 ~O'CJ'O ~C7''''''O "'0 .... ...... ....1' ....... .,,0'......... eL "'Ololt.o .... :lD"..W'" :lDWUlO' .. ... 01' 0'" '\11'" "'I' "'I' :lDOUtW Zm ......0 0 0....... 0""0 ,0 I' ... ,0 0'" 0 C'WO. "" L L L ..' , ....'" .... .... ...... ..... I' .. '.... .... , .... ...... 0 ~ "'0'\11.0 "'.. ~"'WCD .... W UI (lIJ .",CO 0.0 0.0 ... .0 "'.0 "'.. .....0..,..0 00 ... ,",-,.u.lOC 0'" OWN<<' MNOClO 0'" 1'.... ...... .0.... 0'" 0.0 OwOO "'m 00'........ ...... ....00..... ...0....... ....... 0'" 0... :........ ...... ...... ....0........ ...... ) .. '" ~ 3 ~ ... .. '" '" I 0 " " ~ '" ..'" .. ,.. ,.. - ,.. E . . .. .. - - ,.. 0 .. " 0 '" << VI' - . ,.. ,.. E - '" ... m ... 0 % ,... ,.. ... 0.. . " :z 3 3 C'> C'> .. .. "'.. '" << .. m "i m m 0 0 L_ m ~ C'> << % .. .. 3 mo ... n....a. C'>'" "'''' nC'>.. !C'li.... "'... "E ,C'>. C'> '" "C'>O "'Z ... g::...... ..... EO'" C"'" ... "'.. ..- ......c ..'" ..... ........ ... :0- 3 .. 0 .0 ; rn . ... 0 Z 7.....%. ...... % 0 ....0 .....m 0'" %m ~. ....% ....% %.... " ............... ..." ..om 0..... ...... ..e ",Z .... .... .... "'...... ..c~e" O~ ...m.. mo.. iO-l '" ... 'ow 0" 0" ,~~o .'" 0"'''' "'... <<. <<"'% "'- '" 03 ~ 0' :lD "',.. "',.. " 'T'Ix....'" ...'" "m,.. ",...C" ''''Z ~.. ". ....0 ...m ... '" "'...'" e C....nVl '" e"''' ,..",m "'''' ..c ..- '" "'''' "'''' .."'- ,.. Z.C'I c>< 2'C 001 0 -,.. .% C... 0 0 ~o... . 0....%0 %>< 0" ..ZI Z I ...,.. .. ZO %n %n ....Z..c ft'"_V')t '" m "'". '" . I -... ,'" "'.. "'" -'" C 00......." ..... 0'" ",..% ... .. ,..- 0 '...." ..0 "0 0"'''' 2' I 0 I :r ,.. ,.. '''' I " 2 z_ I ~ I '" .'" % 1_ '" '" 3" 3" "''' "3 :0. .. % 3'" 3'" 3'" 33 ... 0""'.1:' ~e 0 ~- ~'" " "'c :.0 . ~C" "'~- ~ "'~- - "'C'> C'>-o _m 0 .e ;_3 -'" _e ~-... C"'rZVI %>< "". "'2' % .. ,..'" .%. Ze '1'::: "'2'" m, ... I >< . . I . 1- m m.. . .. '" '" I ." VI ~. ,,- ..Z Z..,.. " '" "'''' '" ".. "'''' "'''''' .. ... ...<< .... .....'" ... .. ...'" ... '" ... .. ..... C"... - .. 0 " ~ " '" ... ;J[.'" ".. " .. " , .c..:lD I 3 I L'" co I % I ..,.. I , I I '" .. I "..ev." v ...... ..."'... .", c .", "'.. "'... 0"'''' n~mc m "'... ...m m L3 mE mm m3 Lmm ... .....".,....... ,.. .... ..,.. .'" ...- ,..- "'3 "'C m,..", .. "'''' '" "'I' I' "'0 0 0 << '" 0 ~ ..'" '" '" '" ..'" .",m "'<< "', _"'Z ... "'.. .. .. .. '" .. .. .. "'... .. m .. 3 0 m L Z I' ... I ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. '" '" .... '" '" .. ..... .. 1'1' ... ... 0 '" 0 ... I' '" ... "0 "'0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . C I C" ..... .0 00 ... ... ... 0 0 I' .0 .0 .......'" 00 3 .00 0 00 .0 .0 .... 0 0 0 0 0 ......... "'~ .. '" "'0 0 od ... ... co 0 o. 0 0 0 .......'" m... .~ ..... .... m_ 0.. 0 . .. ..." ",.. .. e- - . OC'> ..- 0 "'- "3 0 "'2 .. ) 0 ... ... ,.. CO ...c :rm ... ... co. 0 .. .. .. ... .... .. C3 .... .... '" .... I' .... 0 om -.. . . . . . "2' ...C '" 0 co '" co ... mo .L .. 0 .. 0 '" '" ..m ..... '" " ... '" 0 ... 0 -'" C" .. .. .. Z .. I ",m " I >< m ..... Z .. m '" ... .... , Z .. C '" .... .. "0 m :0 .. . 0- .. '" I' CO CO ... I ... .0 .. ... 0 '" oe e '" 0 .. '" ... CO .....~ 0 ..'" m " I 2 0' 0 .. '" .... .... L , - ...CO CO '" .... I' ... '" ... , , Z ,. . . . . . .. . . . .. I C'> ~ .... 0 .. I' ... ... .. ... .......'" 0' % ...'" ... .... .. .. C ... ... ~\,o)lo,o: I , .o.... .o CO <> CO .. ... ... .......'" 01 0 0 ..., ... ... ... ... C 0 0 ... C I' .. C .. ... :.... m.. ... ... ... 0 .o ... z'" .o .o . . . . "'... .... .... .o ... ... ... CO c.. ... ... .... .o ... .... 32' .. i 0 0 '" ... ... ... "0 m ... '" ... .. )1 0 .o .... ... ..e 0 '" ... .... .... ... .Z .. ... .... 0 0 ,..m 0 .. . . . ~ . ... co .. ... .... .... .... Z'" '" '" .. 0 ... <> .o ",e m CO 0 ... 0 .... m3 ~l/9 ... ... ". - . --.- - -- ..- :-.:;,1 SAN DmGO TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ORDINANCE AND EXPENDITURE PLAN The San Diego County Regional Transportation Commission ordains as follows: \ SECTION 1. TITLE. This ordinance ahall be known and may be cited as the San Diego Transportation Improvement Progt'am Ordinance and ExpenditU1'e Plan. (Commission Ordinance 87-1). The ExpenditU1'e Plan is set forth in Sections 2 and 4 herein. SECTION 2. EXPENDITURE PLAN SUMMARY. This ordinance provides for the imple- mentation of the San Diego Transportation Improvement Progt'am which will result in countywide uansportation facility and service improvements including highway improvements, uolley extensions and public transit improvements, bicycle facility improvements, and local street and road improvements. These needed improvements shall be funded by a one-half of one percent transactions and use tax established for a period not to exceed twenty years. The revenues ahall be deposited in a special fund and used solely for transportation improvements. The specific projects and progt'ams to be funded shall be fU1'ther identified in the ExpenditU1'e Plan Analysis which is set forth in Section n of the document titled Proposition A: San Diego Transportation Improvement Progt'am and is hereby incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein. A summary of the major projects and programs, including the major highway and transit improve- ments depicted on FigU1'e I, is provided as follows: A. Highway Improvements. One-third of the available revenues (estimated $750 million) will be combined with federal, state and local revenues (estimated $85 million) to complete the following projects (see FigU1'e II: 1. Route 52: Construct an initial 4-lane freeway from Santo Road in Tierrasanta to Route 67 in Santee - $Z40 million. . Z. Route 78: Widen freeway to 6 lanes from 1-5 in Oceanside to 1-15 in Escondido - $40. million. 3. Route 78 Corridor Reserve: Reserve fund for highwaY"'t'elated interchange and arterial improvements and additional Route 78 widening - $40 million. -. 4. Route 76: Widen to 4 lanes from Frontier Drive in Oceanside to 1-15 - $100 million. .' 5. Route 54: Widen South Bay Freeway to 8 'lanes including Route US inter- change and connector to San Miguel Road - $90 million. 6. Route 56: Upgt'ade an initial city arterial to a 4- and 6-lane freeway between 1-5 and I-IS, with no Proposition A expenditU1'es in a designated "futU1'e U1'ban- !zing" area - $65 million. Route 56: Widen the Poway Road gt'ade to 4 lanes from Espola Road to Route 67 in Poway (cost-sharing project) - $10 million. ! . 1 7. 8. Route 1Z5: Construct an 8-lane freeway between Routes 54 and 94 in the Lemon Grove/Spring Valley area - $90 t~mBIT 24 H $-50 _. -~.~....:-. / FIGURE 1 Proposition A Major Highway and Transit Improvements Funded by Proposition A Local .treet end roed, tocel bu. end bicycle Improvement. not .hown .. '(,0 00 % o o o o o o o o o o o c o o o o o .... Enclnllal DelMer i I~ Hlllhwaye .. ...... Trollay .Jltanllone ......... Commut., "." l.emon Grove COCDOCOQC Commut., ..,.,a.. 8ua ......... "rY/ce Improvemen'. on .xlatlnll/Undar Conalructlon NaUona. City Trolley .xlatlnll/Undar Conalructlon HI,Ihwaya Chule Villa ~ Imperte. I Beech I NORTH ~5 .:2Lj ~>I \. 9. Route 1Z5: Construct a 6-lane ,freeway from Fletcher Parkway in La Mesa to Route 52 in Santee - $135 million. 10. Project Reserve Fund: Route location, right-of-way protection, environmental fund - $25 million. B. Transit Improvements. One-third of the available revenues (estimated $750 million) will be combined with federal, atate, local and private funding (estimated $190 million) for implementation of the following projects (see Figure 1): 1. Extensions of the San Diego Trolley: L From Downtown San Diego to Old Town _ $55 million. b. From Old Town through Mission Valley to the Stadium _ $150 million. c. From Old Town north to the North University City area _ $130 million. d. From the Stadium east via San Diego State University to La Mesa _ $150 million. e. From North University City to North City West _ $100 million. f. From El Cajon to Santee _ $35 million. 2. Commuter Rail Services: a. Between Oceanside and Downtown San Diego _ $70 million. b. Between Oceanside and Escondido _ $60 million. j ,/ 3. Transit Service Improvements: Total $150 million L Reduced-prlce transit passes for seniors, the disabled, and students. b. New and expanded trolley, commuter express bus, local bus, and dial-a- ride services. 4. Project Reserve Fund: Total $40 million - Right-of-way protection, project stUdies, environmental work, including up to $1 million for a detailed analysis of trolley extensions In the South Bay. 26,) Lj ;JiF-5j. C. Bicycle Facility Improvements. A total of $1 million per year will be allocated for the provision of improved bicycle routes throughout the region. D. Local Street and Road Improvements. One-third of the' available revenues (esti- mated $750 million) will be allocated on a fair and equitable formula basis (Section 4(c)) to each city and the County of San Diego (hereinafter referred to as local agencies) to supplement existing local revenues. These revenues will be USed to repair and rehabilitate existing rOadways, to reduce congestion and improve safety, and to provide for the construction of needed facilities. Each local agency will prepare a listing of the projects proposed for fUnding through the measure with public participation required. SECnON 3. IMPOSInON OF TRANSACnONS AND USE TAX. In addition to any other taxes authorized by law, there Is hereby imposed in the Incorporated and unincorporated territory of the County of San Diego, In accordance with the provisions of Part 1.6 (commencing with Section 7251) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code and Division 12.5 of the Public Utilities Code commencing with Code Section 132000, a transactions and use tax at the rate of one-half of one percent (1/2%) for a period not to exceed twenty years in addition to any existing or future authorized state or local trans- actions and use tax. If, during this time period, additional state or federal funds become available which would fund the projects and services contained in the Regional Transpor- tation Plan, then the tax shaJI be reduced by action of the Commission. SECTION 4. EXPENDITURE PLAN PURPOSES. The revenues received by the Commis- sion from this measure, after deduction of required Board of Equalization costs for performing the functions specified in Section 13Z304(b) of the Public Utilities Code, shall be used to improve transportation facilities and services countywide as set forth in the Expenditure Plan and in a manner consistent with the Regional Transportation Plan and five-year Regional Transportation Improvement Program, and for the administration of the San Diego County Regional Transportation Commission Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") commencing with Public Utilities Code Section 132.000. After the deduc- tion of administrative expenses and the allocation of one million dollars annually for bicycle facilities, the revenues shall with the exception of the conditions set forth herein be allocated as follows: A. One-third for transit purposes; One-third for loc al street and road purposes; and One-third for highway purposes. B. 'The revenues made available for transit purposes shall be allocated and expended pursuant to the following distribution formula and priorities: 1. One percent of the total funds made available annually for transit purposes shall be used 'to support improved transportation services for seniors and disabled persons. These funds shall be allocated in a similar manner as funds made available through Section 991.75 of the Public Utilities Code. . Z. Remaining transit revenues shall be allocated annually to the North San Diego County Transit Development Board and the Metropolitan Transit Development Board based on the population within each board area of jurisdiction using the most recent Department of Finance population estimates. These funds shall be expended in the following manner: . . a. Not less than eighty percent shall be used to implement the rail capital facilities identified in the Expenditure Plan. However, in no case, shall the use of revenues under this sectioD preclude the use of revenues necessary to implement Section 4B(Z)(b). " b. From the remaining revenues, there shall be 'expended such sums as necessary to guarantee in the North County and South County areas for the duration of the measure (1) a monthly regional transit paSs for senior (60 years or older) and disabled riders priced at not more than 1.5 percent of the cost of the regular regional monthly transit pass, and (1.) a monthly regional youth transit pass for students1l8 years or under) priced at not more than 50 percent of the cost of the regular regional monthly transit pass. . " . . c. Remaining revenues may be allocated for transit service improvements. Such improvements shall be limited to new services or extended or expanded services. Services in existence prior to the effective date of . 2.7 ~f ~fJ . . . ...;;;:;;,~~!.~ .... .....~. "'oil .. ...... ....""h ''''u ........ _.~ ~..\ may be allocated to such existing services only in an amount equal to 8.l. reductions in state and federal annual funding levels for operating sUi>. port below Fiscal Year 1986-87 levels. C. The revenues available for local street and road purposes shall be allocated and expended pursuant to the following distribution formula and priorities: \ 1. Each local agency shall receive an annual base sum of $50,000. . z. The remaining revenues after the base BUm distribution shall be distributed to "the each local agency on the following basis: a. Two-:.thlrds based on total population using the most recent Department of Finance population estimates. b. One-third based on maintained street and road mUeage. 3. For the purposes of Section 4C(J) and (Z), any new incorporations or annexa- tions which take place after July 1 of any fiscal year shall be incorporated into the formula beginning with the subsequent fiscal year. The San Diego Asso- ciation of Governments population estimates of such new incorporations or annexations shall be used until such time as Department of Finance population estimates are available. 4. Funds shall be expended in accordance with the following priorities: a. b. c. to repair and rehabilitate existing roadways; to reduce congestion and improve safety; to provide for the construction of needed faclllties. :1 D. The revenues available for highway purposes shall be allocated in accordance with the Expenditure Plan, subject to the following provisions: 1. No revenues as provided for in this section shall be allocated for any state highway projects until the Commission has certified that the San Diego region is receiving at a minimum its fair share of highway funds from the state. The determination of fair share shall consider all relevant factors including the degree to which the San Diego region is receiving its statutory county mini- mum funding for all budgeted, expended, and programmed state and federal highway funds. The policies and project approval actions of the California Transportation Commission and CALTRANS will also be reviewed to insure that the San Diego region is receiving full consideration in the allocation of any additional uncommitted state and federal highway funding. Part of the certification shall include a finding that the state has not reduced any state highway fund allocations to the San Diego region as a result of the addition of any local revenues as provided herein. The certification shall be made annu- ally in the Regional Transportation Improvement Program. Z. If, prior to the start of any fiscal year, the Commission does not make the certification finding required in Section 4(D)(1), then, except for previous commitments of the CommiSSion, the Commission may redistribute remaining revenues for local street and road purposes as provided in Section 4(C)(Z). Z8 .,2/ .Ji#:5~ "-- 7 3. If the Commission finances the construction of highway facilities by the issu- ance of bonds or any similar financing device, the Commission shall first allocate the funds necessary to meet all debt service requirements prior to making any redistribution of funds as provided in Section 4(DHZ). 4. Once any state highway facility or usable portion thereof is constructed to at least minimum acceptable state standards, the state shall be responsible for the maintenance and operation thereof. 5. All new highway projects funded with revenues as provided in this measure, which also are identified as bikeway facllltles in the Regional Transportation Plan, shall be required to include provisions for bicycle use. 6. No revenues provided from this measure shall be used for the acquisition of rights-of-way for, or the construction of local streets and roads and/or high- ways in the Route 56 corridor connecting the communities of North City West and .Penasquitos East within the area designated as 'future urbanizing' as ratified by the San Diego City Council on I/Z7/87 (Resolution No. Z67565) provided that the area remains so designated. 7. All state highway improvements to be funded with revenues as provided in this measure, including project development and overall project management, shall be a joint responsibility of CALTRANS and the Commission. All major project approval actions including the project concept, the project location, and any subsequent change in project scope shall be jointly agreed upon by CALTRANS and the Commission and, where appropriate, by the Federal Highway Adminis- tration and/or the California Transportation Commission. E. Except as provided for herein, the distribution of funds as set forth in Section 4(A) shall be met over the duration of the measure. SECTION 5. EXPENDITURE PLAN PROCEDURES. A. Each local agency shall annually develop a five-year list of projects to be funded with revenues made available under Section 4(C). A local public hearing on the proposed list of projects shall be held by each local agency prior to submitting the project list to the Commission for approval pursuant to Section 6. B. All projects to be funded with revenues made available under Section 4(A) must be consistent with the Regional Transportation Plan. Project priorities or phasing shall also be consistent with the Regional Transportation Plan.. '!'he Expenditure Plan shall be reviewed on a biennial basis to coincide with the biennial update of the Regional Transportation Plan required by State law. The Expenditure Plan shall be amended as necessary to maintain consistency with the Regional Transportation Plan. As funds become available in excess of the amount allocated in the Expendi- ture Plan, additional projects shall be added to the Expenditure Plan consistent with the priorities In the Regional Transportation Plan (State Route lZ5 south of State Route 54 is a prime example of a project so identffied in the Regional Transporta- tion Plan). Any amendments to the Expenditure Plan shall be made in accordance with the procedures for amending this ordinance as provided for in Section 15. C. In the allocation of all revenues made available under 4(A), the Commission shall make every effort to maximize state and federal transportation funding to the Z9 ::L/ -iF~ f-> J region. Section region. The Commission may amend the Expenditure Plan, in accordance with IS, as needed to maximize the transportation funding to the San Diego SECTION 6. PROJECT PROGRAMMING APPROVAL. The Commission shall annually approve a five-year project list and a bieDDial program of projects to be funded during the succeeding two fiscal years with all revenues made available under Section 4(A) herein. The program of projects will be prepared as a part of the five-year Regional , Transportation Improvement Program. A public hearing will be held prior to approval of the program of projects. The Commission may amend the program of projects as neces- .. sary in accordance with the Regional Transportation Improvement Program amendment procedures. No major projects shall be funded with the revenues made available under Section 4(A) unless the projects are in the approved program of projects. SECTION 7. COOPERATIVE FUND AGREEMENTS. To maximize the effective use of funds, revenues may be transferred or exchanged under the following circumstances: " A. Agencies receiving funds may, by annual or lIIulti-year agreement, exchange funds provided that the percentage of funds allocated for each purpose as provided in Section 4(A) is maintained over the duration of the measure and that no more than Z5% of the revenues allocated for each purpose during any five-year period is trans- ferred from one purpose to another. Agreements to exchange funds, including fund repayment provisions, must be approved by the Commission and shall be consistent with any and all rules approved by the Commission relating thereto. B. The Commission may exchange revenues for state or federal funds allocated or granted to any public agency within or outside the area of jurisdiction of the Commission to maximize effectiveness in the use of revenues. Such federal or state funds shall be distributed in the same manner as the revenues from the measure. 30 ff 5tf, SECTION 8. MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT. It is the intent of the Legislature and the Commission that revenues provided from this measure be used to supplement existing local revenues being used for the purposes set forth in Section 4 herein. Each local agency receiving revenues pursuant to Section 4(C) shall annually maintain as a minimum the same level of local discretionary funds expended for street and road purposes as was reported in the State Controller's Annual Report of Financial Transactions for Streets and Roads - Fiscal Year 1984-85. If any local agency had extraordinary local discretion-. ary fund expenditures during FY1984-85, it may use, as a base for determining the mini- mum level of local discretionary funds, the average amount of such funds reported to the State Controller for the three-year period FY198Z-83 through FYI984-85. The use of a three-year average for the base period shall be subject to Commission approval. The Commission shall not allocate any revenues pursuant to Section 4(C) to any eligible local agency in any fiscal year until that local agency has certified to the Commission that It wllllnc1ude in its budget for that fiscal year an amount of local discretionary funding for streets and roads purposes at least equal to the minimum maintenance of effort require- ment. An annual independent audit shall be conducted to verify that the Maintenance of Effort requirements were met. Any local agency which does not meet Its Maintenance of Effort requirement in any given year shall have Its funding under Section 4(C) reduced in . the following year by the amount by which the agency did not meet its required Mainte- nance of Effort level. Any local street and road revenues not allocated pursuant to the Maintenance of Effort requirement shall be redistributed to the remaining eligible . agencies according to the formula described in Section 4(C)(Z). The Maintenance of . Effort requirement also shall apply to any local agency discretionary funds being used for the purposes specified under Section 4(B) and (D). = -- SECTION 9. PRIVATE SECTOR FUNDING: Revenues provided from this measure shall not be used to replace private developer funding which has been or will be committed for any project. SECTION 10. BONDING AUTHORITY. Upon voter approval of the measure, the Com- mission shall have the authority to issue bonds payable from the proceeds of the tax to accelerate the construction of needed transportation facility improvements. The Commission, in allocating the annual revenues from the measure, shall meet all debt service requirements prior to allocating funds for other projects. SECTION 11. ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES. Revenues may be expended by the Com- mission for salaries, wages, benefits, overhead, auditing and those services including contractual services necessary to administer the Act; however, in no case shall such expenditures exceed one percent of the annual revenues provided by the measure. Costs of performing or contracting for project related work shall be paid from the revenues allocated to the appropriate purpose as set forth in Section 4 herein. An annual inde- pendent audit shall be conducted to assure that the revenues expended by the Commis- sion under this section are necessary and reasonable in carrying out its responsibilities under the Act. 31 ::;IS? SECTION 12.. ESTABLISHMENT OF SEPARATE ACCOUNTS. Each agency receiving funds pursuant to Section 4 shall deposit said funds in a separate Transportation Improvement Account. Interest earned on funds allocated pursuant to this Ordinance shall be expended only for those purposes for whleh the funds were allocated. SECTION 13. IMPLEMENTING ORDINANCES. Upon approval of this measure by the voters the Commission shall, in addition to the local rules required to be provided pur- suant to this ordinance, adopt implementing ordinances and rules and take such other actions as may be necessary and appropriate to carry out its responsibilities. SECTION 14. EFFECTIVE AND OPERATIVE DATES. This ordinance shall become effective on November 3, 1987 only if a majority of the electors voting on the measure at the election held on November 3,1987 vote to approve the ordinance. If so approved, the provisions of this ordinance shall become operative on April 1, 1988, and the pro- grams to be implemented with revenues provided through the measure will begin on July 1,1988. . SECTION 15. AMENDMENTS. With the exception of Sections 3, 4(A), 4(D)(6), and 4(E) . which require a majority vote of the electors of the County of San Diego to amend, this ordinance may be amended to further its purposes by ordinance, passed by roll call vote entered in the minutes, with two-thirds of the Commission concurring. . SECTION 16. DESIGNATION OF FACILITIES. Each project or program in excess of $2.50,000 funded in whole or in part by revenues from the measure shall be clearly desig- nated during its construction or implementation as being provided by revenues from the measure. SECTION 17. SEVERABILITY. If any section, part, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional, the remaining portions shall not be affected but shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 18. ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS UMIT. Article xm(B) of the California Constitution requires the establishment of an annual appropriations limit for certain gov- cJ ernmental entities. The maximum annual appropriations limit for the Commission has j been established as $360 million. The appropriations limit shall be subject to adjustment as provided by law. All expenditures of the transactions and use tax revenues imposed in ._ Section 3 are subject to the appropriations limit of the Commission. SECTION 19. DEFINITIONS. A. Commission. Means the San Diego County Regional Transportation Commission created by Chapter 1576 of the Statutes of 1985 (Division n.5 of the Public Utlllties Code, commencing with Section 13Z000). B. North County. Means the area within the jurisdiction of the North San Diego County Transit Development Board. C. South County. Means the area within the jurisdiction of the San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development Board. D. Transit. Means all purposes necessary and convenient to the construction, operation and maintenance of transit services and facilities including the acquisition of vehicles and rigbt-of-way. Transit services include, but are not limited to, bus, light rail (trolley) and commuter rail services and facilities. _ Eo Local Streets and Roads. Means all purposes necessary and convenient to the main- tenance, operation and construction of local streets and roads. Local street and road purposes shall include all purposes allowable under Article XIX, Section 1 (a) of the State Constitution. ,; ~ ~ F. Highways. Means all purposes necessary and convenient to the design, right-of-way acquisition, and construction of highway facilities, including all state highway routes and any other facilities so designated in the Expenditure Plan. G. Bicycle Facilities. Means all purposes necessary and convenient to the design, right- of-way acquisition, and construction of facilities intended for use by bicycles. Bicycle facilities shall also mean facilities and programs which help to encourage the use of bicycles such as secure bicycle parking facilities, bicycle promotion programs and bicycle safety education programs. H. Bonds. Means indebtedness and securities of any kind or class, including but not limited to bonds, notes, revenue anticipation notes, commercial paper, and certifi- cates of participation. L Expenditure Plan. Means the expenditure plan required by Section 13Z30Z of the Public Utilities Code to be included in the transactions and use tax ordinance to be approved by the Commission. The expenditure plan includes the allocation of revenues for each authorized purpose. J. Regional Transportation Improvement Program. Means the five-year programming document required by Section 65080 of the Government Code to be prepared annu- ". ally by the San Diego Association of Governments as the designated Regional Trans- portation Planning Agency. 3Z 2l/ ~~5~ - -- . Bagl.y. MoOarty. ;8: Chairman PASSED AND ADOPTED by the San Diego County Regional Transportation Commission, the 31st day of July, 1987 by the follow ins "ote: Commissioners Mamaux, Cox, Ewen, Barnett, Stockwell, Luke. AYES: Cowan, Mahoney. Madrid. Kunkel. Van Deventer. Kruse. Bailey, Doyle, Schlesinger. McClellan. NOES: None. ABSENT: STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) SS COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) I, KeZllleth E. Sulzer, the Secretary of the San Diego County Regional TraJII- portation Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoins is a true copy of an Ordinance adopted by the San Diego County Regional Transportation Commission on July 31, 1987 at the time and by the "ote stated above, which .aid Ordinance is on file in the office of the San Diego County Regional Transportation Commission. DATED: July 31,1987 33 c2(-, .J!F- 5/ - 1527a EXHiBiT .I.. ,2t{ ~..-&,O 19443 " .1 ; J:' i i:; II! I . , I. 'Iii II i i I I , , ~ " , i i!1 , " I" i i. ii, I i I ! ill ; i 'j I: !; " 'I i l! ; j il ::j , I;j ; ~ I' ! . 'I !, I, I ,j ! , . . i; , ,I: ,Ii , 'I " 'I , I : 'Ii i it :, il i'li : i: ; .11 ; :, :' I II ;: Iii i; : i I " j Ii !: II I 'I ,J : Iii !: ,: i " I; .' 'I; , I i'I' I',' d !, 'II I' . " I' Il iJ I' " :: Ii i: j' !: " : 1 'I . I" I : ~ j I: "; ~; I " ,! I' RESOLUTION NO. 12493 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA'VISTA RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 7532 RELATING TO THE PAYMENT OF PREVAILING WAGES FOR CONTRACTS LET BY THE GITY OF CHULA VISTA The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby resolve as follows: WHEREAS, Labor Code Section 1770, et seq., requires any public entity to pay prevailing wages on public works projects, and WHEREAS, on November 26, 1974, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista adopted Resolution No. 7532 which established the prevailing wage rates as those listed in the booklet entitled .Equipment Rental Rates and General Prevailing Wage Rates., published by the State of California, and WHEREAS, the California Court of Appeal has held that prevailing wage requirements of the Labor Code do not pertain to public works of a chartered city, when the City is contracting for projects which are limited to .municipal affairs., and WHEREAS, the rescission allow the City to contract for reduced rate, and of Resolution No. 7532 will services at a substantially WHEREAS, the rescission of Resolution No. 7532 will allow smaller companies to bid on Ci ty projects due to the lower wage scales used by said companies. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby rescinds Resolution No. 7532. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that projects which are required to have the prevailing wage schedule due to their funding by State or Federal programs, the booklet entitled .Equipment Rental Rates and General Prevailing Wage Rates., published by the State of California shall be used for said projects. Presented by Approved as to form by f~- ' /'/ J..l.V ,e.: C :a ~~ R. Gill, Assistant City Attorney Director of Works/City Engineer - ,(bOPTEb ANt) APPROVEb ay THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF C1WLA VISTA. CALIFORNIA this 20th dAY of May 19~, ./1 the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Council..ember McCandliss, Cox, Malcolm, Moore, Campbell POI.yES: Counc i h.ember 'None ABSTAIN: Council..e..ber None AMENT : Councilmember None . MAyor 'mST !l4fli tl ~lf>7N~l/r eputy C,tyfClerk R~ ty of ChulA VlstA ST....TE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN bIEGO CITy OF CliULA. VISTA ) ) ss. ) I, AbELE A. SARMIENTO. bEPUT!J CITY CLERK of the City of ChulA Vish, ~Ii/ornia, bo HEREay CERTIFY thAt the Above And foregoing is G full, trlle and correct copy of RESOLUTION NO. 12493 . Gnd that the SGme ... not been G..ended or repeG led. llI.7Ib ~fft. ~ ~~~~-" ~~~-- - Deputy City Clerk CIlYOf UIA VISfA c2i ~t/ tlcC-660 / ,; "1-1.3 .--J ., ~ .; I. ;.1 ; 'I I; ;1 . . : ! j! '1' , j I' ; I 1'/ : , ; I ~ : i ill I! '; i ,! f "I . " :", Ii :1 ! '!: , ::i , 1 ,: . 'I , j' I I I, " j 'I : Ii . I' I i ,I ! i II ! . ,I 'ii ", ;i , ii !l . II 'I I " . .1 . .1: " I. ': , 'I :. i : : , i; : . . ! ~ l : I ,; ; i , . , j , I' I j I' : : i; , I, I ~ i , I; . , : I I, i: 'L,:- r f a RESOLUTION NO. 7532 r RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTIlORIZING THE CITY CLERK AND THE CITY ENGINEER TO MAINTAIN A LIST OF PREVAILING WAGE SCALES IN ACCOR- DANCE WITH SECTION 1773 OF THE LABOR CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby resolve as follows: WHEREAS, Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California directs that the local agency awarding any contract for public works ascertain the general prevailing rate of per diem wages in the locality in which the work is to be performed, and WHEREAS, said prevailing wage scales for building and con- struction trades are contained in the attached copy of that certain , booklet known as "Equipment Rental Rates and General prevailing Wage Rates", attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, as if set forth in full. . AYES: Councilmen Hobel, Hamilton. Hyde. Eqdahl. Sco~t NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby authorize the City Clerk and the City Engineer to maintain in their respective offices a copy of said booklet entitled "Equipment Rental Rates and General Pre- vailing Wage Rates, which booklet shall provide the basis for all public works construction contracts let by the City of Chula Vista. ~~ . a/f'.~ .1 Lan . 0 e, Director 0 Public Works Approved as to form by ~~~~ George. L~ndberg, City Attorney Presented by 1 , . I ADOPTED AND APPROVED VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 26th i the following vote, to-wit: i , . by the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF CHULA day of November , 1 97.!..., by IlAYES: Councilmen None ABSENT: Councilmen None ~J!3..~~ Mayor of the City of Chula Vista ATTES~fkJl-/l-.{>C:/f,;t (;,.4 .;1/ ~ City C erk t1 STATE OF CALIFORIIIA ) COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) ss. CITY OF CHULA VISTA ) I, , Chula Vista, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY true and correct copy of Resolution No. not been amended or repealed. DATED City Clerk of the City of that the above is a full, , and that the same has , , . c~ty Clerk iI--t,-Z I . I EXHIBIT .T --: ,...~OM L;l1T t-111ur::r'iC.T I,...lV.lL. . 125 ~ ~ IOK>I$CN -...- snw:r M. swrrr .............'tYCII'T.c!'ft*C!T IAer. lATZ ...~...",cm"'~ tUKTl' N .lTl...m<:l -...- -- OffiCi o. THE CITY ATTORNEY ern' Of SAN OIEGO JOHN W. W1TT em A'lTOlNZT em Al)IoIINlmATlOS ";II.1)I>:C 202 'C' mur SAN DllCO. CAl.ll'O~S1A 92101 38~3 TUlJIIIONE .10) 238 .6220 'AHII10l238.72IS I MEMOltAlCDtJM OF LAW aA!Z1 January 18. 1990 !OI Ralph ShaCkel!ord, Purchasinq Aqent FROM: City Attorney SU!JBCf: Proposition A - Prevailinq WaqeB Requirement :t INQUIRY You recently reque.ted an opinion a. to Whether prevailinq waqe. are required to be paid on City projects utilizinq Proposition A funds. In order to properly answer your question, we must consider the backqround of the subject. II BAC~GROOND OF MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS DOCTRINE The California Constitution, in its -home rule- provisions allow. cities to requ1ate municipal affairs. Article XI, section S, provides in pertinent part: It shall be competent in' any city charter to provide that the city 90verned thereunder may make and 'enforce all ordinance. and requ1ationa in respect to municipal affairs, subject only to restrictions and ltmitations providec! 1n their several charters and in respect to other matters they shall be sub'ect to .-neral lews.' The City of San ~ieqo ha. availed itself of this offer by ac!optinq section 2 of the City Charter which states, in pertinent part I The city of 'San Dleqo, in edcUtion to any of the powers'DOw held by or that may bereafter be Vran1:l8d ~ it under the ConstU:ution or Laws of t.his State, shall have tbe riqht and power and .a'lte and enforce all law. and EXWEIl X ]/,J, J ~,'7 _F.~~~. _ .~I.~'( f!.T..T..~'::..'~ .":.. _ _.. _. _ _.. .___ - - n .__.. - _._ _. - - _. on - - -. -- -. - - - -- n_ .... TO 96915214 P.03 ._-1992 16:26 FROM CITY ATTORNEY CIVIL 12G I ~alph Shackelford -2- . January 18, 1990 regulation. in respect to municipal affair., subject only to the restrictions and ltmitationl provided in thil Charter. However, ~e phrale "municipal affair" il not of certain definition. Justice McFarland in In re Braun, 141 Cal. 204, 214 (1903) referred to the wordl .1 "loose, indefinable, wild wordl," quoted in Weekes v. Citt of Oakland, 21 Cal. 3d 386,423 (1918). The California Supreme ourt in a well-known ca.e in this area stated: . Becau.e the various sections of article XI fail to define municipal affair., it becornel nece.aary for the courtl to deCide, under the facta of each ease, whether'the subject matter under di.cusaion il of municipal or statewide concern. In other words, 'No exact definition of the term municipal affairs can be fomulated, and the courts have made no attempt to do so, but inltead have indicated that judicial interpretation is necessary to qive it meaning in each controverted cas..' BilhOP v. City of San Jose, 1 Cal. 3d 56, 62 l19691. Thouqh municipalities have control over municipal affairs "there are innumerable authorities holding ~at qeneral law prevaill over local enactments of a chartered city, even in regard to matters which would o~erwise be deemed to be .trictly municipal affairs, where the lubject matter of the veneral law is of atatewide concern." Profe.lional Fire Fi ht.era v. Cit of 1.01 Anqelel, 60 Cal. 2d 276, . 'Loca ev a at on 0 a charter city prevaila over qeneral law only when the subject matter is 'exclusivel ' 'solel " or 'str ctl ~ a municipal ~ affair." ee.. v. .itv 0 0 and, 21 Cal. 386, 423 (1978). . .III PUVAILtNG WAGES IN '!'HE CITY OF SAN DIEGO In order to ensu~ that public works projecta were constructed and maintained by adequately compenaated workera, the State of California bal con.iatently required that prevailing wave. be paid to all workera employed on public workl. The qeneral law reqarding prevailing waqe.is contained in California Labor Code section 1771, whicb atateal Except. for public works projects of one thousand dollars ($1,000) or lesl, not lea. ~an the general prevailing rate of per diem . waqes for work of . aimilar character in the -.}. L( J2f'-ttr __.:7 FROM CITY ATTORNEY CIVIL - - --------------------------~------------------------_. TO . .96915214 P.04 ,..- 12'7 Ralph Shackelford -3- January 18, 1990 locality in which the public work 1. performed, and not le.s than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for holiday and overtime work fixed a. provided in this Chapter, shall be paid to all workers employed On public works. Thi. aection il applicable only to work performed under contract, and is not applicable to work carried out by a public agency with its own forces. This .ection i. applicable to contract. let for Mintenance . work. Originally the City adopted wage determinations utilizing input coll~cted from the San Diego County Labor CounCil, the BUilding Trades Council, the Associated General Contractors As,ociation and the Building Contractors As,ociation. Sub.equent~y, the State Director of Industrial Relations determined and pUbli.hed the prevailing wage in each local area in the State, and that determination was required in all public work. specification. and contracts. On June 22, 1977, the San Diego City Council adopted Resolution No. 218685, which 'pecified that prevailing wage schedules would be included in all City . contracts until such time that the resolution .hould be lupeneded by a later resolution of the Counc.i1. In 1980, a City Manager'. Report, No. 80-191, addr.lsed the i.lu. of prevailing wages. Since the State Director of Indu.trial R.1ation. had begun determining wag. r.quirements for .ach local ar.a, the r.port .tat.d .[ulnd.r th.s. circumstance., it appears. in the City'. best intere.t to abandon our 'Prevailinq' Wage Determination as there is no way of d.termining the actual prevailing wage, only the published union wag. rat.. are available. Non-union contractors often pay leal. or above when workers achi.ve high productivity. other. obvioully pay 1..... In addition, that r.port stated that the fiacal impact of taking .uch action would b. .(u)ndeterm1ned laving. due to .low.r con.truction costs and 1... r..trict1ve specification... Con.equently, that r..olution was rescind.d in April 1980, by Resolution No. 251555, which d.clared that prevailing wag.. would be paid only when required by fed.ral or stat. qrants and on K other projects conS1aerea to be of state conc.rn. . The City successfully defended a challm1ge by the California State Department of Industrial Relations to that resolution in Vial v. City of San DieQo, 122 Cal. App. 3d 346, 348 (1981), hearinQ ~enre~ September 19B1. The Court laid; Ji- /,5:: ., ...-__."V"'I ~ ,..'TV ^T"Tnr:Ilo.rV ,..",,,. -----------------------------------------------------------------~------------------------- r~-11-1992 16:27 FROM CITY ATTORNEY CIVIL TO 96915214 P.05 12ti ~lph Shac~elford .-4- January 18, 1990 A chartered city's ordinances which de.l with purely municipal affairs are valid even if they conflict with general laws. On the other hand, qeneral laws on subjects of statewide concern .upersede any conflicting ~.c~ents Ot chartered cities . . . (Citation CIIlitted.) The prevailing wag. law, a general law, do.s not apply to the public wor~s project. of a chartered city, as long as the project. in question are within the realm of 'municipal affairl.' The expenditure of a city's funds on such projects and the rates of pay of the workers whom it hires to carry them out are m~nicipal affairs. (Citation omitted.) Here the rescinding resolution specifically exclude. stat. and federally funded projects and those 'considered to be of state concern:' application of the resolution is limited to projects within the sphere of 'municipal affairs' . . . the resolution is valid despite its conflict with the generalprevai1inq wage law. IV PJtOPOSITION A In 1985, Senate lill 361 was passed which imposed a state-mandated local proqram that required San Di$9o County to "":).-:"') tfJ conduct an election on the transactions and use tax. Public f- ~ Utility Code sections 13200 et leq. were added in 1985 creating the San Die90 County aegional Transportation Commission and defining its duties. Included were legislative findings (section 13200)1 The Leqislature hereby finds and declare. all of the following 1 (e) aecognizinq the Icarcity of resources available for all transportation development, elternative ..thodl of financinq p~ovided in this chapter are ne.ded to finanee the cost of aalntaininq, acquirin!, constructinq, and developinq faci itie. for t~ansportation systelllS in the County of San Dieqo and these methods will ~ncrea.e economic opportunities, contribute to economic development, be in the public int.~e.t and .erve a public purpse, and promote the health, .afety, an welfare of the citizens within the County of San Diego. .:jj,~" .__-.1"'1 C'Ot'"'lM . .':192 16:28 FROM ,..~~,. ...----"- CITY ATTORNEY CIVIL TO 96915214 P.l!l6 12U ~alph Shackelford -5- " January 18, 1990 (bl I~ is in the pUblic in~er..t to allow ~he vo~ers of San Die90 County to create the San Dieqo Coun~y aeqional Transpor~a~ion Commission 80 that local decisionl can be implementea in a timely manner to proviae improvements to ~he ~ransportation system. (BIll ~u dded. I . . Sectio videa ~ha~ "(tlhe Boar4 of Directors of San DieqoAssoc f Governmen~. ((SANOAGll ahall serve al the San Diego County aeqional Tranlportation Commission." Section 132301 state I that "(a] retail transaction. and use tax ordinance applicable in the incorporatea and unincorporated t.rri~ory of the county Ihall be tmpo.ed by the commission." (Emphalis added.) The ~1fferent sections proceed to define the nature of the tax to be imposed, a. well as the uses of the tax revenues: "construction, capital acquisition, maintenance, and operation of streets, roads, and highways, including state highways. . . and public mass transi~ sYstems." Section 132302. Section 132303 states that the "County shall conduct an election pursuant to section 132301." (Emphasis added.) . ~erefore, Proposition A went before the voters on November 3, 1987 and was passed: A SAN DIEGO TRANSPORTATION IMPI'OVEMENT paOGPAM. To help relieve ~raffic cong.stion, increase safe~y, and improve air quality by providing e.sential countywide transportation improvement., includinq: . aeduced ~raffic congestion by wideninq or building Highways 52, 78, 76, 56, 54 and 125, aeduce4 price transit passes .!or ..niors, student.s, and the disabled, Expanded commuter t~nsit. services includinq trolley system extensions to north University City, San Diego Jack Murphy S~adium, san. Dieqo State University, and Santee, CClllllut.er rail service to North County, ~roll.y service improvements in SOUth .ay and East Coun~y, .&nd express and local bus improvements, Increased safety throuqh repair and improyem.n~ of local streets and roads, and JL( . ~-~7 _' < .. CITY ATTORNEY CIVIL _ "'16:28 FROM CITY ATTORNEY CIVIL Tn -~~~~?, ----------------------------_.~-- TO 96915214 P.12I7 130 Ralph Shackelford -6- January 18, 1990 Cons~ruc~10n of new bicycle rcu~es. Shall the San Dieqo Coun~y a.iiona1 Transpor~ation Commis.ion be au~horized to e.tab1ish by ordinance a one-half of one percent transaction. and use ~ax for a period not to exceed twenty years, with the proceeds placed in a .pecial fund 801ely for transportation improvement.?" The Ordinance arid Expenditure Phase of:'ropo.ition A provide. that after deduction of administrative expenses and the allocation of $1 million annually for bicycle facilitie., the revenues would be a1loea~ed one-thir4 for transit purpose., one-third for local .~ree~ and road purpo.es and one-third for hiqhway purpo.es. (Section 4(a).1 The fundI available to local ai_ncies for local street and road purposes were to be distributed aecordinq to a formula ba.ed two-third. on population and one-third on maintained street and road mileaqe. Funds are required to be expended to repair and rehabilitate exiltinq roadways, to reduce congestion and improve safety and to provide for construction of needed facilities. (Section 4(c).) In order to obtain funding, each local agency is required to develop a li.t of projec~s to be reviewed by the Commission (section 5), and the Commission shall approve a five-year project list (section 6). Section 8 provides that a local aqency maintain a level of expenditures on the same level of FY 84-85, and any agency which does not llIeet it.s maint.enance of effort (MOE) shall have i~s fundinq reduced in ~he following year. California Public Utilit.ies Code section "132304 (b) (part of article 5 requirini t.he .1ection and ordinance for the tax) state. that .prior to the operative date of the ordinance, the Commission ahall contract with the State Board of Equalization to perform all functions incident to the administration and operation of the ordinance.. The California '~venue and Tax Code speclflcally mentions the San Dieqo aegional ~r.nsport.tion Commission in aection 7252.7, part of t.he chapter on Transactions and u.. ~axes, as a .distric~. to be included in the provisions for imposition of t.ax.s. It is quite apparen'; that Proposition A funcla are not. monies collected and apent aolaly in the Cit.y of San Dieqo. The state leqialature has provided for the development. of the San Dieqo County"aeiional Transportation Commi.sionr bas appointed the Commission to hold the election 1mpoainq the tax, to impOI. a retail transact.ions and use tax ordinance, to review proposals .-L:( .ilr#;," Y and allocate revenue, received, to contract with the State Board of Equalization for ~rvices, and to withhold fund. from aqencie, which do not comply with the requirements of the ordinance. In addition, thelegi.lative findings declared the Committee fo~tion and re.ult f ded, to be in the public e a public purpose. cIea use of Proposition A fund. is not .olely a aunicipa affair. v ULEVANT CASE LAW There have b..n numerous case. that have 4aalt with the subject of aunicip.l affairs,som. .pecifically with projects that were p.rtly municipal aff.ir.. In Cit~of Pa.ad.na v. Chamberlain, 204 C.l. 653, 658-659 (1928), e California supreme Court addre..ed the Metropolit.n W.ter District Act and h.ld that .(t1he act purports to be . general law .pplic.ble to all portions of the State of California embr.cing municipaliti.. which might de.ire,to unite in a larqer organi.ation with the object of accomplishinq a common purpose which it aiqht not be possible or practical for such municipalitie., actinq sinqly or .ep.r.tely, to accomplish." The court proceeded to hold th.t the .ct in qu..tion w.. . q.n.r.l l.w in .pit. of the f.ct .th.t it confer. power. and ben.fit. upon tho.. who re.ide within the corporat. limit. of municip.liti.... ~., Sf., City of Pasadena v. Ch.rlevill., 215 Cal. 384 (1932) where a contract for construction of a fence .round . reservoir which was part of a city'. municip.l water .y.tam w.. a aunicipal affair. Clos.r to the pre.ent inquiry, Wilson v. City of San Bernardino, 186 Cal. App. 2d 603, 610 (196~1, dealt with formation of a water district. The court .tated that .court. at a very early date began to make a dilt:nction b.tween 'municip.l affairs' c.rried on by a city and atail.r affairs deleg.ted to a larqer area which incluaed a city.- Further, .(i1t would therefore clearly appe.r that whe~ .. gener.l law of the .tate, .aopted by the at.at. l.gillature, provides for a .cheme of public improvement, the acope of which intrude. upon or transcena. th.. boundary o~ one or .everal municipalitie., toget.her with . unincorporated territory, .uch contemplated 1mprovemen~. ce.... to be . municipal affair and COllIe. within the proper domain and . regulation of t.he general laws of the state.. ~. at 611, quoted with approv.l in ~~ttee of Seven Thousand v.-rul)erlor Court, 45 eal. 3a 491, 5~988). .. In City of Santa Clara v. Von R.esf.la, 3 e.l. 3a 239, 246 (1970), concerning. aewer proJect, the court .aid .a. in the cas. of other municipal project., ..wer projects may transcend the bound.ries of one or .everal auniclpaliti.. . . . (i1n such. circumst.ances, the project .c..... to be . municipal affa~r an~ J ),; c.ro~1 ~.J,~'f!-V.cI-:2) .2Jf . '~t,1 ...., I,...J. I I nl ......"",....' ....v...... ..J .. -c-11-1992 16:29 FROM 96915214 P.BS CITY ATTDRt,jEY CIl'IL TO ./ ./ Ralph Shackelford January 18, 1990 -7- . . 131 I ; ; : I II I :: ; ! , ; j :, ~ ~ I i I i , ., t ! , ;' k I _.. '" CITY ATTORNEY CIVIL TO 9691521" -""'" ,. Ralph Shackelford -8- Jenuary 18, 1990 comes within the proper domain and regulation of the general laws of the .tat..... VI CONCLUSION Bxtensive language and history regarding Proposition A bas been utilized to illustrate the ~ount of state involvement in the entire Proposition A arena. The Commis.ion was set up by state legislation in the Public Utilities Cod.,th. tax wa. mandated by state leqislature and the state l&9islature s.t up r.quirements for the Commisl1on. In turn, the COllllllission through the Board of Directors of SANDAG is charg.d with administering and requlatinq Proposition A program., approving proposed projects and allocating funds to ag.ncies included within the area served. , a.l.vant caBe law points out that where projects aff.cting a municipality transcend that municipality's b~undaries to includ. other areas, both incorporated and unincorporated, a .-tter cease. to be a pur.ly municipal affair and become. One that instead i. governed by general law. . In conclusion it is the opinion of this office regarding proj.cts utilizing propolition A funds that gen.ral law prevaill. That is, the City of San Diego must pay prevailing wages on those project. in compliance with California Labor code 1770 et .eq. JOHN W. 1fI'lT,Clty Attorney By ~aY Deputy C KJ(Ja1rlt lSO(xOU. 2) KL-9b-9 . :/70 TnTQI ~ Ci'lCl 132 " !i; ft.; ~1 , 'i ~ ~: ' ~; ) t~ ", ! April 6, 1992 From: The Honorable Mayor and City coun~il Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney Fifth Avenue Project, Orange to aples Alternative Recommendation To: Re: As a result of meeting on Friday in house to evaluate the various bids that have been submitted, it is our new recommendation as follows: NEW RECOMMENDATXON: Adopt the ordinance that was proposed under Item 24 of the Agenda Package recognizing that we would not pay prevailing wage on projects such as the Fifth Avenue project, but do not adopt the attached resolution announcing our intention to award the bid to Caves, Inc. on the basis of the Alternate A, Non-Prevailing Wage, bid. DXSCUSSXON: It appears now that our recommendation that the Caves, Inc. Bid A was probably non-responsive and that will be our recommendation to the City Council on April 21. That puts us in the unexpected situation of having the lowest prevailing wage bid lower than any other prevailing or non- prevailing wage bid. Accordingly, staff will be bringing back a recommendation for the meeting of April 21 to reject Caves, Inc. bid Alternate A as non- responsive and to award Caves, Inc. bid Alternate B, a prevailing wage bid, not because it is a prevailing wage bid, but it is the lowest responsive bid submitted. cc: John Goss John Lippitt George Krempl Cliff Swanson Shale Hanson c:\lt\Stb aye bids c1Lj-7! COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item ~5/1 Meeting Date 4/7/92 ITEM TITLE: II. Report on Interim Staffing Requests for the Planning Department B Resolution /~57;Creating temporary expert professional positions in the unclassified service and appropriating funds therefor SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning ;ljf( REVffiWED BY: City Manager tJ (4/Sths Vote: Yes X No-> Over the past several years, and particularly since the adoption of the City's General Plan Update in 1989, the City has received a large number of major development proposals for review and processing. In addition, both the Montgomery Specific Plan and the General Plan Update called for a number of follow-up implementation actions and special studies, and other major planning issues have arisen during this period. As a result, until recently the Planning Department used planning consultants in many instances to perform special studies and to act as project managers for the review of major development projects by the City. However, based on recent direction from the City Council, the Planning Department has curtailed the use of consultants except in very specific circumstances, and has been evaluating other means by which adequate staffing may be provided to respond to workload demands. The following report presents specific recommendations regarding interim staffing requests in order to meet short-term needs within the Department. As we have previously indicated, we will be presenting an overall proposal for permanent staffing to meet long-term needs as part of the FY 1993 budget. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council accept this report and adopt the resolution creating the positions of temporary expert professionals in the unclassified service and appropriating funds therefor. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: In response to City Council's direction to meet short-term staffing needs with temporary employees rather than outside independent contract consultants, the Planning Department is requesting approval of the attached resolution which would create a temporary expert professional position which would be eligible for pay equal to a comparable permanent staff position (Senior Planner). The actual hourly rate for this position ($35-$45 per hour) has been adjusted to compensate for benefits and paid time off. .25/1-/ Page 2, Item J..5'1J Meeting Date 417/92 The City Attorney has prepared the resolution to authorize a maximum of two (2) temporary positions in the Planning Department subject to the approval of the City Manager and funding authorization by the City Council. CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION In the Current Planning Division, there are currently a large number major development projects which are under review, which require project management and/or technical review by the Current Planning Division. These projects include the Otay Ranch (which is being managed by the Otay Ranch Project Team under the direction of Tony Lettieri), Salt Creek Ranch project, the San Miguel Ranch project, the Eastlake Village Center/Kaiser Hospital project, the Baldwin - Telegraph Canyon project, the Rohr office project, and the Bayfront project (the latter two being handled jointly with the Community Development Department). With the exception of the Baldwin - Telegraph Canyon project and the Salt Creek Ranch project, the other major projects listed above are currently being managed by consultants. The Baldwin - Telegraph Canyon project review is being managed by Steve Griffin, Senior Planner in the Current Planning Division, in addition to his other supervisory duties. The review of the Salt Creek Ranch project, both at the General Development Plan and SPA Plan level, has been managed by Duane Bazzel, Senior Planner, in conjunction with his other duties on the Otay Ranch project team. However, at this time, it is necessary for Duane to return to working full-time on the Otay Ranch General Development Plan review, in order to meet established review deadlines for this project. Therefore, in order to allow processing of the Salt Creek Ranch master tentative map over the next six months, as requested by the applicant (Baldwin), the Planning Department would retain a temporary senior planner to manage this review. We are requesting that the City Council approve the appropriation of $42,000 from the unappropriated balance of the General Fund for this position. The City would be reimbursed for all of the direct costs of this position, as well as indirect costs, through payment into a deposit account. It should be noted that the contract with Bud Gray to manage the review of the San Miguel Ranch project will expire within the next two months. Staff will be returning to Council with a recommendation regarding staffing needs for continued review of this project within the next 3-4 weeks, following further evaluation of the timing and processing requirements for this project, in conjunction with further review of Planning Department proposals for permanent staffing which have been submitted as part of the FY 1993 budget. ,,2.5'/'9 ~ Page 3, Item .<.5:1 Meeting Date 4/7/92 ADVANCE PLANNING DMSION A. Existin!! Work Pro~ram The work program of the Advance Planning Division includes several ongoing responsibilities, as well as special projects. Major ongoing responsibilities include: I) processing of general plan amendments and annexation requests, and review of all major development projects to evaluate General Plan consistency; 2) primary staff support to Montgomery Planning Committee and various redevelopment project area committees; 3) primary staff support to the Growth Management Oversight Commission, which has recently begun its annual review process; 4) population and land use forecasts and monitoring, as well as participation in the SANDAG Series 8 Regional Population and Land Use Forecast process; 5) maintenance of maps, and land use and demographic data, for use by the Planning Department and other departments and outside agencies. In addition, there are a number of special projects to which the Advance Planning Division is currently assigned. These projects include: I) participation in final preparation and review of the Otay Ranch General Development Plan, General Plan Amendment, Housing Plan, Growth Management Plan, Resource Management Plan, and other related plans; 2) participation on the joint planning team for the Otay River Regional Park Plan, including coordination of planning work for the Resource Enhancement Plan for the lower reach of the River; 3) staff support to the SR-125 Interim Facility Financing Plan, including development forecasts and formulation of policies regarding phasing of new development in Eastern Chula Vista relative to roadway capacity; 4) Otay Mesa development monitoring, including review of development projects in the City of San Diego, and the County's East Otay Mesa Specific Plan; ~~/1-.J Page 4, Item .;J..5A Meeting Date 4/7/92 5) participation with the County of San Diego and several major property owners to develop a work program and enrollment proposal for a "South County" Natural Community Conservation Program (NCCP); and 6) preparation of a General Plan amendment in response to a State requirement that the City develop and adopt implementation actions in support of the County Hazardous Waste Management Program. This General Plan amendment and other implementing actions must be adopted by July 1992. 7) completion of the Central Chula Vista wning consistency study, which involves evaluation and processing of General Plan amendments and rezonings for several developed residential areas in Central Chula Vista. Duane Bazrel's position, which is currently assigned full-time to the Otay Ranch project team, was previously responsible for providing staff support to the Growth Management Oversight Commission and other growth management program activities. When an extension of Bud Gray's contract to backfill Duane's position was not approved by Council in December 1991, all growth management-related duties were transferred to the Advance Planning Division. In order to continue to meet existing work program obligations in the Advance Planning Division, as well as providing staff support to the Growth Management Oversight Commission and other growth management projects, it is necessary to backfill Duane's position until the adoption of the Otay Ranch General Development Plan (projected for Fall 1992). Therefore, we are recommending that a temporary senior planner be authorized to backfill this position. Funding for this position is already included in the FY 1991-92 budget. With the approval of the above requested position, the Advance Planning Division can meet its current work program obligations over the next several months. However, there are several other special projects which the City Council and/or private property owners have requested to have initiated in the near future. These projects include: 1) School Impact Mitigation Program 2) Lower Sweetwater Special Study 3) San Diego Gas and Electric Rights-of-Way Study 4) Affordable Housing Implementation Program 6) Fenton Properties Master Plan The Planning Department has requested additional permanent staffing in the Advance Planning Division in its FY 1993 budget, to address both the specific projects discussed above, and other long-term projects and programs which are identified in the City's .25/1-,/ (.tMfin&) ....-- Page 5, Item ~~ A Meeting Date 4/7/92 General Plan or are otherwise known. The Department's staffing proposals are currently being reviewed by Administration, and recommendations will be forwarded to the Council in conjunction with the overall budget. As soon as this review is completed, staff will return to Council with a specific work program and schedule for these projects. FISCAL IMPACT: Staff is requesting that $42,000 be appropriated from unappropriated balance of the General Fund to support the temporary position in Current Planning. The City will be reimbursed in excess of this amount by a deposit account paid for by the applicant. Funding for the position in Advance Planning is already included in the FY 1991-92 budget. Therefore, there is no net impact to the City in authorizing both of the temporary positions. ..;.5/9 ~ 5' RESOLUTION NO. 1~577 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CREATING TEMPORARY, SCIENTIFIC, TECHNICAL OR EXPERT PROFESSIONAL POSITIONS IN THE UNCLASSIFIED SERVICE AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR WHEREAS, the Planning Department needs the assistance of two temporary professional planners; and WHEREAS, the city Council has given policy direction that, where possible, temporary needs be filled by employees in the Unclassified Service rather than outside independent contractor consultants; and WHEREAS, Chula vista Charter sections 701{a) (5) authorizes positions in the Unclassified Service of the City for persons employed to render professional, scientific, technical or expert service of any occasional and exceptional character; and WHEREAS, the Planning Department, with the assistance of the Personnel Department, has advertised for and recruited well- qualified candidates for positions in the Unclassified Service as temporary professional help. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City council of the City of Chula vista does hereby resolve, order and determine as follows: 1. That the 1991-92 Budget Resolution No. 16216 is amended to add to the Planning Department two additional positions in the Unclassified Service designated temporary, professional, scientific, technical or expert employees, Class No. 0999 and the Budget for the Planning Department is further amended by appropriating the amount of $42,000 from the unappropriated balance of the General Fund to Account No. 0622-5101 to fund said positions. 2. The Budget is further amended to add to each other office or department two positions of temporary, professional scientific, technical or expert employees, Class No. 0999. Employees appointed to positions in Class No. 0999 shall be compensated at an hourly rate range of from $8.35 to $45. Persons shall not be appointed to such positions until the City Manager has determined a specified period of temporary service for such position, not to exceed twelve (12) months of full-time service or its equivalent period. The hourly rate within the designated range at which the persons shall be compensated shall be established and may be changed from time to time by the appointing authority with the approval of the City Manager. The particular rate shall be specified on the basis of education and experience and the quantity ;<58-/ and quality of service performed by the employee in this position. Such positions may not be utilized for the performance of management level services, because such positions would have to be created by ordinance adopted by a four-fifth's vote by Council pursuant to Charter sections 500(a) and 701(a)(8). Presented by Approved as to form by Robert A. Leiter, Director of Planning D. R1chard Rudolf, city Attorney C:In\pbn po< ..2.5 0 -.:<. COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item~ Meeting Date ~ t; 2.. ITEM TITLE: Report on the progress of the Mayor's "Environmental Agenda for the 90's" SUBMITTED BY: Environmental Resource Manag~ REVIEWED BY: City Manager til" -) 10 ~.,J On September 7, 1991, the Resource Conservation Commission voted to support the Mayor's Environmental Agenda as a working document and approved the document as an adoption of goals. The RCC requested that, when appropriate, staff would later bring back an in-depth, item-by-item review of the issues within the Environmental Agenda. Consequently, on October 15th, 1991 the City Council directed staff to review each item within Mayor Nader's Environmental Agenda for the 90's and return to the Council with a recommendation on how to proceed. As a result of this review, staff has developed programs for three issues considered priority items within the 57 points of the agenda; our recommendation is to develop a comprehensive program based on the following three items: a) A Comprehensive C02 Reduction Program; b) Toxics Reduction Ordinance; and, c) Water Conservation Package. Items (a), (b) and (c) are recommended to be referred to the Resource Conservation Commission and brought forward for an item-by-item review. RECOMMENDATIONS: Accept the report in concept and refer Items (a), (b) and (c) to the RCC for review and recommendations to be brought back to the City Council for adoption. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The RCC reviewed and approved in concept the original 57 points included in the Environmental Agenda for the 90's. DISCUSSION: After extensive meetings with staff from the various departments which will be involved with implementing the 57 points within the Environmental Agenda, there was a perceived need to initially narrow the focus down to a few of the 57 issues in order to begin the development process of creating programs and drafting ordinances relating to the 57 points. The following are the recommended priorities devised as a result of these various staff conferences: .2."- ) A) C02 Prolml1ll and EnenN Reduction Packal!:e The C02 Program would emphasize an overall approach that the City would undertake to do its part in reducing C02 emissions. Some of these items have been included in other City Council referrals, but may be in the process of revisions or clarifications. These items have an * next to them. The C02 Reduction Package would include the following items within the Environmental Agenda: ITEM # (as listed in the Environmental Agenda) ISSUE 36 24 12 13 Indoor Smoking Law. * Restriction on sale of ozone depleting products. Transportation Demand Management Plan*. City Procurement policy regarding ozone depleting chemicals. Conservation finance authority to provide loans for energy and water conservation improvements. Tree Preservation Ordinance. Chloroflourocarbon reduction legislation. Air quality maintenance program for city equipment. Procurement Policy for Clean fuels. 18 44 7 21 51 B) Toxies Reduction Prolml1ll The purpose of a Toxics Reduction Program is to audit chemicals used within the City itself and replace, where possible, those chemicals with safe-substitutes. The Toxics Reduction program would also work to create an educational program, called "SMART" (Save Money and Reduce Toxics) aimed at businesses to encourage the replacement of highly toxic chemicals with safer-substitutes. The program would include a toxic waste reduction ordinance and a pilot lead abatement program of which funding may be available through the state and/or federal government. ITEM # (as listed in the Environmental Agenda) ISSUE 39 20 Toxic Waste Reduction Ordinance. Replacement program for chemicals used by the City. C) Water Conservation Packal!:e This package would develop water conservation incentive programs. The proposal is consistent with the City's goal in developing an Interim Water Offset Policy. A ~..~ subcommittee of the Interagency Water Task Force met on October 21, 1991 and again on February 12, 1992 to begin developing language for a Water Offset Policy. These included the following items: technique of calculating a fee to look at other offset programs within the region, local water district needs, CWA participation agreements, offset charges, and the impacts on affordable housing, as well as the cost and impact of the Clean Water Program on water reclamation. Planning for the Water Conservation Package, including the proposed Water Offset Policy, would include a cooperative effort with the Ad Hoc Interagency Water Task Force, and will be forwarded to the Interagency Water Task Force; in turn the Water Conservation Package could potentially fund a rebate retrofit pilot program. Planning for a water conservation package would include a cooperative effort with the Ad Hoc Subcommittee of the Interagency Water Task Force, as well as a review by the Interagency Water Task Force itself. This package may also include a potential retrofit resale ordinance to be drafted and brought back to Council. The goal of the Water Conservation package is to reduce the City's quantitative contributions to the Point Lorna sewage treatment system, and subsequently reduce the overall cost to the City's ratepayers for the planned upgrades for the Metro sewage treatment system. ITEM # (as listed in the Environmental Agenda) ISSUE 52 51 Residential retrofit Ordinance. Conservation Finance Authority to provide loans for energy and water conservation improvements. Alternatives to continued participation in the metro sewer system. 49 SfAFF IMPACfS Upon City Council approval of each issue included in the Environmental Agenda, we have designated a particular department to become the lead staff for each item (please see Appendix A). Items (a), (b) and (c) are individual packages of numerous issues, each of which must be reviewed separately. The overall implementation of each package will be the responsibility of the Administration Department. It is possible to begin the C02 Reduction Program and the Toxics Reduction Program reviews immediately, and we estimate that the entire package for (a) and (b) could be implemented, in a sequential fashion, over the next 12 months. Because review for item (c) has already begun as part of the Planning Department's water offset policy issue paper, we will continue with that review and plan to bring back a proposal on the water offset policy in 60 days and follow up with the water retrofit resale policy 30 days later. Prior to any staff assignments, we will review the current workload of staff to analyze if any of these items are currently being dealt with, in order to remove any repetitiveness. Any future staff workload necessary to implement Items a, b, and c will be evalauted and brought back to the City Council on an item-by-item basis. Initially, any staff preparation needed for RCC review ;Z~".3 is projected to fit within the following departments' current workload: Planning, Administration, Park and Recreation, and the Quality of Work Life Committee. Staff needs for item (b) will primarily come from the Public Works Department, with some assistance from the Park and Recreation Department. Staffing for [tern (c) will include Administration, Building and Housing Department, and Engineering. Much of the initial staff time will be dedicated to preparing analysis for the RCC to determine the direction of potential ordinances with regards to each issue. [t is believed the start-up work of these items will not result in an additional work load, and will fit within the work of each department for items (a), (b) and (c). We plan to evaluate the work time needed for each item on an item-by-item basis, and will include this evaluation as part of the review process for each item. FISCAL IMPACfS At this time, there is no fiscal impact. As each issue is brought back to the City Council over the next year, we will examine any potential fiscal impacts on an item-by-item basis. Any economic impacts will be considered at that time as well. 1-1, . ~ APPENDIX A ITEM IMPLEMENTATION DEPARTMENT LEAD expected to be Complel\lSimple AIR OUALITY 6 Public Transit near Employment S Planning! Assist: Transit 7 Transp. Oem Mgmt c Administration! Assist: Transit 8 City TOM C Transit 12 Air Quality Maint. for City Equipment S Public Works 13 Procurement Policy for Clean Fuels S Env Res. Mgr/ Assist: Public Works 8 Indoor Smoking Law S Env Res. Mgr/Finance/ QWL 21 Procurement policy re ozone layer S Env Res. Mgr/Finance 22 Auto Air Cond Ordinance C Env Res. Mgr/ Assist: Public Works 24 Chlorofluorocarbon Legis C Env Res. Mgr 36 Tree Preservation ordinance S Planning! Assist: Park & Rec. 37 Arbor Day Program S Park & Rec/Planning 2.1,-5 44 Sale of ozone depleting products C Administration! Attorney ITEM IMPLEMENTATION DEPARTMENT LEAD expected to be Complex/Simple TRANSPORTATION 1 Growth Moratorium Pending Transit C Engineering/Planning 3 CIP for bike lanes S Engineering/ Assist:Park & Rec. 4 Mixed Use Zone C Planning/Com. Dev./ Administration 5 Street Design Ord. C Engineering/Planning 9 Bicycle Pkg. Facilities S Engineering/planning ADMINISfRATION 10 EIR Payment Policy S Planning 11 EIR Consultant Policy S Planning 26 Pks & Rec Comm. Input S Planning/Community Development 29 Plng. Comm/RCC Input S Planning/Community Development PARKS & OPEN SPACE 27 Acquisition Assessment Districts C Park & Rec./ Assist: Public Works 28 Open Space Zone C Planning z.(...~ 30 Sensitive Lands Ord C Park & Rec/Planning/ Assist: Env Res. Mgr. GROWfH MANAGEMENT PLANNING 32 Stop Development with Threshold Violation C Planning ITEM IMPLEMENTATION DEPARTMENT LEAD expected to be Complex/Simple 33 Threshold changes re cost/quality C 34 New Development Cover Operating Costs S 35 Commission latitude on recommendations S 38 RFP for job training needs C 55 Neighborhood PIng Groups C TOXIC WASfE Planning Planning Administration Community Development Planning 19 Removal of Lead in Homes S Building & Housing 20 Chemicals used by City S Public Works/Park & Rec. 39 Toxic Waste Reduc. Ordinance S Public Works/Park & Rec. 47 Toxic Disclosure S Administration! Env Res. Manager 48 RCC Review of Toxic Waste Generation S Planning 2~-1 ENERGY & WATER 14 Public Energy Distribution Utility C Planning! Admin llhM IMPLEMENTATION DEPARTMENT LEAD expected to be Complex/Simple 49 Metro Sewer System C (in process) Engineering 51 Conservation Finance Authority for Energy/ Water C Administration/Env Res. Mgr 52 Residential Sale - Energy/Water Retrofit S Building & Housing 53 Drought Tolerant Landscaping C Planning!Parks & Rec 54 Reclaimed Water Plan C Park & Rec./Env Res. Mgr 56 RCC - Qtrly. Environ- mental articles S Planning! Administration ).b.' I ~~.(P i ENVIRONMENTAl AGENDA FOR THE 90's AIr Qualltv .. A ZDtIlng orr//nanCl requ/tfng n,w ,mploym,nt Clnt... to be ./tuated within convenl,nt .'k'ng dl.tanCl of public bn.1t "rvfCl. with provl.lon. ftNp$rtn_hlpl betwHn d'lIIlopen .nd th, City tor th, provl.lon of .uch HrvfC#l$ wh_ "'''bl.. ., 7. A Ttan.portatlon o.",.nd M.nag,m,nt Orr/lnanCl. TIll. orr//nanCl would requ/rw "fg' Mlployl18. including th, City, to ""'p$re pI.n. ftN . reduction In .driv, .Ionll' commut.. during puk hours ot OWl' 60% within Itve yea,., Mea.ure. In bn.portatlon .d"".nd _nag,m,nt pl.n. could Includ, Clrpoollng, bn.1t .nd blcycl, InClntlve.. tIIX hours .nd .ltem.tlv, woricwHk.. hiring from re.ld,ntllll.rea. nor th, pl.CI of employm,nt, or other _.ure. to be determined In each pl.n. P"n. .hould be monitored tor compllanCl with ,10.Ia, .nd 110111. Mould be perlodlcelly evaluated tor th,1r .blllty to .chl,ve healthier .Ir. .. Adoption of. city government bn.porflltlon d,m.nd m.n.g,m,nt pl.n In edvanCl of th, etf,ctJva d.t, ot the .bove orr//nanCl, Including th, mea.ure. lI.ted .bow. ,2. Requ..ta. eta" report on cunwnt .Ir quality ",.lntenanCl progrem. tor City equlpm,nt, with recommend.tlon. tor Improvem,nt H .ppropriate. . ,3. Adopt .n orr/ln'f1C1 contaIning . ",.,t_ntl., procurement policy ftN clea" fuel. {within . INII.tlc economic paremeters} .nd requiring .n .nnUIII public report on Implem,ntatlon. ,6. Direct our .taft, .. IntervenOl'$ In .ny proCIedlng conClmlng propoea/. ftN n,w SDG&E fecllltlel In Chul. VI.ta, to d,m.nd proot ot .Ir quality cI.lm.. .nd to oppose .ny .uch propose/. In the .bsence ot proof thet th,y will Improve our .Ir qu.llty .nd th.t SDG&E will be h"d to .ny ...urenc.. It give. by th, pro.pect ot m..nlngful penaltl.. tor vloletlon. ot .ny.greem,nta. ,.. Adopt.n Indoor emoklng "W patterned.1ter Ben Diego Countt.. 111. Adopt. City policy to Id,ntlfy .nd prohibit the purch'" ot .ny unn,CI.sery producta the production, UII or dl.posel of which I. hanntul to the eerth'. ozon, "yer, .nd 'Nure that .11 eta" with purch..lng .uthorlty T8C#1lve . copy. I a Adopt .n orr/ln.nCl requiring worlc on .utomoblle .Ir condit/on... to be performed with equlpm,nt to ",.,vent th, ..Cepe ot ozon..depl,tlng ch,mIClI. Into th, envlronm,nt, with th, e"ectlve d.t, del.yed until. ,'mll.r orr//nanCl Ie .dopted In .11 jurledlctlon. In th, county. .J../P - 1. .. R4. Add .",pport for Au,mblyman P..c;. A.B. 1332 to pha., out chlorofluorocarbon. from .utomobll, .Ir conditionIng by 1995 '0 th, CII)' .1tg1.mU", prog"m. ~" Adopt. TI'fHI "'..._Uon Orr/lllllfIDB. ~7. DItect .." to conMJ". future Arbor Day progrwm -'mIla' to """ being ImplMJMl<<l thl. yM' In E<<:ondldo. 44. Adopt. prog"m ,'mll."o /nI1n~. to ,..trtcl the ..,..nd w. of unnec",." producta ".nnlng the envlronm.nt through ozone d.pletlon .nd nOlJlWCyClablllty. T"n.DorIaUon t. Council policy to unden.k. no furth" ","we" .".,.,. or wld,nlng. for .ccommDtl.Uon of mote ...twllrd d.",/opm.nt unUI pmnnlng m compl.ted for n.w ","we.t public hn.1t. .I. Dlrtctlng .ta",o prepare "o~t".", pl.n for the con.tructlon of. cltywld, .ystem of blcycl. Ian" to m.ke bIcyclIng convenIent .nd ..f, throughout the CIty, with . pha.ed pl.n for ImplementaUon through the cepltallmpro",mentll budget. 4. A newzonlng ordln.nce requiring mixed UN' (e.g., neighborhood commerr:lel.nd re.,dentl.1) wfthln walkIng dIstance of ..ch other In new de""opmen4 .nd fecllltatlng mixed uses con.'.t.n~ wfth community che"ct,,/n prevlou-'y buIlt '''', ,ubJect to d..lgn revl.w. .. A new .treet d,slgn ordln.nc., requIring n.w.""tII to be dHlgned '0 be dri",n .t. .." .p,ed fo, ped,strl.ns (no'/ust motorists), prohlblUng hlg~.peed d"'gn on re.ld.n""l.".,.,. .nd nu, .choo/. .nd unlor cent", .nd requiring the provl,'on of uubl. .nd ..f. blcycl. Ian". 9. Direct .ta",o prepare. pl.n for the construction, through the cepltallmprovem.ntll proce.. (or with red.velopm.nt fund. In .ppropria'e .ru.) or .ecure bicycle parlclng fecllltles .t CIty feclllUes .nd commercl., cen,ers, giving priority '0 location. .t bu.lneHe. wI.hlng to provld, .uch Impro",ments In partn",hlp with the City. , . . . ;2.4-/tJ ~--_._~---_..~-----_.-_.- .~~_._.- ! , '. Admlnl.ntlon 10. Adoption of en orrIlIVnce prohibiting conhcta for EIR, which do not require th. be.t polllbl. qwntlfiClltlon of Impacta In a/'N' ",.rId.ted by CEQA, and prohibiting paym.nt for _ccepfllbl. EIR.. . 11. Direct eflI" to ld.ntIfy proJectllmpact/ng Chula VleflI where ,nllfronmenflll,nd trefflc foreca,flI on which polley _k_ relied turned out 10 be ""ou,ly wrong, 10 hire a con.ulfllnt not conn.cted 10 .nyeuch proJecta 10 conduct e .wdy of how th,y went wrong, and 10 provide recommendetion. for eotrtIctIng the proceuln the future, e, welle. on eny remedl.. the City ",.y heve. a Adopt en orrIlIVnCII requiring new developmenfll to be con"dtITfKI by the Park. and Recrntlon comml,,/on, with thet comml"/orl. recomm,nd.tlon being 'put before th, City Council et iii, time of .ny Council ection, and prohibiting Council approvel prior 10 .uch Inpl/f. RI. Adopt .n orrIln.nce requiring redevelopm,nt pl.n, to b, con.,dtITfKI by th, Plennlng Comml.l1on and iii, RlloUTCII Con,tHVtItion Comml"/on prior 10 City Council action. p.rk"Ooen SOIIce R7. Adopt .n orrIlIVnCII for th, CTNtlon of open eplClland parklecqul,ltIon e..ellment dl.tr#cflI. _ Adopt .n Open SpaCII zone. 3D. Adopt e S.n'ltlve Land, Orr/lnence for th, prot.ctlon of 110pe., CIInyon.. rlparlen hablfllfll.nd oth" environm,ntally ItIn,ltIve tands. Growth M.n.oement PI.nnlna 32. Adopt en orrIlnance requiring all d.v,lopm,nt ag,.,m,nfll to confllln provia/on. heltlng d,velopm,nt where the .thre,hold' eflInd.rd. .re not m,t. 33. Adopt an ordinance am,ndlng th, ''''''',hold' eflInd.rd. to m..,ure compll.nce by Impacta on cost and qu.IIty, a, wella. qwntlty, 01 CItY, .ervfces, and by Impacta on public uf,ty. 14. Adopt an ordlIVnce requiring n,w d,velopmenfll to "'ow th,y will pay th,lr own wey In eflIfflng needs a, wella. caplfllllmprovem,nta. , 31. s.nd a lett" from th, City Council to th. Growth M.IVg.ment OvtInIlght Commlttltl, th, Planning Comml..lon, th. Park' .nd R'CTNtion Comml..lon and th. R..oUTCII Con.tHVtItion Comml..lon ,mphl,lzing iii. Councll.lnt.nt to give th... bodllllil, wfdlltpoulbl. letitud. to d.velop polley recommend.tlon. for th. CounciL . , .,2/P-J/ ."--------'._._._.__.._--~_._---.._-.._----_.- .._-~- >>. DIrect_if to prepsre en RFP for e fiudy (to be done joIntfy with neighboring /Url<<IlctJons If they wish) to identify tuture Job de",.nds end training needs In our Ioce/e end to recommend education. training end _omlc development _sum, with eui_nt>> from e City Economic Development Comml..lon. 6$. E_bllsh nelghborflood piehnlng groups to provide Input on deve/optMnt end plennlng propo..ls effecting the community. TDXlc w..,. fa Direct _ff to repm on the possible eslllbllshment of e fund. slmller to thet proposed et the federellevel by the Enmnmenllll Defense Fund. to subsidize the removel of Iud from older Chug Vlslll home.. This repM should Include en ene/pls of nHil. end, If the need. shown, of ROftIble funding eourt>>8, e.g., e bellot musure to taX lad products. lID. Direct _If to prepsrtJ e policy. with Input from the Enllfronmenllll H..1th eo.lltlon end epproprlete othere. to ellmlnete the UN of pOlluting t:hemlcels by the City end prescribing elternetlve.. . 31. Direct slllff to consider e future MOT Dey progrem slmlgr to thet being Implemented this yeer In Escondldo. 45. DlrtJct our stltff to utllbllsh neighborhood rtJcycllng t>>ntere end negoUete epproprlete plclcup eervfcn. 46. Adopt en orrIlnent>> requiring new developmenl to provide recycling feclllUe.. '"' Adopt e Toxlcs Disclosure Drdlnence. 46. Empower the Resource ConserveUon Commission to review genereUon end uses of toxic Wlfsle In Chule Vlslll, end meke recommendeUons for reduction.. I . , . . )..(.;-/2 ______.____.__" __. - ..._u__ ~__.__._..___.____.___.__ ___-..__ , , Enerav 14. ... . 61. a. 63. . s.nd. ,."., from the City Council to Mayor OConnor of San Diego, the Chair of the County Btwd of Supentlsors, .nd the ""'yortl of the other r;/t/., In the county .,lcJng th.m to join In . DOOperatlve .ffort to explortl the ,..,lblllty .nd d.,lrablllty of t:r8lltltI/1 . public en.rgy dln1butlon utility whl'. opening energy production to the IrH "",rte." DIrect our .reff to pt'OvId. UI with .n interim updated twport on .ltemIItlVN to contInUlld participation In or ".ym.nt tor the Metro S.wer System. Includltl/1 entIfIJIItlve trutm.nt liIIchnoIogIII& Eltllbll,h . Con'lIfVIItlon FInance Authority to pt'OvId. 10111'- end no- InterNt /oen, to hom.ownera .nd bUtlln..,., for t:apltallmpt'Ovem.nlll con,eMtI/1 energy.nd wa"". 64. . . Adopt an onIll7llnce ,.,ulrlng twtroRt of ,."d.ntlll, building' at tlm. of u/. with elmpl., COIf. effective con,ervatlon technology (Insulation and lolll'-"ow fixture.), u.'ng funding from the Con.llfVlltlon Finance Authority .nd D.ve/opm.nt Impact F... ....,.ed on d.ve/opm.nlll con,umltl/1 energy.nd water tw'Ourr:el. Adopt.n onIll7llnce ,.,ulrltl/1 n.w d.II./opm.nlll to u,. droughf.toIerant IIInd'Cllplng.. nd to Include CC./l, ,.,ulrlng droughf.tolerant IIIndeCllplng. D/recI our .reff to pre"." . pllln for expanded uti. of tweIIIlmed water In City fllcllltI... Direct the R..ource ConellfVlltlon Comml..lon to pt'OvId. or affllng. for querterly .rtJcI., on IoCIII .nllfronm.nllll..u.. In our city n.WIII.tt.r, .nd to worIc with the Cllte Public Information Coordinator to d.ve/op better communlClltJon with the public on .nlllronm.nIIIl .nd planning .,u... 1& 67fIOINT8 I . . . J ;2/.,-/} ( I:OUHCn. AGENDA STATEKEHT Item lleetinl Da~ /(, '/"7/9, .. , ( tTDI TITLE: RecommeDdatioD or the RelcNrce CcmnrvaUan r........iJlicm an the "EI1~enUl1 AleDda ftlr the 90',. . . nd.. stJ'BMIttEJ) BY: Chairman or the Raource ecmnrvatian C'.(lfIl"'illicm fY REVIEWED BY: (415.Vate: Tu--1lO-) Council Re1'erral Na._ Becinninl in A Ulurt or 1990 the Ruaurce ecmnrvatian Commil,icm CDnIidered the "Environmental Alenda ftlr the go'," as ,ubmitted b, Mayer Tim Hader. fto 'Was Councilman Nader at the time. The AUCUIl meetinl 'tIU c:anducted as a public hearina Tith input from the dew1apment community and the Sierra Cub. . there ere 57 items to this lIIenda and the, ere attached. Each item include, Mr. Ka4er', propanI and the Commillian', recommendatioD. RECOKMEHDATmH: That Council adopt the 57 item In'riranmental Alenda ftlr the go', as amended by the Commi,lion. DISCUSSION: See attached ror recommendations rer each item. ( ~ 2b~)i ITEMS FOR COUNCIL ACI'ION FROM "ENVl:RONMENTAL AGENDA FOR THE PO'S -) . Aupst 20, 1990 - (MSP) to JeCOmmend that City Council adopt u Coals the documeDt entitled .Items for Council Action from 'Environmental Aaenda for the 90',. Jtcms'1 throulh 157 except for Items 12, 16, '17, 120,124,125,133, '40, '41.'44 and 152. IISUC to continue aJI ~in;'11 pulled Items'17, 120.124, 133, '40. '41. '44 aDd 152 to the DeXt -'II. . 9/10190 - 46 out of 57 items have been previously lpo}UoYed. . 9/24190 - Review of the · A,enda for the 90'.. was continued. Item 16 was awaitinl input from the city attorney and ataff; Item 124 - Board members just received a copy of the bill in question with inadequate time for JeView. . 10/22/90 - It was MSUP (RaylHall) to refer to City Council aJlltems which previously bad action taken by RCC. ~) . 11/12190 - It was MSUP (HallIRay) to continue items 12 and 25 of the .Environmental Agenda for the '90's. until the next relular meetinJ. . Inl91- It was MSUP (FoxlRay) to continue the item regardina .Environmental Aaenda for the 90s" to the next meeting with JeView of previous minutes back to July 1990. . February 1991 - Items remainina for action: 12, 124, 125. 133, 144. 152 . 4/8191 - Action was taken on the remainina items ~, 124, 125, 133, 144. 152 ..... .~6 .-/ -/:7 __ _ _. _ .U ________.__ - .-._--~ ...- --.--...------------.., (-. ITEMS FOR COUNCIL AC'I10N FROM "ENVlRONMENTAL AGENDA FOR THE PO'S c 1. CouDciJ policy to 1IIIde:nab DO furtber east.west streets or wi"-;"Is for KCOmmodation of more eastward devclopmaat until p1.....;"I is completed for new east-west public transit. JnOf90 - Jlecommalded Ibat City rw""';l .sop as ,oa!. 2. A General Plan an-.dment precludin& further appnm1s of aJor new projects which would avc bceD illeaal prior to the General Plan Revision of 1989 untillbe issues IIised by COWICi1 nfem1J OIl General Plan issues - provision of public 1rInSit, protection of nsidentla1 IlCiahbodloods from iDcrased traffic, IDd . Growth MaDIpment E1emc:Qt to the General Plan avc beeII resolved. 8120190 - A&r Ie'oe..d motions, it wu NSC to CIOIIlbine Items n and #25 lin&u1ar1y and Jabc1 it n, takini DO action onlppl'OVal at this time. . ". 9/10190 - combined into one item with #25; further discussion to continue with fun commission. 10122/90 - MSUP to move to continue items n and 25 to the mt meedn,. .,819J - It would appear that the necessity for n and 25 are DO lon,er valid due to projected adoption of the Growth !dana&ement Element to the General PJin. 3. Directin, staff to prepare . lon,-term plan for the construction of. citywide system of bicycle lanes to make bicyclini convenient and safe tbrouibout the city, with . phased plan for implementation througb the capital improvements bud,et. 1120190 . Recommended that City Council adopt as ,oa!. 4. A new zonin, ordinance nquirin. mixes uses (e.,., Deiabborbood commercial and nsidentla1) within walkini distance of each other in new development, and faci1jtatin, mixes uses consistent with community character in pmiously built areas, IUbject to desiJII review. '120190 - Recommended that City CouDci1 adopt I:' aoal. 5. A new street desilll ordinance, requirinJ new streets to be desiped to be driven at . safe speed for pedestrians (not just motorists), prohibitina hIab-speed desiJII on nsidentla1streets and _ IChools and len10r centers, IDd sequirin& tbe provision of usable and safe bicycle lanes. '120190 - ReCommended Ibat City CouDci1 .sop as aoal-' ( 6. A zoninl ordinance nquirinlnew employment centers to be situated within convenient wa1kin& distance of public tnnslt 1eIVices, with provisioos for putnasbips bctwOCll developers and the city for the provision of IUdlIeIVices wbem 1easlb1e. ~1- 026-/b' (rev. 4/91) -----~.- --------------- -.- .... - -- ..- 8I20I9O - (after IeYc:rIl motions made aDd withdrawn) it was wue to continue Item 16 to the IICXt m II':", for the purpose of reviewin& the item and prc:parina IIlOJ'C IUitable Jan&ua&e aDd 10 the CommluiOll" c:oDCmIS and objections can be 8ddrased. (0piDi0D from the City AUomey, &'"t'J --"IIdve from Plannina nques&ed to MkIreII!be Ccrm",i.eiOll'. ~..I';fms). ) 9/10190 - JdSUP to CllI1tiDue 1IJIti1111f1' can adequaIely nport OIllL ' '/24190 - OVOtin...... - awaidq input from tbe city dOme)' aDd staff. .. 10122J90 - IIem 16 was MitiDa for City Auomey opiJIiOD, with the wordin& ~"te OIl the first put, aDd . request that 11 be . poJic:y OIl tile 1eaaa1 plan. 10/22J90 - It was moved and seconded (HaDIGhoupssian) that 16 be chanaed to -ne City ahould encourqe aew employment centen to be situated within ClOIlvaUent walkin. distance of public transit IerYices where feasible, and likewise, have provisions for partnerships between developers and the dty for the provision of auch 1eI'Vica. - (Motion pissed 3-1) ]0n219O - After much discussion, it was MSUP (Ha11IGhou.assian) to eliminate '6 of the Environmental A&enda completely. 7. A TDnsponation Demand Management Ontinance. 'Ibis ordinance would require lar&e :~ employers,includina the City, to prepare plans for. reduction in -drive alone- commutes durin& peat hours of over 50" within five years. Measures in transportation demand manaaement plans could include C'I!pOOlin., transit and bicycle incentives, flex bours and alternative workweeks, birin. from RSidential areas near the place of employment, or other measures to be determined in each plan. Plans should be monitored for compliance with .oals, and .oals ahould be periodically evaluated for their ability to achieve bealthier air. 1120/90 - Recommended that City Cou,ndl adopt as loal. I () Adoption of. dty .ovemmcnt transpor1Ition demand ~ement plan in advance of the ~ective date of the above onIiDance, iDc1udin& the measures listed above 1120190 - RecomJreN'ed that City CoIJ1'c1' adopt ~ loel. . . ,. . I>IJed staff to ~ . plan for tbe CODStrucdoD, Ihrou.h the capillI imp!ovements plOCCIS (or with redevelopment funds in lIW'uvtiaJe areas) of IeCUre bicycle parJdn& facilities at dty facilities and commercial centen, &iviD& priority to locations at businesses wishln& to. provide auch improvements in putnershipwitb the city,. . 1[20190 - Recar9~ that City Cno~ adopt as JqI) . . -2- (rev. 4/91) . H;s:f~~~t,.~/ ~--~ (, 10. Adoption of an ordll'l2"Ce prohibitin& COIItracts for Ems which do DOt require the best possible quantification of impacts in areas ....."".Md by CEQA, and prohibitin, payment for .....~lable Ems. JOOI9O - Jtecom-.wt that City CoIJftcil adopt as loa!. . 11. Direct llafl'to identify pnjects impo~"I ChuIa VJSIa wheR eoviroomental and traffic Iorec::uts OIl which policy maten ft1icd tumed out to be lllrious1y wrona, to bire a ccmsultlnt . IlOl COIIIlCCIed to any IUCh pnjects to CODduct altlldy of bow Ihcy went wrona, and to provide neom.-ut.tions for ~ the Jb~ in the future, as well as OIl any Rmedies the city may !lave. : 112019O - JlecommeMeclthat City Cot'''''''' adopt as loa!. 12. Request a IIaff report OIl current air quality maintallnce propams for city equipment, with recommendations for improvements if ar-jl.Ojl'1atc. ( ~12019O - Jlecommended that City Counci1adopt as loa!. .13. Adopt an ordinance COIItainin, a preferential procurement policy for c:1ean fuels (within nallstic economic parameters) and requirin, an annual public report on implementation. '120190 - Jlecommended that City Council adopt as loa!. 14. Send a letter from the City Council to Mayor o'Connor of San Die,o, the Chair of the County Board of Supervisors, and the mayors of the other cities m the county askin, them to join in a cooperative effort to explore the feasibility and desirability of crcatln, a public enCl'lY dislributlon utility while openin, energy production to the free market. .1120190 - Jlecommended that City Council adopt as loa!. LS. Direct our staff, as intervenors in any ~oceedlna COIIccminl proposals for new SDGItE fAcilities in ChuIa Vista, to demand proof of air quality cl.1m$, and to oppose any such proposals in the absence of proof that they will improve our air quality and that SOOItE will be held to any assurances it Jives by the plosped of _till\&fu1 penalties for violations of any apecments. '~Q~ - Jlecommended that City CcM'llelJ adopt IS JClIl. 16. Send a Jeuer to the California EDeIJy CommissiOll outlllll"l our apeement with SOOItE c:onccrnina the raone of Ibdr ChuIa Vista land and puttlnJ OIl the ncord of any EDeIJy Commission ....~llIa the invalidity UDder that I&1cement of any imp1icatlon d\lI DeW iDdustrialuses by SOOItE OIl our bayfront arc CODSistent with Jocal land use rcp1atlons. J120190 - Jtecommended that City Council adopt as loa!. ( . _/~3- clt,-J~ (rev. 4/91) 17. Consider an Open Space ZODe altemative for at kast put of die sooe ~yftont ") .......-11. -. . . . II2O/SlO . MSUC to CClIltinue IhiI pIMIiftil1& pulled Item to lIeU m~l1l. '110/90 . NSlJP for :aCC to JeCOIl,...-d to City Council to adopl u 1011 the c:onsideraliCXI of opeIIlpICC zooe "'-lptiCXI for at least put of the Bayftont ...~11 to I""J...... but DOt be li...iiM to 1be lite beiDa concidlqd for the tMititwuot powa' plaDL 18. Adopt an iIlcJoor smot.il1llaw pattcmed after San Die&o County'.. : 100190 . :R"'QNft"'-""" that City Cn"".n adopl U loal. 19. Direct staff to RpOrt on the poSS1'b1e estab1is1iinent of a fund, limn.... to that proposed at the fedcnl level by the Environmrntal Defense Pund, to IUbsidize die nmoval of lead from . older Chula VISta homes. This report abould include an analysis of need, and, if the need is 1bowD, of possible lundin. sources, e.I., a ballot measure to lax lead products. 1120/90 . :Recommended that City Counc:illdopt U loal. .20. Direct staff to prepare . policy, with input from the Environmrntal Health CoalitiOll and llfIprop.;ate others, to eliminate the use of poUutin& cbemic:als by the city and prescribin& alternatives. ') '--" 8120190 - WUC to continue this remaininl pulled Item to Deltt meetin&. 2(10190. MSUP for the c:ommissiOll to recommrnd to the City Counc:il to adopt U loa! the direction of staff to prepI!'e a policy, with input from the Environmental Health Coalition and appropriate others, to eliminate wherever feasible, the use of poUutin& chemicals by the city and prescribinl alternatives. 21. Adopt. city policy to identify and proJu'bit the purchase of any IIftft~.e')' products the production, use, or disposal of which is harmful to the earth', ozone layer, and assure that all ItafI' with purcbasin& authority JeCeive a copy. J120190 . :Recommended that City O>>undl adopt as IClI1. 22. Adopt an ontiDanc:e requirin& work CXI automobile air conditioae:n to ~ performed with equipment to prevalt the CSC7' of ozooe.dep1etin& chemicals into 1be eavironmalt, with the declive date delayed UDtila .;...i1llr ordiftllfttlP. is tdopWd in all juriotfictiOlllln the county. 1/20/90 - Jtec:ommeDded that City Council adopt U IClI1. . --- 23t AcId auppon for the Bates ozone layer 9'OIediCXI bill to the city', Jqislative propam. ' ) Jl20190 - :Rec:ommencIed that City Counc:il adopt U loal. J~ .yo- '7 -- -..- ~IE-/I (rev. "/91) . -~----------..........--- . _____- __u ( 'f. ~. Add JUppOrt for Assemblyman Pace', A.B. 1332 to pbue out c:Illorof1uorocarbons from automobile air cooditionl", by 1995 to the city', ~c111tive pIO&fam. 8I2Of9O -I4$UC to ......tinue this .-..;nl"l pulled Item to IICltt meetiiIJ. 9/10190 -ldSUP to request that ItIfI' obtain. copy of &r-blyman Peace', A.B. . 1332 to let the intent aDd impact of Did bill; iIem cootimled to October lit . III rr....'" afta' iDformationia obtaiDed. ( 9/24/90 - Continued - Board members just ftlCeived . copy of the bill in question with aftw.quale lime for m1ew. . f/J191 - It was MstJP to lab DO don either in favor or in vwWition of this item due to InllMquate information u to the IIatuS of the bill to make IUCh . decision. :25. Bold off on further tentative map approvals for ~or projects Jdyin. on the 1989. (Jtnera1 Plan m1sion until that m1sion - inc1udin& . Growth Mana&ement Element with implementation measurea - is complete. 8120190 - Motion to combine Item 2 and 2S sinJlllarly and label it 12, taldnl no action on approval at this time. 9/10190 - Combined u one item with 12; "further discussion to cootinue with fuD commission. . 1012219O - It was MSUP to move to continue items 12 and 2S to the next meetin,. 4/8191 - It would apPear that the ne<<ssity for 12 and 2S are no Jon.er valid due to projected adoption of the Growth Mana&ement Element to the General Plan. 26. Adopt an ordinance requirin. new developments to be considc:red by the Parb and Jtec:reation Commission, with that comniission', nc:ommendation beiD& put before the City Council at the time of any council don, aDd prohibitin& council approval prior to such inpuL 8120190 - Recommended that City Col'ncI1ldopt 1;11011. %7, Adopt an ordinance for the creation of open apace aDd pub lCquisition use~sment &lricta. . 8120190 - Recommended that City CouIId1 adopt u aoaL 28. Adopt an Open Space 1GIlC. ( 8120190 - Recommended that City Council adopt u Joal. ~5: ;J~,--J(/ (rev. 4/91) " ~. Adopt In ordinance requirin& redevelopment plans to be considered by the Plannin. e._minion and the Resource CooIerva!ion Commission prior to City Council actiOn. '120/90 - JlecommeDded that City ~,ftM' adopt as ,oal. 30. Adopt. Sellsitivc Lands Qrdi...nce for the proteetioa of alopea, canyons, riparian habitats _ 0Cber eaviroo"'.....t.aDy -.l:itive lands. 100190 - Jlecorn-......that City ec.mcllldopt as ,oal. 31. Adopt . policy requiriDa eertific:aIion, prior to 1pplOVIl, of projects' complianc:ewith the GeDaa1 Plan Growlh Mana&em=t Elem=t, the -nreshold- Ilandards, Ind Proposition V. with Ibe UIIlfenlaDdin& that projects DOt 10 compUa..- with the JaIler are required by law to pin . 1IIWIimous council me to win apploval. 1/20/90 - Recomm-IJed that City CouDdl adopt as ,oal. 32. Adopt an ordiiwlce requilin. III cIeve10pment IIf=IlCIlts to contain provisions haltin. development where the -threshold- standards are DOt met. 11120/90 - Recommended that City CoUncil adopt as Joal. 33. Adopt an ordinance amenclin. the -threshold standards to measure compliance by impacts .. coli and quality, as well as quantity, of city services, and by impacts on public safety. 8120/90 - MSUC to continue this remainin& pulled Item to next meetin,. 9/10/90 - MSUP to continue this item until the October 1st meetina when input is received from the Planniria Dept. as to how they will accomplish this ,081, what measures to use, and the impact on public safety. ~/8191 - MSUP to recommend that City CouDdl remove this item altoaether from the fnvironmental A,enda for the 90's. ' 34. Adopt an orcIinance requirina DeW developments to show they will pay their own :way in IlIffina needs as well as capital improvements. )00190 - Reco11UllCllded that City Councilldopt as ,oal. ~ Send . IeUer from the City Council to the Growth Jdanaaement Ove:rsi.ht Committee, lne PJaanin, Commission, the Parks and Recreation Commission and the Resource Conservation a-miocion emphasizi.na the council's intalt to Jive these bodies the widest possible latitude to dcveJop policy recom",eoutatioos for the COUDCiL 100190 - Recommended that City Cotlncl11dopt as ,oal. JI--Y- 6 ~:26 - .J / (rev. 4/91) ) ~) ~, i '\ " ~.._' <- 36. Adopt a TRe Plaervatioo 0rdiDance. 1120190 -ltecommaIded that City eo..nejl adopt u 1011. 37. Direct Italt to onn~~ a future AJbor Day 1"'''5'1Dl mmll... to tbat beiDa implemented dIis JIU' ill P~i"". ~190 - PtcO"'....M~ that City eo..nciJ adopt u loal. 28. Direct iliff' to PftPU'e an ltP'P for a ltudy (to be done jointly with Dei&hborina ,par;ctfil!tlnftJ if they wish) to identify future job demands and tzainiD& Deeds ill our Joca1e and to ncommeDd ed.""tiOll, tzainiD& and ecooomic developmeat measures, with ..d~nce from a city Jieonom1c Development CommiulOll. 8120190 - Recommended that City Council adopt u 1011. 39. Direct staff' to work with the Pavinmmental Heal Coalition to develop a model Toxic Waste Reduction Ordinance. )120190 - Recommended that City Council adopt u 1011. 40, Send letters from the city to legislators and local judges n:i.tczating our desire for greater ( pIOteCtion - toul!her Sl!nlencinr - of methamphetamine manufacturen. 8120/90 - MSUC to continue this remaining pulled Item to lIut meetinl. 9110190 - MSUP for council to send letters from the city to Jeeislators and local judges reitczating our desire for pater protection from methamphetamine manufacturers and other illegal dru,s, by tougher IlCIltencin&. Item 140(a) - It was MSUP (Ghou,assianlRay) to rescind the previous motion on Item 140 u just approved, to amend the motion to reflect the same lan&uaae u previously stated, and to adopt Item 140 u Item 14O(a) to RalI, .Council to IlCIld appropriate letters ill IlCIltencin, Pro 'eedingl involving iUe&aJ drug activity ill Chula Vista, mninding judaes or the Ieriousness or this activity and the fteed for protec:tina the public. · . ( ~7.:2~ -,).;2., (rev. 4/91) 41. SeDd app"''1'dlte letters in 1eD1eIICin& p.,(I(AMi,,&i invoMq ~""'IIpbetamine manufac:lurin& in Quia Vista. ",-",iMina judges of the Ieriousness of this activity and the need lor ...,,10.:""1 die public. 1120I9O - MSUC to IlnI'ltinue this JI!!IftIIini,,& pulled Item to ~ v 1ltina. 9/10190 - MStJP lor .....,""u to IeDd -w'.,.ni&te Jeuen in 1eDtenc:iD& j>,ooeedinas IDvoIviD& P'ef"""'I"'-",i- manuf'accuriD& and n1~1 dru& Ktivity in Quia Vuta, remi""i"l judaes of tbe Ieriousness of this activity aDd the Deed lor JIOf~"I tbe public. jJ.C&) 0110190 - MStJP to amend Item 141 to 141(a), and to c:banp the Jan&Ulle to read, -CouDcilIO IeDd Ippropriate Jeuen in IeDtencin&.... eeedin&s Involvin& IDeaal drua activity In Quia VISta, nmindin& Judaes of the leriousness of this activity and the Deed !or protecIiDg the public. - 42. Establish a ...~ for conectina 111 nqrc1able materials (&lass, aluminum, paper) lene:rated at City Hall. '120190 - Recommended that City Counci1ldopt u 1011. 43. Establish a timetable for citywide cwbside recycliDa. '120190 - Reconunended that City Councilldopt u loal. . -) 44.... Adopt a program similar 10 Irvine's 10 restrict the ale and use of UMec:eoury products llannina the environment throuab ozone depletion and lIOII-recyc1ability. 8120190 - MSUC 10 continue this remainina ~ed Item to next mectina 9/10190 - MSUP 10 continue this item until October 1st when there is further mriew of Mr. Peace'. bill. ~/8f91 - MSUP 10 recommend that City Council remove this item allOJetber from the EnviroomcDtal A&enda for the 90'. due 10 Jack of informalion. 45. Direct our 11Ift' to establish nei&bborbood recycliil& centers and DeJotiate appropriate porup Ietvicea. )120190 - Recommenclccl that City Counci1ldopt u loal. 46. Adopt an ordiMnt;le nquirin& new development to pnMde l"eC)'cliDa facilities'. 1120190 - Recommenclccl that City Councl1Idopt u loal. J J ----nr-- ~. ,.. -I- .: ,20-).3 (rev. 4/91) ( 47. Adopt. Taxies Disclosure OIdi..._, JI2Of90 - Jtecommeode:d that City lWlftl'i1 adopt a Coal. 48. Empower Ibe R.esource CclDIenatioo nw.....i.clon SO review aeoendoa and uses of toxic waste ill QuJa V_ and make ftlCOII'.-wti'Xll for nduc:tiODs. Jl20.l9O - ~ that City lW.....n adopt a coat. 49. Direct our ltaffso provide lIS with an interim ""'_."'" nport OD altematives SO continued participatiCIII ill ... payment for tbe Metro Iewer system. iDcludin& altemative w-ent p-h,,^1o&ia.. : Jl20f90 - Reico"'~~ that City Covncl~ adopt a Coal. 50 Direct our Itaff to implement enhanced streetsweepini prior SO forecast storms. )120/90 - Recommended that City Council adopt U ioal. 51. Establish . Conservation Pinance Authority SO provide low- and no- Interest loans to 'llomeowDen and businesses for capital improvements conservina encqy and water. ( , '120/90 - Recommended that City Council adopt u Coal. 52. Adopt an ordinance requirinJ retrofit of residential buildinJs at 1ime of sale with simple. cost-effective conservation technoloJY (1I1SuJation and low-flow fixtures). usini fundinJ from the Conservation Pinance Authority and Development Impact Pees '.",sed on developments CiClIISlIminJ eneriY and water raoun:cs. 8120/90 - MSUC to continue this mnaininJ pulled Items SO next meetin&. 9/10190 - MSUP to continue this item Until October 1st meetin&. time permittini. when Councilman Nader or city attorney is contacted for further Information. It is further requested that staff be plUCl1t or have . commeot draft from the PJannin& Dept. reprdinJ this item. ~18191 .;, Recommended that City Council adopt a'coal. 53. Adopt an ordinance requirin& new developments to UIC drouiht-to1erant landscapini. and SO iDc1uc1e cc:&R'. requiriD& drou&ht-tolm.nt Ja"Cf~. plOI9O - Recommended that City CoUDc:l1 adopt a Coal. "' Direct our Itaff SO prepue . plan for apIftCIecI UIC of rec:laimed water in city facilities. ( .InOI9Q - Recommended Ihat City CoUDc:l1 adopt ,u coat. ~9- .Jt~)Lj (rev. 4/91) 55. Establish aei&hborhood ptlt''',I'lI POUPS to provide input OIl development and planninJ pagpo...t. affecdnJ the ftt"""unity. . . .1 RnOI9O . Recom............. that City CouDc:ilIdopt u loat. 56. Direct die 'D--m:e CclIIIervaIiaIl fWnmlftiOll to pnMde or arraDIe for quarterly articles ClD Joc:aI eaviroameDtal issues in our city DeWSleUer, and to work with tile city', public . iDformatioo coordiDator to develop beaerCOlDJD,ml...t101l with tile public OIl environmental and ,1.""i~ iutJel~ . . JQOI9O . ItecommeDded that City CouIlcilIdopt u loat. . : . 41.. Direct staff, tbrouih our Py 1990-91 budiet. to either bile astaffpmon at the Deputy City Manaaer level with a solid environmentalist bacqroUDd, or to Rlain private environmental expert to work directly with city policy makers OIl all policy wues 1Iavin& environmental ialpJj...t1'm1. ,'1"20/90 - Recommended that City Council adopt u loat. , ..... :> ) I~~O- n/ ~'-.26~>> (rev. 4/91) . . --- -~-- ~ -- - -- -.------ .---- -- -- .------.- ----..----------- . () ,'-~" '.~) '. ( MEMORANDUM To: February 12, 1992 Inter-Agency Water Task Force Ad Hoc Subcommittee Date: Ifta: Subject: Report Regarding Water Offset Policy ( On September 20, 1991, the Planning Department presented a Water Offset Policy Issues Paper to the Task Force. The paper discussed the background and events leading up to the Oty Council referral (June 11, 1991) to prepare a .Water Offset Policy.. During the Task Force discussion, it was decided to. work with representatives of the two water districts and the Oty u....ger to develop a work pro&J'IID for preparing an interim water offset policy. On October 21, 1991, a subcommittee of Keith Lcwingcr, Garry Butterfield, Bob Leiter, John JJppitt, and Bud Gray met to discuss the interim water offsct policy. The subcommittee belcI a wide ranging discussion on the goal of the water offset policy, the technique of calculating a fee, other offset pro&J'IIDS in the region, local water district needs, CW A participation . agreements, amount of offsct charle, other user fees and the impact on affordable housing, the . impact of the Clean Water Pro&J'IID on water reclamation, the cost of reclaimed water facilities and the Otay Water District water reclamation pro&J'IID. Following further research on this issue by staff, a follow-up meeting was held by this group, along with Georae Xrcmpl, Deputy Oty ldaDagcr, on February 12, 1992. The subcommittee felt that developers should o!1ly be asked to offset a portion of new demand after conservation. Most new developments in Chula Vista arc subject to the Water Conservation Plan requirement of the Growth Minagcment Implcinentation Ordinance. The first Water Conservation Plan prepared for Rancho Del Rey SPA m showed a 44 percent water USIIIe savings per home as compared to the average Southern California: residence. The general discusSion of the subcommittee focused on the follOwing points: . . 1. The most logical agency to administer a water offset pro&J'IID is the San Diego County Water Authority because local jurisdictions arc constrained in legal and technIcal ways to create new water through conservation, reclamation or groundwater tfe'ltm~t programs. An offset program involving local water districts would Deed County Water Authority participation to officially credit local water districts for water saving projects if a water shortage emergency develops in the future. ( .21v -;LIP . ".____~. ::'~:::-:-:_~:.-='=:':-:'::::?:..:::-.-:::::~~.::.c..:-:_:-...:-:-.::==--::~-:::....-~---- .. ----.. - --.-.~--'----- .---- ---..-. _.._____.___.__ _ _u_______ . () f- . ) ",-. . . J , 2. New development should pay its fair share of the cost of new ~ demands. CW A staff estimates this share to be approximately 58" of the demand for new water over the next 20 years. CW A staff projects the need for an adcIitlona1166,550 acre feet of water by 2010 based upon SANDAG's Series vn Regiona1 Growth Forecasts. . To meet the year 2010 new water &mands, CWA staff est:imlltf!S the fonowing local proJflJl1S could ~ developed to mllYimi7.e new water supply development: " AFt. Total new water demand requirements for the region by 2010 Local Supply Development - water conservation - water reclamation - groundwater treatment 166,5S0 Total 20,000 74,000 3,000 ",000 Percent of new water demand met by Local Supply Development 58" ,. \ '. , 3. The San Diego Clean Water Program is closely linked to water offset poliey because a large portion of the sewer program will have to involve water reclamation f'aci1ities. The use of reclaimed water for landscaped medians, golf courses, parks, open spaces and other uses will decrease the region's reliance on imported water. Each rate payer within the Metropolitan Sewerage District will pay for the cost of the Clean Water Program, including water reclamation f'aci1ities. 4. The Otay Water District plans to install capital improvements over the next ten years to provide facilities to transport reclaimed water from water reclamation plants to various open space users. This program will involve major pipe lines and pump stations costing $22.S million. These facilities will be paid for exclusively by new developmenL The water offset is estimated to be 100 p110ns per EoD.U. per day. . In 1989, the average use per EDU was 600 gallons. Using the CWA offset estimate of 58 percent, new development would be responsible for off-~ ~t 350 gallons per EDU (58 percent It 600 gallons - 348). (Ibe remaining 42 percent would be provid~ by Metropolitan Water District.) Since new homes subject to the City's Water Conservation Plan will conserve about 2SO gallons per day using ~on methods (~ U ultra loo.y flow toilets, low flow ( -2- d& - ), 7 ~~_.....::.~---_.:---~-:-----~~~ . --- . ._._._--_.._---~-_.- -. - - -. - - - -~ - --. -.. -.. . -. .-._-- - .-_. -- -- ---------- . . . ( l, ( () ,-) . ~ 5. shower heads, xeriscaping, etc.), adding the water rccla.mation facilities offsct within Otay District (100 gallons per EDU per day) amounts to 350 gallons per day which is ~w ~evelopment's fair share JeSpOnSibility for water offset within the Otay Water District area. . Within the portion of the City west of I-80s, the Sweetwater Authority's water conservation program has reduced total water use by an avera&e of 31.4 peu:cnt since It was first started in May 1991. In Iddition, the Authority has also dcve.1opcd a DCW local water supply. Two deep 'we.1ls In the north part of National City produce approximately two million gallons per day and funds are included in the current budget for exploratory drilling to dcve.1op a third we.1l in the same aquifer. A joint study of the potential for dcve.1oping Idditional water from the groundwater basin 'OO"t~ between Loveland and Swcctwater Reservoirs is being ,conducted by the Authority, Otay Water District and the San Diego County Water Authority. It appears that it may be economically feasible to treat poor quality aroundwater in the basin and improve the ove;ra1l poundwater quality by introducing highly treated reclaimed wastewater and imported water to blend with the underground supply. . An application has been filed for a study grant to determine whether brackish ' groundwater in the Lower Sweetwater River Valley can be economically dcminera1izcd and used for both potable and landscape Urigation uses. The impoundment of local ninfall in Loveland and Sweetwater Reservoirs has been a part of Sweetwater Authority's water resources for many years. The construction of San Diego County Water Authority's Pipeline 4 to Sweetwater Reservoir, scheduled for completion in 1994, will allow the economic storage of untreated imported water in the reservoir during the winter months, further reducing Sweetwater Authority's dependence upon aqucductllow during the high water demand summer months and improving the agency's supply reliability. Summaty The subcommittee concurred on the following points: . An interim water Qffsct policy should be directed toward a 58" offset of new demand lencrated by dcvelopmenL . Chula Vista's interim water offset policy should recognize and give appropriate credit to contributions toward water nc1amation, poundwater development and conservation becausc these programs are saving water and are being funded in part by new dcvelopmenL . -3- db~.2V ..----- .- -_-... _-.:=-:. -_:..- _~_-=~.=::'-=::::::"--::7', '-:--:..-:' -: __- '::._-_.-,~"--"-'-- ..-....:..:..:......._;. '-'--'-- .. - ------- ---- . -- . -.- - - - . ( t r , . C> ij Chula VISta's interim water offset policy should be kept simple and efficient by avoiding complicated fee formulas, three-party agreements, complicated water project programs and funding pdlcedures, and CWA participation in baseline allocation proposals. . Chula Vista's interim water offset policy should be monitored by the Inter-Agency Water Task Force 011 aD pnlJaJ basis. . . ]Wed on these conclusions, city and water district staffs should be cIirec:ted to finll1i~ an interim water offset policy, to be structured as follows: The City will nquiJe water c:onsezvation measures in all new development, takini into account existing .Water Conservation Plan. nquirements in the Growth ldanaaement PJOgram, and the Olay Water District's lan4J~ onIiDancej 2. The water districts will be respollS1Dle for implementing an expanded reclaimed water . distribution system and other related improvements to reduce demand on potable water IIlpplles, to be financed in part by new developmenL . 1. :;. ...,.0 , . -4- .2(P-..2i _ __ "' __ -=.~~. _~:,_-''':.::--~~~___,:,=--:",,,,=~_~~,,--,-'_..~::...~z-~::'':~.:'':'::''~_.:.-::=::''':-._..__':..:,-.~--==-~:: .--- -~ -. . Minutes September 17,1991 Page 10 ( Motion: 0Wfer) to accept A1temative 1C mcl2D for 4 contract positionslhrough 1he City MaDagefs ofIice. To include aupenisiDg 1he operation of 1he Mayor md Council office; assist the Mayor; and, lIeIft .. blI"k.1p for OftIfIow wlth 1he other 114 time positions for 1he Council. Motion failed for Iaclt of a second. MS OUodOH/Gnaer Horton) to accept 2C, Or"ln.nce 1B that requires a 3/Sth's _ to establish 1he DepartmerIl of MaJor md City Council md come back to Council in 30 clays wlth a resolution. 1'hia would provide atatua quo for 1he Seuior MaIIagm1ent Assistant position, DO change other than fiI1ing tr,......-....tly wlth 1he currmrjob description md up to a muimum of 114 time or 10 houri per week. or a ....""'"1111 of SOO houri on m ,,,,,,l""l1ied hourlyaca1e per CoI"'...1,,;.....N:r. Amenclmmt to motion: OUodone) to state that in adclition to the aisting original position, creating 5 UDdmi/i.... 114 time -al positk-lII wlthout creating a depar1D1eDt. City Attorney Boogaard stated that on page 14-25, there was m Alternate 2C resolution which if amended to leave In the second to the last paragraph and In the fourth paragraph strike out "the new department of: would work. MS (Grasser HortolllNader) to amend the resolution to state that in the event that a Councilperaon d_llnoes 1he privilege of a Council assistant the City Manager had the authority to reallocate the 114 position to 1he MayoJ's aaistanr. Motion failed 2-3 with Malcolm, Moore md Rindone opposed. . RESOumON 16348D WAS OPPERED BY MAYOR NADER. reading of 1he _ was waived. C =~Horton) to accept Resolution 16348D.. amended. ApI>&V'..d 4-1 wlth CoI",...1",- 15. REPORT tmlJTY UNDERGROUND CONVERSION FOR FIF11i AVENUE BETWEEN "1.' AND NAPl.Bs S'l'REETS . On September 10, 1991 the City Council directed staff to prepare a report on the undergroundlng of utilities on Fifth Avenue between "1.' and Naples Streets. This report also addresses the next phase of Fifth Avenue between Naples Street and Orange Avenue. The plans on this project are nearing completion and staff is working with the utility companies on the relocation plans. Staff recommends that Council accept the report. (Director of Public Works) (15107) MSUC (Malcolm/Moore) to accept the report. , Councilman Rindone Suggested that the list be prioritized md evaluated as to how the streets could be upgraded and make a major effort to start undergroundlng. CIl1f Swanson, Deputy Director of Public Works, stated they would be coming back to Councl1ln the near future to address the remaining phases. John lJppitt, Director of Public Works, stated there would not be additional costs for the remaining phases. BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS ~ 16. imPoRT ENVIRONMENTAL AGENDA FOR. nm 90'S . Belrinnlng In August of 1990 the *' Resource Conservation Conunlssion considered the "Environmental Agencfa for the 90's' as submitted by . Mayor Nader, who was Councilman Nader at the time. The August meeting was conducted as a public ( hearing with Input from the development community and the Sierra Club. There are 57 items to the agenda, . . each including Mayor Nader's proposal and the Commission's recommendation. Recommendation is for ;2&,- Yv "__ ____ ____~_____.~__' __ __.____-- _,._._.___u__ __ _ . . ., .. Minutes September 17. 1991 Page 11 (, .. CouncD to adopt the 57 item "Environmental AJenda for the 9f1s. as amended by the Commission. (Chairman of the Resource Conservation Commission) . (15108) Councilman Malcolm stated that he did not like to see items on the agenda without staff recommendations. He said the City Manager had stated that he had not had enough time to review all the items and was not able to make a recommendation. A number of these items had already been done and he wanted to see the othen cut down. Mayor Nader stated he had been worldng on a memo to divide the items Into small categories for consideration rather than ~g to deal with all of them at one time and would ttyto have that memo ready for the nut meeting. He SllId there were two items he thought should be dealt with and they were number 40 and 41. MSUC (Nader/MoOre) to ap.1'.v~" #40 "Council to send appropriate letters in '---""'It pnll:eedl"p involving illegal drug activity in Chula Vista. reminding judges of the serioumess of this activity and the need for protecting the public. and #41 .Council to send appropriate letters in sentencing proceedl"p involving illegal drug a~ in Chula Vista. reminding judges of the seriousness of this activity and the need for protecting die public.' Mayor Nader stated that #7 was time sensitive because APCD and SANDAG were in the process of preparing a compliance/Ian. Chula Vista is currently a non-attainment region under the Pederal Premier Act. He stated he ha some concerns with the environmental ethics of that approach and with the economic consequence of It. Those approaches would require a series of mandato1Y measures to be imposed on employers with a large number of employees to penalize employees for driving to work. It doem't automatically provide any alternatives. He suggested staff develop an option for Council's consideration to include a sunset clause in the event APCD or SANDAG preempts the exiSting authority in this area and that the ordinance developed give large employen a number of options which they could choose from. CouncDman Malcolm stated that he did not want to vote on the remaining Items without Chamber of Commerce or staff input. He stated that he felt this was a regional problem. * MSUC (Moore/Nader) to formulate concerns with . letter to AJIC) and SANDAG regarding #7 .A Transportation Demand Management Ordinance.. ( Mayor Nader stated that the balance of the Environmental Agenda items should be traDed until the nut meeting and he'd tty to finish the memo putting the items into categories. MS (Moore/Grasser Horton) to fotward the ",""I"I"g 50+ items to the City Manager for review and comments including. but not limited to. fisca1impact and staffing cnmmlnnent and retUm to Councl1 within 90 clays. Amendment to motion: (Rindone) to offer an amendment to the abaft motion to review only up to 6 items within 90 clays. MS (Moore/Grasser Horton) direct the City Managefs office to worlt with Councl1 on how it should be reviewed. MonONS AND SECONDS W11HDRAWN. ITEMS Din Y 1m FROM 1HE CONSENT rAY RNnAR Items pulled: 6 lit 9. The minutes will reflect the published agenda order. ( c1(P -3/ --------.-. &, ..- J.olinutes October I, 1991 Page 8 -J o City Manager Goss stated that there was a process to do that through the UC Task Force which includes two Council representatives. Mayor Nader responded that it took three Councilmembers to set Council policy and he would expect himself as Mayor and the entire Council be notified and allowed to give input. RESOunlON 16260 OFFERED BY COUNCILMAN MALCOLM, reading of the tat was waived. Mayor Nader stated that if staff came back with a negative declaration on this site he would probably be the first to vote against it. The resolution is not a circumvention of the environmental process but a clear statement of the CWTetIt Council policy regarding the UC site. VOTE ON M011ON: approved 4-0-1 with Counc:ilman Rindone absent. Councilman Malcolm stated he did not want to send a mixed message to the University, but information supplied to him indicated there were a lot of problems with the proposed site. He hoped that the property owners would work with the County and City regarding the possible changing of sites as soon as possible in order to avoid confusion with the UC system. c. Announced the passing of former Mayor John Smith and directed that the flags at City Hall be flown at half mast in recognition. 13. COUNCIL COMMENTS J Councilman Malcolm: Turn pocket on "L" Street between 4th and Sth Avenues. Councilman Malcolm stated that Charles Schrader was in the audience and wished to address the Council regarding the "no parking" on both sides of "L" Street between 4th and Sth Avenues. He had been advised by staff that the parking prohibition would be delayed until the issue could be brought before the Safety Commission for additional review and further recommendation to Council. Mr. Schrader will be notified of the meeting dates. Charles Schrader, 440 "L" Street, Letter '". Chula Vista, CA, President of Casa Vianney Homeowners Association, submitted a letter to Council requesting reconsideration of a decision by Council on 4/17/90 to prohibit parking on both sides of oLo Street between 4th and Sth Avenues. It is felt by the Association that the prohibition of parking would make the existing parking shortage worse. Mr. Schrader requested that the record show that several neighbors had accompanied him to express their support for his request. Coundlman Moore: a. Informed Council that he had attended the SANDAG sub-committee meeting for the Clean Air Act as it pertains to "traffic demandJOanagement. The consensus was that the cities being represented by SANDAG on this plan will process Their plans through the Air Pollution Control Board and not through the Disbict. Their comments are to tell the cities where they will not meet the mandated requirements by the State and not get into philosophy and policy. The consensus at this time is that they should proceed forward in utilizing the $4.00 increase in registration fee as to action, but the first thing is to get a plan in place that covers the mandate of the State. There is no intention, as to concept, as it has not been voted on to having fees or fines. . ~ ,) ;2t<3,2 -_._.,..,.--=-.".-=-"'-'"'"-"--..,~--=---=-=~~=.,..,.~'"""'--...,...,-~--:-'"':~=::;;.._=.: -.-...-----.-. ;_..:..-._------~._.~.._-. -- April 1, 1992 MEMO TO: f). FROM: ~ The Honorable Mayor & City Council Leonard M. Moore, Councilman SUBJECT: NATIONAL DEBT I urge you to read the attached comments and if deemed appropriate and timely, to support a motion to direct the City Manager to prepare correspondence for full Council signature with copies to other City officials and the media. Chula Vista can make a difference and seek other cities and media support of a subject that we all know needs to be turned around. The national debt has dragged our country, states and cities to a low that borders on a crisis. Without a sound budget process and minimum debt service, funds are not available to fight social battles and/or the multitudes of social programs. Without major budget changes at the federal and state levels, the programs we know and many depend on today for basic survival, will be beyond funding at a reasonable level. Congress has failed to take action to live within the federal government's annual income. It is said 18% of this year's budget is needed to pay interest only on the national debt and 25% of this year's budget is borrowed -- the majority from foreign sources. If we, the cities, inform the Congress that when they take major actions to reduce the national debt and that action is sound, that pet programs, pork barrel and administrative overhead are first to be cut, than we, the elected officials at the local level will advise our constituents. The City elected officials, by becoming personally involved, explaining Congress rational in reduced funding, a fixed goal in phasing out the national debt and establishing a budget within the federal income, than congress may well bite the bullet and do what they need to do, provide for the good of the country within the funds available. Encls. Imm330 pw :1.~6"'1 THOUGHTS. WORDING AND PHRASING FOR STAFF TO UTILIZE IN FORMALIZING APPROPRIATE CORRESPONDENCE TO THE PRESIDENT AND CONGRESSIONAL LEADERSHIP Our federal government (our country) is in serious trouble. We have a national debt crisis magnitude with a spin-off that has an adverse effect at the national and international levels. The Congress votes on all laws and the federal budget and the President has authority only to approve or disapprove. Corrective action is up to our Congress and correction action is lacking. The nation's cities need to step forth and be counted by committing to assist the Congress through an awareness program when the Congress takes sound action to reduce this massive national debt. Supporting appropriate action will not be popular at any governmental level due to the fact that approximately 50% of the federal annual budget is allocated to entitlement program s and therefore are subject to reductions. Chula Vista can take the lead and initiate correspondence to the President and Congressional leadership that sets forth our concerns as to the national debt and the associates detrimental effect to our country as a whole. Such correspondence to include that the Congress and the President's administration solicit the governors and city elected officials to support their action at the local level nationwide through personal contact. Why the cities support? City government is where the public is in touch, face to face with our residents, they know one another, explanations are personal, hard questions can be answered, rumors and distortions are minimal. Congress needs our personal input to spark action before the situation becomes more serious. Congress and all elected officials need to set aside "politics as usual" and cast aside the hometown pork barrel ploys to enhance re-elections. Our country is in dire need, we should concentrate on the national debt and how it is adversely effecting the United States and its people. If benefit programs must be reduced and other allocations in their order are also cut back or deleted, than Congress should know that the governors, cities and other elected officials and officers will support Congressional action rather than make hay for political purposes. This is the time for elected officials to take bold but prudent action to decrease the national debt and if done well, the worse that can happen is one may not be re-elected. We have waited too long, the national damage is too serious, the personal pain is too deep, the interest on debt is too severe, the borrowing to cover the annual budget is too high! .J.9b-3 -- The City of Chula Vista, California -- 131 st largest populated City in the Union -- should urge the President and the Congress to take action this fiscal year for the 1993/94 budget, and combine with appropriate laws that will accomplish the following: 1. Reduce the national debt to zero within 10 years. 2. Take necessary action to authorize Presidential line items veto of Annual Federal Budgets. 3. Institute actions that will not allow federal expenditures in excess of income on yearly basis -- a balanced budget. 4. Do not mandate programs of State and Cities without associated funding. 5. Start with major reduction of government programs staffing and administrative overhead. 6. Reduce administrative procedures by combining duplicative actions among agencies. 7. Assist the cities through agreed upon high priority items only. In turn, the cities and states should not solicit funding from the federal government for "nice to have" items but be very restrictive, items of high priority and of nationwide effect, the following are worthy of mention: 1. Crime: The major crime issue is drug related -- an international problem and costly. 2. Immiaration legal/illegal, the program is federal and costly to a city, state or region. 3. Health: A multi-governmental issue. 4. Environmental: A multi-governmental issue. 5. Transportation: A multi-governmental issue. 6. Housina & Assistance for low income citizens -- a major multi- governmental issue. Encls. 4/1/92 .2.'b~L/ (1 1, \) "