HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1992/12/15
III declare under penalty of perjury that ram'
em~lo;.re:j by the City of eh:"::3 Vista in the
Oitlca 0J ;,~L0 Cit:/ C:Jrl' c:l'l C~:;.{ I pos:,ed
this Ai::cn:~-;J~',hJi.i:..;c on U,e Bulletin E3'Jard at
Tuesday, December 15,1992 the Public ~v,s Buil~i,,:: cn~".at~n , Council Chambers
6:00 p.m. Dt\fED,.lj< .~ ?..:z.sIGNED E.;..lI . ~Public Setvices Building
RelZUlar MeetinS1: of the City of Chula Vista City Council
CALL TO ORDER
1.
ROLL CALL:
Councilmembers Fox ~ Horton ~ Moore _, Rindone -' and Mayor
Nader _
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. SILENT PRAYER
3.
APPROVAL OF MINlITES:
October 12, 1992 (Joint Meeting of the CounciVPlanning
Commission) and November 24,1992.
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY:
a. Selection of Mayor Pro Tern.
b Presentation of the 21st Annual Humanitarian of the Year Award to Doris Cox by Patrick
Howell, Chairman of the Human Relations Commission.
c. Introduction of the new Downtown Business Association's Town Manager by Chris
Salomone, Director of Community Development.
d. Resolution of the Sweetwater Authority commending Garry L. Butterfield upon his
retirement from Sweetwater Authority will be presented by Mayor Nader.
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items 5 through I4)
The stIJjJ recomnrmdntions n<garding the following items listBl under the Consent Calendar will be enodei1 by the
Council by one motion wiJhout discussion unless a Cowu:iImember, a member of the publil: or City stIJjJ requuts
that the iIem be puIkd for discussion. If you wish to speak on one of these items, please fill out a "Request to
Speak Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete the green form
to speak in favor of the stIJjJ recommendation; wmplete the pink form to speak in opposition to the stIJjJ
recommmdation.) Items puIkd from the Consent Calendar will be discussed after Board and Commission
Recommendations and Action Items. Items puIkd by the publil: will be the first items of business.
5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
a. Letter requesting consideration of jointly contracting through a joint powers agency with
other cities in the Municipal Court Judicial District to provide a jail facility. The Honorable
Lawrence W. Stirling, The Municipal Court, San Diego Judicial District, 1409 Fourth
Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101-3105.
b. Letter requesting a resolution asking the Board of Supervisors to place the question of
incineration on the June, 1994 baIlot for voter consideration - Mayor Claude A. "Bud" Lewis,
City of Carlsbad, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008-1989.
c. Letter of resignation from the Resource Conservation Commission - John C. Ray.
Agenda
6.
RESOLUTION 16914
7.
RESOLUTION 16929
SA
RESOLUTION 16930
B.
RESOLUTION 16931
9.
RESOLUTION 16932
-2-
December 15, 1992
AMENDING TIiE 1992 LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM POR 1993 AND
ADOPTING A LEGISLATIVE WORK PROGRAM POR 1993 - The report
proposes amendments to the Legislative Program to reflect issues and
address concerns raised during the second half of the 1991-92 legislative
session. In addition, a work program for 1993 has been formulated to
guide staff and the City's legislative consultant throughout the session. The
list of projects was developed after a series of meetings with departments
and Councilmembers. Staff recommends approval of the resolution.
(Administration) Continued from the meeting of 12/8/92.
APPROVING AN EXTENSION OP TIiE AGREEMENT WI1H REMY AND
mOMAS AND AUTIlORlZING TIiE MAYOR TO EXEClITE SAID
AGREEMENT - The work being requested of Remy & Thomas is to continue
environmental legal review of the Otay Ranch Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) and supporting documents. Remy & Thomas has, since
11/19/91, provided legal assistance to the City of Chula Vista and the
County of San Diego in this area. The Agreement has been reviewed by all
parties and is acceptable to Remy & Thomas, the Baldwin Company, and
the City. The County is supportive of the scope of services to be
undertaken. This is the second extension of the original contract. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (Deputy City Manager Krempl)
APPROVING RENEWAL OP TIiE AGREEMENT WI1H LETI1ERl-MCINTYRE
AND ASSOCIATES, PROJECT MANAGER AND TIiE BALDWIN VISTA
ASSOCIATES POR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POR OTAY RANCH, AND
AUTIlORlZING TIiE MAYOR TO EXEClITE SAID AGREEMENT - The
Agreement renewal for professional project management services with
Lettieri-McIntyre & Associates (Anthony J. Lettieri) and Baldwin Vista
Associates is for temporary professional management assistance. The
assistance will allow the City of Chula Vista and the County of San Diego
to continue to process a General Development Plan and related documents
for the approximately 23,OOO-acre Otay Ranch Project. Staff recommends
approval of the resolution. (Deputy City Manager Krempl)
APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO TIiE AGREEMENT WI1H LETTIERI-
MONTYRE AND ASSOCIATES, AND TIiE BALDWIN VISTA ASSOCIATES
POR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO ASSIST TIiE OTAY RANCH TEAM
GENERAL MANAGER, AND AUTIlORlZING TIiE MAYOR TO EXEClITE
SAID AGREEMENT - The Agreement modification for project management
and planning services with Lettieri-McIntyre & Associates and Baldwin
Vista Associates is for continuation of temporary planning assistance. The
request is a continuation of the same contract previously approved by
Council. The assistance focuses on processing of the General Development
Plan and related documents for the approximately 23,OOO-acre Otay Ranch
Project. The Agreement has the concurrence of both the City of Chula
Vista and County of San Diego staff, as well as the applicant. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (Deputy City Manager Krempl)
ESTABUSHING TIiE LOCAL APPOINTMENTS UST POR 1993 AND
DESIGNATING TIiE CHULA VISTA PUBUC UBRARY AS A PLACE TO
RECEIVE A COPY OP SAID UST - According to the Maddy Act (Government
Code ~54973) before December 31st of each year, a list of all regular and
ongoing Board and Commissioners appointed by Council whose terms of
office will expire during the next year must be prepared and made
available to the public. In 1991, the Act was amended to name the list as
the 'Local Appointments List' and to designate the public library with the
largest service population within the jurisdiction as the place to deposit the
List. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (City Clerk)
Agenda
-3-
December 15, 1992
10. RESOUTUON 16933 APPROVING TIlE BALANCE OF TIlE RENfAL ASSISfANCE PAYMENT AND
A PORTION OF TIlE LAST RESORT HOUSING PAYMENT FOR TIlE
RELOCATION OF TENANTS FORMERLY RESIDING ON CITY PROPERlY
AT 365 ORANGE AVENUE AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS IN TIlE AMOUNT
OF $7,234 TIlEREFOR - The City's relocation consultant, Pacific Relocation
Consultants (PRe), has reviewed and recommended approving the
remaining balance of the Rental Assistance payment of $3,750 plus a
portion of the Last Resort Housing payment to Jeff and Lisa Oien
previously residing at 365 Orange Avenue. The payments reflect the City's
legal requirement to pay rental assistance payments when relocating
households oflow and moderate income. The relocation was necessary as
part of the development of the library project at the comer of Fourth and
Orange. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of
Community Development) 4/5th's vote required.
11. RESOLlfTION 16919 AMENDING SCHEDULE VIII, SECDON 10.52.400 OF TIlE MUNICIPAL
CODE TO ALLOW DIAGONAL PARKING ON TIlE 100 BLOCK OF
QUlNTARD SfREET - Staff received a request from Earl Wiens, Principal
of Castle Park Middle School, to provide diagonal parking stalls along the
entire frontage of the school. Staff recommends approval of the resolution.
(Director of Public Works) Continued from the meeting of 12/8192.
12. RESOLlfTION 16934 AMENDING COUNOL POUCY NUMBER 585-1 BY EXPANDING TIlE USE
OF lfTIU1Y FUNDS TO REIMBURSE ALL PROPERTIES FOR TIlE COST OF
UNDERGROUNDING OF PRIVATE SERVICE LATERALS - Council Policy
Number 585-1 addresses the use of utility allocation funds for the
underground conversion of private service laterals. The current Policy
limits funding to single-family residential properties. In response to the
complaints of condominium owners, Council directed staff to amend the
policy to examine the possibility of using utility funds to reimburse all
properties for the underground conversion of private service laterals. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
13. REPORT ACCEPTANCE OF AUDITED FINANaAL SfATEMENTS FOR TIlE YEAR
ENDED JUNE 30, 1992, AND AUDITOR'S OPINION - Each year the City's
financial records are audited by an independent audit firm. The audit for
the year ended 6/30/92 was performed by Deloitte and Touche. Staff
recommends Council accept the report. (Director of Finance)
14. REPORT SANDAG DRAFT REGIONAL PUBUC FAOUTIES FINANaNG PLAN - The
San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) has released a draft
Regional Public Facilities Financing Plan for review and comment. The
plan, when completed, is intended to be the public facilities financing
element of the Regional Growth Management Strategy. Staff recommends
Council accept the report. (Director of Planning)
* * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * *
/
Agenda
-4-
December 15, 1992
PUBUC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
The following itons hilve been advertisoI and/or posted os public heorings os mpUrrtI by Ww. If you wish to speoJc
to any item, pIet= fill out the .Request to Speak Fann. avaiIDbk in the lobby and submit it to the City C1ek prior
to the meeting. (Complete the gTUII~a:...infavorofthe staffrecommendation; complete the pinkfann
to speoJc in oppo.rition to the staff . ) Comments are IimiJed to five minutes per individuoL
15.
PUBUC HEARING
ADOPTION OF AB939 SOURCE REDUCI10N AND RECYCUNG ELEMENT
(SRRE) AND HOUSEHOlD HAZARDOUS WASTE ELEMENT (HHWE) - The
California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB939) required
that all cities and counties prepare formal plans aimed at wastestream
diversion goals of 25% by 1995 and 50% by the year 2000. The law
requires that two public hearings be held prior to adoption of documents
or plans which address source reduction, recycling and composting
programs (SRRE) , and the elimination of illegal disposal of household
toxins (HHWG). The first public hearing requirement was met when the
preliminary documents were accepted at the Council's regular meetings of
11/19/91 (SRRE) and 12/17/91 (HHWE). This public hearing completes
the second requirement and allows Council to consider adoption of the
plans to be forwarded to the County for inclusion along with 18 other
Jurisdictions in the Countywide plan. Staff recommends approval of the
resolution subject to changes required by subsequent legislation and
updated information. (Administration)
RESOLUTION 16935 APPROVING THE SRRE AND HHWE AND AUTIiORIZING THAT BOTH
DOCUMENTS (AS AMENDED) BE FORWARDED TO THE COUNlYOF SAN
DIEGO FOR INCLUSION IN THE COUNfYWIDE INTEGRATED WASTE
MANAGEMENT PLAN
CONSIDERING ABATING THE SCHEDULED CALENDAR YEAR 1993
BUSINESS UCENSE TAXINCREASE TO RETAIN TAXES AT THE CURRENT
CALENDAR YEAR 1991 LEVEL - This public hearing is to consider the
advisability of abating the Business License Tax Increase scheduled to be
effective on 1/1/93. Ordinance 2408 specifies the business license tax
level for each calendar year and provides Council with the option of
abating the scheduled increase for a one-year period. If the scheduled tax
increase is not abated, the business license taxes for most businesses will
double. Staff recommends that after the public hearing is conducted,
Council approve the resolution which abates the scheduled 1993 tax
increase, retaining business license taxes at their current (Calendar Year
1991) level. (Director of Finance) Continued from the meeting of
12/8/92.
RESOLUTION 16921 ABATING THE SCHEDULED CALENDAR YEAR 1993 BUSINESS UCENSE
TAX INCREASE FOR ONE YEAR AND RETAINING BUSINESS UCENSE
TAXES IN CALENDAR YEAR 1993 AT THE 1991 LEVEL, AS PROVIDED
FOR IN ORDINANCE 2408, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF TAXES ON
SPECIFIC BUSINESSES WHICH WERE ADOPTED BY COUNCIL
ORDINANCE APTER JANUARY 1, 1991
16.
PUBUC HEARING
A. ORDINANCE 2537
Related Items. but not Dart of the Dublic hearinl!::
/
AMENDING TITLE 5 AND CHAPTER 9.13 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATED TO BUSINESS UCENSE TAXES AND REGULATIONS - This
taxation ordinance is primarily administrative in nature and will not
increase taxes on ani business currently licensed in Chula Vista. Passage
of this ordinance wil enable the City to collect business license taxes from
unlicensed businesses. Passage of this ordinance will also make the Code
consistent with recently-passed State laws. The ordinance also includes
some adjustments to taxes for specific business classifications to address
Agenda
-5-
December 15, 1992
equity and legal issues. Ordinances related to taxes take effect
immediately. Staff recommends adoption of the ordinance.
B. RESOLImON 16922 AMENDING THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE TO INCLUDE INVESTIGATION
FEES FOR JJVE ENTERTAINMENT UCENSES AT THEIR CURRENT LEVEL
AS SPECIFIED IN SECOON 9.13.050 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE - This
resolution is administrative in nature and basically inserts the current fees
for Live Entertainment License investigations into the Master Fee Schedule
since the specific fees will be deleted from the Code in Ordinance 2537.
Staff recommends approval of the resolution.
17. PUBUC HEARING CONCERNING THE COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING AFFORDABIUlY
STRATEGY (CHAS) ANNUAL PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 1993 - The National
Affordable Housing Act of 1990 requires all jurisdictions applying for
funding from the Department of Housing and Urban Development to
submit a CHAS. The CHAS is a planning document which identifies the
City's housing needs and outlines a strategy to meet these needs and must
be updated annually. Staff recommends approval of the resolution and
acceptance of the report. (Director of Community Development)
A. REPORT DESCRIBING THE COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING AFFORDABIUTY
STRATEGY ANNUAL PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 1993
B. RESOLImON 16936 AIlTHORlZlNG SUBMlTIAL OF THE COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING
AFFORDABIUTY STRATEGY ANNUAL PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 1993 TO
THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
18. PUBUC HEARING GPA-92-01 AND PCZ-92-B; PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE MONTGOMERY
SPECIFIC PLAN/CHULA VlSfA GENERAL PLAN AND REZONE
APPROXIMATELY 113 ACRE LOCATED IN SOUTI-JWESTERLY QUADRANT
OF WEST MAIN STREET AND DEL MONTE AVENUE, FROM
"LOW/MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL" AND R-l-6-P TO "RESEARCH
AND UMITED INDUSTRIAL" AND I-L-P - MARGARITA ROMERO,
APPUCANf - The item involves consideration of a proposal to amend the
Montgomery Specific Plan/Chula Vista General Plan by the redesignation
of a certain 1/3 acre parcel of land, located in the southwesterly quadrant
of West Main Street and Del Monte Avenue, from "Low/Medium Density
Residential" and "R-1-6-P" to "Research and Limited Industrial" and "I.L-P"
(Margarita Romero - applicant). Staff recommends Council place the
ordinance on first reading and approve the resolution. (Director of
Planning)
A. ORDINANCE 2538 AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OR MAPS ESfABUSHED BY SECOON
19.18.010 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE REZONING 0.3 ACRES LOCATED
ON THE WEST SIDE OF DEL MONTE AVENUE, SOUTIi OF MAIN SfREET,
FROM R-l-6-P TO I-L-P (first readinR:)
B. RESOLImON 16937 APPROVAL OF MONTGOMERY SPECIFIC PLAN/CHULA VISTA GENERAL
PLAN AMENDMENT GPA-92-01
19. PUBUC HEARING GPA-93-03 AND PCZ-93-C; PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE CHULA VISTA
GENERAL PLAN/MONTGOMERY SPECIFIC PLAN AND REZONE
APPROXIMATELY 13.48 ACRES LOCATED ON THE EASTERN PORTION OF
BROADWAY, BETWEEN MAIN SfREET ON THE SOUTIi AND ANITA
STREET ON THE NORTH; SUBAREAS 1 AND 2 FROM "RESEARCH AND
LIMITED INDUSTRIAL" AND "I-L-P" TO "RETAIL
COMMERCIAL"/"MERCANTILE AND OFFICE COMMERCIAL" AND "C-C-P";
SUBAREA 3 FROM "RESEARCH AND UMITED INDUSTRIAL" AND "J-L-P"
TO "MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL" AND "R-2-P" - The request is an
application for the redesignation and rezoning of 13.48 acres, amending
Agenda
-6-
December 15, 1992
the Chula Vista General Plan/Montgomery Specific Plan. The three areas
in question are: a) Adobe Plaza (Sepehri property privately initiated) 4.56
acre area located on the northeasterly quadrant of West Main and
Broadway (Subarea 1); b) East Sommerset (City initiated) 4.00 acre area
located on the southeasterly quadrant of West Anita and Broadway
(Subarea 2); and c) Property south of Anita Street with 4.92 acre area,
located at the northeast boundary and adjacent to the southeasterly
quadrant of West Anita Street and Broadway (Subarea 3). Staff
recommends Council place the ordinance on first reading and approve the
resolution. (Director of Planning)
A. ORDINANCE 2539 AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OR MAPS ESTABUSHED BY SECTION
19.18.010 OP THE MUNlOPAL CODE REZONING 13.48 ACRES LOCATED
ON THE WEST SIDE OP DEL MONTE AVENUE, SOUlH OP MAIN STREET,
PROM I-L-P TO C-C-P AND R-2-P AND ADOPTING P DISTRICT
REGll.ATIONS (first readinld
B. RESOLUTION 16938 APPROVAL OP THE CHULA VISTA GENERAL PLAN/MONTGOMERY
SPEOPlC PLAN AMENDMENT GPA-93-03
20. PUBUC HEARlNG CONSIDERATION OF ESTABUSHlNG UNDERGROUND UTIUTYDlSTRICT
NUMBER 125 ALONG ORANGE AVENUE PROM POURTIi AVENUE TO
TIIlRD AVENUE - On 11/3/92, Council ordered a public hearing to be held
on 12/15/92 to determine whether the public health, safety or general
welfare requires the formation of an underground utility district along
Orange Avenue from Fourth Avenue to Third Avenue. Staff recommends
approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
RESOLUTION 16939 ESTABUSHlNG UNDERGROUND UTIUTYDlSTRICT NUMBER 125 ALONG
ORANGE AVENUE PROM FOURTIi AVENUE TO TIIIRD AVENUE AND
AUlHORlZlNG THE EXPENDITURE OF UTIUTY ALLOCATION FUNDS TO
SUBSIDIZE PRIVATE 'SERVICE LATERAL CONVERSIONS
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is an opportunity for the general publU: to address the CiI.y Council 011 any subject matter within the Council's
jurisdU:tion tIuJt is not an item 011 this agenda. (Stale law, however, generally prohibits the CiI.y Council from
taking action 011 any issues not included 011 the posted agenda.) If you wish to address the Council 011 such a
subject, please complete the yeIIow .Request to SpeDk Under Oral CommunU:ations Form. availabk in the lobby
and submit it to the CiI.y CInk prior to the meeting. Those who wish to speak, please give your IJQ1IIe and address
for record purposes and follow up aaion. Your time is IimiuLl to three minutes per speIlker.
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
This is the time the CiI.y Council will consider items whil:h have been forwarded to them for consideration by one
of the CiI.y's Boards, Commissions and/or Committees.
None submitted.
Agenda
-7-
December 15, 1992
ACllON ITEMS
The items listed in this section of the agenda art! ~ to eIiciJ substantial discussions and deliberations by the
Council, stoff, or members of the genoal public. The items win be COIISiiJerrd indiviibuIIly by the Coundl and staff
m:onunendDtions mo.y in certoin CQSt!S be presented in the aIIemIlIive. Those who wish to speok, please fill out
a "Request to SpeaK' form avai/JJJJle in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the muting. PublU:
commenJS art! Iimikd to fiIIe minutes.
21.A. RESOLtmON 16940 APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OP AN IMPLEMENTING
AGREEMENT wrrn MAJOR RETAILER A (HOME DEPOT), RANCHO DEL
REV COMMERCIAL CENTER, AND RELATED CEQA PINDINGS - The
Development Agreements cover the parcels to be purchased by Home
Depot, Kmart and The Price Company and requires Implementing
Agreements be entered into prior to the issuance of building permits. Staff
recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of Community
Development)
B. RESOLtmON 16941 APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OP AN IMPLEMENTING
AGREEMENT WITH MAJOR RETAILER B (KMART), RANCHO DEL REV
COMMERCIAL CENTER, AND RELATED CEQA PINDINGS
C. RESOLtmON 16942 APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OP A PUBUC PACIUTIES
PINANCING AND IMPLEMENTING AGREEMENT WITH MAJOR RETAILER
C (1HE PRICE COMPANY), RANCHO DEL REV COMMERCIAL CENTER,
AND RELATED CEQA PINDINGS
ITEMS PUU.ED PROM TIiE CONSENT CALENDAR
This is the ~ the City Council win discuss items whii:h have been removed from the Consent Calendar. Agmda
items pulled 01 the request of the publU: win be COIISiiJerrd prior to those pulled by Cowu:iJnrnnben. PublU:
commenJS art! Iimikd to five minutl1s per individual
OTHER BUSINESS
22. CI1Y MANAGER'S REPORTCSl
a. Scheduling of meetings.
b. Report on Human Services Coordinator position.
23. MAYOR'S REPORTCSl
a. Acceptance of verbal resignation of Child Care Commissioner Tonette Joynes.
b. Designation of the Councilmember representatives on the PAC/MPC reviewing group per
Council motion 10/6/92 (minutes attached). ~ Nor sellt"JAJ ED
c. Hiring of secretarial position in Mayor/Council office.
Agenda
-8-
December 15, 1992
24. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilman Fox
a. Strategies for attracting environmentally sound businesses to Chula Vista.
b. Reconsideration of Council Policy regarding use of City vehicles and auto allowances
adopted on 12/8/92.
Councilman Moore
c. Status report regarding three Project Area Committees and potential merger of the
Montgomery Planning Committee remaining members into the Southwest PAC.
Councilman Rindone
d. Consideration of re-sequencing of the City Council Agenda to place Items Pulled From the
Consent Calendar following Board and Commission Recommendations.
ADJOURNMENT
The City Council will meet in a closed session immediately following the Council meeting to discuss:
Participation in pending litigation between Laidlaw vs. Bay Cities and EDCO - pursuant to
Government Code Section 54856.9.
The meeting will adjourn to (a closed session and thence to) a joint meeting of the City Council/County
Board of Supervisors on Thursday, December 17, 1992 at 4:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers and thence
to the Regular City Council Meeting on January 5, 1992 at 4:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.
A Special Joint City Council/Redevelopment Agency meeting will be held immediately following the City
Council meeting.
'.
COUNCIL aGENDA STATBMENT
ITEM
'16
JlEETING DATE 12/15/ 9 2
ITEK TITLE: Presentation of the 21st Annual Humanitarian of the Year
Award
SUBMITTED BY:
Human Relations commissio(l4/5TBS VOTE: YES_ NO xx
The award will be presented by Patrick Howell, Chairman of the
Human Relations Commission, to Mrs. Doris Cox.
J/b -- /
~ -
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 3c/
Meeting Date 12-15-92
ITEM TITLE:
Resolution
General Manager
Retirement.
Commending Gary Butterfield,
of Sweetwater Authority upon his
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works
REVIEWED BY:
ci ty Manager f!}
(4/5ths Vote: Yes___No-X--1
BACKGROUND:
Gary Butterfield has been the General Manager of the Sweetwater
Authority since itscreation in 1977. Gary has been an excellent
Manager and Leader for the Water Authority. Under his leadership,
Sweetwater Authority has provided excellent water service to the
citizens of Chula vista. This resolution is to commend Gary for
his oustanding service to the community.
Mr. Butterfield will be in attendance at tonight's meeting to
receive this resolution.
L/ d~ J
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA COMMENDING GARRY L. BUTTERFIELD
UPON HIS RETIREMENT FROM SWEETWATER AUTHORITY
WHEREAS, Garry L. Butterfield has so ably served as
General Manager of the Sweetwater Authority from August, 1977 until
November 1, 1992; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Butterfield also acted as General Manager
for the South Bay Irrigation District from August, 1977 to
November, 1992 and previously functioned as General Manager of the
Ramona Municipal Water District from 1961-1977; and
WHEREAS, Garry L. Butterfield has given generously of his
time to the community by serving as Secretary to the Chula vista
Salvation Army Advisory Council, past Vice-President of the Chula
vista Chamber of Commerce, and past Member of the Board of
Directors of the Rotary Club of Chula Vista; and
WHEREAS, due to his expertise in the water arena, Mr.
Butterfield gave to the Sweetwater Authority strong and invaluable
assistance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city Council of
the city of Chula vista does hereby recognize the outstanding
leadership and management that has been rendered by Garry L.
Butterfield to the Sweetwater Authority and wish him health and
happiness in his well-earned retirement years.
Jj~-3
HONORABLE LAWRENCE W. STIRLING
JUDGE
THE MUNICIPAL COURT
SAN DIEGO JUDICIAL DISTRICT
1409 FOURTH AVENUE
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92101-3106
(6191687-2004
LOCATION CODE 743
FAX (6191 687-2088
NOV
o
November 24, 1992
Mayor Timothy Nader
city of Chula vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mayor Nader:
In spite of the Court Marshal's best efforts in conjunction with
local law enforcement, the balance in unserved warrants still totals over
640,000.
The largest single hurdle to effectuation of these warrants is the
unavailability of misdemeanor jail space. The City of San Diego has changed that
by directly providing misdemeanor jail space instead of relying on the County.
The City made 200 beds available by simply contracting out the
construction and operation of a pre-arraignment facility (Wackenhut - Rob Roberts
- 661-7205).
The San Diego Municipal Court responded with a video arraignment
process. Since the inception of City Jail on May 12 through November 6, we
handled over 4,000 defendants and disposed of 21,000 cases. The San Diego
Association of Governments (595-5383) is doing a report on the impact of the City
Jail. I believe it will be salutary.
However, that facility serves only the City of San Diego. The public
safety of every other City would benefit from similar jail capacity.
As a former City Councilmember, I realize that each City building
such a facility would be too much. But, it occurred to me that perhaps you may
feel strongly enough about the issue of the unserved warrants that your City may
consider jointly contracting through a joint powers agency (Government Code
sections 6500, et seq.) with the other cities in your Municipal court Judicial
District to provide a jail facility.
Such a facility would have a dramatic impact on the public safety in
your city. More than 90 percent of all outstanding warrants are for
misdemeanors. Misdemeanors include, among many other violations, DUI, battery
on women, and failure to support children.
A joint powers agency jail serving our citizens' safety will go a
long way toward protecting the public from DUI's and women and children from
abuse and neglect. The courts need your help to do this job.
Thank you very much for your time
attention to this issue.
LARRY STIRLING
WRITTEN CdUMU
.CA.. l"I."''''''.~Fjt;
, . ;~~ '.' '. ~ ".. '.;. ",. '"
, ',~'0':\'ji,:~J1<.:1."
/.00~
~~/
Cit
of Carlsbad
Office of the Mayor
December 1, 1992
lie 2 .-
Mayor Tim Nader
City of Chula Vista
P.O. Box 1087
Chula Vista, CA 91912
Cou~r ~F SAN DIEGO CLEAN AIR CHARTER AMENDMENT
DearT~.
When the County of San Diego acted to abandon the contract and permits for the waste.to.
energy incinerator at San Marcos landfill, it appeared to many that incineration 'of trash would no
longer be considered for San Diego County. However, that may not be the case. In August of
1989, the Board of Supervisors directed their staff to examine alternative waste management
technologies in more depth. Pursuant to the Board's direction, County staff has preceded with
the process to examine alternative technologies. On August 12, 1992, the Board authorized
distribution of an RFP which is intended to select a vendor to construct 200, 500 or 1,000 tons
per day waste processing/disposal projects serving the Sycamore and Otay landfill wastesheds.
Prior to August, 1992, County staff had evaluated qualifications of many vendors and
recommended nine firms to which the RFP should be submitted. The technologies to be
considered for construction are: MRF's, composting and several incineration technologies. The
appropriate County staff reports are attached for your review.
Although the County's efforts do not seem to involve the north county area, we remain
concerned about the use of solid waste incineration as an appropriate technology for solid waste
management anywhere in San Diego County. Both from a cost and clean air standpoint, solid
waste incineration is not good for San Diego County.
This issue was recently discussed by the North County Solid Waste Coalition and the Coalition
members determined to ask their respective City Councils to adopt resolutions requesting the
Board of Supervisors to place an item on the June, 1994 ballot which would have the effect of
preventing the use of solid waste incineration in San Diego County. Coalition members also
voted to ask me to correspond with all the county mayors and request that their City Council's
also adopt a similar resolution. A draft of a suggested resolution is attached for your
consideration.
WRln'EN
COMMUNICArl;;;,/~...z
'I)
5b-/
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive . Carlsbad. California 92008-1989 . (619) 434-2830
*
Mayor Tim Nader
December 1, 1992
Page 2
Accordingly, I am requesting that you ask your City Council to adopt a resolution asking
the Board of Supervisors to place the question of incineration on the June, 1994 ballot for voter
consideration. When your City Council acts, please ask your City Clerk to send me a copy of
the resolution.
3d~~
Sincerely;
CLAUDE A."BUD" LEWIS
Mayor
Attachment
ma
c: City Council
Board of Supervisors
City Manager
Letter also sent to: Mayor Tim Nader, City of Chula Vista
Mayor Mary Herron, City of Coronado
Mayor Rod Franklin, City of Del Mar
Mayor Joan Shoemaker, City of EI Cajon
Mayor John Davis, City of Encinitas
Mayor Jerry Harmon, City of Escondido
Mayor Mike Bixler, City of Imperial Beach
Mayor Art Madrid, City of La Mesa
Mayor Brian Cochran, City of Lemon Grove
Mayor George Waters, City of National City
Mayor Dick Lyons, City of Oceanside
Mayor Don Higginson, City of Poway
Mayor Susan Golding, City of San Diego
Mayor Lee Thibadeau, City of San Marcos
Mayor Jack E. Dale, City of Santee
Mayor Margaret Schlesinger, City of Solana Beach
Mayor Gloria McClellan, City of Vista
5b.. ;;,
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ,
CAllFORNIA, REQUESTING THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE
COUNIY OF SAN DIEGO PLACE A PROPOSmON AMENDING THE
COUNIY CHARTER TO BAN SOUD WASTE INCINERATION, ON THE JUNE,
1994 BALLOT.
WHEREAS, The County Board of Supervisors acted to abandon the
construction of a solid waste incinerator at the San Marcos landfill; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors has directed staff to pursue alternative
technologies for solid waste handling and disposal; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors will be considering incineration as an
appropriate solid waste management technology for solid waste generated in the Otay and
Sycamore landfill wastesheds; and
WHEREAS, the City of San Diego by a vote of the people has effectively
banned incineration in the City of San Diego; and
WHEREAS, several other cities by Resolution of their City Councils have
opposed incineration of solid waste; and
WHEREAS, cost and air pollution implications, render solid waste incineration
as an inappropriate technology for San Diego County.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
, California, as follows:
The Board of Supervisors, County of San Diego, is requested to place a
proposition on the June, 1994 ballot which would ban solid waste incineration as an
appropriate solid waste management technology for San Diego County.
5/;--3
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE
AGENDA ITEM
SOARe:~ s.....~r:::;-.-S~-=l~
aF;:.l,,'" p ,~Ul....lY
"""':>Sf.oC.
GEOACE F gA,i.:V
nc.o"'oQlS'raoC.
Sl:SolN CiC4..:):,"C;
0..,"0 O!STlIlIC:~
l.EO"lL,WIl.'..-......s
'00..0.'" otSr-..c:~
JOHN lrotAC'X......l,.:)
"""O'STIIbC~
DATE: February 4, 1992
TO: Board of supervisors
SUBJECT: Alternative Technology Project
SUMMARY:
Issue
Should the Board direct staff to distribute the attached
Request for Qualifications for Alternative Technologies, and
include both burn and non-burn technologies?
Recommendation
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER:
1. Direct staff to distribute the attached Reauest for
Qualifications for Alternative Technologies.
Fiscal Impact
The recommended action has no fiscal impact.
Alternatives
00 not solicit Qualifications on alternative waste
technologies that burn waste and consider only non-burn
technologies. Do not issue the RFQ to solicit interest on
alternative technologies.
BACKGROUND
On August 22, 1989, your Board conducted a workshop, presented by
Brown, Vence and Associates (BVA), in which alternative waste
management technologies were summarized, and a workbook was
presented. At the conclusion of the workshop, your Board directed
the CAO to examine alternative technologies in greater depth. The
Director of the Department of Public Works, with the City of San
Diego officials, toured several facilities.
i
5'b "' '1
SUBJECT: Alternative Technology Project
On November 28, 1989 your Board expressed support for the Prison
Industry Authority Waste Recycle Energy Plant proposal and directed
the CAO to negotiate the terms. Also on November 28, 1989, a
private party indicated willingness to commence an Environmental
Impact Report toward implementing a recycling facility that will
process 1000 tons per day of waste.
At that time your Board directed that the CAO work with private
industry and develop a Request for Qualifications for alternative
technology projects by private industry.
To date staff has procured engineering and legal support for
negotiations with the PIA and concurrently procured a consultant
to develop a Request for Qualifications for alternative
technologies. staff contracted with CalRecovery Systems
Incorporated, a california based waste management consultant, to
develop an RFQ, and a draft RFP for alternative burn and non-burn
technologies. A draft RFP and a completed RFQ were submitted, by
the consultant, to staff on October 8, 1991. In early December,
purchasing and contracting provided their review of and input to
the RFQ. The completed RFQ is attached.
staff proposes a two step process to solicit proposals from private
industry. The first step will be to issue a Request for
Qualifications (RFQ) to identify firms that have the experience and
financial capability to implement successful alternative waste
disposal projects. Staff proposes to present the short list of
successful respondents to the Board in June, 1992. At that time
a workshop will be held on the short listed technologies as
directed by your Board.
The workshop format will provide information and be a forum for
local environmental groups and representatives of alternative
technologies to discuss the potential use of various technologies
in San Diego county for your Board's consideration.
The second step will be a Request for Proposals (RFP) issued to
those firms qualified in the RFQ process. Staff has been compiling
a list of interested industry representatives that currently
numbers almost 200 firms.
As directed by your Board, staff will return to the Board in June,
1992 with a report on the RFQ results and a proposed RFP which will
be issued to respondents who were qualified through the RFQ
process.
The following discusses the proposed specifications in the attached
RFQ.
2
5b~5
SUBJECT: Alternative Technology Project
Request for Qualifications specifications
The attached RFQ includes a project description which allows for
burn and non-burn facilities. It includes project specifications
such as:
200 - 1000 ton per day facility size
Public or private site
Full risk assumption by developer
Revenue sharing with the county
Disposal of process residual handled by developer
The RFQ includes the fOllowing evaluation criteria for the vendor:
Vendor operating history and capabilities
Project technology and system design
Management structure and financial strength
The RFQ provides the following information on the county's:
Waste disposal tonnages at County landfills
Waste composition data
Local recycling statistics
county Mandatory Recycling Ordinance with implementation
schedule
Map showing existing county disposal facilities
Your Board is being asked to authorize distribution of the
Al ternati ve Technolog ies RFQ. The Board should note that the
following issues will require resolution in order to proceed in the
future with the RFP. Staff will be working during the RFQ process
to analyze these issues and provide the Board with alternative
policy options and staff recommendations.
In which areas of the county may an alternative
technology be located?
Maya facility be located on a county owned landfill,
other County held land, or on private land?
What level, if any, of waste quantity commitment will
the County be willing to make? .
What level, if any, of cost and investment risk will the
county accept?
What level of responsibility for obtaining financing
will the County accept?
3
5J:;-IP
SUBJECT: Alternative Technology Project
What level of
required above
requirement?
external and
and beyond
public review will be
established permitting
What will be the role of the cities and the AB 939 Task
Force in the process?
proposed Schedule for Alternative Technoloqy solicitation Process
In September, 1991 the CAO submitted a status report to the Board
of supervisors which included a schedule for the alternative
technology proj ect. subsequently I Purchasing and contracting
recommended some revisions to the RFQ which delayed completion of
the RFQ. The revised schedule is shown in the Attachment.
Staff will return to the Board with firms identified in the RFQ
process, and a proposal to complete the RFP in June of 1992. A
recommended RFP proposal ranking will be presented to your Board
by November, 1992.
Respectfully Submitted,
NORMAN W. HICKEY
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
4
5b-7
Attachment
ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGY PROJECT SCHEDULE
(12/18/91)
ESTIMATED
DATE
2/04/92
2/92
3/92
Board hearing on Request for Qualifications
Issue RFQ
Receive Statement of Qualifications
4/92
6/92
Identify Qualified Firms
Board hearing; present qualified firms and
proposal for the. completion of the RFP,
including procurement of consultant if
necessary
8/92
10/92
Issue RFP
Develop Short List of proposals
11/92
Return to Board with proposal recommendation
3b'~
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA ITEM
INFORMATION SHEET
SUBJECT: ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGY PROJECT
SUPV. DIST.: ALL
COUNTY COUNSEL APPROVAL:
( ) standard Form
Form and Legality
( ) Ordinance
(X) Yes () N/A
( ) Resolution
AUDITOR APPROVAL:
(X) N/A () Yes
4 VOTES: () Yes (X) No
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT REVIEW:
( ) Yes
(X) No
CONTRACT REVIEW PANEL:
CONTRACT NUMBER/Sl: N/A
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOARD ACTION:
8/13/91 (71) Directed CAO to investigate other alternatives and to report
back to the Board.
( ) Approved
(X) N/A
11/28/89 (27) Directed CAO to work with private industry and develop an RFQ
for alternative technology projects by private industry.
8/22/89 (84) Directed CAO to examine alternative technologies in greater
!pth.
BOARD POLICIES APPLICABLE:
1-76, Solid Waste Disposal
A-72, Board of Supervisors' Agenda and Related Processes.
M-23, Support of Solid ~aste Resource Recovery Facilities
CITIZEN COMMITTEE STATEMENT:
CONCURRENCE/Sl:
CONTACT PERSON: william A. Worrell (SOB)
ORIGINATING DEPARTKENT: Public Works
DEPARTMENT AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
Februarv 4. 1992
MEETING DATE
fb., if
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE
AGENDA ITEM
a.'A,.,. ,. .,l...lIIII....,
...... ........C..
Gr.OACI!: " ....,\.,.1:...
'"CO... ."..'CT
SVS....... COI..CI....G
......0 .......C..
LEOH L_ """.....L.,..."""S
..0"..... .......e..
JOI'l.... M "'C:OO""'" '-0
w,..... .......c..
DATE: August 12, 1992'
TO: Board of Supervisors
SUBJECT: Alternative Technology Project (All Districts)
SUMMJl.RY:
Reference
On February 4, 1992 (14) your Board approved
of a Requests for Qualifications (RFQ)
Technologies.
Your Board is asked to approve $32,000 to extend the County
consul tant contract ~I i th CalRecovery, Inc. to complete a
Request for proposals and assist the County in selec~ing a
firm(s) for negotiation of a contract award.
the distribution
for Alternative
Your Board is asked to authorize the distribution of the
Final Request for Proposals (RFP) to the firms on the RFQ
short list.
Recommendation
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER:
1. Accept presentations from short listed firms.
2. Receive public testimony from interested parties.
.3. Authorize the Director of purchasing and contracting to
negotiate and execute amendments to county Contract No.
~('5J> 1165"3, for an amount not to exceed .$32,000, to assist
the County in the development and evaluation of the
Request for Proposals (RFP).
4. Approve the project .requirements and direct staff to
complete and distribute the Request for Proposals (RFP)
for Alternative Technologies to the RFQ short list.
5. Direct staff to return to your Board in 90 days with an
alternative technology proposal.
J'b'/P
SUBJECT: Alternative Technology project (All Districts)
Fiscal Impact:
Funds for this project are budgeted. The funding source is the
solid Waste Enterprise Fund (SWEF). If approved, this request will
result in $32,000 current year cost, and no annual cost, and will
require the addition of no staff years.
BACKGROUND
On August 22, 1989 (84), your Board conducted a workshop, presented
by Brown, Vence and Associates (BVA) , in which alternative waste
management technologies were summarized, and a workbook was
presented by BVA. At the conclusion of the workshop, your Board
directed the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) to examine
alternative technologies in greater depth. The Director of the
Department of Public Works, with City of San Diego officials, has
toured several facilities. In addition, your Board directed the
CAO to provide, in a workshop mode, an opportunity for
'environmental advocates and representatives of the alternative
technology industry to debate the use of alternative technologies
in San Diego County.
On November 28, 1989 (27), your Board expressed support for the
Prison Industry Authority (PIA) Waste Recycle Energy Plant proposal
and directed the CAO to negotiate contract "terms with the PIA.
Staff procured engineering and legal services and is currently
negotiating with the PIA.
Also on November 28, 1989, a private party offered a proposal to
prepare an Environmental Impact Report to implement a recycling
facility which would process 1000 tons per day of waste. In
response, your Board directed that the CAO work with private
industry to develop alternative technology projects.
Staff initiated a two-step process to solicit proposals from
private industry. The first step was to solicit Request for
Qualifications (RFQ) to identify firms experienced and financially
capable of implementing successful alternative waste technology
proj ects. The second step is to issue a Request for Proposals
(RFP) to a short list of respondents to the RFQ.. staff contracted
with CalRecovery, Inc., a California-based waste management
consultant, to develop an RFQ and an RFP for alternative burn and
non-burn technologies.
Request for Qualifications ,
The Request for Qualifications (RFQ) was completed and approved for
distribution by your Board on February 4, 1992. Eighteen responses
were received on March 24, 1992. CalRecovery provided 'staff with
a recommended RFQ short list and report on May 11, 1992. The short
list is presented below, and the report is attached.
2
5b'~I/
SUBJECT: Alternative Technology Project (All Districts)
SHORT LIST OF RFQ RESPONDENTS
Qualified Vendor
Technology *
American Ref-Fuel
JWP, Inc.
Mid-American Waste Systems, Inc.
Ogden Products, Inc.
Mass-burn
MRF, compost
MRF
Mass-burn, RDF
Conditionally Qualified Vendor
American Consultation Services, Inc.
NRG Resource Recovery, Inc.
OTVSD/American Interntl. Enterprises
Reuter, Inc.
Wheelabrator Environmental syst., Inc.
Compost, recycling
MRF, RDF, compost
MRF, compost,WTE
Compost, RDF, recyc.
MRF, compost, WTE
* Mass-burn: incineration of non-processed mixed waste
MRF: material recovery facility, recycling facility
RDF: incineration of pre-processed combustible waste
Compost: production of any of a variety of soil amendments
RecYCling: generally refers to a MRF, or related technology
The Conditionally Qualified category includes vendors that were
basically qualified, but were deficient in one or more important
areas. The deficiencies are not considered so significant as to
disqualify the vendors from receiving the RFP. During the RFP
process, the proposals from the conditionally qualified vendors
would be evaluated especially in those areas identified as
deficient in the Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) process. The
deficiencies are discussed in the attached report, page 5, and
listed below:
American Consultation services, Inc.: limited experience by
prime contractor; limited/incomplete financial information
NRG Resource Recovery, Inc.: no guarantor listed; limited,
incomplete financial information
OTVSD/American International Enterprises: no direct solid
waste experience for joint venture members; no guarantor
listed; limited, incomplete financial information
Reuter, Inc.: little detail on similar facilities or project
team members; uncertain financial stability
Wheelabrator Environmental syst., Inc.: little detail on
similar facilities or project team members
3
5b ../.2.
SUBJECT: Alternative Technology Project (All Districts)
Vendors were not qualified initially if they did not provide
sufficient information to meet the following evaluation criteria.
Evaluation criteria
MaximUlll points
1-
2 .
J .
4 .
5.
6.
7.
8 .
Vendor's overall capabilities
Compliance with RFQ requirements
Project technology and system design
overall management structure
Financial strength
Degree of experience related to the task
Record of environmental compliance
Diversion of waste from landfill for similar
facilities: amount and composition of
project residue
Total
50
40
200
60
200
200
50
200
1000
Each vendor was contacted in writing on April 28, 1992, regarding
deficiencies in the Statement of Qualifications submitted by their
team. Vendors v!ere gi\'en an opportunity to provide supplementary
information no later than 2 pm, May 7, 1992. Vendors were not
qualified if they did not respond, or responded insufficiently to
the request for information.
The following is a list, in alphabetical order, of the firms whose
proposals were found to be not qualified for this project.
Bedminster Bioconversion corporation
CR&R, Inc.
Facilities systems Engineering corporation
Hansa Tech International, Inc.
Hipp Engineering Ltd.
Simon Waste solutions, Inc.
A selection committee of County staff
submittals and concurs with CalRecovery's
has also reviewed
recommendations.
.
the
Request for proposals
CalRecovery, Inc. has prepared a draft Request for Proposals (RFP)
and the RFQ. Their current contract does not contemplate the
completion of the RFP, therefore your Board is being asked to
authorize an amount not to exceed $32,000 for CalRecovery, Inc. to
complete the RFP and evaluate responses.
4
56""/3
aUBJECT: Alternative Technology Project (All Districts)
Project Requirements
staff proposes that the following list of project requirements be
included in the final RFP. This list is not all inclusive. It
addresses issues that may be policy related. These requirements
may be waived or modified during negotiations if it is in the
County's interest to do so.
Technical:
Request three size options (200, 500, or 1000 tons/per
day)
Require private site; draft Board Policy scheduled to
be before your Board on september 8, 1992, allows the
option of private ownership of alternative technology
facilities
Require disposal of process residual be handled by
developer; direct cost of disposal will be paid by the
County
Require that developer be responsible for all permitting
and licensing
Require that facility divert waste from the landfill(s}
that counts toward AD 939 diversion goals
Financial:
Require revenue sharing for recovered materials and
energy between the developer and the County
Require Vendor Parent Guarantor or Letter of Credit for
the project
Require that the county has authority to approve
financing
Require developer to be responsible for marketing
Risk:
Request that vendor take Force Majeure Risk; require
vendor to identify/justify risks that it will not assume
Require vendor to take operation and construction risk
Offer a County "put or pay" or guaranteed waste delivery
contract, subject to waste flow control
5
5b-,/i
SUBJECT: Alternative Technology Project (All Districts)
county Information: As in the RFQ, the RFP will indicate a
preference for siting the facility as conveniently as
possible to the otay and sycamore landfill wasteshed areas.
The county will also provide to proposers the following
information on the County's waste disposal system:
Disposed waste composition and tonnages at County
landfills
Local recycling statistics
County Mandatory Recycling Ordinance with
implementation schedule
Map of existing county disposal facilities
Information on planned county facilities; Integrated
Waste Management Plan/CoSWMP
The following is the proposed schedule for the RFP process:
DATE
08/12/92
08/21/92
10/21/92
11/12/92
11/19/92
11/24/92
ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGY PROJECT SCHEDULE
MILESTONE
Board hearing on RFQ short list, Presentations by RFQ
respondents and, change order to complete RFP
Complete and Issue RFP
Receive responses to RFP
Complete 'review of responses to RFP
Present RFP recommendation to Public Works Advisory
Board
Return to Board with recommendation to negotiate and a
contract for Alternative Technology
Respectfully Submitted,
DAVID E. JANSSEN .
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
By
LARI SHEEHAN
DEPUTY CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
6
5// " /5
..
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA ITEM
INFORMATION SHEET
SUBJECT: ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGY PROJECT
SUPV. DIST.: ALL
COUNTY COUNSEL APPROVAL:
( ) standard Form
Form and Legality
( ) Ordinance
( ) N/~Yes 4 VOTES:
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT REVIEW: t'rt/ (X) Yes
(X) Yes0f7( ) NIA
( ) Resolution
AUDITOR APPROVAL:
( ) Yes (X) No
( ) No
CONTRACT REVIEW PANEL:
( ) Approved
(X) NIA
CONTRACT NUMBER(S): NIA
lREVIOUS RELEVANT BOARD ACTION:
2/4/92 (14) Distribute Request for Qualifications for Alternative
Technologies.
BOARD POLICIES APPLICABLE:
1-76 Solid Waste Disposal
A-72, Board of s~ervisors' Agenda and Related Processes.
M-23, Support of olid Waste Resource Recovery Facilities
--
/
iATEMENT:
CONCURRENCE(S). ~,partment of purchasing and contracting
ATTACHHENT(S) Alternative Technology Selection Committee Recommendations
. "Design, Construction, Financing, and Operation of a Solid Waste
Resource Recovery System for San Diego County, California" by CalRecovery
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: public Works
Roger F. Walsh (KAL) 550/694-2231
0-332
Auaust 12. 1992
MEETING DATE
5b'Jd,
FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT
Level of Mandate for the Program{Service Level is:
..
Mandated/Discretionary
o
o
Diseretionlry/Mlndat~
o
r.J
Mandated/Handated
Publ it Work.s Sol id \Jaste
Department Program
Di$cretion.rY/O;scretiona~i
level of Mandlte for this Proposal/Service Level is:
Budget Page No. 24'-250
o
Mandated/Mandated
o
o
Discretionary/Mandated
ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGY PROJECT
Proposal
I:J Mand,ced/D i scret ionary
Discretionary/Discretionary
Direct Cost
s
32 000
FUTURE YEAR ESTIMATED
(bl (c) OF PROPOSAL IF ADOPTED
Proposed Change Proposed Revised (d) Ce)
in Budgeted Current 'elr 1 st Subsequent 2nd subsequen':
Amount Budget. C..b) Year Year
S 0 S 32 000 S 0 S 0
S 0 S 32.000 S 0 S 0
S 0 S 0 S 0 S 0
0 0 0 C
BUDGET
(0)
Budgeted
Amount For
Propenl
Rev.nue
S 32 000
NET GENERAL FUND COST
s 0
Staff Years
o
Sources of Revenue for Proposed Change and Subsequent Years:
s
s
s
s
s
s
Space-Related Impacts: Will this proposal result in any additional space requ;rements? [] Yes [Xl No
If yes, how will these requirements be accomodated? (Attlch add;tional sheets as required)
Support/Other Department l~ctS: (Attlch edditional sheets IS requ;red)
NONE
Remerks: (Attach additional sheets as required)
Approval of this act;on will authorh. an ..ncfen'\t to CCM.I'\ty Contract No. '16SS(CIUec:overy, Inc.), not to .xceed S32,000 to cOft1)l~te
and evaluate the RFP for Alternative Technology. The funding source is tho Solid Wast. Enterprls. Fund (ORG.6&45, Account 2315.
Activity SR9195l.
This action will be funded entirely from the Solid ~.ste Enterprise fund and will hive no i~t upon the Countyl, Cen~r.l Fund.
5);,-/?
,
NOV 3El '92 10:24AM 691-3259
~~*
1GoNov-"""
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CI1Y COUNOL
CITY OF CHOtA VISTA, CAI.lFORNlA
RECEIVED
'9Z f(JV 30 P2:01
.
MAYOR AND COUNCIL,
em OF CHUlA V\ST A
CITy CLERK'S OFFICE
t WOULD UKE TO THANKYOU ALL FOR THE OPPOR'T\NlYTO SERVE ON THE CITY Of
CHULA V1STA'S PlNI'llNG COMMISSION. HOWEVER, fItS A AESULT OF MY RECENT
APPOINTMENT. I HAVE BEEN INFORMED 11iAT I MUST FORMALLY RESIGN MY SEAT ON
THE Reo. 'Il-tEREFORE. PLEASE ACCEPT'MS Lt;1 reA OF REStGNAllON FROM MY
SEAT ON THE RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION EFFECT1VE IMMEDlATLY.
I WOULD UI<E TO ACl<N()Wl..EDCaE AU. MEMBERS OF THE RCC FOR "THEIR DB)ICA11ON
AND SUFPOFtT DURING THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS. ALTHO\.IGH NOT ALL OUR
DECISIONS CAME EASILY, NOR WERE THEY UNANIMOUS, I FeEL PROUD TO HAVE
SERVeD wm-t SUCH FINE PEOPLE.
CC; BAR6AAA HAI.L
~(.' l/,r-- (0
0'd~
WRITTEN COMMUNICA 1'10 i ",,'
~y;
5(:,-1
#~
MEMORANDUM
December 10, 1992
FROM
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
John D. Goss, City Manager tJ
Sid W. Morris, Assistant City Manager 6SM
...--:::;
TO
VIA
SUBJECT
1993 Legislative Program
At the December 8, 1992 Council meeting, the 1993 Legislative Program was pulled
from the Consent Calendar by the Mayor for further discussion. Because of the length
of the meeting, this item was carried over to tonight's meeting. During the interim,
staff was able to contact the Mayor and Council members Horton and Fox to discuss
their concerns with the proposed Legislative Program. The concerns were related to
various categories including: Bayfront/Redevelopment, Fiscal Support, General
Government, Land Use Planning, Environmental Protection, Transportation and Public
Safety. Changes to the Legislative Program which address these concerns are noted
in Exhibit' A' by double asterisks.
cs .11,-, ~ ~ ffl ~
t .A1c 40:0f
~
('-1/' -8
EXHIBIT "A"
1993 LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM
I. LEGISLATION WIllCH CAN BE ACTED UPON DIRECTLY BY STAFF WITH CONCURRENCE
OF LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE.
A. Bayfront - Redevelopment.
1. Support legislation adjusting Redevelopment Agency members pay (more than $30 per
meeting, up to 4 times per month).
>i"t
2.
Sl:If'fJsrt Cssraiaatis8 sf Feaeral Caaalal ZaBEl ~{anagBmeRt f~et, Ilw:ireameatal
PreteetisR AgaRS}' (BP f~) reglllatiBRS ana State Cesstal Zens :\9t, ia aa effert t8
elimieate ~uplieate effofts.
3. Oppose efforts to further control tax increments in redevelopment projects.
4. Seek Port District-State Lands Commission reorganization of tidelands boundaries in
cooperation with Rohr and Chula Vista Investors in an effort to make better use of land
available for development.
5. Support legislation to provide additional funding for the Nature Interpretive Center (NIC)
exhibits from the Environmental License Plate (ELP) Fund.
**
~.
OfJf38Se effects ta reau.se tH8 SliFRBS! sf SaR Diega TJaifiea Pert Distriet Cemmissisn8FB
aRa'sr f8ElHice eSfRfRissisReFs t8 Be sIasles ffl8mesfs sf the City CEH.:!aeil \':hieh they
ref3FE!S8at.
7. Support efforts which provide funding for urban waterfront restoration projects and the
enhancement of the waterfront within the southern San Diego Bay.
8. Oppose efforts to discontinue State supplemental subvention for redevelopment agencies.
9. Support efforts to amend the State Community Development law so as to aIlow a
jurisdiction to combine tax increment from all projects for use in a specific project.
'**
lQ.
Suppeft effofts t8 eMlIRee '",sieeos attraetiee lIRa reteeliee (Go"emor'. Pregfalfl .f
Celflpetitivoeeso).
B. Fiscal Support - Home Rule.
1. Support efforts which:
a. Permit retention and control by local governments of a greater portion of
reveoue generated by Federal, State. and local taxes.
b. Require the Federal government and State to reimburse local governments for
all mandated cost or regulatory actions.
",
~
c. Retain maximum flexibility in the administration of Article XIIIB (the Gann
Initiative).
d. Expand local autooomy or the home rule authority to govern municipal affairs.
e. Enhance the quality of urban life by funding the creation, improvement, or
expansion of parks, libraries and community seIVices.
f. Provide state/federal funding for construction or renovation of public buildings
such as community centers, libraries, civic center, etc.
g. Expand the sales tax base to include mail order sales and home shopping
sources.
h. Provide that cities and school districts can issue general obligation debt with a
majority vote instead of the current 2/3 vote requirement.
i. Permit cities and counties to recover administrative costs from owners of
impounded vehicles upon payment of towing and storage charges.
i Adiust the unitary tax roll nrocedures so that the iurisdiction in which maior
utility oroiects are constructed receives substantially more fiscal benefit than is
currently orovided for.
k. Provide for fiscal reform in the form of .reater reliabilitv. certaintv, and
eauitabilitv of state fundi nil for local llovemments.
2. Oppose efforts which:
a. Restrict or allocate the use of Transient Occupancy Tax revenues.
b. Exempt residential users from the Utility Users' Tax.
c. Reallocate fines and forfeitures.
d. Repeal Gas Tax exemption for local agencies.
*'
e.
Reallocate sales and property tax revenue to the detriment of local i!ovemments.
C. General Government.
*
*
1.
Oppese efforts te impose greater reBtrietieAs eA leeal go\"emmeAt through ameAamoAt ef
tho RrowA f.et.
2. Support efforts to subiect the State Le.islature to the same requirements for public
meetini!s. advance aeenda. etc. as currentlv imoosed on cities throui!h the Brown Act.
3. Oppose efforts to mandate district elections in all cities and/or school districts.
4. Support legislation to eliminate the State's requirement which mandates Project
Committee and/or Boards & Commissions members to complete a fmancial disclosure
statement.
{, ,4D
5. Support efforts to free the sample ballot of campaign rhetoric and distortion.
6. Support efforts to return the "positive purge" method of removing excess names from the
voter registration roles.
7. Support efforts to limit to 1 % the amount of administrative costs and Board of
Equalization may charge to administer local sales taxes such as San Diego's 1/2 cent
sales taxes for transportation and justice facility construction.
8. Oppose legislation which would limit franchise fees/taxes imposed on cable television
operators and utilities.
D. Housing & Community Development.
I. Support efforts which exclude redevelopment agencies from competitive bidding statues
and fair market value restrictions for resale of public properties to permit joint
development of public facilities by private developers upon findings of public benefit.
2. Oppose efforts which grant the State or Federal government approval or veto authority
in the implementation of local redevelopment and rehabilitatinn projects.
3. Oppose efforts to prohibit any state agency from making subventions, financing.
insurance or any other kind of assistance, available to any city or county which has in
effect any rent control measure.
4. Support extension of the following three Federal Low-Income Housing Programs:
a. Mortgage Credit Certificate Program for low/moderate income home buyers;
b. Tax Credits for low income housing programs; and,
c. Continue funding for HUD HOME and HOPE Programs.
5. Support change in Federal banking regulations to exempt banks from having to count
financing or Letters of Credit for low income housing in their risk capital limit
calculations.
E. Land Use Planning.
I. Support efforts which:
a. Strengthen local government's powers and capacity to prepare, adopt and
implement fiscal plans and programs for orderly growth, development,
beautification, and conservation of their planning areas.
b. Are consistent with the doctrine of "home rule" and the local exercise of police
powers, through the planning and zoning processes, over local land use.
c. Expand the land use, conservation, and growth management policies of
municipalities to the unincorporated territories within their spheres of influence.
d. Broaden local government's power to require developers and subdividers to
provide the on-site and off-site facilities and infrastructure needed by their
projects.
',11
~*
e. Maximize the authority of the City to exercise Local Control over general plan
decisions.
f. Require special districts to adopt facility master plans which are consistent with
City and County general plans and growth management programs, and to adopt
five year capital improvement programs and financing plans which are consistent
with their facility master plans.
g"
Permit nrocessin./nrovide fundin. for a Master EIR for biomedical/biotech
industrial develonment in Chula Vista.
2. Oppose efforts which abridge local government's ability to effectively plan, or regulate
local land use including amendments to the laws governing the local agency formation
(LAFCO). Specifically toward legislation which would financially overburden local
governments during the course of their efforts to amend planning policy, regulate land
use through removal of incompatible developments, redevelop blight areas, or annex
territories which are within the spheres of influence.
3. Oppose efforts to site a regional or bi-national airport in the Otay Mesa area.
F. Environmental Protection.
1. Support efforts to require an environmental impact report (EIR) for large projects/utility
mergers.
2. Support efforts to obtain funding for wetlands and riparian habitat acqUlslllon and
restoration, and funding for acquisition of land needed for multi-species habitat
conservation planning.
3. Support efforts to fund planning and land acquisition for Natural Community
Conservation plans created by AB 2172 (Kelley) (1991).
4. Support efforts to obtain funding for a comprehensive environmental management
planning effort for San Diego Bay.
5. Support measures prohibiting the granting of new leases for oil and gas development in
state-owned coastal waters off of San Diego County.
6. Support efforts which encourage the installation of water conserving fixtures in existing
residences and businesses.
7. Support efforts to obtain funding for water conservation to include the construction of
reclaimed water distribution systems, and fixture and irrigation system renovation and
retrofit.
8. Support legislation that will develop an ongoing, reliable statewide funding source to
acquire, develop andlor maintain open space, greenbelts, rivers, streams and trails.
9. Support efforts to expand and utilize existing landfills in the county.
10. Support efforts which encourage post-consumer recycled products use in manufacturing,
residential and business applications through incentives, educations, promotions, etc.
',/2
*'*
II. Support truth in labeling efforts which identify a product's regional recyclability, and its
post-consumer recycled content.
12. Support efforts which require 'disposal warning' labeling on household hazardous
materials, which reduce the use of toxic materials, and which promote nontoxic
alternatives to present materials.
11:. SUPDort efforts to reauire minimum content standards for use of recycled materials in
manufacturinl! orocesses.
14.
Sunport efforts to provide fundi0l2 for environmental enternrise incentives.
G. Public Employer-Employee Relations.
1. Support efforts to protect the rights of City's to establish conditions of employment,
including hours, wages, employee benefits, the meet and confer process, appeal
procedures, and management rights.
2. Oppose efforts which:
a. Impose restrictions on the scope and authority of charter cities to control their
own health plans or retirement systems.
b. Mandate the inclusion of local government employees in the Social Security
System and/or Medicare.
c. Increase workers' compensation benefits without also making needed reforms.
d. Mandate changes. impose limitations, and/or other benefit plans, wages, hours,
or working conditions which are properly determined through the meeting and
confer process.
e. Mandate mental health coverage in group health insurance plans.
f. Reduce local control over public employee disputes and impose regulations of
an outside agency (such as PERS).
g. Prohibit an employer from testing an employee or applicant for employment for
illegal substances.
3. Support efforts to reform California Workers' Compensation Program to reduce public
costs and tighten restrictions.
4. Support lel!islation amendinl! the Fair Labor Standards Act to ensure that executive.
administrative and nrofessional emolovees still Qualifv as exemot.
H. Public Liability.
1. Support efforts to change the legal principal of "joint and several liability' to protect, the
City against "deep pocket" liability.
2. Support efforts to reinforce public entity design and discretionary act immunity.
t~tJ
3. Oppose efforts to further erode government toward immunity.
4. Support legislation which would prohibit recovery by a plaintiff for injury where those
injuries were caused as a result of avoiding a police pursuit.
I. Public Safety.
1. Encourage efforts to strengthen local law enforcement.
a. Support efforts that strengthen present State and Federal laws which give local
governments the power to further restrict or regulate prostitution.
b. Support legislation that increases penalties for the manufacture at or sale for
profit llft<Ifef of dangerous drugs including but not limited to PCP.
methamphetamine and narcotics.
t< 'IE e.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
1.
J.
k.
L.
m.
n.
S1:l~pert legislatisR tABt rSEiuires life seRh~R6E!S fer aealeFs sf seaaly arugs aRB
rspeat effen8sfs relates 113 sals fer pFaHl BREVet aaflgereu8 9nlgs.
Support legislation which prohibits the sale and brandishing of replica or
facsimile firearms.
Support legislation to toughen drunk driving laws.
Support legislation which requires notification be given to local law enforcement
prior to the release of a prisoner in that County/City.
Support legislation which strengthens the City's ability to regulate the public
display of material which is harmful to minors.
Oppose legislation which would preempt local ordinances concerning Fetal
Alcohol Syndrome.
Support legislation which increases drunk driving penalties and enhancements.
Support legislation which provides a penalty of life imprisonment for individuals
convicted of selling deadly drugs for profit.
Support legislation which would permit forfeiture of all assets of drug dealers
which would then be committed to drug enforcement programs.
Support le2islation which would allow ta22in2 (ie. serialized identification) of
beer kel1s in an effort to reduce under ai!e consumotion of alcoholic beverai!es.
Support le2islation which permits the staffin2 of Photo Radar posts bv properlv
trained non-sworn personnel.
SUPDort lellislation which oermits the issuance of a Dhoto radar citation to tril?l1er
the arrest warrant orocess.
,., I,.
J. Transportation.
1. Support clean-up legislation related to transportation funding.
2. Support efforts to provide funding which would complete missing links on interstates;
emphasis on SR-125.
3. Support efforts to fund transportation.
~Jj(
4.
Support efforts to reduce municipal costs associated with CALTRANS proiects.
K. Recreation.
1. Support legislation that will allow for State/Federal funding for City arts programs.
2. Support legislation which provides State/Federal funding for Child Care programs.
3. Support legislation which provides State/Federal funding for gang prevention and
diversion in community-based recreation setting.
4. Support legislation which provides State/Federal fupding for Drug Prevention and
Intervention programs in a community-based recreation setting.
L. Librarv.
L Support le~islation which provides for continued state fundin~ of the Public Librarv Fund
(PLF) and California Librarv Services Act (CLSA).
L Support le~islation which continues to provide for State/Federal fundin~ for literacv
nro!!rams.
1.. Support le~islation which provides for State/Federal fundin~ of librarv construction and
renovation.
4. Support le~islation which provides for continued State/Federal fundin~ of the Librarv
Services and Construction Act (LSCA).
/,.-./0
II. LEGISLATIVE ITEMS REQUIRING FORMAL COUNCIL ACTION.
A. Bayfront - Redevelopment.
1. Support consolidate control and administration of environmental regulations and
enforcement; presently in Department of Interior; Corps of Engineers; Department of
Commerce; (NOOA); Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
:t;jt
2.
Sunnort Coordination of Federal Coastal Zone Manaoement Act. Environmental
Protection Aoencv (EPA) reoulations and State Coastal Zone Act. in an effort to
eliminate dunlicate efforts.
~*
1..
Onnose efforts to reduce the number of San Dieoo Unitied Port District Commissioners
and/or reauire commissioners to be elected members of the City Council which they
reoresent.
~*
4.
Suooort efforts to enhance business attraction and retention (Governor's PrOl!ram of
Comoetitiveness),
B. Environmental Protection.
1. Support efforts which:
a. Approve the coordination of State, Federal and local agency responses to air
quality control, energy, and environmental protection.
b. Seek funds for facilities to capture and treat the flow of raw sewage entering San
Diego from Tijuana.
c. Encourage development of environmentally sound techniques for treating
hazardous waste to reduce its volume and eliminate any toxicity.
d. Provide funding to study the water quality/toxic pollution in San Diego Bay.
e. Encourage development of water resources facilities and make improvements to
the delta.
f. Obtain tinancial assistance at the federal level to construct new and upgrade
existing secondary treatment facilities in San Diego County.
g. ferm a g~eeial Aet DistRet. eeasisteBt ~ith established CeuBail aireetieB aaa
petie:,'. fer FsgieRal aamiBistratisa sf the San Diege ~fetr8f38titaa \'~ster 'Vater
TreahHeat System.
C. General Government.
I. Support efforts to fund school facility construction programs.
2. Support efforts to clarify the authority of school districts to impose facilities fees
established by CH 887, Statutes of 1986 (AB 2926).
:t<-"*
1..
0000S6 efforts to imoose lZreater restrictions on local Q'overnment throui!h amendment of
the Brown Act.
'''I''
D. Housing and Community Development.
1. Support efforts to:
a. Develop Federal and State participation and financial support for creative
programs to provide adequate housing for the elderly, handicapped, and low-
income persons throughout the community.
b. Maintain and create tax incentives for private revitalization of existing
commercial, industrial and housing resources where such assistance benefits the
City.
E. Puhlic Safety.
1. Oppose efforts to:
a. Change/remove date and/or shift, to the employer, the burden of proof related
to firefighter cancer presumption.
b. Shift to the employer, the burden of proof related to Public Safety Aids
presumption.
2. Support efforts to:
a. Increase municioal fundine ~ for the removal of abandoned vehicles.
h. ];:slahlisH a. aha.ae.ea yeHiole flrogmm anewiAg tHO immeaiate remeval hy tlte
City sf junlc'a19aBs8Rsa "sRielea.
''''/7
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
to
Meeting Date December 15. 1992
ITEM TITLE: Resolution I~I~ Amending the 1992 Legislative
Program and Adopting a Legislative Work Program for
1993.
SUBMITTED BY: Assistant city Manager
REVIEWED BY:
City Manager
(4fsths Vote: Yes___ No-X-l
The Legislative Program was provided for in the Orqanization and
Procedures on Leqislative matters affectinq the citv of Chula vista
adopted as Council Policy in January 1987. The purpose of the
Legislative Program is to identify and adopt position statements
regarding a variety of issues which reflect the policy and
direction of the councilf Agency. This action sets guidelines which
permit staff to make timely responses consistent with Council's
desires to sponsor, support or oppose bills during the legislative
process. Historically, the program has been reviewed at the
beginning of each 2-year legislative session and amended as
necessary at the midpoint of the session.
This report proposes amendments to the Legislative Program to
reflect issues and address concerns raised during the second half
of the 1991-92 Legislative session. In addition, a work program
for 1993 has been formulated to guide staff and our legislative
consultant throughout the session. The list of projects was
developed after a series of meetings with departments and
Councilmembers.
RECOMMENDATION: That the city Council adopt the proposed
amendments to the Legislative Program and the Work Program.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: This report has been reviewed by
the Legislative committee and reflects their comments as well as
input from the department heads and Councilmembers.
DISCUSSION:
Leqislative Proqram
The Legislative Program is divided into two categories. category
I represents those items "which can be acted upon directly by staff
with concurrence of the Legislative committee", with category II
consisting of legislative items "which require formal Council
action". component areas include:
~'3
Item
Meeting Date December 15. 1992
A. Bayfront/Redevelopment
B. Fiscal support/Home Rule
C. General Government
D. Housing and Community Development
E. Land Use Planning
F. Environmental Protection
G. Public Employer/Employee Relations
H. Public Liability
I. Public Safety
J. Transportation
K. Recreation
L. Library
A number of amendments
Legislative Program. The
resolution as Exhibit 'A',
deletions by strikeout.
are proposed to update the City's
copy, attached to the accompanying
denotes additions by underline, and
The following have been deleted:
section I.
1.1.c.
"Support legislation that requires life sentences
for dealers of deadly drugs and repeat offenders
related to sale for profit and/or dangerous drugs."
This is redundant of I.l.j.
B.1.g.
"Support efforts to form a Special Act District,
consistent with established Council direction and
policy, for regional administration of the San
Diego Metropolitan Waste Water Treatment System."
Accomplished.
E.2.b.
"Support efforts to establish an abandoned vehicle
program allowing the immediate removal by the City
of junk/abandoned vehicles."
Accomplished.
Items dealing with consolidation of environmental management
agencies, Port Commissioners, Governor's prog~am of
Competitiveness, and Brown Act restrictions ~n the
Bayfront/Redevelopment and General Government sections have been
moved to section II requiring formal Council action.
Noteworthy is the proposed addition of a Library section, which
addresses support for continued State and Federal funding of
Library and literacy programs. other proposed additions include:
~..~
Item
Meeting Date December 15. 1992
*
Adjusting uni~ary tax roll procedures so that the
jurisdiction 1n which major utility projects are
constructed receives substantially more benefit than is
currently provided for;
*
Seeking fiscal reform for local government funding;
*
Subjecting the Legislature to the Brown Act;
* Processing of a Master EIR for biomedical/biotech
industrial development;
* Requiring minimum content standards for use of recycled
materials in manufacturing;
* Seeking funding for environmental enterprise incentives;
* Clarifying exemptions to the Fair Labor Standards Act for
salaried employees;
* Identification of beer kegs to curb under-age drinking;
* Staffing of Photo Radar posts by properly trained, non-
sworn personnel, and allowing the issuance of a photo
radar citation to trigger the arrest warrant process.
* Reducing municipal costs associated with CALTRANS
projects.
Work Proqram
In an effort to maximize our resources and impact at the State
level, the work program, attached to the accompanying resolution as
Exhibit 'B', has been developed to guide staff and our legislative
consultant. This document is the result of several meetings with
departments, councilmembers, and our legislative consultant. It
serves several purposes: a) as a work plan for staff and the
legislative consultant; b) narrows the scope of the legislative
arena to specific issues of concern to Chula Vista; and, c) serves
as a valuable tool for setting the City's agenda and evaluating our
lobbying efforts in the state legislative process.
The proposed work program is divided by department and priority.
Included is a description of each request and recommended follow-up
action. The priority assigned to projects is based on the
following criteria:
1. Urgency (i.e., significant cost or need)
2. Timing/pOlitical climate in Sacramento
3. Feasibility
t,~~
Item
Meeting Date December 15. 1992
Although priorities have been set, the Work Program should not be
considered a static document. It will be reviewed by staff and the
Legislative Committee and amended throughout the year to take
advantage of the legislative agendas at the local and state level.
It is staff's intent to continue to update the Work Program as
needed and provide Council with quarterly status reports on
progress.
FISCAL IMPACT: Although adoption of the Legislative Program and
Work Program for 1993 does not result in any cost to the city, the
contract with Advocation, Inc., as amended and approved by Council
on 11/17/92, constitutes an annual cost of $74,040 inclusive of the
base contract and reimbursable expenses.
A:\(Al13j\LEGISPRO.REV
~,b
.
.
.
RESOLUTION NO.
/~9JlI
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AMENDING THE 1992 LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM FOR 1993 AND
ADOPTING A LEGISLATIVE WORK PROGRAM FOR 1993
The City council of the City of Chub Vhta doea hereby reao1ve aa followa,
WHEREAS, in January, 1992, the City Council adopted ita 1992 Legia1ative
Program in order to aet forth the guide1inea for reviewing and eatab1iahing a
City position related to State and Federal legialation and po1iciea/ and,
WHEREAS, amendments to the Legislative Program to reflect iaaues and
address concerns raised during the 1991-92 State Legislative Session are
contained in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference
as if eet forth in fulll and,
WHEREAS, as a result of meetings between City ataff, Advocation, Inc. and
membera of the City Council in November 1992, a Legislative Work Program,
attached hereto as Exhibit "B", was developed for 1993 to guide the work of etaff
and Advocation, Inc. regarding iesues of immediate concern; and,
WHEREAS, Exhibits "A" and "B" have been reviewed by the Legialative
Committee and reflect their comments as well as input from the City Council and
department heads.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby amend the 1992 Legislative Program as set forth in Exhibit "A",
and as amended, eame shall be known as the 1993 Legislative Program of the City
of Ch\.lla Vista.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby adopt the 1993
Legislative work Program as set forth in Exhibit "B".
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that staff and the Legislative Committee are hereby
authorized to implement these programs.
Presented by
Sid Morris
Aesiatant City Manager
F:""""""'\IDspnI&.-
~7
..........
~,.,' .
~,
1HIS PAGE~
.........,
........,
~
{
~
s:
l!l
g.
g
o
In
."
>
~
"
.~
{ l:'C e:~ > l'i -!; ::; '" a"
.. n .. " g ... ': 'g, .&\ t =: ~.
~o ~.1l
a':>'Q. .:-::>!", li!. i.
'" {II,@ K'< B ~Er;ri~ ("
= '"'! n"'<
~ ~I); o~- ~rli~ I a' ..' -6 ~ 0 ~ ;g
'" -'" _ire .1 i 1- g. ..
..., g' ~ ~'- fol~oc 0
~ .. ri ,<!;B" - ....
" {II """a'_- Wen,",! r ~ In
s: ;'If .. r- :5.~iri8~ I!.=:E !l ~
" - ~Q.g, I ~dl: .. .- c fA '" Ii - ~
.. lE o' ,,~~ 1'"'! c 0
- ~ ~ -. _. n 0' " ..ll ." '<=: ii ~ trl
." fA .. .. """ (") -. '"
a ~ _. .. :3 11 E. ~
.g ~ . . '" n
'& 0'" ::. -" ~ '"'! "'. a 2!!
1);'" c = -~ f:! p,o
:>. ::.OQ =: " - ~ ~~
'< _. '8 " - t ~'i! ~ = cS"
= :>. " .. q ill 0
.- O'lE
.. filc ~ (l i ~ sl ~ o ~. :z:
r c n c - d -
a;= - .. a;n2i
!" <~ g:i ;3 In - ~ ~~
-. ~ fA S it "'.1:) . ..
'" Q. . ~ > n
F" e; [' j~
...., s ...
fg.~.i:
... ~
... 1:)0'"
m ~ Cc>
- trl:z:~ i~
...,
Ii 9 ~ ~:~ -
~~ "
....
-.
." ...
2!! !
~ -
- - - N -
-<
i '" l!l.l!: -;::'"'!lg.I!1.l!: :E -118.1 "':E
~ !; " 8 g.~ s.t ~. i ~ 1!1. ~ !i
{II El. ~ = i'" S
-0 " ~ 8. o' g- i g.
" . 2 ~ ~ ~ ~J ~ ;.
5' ~.a [ B J'!=.ltl
1 8 1 n Ii S lP. ",.i p; != '<
'< .... 8 - ~
'< - '< o '<
"!- ...
I
.
~
~ -/&
(
'"
. t
~ r- i~ 0
5!: cr III
I'" ~ ":. e, ."
~ ~e. >
0 ~ ~
a- !!::
g' tr1
Z
-I
i -. ~ -I ::'i!C: -." ~En &lr€ ~~ a-.
5 0 " 50 ~ - 8
_"a (i'" !"gl> ! ~ i-:g 1
R- "8 00 [-~ oola, K a'
::>. j;l <::>. _0
~,(l ~'g. 00'< _. r- ~ ! ,lla
j;l ~ ~! il '"
g -, E- ~ -. t~ ~
. e. ~ ~'oo -, '" ;g
~ =' o j;l ~, e: I> l!. -.
0'< ~'%1 &'g o' !i
::I, g 8"a ~'8~ - e
~ 5 ~ '" r J
~ ~ a '%1 O'~ III
0' ~ 'll~ ..., '" ~, ~ Co " Q
" 0 2. ~ g 0
- '" o 5. ~ ." " ~ ~ i -
O'o~ ::l -, !;l r- oog.~ '" 0
!!~ j;l -, ..:<~
~"''%1 ",.::;J ." _.- '" ~ ~ Ul
2'~- ~. en ...'" ... >!!?
o - ()
"'.. ~ :":,,cn 0 ~ = ~ ttl o' [ - E
~!ln >00 0'" -'" ..
'" "'"8 ,ll- 0", ... ;!j
" i 0 ~1! :-'::>. ~ (i;'n wi ~ ..
... .. ~::>. ...., '" -00 g- o
lo[ "'2' ":"!. u). ~-
s ~ ~= < ;; l~ fI.o t z
~ n [ ~, 2' " S ~
a' > ~ 5. l~ t:::'8 I!. . .
>0 '8
a' fI.o IN
~~ 6' '" 00 m >0 ::>.
- .. 0
0 6' u; ",'
.... .... ~ _. .... .... g;.~~
v. - " 5 .oo~
~-~ <
" ~~ :0 <:cQ
'" IIlz
Ii .....
. o. ..... ~~-
~ ~ 5' ~ f!g .. ..
...
."
E
0
- '" - - '" '" - .~
.. -<
.. .
i Q e, 6' ~ ~ l g:i !r !!:: !!:: ~i~~ !!:: !!:: i
. J: 1l ~ r. '%1 ~ o,g, 8. 8, ! a in' 0 0 "" .
e, e,
B ~. e, ~ la' ~ (l g 6' ~ - "'!1-.- S S 0
:" 11 !,! :" :" n ..~
[i il I B c ,g. '" 0 =' [
~&' i6'(l - . '" '.~
s: g'.:! 0 19 '< 1< C:
...
>..
Iii...................
.......ii
it>
b../1
. ,
.
. f z I ~ C
l1. 'm
c ."
(l 0' >
DO i ~ ~
=- !:
m
z
-!
"0 Iii lS Cl
g.c cO
",..a =, IE
~~!~
~~oE
" !!. (l DO
.' 10 DO "
~' B. [ B
~ ~ 7
. 0 ;'i
c IE "
a-a-s-:
~ "'0 S
.' 0 -
-< a o'
o - =
~ " 0
" ~ ...
~ ~
~ IE ~
=. :;.' 0'
~ 5";
",,1:-
~-
..,
!:
o
e,
o
:"
z
~
l
l
i
~.
-
!l ~~, ~
g", ... l\'
!, t~ ~
~g.li
- -
0'"
/",-2b
.."
f
!
...
~
IE
"
6'
~
.:!
.,
6'
a
...
..,
8
~
~-(l>
~~U!.
_ ~l!l
U\ " &. .'
to.9'!il =
-;.-
~, 8'
8 0
-.
(l '"
< I:
g:g
fi "
. B
E
i!!
...
<
~
o
ii1
~
s'
0;
s'
"
c
i
'"
E ~
~' ~
~ ~
'(
8
i
i
i
(
"0
o
~,
a
~
s-
"
!
~~
!' r
f'
8-~
,,-!
oE
~ ~
~.:..
-~
",'
~~
iP'
, ~
=
0-
~
'"
!:
8
g'
:"
~
!5
o
Ul
l"l
'"
~
S
z
"';>o-
m!::::
100'"
c: >
trlC:Q
~~-
o
-.
...
."
'"
'0
'"
~
~
.."
fa
E
~
c
-.;
,
.ii
....
I
, I" '., ~.o(.
. .1
a'
='
8
"rl
a'
'!:l
,..~
,~
,il::
In
?i
~i IO-~ f
il~
lk'
~~~i
a.'
. I! '<
(l i l ~ ~ il:: '~
, t ,.
" . Doe - 0
f If - '~
!!l
='11 Q
~ ~ ~ ~. 0
.. 6 g ;; ~ 'el
~ - If
:1.:-:' ""'!'l '~
gg~=' I'
a ~ N~
...- ':lj
~r f1~ -
0
0' i ~.] E' Z
... IS.
i .'1 if
~ I~
(l
8
...
G;,.~"~
.oo~
<It .c::CQ
~ ~?i-
~ 0
...
~
j
c
~
i
:g
l:
tv
...
I a'l ~ 1] m ~ ~ !:
E: & s. tl 0 i ~ ::: =. i.
g. Ii ~ 6" il i! !.~' ~ ~
.. B. '< .. .. . l! 0 IS. !;.
. Ill:;'" Ii
Ii f
f. 11~ijitlil;J.1.
~ I ai~I~'~1 t
.. . I!. ~ L. I 0
~ 5 - . ,. ~ .. III
a.
&,;)/
tv
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
VIA:
Item Number % 7
Meeting Date 12/15/92
Resolution / t 9.21Approving an Extension of the Agreement
Between the City of Chula Vista and Remy & Thomas and
Authorizing the Mayor to Execute Said Agreement
General Manager, Otay Ranch project~
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMrllhD BY: Deputy City Manager Krempl (p{t/
REVIEWED BY: City ManageQ
"
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_No X )
The City of Chula Vista is the agency designated to approve consulting contracts for the
Otay Ranch. The work being requested of Remy & Thomas is to continue environmental
legal review of the Otay Ranch Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and supporting
documents. Remy & Thomas has, since November 19, 1991, provided legal assistance to the
City of Chula Vista and the County of San Diego in this area. The Agreement has been
reviewed by all parties and is acceptable to Remy & Thomas, the Baldwin Company and
the City. The County is supportive of the scope of services to be undertaken. This is the
second extension (and it is anticipated that this is the final extension) of that original
contract executed in 1991.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution approving the Agreement with Remy &
Thomas to review and provide legal input on the Otay Ranch EIR and supporting
documents and authorizing the Mayor to sign the attached Agreement.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION: Remy & Thomas has provided legal support on this project since November
1991. They have been instrumental in assisting and will continue to assist in: the content and
focus of the EIR, and they are now providing assistance in review of the EIR including the
Findings, Statement of Overriding Considerations, Mitigation Monitoring Program and the
Staff Report. It will also be necessary from time to time to have Remy & Thomas meet with
staff and coordinate on Planning Commission, Board of Supervisors and City Council
referrals dealing with legal issues on the EIR. Remy & Thomas is involved since they can
focus staff on this project in a timely manner. Because of the size of the project and the
amount of time involved, Remy & Thomas can provide initial legal expertise to both the
City and County. Because of this unique project, an objective third party legal counsel has
been invaluable in this process.
7-/
Page 2, Item No.
Meeting Date 12/15/92
/7
During 1990, Remy & Thomas invoiced the City of Chula Vista $7,380.85. During 1991, that
amount was $39,462.17. In 1992 (through October), that figure was $42,146.34. This request
is for an additional $20,000.00 in services through April, 1993.
FISCAL IMPACf: There will be no fiscal impact to the City of Chula Vista because the
Baldwin Company will be funding this scope-of-work ($20,000.00).
SR:\R&TAl13b,ajl
7" ,p.,
,~ i
\
RESOLUTION NO. /69.:t..?
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN EXTENSION OF THE
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND
REMY & THOMAS FOR LEGAL CONSULTING SERVICES
FOR THE OTAY RANCH PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT
The City Council of the City of Chula vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, the City of Chula vista is the agency designated
to approve consulting contracts for the Otay Ranch; and
WHEREAS, Remy & Thomas is requested to continue to
perform consulting services regarding environmental legal review of
the Otay Ranch Environmental Impact Report.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby approve an extension of the
agreement between the city of Chula vista and Remy & Thomas for
legal consulting services for the Otay Ranch Project, a copy of
which is on file in the office of the City Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that 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 vi
Presented by
ALIOf
~ce M. Booge.
Attorney
, City
George Krempl, Deputy city
Manager
C:\RS\Remy&Thomas
,?-3/'l-#-
Renewal of Agreement with
Remy and Thomas
for Legal Consulting Services
This Agreement is made this day of 1992 for the purposes of
reference only, and effective as of the date last executed between the parties, between the
City of Chula Vista ("City") herein, a municipal corporation of the State of California, and
Remy and Thomas, a professional law firm ("Consultant"), and is made with reference to the
following facts:
Recitals
Whereas, the City and County of San Diego desire to employ a law firm with
expertise and experience in reviewing environmental documents for compliance with the
guidelines and procedures of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in reference
to the Otay Ranch Project; and
Whereas, Consultant warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed in
a manner such that they are and can prepare and deliver the services required of Consultant
to Agency within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the terms and
conditions of this Agreement; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City and Consultant do hereby
mutually agree as follows:
1. Consultant's Duties
a. General Duties
i. Consultant shall review environmental documents prepared by the City or their
consultants consisting of a Program Environmental Impact Report for compliance with CEQA
and advise City/Otay Ranch Project Team staff as to necessary and relevant changes that may
be required; and,
ii. Consultant shall provide guidance to City staff as to the processing of all
supporting environmental documents to assure compliance with CEQA requirements such as
the Findings, Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring Program;
and,
iii. Consultant shall provide legal advise to City staff to defend litigation predicated
upon alleged deficiencies in environmental documents or improper processing of said
documents.
1
?-5'
(the duties of the Consultant as herein in this section contained may hereinafter be referred to
as "General Duties"); and, . . .
b. Scope of Work and Schedule.
Work assignments under this Agreement will be issued on an as needed basis. The
schedule will be agreed upon at the time that the tasks are assigned.
c. Standard of Care
Consultant, in performing any Services under this Agreement, whether Defined
Services or Additional Services, shall be performed in a manner consistent with that level of
care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under
similar conditions and in similar locations.
d. Insurance
Consultant represents that it and its agents, staff and consultants employed by it are
protected by worker's compensation insurance and the Consultant has the coverage under
public liability, property damage and errors and omissions insurance policies which this
Agreement requires to be demonstrated in the form of a certificate of insurance.
Consultant will provide, prior to the commencement of the services required under
this Agreement the following certificates of insurance to the Agency prior to beginning work:
Statutory Worker's Compensation coverage plus $1,000,000 Employers liability
coverage.
General and Automobile Liability coverage to $1,000,000 combined single limit, and
which is primary to any policy which the Agency may otherwise carry ("primary coverage"),
and which treats the employees of the Agency in the same manner as members of the general
public ("cross-liability coverage").
All policies shall be issued by a carrier that has a Best's Rating of "A, Class V", or
better, or shall meet with the approval of the Agency's Risk Manager.
All policies shall provide that same may not be canceled without at least thirty (30)
days written notice to the Agency.
2. Duties of the City:
a. Consultation and Cooperation
City agrees to provide information, data, items, and materials as may be required by
Consultant in order to carry out Consultant's duties under this Agreement.
b. Compensation
2
')~?
i. The City hereby agrees to pay an hourly fee of $195.00 per hour to attorneys
Michael H. Remy, Tina A. Thomas, and J. William Yeates, and James G. Moose and an
hourly fee of $150.00 per hour to attorney Elizabeth O'Brien. Services of Staff Planner,
Georganne Foondos, will be billed at the hourly rate of $75.00 per hour. Time for research
done by a law clerk or paralegal will be billed at an hourly rate of $50.00 per hour. Time of
attorneys for travel shall not be billed to City unless same is also actively spent in the
rendition of legal services.
ii. In addition to the above attorney fees, City hereby agrees to pay to the attorneys
all applicable costs, such as: filing fees, copying costs at $0.25 (.25 cents) per copy,
mileage costs at $0.35 (.35 cents) per mile; printing costs by a professional printer, as
charged, long distance phone charges, as charged; postage charges, as charged;
reimbursement for lodging and meal expenses in instances requiring out of county travel,
including but not limited to any costs involving common carriers (e.g., airplane), and any
other agreed upon costs or expenses related to this matter.
iiL Consultant shall not incur costs or billings which, in total, exceed Twenty
Thousand Dollars ($20,000.00) without further written approval of the City.
iv. It is understood that the City has established the Otay Ranch Trust Fund to
account for and pay all expenses from deposits made by the project proponent, Baldwin
Vista, Ltd. If there is a default of the proponent, compensation for the services performed
shall be paid only from deposited monies and from no other asset or resource of the City, a
special obligation which is not a burden upon, or appropriation from, the General Fund of
the City.
c. Additional Scope of Work,
In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set forth, City may require
Consultant to perform additional consulting services related to the General Duties and Scope
of Work ("Additional Services"), and upon doing so in writing, Consultant shall perform
same on a time and materials basis at the rates set forth in Section 2b. All compensation for
Additional Services shall be paid monthly as billed.
3. Administration of Contract
The City hereby designates the Otay Manager, or his designee, as its representative
for the coordination and administration of the work performed by Consultant herein required.
Copy of all correspondence will be provided to the City Attorney, and important legal
decisions or conclusions will be reviewed with the City Attorney.
4. Term
Consultant shall perform all of the Defined Services herein required of it as may be
required until the earlier of the billing of the cumulative total amount authorized under this
Agreement, or April 30, 1993.
3
,}-7
5. Financial Interests of Consultant
Consultant warrants and represents that neither she, nor her immediate family
members, nor her employees or agents ("Consultant Associates") presently have any interest,
directly or indirectly, whatsoever in property which would constitute a conflict of interest or
give the appearance of such conflict in relation to the projects identified in this Agreement.
Consultant further warrants and represents that no promise of future employment,
remuneration, consideration, gratuity or other reward or gain has been made to Consultant or
Consultant Associates. Consultant promises to advise City of any such promise that may be
made during the Term of this Agreement, or for 12 months thereafter.
Consultant agrees that neither Consultant nor her immediate family members, nor her
employees or agents, shall acquire any such Prohibited Interest within the Term of this
Agreement, or for 12 months after the expiration of this Agreement.
Consultant may not conduct or solicit any business for any party to this Agreement,
or for any third party which may be in conflict with Consultant's responsibilities under this
Agreement.
6. Hold Harmless
Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City from and against
all liability , cost and expense (including without limitation attorneys' fees) arising from loss
of or damage to any property whatsoever or injury to or death of any person whomsoever
caused or alleged to be caused or occasioned by the negligent act or omission of Consultant
or any agent or employee of Consultant arising out of or in connection with this Agreement
or the work to be performed by Consultant hereunder, except to the extent such liability, cost
or expense is caused by the negligence of the City.
7. Termination of Agreement for Cause
If, through any cause, Consultant shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper manner
his/her obligations under this Agreement, or if Consultant shall violate any of the covenants,
agreements or stipulations of this Agreement, City shall have the right to terminate this
Agreement by giving written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the
effective date thereof at least five (5) days before the effective date of such termination. In
that event, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps,
reports and other materials prepared by Consultant shall, at the option of the City, become
the property of the City, and Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable
compensation for any work satisfactorily completed on such documents and other materials
up to the effective date of Notice of Termination, not to exceed the amounts payable
hereunder, and less any damages caused City by Consultant's breach.
8. Errors and Omissions
4
?~g/
In the event that the City Manager or his designee determines that the Consultant's
negligence, errors, or omissions in the performance of work under this Agreement has
resulted in expense to City greater than would have resulted if there were no such
negligence, errors, omissions in the plans or contract specifications, Consultant and City
shall select a mutually acceptable arbitrator with legal and technical expertise in preparing
BIR's and in the application of CEQA to determine whether Agency shall be reimbursed for
the additional expenses incurred by the City including engineering, construction and/or
restoration expense. Nothing herein is intended to limit City's rights under other provisions
of this Agreement.
9. Termination of Agreement for Convenience of City
City may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any reason for giving specific
written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof, at
least thirty (30) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all finished
and unfinished documents and other materials described hereinabove shall, at the option of
the City, become City's sole and exclusive property. If the Agreement is terminated by City
as provided in this paragraph, Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable
compensation for any satisfactory work completed on such documents and other materials to
the effective date of such termination. Consultant hereby expressly waives any and all claims
for damages or compensation arising under this Agreement except as set forth herein.
10. Assignability
The services of Consultant are personal to the City, and Consultant shall not assign
any interest in this Agreement, and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by
assignment or novation), without prior written consent of City which City may unreasonable
deny.
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
Agency. City shall have unrestricted authority to publish, disclose as may be limited by the
provisions of the Public Records Act, distribute, and otherwise use, copyright or patent, in
whole or in part, any such reports, studies, data, statistics, forms or other materials or
properties produced under this Agreement.
12. Independent Contractor
City is interested only in the results obtained and Consultant shall perform as an
independent contractor with sole control of the manner and means of performing the services
required under this Agreement. City maintains the right only to reject or accept Consultant'S
work Products). Consultant and any of the Consultant's agents, employees or representatives
5
7-9
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 Tina A. Thomas shall be Consultant's representative
("Project Manager") to the project for the duration of the project. No substitution for this
position shall be allowed without written approval from the City.
14. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures
No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this Agreement, against the
Agency unless a claim has first been presented in writing and fIled with the Agency of the
City of Chula Vista and acted upon in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter
1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, as same may from time to time be amended, the
provisions of which are incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein, and such
policies and procedures used by the City in the implementation of same.
Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in good faith with Agency for
the purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement.
15. Statement of Costs
In the event that Consultant prepares a report or document, or participates in the
preparation of a report or document as a result of the scope of work required of Consultant,
Consultant shall include, or cause the inclusion, in said report or document a statement of the
numbers and cost in dollar amounts of all contracts and subcontracts relating to the
preparation of the report or document.
16. Miscellaneous
a. Consultant not authorized to Represent City
Unless specifically authorized in writing by Agency, Consultant shall have no
authority to act as City's agent to bind City to any contractual agreements whatsoever.
b. Notices
All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to be given pursuant to
this Agreement must be in writing. All notices, demands and requests to be sent to any
party shall be deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served or
deposited in the United States mail, addressed to such party, postage prepaid, registered or
certified, with return receipt requested, at the addresses identified adjacent to the signatures
of the parties represented.
6
7-J~
c. Entire Agreement
This Agreement, together with any other written document referred to or
contemplated herein, embody the entire Agreement and understanding between the parties
relating to the subject matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof may
be amended, modified, waived or discharged except by an instrument in writing executed by
the party against which enforcement of such amendment, waiver or discharge is sought.
d. Capacity of Parties
Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and represents to the other party that
it has legal authority and capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this
Agreement; that all resolutions or other actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter
into this Agreement.
e. Governing 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 Chula Vista, or as close thereto as possible. Venue for this
Agreement, and performance hereunder, shall be the City of Chula Vista.
f. Attorney Fees.
Should a dispute result in litigation, it is agreed that the prevailing party shall be
entitled to recover all reasonable costs incurred in the defense of that claim, including costs
and attorney fees.
[end of page. next page is signature page.]
7
7-/1
Signature Page to
Agreement with Remy and Thomas
for Legal Consulting Services
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this Agreement this _
_ day of , 1992.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
By:
Tim Nader
Mayor
Attest:
Beverly Authelet
City Clerk
roce M. Boogaard,
City Attorney
Remy and Thomas
By:
Tina A. Thomas
C:IAGIREMY &'Thoma.
8
7-/~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
~?/I
Meeting Date 12/15/92
ITEM TI1LE: Resolution II, 9 :J () Approving Renewal of the Agreement Between
the City of Chula Vista and Lettieri-McIntyre & Associates, Project
Manager and the Baldwin Vista Associates for Professional Services
for Otay Ranch, and Authorizing the Mayor to Execute the Agreement
SUBMIITED BY: Deputy City Manager Krempl~t-
REVIEWED BY: City Manage~ (4/5th Vote: Yes_No X)
The attached Agreement renewal Yo: professional project management services with Lettieri-
McIntyre & Associates (Anthony J. Lettieri) and Baldwin Vista Associates is for temporary
professional management assistance. The assistance will allow the City and County to
continue to process a General Development Plan and related documents for the
approximately 23,000-acre Otay Ranch Project. This Item could be considered with Item 7B.
This Contract is intended to cover the final phase of this project; that is, through the
approvals of the General Development Plan (GDP)/Subregional Plan stage. Besides the
GDP, the work program includes finalizing project approval documents (resolutions) and
transition work necessary to assist City staff on any future work.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the attached Agreement and authorize the
Mayor to sign on behalf of the City Council.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
In the spring of 1989, the City of Chula Vista and County of San Diego both approved a
"Statement of Intentions" with Baldwin Vista Associates concerning the processing of Otay
Ranch. In the summer of 1989, the City Council and Board of Supervisors approved a
Memorandum of Understanding establishing a joint planning effort. Mr. Vemon G. Hazen
was hired as the Project Manager for that effort. On July 20, 1990, Mr. Hazen resigned. Mr.
Lettieri was hired on September 25, 1990 for a one-year term expiring on September 28,
1991. Council extended Mr. Lettieri's Contract on October 8, 1991 until October 1992 and
on September 22, 1992 to expire on December 31, 1992. This is anticipated as the final
contract extension for Mr. Lettieri's services. The term of this Agreement is through April,
1993, and it includes, specifically, attendance at all public hearings, finalization of all
planning documents, coordination of City/County staff and all consultants and preparation
of staff reports for Planning Commissions and City Council/Board of Supervisors.
2"/1-/
Page 2, Item ;],1( '6/)
Meeting Date 12/15/92
Over the last two years, Mr. Lettieri has demonstrated that he is well suited to perform all
of the Project Manager duties and responsibilities. He has had extensive experience and
background with development projects and public/private endeavors in San Diego County
which make him ideal for this position. He has over 23 years of experience in urban and
regional planning including four years with the City of Chula Vista, six years with the County
of San Diego and 12 years in the private sector.
During that period of time, the following has been accomplished: Acceptance by the
Interjurisdictional Task Force of the Phase I and Phase II Progress Plans; Resource
Sensitivity Analysis; Village Character Issue paper; Transportation/Transit and Villages
Issue Paper and the Service/Revenue Macro-analysis. The Otay Valley Regional Park,
Development Around Otay Lakes Reservoir and Central Proctor Valley Issue Papers were
also accepted by the Interjurisdictional Task Force.
This year, the Public Participation Program has commenced with a number of workshops
scheduled with the Planning Commissions, City Council and Board of Supervisors. The Draft
Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) is out for public review, and staff is preparing for the
public hearing process. Meetings have been scheduled with all affected Planning Groups to
assist them in their review of the DEIR and the plan itself. The processing of the plan,
including the public hearings, drafting of all documents and resolutions and coordination at
the City and County levels are the major tasks to be completed this year.
The monthly rate for Mr. Lettieri is proposed to be $85.00 per hour not to exceed
$11,500.00 per month. This is no change from his previous Contract rate. For Council's
information, we would also note that Lettieri-McIntyre & Associates received $285,537.47
in FY 91-92 and $140,231.55 to date in FY 92-93 which included not only work on Otay
Ranch but also EIR work for the City on EastLake Kaiser, Palomar Trolley Center and
some work on RDR SPA III.
For the above reasons, and acknowledging that Baldwin Vista Associates will reimburse the
City for the full costs of the consultant, it is appropriate to approve the Agreement.
FISCAL IMPACT: There will be no fiscal impact to the City of Chula Vista. The monthly
costs are already incorporated into the overall Otay Ranch expenditure plan. All costs will
be paid to the City by the applicant.
Attachment
memos#4:\ajI.113
8'/9'~
RESOLUTION NO. ) ~ J.3 0
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING RENEWAL OF THE
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND
LETTIERI-McINTYRE & ASSOCIATES, PROJECT
MANAGER AND THE BALDWIN VISTA ASSOCIATES FOR
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR OTAY RANCH, AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, the renewal agreement for professional project
management services with Lettieri-McIntyre & Associates and Baldwin
vista Associates is for temporary professional management
assistance; and
WHEREAS, this assistance focuses on processing of the
General Development Plan and related documents for the
approximately 23,OOO-acre Otay Ranch project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby approve the Renewal of the
Agreement between the City of Chula vista and Lettieri-McIntyre &
Associates, Project Manager and the Baldwin vista Associates for
Professional Services for Otay Ranch, a copy of which is on file in
the office of the City Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
Chula vista is hereby authorized and directed to execute said
Agreement for and on behalf of the City of Chula vista
Presented by
to fo
i
Bruce M. Boogaard, cit
Attorney
George Krempl, Deputy city
Manager
F:\home\attomey\lettierl
8'~'3/8A"f
CONTRACT FOR
PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES
OTAY RANCH PROJECT
This agreement, made this December 7, 1992 for the purposes of
reference only, and effective as of the date last executed by the
parties, is made between the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a municipal
corporation (hereinafter referred to as "CITY"); LETTIERI-MCINTYRE
& ASSOCIATES, planning consultant (hereinafter referred to as
"CONSULTANT"); and BALDWIN VISTA ASSOCIATES, a California limited
partnership, the developer of the Otay Ranch Project (hereinafter
alternatively referred to as "APPLICANT" or "PROJECT APPLICANT")
and is made with reference to the following facts:
I. Recitals
A. The term "Otay Ranch Project" (or alternatively "Project")
as referred to hereinbelow means that project consisting of (1)
approximately 22,500 acres and located generally east and west of
the otay Reservoir between I-80S and Route 94 and south of
Telegraph Canyon Road and the San Miguel Mountains and north of
Brown Field and the San Ysidro Mountains, and (2) approximately
1,300 acres located north of EastLake Business Center and east of
proposed SR 125 and commonly referred to as the Salt Creek Ranch
Project.
B. Anthony J. Lettieri, has served as General Manager of the
Otay Ranch Project on behalf of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA and the
county of San Diego since October 1990 pursuant to an agreement
entered into with the CITY, which with the latest renewals
(October, 1991 approved by Council Resolution No. 16365) provided
for termination on December 31, 1992; and
C.
in need
for the
The CITY OF CHULA VISTA and County of San Diego are still
of professional development project management assistance
Otay Ranch Project; and
D. Mr. Anthony J. Lettieri has 23 years of experience
involving the coordination and management of development projects
and consultants, and over 10 years of work experience with both
the CITY and County, and his availability and professional skills
enable a full commitment to this project as General Manager as an
independent contractor; and
E. Consultant is needed to provide review, analysis,
evaluation, preparation of report~, plans and development
regulations with respect to said project all leading to meeting
environmental impact report requirements, General Development Plan
approval, General Plan Amendment and a Sphere of Influence
Amendment and Benefit Agreement for said property.
1
'6/1"~
II. Executory provisions
NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereto do hereby mutually agree
as follows:
A. Working Relationship Among Parties; General Duties.
It is the intent of the CITY, CONSULTANT, and APPLICANT that
CONSULTANT work solely for the CITY and County and perform the
tasks outlined hereinbelow associated with the otay Ranch Project
to assist the CITY and County in providing the project quidance
and reviews which are appropriate for a proposal of the type
submitted by APPLICANT in accordance with applicable provisions of
State and local laws. CONSULTANTS obligation, as provided further
hereinbelow, is to provide the general management necessary to
expedite the review, analysis, negotiations, coordination of
reviews, and preparation of various recommendations to the
Interjurisdictional Task Force, CITY and County Planning
Commission and the CITY COUNCIL and Board of Supervisors with
respect to APPLICANT'S proposal. APPLICANT'S duties are generally
to provide payment to the CITY for the management services provided
by the CONSULTANT and, further, to provide such information,
applications, etc., as may be otherwise required by CONSULTANT and
CITY/County staff to fully and adequately review the otay Ranch
Project.
B. Obligations of Consultant.
CONSULTANT hereby agrees to provide, through the person of
Anthony J. Lettieri, and for the sole benefit of the City and the
County of San Diego, directly and indirectly and in conjunction
with CITY and County staff, the following:
1. Scope of Work:
Manage the administration of the Project and its
process to ensure a timely but complete staff critical review,
processing, analysis and recommendations with respect to the
Applicant's request for various approvals within the otay Ranch
Project Area, including but not limited to the following:
a. An environmental impact report for the
Otay Ranch Project.
b.
A general plan amendment
development plan for the
Project.
c. A service revenue plan for the otay Ranch
Project.
and general
otay Ranch
2
8"/9 ~J;
d. Coordination of infrastructure planning
including water, sewer, and
transportation systems.
e. A "benefit" development agreement/pre-
annexation aqreement for the Otay Ranch
Project.
f. A sphere of influence and annexation
phasing plan and supporting documentation
including prezoning.
g. Conditions, exactions, or mitigation
measures referred to or required by the
CITY, County and other public agencies.
h. All further permits, approvals,
applications, or other documents for
enti tlement which the CITY and County
must consider in order to approve
APPLICANT's application.
L Coordinate and provide community
interaction and information about the
project to keep the general public well
informed.
CONSULTANT shall perform the scope of work described
hereinabove and in doing so shall review, analyze, critique, and
make recommendations regarding the various discretionary approvals
sought by the APPLICANT to the CITY MANAGER, or his designee, the
County Chief Administrative Officer, or his designee and the
Interjurisdictional Task Force.
C. Obligations of Applicant
1. Make Deposits on Demand.
APPLICANT, pursuant to the terms and conditions of this
agreement, shall make deposits for all costs incurred for
Consultant and city under this Aqreement by promptly remitting to
the CITY payments upon receipt of invoices for compensation
required herein to be paid to the Consultant by City and for the
City'S Administrative Overhead, as herein provided.
2. city Administrative Overhead:
In addition to the making deposits to cover the CITY'S
cost of retaining CONSULTANT, APPLICANT shall pay an additional fee
of four percent (4%> of the CONSULTANT'S fee to CITY as CITY'S
administrative overhead incurred in the administration of this
agreement. The APPLICANT agrees to pay the CITY upon demand the
3
8'/7'/
administrative overhead fee billed by the CITY each month for the
duration of this aqreement.
3. Applicant's Submittal of Materials:
APPLICANT shall provide such information as reasonably
necessary, pursuant to the terms and conditions of this aqreement
and the herein described scope of work for the CITY and County and
CONSULTANT to review APPLICANT'S proposal, exceptinq therefrom any
business or trade secrets or otherwise proprietary business
information held by APPLICANT.
D. Obliqations of City.
1. Access to city Facilities and Office Space for Work
Unit.
The CITY shall permit access to its facilities by
CONSULTANT throuqhout the term of the contract.
The CITY and County assiqned additional employees to work
assiqned on a full cost recovery basis to work exclusively on this
project. In addition, there are several consultinq firms workinq
on this project. Those employees and consultants are housed in
nearby office space provided by the CITY and fully reimbursed by
the APPLICANT.
The office space includes space for the CONSULTANT to use
at his discretion. This office space includes all necessary
support staff, office equipment and supplies at no cost to
CONSULTANT.
2. Compensation.
The compensation to be paid by CITY to CONSULTANT shall
be hourly at the rate of $85.00 per hour not to exceed $11,500 per
month throuqh April, 1993. In addition to the above monthly
professional services, $300 per month may be billed for direct
expenses. The APPLICANT shall pay to the CITY the sum accordinq to
the above amounts plus reimbursables on the 1st of each month;
CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices to the Finance Director of
the CITY which shall be due and payable within 30 days.
Notwithstandinq the above payment schedule, all monies shall be due
and payable within 30 days of invoice, except as provided for
hereinbelow with respect to cancellation at the convenience of CITY
or APPLICANT or for reasons of nonperformance.
Compensation for the services performed shall be paid
only from Deposited Monies, and from no other asset or resource of
the city, a special obliqation which is not a burden upon, or
appropriation from, the General Fund of the City.
4
8"/J ,g/
E. Term.
This agreement shall become effective January 1, 1993 and
shall terminate April 30, 1993, if not terminated pursuant to the
provisions contained hereinbelow.
1. Termination of Agreement for cause.
If, through any cause, CONSULTANT, shall fail to fulfill
in a timely and proper manner his 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 CITY, become the property of
CITY, and CONSULTANT shall be entitled to receive just and
equitable compensation for nay work satisfactorily completed on
such documents and other materials up to the effective date of
notice of termination, not to exceed permitted compensation, ~
anv damaaes caused bv said breach.
2. Termination for Convenience of city.
CITY may terminate this agreement at any time and for any
reason by giving written notice to CONSULTANT of such termination
and specifying the effective date thereof, at least ten (10) days
before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all
finished and unfinished documents and other materials described in
Subparagraph F.1. hereinabove shall, at the option of 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, not to exceed nermitted
comnensation. CONSULTANT hereby expressly waives any and all
claims for damages or compensation arising under this agreement
except as set forth in Paragraph D.2. hereinabove in the event of
such termination.
3. Termination at Request of Applicant:
APPLICANT may terminate APPLICANT'S obligations with
respect to this agreement at any time and for any reason by giving
written notice to CITY of such intent to terminate said agreement
and specifying an effective date of such termination at least sixty
(60) days before the date of termination. In the event that
APPLICANT shall terminate the terms of this agreement, APPLICANT
shall remain liable for all work undertaken up t and including the
effective date of said termination for which CITY shall be entitled
5
<6~~?
to receive just and equitable compensation for satisfactory work
performed by CONSULTANT due and owning pursuant to Paragraph E.2.
hereinabove.
III. Interest of Consultant
CONSULTANT presently has and shall acquire no interest
whatsoever in the Otay Ranch Project, the subject matter of this
agreement, direct or indirect, which would constitute a conflict of
interest or give the appearance of such conflict. No person having
any such conflict of interest shall be employed or retained by
CONSULTAnT under this agreement. CONSULTANT specifically certifies
that neither CONSULTAnT nor any other person employed or retained
by CONSULTANT is employed by the APPLICANT. CONSULTANT
specifically certifies, in addition, that no promise of future
employment or other consideration of any kind has been made to
CONSULTANT or any other employee, agent, or representative of
CONSULTANT, by the APPLICANT, any employee, agent, or
representative of the APPLICANT, regarding the subject matter of
this agreement, or any future project in which APPLICANT has an
interest.
It is further understood that the nature of the anticipated
work schedule and the attendant proposed time frame, will require
the full attention and time of the CONSULTANT during the length of
this agreement.
IV. HOLD HARMLESS.
CONSULTANT agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the CITY and
APPLICANT from and against all liability, cost and expense
(including without limitation attorneys, fees, loss of or damage to
any property whatsoever or injury to or death of any person
whomsoever) caused or occasioned by the negligent act or omission
of CONSULTANT or any agent or employee of CONSULTANT, arising out
of or in connection with this agreement or the work to be
performed by CONSULTANT hereunder.
V. ASSIGNABILITY
CONSULTANT shall not assign any interest in this agreement and
shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by
assignment or novation). Provided, however, that claims for money
due or to become due to CONSULTANT from CITY and APPLICANT under
this agreement may be assigned to a bank, trust company, or other
financial institution. Notice of such assignment or transfer
shall be furnished promptly to CITY.
VI. OWNERSHIP, PUBLICATION, REPRODUCTION AND USE OF MATERIAL:
All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms,
designs, plans, procedures, systems, and any other materials or
6
g'/) .-;C
properties produced under this agreement shall be the sole and
exclusive property of CITY and County. No such materials or
properties produced in whole or in part under this agreement shall
be subject to private use, copyrights, or patent right by
CONSULTANT in the united States or in any other country without
the express written consent of CITY and County. CITY and County
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.
VII. Independent Contractor
CITY is interested only in the results obtained, and
CONTRACTOR shall perform as an independent contractor with sole
control of the manner and means of performing the services
required under this agreement. CITY and County maintain the right
only to reject or accept CONSULTANT'S final work product as each
phase of this agreement is completed. CONSULTANT and any of
CONSULTANT'S agents, employees, or representatives are, for all
purposes under this agreement, an independent contractor, and shall
not be deemed to be an employee of CITY, and none of them shall be
entitled to any benefits _to which CITY employees are entitled,
including, but not limited to, overtime, retirement benefits,
worker's compensation benefits, injury leave, or other leave
benefits.
VIII. CHANGES
CITY and County may from time to time require changes in
the scope of the services by CONSULTANT to be performed under this
agreement. Such changes, including any increase or decrease in
the amount of CONSULTANT'S COMPENSATION, which are mutually agreed
upon by CITY, county, CONSULTANT, and APPLICANT shall be effective
as amendments to this agreement only when in writing.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CITY, CONSULTANT and APPLICATION have
executed this contract for Planning Services (agreement) this ___
day of , 1992.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
CONSULTANT:
Mayor of the City of Chula
vista
ANTHONY J. LETTIERI
Lettieri-McIntrye and Associates
Attest
APPLICANT:
city Clerk
7
~/I-//
,
Approved as to form by:
Bruce M. Boogaard, City Atty.
P:_-..oy\loaiel2
BALDWIN VISTA ASSOCIATES, L.P.
A California Limited
Partnership
By: Baldwin Builders, a
California corporation,
General Partner
Greg Smith, President
8
[{/I 'l~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
;n( '6.fJ
-
Meeting Date 12/15/92
ITEM TITLE:
Resolution / IP , :J I Approving a Modification to the Agreement
between the City of Chula Vista and Lettieri-McIntyre & Associates,
(Mary May) and the Baldwin Vista Associates for Professional Services
to Assist the Otay Ranch Team General Manager, and Authorizing the
Mayor to Execute the Agreement
SUBMlT1'ED BY:
Deputy City Manager Krempl ~ It-
City Manager?
(4/5th Vote: Yes_No X)
REVIEWED BY:
The attached Agreement modification for project management and planning services with
Lettieri-McIntyre & Associates and Baldwin Vista Associates is for continuation of
temporary planning assistance. This request is a continuation of the same contract previously
approved by the City Council. The assistance focuses on processing of the General
Development Plan and related documents for the approximately 23,000-acre Otay Ranch
Project. The Agreement has the concurrence of both City of Chula Vista and San Diego
County staff as well as the applicant. This Agenda Item and Agenda Item 7A are related
and could be discussed together.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the attached Agreement modification and
authorize the Mayor to sign on behalf of the City Council.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION: In March of this year, the Council approved a budget of $20,000.00 through
June 30, 1992 for planning assistance to the General Manager to complete certain tasks
listed in Exhibit A That contract was extended through September 30, 1992 and then
through December 31, 1992. Those tasks are proceeding and joint workshops on this project
at the City Council/Board of Supervisors level began in late July 1992. Public hearings at
the Planning Commission level will begin in December, 1992 and continue into January,
1993. The purpose of this modification is to continue the assistance at the same level
through April 30, 1993 or an additional four months.
Attached is a proposed scope-of-work, schedule and costs of the above tasks (Exhibit A).
To continue to respond to that schedule, this request is being made that will assign one
Lettieri-McIntyre & Associates staff person (Mary May) to assist in coordination of such
projects as the Planning Commission referrals and the Public Participation Program,
including public hearing notice coordination and assistance during public hearings. Ms. May
8' lJ ,/
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 12/15/92
:Jff'$
has City and County experience having worked for the County as a planner and the City of
Chula Vista on Rancho del Rey and EastLake SPAs. The monthly rate for Ms. May is
$55.00 per hour not to exceed $2,000.00 per month. This represents the current level of
service needed even though the City Council approved $5,000.00 per month in September,
1992. Therefore, this is in essence a reduction of $3,000.00 per month from the current level
of support service being provided. For Council information, we would also note that Lettieri-
McIntyre & Associates received $285,537.47 in FY 91-92 and $140,231.55 to date in FY 92-
93 which included not only work on Otay Ranch, but work for the City on EastLake Kaiser
EIR, Palomar Trolley Center and some work on RDR SPA III.
For the above reasons, and with the acknowledgement that Baldwin Vista will continue to
deposit funds to reimburse the City in full, it is appropriate to approve this Agreement
modification.
FISCAL IMPACf: All costs will be paid to the City by the applicant. This amendment
extends the time of the contract through April 30, 1993.
Attachments
memos#4:\marymay.113
E'!3 ..-,;;..
RESOLUTION NO.
/~93 J
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO THE
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND
LETTIERI-McINTYRE & ASSOCIATES, PROJECT
MANAGER AND THE BALDWIN VISTA ASSOCIATES FOR
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO ASSIST THE OTAY RANCH
TEAM GENERAL MANAGER, AND AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, a modification of the Agreement between the city
of Chula vista and Lettieri-McIntyre & Associates and Baldwin vista
Associates for project management and planning services for
continuation of temporary planning assistance is needed; and
WHEREAS, there is no change from the current level of
support service being provided; and
WHEREAS, the assistance will focus on processing of the
General Development Plan and related documents for the
approximately 23,OOO-acre Otay Ranch Project; and
WHEREAS, said Agreement has the concurrence of both the
City of Chula vista and San Diego county staff as well as the
applicant.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the city of Chula vista does hereby approve a Modification to the
Agreement between the city of Chula vista and Lettieri-McIntyre &
Associates, Project Manager and the Baldwin vista Associates for
Professional Services to assist the Otay Ranch Team General
Manager, 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 xecute said
Agreement for and on behalf of the City Chula v'st .
C:\rs\nwymay
Bruce M.
Attorney
Presented by
George Krempl, Deputy City
Manager
g'[J-J /8/3.-4
EXHIBIT "N
SCOPE-OF-WORK
Lettieri-McIntyre & Associates (Ms. Mary May) will assist the General Manager in the
following areas:
a) Assist in providing response to Planning Commission inquiries as generated from
workshops and public hearings.
b) Providing project coordination services to include public agency and applicant
contacts and critical path/flow chart preparation.
c) Assistance in the preparation for scheduling, coordination and noticing of the Public
Participation Program, including all work associated with community planning groups,
joint Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors/City Council workshops and
other public presentations.
d) Other duties as assigned by the General Manager to ensure the timely completion
of the project.
SCHEDULE
The duration of this contract is four months, ending April 30, 1993.
COSTS
The above services are to be provided on an hourly basis not to exceed $12,000.00. The
hourly rate is $55.00.
sr:\sow.ajl
158~>/g8-r
CONTRACf FOR ASSISTANT SERVICES FOR
GENERAL MANAGER OF THE OTAY RANCH PROJECf
THIS AGREEMENT, dated this day of December, 1992 for the purpose of
reference only and effective as of the date last executed by the parties hereto, is between
the CITY OF CHUlA VISTA, a Chartered municipal corporation ("City"), BALDWIN
VISTA ASSOCIATES, a California limited partnership ("Applicant") and LETTIERI-
McINTYRE & ASSOCIATES, INC. ("Consultant"), and is made with reference to the
following facts:
WHEREAS, City, Applicant and Consultant entered into an agreement dated
October 8, 1991 by which Baldwin agreed to pay for and Consultant agreed to provide to
the City general management services over the Otay Ranch Project in the person of
Anthony J. Lettieri ("General Management Services Agreement"); and
WHEREAS, the parties desire that the General Management Services are to be
augmented by an assistant to the person of Anthony J. Lettieri, the cost of which will be
paid for by Applicant.
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. Consultant agrees to retain and assign to the Otay Ranch Project the person of Mary
May and shall require Ms. May to assist General Manager Lettieri from the effective
date of this Agreement until April 30, 1993 in the following areas:
a. Provide project coordination services to include public agency and Applicant
contacts, critical path/flow chart preparation on a weekly basis and monthly
assignment sheets for each working group assigned to the Otay Ranch Project.
b. Assist General Manager Lettieri in the preparation for scheduling and
coordination of the Public Participation Program, including all work
associated with community planning groups, joint Planning Commission
workshops, Montgomery Planning Committee and other public presentations.
c. Assist General Manager Lettieri on the Sphere of Influence Study.
d. Perform such other duties as are assigned to her by General Manager Lettieri
to ensure the timely completion of the project.
2. Applicant agrees to compensate Consultant for the costs of retaining Ms. May at the
rate of $55.00 per hour not to exceed $12,000.00, not to exceed $2,000.00 in any
month, which compensation shall only be payable by City from the Otay Ranch Trust
Fund, and shall not be an obligation of the General Fund.
.
8"[5 -7
3. All other rights, duties and obligations of the parties to the General management
Services Agreement shall remain in full force and effect except as may be specifically
augmented by this Agreement, except that this Agreement may be canceled upon 10
days notice.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
LETTIERI-McINTYRE & ASSOCIATES
By:
Tim Nader, Mayor
By:
Anthony J. Lettieri
By:
City Clerk
BALDWIN VISTA ASSOCIATES, L.P.
A CA Limited Partnership
By: Baldwin Builders, a CA
Corporation, General Partner
ArrEST
APPROVED AS TO FORM
By:
Gregory T. Smith, President
By:
Bruce M. Boogaard,
City Attorney
sr:\marymay.con
8'"8-lT
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
<1
Meeting Date
12/15/92
SUBMITTED BY:
RESOLUTION I It> '3,)" ESTABLISHING THE LOCAL
APPOINTMENTS LIST FOR 1993 AND DESIGNATING THE
CHULA VISTA PUBLIC LIBRARY AS A PLACE TO
RECEIVE A COPY OF SAID LIST.
Beverly A. Authelet, city Cler~O
./
ITEM TITLE:
(4/5ths Vote: Yes ___ No -X-)
According to the Maddy Act (Government Code ~54973) before December
31st of each year, a list of all regular and ongoing Board and
commissioners appointed by the City Council whose terms of office
will expire during the next year must be prepared and made
available to the public. In 1991, the Act was amended to name the
list as the "Local Appointments List" and to designate the public
library with the largest service population within the jurisdiction
as the place to deposit the List.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the city Council adopt the
resolution naming the Chu1a vista Library as the place to deposit
the Local Appointments List for 1993 and establishing the List.
BACKGROUND: The Maddy Act has always required the city Clerk to
prepare a list of upcoming vacancies on all boards and
commissioners before December 31st. Previously, the list was made
available in the City Clerk's Office only. The amendments to the
Act expand the prior requirements which include:
Actual name of the document to be titled, "Local Appointments
List;"
List to be deposited in the library;
List to be approved by the city council by Resolution.
9-/ / CI-:l.
1~'3';;'"
RESOLUTION NO. XXXXX
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA ESTABLISHING THE LOCAL APPOINTMENTS LIST FOR 1993
AND DESIGNATING THE CHULA VISTA PUBLIC LIBRARY AS A
PLACE TO RECEIVE A COPU OF SAID LIST
WHEREAS, the Maddy Act (Government Code Section 54972 et seq.) requires the
City Council to annually prepare a Local Appointments List and designate the
public library with the largest service population within its jurisdiction as a
place to receive a copy of the list.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby designate the Chula Vista Public Library as the public library
with the largest service population in the City of Chula Vista and the place to
recei ve a copy of the Local Appoi ntments Li st and estab 1 i shes the Local
Appointments List for calendar year 1993 as set forth in Exhibit A attached.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
Beverly A. Authelet
City Clerk
(Submitted without City Attorney review)
9'3
W L Z, ~
l Ii i c: ~ U L ~ - ..
.. ~ L c: ~ .., " ~ >- I
z .. U L 11 t m L L Z, ~ .. L ~
'~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ "ii. 0 ~
~ L .. ~ l!' ~ L Z, .. ..
.. .0 ~ L '0 L C .. ';: CO L :i
c CO 'cO L CO " u 'cO CO ~ i! CO ;; 0 ;;
... Q ~ .. " Z .. U " ... Z ~ U Q ~
N
~ 9-/
g
...
N
-
-
N
....
~
....
'"
N
n n ~ < ~ - n .. f - '" ,. ~ ~ '" '" n - '" ....
". .. IT i c .. 2 , ~ .. i g. Ii .. ~ c !!. ~
.. ! i" n , !l. ;; .. ~ , , ..
~ .. i , .. ~ ii ~ ~ .. i a. -
~ ~ i ". .. !l ~ il
.... ~ , ;; .. .. , ..
; N , B- ". J
.. ,
9~/'
12/09/92
Standard report
LAST NAME
FIRST NAME
-- - ---
BOARD/COMMISSION APPTD
-------------------------
------- ----- - --
Dualao
------
Larry V.
Cultural
Arts
Gerber
Joan
Cultural
Arts
McAllister
Archibald A.
Cultural
Arts
Scott
Coleen A.
Cultural
Arts
Souval
Dency B.
Cultural
Arts
Torres
Ralph A.
Cultural
Arts
Bernier
Raymond
DRC
Fl ach
Matt A.
ORC
Gilman
Barbara
DRC
t�
I
Rodriguez
John C.
DRC
V
Spethm n
Michael
DRC
Allen
Penny
EDC
Clark
Kenneth N.
EDC
Compton
Marshall
EDC
Davis
Patty
EDC
Fuller
Douglas G.
EDC
Johnson
Earl J.
EDC
Logue
Jim
EDC
Lopez
Gonzalo
EDC
Page 3
1ST TERM 1ST EXP 2ND TERM 2ND EXP RESIGN MISCELLANEOUS
-- -- - - -- ........ .. . . . ... .. ... . .. .....'" ..------------- - - - - --
07/10/90 06/30/93
07/10/90 06/30/93
08/28/90 06/30/94
07/10/90 06/30/94
07/10/90 06/30/92 08 /11/92 06/30/96
07 /10/90 06/30/91 06 /04/91 06/30/95
11/17/92 06/30/96
05/21/85 06/30/89 06 /13/89 06/30/93
05 /21/85 06/30/89 06 /13/89 06/30/93
08/04/92 06/30/96
07/17/90 06/30/94
10/09/90 06/30/94
10/06/92 Ex- Officio
10 /09/90 06/30/91 06 /04/91 06/30/95
10/09/90 06/30/94
10/06/92 Ex- Officio
08/25/92 06/30/96
10/09/90 06/30/93
10/09/90 06/30/93
9#'Y
S!
~
...
N
-
9'9
-
N
....
~
~
'" n < ft < .. ... :II .. C < ~ ... ." !" !: ~ " . ~
!!!. .. Il Il n ~ n .. .. i :r , .. ~ ;; .
~ :r .. ~ , .. ~ ;; ;; ::: :: ..
~ ~ .. ~ .. .. ;; , ~ " ~
~ .. ~ '" ~ !l n ..
;; i , .. .. I .. .. ~ z
'" '" , I ~ .
.. ~ .. , ill
~ ~ } n ~ ~ ... ~ .. n . ~ .. ~ ... !: ~ ..
i 5l .. .. .. .. a. i ~ 5l ..
.. , .. ~ "' ::: .. ..
~ :' ~ i .. ~ , .. "' .. i
, il Ii: '" ~
~ z '" :" !l
... , :- 0 ~ z
.. i n m ~ ,
~ il .. :- '"
~ ,
.. ~
" " :II ~ ~ ~ :II :II :II f. :II :II :II :II ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ,
.. .. !l !l !l !l ~ ~ ~ ~ ..
.. ~ <T <T <T <T <T
'" .. .. .. .. .. .. .. , , , , , ~
"' "' "' i "' "' i i i i i .. .. .. .. ..
~ < i Ii i Ii Ii !!- ~ , ~ , , ....
.. '" '" '" n
i i ~ , , , ~ , , Ii Ii Ii Ii Ii .. .. .. .. .. ~
'" '" '" '" '" 0 5l 0 5l 5l
.. ..
... ... ... .... ... ... ... .. .. .. .. .. , , a. a. , ..
~ ... ;; ;; ;; ;; ;; 3 3 3 3 3 '" '" '" ..
. ~, .. i
n n ! 3 3 3 ~, ~, .. .. .. .. ..
i' i' i' .. .. .. .. ..
i i i i ~. .. ~. ~, ~. .
5, ...
...
il il il il .. ~
E "
" - - ...
lil ~ ~ st c; st ~ c; N N ~ ~ " " " ;;; ..
N ~ N - .... :::! :::! "'
.... .... .... .... .... .... .... ~ .... ~ .... .... .... ~ ..
" N N - IN N ~ N <>> N c; N ~ N ~ ;; ;;
N :::! N " ~ IN :::! ~ " " '" '" ~
.... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... m
:8 a:: 2l co 8! :!! :!! a:: 8! :!! :!! :!! :!! ~ :8 :8 :8 .. '"
.... :II
& " & ~ ~ ~ & ~ S & ~ & & ~ & ~ & & " -
S !?: ..
.... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ~
IN IN IN IN IN IN IN IN IN IN IN IN IN IN IN IN IN
" " ~ " ~ " " " " " " " " " " " " " " m
.... .... .... ~ .... ~ .... .... .... .... 'ai .... .... .... .... .... .... )(
11 <l ill <l :!! :!! <l ;Sl 11 ;Sl 11 ;Sl ~ 11 11 11 ...
N N N
~ ~ & & N
Z
.... ~ "
- ~ ~ IN ~
.... .... .... m
is :!! :!! ~ ..
:II
& ~ ~ 5: N
.... .... l!j
IN IN IN IN
" ~ " " m
.... .... .... )(
11 ;Sl ;Sl ill ...
" c; " ..
:::! :::! m
.... ~
N N <l
~ :::! N ...
z
is <l
N
~ ~ z :!
:l .. ~ ..
~, n
~ '" m
~
:l 0 -: t;
i n i z
.. m
.. ~
.. ,
,
, 0 ,
.. ..
.. , '1
a. ..
'1
Cj- / CJ
12/09/92
Standard report
LAST NAME
FIRST NAME
BOARD/COMMISSION APPTD
......................
...............
McMahon
............
John J.
Otay Valley PAC
Palumbo
Donald R.
Otay Valley PAC
Vacancy
Otay Valley PAC
Carpenter
Diane Smith
Parks 8 Rec
Nell
Russell C.
Parka 8 Rea
Helton
Margaret J.
Parks R Rec
Lind
James
Parks 8 Rea
Roland
Clifford
Parks 3 Rec
V`
Sandoval
Carmen
Parks i Rec
Willett
John A.
Parks i Rec
Carson
Joanne E.
Planning
Fuller
Susan J.
Planning
Martin
Thames A.
Planning
Moot
John S.
Planning
Rey
John C.
Planning
Tarantino
Frank A.
Planning
Tuchscher
William C.
Planning
Fox
Robert
RCC
Ghougassian
Joe
RCC
Page 7
1ST TERM 1ST ExP 2ND TERM 2ND EXP RESIGN MISCELLANEOUS
........ ........ ........ ........ ........ .............
08/02/90 06/30/94
04 /06/89 06/30/92 08 /11/92 06/30/94
06/30/96
01 /29/91 06/30/91 08 /13/91 06/30/95
08/08/88 06/30/91 06 /04/91 06/30/95
01/29/91 06/30/94
10/30/89 06/30/93
07/19/88 06/30/92 08/04/92 06/30/96
08/10/88 06/30/92 08 /18/92 06/30/96
08 /05/86 06/30/90 06 /12/90 06/30/94
08 /02/84 06/30/89 06 /13/89 06/30/93
06/09/87 06/30/91 06/04/91 06/30/95
01/29/91 06/30/94
11/17/92 06/30/94
08/04/92 06/30/96
11/17/92 06/30/95
10/23/91 06/30/93 06 /30/97
02 /16/88 06/30/90 06 /12/90 06/30/94
07/24/90 06/30/94
...
N
...
$
...
..,
N
< 0 :I: ~ ~ n .. ... :! ... :I: " n .. ! :I: " ~ '" ~
.. .- n ~ ~ I , ~ ~ .. i ~ , n , ~ .. ,.
n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i I .. .. ..
~ i .. ~ .. .. , .. n iil ...
~ .. .. ~ n ~ .. ~
, .. .- .. , .. g ..
'< ~ .. , ~ "
" ..
.. - , m
~ ,. m ,. J ~ .. .. .. !; ~ g it :I: ~ ~ .. ~
:!. 3 ~ ~ i t ~ , .. ~ .. ..
i n i .. J, c n , .. ~
~ ~ jl. ;t' , " ~ i .. I
i ~ il. , .. Iil i !J ! .. ...
i ~ il. !J ~ :!. ,
i !" .. ..
~ ~ f' f' ~ 3 ~ il.
~
~ ,
.. t
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. S ,
~ l! ~ l! l! l! l! .. .. .. .. .. .. .. n n n n n ~
... ... ... ... ... ... ... n n n n n
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
~ ~ ~ ~ f ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..
! ! ! ! ! Ii '< '< '< '< '< '< '< ...
n
.. .. ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
:: :: ... :: ... ~ ...
,. ,. ,. ..
n n n n n n ..
i
,.
...
...
...
..
.. .. .. ...
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ $ Q ... Q Q Q ;;; ..
~ '" '" '"
... ... ... ... ... ... ... :::: ... ... ... ... ... ... ..
g g g .. g .. .. ~ ~ ~ .. ~ N N N ... ~
~ .. N '" '" ~ ~ ... .. ...
'8 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .., ... m
8 8 8 8 8 ~ :!l :!l 8 ~ 8 81 .., .., .. ~ ~ .. co
N N '"'
.. ~ ~ ~ ~ !i .. !j: .. ~ .. .. !j: ~ !j: .. ~ ~ ;;;
S ~ l!: 0- 00 ~
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
~ ... ~ ... ~ ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
-: -: -: ~ .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ~ .. m
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ~ ... ... )(
~ .., ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :ll ill ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ill ill ...
N
~ !j: !j: ~
... ...
co ;;; ~ ...
... ... ... m
.., 8 ~ ~
N
~ !j: !j: N
... ... i!i
... ... ...
.. .. ~ m
... ... )(
~ ~ ill ...
!j: ..
m
... ..
~ C;
... ..
:!l
'" :I:
~ iii
~
0 m
, ~
~
... ~
I m
~ e
..
,
..
'"
il.
9-/cA
1
..
..
~ "l!
..
.. i
:5
... 5
tl l:
i ...
~
l!J '-
C
;;; '-
w :g
..
!;! ... ~ ;1.
... ~
)( '- '-
w .. .. ..
'" '" '" ~
!l '- '- '-
N 8 8 8
~ 0: ~ ~ ~
w '- '- '- '-
.. S! ~ ~ ~
.. '- 8 '- ;;.
.. N :g
N - ..
... ~ ;1. ~ ~ ;1. ;1. ~ ;1. !;! ~ !;! !;! ~ ;1. l?! ~
)( '- '- '- '- '- ~ '- '- '- '- '- ~ '- '-
w .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ~ .. ~ .. ~
'" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" ~ '" '" '" '"
.. 8 '- 8 '- 8 '- 8 '- 8 '- 8 '- 8 '-
~ 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
~ N g N ~ g ~ N l?! 0: ~ 0: 0: 0: ~ g 0:
'" '" '" '"
w '- '- '- '- '- '- '- '- ~ '- '- '- '- ~
.. N N :!! ~ N ~ ~ ~ .. .. .. S! ~ N
N ~ ~ , N , N ,
.. .. '- '- 8 8 '- '- '- '- '- 8 '-
.. on ~ g :g :g N - N ~ ~ on N
.. - .. .. - - - .. -
...
..
..
...
~
i!i u u u u u u u
;;; jf c c c jf c c
u ... ... ... ... ...
i jf .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. .. ..
~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~
.. Ii Ii Ii Ii Ii
'- !l u u u u u u u
" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ &
~ il il il il il il il il il
.. on .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
~
..
." ~ ~ -.: ,
.. w
-E .. ';: .. I 6 ..
.. = .. >- .. .. ,; '0 j 6 -.: .. ..
.. on ~ .. ~ "" 'E ~ c: -.: ..
~ !!; .. II ~ ~ .. - .. "6 .. Il .. :;
on .. .. .. .. ;;: :a :;; >- .. ..
~ '" , u '" " .. , , .. , " .. ,
! ~
I ..
~ ! ..
>- ! >- 6 .. .. .. Il ~ ~ 0
.. ~ .. ~ .. .. f 0 i
11 .. i 6 .. -8 .. :; .. ..
.. .. i ;; 'c: .. .. & Il -
::! .. ~ !! .. .. N U i -
.. :;; .. ~ :a 0 .. .. .. .. :a
... > ... , ... '" on ... u , '" ... ...
l?!
g
'-
N
-
9-/3
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
Item ) tJ
Meeting Date 12/15/92
RESOLUTION 1f,'.J .z.pproving the Balance of the Rental Assistance
Payment and a portion of the Last Resort Housing Payment for the
Relocation of Tenants Formerly Residing on City Property at 365 Orange
Avenue and Authorizing an Expenditure in the Amount of $7,234 therefor
SUBMITTED BY:
Community Development Director
City Manage1
c~ I
REVIEWED BY:
(4/5ths Vote: Yes
No X)
BACKGROUND:
The City's relocation consultant, Pacific Relocation Consultants (PRC), has reviewed and
recommends approving the remaining balance of the Rental Assistance payment of $3,750 plus
a portion of the Last Resort Housing payment to Jeff and Lisa Oien previously residing at 365
Orange Avenue. The payments reflect the City's legal requirement to pay rental assistance
payments when relocating households of low and moderate income. The relocation was
necessary as part of the development of the library project at the comer of Fourth and Orange.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Resolution.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970
established the requirements of cities or other displacement agencies for the relocation of
residential tenants and homeowners located within the jurisdiction of the displacement agency.
In this case, Mr. and Mrs. Oien were previously approved at the August 4, 1992, meeting to
receive an Advance Rental Assistance payment ($1,500) and a Fixed Moving Expense payment
($1,250) totalling $2,750. At that time, the Oien's used the previous payment to secure another
dwelling at market rent and have subsequently made a claim for the balance of the Rental
Assistance payment ($3,750) plus a Last Resort Housing Payment ($17,952), totalling $21,702.
Included in the Agenda is a copy of their final claim. As indicated, PRC determined that a
comparable dwelling unit for the Oien's was listed for rent at $825.00 a month. When adding
in an average monthly utility factor, their monthly housing "need" as determined by Federal
requirements is $386.70. The monthly housing "need" is determined by the difference between
the comparable market rent and their ability to pay which is calculated as 30% of the gross
ItJ"'/
Page 2, Item / a
Meeting Date 12/15/92
monthly household income. Again according to Federal requirements, the displacement agency
is responsible for paying the monthly need for a period of sixty (60) months which results in the
large Last Resort Housing payment due to Mr. and Mrs. Oien. Following is an accounting of
their final claim:
Total Rental Assistance and
Last Resort Housing:
Advance Rental Assistance:
$23,202
$ 1.500
($386.70 x 60 mos.)
(paid previously)
Total:
$21,702
$ 3,750
$17.952
$21.702
($5,250 less Advance Pmnt)
(Represents Last Resort Pmnt)
Total Amount Due:
Balance for Rental Assistance:
Remaining Balance Due:
As recommended by PRC, since Mr. and Mrs. Oien have elected to use their relocation benefits
to subsidize their new rental payment as opposed to trying to purchase a home, it is
recommended that only a portion of their benefit be paid at this time. PRC has advised staff that
the City can elect to pay their benefit over a maximum period of five years since the City is
subsidizing their rent for the next five (5) years. Since the City has this discretion, and since
only a portion of the funds are available for payment at this time, staff is recommending that
their remaining benefit amount ($21,702) be paid over a period of three (3) years or $7,234 a
year. As a matter of accounting, the payment this year consists of $3,750 for Rental Assistance
and $3,484 for Last Resort Housing. The payments in the following two years will all be
payable as Last Resort Housing.
As indicated by this report, the State and Federal relocation assistance statutes are complex and
requires a substantial amount of interaction and documentation with the clients as well as
specialized knowledge and training which at this point, cannot be performed by City staff.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approval of the resolution will result in a Rental Assistance payment ($3,750) and a Last Resort
Housing payment ($3,484) totalling $7,234. The funds are available in the City's Capital
Improvement Project #PR 143, Orange and Hermosa Park. Staff will need to bring this item
before the City Council again in December 1983 and December 1984 to pay Mr. and Mrs. Oien
their remaining benefit payments of $7,234 in each year.
C:\WP51\HA YNES\REPORTS\OIENFINL.113
/~ ~.,,2
~"
""7;~"""
" ..rW=t'c
'ni .' ,,::,"
'" ,:::,,1
PACIFIC
RELOCATION
CONSULTANTS
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
100
WEST BROAOWAY
SUITE 300
LONG BEACH
CALIFORNIA 90802
(310) 590-8584
FAX (310) 495-0889
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
333
HEGENBERGER ROAD
SUITE 812
OAKLAND
CALIFORNIA 94621
(510) 838-3081
FAX (510) 838-0750
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
November 20, 1992
Lyle Haynes, Principal Community Development Specialist
r.oMary O'Toole, Pacific Relocation Consultants
SUBJECT:
Jetrand Lisa Oien-Library Project
This is to request the final relocation payment for Jeff and Lisa Oien, previous
residents of 365 Orange Avenue.
It is recommended that payment be made in yearly installments.
Due to the fact that the Library Project is a federally-funded CDBG development,
the Oien's are eligible for a differential payment for 60 months (very low income).
Recommended payment is based on the difference between a comparably priced
home in the Chula Vista area and the Oien's ability to pay.
Approval is recommended and payment is requested as follows:
Balance-Rental Assistance
Last Resort Housing
Total
$3,750.00
$17.952.00
$21,702.00
Thank you for your assistance.
[ws:mary/oien.mem]
1~5
. .
PACIFIC RELOCATION CONSULTANTS. LEITER OF TRANSMITTAL
Date: November 20. 1992
TO: Lyle Haynes
Principal Community
Development Specialist
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, California 9201 0
FROM: Pacific Relocation Consultants
100 West Broadway, Suite 300
Long Beach, California 90802
Phone: (310) 590-8564
Fax: (310) 495-0889
THIS CORRESPONDENCE REFERS TO:
Name: Jeff and Lisa Oien
Address: 365 OrllJUte Avenue
Chula Vista CA 91911
File # or Project: ,
Librarv
ATTACHED ARE DOCUMENTS TO SUPPORT THE FOllOWING PAYMENT REQUEST(S):
Advance Assistance
Rental Assistance
Downpayment Assistance
Replacement Housing Assistance
Fixtures and Equipment
COMMENTS:
x
Residential Moving Expense
Business Moving Expense
Business In-lieu
x Last Resort Housing
Other:
THIS CHECK SHOULD BE MADE PAYABLE TO:
IN THE AMOUNT OF:
Jeff and Lisa Oien
$ 21,702.00
Your prompt attention in this matter is appreciated.
Sincerely,
"'- "'-J k. O''''~
Mary K O'Toole
Pacific Relocation Consultants
JtJ--?
, ,
Claim for Rental or Downpayment Assistance Payment
Under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970
FORAGlONCYUSlOONLY
Name'" Agon<!;l//>/'/ " ,,' ,/'</;
ChuUiNista Reqeve 0 nt. A 'ell Librar
PRIVACY ACT NOTICE: You are asked to provide this Information In order to determine whether you are eligible to receive a rental or downpayment
_ce payment You ore not required by law to fumlah thla Infonnation, but n you do not provlda It, you may not racaIve thla paymant
or ~ may taka Iongar to pay you. Thla Information Ia baing collacted undar tho authority '" tho UnWorm Ralocation AssIstance 8lld Real Proparty
Acquisition Policies Ad. of 1970. The Information is reported to the displacing Agency and may be made available to 8 Federal agency for review.
INSTRUCTIONS: Thla claim Iorm Ia lor tha usa '" lamlllaa and IndMduals applying for a rental or downpayment assistance payment A represantative
of the displacing Agency will help you complete the fonn and infom1 you of the information that you must provide in support of this claim. "the
full amount of your ctaim is not approved, the Agency will provide you with 8 written explanation of the reason. If you are not satisfied
with the Agency's determination. you may appeal that determination. The Agency will explain how to make an appeal.
1. Your Name(s) (You are the Claimant(s)) 1 a. Present Mailing Address(es) of Claimant(s)
3B8 Monterey 'Court
Chula Vista, CA 91911
lb. Telephone Number(s)
J
(619) 498-0523
2. Have all members of the household moved to the same dwelling? ----X---- YES NO
(If "NO", list the names of aU members and the addresses to which they moved in the Remarks Section.)
Dwelling Address When Did You Rent
This Unit?
When Did You Move
To This Unit?
When Did You Move
Out of This Unit?
3. Unit That 365 Orange Avenue
You Moved From Chula Vista, CA 91911
4. Unit That 388 Monterey Court
You Moved To Chula Vista, CA 91911 10/28/92
211/91
11/4 92
11/4/92
5, Computation at Rental Assistance Payment, Downpayment Assistance Payment
INSTRUCTIONS: Complete Items 12 and 13 on the reverse side of the form before TO BE COMPLETED BY CLAIMANT
completing this section. The displacing agency representative will help you.
(1) Monthly Housing Cost for Replacement Dwelling Unit to which you moved
(From hne (3), Column (c), Item 12)
(2) Monthly Housing Cost for Comparable Replacement Dwelling
(From Line (3), Column(e), Item 12. To be provided by Agency.)
(3) The lesser of Line (1) or Line (2)
(If Claim is for Downpayment Assistance, enter amount from Line (2).)
(4) Monthly Housing Cost for Dwelling Unit from which you were displaced
(From Line (3), Column (a), Item 12)
(5) Claimant's Ability-To-Pay (From Une (3), Column (a), Item 13)
(6) Enter the Lesser of Line (4) or (5)
FOR AGENCY USE
$
$
$
$
$
$
(7) Monthly Need (Line (3) minus Line (6))
(8) Amount from Line (7) Multiplied by
(9) Amount of Rental or Downpayment Assistance Claimed
(Enter Amount on Line (8) or $5,250.00, whichever is less)
(10) Amount of Advance Payment, if any
23,202.00
1,500.00
21 702.00
$
$
$
$
$
$
(11) Amount Requested (Line (9) minus Line (10))
6. Certilication by Clalmant(s)
WARNING: If you knowingly or deliberately make false statements on this form, you may be subject to eMl or criminal penalties under SectIon 1001 of Title 18 of
the United States Code. In addition you may not receive any of the amounts claimed on this fonn. I CERTIFY that this claim and supporting information are true and
complete. that I have not submitted any other claim for the expenses listed and that I have not been paid for the expenses by any other source. I ask that I be paid
the amount on Une (11) of Item (5) in: _ one lump-sum --X- installments (as specified in the Remarks Section). My decision to rent or buy a dwelling was based
on a full explanation by the displacing agency representative of the difference between the types of payments available (Rental or Downpayment Assistance).
Signature C mant(s) . Date
X
$
",,iIPP
Pacific Relocation Consultants
PRC,01/90
Page 1 of 2
~
12. DETERMINATION OF CLAIMANTS MONTHLY HOUSING COST (MHC)
MONTHLY
INSTRUCTIONS: The term 'Monthly Housing Cost' Means MONTHLY HOUSING COST MONTHLY HOUSING COST HOUSING
the average monthly cost for rent and utility charges. FOR DWEWNG FROM FOR REPLACEMENT COST FOR
UtIlity charges Include reasonable costs to provide heat. WHICH YOU WERE DWEWNG TO WHICH COMPARABLE
hot water, lighting, water and sewer, and trash removal. DISPLACED YOU MOVED REPLACEMENT
A person's monthly housing cost for a replacement dwelling DWEWNG
shall include one-twelfth of the estimated reasonable FOR AGENCY FOR AGENCY ro BE PROVIOE[
yeer\y ooet lor utility charges. CLAIMANT USE ONLY CLAIMANT USE ONLY BY AGENCY
(0) (b) (0) (d) (eJ
(1) Contract Rent $ 600.00 $ $ 975.00 $ $ 825.00
(2) Average Monthly Utilities Not Included in Contract Rent.
(List each item below (e.g. gas, electricity, oil, water) 36.00 36.00 36.00
and list amounts in columns (a) and (e))
(3) Total Monthly.Housing Cost $ $ $ $ $ 861. 00
(Sum of Line (1) plus all entries in line (2)) 636.00 1,011.00
13. DETERMINATION OF CLAIMANTS ABIUTY-TO-PAY
(1) Gross Montly Income of All Adult Members (18 years or older) of Household FOR AGENCY
(List names below and list amounts in Column (a)) CLAIMANT USE ONLY
(s) (b)
Jeff Oien 1,581.0C
(2) Total Gross Monthly Income (Sum of entries in Une (1)) $ $
1,581. 00
(3) Claimant's Ability-To-Pay Monthly Housing Cost (Amount on Line (2) x 30% (O.3)) $ 474.30 $
14. COMPARABLE REPLACEMENT DWELLING
261 Garrett Street
Chula Vista, CA 91911
3 B/R 1 1/2 Bath-- J:825 110
15. REMARKS
Yearly Installments Recommended
Pacific Relocation Consultants //)~y PRC,Ott9Q
Page 2 of 2
RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING THE BALANCE OF THE RENTAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENT
AND A PORTION OF THE LAST RESORT HOUSING PAYMENT FOR THE
RELOCATION OF TENANTS FORMERLY RESIDING ON CITY PROPERTY
AT 365 ORANGE AVENUE AND AUTHORIZING AN EXPENDITURE IN
THE AMOUNT OF $7,234 THEREFOR
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, Pacific Relocation Consultants has reviewed and recommends
approval of the balance of a Rental Assistance payment and a Final Resort Housing payment
totalling $21,702 to Jeff and Lisa Oien and;
WHEREAS, the City, through its' Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) funds has provided funds for the City's Capital Improvement Project HPR 143, Orange
and Hermosa Park, for the purpose of, among other things, relocating tenants and;
WHEREAS, the City Council has elected to pay the total remaining benefit
amount of $21,702 due to Mr. and Mrs. Oien over a three (3) year period at a rate of $7,234
a year, and;
WHEREAS, the relocation of the tenants pursuant to the Uniform Relocation
Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 is necessary in order to
implement the project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista does hereby authorize the payment of $7,2 to Jeff and L" ien.
'O~bY
J
Presented by:
ChrisSalomome
Community Development Director
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
C:IWP51IHAYNESlDOCUMENTIOIENFINL.RES
J~~J I/Q - 8
-
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
Item ) ;l.
Meeting Date 08/04/92
Resolutionl b131pproving Advance Assistance and Residential Moving
Expense Payment for the Relocation of Tenants Residing on City Property
at 365 Orange Avenue and Appropriating Funds in the Amount of $2,750
therefor. . ,
SUBMITTED BY:
Community Development Director
uS.
REVIEWED BY: City Manager
(4/Sths Vote: Yes X No ~
BACKGROUND:
The City's relocation consultant, Pacific Relocation Consultants, has reviewed and recommends
approving the Advance Assistance and Residential Moving Expense claim of one (1) tenant
residing on property owned by the City. The tenant is requesting the Advance Assistance
payment in order to have the funds for securing a new replacement dwelling. The purpose of
relocating the tenant is to provide for development of a library at the comer of Orange and
Hermosa.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Resolution authorizing the approval of the Advance
Assistance and Residential Moving Expense claim of one (1) tenant residing on City property
in the amount of $2,750.00.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970
established the requirements of cities or other displacement agencies (not Redevelopment
Agencies) for the relocation of residential tenants and homeowners located within the jurisdiction
of the displacement agency. In this case, the City is responsible for relocating one (1) tenant
residing at 365 Orange A venue for the purpose of developing a library. The status of the claim
is as follows:
Jeff and Lisa Oien
365 Orange Avenue
Advance Rental Assistance:
Fixed Moving Payment:
Total:
$1,500
$1.250
$2,750
/tJ~ /
~-
,--.
, 'j
Page 2, Item Jd-..
Meeting Date 08/04/92
Since Mr. and Mrs. Oien are tenants on property acquired by the City with Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds, the rules for providing relocation assistance differ
slightly from the State regulations which govern Agency relocations. The Oiens' will still
qualify for reimbursement of all actual reasonable moving expenses plus a rent differential
payment for a period of sixty (60)' months, rather than the State mandated forty-eight (48)
months. Due to their existing rent being very low ($600.00 per month for a three-bedroom
house) and because they will qualify for the extended rent differential payment, it is likely that
they will qualify for additional assistance in the amount of $15,000 to $20,000. Future Council
action will be required if a Final Rental Assistance and Last Resort Housing payment is
required.
The rental differential payment is calculated by determining the difference between their prior
rent and their new rent multiplied by sixty (60). Relocated tenants are restricted in their choice
of replacement dwelling units to those that are comparable to their old dwelling units with the
City having the authority to approve or disapprove new replacement dwelling units if the new
rent is not reported at the fair market rent or is not a comparable replacement unit.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approval of the resolution will result in an advance payment being made of $2,750.00. The
funds are available in the City's Capital Improvement Project UPR 143, Orange and Hermosa
Park. In addition, once the replacement dwelling unit has been identified by the tenant,
additional rent differential assistance will be required.
Ie; -10
I~.i"'.~.'
'tfl~",~ :
~ ~.~
PACIFIC
RELOCATION
CONSULTANTS
IUTHERN CALIFORNIA
'00
WEST BROADWAY
SUITE 300
LONG BEACH
CALIFORNlA 90802
(310) 590-8564
FAX (310) 495-0889
'RTHERN CALIFORNIA
333
EGENBERGER ROAD
SUITE 612
OAKLAND
CALIFORNIA 94621
(510) 638-3081
FAX (510) 638-0750
MEMORANDUM
r-.
I
,......
\ I
r "lj l"'. 1...; Je. ' .
r\/... '/..,".
s:;-' k /(T"'\
~ "t" ...&\
c-) ~2,\
;: JUN 1992 '3 \
(!) Received :~ i
Community Oevelopmenl !.;: J
Ikpartmenl .< 'j
//
'I ~(:::~J,/
-:00 I"' .. /
'- 2El21.t--P
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
June 9, 1992
.Lance Abbott, Conimunity Development Specialist
I" ""Mary K. O'Toole, Pacific Relocation Consultants
SUBJECf:
Advances For Tenants of The Church and Center Parking Lot I
4th and Orange Library Site Projects
:
Relocation activity on the above mentioned projects has progressed to the active
search for replacement sites.
The tenants have indicated the necessity of advance payments in order to secure
replacement dwellings.
The advance checks will be issued to each tenant upon location of a replacement site.
Approval is recommended and payment requested as follows:
Juan Miranda
334 Church Avenue
Advance Rental Assistance:
Fixed Moving Payment:
Total:
Jack A and Lesla C. Losey
338 Church Avenue
Advance Rental Assistance:
Fixed Moving Payment:
Total:
Jose L and Cynthia M. Sanchez
342 1/2 Church Avenue
Advance Rental Assistance:
Fixed Moving Payment:
Total:
Jeff and Usa Oien
365 Orange Avenue
Advance Rental Assistance:
Fixed Moving Payment:
Total:
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
$1,500.00
$850.00
$2,350.00
$1,500.00
$1,450.00
$2,950.00
$1,500.00
$1,250.00
$2,750.00
$1,500.00
$1,250.00
$2,750.00
Ib-//
..
.
.
RESOLUTION NO. /,9' ,
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CJIUIA VISTA AMENDING SCHEDULE VIII, SECTION
:10..52.400 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE TO
mLOW DIAGONAL PARKING ON THE 100 BLOCK OF
IDINTARD
WHEREAS, staff received a request from Mr. Earl Wiens,
Principal fill Castle Park Middle School, to provide diagonal parking
stalls Jl:L.q the entire frontage of the school; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends that the City Council adopt a
resolutiORto allow diagonal parking along the north curbline of
Quintard SBreet between First Avenue and Second Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the Safety Commission at its November 12, 1992
meeting ~d 5-0 to accept staff's report.
BOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city Council of
the City af Chula vista does hereby amend Schedule VIII, Section
10.52.40l!) of the Chula vista Municipal Code, to allow diagonal
parking along the north curbline of Quintard Street between First
Avenue aDd Second Avenue as follows:
10.52.400 IDiagonal Parking - Permitted where - Schedule VIII.
.ame of Street Beainnina at Ending at Side
Qltintard Street First Avenue Second Ave. North
Presented by
A~ed as t
I~
ruce M. Boogaar, , C1ty
Attorney
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
P:_IaIIDnIoy~.I00
Sa. ~ ~ )??~ .tu
~ Af,uf
11,,1
""'"'
1HIS PAGE BLANK
.-.
.-.
13-1'
,
11-"1
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
'. J~
Ite~l\
Meeting Date 12/8:92 I I
l~ I~ qa,.
ITEM TITLE: Resolution I~ 91" Amending Schedule VIII, Section
10.52.400 of the Municipal Code to allow Diagonal Parking on the
100 block of Ouintard
SUBMITTED1ft': Director of Public wor~
REVIEWED": City Manager g (4/5ths Vote: Yes_ NoX)
Staff receivllf!a ~est from Mr. Earl Wiens, Principal of Castle Park Middle School,
to provide .dqolllf parking stalls along the entire frontage of the school.
RECOMMEftllA18II: That the City Council adopt the resolution amending Schedule
VIII, Section to.51.4oo of the Municipal Code, to allow diagonal parking along the
north curblilR.of Gldintard Street between First Avenue and Second Avenue.
.
BOARDS/C.-aMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Safety Commission at their
November 12. 19W meeting voted 5-0 to accept staff's report and recommend to the
City Council 10 a_t a resolution allowing diagonal parking along the north curbline
of OuintardStreet between First Avenue and Second Avenue.
DISCUSSION:
Ouintard Street is a Class III collector with a 40' curb to curb width. The block
between First Avenue and Second Avenue is 50 ft. wide with the additional 10 foot
width all north of ttle centerline. Therefore, the eastbound traffic lane is 20 ft. wide
with parallel parking while the westbound traffic lane is 30 ft. wide. The posted
speed limit is 30 MPH except in the vicinity of Castle Park Middle School, where the
speed limit is 25 MPH when children are present. Traffic counts completed by staff
in May of 1991 show an Average Daily Traffic count (ADT) of 4,300 vehicles per day.
A review of the accident history for this block for the period of 111/89 - 10/2/92
shows that there have been 4 reported accidents. A similar accident history review
was done for Fifth Avenue south of G Street in front of Chula Vista Junior High
School where there is diagonal parking along the east curbline and parallel parking
along the west curbline. In comparing the two locations, there have been no reported
accidents at either locations during the beginning and dismissal periods. On Fifth
Avenue there have been no accidents attributed to the angle parking.
.
Traffic Engineering staff marked 55 temporary diagonal parking spaces along the north
curbline of Ouintard Street for the week of October 12, 1992 for a special event
recently held at the Castle Park Middle School campus. Where there were 37 parallel
'3 J
, ,
1\ ~ \
Page 2, Item II
Meeting Date 12:~ /Z.!t",jo,z..
~
parking spaces along the school frontage, staff has temporarily marked 55 - 45 degree
parking stalls, thus leaving a 15 foot wide westbound lane versus a 22 foot wide lane
which encouraged double and sometimes triple parking due to a lack of adequate
parking spaces. The school staff has started using these angle parking stalls on a
daily basis. Field investigations done at the 2:05 P.M. dismissal time show that the
55 angle parking stalls have significantly improved traffic flow during the peak periods
and provided sufficient on-street parking spaces for parent's vehicles. The Chula
Vista Police Department prefers the angle parking, since it is easier to enforce and cite
illegally parked vehicles. The existing yellow curb area by the front entrance walkway
will still be used as a passenger pick-up/drop-off area.
CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends that the City Council to adopt a resolution amending Schedule VIII.
Section 10.52.400 of the Municipal Code. to allow diagonal parking along the north
curbline of Quintard Street between First Avenue and Second Avenue.
10.52.400 Diagonal Parking - Permitted where - Schedule VIII.
Name of Street Beginning at Ending at Side
Quintard Street First Avenue Second Avenue North
.""",
FISCAL IMPACT: $250.
FXR,KY-119 .
WPC F,\homoI_logond.\qukIt.d.1oo
120292
Attachments:
Area Plats
Letter dated October 19, 1992
Safety Commission minutes dated 11/12/92
""'"
I'~A
-
11-2.
I 1
"1
\. 1_ ., : I .3^I~ cJOJ." It-I T I t
,
I . i' ."'T
= ,,^- ;. <",\..7 h!: I~ 11111 .
,
::: - ., i: - "1B):..UT
~_,/lo2c_= ~ IL -
.. EJt -- _I-:':~
........ 1 11 ""'Ill P 1111l1T
- l- II .... 8TT E I-
- _~ E
:It ~.'" - L i- :::m -
,;.;; - " == ~
- - ~-- == ~.
- - ~-- ;;::;
- - >--;--
. 1 i--
, -1
'.
U- 1= ~ J.Sa:l1 Q.
,
- .- , T
, -.J
_A - , I
/ ..
"'" <
I.....- ~ 11<1 I'
, - J ~ "- W
. L- t-
K 0 " I
- Ir.II - I-- II: a:
1:_- II:
~ c c 1
~ ..
i L... ..,~ ... I "8 c(
L-- ~ z I ...
t1 -
L - ~ :) .
I . 0 -
ii"" ~'= c
, v
I I"
I ~
inNi^Y ::. ONO'ili
..
III
'J ~
I-
L ;
...
11.1
11.1 =
J II: - ;:::) 2
... I
I en ti ,
I 7 ~ I
$2
.. 'yt
1 JJJ ..
rl ., ..
c:
. i
\ \ - 5 . -
.. .
Q
- -- -
-
(
(
:3J'\rlSf\'"
4...r
Q~
1:l:cl 1,1
"
"
"'" ?;-"Q,'!
::l "it":
~ I:
'1 !'II):
..... I""llr) ': I
~ '~
~ II II ·
J
8
~
. 0
o~
L----- ,..
.. ' C\I (T)
___._ C\J (')
I~
, '
-'
II C'
L-.. ~/ '\
\'-Pi
__I P')~I
.- - -3,'-
",I
J-I .~
i n.:
--10\
",,'
"'.
r ~
,.
e
L
':;{
~,
'.L
&
cJ
~
\
\;:
o
"'3.~~"""'V
f'~2
\1
"~I
/io.
o Ci'
I ~'
Z:i
,&1
.' ~-,DC::
- ,
,. Z~-~
".1'
Z"';.""
o:~
t".
.~
'J'
~~
~
)(
I S
"
~
"2
~
~
~
^'
-
1
ll!
I "
.
~
I < ~
, ,
u
'- ,
, , ~
, ' ~ "
, ,~ ~
.~ . ...
~ I . "" ~
, ,
.J ,~ l'
~ . i'
::!
~
III
co
_1
.,
-J ..:
- '-
:"l:.. L
r: '<,
UJ ,"
A ~
,-'
,I
-
C-
..
,-
i
~ I_~-
I
I
~l
.
.'
"
,t:..
..
.
,
l8
: - 1
L/:~
;.r"""" \/. - -
"
.
/ ::l~~
11-<':'
D
%
2
~
:)
.
-r
I:
, '
i!
, '
, I
, I
Ii
I
2)
..J
~
'"'-
,-)
.J
::2
.
~
..-
,
;::J
~
...J
N
~
I
o
r;:::
'::5
:z
~
o
-.J
<t
--b
:z.
~
""
~
1"
0.
'"
8
tb
.::- -'
~~
f-
v'" 0
-Q::
o~~
C. ::5
::;::CI
'..) :.:::-
~ \J
'oJ 0
lC -1
..lti cQ
W
.J
...
~
~
'';'
t.
Office 01 the Principal
160 Quintard Street
Chula Vista, CA 91911-4499
Phone: (619) 691.5490
.
n , . ,,\,,,.1
..>(\,J"
.9 fe.r!(
Ie
Castle Park Middle School ~,
Sweetwater Union High School District
..~:: -:... ~ v~..
October 19, 1992
Bob Thomas
Chairperson of Safety Commission
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91 910
Dear Mr. Thomas,
At a recent meeting with Francisco X. Rivera, P.E. in a presentation
for a reception/celebration at Castle Park Middle School for Gail Devers I
was delighted to see diagonal parking being used to enhance the number of
parking places. I would like to ask you to make parking on the north side
of ..>ii'1__dt:i from Second Avenue to First Avenue diagonal parking all the
time. Our enrollment, has increased dramatically the last few years,
therefore, our visitors and parents have increased and more parking is
needed. I believe this would also reduce the number of double parked cars
and provide a safer environment for the delivery and pick-up of our
students.
I appreciate your consideration in this maUer.
Thank you,
~~~
Earl Wiens
Principal
EW/ck
'3-7
' .
\t-I
Slifety Commission Minutes
November 12, 1992
Page 5
-.
MSC 1Th0maalBrlclenl thet the Slitety Commllalon lICC8Pt lUff'a nport...d lUff'a recomrnendlltion
to NteII intersection .....11 ligna with 20 MPH IcIv110ry ...... WId to InateII 30 MPH pavement
INrIdnlla 8t the 30 MPH Ilgn for ~ nffIc. ApproYlcl4-1.2 with CommIaaioner Chideater
votInll no, WId VIce ChaIr PH'" WId CommIuIoner MetKII ....t.
9. REPORT on Request for Diagonal ParkIng 8t the 100 block of Quintlrd Street
mnk Rivere pruented lUff'a report.
MSC IChldel1erlPltta1 thet the Slifety CommJlalon lICC8Pt lUff'a npoft WId recommend to the City
Councl to lIdopt a rnolutlon ..0....11 _oneI ~II "onll the north curbllne of Oulnterd Street
between firat ...d Second Avenue. ApproYlcl &.0.2 with VIce Chair PHlla ...d CommIuloner Matecia
abaent.
10. REPORT on Retaining on Street Parking in the 400 block of L Street
Frank Rivera presented mff's report.
CIHIrfes Schnld"" U() L StTHt ./, CINM Via,., CA 9"'0, spoke in favor of mff's recommendation.
He said that the homeowners in his complex had been obeying the "wand antering from only one
direction. He Aid the violators of the painted median were users of the Youth Center. He supported
lteff's recommendation aa long aa it did not affect on-Itreet perking.
Mlka Osbom, 29 Vis" Way, CINM Via,., CA 9'9'0, reprnenteil the Chula Vista Church of Christ
at 470 L Street. He said he wes in favor of lUff's recommendation and asked that ltaff make lure
that the median/delineatorl did not axtend peat the entrance to their church property. He Aid that
there were people at the church on Wednesdays and SundaYI and they saw many violators of the
painted median turning into the Youth Center.
-.
MlchHI Offennen, U() L StTHt .F, CINM Via,., CA 9'9'0, apoke in favor of mff'l recommenda-
tion. He aaid the problema were a relult of the Youth Center and hopefully the delineators would be
a lolution. He felt the treffic in the area with .the youth Center wel poor p'-nning and it was the
City's burden to find a aolution without affacting the property owners perking.
MSC 1Th0mellK08aterl th8t the SIifety CommIaIIon lICC8Pt 1Uff'l npoft WId racommand to the City
Councl to retain on-straat ~llln the 400 block of L Straat WId lIdd yellow ratlectIve pyIona within
the pelnted median. Approved &.0.2 with VIce ChaIr PHlla WId CommIuIonar Matec.. 8blent. '.
". ORAL COMMUNICAnONS None.
STAFF REPORTS
12. 1992-93 CIP Statui Reoort . DlstributecI for CommiaaIoner Information.
13. Chura Vlate Palice Deoartment TraffIe Summary for s._mber 1992 . Diatributed for _
Commiaaioner Information. "\
I'C': ~~r: r -: r.. ~
.. D~/~ .'~, '::-'.:=~=~'~~i-'. .H~
4..,iJ~'''''''';- ~
r<t- ...- f""~~'~
r ,. :' ...., 'i'c,
,. . ...."vl.....-.
.LI\.:....~- -
/J'-g/
II-~
-,--
_._~...._--
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item / e2
ITEM TITLE:
Meeting Date 12/15/92
Resolution /j,'JYAmending City Council Policy No. 585-1 by
expanding the use of utility funds to reimburse all properties for
the cost of undergrounding of private service laterals
SUBMITTED BY:
Director of Public Works
r
REVIEWED BY:
City ManageV'>
(4/5ths Vote: Yes No X I
- -
Council Policy No. 585-1, adopted by Resolution 11977 on April 2, 1985, addresses
the use of utility allocation funds for the underground conversions of private service
laterals. The current Council Policy limits funding to single family residential
properties. In response to the complaints of condominium owners, the Council has
directed staff to return with a report to examine the possibility of using utility funds
to reimburse all properties for the underground conversion of private service laterals.
Approval of the subject amendment to Council Policy No. 585-1 will allow the City
to reimburse all properties for the cost of private undergrounding.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the resolution amending Council Policy
No. 585-1 as outlined above.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
On January 5, 1982, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) by decision
82-01-18 allowed local agencies the option of utilizing part of their utility allocation
funds for converting customers' services. The CPUC leaves it to the discretion of the
local agency to decide which (if any) customer is to receive utility fund
reimbursements. On April 2, 1985, the Chula Vista City Council adopted Council
Policy No. 585-1 regulating the use of utility funds for the underground conversion of
private service laterals. The policy limits the reimbursement to single family residential
properties.
The current policy does not address the condominium ownership issue.
Condominiums are owned by families or individuals, similar to single family detached
homes. Since they are owned individually, Council directed staff to review said
Council Policy and recommend possible amendments to allow condominium owners
to be reimbursed. At the October 27,1992 meeting, the City Council directed staff
to examine the possibility of using utility allocation funds to reimburse all properties.
/~-I
Page 2, Item leZ
Meeting Date 12/15/92
In an effort to justify the subject amendment, staff examined the applicability of said
funds as practiced by other cities in our region. Exhibit "B" shows a list of agencies
contacted by staff. Most of these agencies do not have written policies regulating the
reimbursement. However, three of the four cities that have written policies (San
Diego, Imperial Beach and Lemon Grove) provide for reimbursements to all properties
including commercial and industrial.
Staff also examined the fiscal impact that such an amendment will have on the utility
allocation funds for the remaining life of the program. Exhibit "C" tabulates frontage
percentages for the different land uses within each district in the City's Utility
Undergrounding Program. Expanding the applicability of the reimbursement policy will
approximately require the doubling of reimbursement projections.
The policy amendment is proposed to be applicable to all future districts and to all the
Utility Undergrounding Districts that were formed in Calendar Year 1992. This
includes the following districts: \
1. "F" Street, Church Avenue to Second Avenue
2. Fourth Avenue, "E" Street to State Route 54
3. "E" Street, Broadway to Toyon Lane
A notice of proposed Council action was mailed to all properties within the districts
listed above.
The City's Underground Utility Advisory Committee (UUAC) has reviewed the draft
policy revision and recommends its approval by the City Council.
Schedule Impact - This revised policy will have no cost impact to City funds, since
SDG&E is paying the cost. However, these funds are set aside for our use in the
Undergrouding Program. Currently the reimbursements amount to approximately 2%
to 5% of the total cost of the program. Approval of this resolution will double this
range to as much as 10%. This will, therefore, extend the implementation time of a
twenty year program by one year.
FISCAL IMPACT: None. Reimbursements to property owners will continue to be
made from Utility Allocation funds.
SMN: File No. KY.078
WPC:F:IHOMElENGINEERlAGENDAIPOL585-1
120992
/).-.;2.
RESOLUTION NO.
/693'/
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING COUNCIL POLICY NO. 585-1
BY EXPANDING THE USE OF UTILITY FUNDS TO
REIMBURSE ALL PROPERTIES FOR THE COST OF
UNDERGROUNDING OF PRIVATE SERVICE LATERALS
WHEREAS, Council Policy No. 585-1, adopted by Resolution
11977 on April 2, 1985, addresses the use of utility allocation
funds for the underground conversions of private service laterals;
and,
WHEREAS, the current Council Policy limits funding to
single family residential properties; and,
WHEREAS, in response to the complaints of condominium
owners, the Council has directed staff to amend Council Policy
585-1, to examine the possibility of using utility funds to
reimburse all properties for the underground conversion of private
service laterals; and,
WHEREAS, approval of the subject amendment to Council
Policy No. 585-1 will allow the city to reimburse all properties
for the cost of private undergrounding; and,
WHEREAS, the City's Underground Utility Advisory
Committee (UUAC) has reviewed the draft policy revision and
recommends its approval by the city Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby amend Council Policy No. 585-1
by expanding the use of utility funds to reimburse all properties
for th~ cost of undergrounding of private service laterals as set
forth in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by
reference as if set forth in full.
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
'OJ 0 bY~
Presented by
Bruce M.
Attorney
F: \home\attomey\poI585.1
Ie/- -:3 //~..I{
EXHmIT "A"
SUBJECT:
COUNCIL POLICY
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
POLICY
NUMBER
.
Use of Utility Funds for Underground Conversion of Private
Service Laterals
585-1
EFFECTIVE
DATE
12-15-92
PAGE
1 .
ADOPTED BY:.
I DATED: December 15, 1992
BACKGROUND
In 1982, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) by Decision 82-01-18 gave the authority to the local
agencies to request electric utilities to expend allocation funds for the conversion of electric lateral services for each
customer in utility allocation funded undergrounding districts. On October 18, 1983, Pacific Telephone (now Pacific
Bell) filed a change in tariff with the CPUC so that communications utilities would also be in conformance with
Decision 82-01-18. Cox Cable TV, is not governed by the CPUC, but chooses to cooperate with the program by
providing conduit and service wires up to 100 feet in length at no cost to the single family residence.
Decision 82-01-18 provides the mechanism to reduce the property owner's cost for the conversion from the distribution
line to the residence. TIlis cost depends on the distance from the property line to the point of connection with the
customer's wiring and varies from customer to customer.
.
The CPUC decision permits the use of utility funds to provide up to 100 feet of the property owner's service lateral
(trenching and conduit). The net result is a reduction in cost that will benefit the individual property owner. Under
the City Code it is the property owner's responsibility to provide and maintain the underground supporting structure
needed on the property.
PURPOSE
To establish a policy for the use of utility funds for conversion of the customer's service laterals to encourage property
owner acceptance for desirable conversion district projects.
POLICY
The City Council establishes the following policy for the use of utility funds for underground conversion of private
service laterals:
I. General Provisions
.
~ -.
:fYH~g .aII13e liIRiteEl 19 smgle f~' resideRlial pfBIlemes.
B, A. Funding shall be limited to facilities which customer traditionally supplies/installs -trenching and
conduit from property line to point of connection.
G,!h Funding shall not exceed the estimated cost of trenching and conduit installation for up to 100 feet of
the private service lateral.
.
*Replaces Resolution No. 11977
/.,2~
EXHmIT "A" (coot'd)
SUBJECT:
COUNCIL POLICY
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
POLICY
NUMBER
Use of Utility Funds for Underground Conversion of Private
Service Laterals
585-1
EFFECTIVE
DATE
12-15-92
PAGE
2
ADOPTED BY:*
DATED: December 15, 1992
II. Implementation Procedures
A. The use of utility funds to convert private service laterals shall be recommended by the City's Utility
Undergrounding Advisory Committee (UUAC).
B. UUAC members shall determine the length of Iatera1 (trenching and conduit) that is (1) eligible for
utility funding for each siRgle family fOSilleRliaI property within the conversion district and (2) the
length of conduit and wire that Csx CaBle TV the aoDroDriate cable comDanv will provide free of
charge to tile single fllHlily each residential property.
C. UUAC members shall agree on a "reasonable" cost per linear foot of lateral conversion.
D. WAC utility member representatives shall agree on the proportional split each utility is to bear for
conversion of the service laterals.
E. All owners within the conversion district shall be informed of the utility fund amount proposed to be
reimbursed prior to the public hearing on the conversion district formation.
F. Council shall set the limit for each amount of reimbursement to be applied to each service lateral by
resolution. The amounts shall be those recommended by the UUAC or as amended by Council
pursuant to public hearing deliberations.
G. Utility companies shall pay City !be total of proportional shares specified in "E" above when:
1) all the customers have satisfactorily completed their service lateral conversion, and
2) the electric metering equipment has passed a City inspection certifying it ready to receive
underground service.
H. The Qty shall !ben pay the amount of reimbursement due each owner after receipt of funds from the
utility companies.
NOTES:
1)
The service lateral shall be dermed as: trench, bac1di1I, and any necessary conduit from the
customer's property line to the underground sweep at !be base of the customer's termination
facility. In those cases where the service conduit enters !be customer's building, the service
Iatera1 will terminate at the point where !be conduit enters the building.
For the purpose of this policy utility is dermed as any company providing electric, telephone
communications, cable television and data transmission services.
2)
(:bcImt_P-^l83.92
*Replaces Resolution No. 11977
l:l-?
December 1,1992
File No. KY - 078
EXHIBIT "B"
REIMBUltSEMENT POllCIES OF VARIOUS AGENCIES
AGENCIES CONTACfED WlU'ITEN REIMBUltSEMENT PRACDCE
POllCY
1 CITY OF SAN DIEGO YES Reimburse All Property Owners
2 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO NO No Reimbursements
3 CARLSBAD NO No Reimbursements
4 CORONADO YES Reimburse Residential Properties Only
Mostly Residential Neighborhoods
5 EL CAJON NO No Reimbursements
6 ENCINITAS NO No Reimbursements
7 ESCONDIDO NO Evaluate Each District On a Case by Case Basis
WRmEN ( Non - Income Producing Properties Only)
POUCY
8 IMPERIAL BEACH YES Reimburse All Property Owners
9 LA MESA NO No Reimbursements
10 LEMON GROVE YES Reimburse All Property Owners
11 NATIONAL CITY NO No Reimbursements
12 OCEANSIDE NO No Reimbursements
13 Pr:JNAY NO City Pays Contractor Directly For The Private
Conversions (All Property Owners)
14 SAN MARCOS NO No Reimbursements
15 VISTA NO No Reimbursements
(uupdIIo)
1.)- ?
~s
.;::~
j~
~
~
o ei~
.2; :::>la
il ~~
I !I
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
<:1 "" "" t-: '" '" '" '" '"
....
i l:Q
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;; ~ ~ ~ ;; ~
~ ....
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~II~I~
~ '" .... ;:!i t-: ~.n2
.... '" .... .... .... ....
i .... ....
l:Q
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ .... .... .... ....
.... ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
!;j .... '" "" ~ ..,. ~ co 2 ~ .... .... "" ~
.... .... .... ..,. ....
~ ~
- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~
!
.... .... ""
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I~ ~
~ co co ~ :0 ..,. '" :;:i :::J
.... .... ....
~ ~
; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ....
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ !i; ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;;!; ~ C! ~ ~ :s: "1
l;l ~
~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ .... .... .... ....
~
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~ .... '"
.... .... .... .... ....
~~
~ .!i ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
~ .! 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ [J
J tj ! J ~ dol i II f I ~ ~ ! II i ) '" ~
i I II ~ ;l! ~ ~ I II ~
~ II ;.. ~ II ~ I ~ .!l ~
~ J II ~ II ~ ! J II ~ II .. , i II ! }
dol dol i ~ ~ dol I
II ~ II ~ ~ II ' ':' ~ II I II ~
c::I ::: ~ J 1 i fil ~ fil ~ f II J ~ ~ i j ~
tj ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .
I i i ~ ~ i ~ ~ i ~ ! ~ ~ i ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ tj ~ ~ tj tj
. ;.. !> !> ;.. !> !-> !-> !-> r.. '"
< ~ u c::I "" 0 ::c: - .... ~ ....l ::Il 0 .... 0 to: '" 0 <:1 ~ ~ ~
.... ....
I
/,)-8/
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item /.3
Meeting Date-r2715/92
ITEM TITLE: Acceptance of city of Chula vista audited financial
statements for the year ended June 30, 1992 and
auditor's opinion
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Finance~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager~ (4/5 vote: Yes___No~)
v
Presented for Council information are the City's Audited Financial
Statements for the year ended June 30, 1992, as prepared by the
independent audit firm of Deloitte & Touche. The report was
received on December 9, 1992.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council accept the Auditor's Report.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Pursuant to the city Charter Section 1017,
performed of the City's financial records
auditor.
an annual audit is
by an independent
In accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, Deloitte
& Touche has examined the general purpose financial statements of
the City of Chula vista including the Combined Balance Sheet,
combined Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and the Changes in
Financial position.
Deloitte & Touche also evaluated the internal accounting controls
of the City and their evaluation disclosed no material weaknesses.
In the opinion of Deloitte & Touche, the general purpose financial
statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial
position of the city of Chula vista at June 30, 1992, and the
results of its operations for the year ended in conformity with
generally accepted accounting principles.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
J3- )
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING SCHEDULE VIII, SECTION
10.52.400 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE TO
ALLOW DIAGONAL PARKING ON THE 100 BLOCK OF
QUINTARD
WHEREAS, staff received a request from Mr. Earl Wiens,
principal of Castle Park Middle School, to provide diagonal parking
stalls along the entire frontage of the school; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends that the city Council adopt a
resolution to allow diagonal parking along the north curbline of
Quintard Street between First Avenue and Second Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the Safety Commission at its November 12, 1992
meeting voted 5-0 to accept staff's report.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby amend Schedule VIII, Section
10.52.400 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, to allow diagonal
parking along the north curbline of Quintard Street between First
Avenue and Second Avenue as follows:
10.52.400 Diagonal Parking - Permitted where - Schedule VIII.
Name of Street Beainnina at Endina at Side
Quintard Street First Avenue Second Ave.. North
F: \home\attomey\quintard.l 00
Presented by
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
/3'-'3/1.3-'1
I T
1_ . I . 3AI(XJ cJOl/l/t-1
_ : l7 i': ~-[T [IIJ 111m
w _ ,,\ : c ,_: _"I
~_~l-rr/-,o~I,' =
~ j t"'~ ::- - -
II) I 1l::=.... j- - - ~ - I-:-
}tll f- illm
L ~:=
I
I- 'v'
~_"'-. 1-
=~ ~--
'---
f-T-
:, T~
I
.1S~ I 1:
r
~
1&1
1&1
~_ N
--:. I 7
/3-:5 ~ -......----N
TT / I
"T
~
-
-
-
.:;-
-
1=
-
W-11=
-
-
"-- I
._ I
I
- '
-= ~~-? ~ -.
-_ L--
f--
~- --
0-- ~
~-
- ::[
-;; i' " ,--
l-
I"
:It
a::
c
L
1oIL(2]
j
I-
..
C
u
3nN3^Y I;;,.
j
1
r1
n
.,
Q
ac:
of
...
Z
::;)
o
'-
')
!
~
it
I
I
.
I
~
l=t=
t::f-
~ I - ==
111{~ -
I
9
.".
ONO:>3~
J l !
I
()
I
.
(
....
<C
..J
Q.
<C
UJ
a:
<(
..
w
j
!:
I-
S
d
-;
N
~
I
I/)
~
I
o
~
~
c:
. -
. !
..IUL.I
~--~
V i' ~
/
:::::-"
3nrol3f\'<:f 1$ r
8
-< 0J
-::\. --
Q~.~I
:cI I
"
"
~"lQ,. :1
V'\ ~i~";!
:::l Ii
~I
C') 1'\1') .,
-..l 1'/1.1) Ii '!
~ :~ ;~i
~ II 1\
. .
:J
7
L-----, f\J (T)
-"- ! (\j (')
-~-'"~
J
o
o
~
-1 r-- -
I~.~/
J-1
----.l
1--1
l~
L_,/~
(~//, \
~'I..\.j'1l
. .. / ,/ /'::\~
/ / .j~
/ / ~<t
,/ (D' J
bZ +'2.1 ....s 'f
<:nd
-:f/
CD
-.
/'
6
L
'::1.
('0'
;!(
D.
!J
3
I
'30r'd"'<I f',;Z
'\!
<,if)
10
\. ci.
~!
7,'
i &\
'"
~. .
"
",
-w...
~t!.V_
~
rf
7
~
V
: /'
(s/
.
,
!'
%
.j
~
.J
,
~
I<J
c:,
'-. '
,.t .t
:1.
. .:t.
~ ~.
/-I. ,) . ....
. .<:. : 'D1
, .
,
~
~
'2
-
)i
~
;;::
~
l W
_i
-J
~ "-
-
~ c
\j,.
UJ 'j~
f2
t:4 ,i
"
~
c..
,
)8
, ...'" 1
/ .
""...... ~ 0.. - -
.,'
..
, .
"
~
Ol
~
,
I)
'5
o
...
-J
~
,
f'-
I'
, ,~
, "
'.'
"
,
d'
"
.
/3,(,
.
-r
I
I
I
-
....
0-
..0.
"
,
I
!
81
~
o
cr
t
2
'5
:)
.. '1'
2
...,
'-'-
i')
i..J
"'"
.-l
:']
3
.-l
~
F-
::s
:z
cb
2.
o
...j
<(
~
..c.
y.
'"
'i'-
~
c.
..JJ
if)
Dr
"'r-;
(; W
'" 'eeJ
-.- ,......("
~~
t:;Q
-Q::
,.~~
(\ ::s
.. 0
I
'...! ~
F- V
\J..J 0
Y. -J
Vi cD
0,
w
...
l-
I-
~
(\J
cr
Q
I
o
>-
m
c
.
..
Q
..
~
..
Q
J~L3
Deloitte &
Touche
o
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
GENERAL PURPOSE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR THE
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1992
AND INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT
J3 --3
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
TABLE OF CONTENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1992
Page
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT
I
GENERAL PURPOSE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS:
Combined Balance Sheet - All Fund Types and Account Groups
Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund B~lAnC"" -
All Governmental Fund Types and Expendable Trust Funds
Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances-
Budget and Actual (Non-GAAP Budgetary Basis) - Certain Governmental Fund Types
Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Retained Earnings -
Proprietary Fund Type
Combined Statement of Cash Flows - Proprietary Fund Type
Notes to Combined Financial Statements
2-4
5
6-7
8
9
10-25
ADOmONAL INFORMATION:
Ga1eral Fund:
Schedule of Revenues - Budget and Actual (Non-GAAP Budgetary Basis)
Schedule of Expenditures - Budget and Actual (Non-GAAP Budgetary Basis)
26
27
Special Revenue Funds:
Combining Balance Sheet
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances
(Deficit)
Schedule of Revenues - Budget and Actual (Non-GAAP Budgetary Basis)
Schedule of Expenditures - Budget and Actual (Non-GAAP Budgetary Basis)
28-29
30-31
32-34
35-36
Debt Service Funds:
Combining Balance Sheet
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances
37
38
Capital Projects Funds:
Combining Balance Sheet
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances
(Deficits)
Trust and Agency Funds:
Combining Balance Sheet
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances -
Expendable Trust Funds
Combining Statement of Changes in Assets and Liabilities - Agency Funds
39-40
41-42
43
44
45-46
Proprietary Funds:
Combining Balance Sheet
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Retained Earnings
(Deficit)
Combining Statement of Cash Flows
47
48
49
)"3-'1
.
.
Deloitte &
Touche
o
Su ite 1900
701 "B" Street
San Diego, California 92101-8198
Telephone: (619) 232-6500
ITT Telex: 4995722
Facsimile: (619) 237-1755
.
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT
.
City Council
City of Chula Vista, California
.
We have audited the accompanying general purpose financial statements of the City of Chula Vista,
California, as of June 30, 1992, and for the year then ended, listed in the foregoing table of contents.
These general purpose financial statements are the responsibility of the City of Chula Vista,
California management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these general purpose
financial statements based on our audit.
.
We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. Those standards
require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the general
purpose financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the general purpose financial
statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates
made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe
that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
.
In our opinion, such general purpose financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the
financial position of the City ofChula Vista, California at June 30, 1992 and the results of its
operations and the cash flows of its proprietary fund type for the year then ended in conformity with
generally accepted accounting principles.
.
Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming an opinion on the general purpose financial
statements taken as a whole. The combining and individual fund financial statements and schedules
listed in the foregoing table of contents, which are also the responsibility of the management of the
City of Chula Vista, California, are presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a
required part of the general purpose financial statements of the City of Chula Vista, California. Such
additional information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in our audit of the
general purpose financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated in all material respects when
considered in relation to the general purpose financial statements taken as a whole.
.
.
D~;'~' +-/~
September 18, 1992
.
Member
.....
ijii i International
-1- ) 3-cS
. jh
S OOll")lI")f"'o"'-OON~ !;;j DO ....
,.,~.......--~.... N ,.,
C\ ('f")OO-N C\N "'!. DO N
~ 00" 0\" ~.. r---" NO. ..: 0\ t 0 - ! 0-
0\'" NC\tnOO N ,., r::
DOC\. 1oC...\C> t'--\C ....
S .......N...N' OCOC N ~ DO -
~ ... ~
...
. !;;j ~ !
)I~ N
.....
,.,
....
~
...
. ~ !
<J~jl N
~ fJ
"'.
N ~
to
. 11)111 ~ DO -'" I
,., ~~
,., 0-
~ 00 \/:J'o\
- ~ ,., ...
N ..: ~
-
...
.f;l j 11 8 0- ;
. ....
,., ,.,
c. ,.;
,.,
r:! I'. -
-
...
~ ....:1 .... I
Jill ~ ~
. ,.; ~.~. ..:
,e ,.,- ,
,.; N
~ ,
0- -.... I
l~jll - ~;:::
...
..... \&J"'=
. - -N
c.
I'. 0-
...
I
C """'80- ~ i
Jlill - .... DO ;:1;.
DO ....-... ....
~ :j.....c.. ~
C_N ~
DO II")ff")N.....
. (I) 00 _" c-: 1"'-" '"
,., ....
Q. ...
:) ~ "'a-...NOOC I
~ JI 0- ~. .~.:;t.:8.~.:::t
C) ..... C\1I"lI\c-IoCCJ\OO
C ... 00"'" 00 NOO
t- .... 0\11'\ NO\. I
N N ~
Z -
. :) ...
j! li:io
w8 ~I ~ I
U) :l:c( III .!l Q :i ]
:> (l)c i'6.!l11i~ ~r
:5 ~~
5fa :l u1 . ~ !
. :::J W-!.i h .~Vh I
:I: c(~N ~
CJ lD Sl .gllI111~~"ai;
Ia.. cc- · 11 J i! i i"' ~
0 WZCl '" S
~~&') < I
~ lD w ~~~B~<l~~ J~l Joa ~
. ~::tZ
- !
(J CJc(.., ~ }:J'.?
. !h
~"U*".'.~. ~~~~ ~
~O\~Q~ggto~ ~~~ ~
ff1.~.."'...-:. . - 00... OO..f"\
..........~ .......~ 3:
~ ..
. J}~I ~. ~...~ ~
~ li2~@
~
on
..
. I)U
fliJJ ~. on 00 ~
. li. S::.
'" ... !
... i!.
0 ,.:
-
..
Ilil!1 s.~. ~
. lit:: &;
...
..
....on~ !: ~
Jill :q~ .
-~li2 -
~on.... -
. .
..,
.. ,
i~111 ~ ~
on
-
.
1<0 ..
hu
~........ !;~ ~
""..~..;:g... ......
...on... 9a
~~~
-.........
. en
D. ..
::::I 00 ... ~ ~. ~
~ ]!I '" '"
"l. ~
0 '" '" on
- - on on
~ ..... 00.
... ...
....::::1 .. I
. j! w8
WU-a i i s ~ ~
rn ::Cc(1I
:> enC~
w~c 1 Q ~u t ~ ]
~ U 1! 1 ~~ Is: it ~(;;8
ienO
:;) wU 1{ t~'~1 Ii ilJ I
. ::J: c~i 1
CJ :ll ;;;'1!.]IU(; u ~(; .
u.. c.... ~i!ii~l!t! IrrJJl !
0 Wzo S
i!l;::::IC'?
~ mU.w ~l ~~i~ jiJJ~t]J I
:EdZ
. - 8c(~ J!
CJ /)-7
. ~
~I~ ~ H -- . . 0-"-""-" ""~ " ;
~~ _ ~ ~~_O~~ M~~ ~
~~ ~ ~ ~~ a~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~
~~ ~ ~ M~~~~~~8~ ~M~ ~
fool \0.. - V'l -~ . ~:~ ~- ~ ~$~ ~
!:! N~ ~ ~ ~~ . ~N_ ~
...."" - ~
. , ~
)1~1
l;; ~ I
. <)11 i 1'l
...
flilll on ~ ~
i
. '"
~
.. 1'l
J>.J>.E-<
JII]!I ~.~ ~I ~
. <J.. ~
-'"
00 '" ~. C> ~
- '" rt
Jill .... ....
.... ~ ~. ....
- '"
00 .
. ~ .... ;!i ~
....
,
00 ~I ~
1~]11 :;;! :;;!
<J. <J
00 00
. 00 ..
J>.
hu
~.. ~.. "''''' ~
"" ~~ U ~
- =. s.
0. "'-
on C> on ~g ~i
- - ....
\0.. ("\ 00..
- .... - .; ...
.
)ll ~ ::!: ~:gOO=S:;;! ~ ~ ~ ~ .
rf ~ 0\.. ..::J:..0Cl..~..~..
=. 1\ &l!Jj!~"'''':a ;:
- - ....
. ~ [J i
CI) I 1)1 I - ~ llJli -I !
:>
j J ] 1 1 J li)!]l[ Ii t ~ l
:;) jl J. ~ jl~D~~j~ ~~]] ~
. ::E:
U
II.
0
~ ~ ~::>! ~ i!
. U Jl J3-V ~ Jl
. CITY OF CHULA VISTA
COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND
BALANCES
ALL GOVERNMENTAL FUND TYPES AND EXPENDABLE TRUST FUNDS
. YEAR ENDED JUNE 3D, 1992
Fiduciary
Governmental Fund Tvnes Fund TvDe
Special Debt Capital Total
GeIlenl Revenue Service Projects Expendable (Memorandum
flIIIlI flIIIlI flIIIlI fl!lIl! IIlII1 QDb:l
REVENUES:
. Taxa 526,712,548 S 7,589,094 $4,271,321 S 190,300 S 38,763,263
Jntasovemmenta1 11,739,339 4,268,856 1,687,702 17,695,897
Licenses and penDits 2,037,460 2,037,460
Charges for seniccs 2,313,759 9,979,497 12,293,256
FiDes and forfeitures 106,081 202,895 308,976
Revenue liom use of IIIOIlC)'
. and property 1,351,955 3,368,452 724,594 2,356,874 S 277,659 8,079,534
0dIcr 915,253 2,108,880 1,476,133 3,409,860 7,910,126
Development fees 2.206.188 2206188
Total revenues 45.176395 27517674 4 995 915 7 917197 3.687519 89.294.700
EXPENDITURES:
Cum:nt:
. GeIlenl government 7,894,275 9,854,883 3,945,303 21,694,461
Public safely 21,945,399 21,945,399
Public works 11,565,963 10,776,616 22,342,579
Parks and recreation 4,375,571 4,375,571
LibJary 2,970,235 69,355 3,039,590
Copital outlay:
. Capital projects 25,530,616 25,530,616
Debt senice:
Principa1 retirement 2,997,836 2,997,836
Interest 4,515,053 4,515,053
Trustee expense 115,983 115,983
PremiIDD on called bonds 67.250 67 .250
. Total expenditures 48751443 20 700 854 7 696 122 25530616 3.945.303 106.624.338
EXCESS OF REVENUES OVER
(UNDER) EXPENDITURES 13.575.048) 6.816.820 12.700.207) ()7.613.419) 1257.784) () 7.329.638)
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES
(USES):
. Transfen in 4,678,305 5,248,262 4,204,713 7,894,335 22,025,615
Transfen out (982,843) (15,154,358) (2,694,S11) (2,936,528) (271,017) (22,039,257)
CODtribution liom property
0WIItn 19,802,623 19,802,623
Repayment oflong-tcnn advances (250,000) (250,000)
Bond proceeds 47,836 219,088 266,924
. HUD loan proceeds 750 000 750.000
Total other IIOIIIl:eS
(uses) 3 695.462 19.358.260) 1 729.290 24 760 430 1271 017) 20 555 905
EXCESS OF REVENUES AND OTHER
SOURCES OVER (UNDER)
EXPENDITURES AND
. OTHER USES 120,414 (2,541,440) (970,917) 7,147,011 (528,801) 3,226,267
FUND BALANCES, JULY I, 1991 12.950340 48.796.263 9865 745 15.745729 2714.606 90.072.683
FUND BALANCES, JUNE 30,
1992 $13.070754 S46.254.823 58.894 828 522.892.740 52185.80S $ 93.298.950
See DOtes to combined financial statements.
. -5- )J/;
.
.
-6-
) 3 --J 0
.
.
.
-7. /3~//
.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
.
COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES, AND CHANGES IN RETAINED
EARNINGS
PROPRIETARY FUND TYPE
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30. 1992
.
OPERATING REVENUE:
Charges for services
OPERATING EXPENSES:
Operations and administration
OPERATING INCOME
$1,900,315
1.700.815
199.500
33.896
233,396
(4.342)
229,054
547.366
$ 776.420
.
NON-oPERATlNG REVENUE:
Interest
NET INCOME BEFORE OPERATING TRANSFERS
. TRANSFERS TO OTHER FUNDS
NET INCOME
.
RETAINED EARNINGS, JULY 1, 1991
RETAINED EARNINGS, JUNE 30, 1992
See notes to combined financial statements.
.
.
.
.
.
-8- ) 3~Jc2
. CITY OF CHULA VISTA
COMBINED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
PROPRIETARY FUND TYPE
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30.1992
.
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
Operating income $ 199,500
Adjusbnents to reconcile operating income to net cash provided by
. operating activities:
Changes in assets and liabilities:
Accounts and interest receivable 4,552
Accounts payable (103,312)
Cash advances payable 82.503
. Net cash provided by operating activities 183,243
CASH FLOWS FROM NONCAPITAL FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
Transfers to other funds (4.342)
. Net cash used by noncapital financing activities (4.342)
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
Interest income 33.896
. Net cash provided by investing activities 33.896
NET INCREASE IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS 212,797
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, JULY 1, 1991 917.503
. CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, JUNE 30, 1992 $1.130.300
See notes to combined financial statements.
.
.
.
.
.9. /3r).3
.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
NOTES TO COMBINED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
. YEAR ENDED JUNE 3D, 1992
A.
SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
.
ReOOrtinll Entitv - The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 1 requires
certain organizations, functions and activities of governments that meet the following criteria be
included in the general purpose financial statements. The criteria are defined as:
1) Manifestation of oversight by:
.
.
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
financial interdependency
selection of governing authority
designation of management
ability to significantly influence operations
accountability for fiscal matters
2) Scope of public service by:
.
a) benefits of reporting entity and/or its residents
b) geographic boundaries
The reporting entity City ofChula Vista, California (the "City") includes the accounts of the City, the
Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") and the Chula Vista Industrial Development
Authority (the "Authority"). Although the City, the Agency and the Authority are legally separate
entities, the Chula Vista City Council exercises oversight responsibility for all three entities.
.
.
RedeveloDment Allencv of the City ofChula Vista - The Agency was activated in October 1972
pursuant to the California Community Redevelopment Laws, for the purpose of e!in>in.ti'lg the
blighted areas by encouraging development of residential, commercial, industrial, recreational and
public facilities. The City's Council members appoint the Agency's directors, designate management
and have full accountability for the Agency's fiscal matters. The Agency's financial data and
transactions are included with the special revenue, debt service and capital projects fund types and the
general fixed assets and general long-term debt groups of accounts.
.
Chula Vista Industrial DeveloDment Authoritv - The City formed the Authority in 1982 for the purpose
of promoting and developing commercial, industrial and manufacturing enterprise and encouraging
employment. The City's Council members appoint the Authority's directors, designate management
and have full accountability for the Authority's fiscal matters. The Authority's financial data and
transactions are included with the capital projects fund types.
.
.
-10 -
/3 --J,/
.
.
Bayfront Conservancy Trust - The Chula Vista Bayfront Conservancy Trust (the "Trust") was
established tn assist in carrying out the provisions of the City of Chula Vista's Local Coastal Plan, as
approved by the State Coastal Commission. The Trust is operating as a nonprofit public benefit
corporation established tn ensure the protection of the environmentally sensitive areas of the Chula
Vista Bayfront. The reporting entity of the Trust includes the activities of the Trust and its bookstore
operations. Because the Trust has separate management from the other entities of the City, and the
Trust intends tn be financially independent from the City, it will be reported separately for the year
ended lune 30, 1992 in accordance with GASB Statement No.1.
.
Descriotions of Funds and Account Groups. The accounts of the City are org;>ni7.ed on the basis of
funds and account groups, each of which is considered a separate accounting entity with a self-
balancing set of accounts. The following are the types of funds and account groups used:
Governmental Fund Twes:
.
General Fund is used tn account for all financial resources except those required tn be accounted for in
another fund.
Snecial Revenue Funds are used tn account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources that are legally
restricted tn expenditures for specified purposes.
.
Canital Proiects Funds are used tn account for financial resources used for the acquisition or
construction of major capital facilities.
.
Debt Service Funds are established tn account for tax increment revenues, bond proceeds required tn
be set aside for future debt service, and related interest income. The funds are used tn repay principal
and interest on indebtedness of the City.
Proorietarv Fund Tvoes:
Internal Service Fund accounts for services performed by one governmental department for others.
.
FiduciaJY Fund Tvoes:
Trust and Al!ency Funds are used tn account for financial resources deposited and held in a trustee or
agency capacity.
.
Account Grauns:
The two account groups are not "funds". They are concerned only with the measurement of financial
position. They are not involved with the measurement of results of operations.
.
General Fixed Assets Account GroUD is used tn account for the cost of capital assets owned by the
City.
General Lonl!-term Debt Account Graun is used tn account for bonds and notes payable and other
long-term debt payable from future resources.
.
Basis of Accountinl! - Governmental fund types are accounted for using the modified acerual basis of
accounting. Revenues are recognized when they become measurable and available tn finance
expenditures of the current period. Accrued revenues include tax increment revenue and earnings on
investments. Expenditures are recorded when the related fund liability is incurred, except that
principal and interest on general long-term debt is recognized when due, and accumulated vacation,
,.---
-11- ) ]~/3
.
.
sick pay and compensatory time are recorded as expenditures in the year paid.
.
The Proprietary fund type is accounted for using the accrual basis of accounting. Revenue is
recognized when earned and expenses are recognized when incurred.
Fiduciary fund types are accounted for using the modified accrual basis of accounting.
.
Bud2ets and Bud2etarv ACCOuntinll - An annual budget is adopted by the City Council prior to the first
day of the fiscal year. The budget process includes submittal of each department's budget request for
the next fiscal year, a detailed review of each department's proposed budget by the City Manager, and
a fiua1 City Manager recommended budget that is transmitted to the City Council for its review before
the required date of adoption. Once transmitted to the City Council, the proposed budget is made
available for public inspection. A public hearing is held to give the public the opportunity to comment
upon the proposed budget. Notice of such public hearing is given in a newspaper of general
circulation.
.
The adoption of the budget is accomplished by the approval of a Budget Resolution. The level of
budgetary control is by fund.
.
Any budget modifications which would result in an appropriation increase, a transfer of appropriations
among departments, or an appropriation transfer within a department for the purpose of increasing a
salary appropriation requires City Council approval. The City Manager is authorized to transfer non-
salary related appropriations within a departmental budget.
.
All appropriations which are not obligated, encumbered or expended at the end of the fiscal year shall
lapse and become a part of the unreserved fund balance which may be appropriated for the next fiscal
year.
.
An annual budget for the year ended June 30, 1992 was adopted and approved by the City Council for
the General, Special Revenue, and Debt Service Funds. The total original budget for all funds was
$73,202,825. The budgets of the Capital Projects Funds are primarily long-term budgets which
emphasize major programs and capital outlay plans extending over a number of years. Because of the
long-term nature of these projects, annual budget comparisons are not considered meaningful, and
accordingly, no budgetary information for Capital Projects Funds is included in the accompanying
financial statements.
.
During the year ended June 30, 1992, the original operating budget was modified by supplemental
appropriations totaling $16,215,897. These budget modifications were adopted and approved by the
City Council.
.
Formal budgetary integration is employed as a management control device. Encumbrance accounting,
under which purchase orders, contracts, and other commitments for the expenditure of monies are
recorded in order to reserve that portion of the applicable appropriation, is employed as an extension of
formal budgetary integration. Encumbrances outstanding at year end are reported as reservations of
fund balances, since they do not constitute GAAP basis expenditures or liabilities. Fund balance
differences between GAAP basis and the City's budgetary basis of accounting are $2,727,650 of
encumbrances outstanding at year ead.
.
.
Total Columns on the Combined Financial Statements - Total columns on the combined statements are
captioned "Memorandum Only" to indicate that they are presented only to facilitate financial analysis.
Data in these columns do not present financial position, results of operations, or changes in financial
position in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles, nor is such data comparable to a
consolidation. Interfund eliminations have not been made in the aggregation of this data.
- 12 - /:; -j ~
.
Reserves and Desil!lllltions of Fund Eouitv. The City may set up "reserves" offund equity to segregate
fund balances wbich cannot be appropriated for expenditure in future periods, or which are legally set
aside for a specific future use. Fund "designations" also may be established to indicate tentative plans
for financial resource utilization in a future period.
.
General Fixed Assets. General fixed assets are recorded as expenditures of the various City funds at
the time of purchase and are subsequently capitalized for memorandum purposes in the General Fixed
Assets Account Group. Such assets include land, buildings, building improvements, furniture and
equipment. The costs of roads, streets, sidewalks, bridges, curbs, gutters, paIkways, drainage and
certain improvements constructed in the public right-of-way such as lighting systems and similar assets
are not capitalized. No depreciation is provided on general fixed assets.
.
All fixed assets are valued at historical cost or estimated historical cost if actual historical cost is not -
available. Donated fixed assets are valued at their estimated fair nwket value on the date donated.
.
Comoensated Absences - The City accounts for compensated absences (unpaid vacation and sick
. leave) in accordance with GASB Statement No. I. In governmental fund types, compensated absences
are recorded as expenditures in the year paid, as it is the City's policy to liquidate any unpaid vacation
or sick leave at year end from future resources rather than currently available expendable resources.
Accordingly, the entire unpaid liability for the governmental funds is recorded in the General 1.ong-
Tenn Debt Account Group.
.
Proocrtv Taxes - Under California law, property taxes are assessed and collected by the counties up to
1 % of assessed value, plus other increases approved by the voters. The property taxes go into a pool
and are then allocated to the cities based on complex fonnulas. Accordingly, the City accrues only
those taxes which are received within 60 days after year end.
.
The City's property taxes are levied and collected by the San Diego County Treasurer. Property taxes
(secured and unsecured) are levied on July I based upon the previous March j assessed values as
determined by the San Diego County Assessor. Taxes are due in two equal installments on December
10 and April I 0 following the levy date.
.
Deficit Fund Balances and Retained Deficits - Generally accepted accounting principles require
disclosure of certain infonnation concerning individual funds including deficit fund balances or
retained deficits. As of June 30, 1992 the following funds have deficit balances:
.
Town Centre I (Special Revenue) Fund
Baldwin Project Management (Special Revenue) Fund
Parks and Recreation State Grants (Capital Project) Fund
Residential Construction Tax (Capital Project) Fund
Central Garage (Internal Service) Fund
$ 79,149
302,762
362,004
105,502
315,989
Measures to reduce these deficits are in the process of implementation.
.
Interfimd Transactions. Interfimd transactions consisting of identified services perfonned for other
funds or costs billed to other funds are treated as expenditures in the fund receiving the services and
revenue in the Internal Service Funds pcrfonning the services.
.
Operating transfers are made in certain funds to shift resources from a fund legally authorized to
receive revenue to a fund authorized to expend the revenue. These transfers are shown as other
financing sources and uses.
.
. 13 - / '3 - / 7
.
Reserve for Amounts Due from Other Funds - As the amounts due from other funds are not expected
to be fully repaid in time to be used as a financing source in the 1992-93 fiscal year, the related fund
balances have been fully reserved.
. B. CASH AND INVESTMENTS
Cash and investments at June 30, 1992 include the following:
.
Pooled deposits and investments
Cash and investments with fiscal agents
$91,579,339
5.897.738
$97.477.077
.
Deoosits and Investments - The City maintains a general bank account where cash from all funds is
deposited. Investments are bought using this account. For report purposes, the City's General Fund
cash includes all funds' idle cash which is recorded in other funds as cash advances receivable or
payable for their portion of the cash. Investments are recorded in each fund separately. Cash and
investments are stated at cost with accrued interest shown under a separate caption of the balance
sheet. Cash and investments, excluding amounts held by fiscal agents, at June 30, 1992, consist of the
following:
.
.
Approximate
Bank Carrying Market
Balance Amount YB
Petty cash $ 6,025 $ 6,025
Checking and savings accouots $1,990,629 1,911,621 1,911,621
Loca1 Agency Investment Fund 45,191,224 45,191,224
Federal agencies 30,993,466 30,993,466
U.S. Treasury notes 3,665,055 3,665,055
Bankers' acceptances 9.811.948 9.811.948
$1.990.629 $ 91.579.339 $ 91.579.339
.
.
City Council resolution authorizes the City, including the Agency, to invest in certificates of deposit
insured or collateralized in accordance with the California Government Code; securities of the U.S.
Government or its Agencies; U.S. Treasury Bills, Notes, Bonds or Certificates of Indebtedness; Loca1
Agency Investment Fund; Bankers' Acceptances; Commercial Paper; Negotiable Certificates of
Deposit; and Repurchase Agreements as specified in the City's Investment Policy and Guidelines.
.
Cash and Investments with Fiscal ARents - Cash and investments with fiscal agents includes cash and
investments held by trustees under debt agreements which are subject to authorized investments as
specified in the agreements. Pennissible investments in the various agreements include: 1) Federal
Securities; 2) Interest bearing demand or time deposits (including certificates of deposit) which are
insured by the FDIC or are rated "A" or better by S&P; 3) Commercial paper rated "A-I" or better by
S&P and "P-l" or better by Moody's; 4) Obligations issued by any corporation organized and
operating in the U.S. having assets in excess ofS500 mi11ion whose obligations are rated "A" or better
by S&P or are unconditionally guaranteed by the U.S.A.; 5) Money market funds which invest solely
in Federal Securities or rated "A" by S&P; 6) Bankers' acceptances of commercial banks (which banks
must be rated for unsecured debt in one of two highest S&P classifications); 7) Obligations the interest
on which is exempt from federal income tax; 8) Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation or Farm
Credit Bank participation certificates or senior debt obligations; 9) Federal National Mortgage
.
.
-14 -
/] ,,/~
.
Association mortgage-backed securities or senior debt obligations; 10) Investment agreements
approved by the Trustee representing the general obligations of a financial institution whose unsecured
general obligations are rated "A" or better by S&P; and 11) Student Loan Marketing Association letter
of credit-backed issues or senior debt obligations.
.
Cash and investments with fiscal agents as of June 30, 1992 consists of the following:
.
Approximate
Bank Carrying Market
'RA1R1nce Amount ~
Cash $ 8 $ 8 $ 8
Money market accounts 286,6S8 286,6S8 286,6S8
Investment Agreements 2,342,030 2,342,030
U.S. Treasury notes 3.269.042 3.269.042
$286.666 $S.897.738 $S.897.738
.
.
Deoosits - At June 30, 1992, the carrying amount of the City's deposits (checking and savings
accounts, money market accounts and non-negotiable certificates of deposit) was $2,204,312 and the
balance per various financial institutions was $2,277,29S. Of the balance in financial institutions,
$1,990,637 was covered by federal depository insurance and $286,6S8 was uninsured. The uninsured
deposits are with financial institutions which are individually legally required to have government
deposits col1ateralized, based upon the market value of the col1ateral, at a rate of 110% of the deposits.
Such col1ateral is considered to be held in the City's name.
.
Investments - The City's investments are categorized below to give an indication of risk assumed by the
City at the end of the fiscal year. Category 1 includes investments that are insured or registered or for
which the securities are held by the City or its Agent in the City's name. Category 2 includes
uninsured and unregistered investments for which the securities are held by the pledging financial
institution's trust department or agent in the City's name. Category 3 includes uninsured and
unregistered investments for which the securities are held by the pledging financial institution, or by its
trust department or agent, but not in the City's name.
.
At June 30, 1992, investments to be categorized from the City's pooled investments and investments
with fiscal agents include the fol1owing:
.
Catel!orv
1 2 3 Total
U.S. Treasury notes $ 3,66S,OSS $ 3,269,042 $ 6,934,097
Federal agencies 23,OS9,S 17 7,933,949 30,993,466
Investment agreements 2,342,030 2,342,030
Bankers' acceptances $ 2.SOO.OO0 980.444 6.331504 9.811.948
$ 2500.000 $ 27.70S.016 $ 19.876.S2S $ Sll.081541
.
Local Agency Investment Fund deposits 0($4S,191,224 are fully collateraIized through the State of
California col1ateral pool and are therefore not required to be categorized.
.
.
- IS - ) ') ~ / ~
.
C. SELF-INSURANCE - JOINT POWERS AUTIiORlTY
The City self-insures claims and judgments for public liability, workers' compensation, and
unemployment insurance and has excess insurance coverage as follows:
.
Self-Insured
per occurrence
Excess coverage per occurrence
over self-insurance retention
.
Public liability
Workers' compensation
Unemployment claim
$250,000
$250,000
Full amount of benefits
$10,000,000
Excess to the statutory 1imit
None
The City has entered into contracts with servicing agents who administer the public liability and
workers' compensation claims program.
.
At June 30, 1992 the following amounts have been accumulated and are restricted for use pursuant to
the self-insurance program initiated by the City.
Workers' Public Unemployment
Comoensation Liabilitv Insurance Ill!I!
Cash and investments $ 685,484 $1,541,156 $ 613,018 $2,839,658
Accrued interest
and other receivables 2.063 10.205 4.050 16.318
Self-insurance claims
payable $ 687.547 $1.551.361 $ 617.068 $2.855.976
D. DUE FROMffO OTHER FUNDS
.
.
Due From
.
Residential Construction Conversion
Fund (2)
Transportation Development Impact
Fund (2)
RDA: TO\We Centre n Fund(l)
RDA: Otay Valley Fund(l)
RDA: Town Centre n Fund(l)
RDA: Otay Valley Fund(l)
RDA: Otay Valley Fund(1)
RDA: Southwest Fund(l)
.
.
. Total
.
Fund types are indicated as follows:
(1) Special Revenue
(2) Capital Project
Due To
Sewer Service Revenue Fund (1)
Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund (1)
General Fund
General Fund
RDA: Town Centre I Fund(1)
RDA: Low and Moderate Fund(l)
RDA: Bayfront/TO\W Centre I
Fund(l)
RDA: Bayfront/TO\W Centre I
Fund(l)
Amount
$ 50,000
420,000
289,691
991,723
1,709,500
45,600
4,605,600
380.000
$8.492.114
At June 30, 1992, $920,067 of the above "Due From" balances are considered to be long-term
interfund advances and are included in the general long-term debt account group.
o 16 - I J ~d.. {)
.
.
E. LOANS RECEIVABLE
.
As of June 30, 1992 the Agency bad made the following loans receivable:
Community Housing Improvement Program -loan for the purpose of offering
deferred and low interest rate home improvement loans to qualified
borrowers residing within a target area (included in the Housing
Programs special revenue fund)
One Park, Ltd. - deferred loan for financial assistance for constructicm of
low and moderate income housing
Town Centre Development Corporation - commercial rehabiIitaticm loan program
Chula Vista Bayftont Conservancy Trust - loan for financial assistance in
general operations of the Trust
Civic Center Barrio Housing Corporaticm - loan for construction of a 28 unit
low income housing project
Scripps Memorial Hospital -loan for relocation assistance
Acquisition Association of Orange Tree Mobilehome Owners, Inc. -loan for
the purchase of the Orange Tree Mobilehome park which is primarily
used for low and moderate income housing
County of San Diego - loan for funding of study for occupancy of justice
facilities in the South Bay area
.
.
.
The community development block grant housing program bad the following loan
receivable included in the Housing Programs special revenue fund at June 30, 1992:
.
Community Housing Improvement Program - loan to offer deferred and
low interest rate home improvement loans to qualified borrowers
. residing within a target area
The General Fund of the City bad the following loans receivable at June 30, 1992:
.
Chula Vista Bayftont Conservancy Trust - loan for financial assistance in
general operations of the Trust
Boys and Girls Club - loan for construction of new facility
Total loans receivable
.
$3,705,893
850,000
756,000
661,350
350,000
300,000
167,545
36,460
897,301
676,662
250.000
$8.651.211
As the loans above are not expected to be repaid in time to be used as a financing source in the
1992-93 fiscal year, certain related fund balances have been fully reserved.
Chula Vista Rehabilitation Community Housinl! Imorovement Proeram - The Chula Vista
Rehabilitation Community Housing Improvement Program ("CHIP") is under the direct control of the
Agency. CHIP offers deferred and low interest rate home improvement loans to qualified borrowers
residing within a target area. Loan repayments are redeposited into the program cash accounts and are
redistributed as future loans. The program was originally funded entirely with Community
Development Block Grant ("CDBG") Federal funds. In recent years, the Agency began supplementing
the program due to decreased availability of Federal grants. In the current year, new contributions to
the program were made entirely with Agency funds. The outstanding principal balances of the CHIP
loans to the City's Housing Programs Fund and Redevelopment Agency Fund are $897,301 and
$3,705,893, respectively, at June 30, 1992.
.
.
.
) 3-d- /
-17 -
.
.
Deferred [N.on . The Agency entered into a cooperative agreement with One Park, Ltd. ("OPL")
whereby the Agency's Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund provided a constlUction loan of
$850,000 to OPL on a deferred basis with a ten year term. The project is a rental apartment project
and under the agreement, 75% of the project units are reserved for low and moderate income
occupancy at affordable rent levels. The Agency participates in the equity gain on the project,
receiving at sale or term a percentage of the project profit. The percentage increases incrementally
over the term of the loan and peaks at 4.5%. Interest accrues, but is not paid periodically nor is
principal. The outstanding principal balance of the OPL loan at June 30, 1992 is $850,000.
.
The deeds of trust to be provided by OPL to the Agency have been suboTtlin~t<:d to concurrently
recorded deeds of trust held by the construction and permanent financing lenders.
.
Commercial Rehabilitation Loan ProlmUll - The Agency is participating in the City's commercial
rehabilitation loan program for the Bayfrontrrown Centre I Redevelopment Project Area in an effort to
improve the exteriors of commercial buildings in the centra1 business district. Agency funds are used
to subsidize loans through a bank with the Town Centre Development Corporation (the "Corporation")
administering the program. In prior years, the Agency bad advanced $756,000 to the Corporation for
such subsidized loans. The bank and the Corporation receive trust deeds on the rehabilitated property
as security for the loans which are to be repaid over a period of 10 to 15 years. The funds advanced to
the Corporation will be repaid to the Agency upon dissolution of the Corporation.
.
Chula Vista Bavftont Conservancy Trust - As of June 30, 1992 the City and Agency bad made loans
of$676,662 and $661,350, respectively, to the Chula Vista Bayfront Conservancy Trust, a nonprofit.
public benefit corporation established to ensure the protection of the environmentally sensitive areas of
the Chula Vista Bayfront. The loans are due on demand and carry annual interest rates ranging from
10% to 12%. As ofIune 30, 1992 the Trust bad an accumulated deficit of$I,637,Il3.
.
.
Construction Loan - The Agency bas entered into a loan agreement with the Civic Center Barrio
Housing Corporation, a California non-profit public benefit corporation. The loan was made for the
purchase ofland and the development of a 28 unit low income housing project. During 1992, the loan
was assigned to Park Village Ltd., a California limited partnership in which Civic Center Barrio
Housing Corporation is the managing general partner. The loan is secured by a deed of trust on the
property and assignment of rents. Principal and interest are payable monthly, commencing one year
after all Certificates of Occupancy have been issued. Interest accrues at 8% of the unpaid principal
balance of the note. The outstanding principal balance of the loan receivable was $350,000 at June 30,
1992.
.
.
SCriDpS Memorial HosDital Loan - The Agency bas entered into a loan agreement with Scripps
Memorial Hospital, a California non-profit benefit corporation. The loan was made so Scripps could
provide relocation assistance to relocate Rollerskateland as part of Scripps' expansion in the City. The
loan is an unsecured promissory note. Interest accrues annually at 8% and is payable monthly. All
principal and any accrued but unpaid interest is due and payable December 20, 2004. The loan may
be required to be paid earlier in the event of default. The outstanding principal balance of the loan
receivable was $300,000 at June 30, 1992.
.
Mobilehome Assistance ProlmUllS - The Agency entered into an agreement with eligible residents of
the Orange Tree Mobilchome Park, whereby the Agency loaned $250,030 as permanent financing
assistance to residents for the purpose of pure basing certain mobilehome property. Loans are secured
by deeds of trust on the property and mature in 2017 or when the property is sold. The principal
balance of the loans is $167,545 at June 30, 1992. Contingent interest will be charged based on
calculations specified in the agreement (Note H).
.
-18.
) '3 'c2:2
.
.
San Diel!o Countv Re2ional Center lnan - The Agt::ncy has made a loan of 536,460 to the County of
San Diego to fund an update of the South Bay Regional Center Master Plan. This includes studies of
space requirements, capital costs, options for site dcvclopmc:m, and requirements for occupancy of
justice oolities in the South Bay area. The loan is interest free and repayment is contingent upon the
final decision of state courts in regard to the validity of the onc-ha1f percent transactions and use tax
approved by voters in the County in 1988.
Bovs and Girls Club Construction Loan . The City has made a loan of$250,OOO for construction ofa
new facility for the Boys and Girls Club. The loan is interest free and will be repaid with cqual annual
payments over 20 years, starting in January 1999.
.
F. GENERAL FIXED ASSETS
Fixed assets owned by the City arc recorded in the Gcncral Fixed Assets Account Group. Activity in
fixed assets during the year is as follows:
.
.
RAJa""", Ba1ance
Julv 1. 1991 Additions Retirements June 30. 1992
Land 529,726,226 5 182,529 5 30,836 $29,877,919
Building 24,262,907 2,166,313 299,042 26,130,178
Equipment 10,660,337 1,649,236 1,126,038 11,183,535
Improvements 4.591.643 837.012 5.428.655
$69.241.113 $4.835.090 $1.455.916 $72.620.287
.
G. DEFERRED COMPENSATION
.
The City has made available to its employees a deferred compensation plan in accordance with Internal
Revenue Code section 457, whereby employees authorize the City to withhold funds from salary to be
invested in individual savings accounts. The funds are held by a local bank and the ICMA Retirement
Corporation. Funds may be withdrawn by participants upon termination of employment or retirement.
Since the City has a fiduciary responsibility to handle the plan, assets of the plan arc included in an
agency fund in the City's financial statements. At June 30, 1992, the market value of deferred
compensation under this plan totaled $7,898,938.
H.
LOANS PAYABLE
.
1.l\ll"B Pavable:
.
The Agency entered into loan agreements with a bank in order to purchase certain Orange Tree
Mobilehome Park lots. These lots will be held by the Agency and rented to park residents until the
residents or other qualified buyers can purchase these lots from the Agency. Loans carry interest at
11.5% annually and mature in the year 2008. The Agency intends to sell the land and pay off the loans
in the subsequent fiscal year and therefore the City has recorded the outstanding $488,307 loans as a
current debt of the Redevelopment Agency Special Revenue Fund at June 30, 1992. The land has been
recorded in the General Fixed Assets Account Group (Notes E and F).
.
.
-19 - ) J --- d.]
.
I. GENERAL LONG-TERM DEBT AND CAPITAL LEASE OBLIGATIONS
Changes in long-teon debt during the year were as follows:
. B~I~.....e Balance
Julv 1. 1991 Additions Retirements June 30. 1992
General obligation bonds $ 240,000 $ 45,000 $ 195,000
1986 tax allocation bonds 29,775,000 835,000 28,940,000
Assessment District 85-2 6,875,000 1,575,000 5,300,000
. Assessment District 86-1 4,745,000 165,000 4,580,000
1987 Series A certifi-
cates of participation 9,835,000 9,835,000
1987 Series B certifi-
cates of particiption 5,995,000 330,000 5,665,000
. 1991 certificates of
participation 1,220,000 215,000 1,005,000
HUD Section 108 loan 5 750.000 750.000
58,685,000 750,000 3,165,000 56,270,000
. Capitalleasc obligations 85,541 20,032 65,509
Compensated absences 1,840,970 229,564 2,070,534
Interfund advances -
long-tenn 1.170.067 250.000 920.067
. 561.696.037 51.065.105 53.435.032 559.326.110
Various long-teon interlimd advances of$920,067 are included in the General Long-teon Debt
Aceount Group. There are no specified maturity dates on the advances; interest rates range from 8.2%
to 12% annually.
. Detail of the June 30, 1992 balances are as follows:
General Oblilzation Bonds
.
1965 Golf Course bonds due in annual installments of$45,OOO to $50,000
through 1996; interest ranges from 3.75% to 3.9% annually, payable
semi-annually.
5 195.000
Assessment District Bonds
.
District No. 85-2, (Eastlakc), dated June 17, 1986, funded the acquisition
and construction of public works in the assessment area. The original
amount due was 57,680,624 and matures in amounts payable in
September, ranging from $160,000 in 1993 to 5625,000 in 2007.
Interest is payable semi-annually on March 2 and September 2
at interest rates ranging from 6.75% to 7.6% annually. The bonds
are redeemable on any March 2 or September 2.
$ 5,300,000
.
.
-20- /3-":21
.
District No. 86-1, (Eastlake), dated July 22, 1986, funded the acquisition
of public works in the assessment area. The original amount due was
$5,279,986 and matures in amounts payable in September, ranging
from $165,000 in 1993 to $490,000 in 2007. Interest is payable semi-
. annually on March 2 and September 2 at interest rates ranging from
6.75% to 7.6% annually. The bonds are redeemable on any March 2
or September 2. 4.580.000
$ 9.880.000
Revenue Bnnd~
.
The Bayfront/Town Centre Redevelopment Project 1986 Tax Allocation
Bonds, dated May I, 1986, were issued to provide financing for
redevelopment projects in certain target areas. The original amount due
was $38,655,000 and matures in amounts ranging from $895,000 in 1993
. to $18,275,000 in 20 II. Interest is payable semi-annually on November I
and May I, at interest rates ranging from 7.5% to 8% annually. Bonds
maturing after May I, 1996 are subject to redemption at premiums from
1/2% to 2%. The bonds are secured by a first pledge of tax revenues
in the BayfrontfTown Centre project area. $28.940.000
. Certificates of Participation
The 1987 Series A and B certificates of participation, dated September I,
1987, evidencing proportionate interests in lease payments of the City
were issued to provide capital improvements and to advance refund the
. 1982 Parking Facility Certificates of Participation. The original amount
due was $16,435,000 and matures in amounts ranging from $545,000 in
1993 to $1,145,000 in 2003, for both Series A and B, and in amounts
ranging from $445,000 in 2004 to $950,000 in 2013 for Series A.
Interest is payable semi-annually on March I and September I, at
. interest rates ranging from 5.75% to 8.75% annually. Certificates
maturing on or after September I, 1997 are subject to redemption at
premiums ranging from zero to 2%.
On September I, 1987 the Agency entered into an agreement with the
City to repay the City for certain payments made by the City.
. The Agency's payments to the City shall be made within thirty days
of Agency's receipt of tax increments and shall be in the full amount
of all tax increments attributable to the Town Centre n Redevelopment
Project, less any amounts withheld in conformance with legal
requirements, preexisting passthrough agreements with other taxing
. entities or funds pledged. Reimbursement may be made on an irregular
basis over a period of time due to the necessity to use tax increment funds
to complete other projects within the project area consistent with the
Agency's financial ability to make the City whole as soon as practically
possible. Interest is payable on the advance at a rate equal to the
City Treasurer's average portfolio yield, calculated annually. $15.500.000
.
.
- 21-
) 3~el3
.
.
The 1991 c:ertificates of participation, dated October I, 1990 funded the
acquisition of certain equipment being leased to the City under an
agreement with the California Cities Financing CorporatiOl1. The
c:ertificates evidence fractional interests of the owners in the 1casc
payments to be made by the City. The original amount due was
51,220,000 and matures in amounts ranging from 5225,000 in 1993
to 5275,000 in 1996. Interest is payable semi-annually 011 October 1
and April 1, at interest rates ranging from 6.25% to 7% annnally.
5 1.005.000
.
HUD Section 108 l,nan
.
The City cntcrcd into a contract for Loan Guarantee Assistance with the
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in 1991.
The City signed three promissory notes for 5250,000 each. &ginning
August I, 1992 the principal payment of$250,000 will be due each
year until paid in full. The interest is due semi-annnally and the rate
varies between 6.43% and 7.6%. The loan is payable to Chemical
Bank and has been guaranteed by HUD. The loan is secured by a
pledge of future Community Development Block Grant entitlements.
The proceeds of the loan were used for the Norman Park Senior
Center renovation project.
5 750.000
.
CaDitalizcd Lease OblilzatiOl1
.
The City cntcrcd into an agreement in 1991 for the lease of 2 copiers.
The City has options to purchase the equipment during the terms of the
leases for specified amounts, depending on when the option is exercised.
5 65.509
At June 30, 1992, aggregate maturities of generatlong-term debt were as follows:
.
General Revenue Bonds and AJ--....t Capital SectiOll108
Obligation Certificates of District Lease HUD
Year endinll June 30 1l2ndI Particination IllmllI Am-eement 1&lm
1993 551,727 55,246,731 $1,059,028 $21,877 $294,850
1994 54,875 5,240,919 1,069,736 21,877 277,906
1995 52,925 5,224,989 1,082,170 21,878 259,500
1996 50,975 5,217,825 1,086,318 12,762
1997 4,923,992 1,092,188
1998 through 2013 65,846,683 11,291,510
Less amount repre-
senting interest ns.502) (46.256.139) (6.800.950) 112.885) (82.256)
Total 5195.000 545.445.000 59.880.000 565.509 5750.000
Special assessments bonded debt as reported in the General Long-term Debt Account Group are not an
obligation of the City and are cntireIy supported by the assessments made against property owners.
The City has a contingent liability against its full faith and credit on the District No. 85-2 and District
No. 86-1 assessment bonds to the extent that liens foreclosed against properties involved in the
assessment district are insufficient to retire outstanding bonds.
.
.
.
On March 9, 1979, the $3,400,000 1975 Tax Allocation Bond issue was defeased. At June 30, 1992,
a principal balance of $2,000,000 remained outstanding.
.
-22- /:> -;;zt
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
On May 29, 1986, the $7,150,000 1979 Tax: Allocation Bonds were defeased. At June 30, 1992, a
principal balance of 55,5 15,000 remained outstanding.
On September I, 1987, the $4,055,000 Parking Facility Certificates of Participation were defeased.
At June 30, 1992, a principal balance ofS3,225,ooo remained outstalldi"ll.
Dcfeased debt and the related cash are appropriately not included in the financial statements.
Non-oblilZated Assessment District Bonds - The City has six Assessment Districts, Numbers 85-1, Las
Flores Drive, 87-1, East "H" Street, 88-2, Otay Lakes Road, 88-1, Otay Lakes Road (EL), 90-3,
Eastlake Greens, and 91-1, Telegraph Canyon Road in which bonds were issued June 15, 1987, May
2, 1989, March 6, 1990, June 11, 1991, August 6, 1991 and June 23, 1992, respectively. The
outstanding amount of these bonds is $632,859, $7,490,000, $7,840,000, $7,349,608, $22,352,427
and 56,839,455, respectively, at June 30, 1992. The City is in no manner obligated to repay these
special assessment bonds. The City functions only as an agent for the property owners by collecting
assessments, forwarding collections to special assessment debt-holders and beginning foreclosure
procedures when and if necessary. As such, these amounts are not included in the City's General
Long-Term Debt Accouot Group. Proceeds from the bonds were used to make capital improvements
in the related assessment district and are recorded in the Assessment District Improvement Fund.
J.
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
At June 30, 1992, the City has been named as a defendant in various legal complaints. The City
intends to contest the allegations made, but the results of the litigation are not presently determinable.
However, in the opinion of management, the amount of losses that might be sustained would not
materially affect the City's financial position.
Gann Soendin2 Limitation Initiative - Under Article xnm of the California Constitution (the Gann
Spending Limitation Initiative), the City is restricted as to the amount of annual appropriations and, if
certain proceeds of taxes exceed allowed appropriations, the excess must be refunded to the taxpayers
through revised tax rates or revised fee schedules. However, nothing has come to the attention of the
City to indicate it is not in compliance with this law.
The City and the Agency have issued various revenue bonds and notes which do not constitute an
indebtedness of the City or the Agency. Neither the faith nor credit of the City or the Agency are
pledged for payment of the bonds or notes. The bonds and notes, together with interest thereon are
payable solely from bond proceeds, revenues, mortgage loan repayments, lease rental payments, and
commercial loan repayments of the obligated parties. Accordingly, these bond funds are not included
in the financial statements.
The following is a schedule of all such revenue bonds and notes issued:
Original Balance
Descrintion Year Issued Amount June 30. 1992
Lease Revenue Bonds (South Bay
Regional Center) 1979 551,000,000 540,120,000
Residential Mortgage Revenue
Bonds (single family mortgage
loans) 1979 17,980,000 15,945,000
-23- /]-.,2 7
.
K. PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM
.
The City contributes to the California Public Employees Retirement System ("PERS"), an agent
multiple-employer public employee retirement system that acts as a common investment and
administrative agent for participating public entities within the state of California. All salaried full-
time and part-time City employees are eligible to participate in PERS. Participants in the plan vest
after 5 years of employment. Employees in the plan who retire at or after age 50 receive annual
retirement benefits calculated based on age, years of service and compensation during the last 12
consecutive months of employment or another period of 12 consecutive months selected by the member
if the average payrate was higher. The City's payroll for employees covered by PERS for the year
ended Iune 30, 1992 was $29,345,649 out ofa total payroll of$32,328,OO7.
.
No securities of the City or related parties are included in plan assets.
.
Fundinsz Status and Proszress - The amount shown below as the "pension benefit obligation" is a
standardized disclosure measure of the present value of pension benefits, adjusted for the effects of
projected salary increases and step-rate benefits, estimated to be payable in the future as a result of
employee service to date. The measure is intended to help users assess the funding status of PERS on
a going-concern basis, assess progress made in accumulating sufficient assets to pay benefits when
due, and make comparisons among employers. The measure is the actuarial present value of credited
projected benefits and is independent of the funding method used to determine contributions to PERS.
.
The pension benefit obligation was computed as part of an actuarial valuation performed as of Iune
30, 1991. Significant actuarial assumptions used in the valuation include (a) a rate ofretum on the
investment of present and future assets of8.75% a year compounded annually, (b) projected salary
increases of 4.5% a year compounded annually, attributable to inflation, (c) additional projected salary
increases of 2.5% a year, attributable to seniority/merit, and (d) no postretirement benefit increases.
.
Total unfunded pension benefit obligation applicable to the City's employees was $13.5 million at
Iune 30, 1991, as follows (in millions):
.
Pension benefit obligation:
Retirees and beneficiaries currently receiving benefits and
terminated employees not yet receiving benefits
Current employees -
Accumulated employee contributions including
allocated investment earnings
Employer-financed vested
Employer-financed nonvested
$34.8
.
21.4
31.9
-li
Total pension benefit obligation
Net assets available for benefits, at cost (market value is $84.5)
89.7
76.2
.
Unfunded pension benefit obligation
$13.5
There has been an increase in the pension benefit obligation of $3,427,697 due to changes in benefit
provisions and a decrease in the pension benefit obligation of$2,534,857 due to changes in actuarial
assumptions.
.
Contributions Reauired and Contributions Made - PERS uses the Entry Age Normal Actuarial Cost
Method which is a projected benefit cost method. That is, it takes into account those benefits that are
expected to be earned in the future as well as those already accrued.
.
-24 -
) ] ~c2r
.
.
According to this cost method, the nonna! cost for an employee is the level amount which would fund
the projected benefit if it were paid annually from date of employment until retirement. PERS uses a
modification of the Entry Age Cost Method in which the employer's total normal cost is expressed as a
level percentage of payroll. PERS also uses the level percentage of payroll method to amortize any
unfunded actuarial liabilities. The amortization period of the unfunded actuarial liability ends in the
year 2011. The dates are June 30 of the years specified on the rate sheets of the PERS Actuarial
Valuation Report.
.
The significant actuarial assumptions used to compute the actuarially detennined contribution
requirement are the same as those used to compute the pension benefit obligation, as previously
described.
.
The contributions to PERS for 1992 of $5,779,132 was made in accordance with actuarially
determined requirements computed through an actuarial valuation performed as of June 30, 1991. The
contribution consisted of (a) $5,016,142 nonna! cost (17.1 percent of current covered payroll) and (b)
$762,990 amortization of the unfunded actuarial accrued liability (2.6 percent of current covered
payroll). The City contributed $3,489,294 (11.9 percent of current covered payroll); employees
contributed $2,289,838 (7.8 percent of current covered payroll). The actual employer contributions
were reduced by $2,012,681 due to pennitted usage of AB702 credits.
.
Trend Inforrnation - Trend ioforrnation gives an indication of the progress made in accumulating
sufficient assets to pay benefits when due. Three-year trend ioforrnation may be found in the following
table. Systemwide ten-year trend ioforrnation may be found in the California Public Employees
Retirement System Annual Reports.
Unfunded pension benefit obligation as
percentage of annual covered payroll
PERS
Fiscal Y ear Ended
1989 1990 1991
(in millions)
$61.0 $68.9 $76.2
69.1 80.0 89.7
88% 86% 85%
$8.1 $11.1 $13.5
21.0 23.8 26.4
39% 47% 51%
.
.
Net assets available for benefits
Pension benefit obligation
Net assets available for benefits as a percentage
of the pension benefit obligation
Unfunded pension benefit obligation
.
Annual covered payroll
.
Employer contributions (made in accordance with
actuarially detennined requirements) as a
percentage of annual covered payroll
11.2
8.7
13.3
.
......
.
-25- / "3'd-i
.
.
.
.
.
ADDmONAL INFORMATION
.
.
.
.
.
.
) 'J /30
. CITY OF CHULA VISTA
GENERAL FUND
SCHEDULE OF REVENUES - BUDGET AND ACTUAL (NON-GAAP BUDGETARY BASIS)
. YEAR ENDED JUNE 30.1992
Actualona Variance
Budgetary Favorable
Budszet ~ (Unfavorable)
.
TAXES:
Sales BDd use $ 12,555,000 $ 11,679,477 $ (875,523)
Property 9,470,000 9,034,134 (435,866)
Franchise 1,650,600 1,898,299 247,699
Property transfer 245,000 236,686 (8,314)
. Transient lodging 1,315,000 1,181,074 (133,926)
Utility 2.570.000 2.682.878 112.878
27.805.600 26.712.548 (1.093.052)
INTERGOVERNMENTAL:
. Motor vehicle license fees 5,106,400 4,806,183 (300,217)
Cigarette taxes 122,000 109,169 (12,831)
From other agencies 7.179.602 6.823.987 (355.615)
12.408.002 11.739.339 (668.663)
. LICENSES AND PERMITS:
Business licenses 876,750 797,228 (79,522)
Building pennits 1,020,000 875,057 (144,943)
Animal license 53,000 40,915 (12,085)
Other 373.000 324.260 (48.740)
. 2.322.750 2.037.460 (285.290)
CHARGES FOR SERVICES:
Engineering, supervision and other fees 2,070,500 1,931,905 (138,595)
Pound fees 93,000 68,136 (24,864)
Police services 130,500 113,147 (17,353)
. Parks and recreation programs 175.000 200.571 25.571
2.469.000 2.313.759 ns5.241)
FINES AND FORFEITURES:
Court fines 150.000 106.081 (43.919)
. INVESTMENT EARNINGS 972.941 1.35 1.955 379.014
OlHER 784.560 915.253 130.693
TOTAL REVENUES $ 46.912.853 $ 45.176.395 $(1.736.458)
.
.
-26-
/ J- J /
.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
GENERAL FUND
SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES - BUDGET AND ACTUAL (NON-GAAP BUDGETARY BASIS)
. YEAR ENDED JUNE 30.1992
Actual on a Variance
Budgetary Favorable
Bud2et Dam (Unfavorable)
GENERAL GOVERNMENT:
City Council S 297,798 S 281,733 S 16,065
. City Clerk and e1ections 299,314 279,111 20,203
Administration 1,263,917 1,078,842 185,075
Finance 1,021,666 958,450 63,216
Attorney 848,347 759,300 89,047
Personnel 1,271,893 1,158,091 113,802
. Nondepartmental (1,662,239) (1,552,894) (109,345)
Insurance 1,098,176 1,026,969 71,207
Purchasing 378,939 370,072 8,867
Boards and commissions 57,574 53,817 3,757
Community promotions 24,250 21,309 2,941
Community development 1,413,312 1,385,350 27,962
. Planning 1,837,533 1,751,447 86,086
Data systems 668,026 571,878 96,148
Word processing 116,343 105,869 10,474
Public infonnation 164.878 155.798 9.080
9.099,727 8.405.142 694.585
PUBLIC SAFETY:
. Fire protection 6,327,358 6,209,043 118,315
Police protection 15,034,114 15,588,127 (554,013)
Animal regulation 336.538 325.305 11.233
21.698.010 22.122.475 (424.465)
PUBLIC WORKS:
Administration 161,677 166,504 (4,827)
. Engineering 4,139,608 3,919,349 220,259
Streets, culverts, etc. 3,212,981 3,073,620 139,361
Building inspection 956,564 999,458 (42,894)
Sewer system 1,195,452 1,188,338 7,114
Building maintenance 714,426 724,456 (10,030)
Communications 186,074 184,645 1,429
. Traffic signal and street light maintenance 1,110,226 1,060,812 49,414
Traffic operations maintenance 576.304 564.299 12.005
12.253.312 11.881.481 371.831
PARKS AND RECREATION:
Administration 927,554 935,022 (7,468)
Maintenance 2,080,916 1,960,077 120,839
. Activities 1.502.993 1.505.393 (2.400)
4.511.463 4.400.492 110.971
LWRARY:
Administration 361,722 366,419 (4,697)
Services 1,572,191 1,586,637 (14,446)
Acquisitions 507,273 503,426 3,847
. Circulation 467,752 463,712 4,040
Maintenance 138.970 134.295 4.675
3.047.908 3.054.489 (6.581)
TOTAL EXPENDITURES S 50.610.420 S 49.864.079 S 746.341
. -27 - / '3 ~ 3.2
CITY OF CHULA VISTA .
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
COMBINING BALANCE SHEET
JUNE 30,1992
Elderly & Open Golf .
Transportation Parking Traffic Sewer To"" Handicapped Space Housing Course
~ ~ ~ ~ Centre! :rrnnm Districts Pro2I8lllS Revenue
ASSETS:
Cash and investments $2,793,778 $ 369,798 $26,018 $16,315,751 $ 42,844 $1,692,768 $ 1,872,729 $ 318,989
AccO\Ults and taxes
receivable 2,296 9,944 20,597 1,280,599 165 16,001 4,384 .
Accrued interest
receivable 21,218 2,720 771 120,885 235 12,045 6,454 2,147
Due from other funds 470,000
Loans receivable 4,603,194
Grants receivable 558.073
..
TOTAL $3 375 365 $ 382.462 $ 47.386 $18.187 235 $ $ 43 244 $1720814 $ 6.482 377 $ 325.520
LIABILITIES:
Accounts payable
and acemed payroll $ 146,992 $ 10,355 $ 25,561 $43,244 $ 54,506 $ 18,410
Cash advances payable 929,056 $ 79,149 .
Due to other funds
Loans payable
Deferred revenue
Total liabilities I 076 048 10.355 25.561 79149 43.244 54 506 18410
FUND BALANCE (DEFICIT):
Reserved:
For encumbrances 2,512 8,474 116,181
For amounts due from
other funds 470,000
For low & moderate
income housing
For contingencies 31,994 106,028 346,022
For loans receivable $ 2,720,813
For incurred liability
For future projects 3,810,758
Unreserved and
undesignated 2 267 323 263 567 $ 47 386 17.337.178 (79.149) 1 550 127 (49.194) 307110
Tots! fund
balances (delicit) 2299317 372 107 47386 18.161 674 (79 149) I 666 308 6.482 377 307.110
TOTAL $3 375.365 $ 382 462 $ 47 .386 $18187 235 $ $43 244 $1720.814 $ 6 482 377 $ 325 520
-28 -
) }--}}
/_~
.
. Special Baldwin TI1IIlll- Other
TJaDSit Sundry Traffic Capital Bayfront Redevelopment Project portation MisccJlaneous
SmS ~ ~ QWIax ~ A&m0: MRn.D~4!nt Sales Tax flmdl ThlA!.
$ 272,406 $599,281 $ 193,493 $23,970 $ 118,429 $ 8,695,519 $5,499,098 $47,939 $38,882,810
. 197,372 5,098 7,999 1,544,455
1,558 3,935 382 764 90,495 35,959 1,615 301,183
6,740,700 7,210,700
3,121,355 7,724,549
212.424 770 497
. 5273.964 1815.640 S 193875 S 23.970 S 119.193 518.845.441 $ SS.S40.1SS 557.553 556.434.194
$ 12,779 $ 10,198 $ 59,443 $ 150,011 5 10,320 $ 665 $ 542,484
. 95,642 668,599 152,751 1,925,197
7,102,047 7,102,047
488,307 488,307
121336 121.336
12.779 227.176 8 318 396 302.762 10.320 665 10.179.371
.
5,988 $ 9,693 401,032 1,068,854 2,279 1,615,013
6,740,700 7,210,700
.
1,875,699 1,875,699
60,621 28,371 13,853 586,889
2,103,810 4,824,623
750,000 (847,635) (97,635)
253,439 4,064,197
.
200.564 1195 895) $ 193875 424 5119193 11.371.616) 5.529.835 54 609 26175337
261185 588.464 193.875 23.970 119.193 10 527 045 1302.762) 5 529 835 56 888 46 254 823
. S 273.964- $815.640 5 193.875 $ 23 970 5119.193 518845441 5 SS.S40 lSS 557.553 556434 194
.
.
-29- /3-31
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES
(DEFICIT)
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30.1992
Elderly & Open Golf
Transportation PBIking Traffie Sewer Town Handicapped Space Housing Course
QI:mlI ~ S!fm f!!n!!I ~ :rx-n Districts Promuns Revenue
REVENUES:
Taxes $ 2,339,300 $ 21,733 $1,409,785
Intergovernmental 1,222,577 217,073
Charges for service $ 248,445 $ 9,199,879 40,265
Fines and forfeitures $ 202,895
Revenue from use of
money and property 243,594 22,925 5,749 1,363,008 $ 1,939 2,278 90,952 $ 75,943 $ 308,755
Other 5.389 155.282 121.414 10594
Total revenues 3810 860 426 652 208.644 10 684 301 1939 281.349 1.511 331 75.943 308 755
EXPENDmJRES:
General government 300,992 3,406,212 281,349
Publie works 5,076,606 856,865 127,013 1,234,694 122,918 34,184
Library
Total expenditures 5 076 606 300.992 4.263.077 127.oJ3 281 349 1.234.694 122.918 34 184
EXCESS OF REVENUES
OVER (UNDER)
EXPENDmJRES (1.265.746) 125660 208.644 6.421.224 (125074) 276.637 146 975) 274.571
OTHER FINANCING
SOURCES (USES):
Transfers in 35,820 1,510,617 722,923 131
Transfers out (208,644) (6,503,436) (112,923 ) (54,110)
Repayment of long-
term advances (250,000)
Bond proceeds
HUD loan proceeds
Total other fmancing
sources and (uses) 35.820 1208 644) 14.992.819) 610.000 1303 979)
EXCESS OF REVENUES
AND OTHER SOURCES
OVER (UNDER)
EXPENDmJRES
AND OTHER USES (1,265,746) 161,480 1,428,405 (125,074) 276,637 563,025 (29,408)
FUND BALANCES
Iuly I, 1991 3 565.063 210627 47.386 16733.269 45.925 1.389.671 5919352 336518
FUND BALANCES
(DEFlCm,
Iune 30, 1992 S 2.299.317 $372 107 S 47 386 $18.161.674 $ 179.149) $ 51.666.308 $6 482.377 $ 307.110
-30 -
.----
/ J~ J.!7
.
.
Special Baldwin T_ Other
Tnmsil S1IIllIIy Tndlic Capital Bayficol RedevelopmeIlI Project pcrIaIiOll Mi4iMlIAnIllnUS
~ ~ BiIIIII QmIm: ImIIe: Aum;x UllnADfI!I'IV!nt Sales Tax ElmdI I2!Dl
. S 2,625,976 SI,192,300 S 7,589,094
S212,383 $2,110,803 S506,020 4,268,856
$128,135 362,773 9,979,497
202,895
lS,692 33,177 53,526 $26,041 S 7,642 749,074 S 6,288 349,067 12,802 3,368,452
. 567.129 1.185 116 27 855 36.101 2 108880
228 075 2.143.980 181661 26041 7642 4 304 952 1.191.404 1.569 ", 554 923 27.517.674
196,889 4,560 30,000 4,002,106 1,611,597 21,178 9,854,883
. 2,441,219 883,117 10,776,616
32.743 36612 69.355
196 889 2 473.962 4.560 66612 4 002106 1 611 597 883 117 21.178 20 700 854
.
31186 1329.982) 177.101 (40571) 7642 302.846 (420193) 686.105 533.745 6.816.820
9 91,000 79,917 1,869 2,800,930 5,046 5,248,262
. (17,343) (166.000) (307,580) (23,598) (7,276,565) (484,159) (15,154,358)
(250,000)
47,836 47,836
750.000 750 000
(17.334) 675 000 1227 663) 26107 14.475.635) (479113) 19.358.260)
.
13,852 345,018 (50,562) (14,464)
7,642
(4,172,789)
(420,193)
686,105
54,632 (2,541,440)
.
247333 243446 244 437 38.434 111 551
14 699.834
117.431
4.843.730
2.256 48.796.263
.
5261.185 5588.464 5193875 523.970 5119.193
S10 S27 O4S S (302.762) 5S 529 835
S S6 888 S 46.254.823
.
- 31-
J]"Yb
.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
SCHEDULE OF REVENUES
. BUDGET AND ACTUAL (NON-GAAP BUDGETARY BASIS)
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30. 1992
Actual on a Variance
Budgetary Favorable
. Bud2et BHiI (Unfavorable )
FUND:
Transportation Grants:
Intergovemmental $ 2,895,500 $ 1,222,577 $(1,672,923)
Gasoline taxes 2,296,400 2,339,300 42,900
. Interest 257,000 243,594 (13,406)
Other grants and contributions 1.200 5.389 4.189
5.450.100 3.810.860 0.639.240)
Parking Meter:
Meter collections and space rentals 232,010 248,445 16,435
Interest 17,000 22,925 5,925
. Other revenue 100.000 155.282 55.282
349.010 426.652 77.642
Traffic Safety:
Iustice court fines 400,000 202,895 (197,105)
Interest 6.000 5.749 (25 1)
406.000 208.644 097.356)
. Sewer Funds:
Connection and repayment fees 22,000 31,493 9,493
Cbarges for current services 4,673,300 5,723,383 1,050,083
Interest 1,010,000 1,363,008 353,008
Sewer Facility Participation 2,000,000 2,116,809 116,809
Sale of metro capacity rigbts 110,000 11 0,398 398
. Other Non-revenue 11,016 11,016
Collections 1.200.000 1.328.194 128.194
9.015.300 10.684.301 1.669.001
Town Centre I:
Interest 8,000 1,939 (6,061)
In lieu parking fee 77.000 m.OOO)
. 85.000 1.939 (83.061)
Elderly & Handicapped Transit:
Intergovernmental 228,100 217,073 (11,027)
Cbarges for services 30,000 40,265 10,265
Interest 3,000 2,278 (722)
Sales tax for transportation 25.100 21.733 (3.367)
. 286.200 281.349 ( 4.8sn
Open Space Districts:
Taxes 1,432,132 1,409,785 (22,347)
Interest 37,000 90,952 53,952
Other 10.594 10.594
1.469.132 1.511.331 42.199
. Housing Programs:
IntergovemmcntaI 5,534,226 (5,534,226)
Interest 75.943 75.943
5.534.226 75.943 (5.458.283)
Subtotal 22.594.968 17.001.019 (5.593.949)
. -32 - )] -:37
. CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
SCHEDULE OF REVENUES
BUDGET AND ACTUAL (NON-GAAP BUDGETARY BASIS)
. YEAR ENDED JUNE 30. 1992 (CONTINUED)
Actual 011 a Variance
Budgetaty Favorable
Bud2et Bu.ii (Unfavorable)
. Balance brought forward $ 22.594.968 $ 17.001.019 $ (5.593.949)
GoIfCourse Revenue:
Interest 27,000 24,874 (2,126)
Reotal and leases, land and space 303.000 283.881 ()9.119)
. 330.000 308.755 (21.245)
Transit Service:
Interest 14,000 15,692 1,692
Other agencies 185.600 212.383 26.783
199.600 228.075 28.475
Grants:
. Community Development Block Grant 1,862,600 1,896,392 33,792
State Grant 198,200 214,411 16,211
Interest 18.000 33.177 15.177
2.078.800 2.143.980 65.180
Traffic Signal:
Signal fee 11 0,000 128,135 18,135
Interest 67.000 53.526 (}3.474)
. 177.000 181.661 4.661
Special Capital Outlay:
Interest 5.000 26.041 21.041
Bayfront Trolley:
. Interest 7.000 7.642 642
7.000 7.642 642
Redevelopment Agency:
Taxes 5,191,500 2,625,976 (2,565,524)
Interest 1,332,500 749,074 (583,426)
Charges for services 2,859,400 362,773 (2,496,627)
. Other 1.400.000 567.129 (832.871)
10.783.400 4.304.952 (6.478.448)
Subtota1 36.175.768 24.202.125 () 1.973.643)
.
.
.
- 33. ) J - J ~
. CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
SCHEDULE OF REVENUES
. BUDGET AND ACTUAL (NON-GAAP BUDGETARY BASIS)
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30,1992 (CONTINUED)
Actual on a Variance
Budgetary Favorable
Bud2ct DIIiI (Unfavorable)
.
Balance brought forward S 36.175.768 S 24.202.125 S m.973.643)
Baldwin Project Management:
Interest 6,288 6,288
Reimbursement from developers 1.185.116 1.185.116
. 1.191.404 1.191.404
Transportation Sales Tax:
Interest 185,000 349,067 164,067
Taxes 1,984,000 1,192,300 (791,700)
Other 44.350 27 .855 (16.495)
. 2.213.350 1.569.222 (644.128)
Other Miscellaneous Funds:
Intergovcmment 400,000 506,020 106,020
Interest 12,000 12,802 802
Other 20.000 36.101 16.101
. 432.000 554.923 122.923
TOTAL S 38.821.118 S 27.517.674 S m.303.444)
.
.
.
.
.
-34. )]/}'7
.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES
. BUDGET AND ACTUAL (NON-GAAP BUDGETARY BASIS)
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30.1992
Actual on a Variance
Budgetary Favorable
Budlzet ~ (Unfavorable)
.
FUND:
Tl'IIIIS)lOrtation Grants:
Select streets $3,956,193 $1,713,946 $ 2,242,247
Other streets 4,883,215 3,352,660 1,530,555
Engineering 10.000 10.000
.
8.849.408 5.076.606 3.772.802
Parking Meter:
Salaries 212,997 224,434 (11,437)
Operating costs 58.170 79.070 (20.900)
.
271.167 303.504 (32.337)
Sewer Funds:
Deposits refunded 2,000 6,462 (4,462)
Refund of fees 15,500 102,348 (86,848)
. Sewer payment 4,794,067 3,993,092 800,975
Other costs 186.655 169.649 17.006
4.998.222 4.271.551 726.671
Town Centre I:
. Parking facilities 139.309 127.013 12.296
Elderly & Handicapped
Transit:
General government 284.960 281.349 3.611
. Open Space Districts:
Public works 1.520.782 1.350.875 169.907
Housing Programs:
Rebabilitation grants 120,674 (120,674)
Interest 2.244 (2.244)
.
122.918 022.918)
Golf Course Revenue:
Repairs and maintenance 144.750 34.184 110.566
144.750 34.184 110.566
. Transit Service:
Sa1aries 197.457 196.889 568
Subtotal 16.406.055 1 1.764.889 4.641.166
. - 35- )}';/I/
. CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES
. BUDGET AND ACTUAL (NON-GAAP BUDGETARY BASIS)
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30.1992 (CONTINUED)
Actual on a Variance
Budgetary Favorable
. Bud2et DAm (Unfavorable )
Balance brought forward 516.406.055 511.764.889 5 4.641.166
Grants:
Community Development Block Grant 3,356,508 2,148,449 1,208,059
. State Libnuy Act 203,253 161,468 41,785
Rental Rehabilitation Grant 120,800 120,800
OCJP State Grant 147,470 136,740 10,730
Federal Libnuy Grants 50.275 33.293 16.982
3.878.306 2.479.950 1.398.356
.
Traffic Signal:
Refund of fees 4.560 (4.560)
Special Capital Outlay:
Automated Libnuy System 50,009 46,305 3,704
. Capital Projects 30.000 30.000
80.009 76.305 3.704
Redevelopment Agency:
General government 5.471.405 4.403.138 1.068.267
.
Baldwin Project Management:
Operating costs 594.558 2.680.45 I (2.085.893)
Transportation Sales Tax:
Capital projects 6.352.663 883.117 5.469546
.
Other Miscellaneous Funds:
Asset Seizure 2,319 (2,319)
Waste Management & Recycling 36.096 21.138 14.958
36.096 23.457 12.639
.
TOTAL 532.819.092 522.315.867 510503.225
.
.
-36- /J-,//
.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
DEBT SERVICE FUNDS
COMBINING BALANCE SHEET
. JUNE 30. 1992
Redevelopment Assessment
Aszencv Districts 1987 COP 1990 COP I2!l!l
ASSETS:
. Cash and investments $3,413,273 $ 3,117,981 $ 2,362,944 $ 121,521 $ 9,0 15,719
Accounts receivable 16,061 16,061
Accrued interest receivable 20.314 20.314
TOTAL $3.413.273 $ 3.154.356 $ 2.362.944 $ 121.521 $ 9.052.094
. LIABILITIES:
Cash advance payable $ 157 .266 $ 157.266
Tota1liabi1ities 157.266 157.266
FUND BALANCES:
. Unreserved:
Designated for debt
service $3.413.273 $ 3.154.356 2.205.678 $ 121.521 8.894.828
Total fund balances 3.413.273 3.154.356 2.205.678 121.521 8.894.828
. TOTAL $3.413.273 $ 3.154.356 $ 2.362.944 $ 121.521 $ 9.052.094
.
.
.
.
.
-37- /:3 ~ Ye7
.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
DEBT SERVICE FUNDS
COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES,
. EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30. 1992
1965 Redcvclop-
Golf meat As-t
!;mm ~ Districts 1987 COP 1990 COP I2lIl
.
REVENUES:
Taxcs $2,975,675 S 1,295,646 14,271,321
Revenues 1iom lIIe of IIIODe)'
and property 193.636 252.1 82 S 252.135 S 26641 724.594
. Total __ 3.169.311 1.547.828 252.135 26641 4 995.915
EXPENDInJRES:
Principal retirement S 45,000 835,000 1,740,000 330,000 47,836 2,997,836
Interest and charges 8,460 2,317,574 856,049 1,294,246 38,724 4,515,053
Trustee expeDSe 519 16,225 51,870 9,721 37,648 115,983
. Premium 011 caJled bonds 67.250 67.250
Total expenditures 53.979 3.168.799 2715 169 1.633.967 124.208 7.696 122
EXCESS OF REVENUES OVER
(UNDER) EXPENDrruRES 153.979) 512 II 167.341l 11.381.832) 197.567) 12.700.207)
.
01lJER FINANCING SOURCES
(USES):
TllIIISfersill 54,110 1,390,593 1,372,476 1,387,534 4,204,713
TIlIDSfers out (131) (1,390,593) (9,043) (1,294,744) (2,694,SJ1)
Bond proceeds 219088 219.088
. Total other finllllcing
soun:es and (uses) 53 979 1 363433 92.790 219.088 1 729 290
EXCESS OF REVENUES AND
OrnER SOURCES OVER
(UNDER) EXPENDrruRES
. AND 01HER USES 512 196,092 (1,289,042) 121,521 (970,917)
FUND BALANCES.
1uly I, 1991 3.412.761 2.958.264 3.494.720 9 865 745
FUND BALANCES,
1une 30, 1992 S - $3413.273 S 3.154.356 S 2.205 678 S 121.521 58.894.828
.
.
.
- 38-
)J..1/3
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS
COMBINING BALANCE SHEET
JUNE 30. 1992
Parks and Capital Park Residential State Telegraph
Recreation Improvement Acquisition Construction LibraI)' Bond Act Canyon
Block Grants Prooram Develomnent ImI Construction lill RllDl!
ASSETS:
Cash and investments 5 33.608 55,536,969 51,105,990 5203,675 5 803 5933,186
AccOlUlts and taxes receivable
Accn1ed interest receivable 248 31,6S4 6,943 80 6 6,S34
Grants receivable ...1.W.
TOTAL 5 33.856 55.568.623 51.112.933 5 5203.755 ~ $ 939.720
LIABILITIES:
AccOlUlts payable 5 77,221
Cash advance payable 5389,719 5 55,S02
Due to other funds 50,000
Deferred revenue 6.141
Total liabilities 395.860 77 .221 105 502
FUND BALANCE (DEFICIT):
Reserved:
For encwnbrances
For contin8encies 5 69,900 202,555
Designated for capital projects (362004) 5.491.402 1.043.033 1308 057) 5203.755 Ulli 5939.720
Total fund balances
(deficit) 1362.004) 5491.402 1.112 933 1105.502) 203 755 ...J.1M 939 720
TOTAL 5 33 856 55.568.623 51 112.933 5 5203.755 ~ 5939.720
-39- ) J .-J/Y
.
. .As.set-Il!'!nt Transpor-
lDdustriaJ District Development SewerFaci1ity tation
Bic:yde DevoIopmeDt Improvement ImJl8"t Redevelopment Replocement Partnenbip
t:I&iIilx A""","tv fl!IW Elmd! ~ fllmI f!lIId I2!Al
5 333,241 S7,702 5 3,795,959 5 10,214,305 5267,061 5 1,155,154 5176,217 5 23,763,870
. 34,091 73,074 219,759 326,924
2,341 24,329 66,007 1,092 7,430 146,664
7925
S 335 582 ~ S :3 820.288 S 10.314403 5268153 S 1.235 658 5395976 $ 24 245.383
.
5 26,11 5 5 82,867 5 95,154 5 281,357
145,024 590,245
420,000 470,000
4.900 11.041
. 31015 647 891 95.154 1.352.643
17,418 17,418
272,455
. 304.567 ..J.:!91 3 802 870 9.666.512 172 999 1 235 658 395.976 22 602 867
304 567 ..J.:!91 3 820.288 9666 512 172.999 1.235 658 395.976 22 892.740
. S 335.582 ~ 5 3.820.288 S 10.314.403 $268 153 S 1.235.658 S 395976 S 24.245.383
.
.
.
.
-40- J3~Y~
-
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS
COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES. EXPENDITURES. AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES
(DEFICIT)
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30,1992
PIIIb and Capital Pari< Residential State Telegraph
Recreation Improvement Acquisition Construction Library Bond Act Canyon
Block Grants Pro2ram Develomnent IM Construction 1m. R!1al!
REVENUES:
Taxes $ 190,300
Intergovernmental $ 679,406 $ 3,105
Revenues from use of money and
property 2,501 $ 971,937 59,119 $ 1lO7 54 $ 75,054
Other 2,550
Development fees
Total revenues 681.907 974.487 249.419 1lO7 .2.ill 75.054
EXPENDfTIJRES:
Capital projects 448.705 $1.710.242 19 650 3093 272 592
Total expenditures 448.705 I 710.242 19650 3.093 272.592
EXCESS OF REVENUES OVER
(UNDER) EXPENDITIlRES 233.202 11.710.242) 974.487 229.769 (2286) .2.ill 1197.538)
OTIlER FINANCING SOURCES (USES):
Transfers in 3,386,542 3,000 10,873 194,370 4,944
Transfers out (4,846) (103,995) (250,967) (649,382) (98)
Contribution from property owners
Total other financial
sources (uses) 14.846) 3.282 547 1247 967) 1638.509) 194.370 ~
EXCESS OF REVENUES AND OTIlER
SOURCES OVER (UNDER)
EXPENDfTIJRES AND
OTIlER USES 228,356 1,572,305 726,520 (408,740) 192,084 8,005 (197,538)
FUND BALANCES (DEFICIT),
JULY I, 1991 1590.360) 3.919 097 386 413 303.238 11.671 --.m 1.137 258
FUND BALANCES (DEFICITS),
JUNE 30,1992 $(362.004) 5S 491 402 51112933 $ nos 502) $203.755 ~ $ 939 720
-41- J3 -'1~
.
.
Assessment Transpor-
Industrial District Development Sewer Facility taticm
Bicycle Development Improvement Impact Redevelopment Repllcement Plr1nership
fEIilx Authoritv 1'iIIldI fl!IW ~ ~ ~ I2lIl
.
S 190,300
S 465,218 S 143,997 S 395,976 1,687,702
6,564 480,953 S 684,486 S 9,409 S 65,990 2,356,874
S 4,844 49,376 1,069,821 349,542 1,476,133
. 2.206.188 2.206 188
471 782 4844 674.326 3 960 495 9409 415.532 395.976 7.917.197
249 963 2.996 16.633.951 2.210 597 3.974.296 4.531 25530 616
.
249.963 2.996 16633951 2.210.597 3.974.296 4531 25.530.616
221819 1848 m.959.625) 1 749.898 13.964.887) 411.001 395 976 117.613.419)
.
313,169 3,981,437 7,894,335
(1,658,102) (261,997) (7,141) (2,936,528)
19802623 19.802.623
. 18.144.521 51.172 3.974.296 24.760.430
221,819 1,848 2,184,896 1,801,070 9,409 411,001 395,976 7,147,011
.
82 748 5.854 I 635 392 7.865442 163.590 824.657 15745.729
. 5 304 567 S 7.702 S 3.820.288 S 9 666 512 S 172.999 S 1 235.658 S 395 976 $ 22 892.740
.
.
- 42 - ) J - Y 7
.
.
.
.
/J -?IJ/'
-43 - 7
. CITY OF CHULA VISTA
TRUST AND AGENCY FUNDS
COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES,
. AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - EXPENDABLE TRUST FUNDS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30.1992
Cash
Bond Development
Deoosits Reserves Imi!
.
REVENUES:
Revenues from use ofmoney and property $ 277,659 $ 277,659
Other 3.397.104 5 12.756 3.409.860
Total revenues 3.674.763 12.756 3.687.519
.
EXPENDITURES:
General government 3.374.272 571.031 3.945.303
Total expenditures 3.374.272 571.031 3.945.303
. EXCESS OF REVENUES OVER EXPENDITURES 300.491 (558.275) (257.784)
OTHER FINANCING USES:
Transfer out (271.0)7) (271.0)7)
Total other uses (271.0)7) (271.017)
.
EXCESS OF REVENUES OVER EXPENDITURES
AND OTHER USES 29,474 (558,275) (528,801)
FUND BALANCES, JULY I, 1991 2.156.331 558.275 2.714.606
. FUND BALANCES, JUNE 30, 1992 $2.185.805 5 52.185.805
.
.
.
.
-44- /3-(1)
. CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AGENCY FUNDS
COMBINING STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN ASSETS AND LIABILITIES
. YEAR ENDED JUNE 30. 1992
Balance Balance
Julv I. 1991 j.tltlitions Deletions June 30. 1992
Deferred Comnensation
. ASSETS:
Cash and investments $6.321.690 $1.914.577 $337.329 $7.898.938
$6.321.690 $1.914.577 $337.329 $7.898.938
LIABILITIES:
. Deferred compensation $6.321.690 $1.914.577 $337 .329 $7.898.938
$6.321.690 $1.914.577 $337.329 $7.898.938
Recreation Trust
ASSETS:
. Cash and investments $ 271,873 $ 85,292 $ 357,165
Accounts and taxes receivable 7,483 8,153 $ 7,483 8,153
Accrued interest 1.843 2.100 1.843 2.100
$ 281.199 $ 95.545 $ 9.326 $ 367.418
. LIABILITIES:
Deposits $ 281.199 $ 95.545 $ 9.326 $ 367.418
$ 281.199 $ 95.545 $ 9.326 $ 367.418
Snecial Assessment District
. ASSETS:
Cash and investments $ 4,890 $ 8,735 $ 8,249 $ 5,376
Accrued interest 32 29 32 29
$ 4.922 $ 8.764 $ 8.281 $ 5.405
. LIABILITIES:
Deposits $ 4.922 $ 8.764 $ 8.281 $ 5.405
$ 4.922 $ 8.764 $ 8.281 $ 5.405
.
.
.
-45- /]~SV
. CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AGENCY FUNDS
COMBINING STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN ASSETS AND LIABILITIES
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30.1992 (CONTINUED)
.
Balance Balance
Julv 1. 1991 Additions Deletions June 30. 1992
Assessment Bond Reserve:
ASSETS:
. Cash and investments $ 4,135,430 $ 6,595,040 $2,860,905 $ 7,869,565
Accounts and taxes receivable 11,109 25,851 11,109 25,851
Accrued interest 25.910 50.814 25.910 50.814
$ 4.172.449 $ 6.671.705 $2.897 .924 $ 7.946.230
. LIABILITIES:
Refundable deposits $ 4.172.449 $ 6.671.705 $2.897.924 $ 7.946.230
$ 4.172.449 $ 6.671.705 $2.897.924 $ 7 .946.230
. ThIll:
ASSETS:
Cash and investments $10,733,883 $ 8,603,644 $3,206,483 $ 16,131,044
Accounts and taxes receivable 18,592 34,004 18,592 34,004
Accrued interest 27.785 52.943 27.785 52.943
. $10.780.260 $ 8.690.591 $3.252.860 $ 16.217.991
LIABILITIES:
Deposits $ 4,458,570 $ 6,776,014 $2,915,531 $ 8,319,053
Deferred compensation 6.321.690 1.914.577 337.329 7 .898.938
. $10.780.260 $ 8.690.591 $3.252.860 $ 16.217.991
.
.
.
.
-46- ) ;J/~J
.
.
.
.
.
.47- J J~;.;2.,
. CITY OF CHULA VISTA
.
.
.
.
-48 -
) ; ~5;J
.
.
-49 -
/ }~5f
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ) t../
Meeting Date 12/15/92
ITEM TITLE: Report on SANDAG Draft Regional Public Facilities Financing Plan
REVIEWED BY:
Director of Planning
City Manager~
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_No20
SUBMITTED BY:
The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) has released a draft Regional Public Facilities
Financing Plan for review and comment. This plan, when completed, is intended to be the public facilities
financing element of the Regional Growth Management Strategy.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to forward the
comments contained in this report on the draft Regional Public Facilities Financing Plan to SANDAG.
DISCUSSION:
The basic premise of the draft Regional Public Facilities Financing Plan is that such a plan will help achieve the
goals of the Regional Growth Management Strategy. This premise is based on the fact that regional public
facilities are important to the quality of life, and to keep pace with growth, a way must be found to pay for them.
The draft Regional Public Facilities Financing Plan includes a survey of current funding sources and financing
methods, capital, and operating and maintenance costs to the year 2010, and a forecast of unfunded capital costs
for thirteen regional public facilities: water supply, sewage treatment I waste water reclamation, gas and
electricity, transportation, solid waste, hazardous waste, justice facilities, health, libraries, open space, animal
control, social services, and fire communication.
Findinl!s and Conclusions
The Plan contains several major findings and conclusions:
1) Government's provision of public facilities to accommodate growth and the existing population is
essentialto the region's quality of life. The provision of these public facilities is accomplished through
the transfer of money from "the private sector to the public sector through taxes and fees. On the one
hand, this transfer of money may impact the economy and may reduce housing affordability. On the
other hand, a lack of facilities in a timely manner will also have negative economic impacts.
2) Current and forecasted revenues for regional facilities are less than the forecasted costs for their
provision. Specifically, the average annual cost of five categories of needed regional facilities
(transportation, justice facilities, regional parkslopen space, health, and social services) in the San Diego
region, at current service levels, is $465.6 million. At the same time, the revenues contributed by
taxpayers in the San Diego region ($111.3 million) combined with anticipated state and federal funds
($135.9 million), will pay for about $247.2 million of the total annual average cost of these facilities.
3) A coordinated approach is essential to achieve an effective and equitable fmancing strategy. Local and
regional revenue programs should be compatible and complementary with each other, and with state
)4 ~ I
Page 2, Item I ~
Meeting Date ~
and federal revenues. A comprehensive and fair approach should be used in raising new revenues for
regional public facilities.
4) A fair allocation of public facilities is a necessary step toward achieving agreement on raising taxes, fee,
or other exactions, and the allocation of public facilities costs between the existing population and future
population is an important issue.
5) The allocation of the unfunded regional costs for transportation, justice facilities, regional parks/open
space, health, and social services, based on the nexus requirements of Government Code Section 66000,
results in an average annual cost of $218.4 million for the future population, and an average annual cost
of $149.3 million for the existing population.
Recommendations
The report includes several key preliminary recommendations:
1) Five of the thirteen regional facilities studied (water, sewerage, solid waste, energy, and hazardous
waste) will be financed by increases in charges for current services, hookup fees, and private investment.
Of the eight remaining categories studied, libraries and animal control were determined to be more
local in nature, and no recommendations were made for regional fire communications facilities. The
recommendations in the report focus on transportation, justice facilities, regional parks/open space,
health, and social services, with transportation generating the vast majority of the unfunded liability
among these regional facilities.
2) Any recommendation to increase taxes, exactions, fees, or other government revenues for regional
facilities should consider the proposal's impacts on population, employment and unemployment,
personal and household income, housing affordability, and operations and maintenance costs. The
quality of life impacts of reduced service levels which would result if the increase is not implemented
also should be considered.
3) A fair allocation of public facilities costs between existing population and future population is important.
In that light, the report suggests three potential funding allocation methods for allocating unfunded costs
of regional transportation facilities needed between 1990-2010 (at an estimated cost of $190.5 million
per year):
a) Full Cost Allocation: based on allocating the full costs of needed facilities to future population.
Under this method, $190.5 million in annual costs would be allocated to future population.
b) Marginal Cost Allocation: based on dividing unfunded costs between existing and future
population based on their percentage of the increase in total average daily trips (ADT) in the
region from 1990-2010. Under this method, $29.9 million in costs would be allocated to existing
population, and $160.6 million to future population.
c) Total ADT Allocation: based on dividing the unfunded costs between existing and future
population on the basis of their respective impacts on the total ADT of the region. Under this
method, $149.2 million would be allocated to existing population and $41.3 million to future
population.
3) There are at least two potential approaches to raising revenue for regional facilities:
a) a tax increase would be one way to fund the existing population's share of regional facilities.
b) regional impact fees would be a way to fund future population's share of regional facility costs.
!Lf'1-
Page 3, Item \ I.j
Meeting Date lttsi92
COMMENTS
Our staff has reviewed the draft report, and fmds that it provides a comprehensive overview of the complex fiscal
issues which are facing the San Diego County region over the coming years, both in providing services and
facilities to existing residents as well as accommodating new growth. The report leads to the conclusion that
the region faces major unfunded costs for regional facilities, particularly transportation, and that the primary
means for allocating facilities costs to future population will be through imposition of substantial regional impact
fees or other assessments. The Advisory Committee which assisted in preparing this report, on which the City
Manager served, suggested several options for allocating costs through regional impact fees, and recommended
a "middle of the road' approach which would meet some but not all of the needs generated by future population.
The report provides a good overall framework for future evaluation of regional financing proposals including
the need to consider impacts on housing affordability and the overall economy as specific proposals are
developed. With regard to housing affordability, there should be additional quantitative analysis regarding
existing local impact fees, exactions, assessment districts, and the like, and the capacity of the regional housing
market to carry additional impact fees and/or assessments; also, the potential for phasing in such fees should
be considered if a regional DIF is implemented during a stagnant or declining economy. In the past, locally
imposed fees and assessments may not have had any effect on housing costs, due to other market forces at work
in an expanding real estate market. However, the imposition of new regional impact fees or assessments during
a contracting real estate market could have negative consequences on housing affordability, which need to be
better understood before moving forward on any such proposal. In this light, the Advisory Committee suggested
that if any regional development impact fees are approved during a contracting economy, the implementation
of these fees should be delayed and should be phased in over time.
Also this concern with housing affordability needs to be balanced by the policy value that growth should pay for
itself and not be subsidized by the existing community of taxpayers. As a matter of fairness and equity, an
analysis would need to be undertaken if a Regional DIF is approved to determine the portion of needed new
transportation facilities generated by growth and that generated by existing development. In this way, some
judgment can be exercised as to the balance between "growth" and existing development in funding needed
regional transportation facilities.
There also should be further analysis of the effects of new regional impact fees and assessments on the San
Diego Region's competitiveness in certain commercial and industrial markets. In this regard, we concur with the
recommendation in the report that consideration be given to the 'quality of life objectives in the Economic
Prosperity element of the Regional Growth Management Strategy' when considering any regional revenue
proposal. At the same time, one needs to be aware that the absence of adequate funding for regional facilities,
particularly regional transportation facilities, may damage the Region's economic competitiveness, especially if
growth does not pay for itself at the regional level. This may lead to a reduction in "quality of life" standards,
making the region a less desirable place for commerce and industry to locate to the detriment of the region.
With regard to fmancing methods other than impact fees, the report does not adequately consider so-called
"value capture' methods of fmancing regional facilities. For example, a large portion of future regional parks
and open space needs may be met through methods such as transfer of development rights, environmental
"mitigation banks," development agreements, and other methods of acquiring land in conjunction with
discretionary planning approvals. These types of financing mechanisms are currently being evaluated in
conjunction with the development of the various regional and subregional habitat conservation plans, including
the South County Natural Community Conservation Program (NCCP) and the Clean Water Program Multiple
Species Conservation Program (MSCP).
Jl/d
Page 4, Item --1L
Meeting Date 12/15/92
Fmally, with regard to transportation facilities, the report does not adequately address the existing facility
financing framework established in the Congestion Management Program. The CMP sets forth the concept of
developing subregional "deficiency plans" for financing and constructing regional transportation facilities which
are projected to be needed as a result of future growth. While this concept has not yet been implemented, and
needs further refmement, it would appear to be more productive to use the CMP as the framework for
developing regional transportation facility financing mechanisms, rather than developing a separate regional
traffic impact fee program.
FISCAL IMPACT: None at this time. However, future decisions to implement regional revenue measures could
have both positive and negative impacts on the City, depending on how such measures are structured.
(regfln4.a13)
/4 ~~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DRAFT
REGIONAL PUBLIC FACILITIES
FINANCING PLAN
August 1992
San Diego
~
ASSOCIATION OF
GOVERl'UIENI'S
First Interstate Plaza
401 B Street. Suite 800
San Diego, California 92101
(619) 595-5300
MEMBER AGENCIES: Cities of Carll bad. Chula Viata, Coronado. Del Mer, EI Cajon. Encinitas. escondida, Imperial Beach, 18 Mea..
Lamon Grove, National City. Oceanaide, Poway, San Diego. Sin Marcos, Sante., Solana Beach, Vista, and County of Sin Diego
ADVISORY/UAISON MEMBERS: California Department of Tran8portation, U.S. Departmentaf Defenae, and Tijuana/Saja California Norte ,
)Lj-5 .
\
-
...
Board of Directors
SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS
....
The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) is a public agency formed voluntarily by
local governments to assure overall areawide planning and coordination for the San Diego region.
Voting members include the Incorporated Cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, EI Cajon,
Encinitas, Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, Lemon Grove, National City, Oceanside,
Poway, San Diego, San Marcos, Santee, Solana Beach, Vista, and the County of San Diego.
Advisory and Uaison members include CAL TRANS. U.S. Department of Defense,
and TijuanalBaja California.
...
...
CHAIRWOMAN: Hon. Gloria McClellan
VICE CHAIRMAN: Hon. Mike Bixler
SECRETARY-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Kenneth E. Sulzer
...
CITY OF CARLSBAD
Hon. Bud Lewis, Mayor
(A) Hon. Ann Kulchin. Mayor Pro Tem
CITY OF POWAY
Hon. Don Higginson, Councilmember
(A) Hon. Jan Goldsmith, Mayor
(A) Hon. Bob Emery, Councilmember
...
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Hon. Leonard Moore, Councilmember
(A) Hon. Tim Nader, Mayor
CITY OF SAN DIEGO
Hon. Judy McCarty, Councilmember
(A) Hon. Tom Bahr, Councilmember
...
CITY OF CORONADO
Hon. Michel Napolitano, Mayor Pro Tern
(A) Hon. Sua.n Keith, Councilmember
CITY OF SAN MARCOS
Hon. Lee Thibedeau. Mayor
(A) Hon. Mike Preston, Vice Mayor
(A) Hon. Mark Loscher, Councilmember
...
CITY OF DEL MAR
Hon. Elliot Parka, Deputy Mayor
(A) Hon. Henry Abarbanel, Councilmember
(A) Hon. Ed Colbert, Councilmember
CITY OF SANTEE
Hon. Jack Doyl., Mayor
(A) Hon. Hal Ryan, Vioo Mayor
...
-j
CITY OF EL CAJON
Hon. Harriet Stockwell, Deputy Mayor
(A) Hon. Mark lewis, Councilmember
(A) Hon. Richard Ramos, Councilmamber
CITY OF SOLANA BEACH
Hon. Richard Hendlin, Councilmember
(A) Hon. Margaret Schlesinger, Deputy Mayor
(A) Hon. Callna Olson, Mayor
...
CITY OF ENCINIT AS
Hon. Maur. Wiegand, Mayor
(A) Hon. Gail Hano, Councilmembar
CITY OF VISTA
Hon. Gloria E. McClellan, Mayor
(A) Hon. Bernie Rappaport, Mayor Pro Tem
...
CITY OF ESCONDIDO
Hon. Jerry Harmon, Mayor
(A) Hon. Lori Holt Pfeiler, Councilmember
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
Hon. Brian Bilbray, Supervisor
(A) Hon. Susan Golding, Supervisor
(A) Hon. John MacDonald, Supervisor
""I
CITY OF IMPERIAL BEACH
Hon. Mike Bixler, Mayor
(A) Hon. Marti Goethe, V1ca Mayor
CITY OF LA MESA
Hon. Art Madrid, Mayor
(A) Hon. Barry Jantz, Council member
(A) Hon. Jay LaSuer, Vioa Mayor
CITY OF LEMON GROVE
Hon. Brian Cochran, Mayor
(A) Hon. Jerome Legerton, Councilmember
STATE DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
(Advisory Mamber)
James W. van Loben Sels, Director
(A) Jesus Garcia, District Eleven Director
..,
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
(Uaison Member)
Copt Tom Crane, CEC, USN
Commanding Officer Southwest Division
Naval Facilities Engineering Command
...,
\
..,
CITY OF NATIONAL CITY
Hon. Jess E. Van Deventer, Councilmember
(A) Hon. Michael Dalla, Councilmember
TIJUANAfBAJA CALIFORNIA
(Advisory Mambar)
Hon. Carlos Montejo Favela
Presidente Municipal de Tijuana
...
i
CITY OF OCEANSIDE
Hon. Nancy York. Councilmember
(A) Hon. Melba Bishop, Deputy Mayor
Revised Auguat 24, 1992
....
ii
! '1- ~
..,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ABSTRACT
TITLE: Draft Regional Public Facilities Financing Plan
AUTIlOR: San Diego Association of Governments
SUBJECT: Recommendations regarding the financing of thirteen
regional public facilities
DATE: August 1992
LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY: San Diego Association of Governments
401 B Street, Suite 800
San Diego, CA 92101
NUMBER OF PAGES: 101
ABSTRACT: The Regional Revenues Advisory Committee, SANDAG
staff and consultants have prepared the Draft Regional
Public Facilities Financing Plan. This report contains
conclusions and recommendations regarding the fmancing
of thirteen regional public facilities: water supply,
sewage treatment/wastewater reclamation, gas and
electricity, transportation, solid waste, hazardous waste,
justice facilities, health, libraries, open space, animal
control, social services and fire communication.
ill
1'/-7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Regional Public Facilities Financing Plan was prepared with the assistance of the
Regional Revenues Advisory Committee and Regional Public Facilities Financing Advisory
Committee.
REGIONAL REVENUES ADVISORY COMMITIEE
Elected Officials
Mayor Pro Tern Michel Napolitano,
City of Coronado
Councilmember Judy McCarty,
City of San Diego
Deputy Mayor Harriet Stockwell,
City of El Cajon (Committee Chair)
Supervisor George Bailey,
County of San Diego
Mayor Jerry Harmon,
City of Escondido
Supervisor Leon Williams,
County of San Diego
Councilmember Nancy York,
City of Oceanside
City/County ManalZer Re.presentatives
Frank Mannen, Assistant City Manager
City of Carlsbad
Severo Esquivel, Deputy City Manager
City of San Diego
John Goss, City Manager
City of Chula Vista
Lari Sheehan, Deputy CAO
County of San Diego
Ron Ballard, City Manager
City of Santee
City/County Attorney Reoresentatives
John Riess, Deputy City Attorney
City of San Diego
Dan Hentschke, City Attorney
Cities of San Marcos and Solana Beach
William D. Smith, Deputy County Counsel
County of San Diego
v
) i~ if'
...
...
Private Sector Attorney R~resentative
Construction Industry R~resentative
Rebecca Michael, Attorney at Law,
Peterson & Price
Tom Sheffer, Legislative Director
Construction Industry Federation
...,
Chamber of Commerce
.,
Hannah Cohen
...
Advisory R~resentatives
Carl West,
Deputy District Director
CALTRANS
Murphy McCalley,
Director of Finance and Administration
Metropolitan Transit Development Board
""l
'""!
Dennis Shives,
Director of Finance and Administration
North County Transit District
""l
-),
;
REGIONAL PUBUC FACIUTIES FINANCING PLAN ADVISORY COMMITrEE
.,
,
Doug Clark
Severo Esquivel
John Fowler
Rick Gittings
John Goss
Henry Lozano
Jim Ryan
Lari Sheehan
Don Shelton
Glen Sparrow
J.V. Ward
Jeff Washington
Olive Wehbring
Joan Vokac
...,
,
.,
Consultants:
Recht Hausrath & Associates
Ken Fabricatore
,
;
SANDAG Staff:
Susan Baldwin, Project Manager
Stuart Shaffer, Deputy Executive Director
Michael McLaughlin, Director of Land Use
Marney Cox, Special Services Director
Ray Major, Associate Research Analyst
Craig Scott, Manager of Transportation Finance
Michael Hix, Senior Transportation Planner
Ruth Potter, Senior Regional Planner
Steve Sachs, Senior Regional Planner
.,
""'!
""l
""l
Descriptions of the County of San Diego's public facilities were taken from the County's
General Plan Public Facilities Element.
.,
vi
) L/ ~ C;
""'!
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction/Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Description of Regional Public Facilities and Projected
Capital Costs for 1989-2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Allocation of Costs for Transportation, Justice Facilities,
Regional Parks/Open Space, Health, and Social Services
. ........ ......
Recommended Approach to Determining if Revenues Should be
Increased for Transportation, Justice Facilities, Regional Parks/
Open Space, Health, and Social Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Recommended Approaches to Increase Taxes or Implement a Regional
ImpactFeeProgram .....................................
APPENDICES
List of Reports
1.
................ .....................
2. Description of Thirteen Regional Public Facilities, Projected Costs,
and Funding Sources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3. Estimates of User Fee Increases Related to Regional Facilities ........
4. San Diego Region Local Government Expenditures and Revenues
for Fiscal Year 1988/89 Total Expenditures and Revenues. . . . . . . . . . .
5. Survey of Funding Sources for Regional Public Facilities ...........
vii
12/-/ t?
3
15
21
33
37
45
49
65
69
77
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Table 6
Table 7
Table 8
Table 2-1
Table 2-2
Table 2-3
Table 2-4
Table 3-1
Table 4-1
Table 4-2
-
...
""!
LIST OF TABLES
...
Cumulative Costs of Thirteen Regional Public Facilities
and SelVices (1989-2010) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 17
...
j
Total Funding Needs for Regional Facilities Less Federa1l
State & Local Revenue 1989-2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 21
...
Three Potential Capital Cost Allocations Between the Existing
Population and Future Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 22
..,
Series 7 Growth Forecast - Population and Employment . . . . . .. 23
...
Annual Average Regional Transportation Costs ............ 24
...
Marginal Cost Allocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 26
Total Average Daily Trip (ADT) Cost Allocation. . . . . . . . . .. 27
.,
Justice Facility Cost Allocation Annual Average Cost,
1989-2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 28
...
1990 Inventory and Levels of SelVice for Justice Facilities ..... 57
.,
Justice Facility Needs and Costs, 1989-2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 57
""!
1990 Inventory and Levels of SelVice for Regional Parks!
Open Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 59
.,
Regional Parks!Open Space Needs and Costs, 1989-2010 . . . . .. 60
Estimated User Fee Increases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 65
...
Local Government in the San Diego Region, Operating, Capital,
and Total Expenditures by Type of Agency, Fiscal Year 1988-89 70
.,
Local Government in the San Diego Region, Operating, Capital,
and Total Expenditures by Public SelVice Category, Fiscal Year
1988-89 .................................... 71
,
""!
ix
)1/-1/
...
j:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Table 4-3 Local Government in the San Diego Region, Total Revenues
by Source, Fiscal Year 1988-89 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 73
x
/ L/ - ),A
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTRODUCTION!
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
/1~/}
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INTRODUCTION/EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The San Diego region and other major metropolitan areas across the nation are
experiencing difficulties in maintaining their existing infrastructure and in providing for
the infrastructure needs of a growing population.
During the past ten years, the San Diego region has experienced a high rate of growth
resulting in the need for a variety of additional local and regional public facilities. The
amount of money available to provide these facilities has not, however, kept pace with the
need for them. In fact, in some instances, there is a shortfall. Current revenues are not
adequate to achieve the perceived expectations of the populace, nor are they adequate to
meet the operating and maintenance and capital needs of the region. This lack of adequate
revenue is caused by several factors. State and federal assistance has been generally static
(or has actually declined in some instances), additional responsibilities have been mandated
with little or no fmancial support, costs have increased, and the two-thirds vote required
by Proposition 13 has virtually eliminated the ability to raise most types of taxes. As a
result of Proposition 13, the San Diego region has also been the victim of an unfair
allocation of state funds, an inequity that is being addressed in the courts.
Re~ional Public Facilities Are Needed to Manage Growth. Too
To serve new growth many local jurisdictions have adopted development impact fees to
provide local-serving public facilities such as libraries, parks, local roads, and fire stations.
However, the fast-paced growth of the San Diego region has resulted in the need for new
and expanded regional facilities as well. Accordingly, this plan is intended to put the
financing of regional public facilities on a more equal footing with local facilities.
The importance of regional facilities was recognized by the decision to prepare a Regional
Public Facilities Financing Plan. The purpose of the plan is to determine if more money
is needed to pay for regional public facilities, and if so, to recommend funding sources.
Although the study indicates that additional revenue is needed, the task of recommending
how much and how it should be raised is far from easy. Potential sources such as new
taxes are unpopular with businesses and residents alike, and regional development impact
fees are not favored by business or the development community . Yet if additional
revenue(s) to pay for our regional facility needs are not found, the levels of service will
decline (though by what amount may be arguable). This report describes procedures the
region should use to determine when and how to raise revenues.
3
jtf)tf
\>
-
What Are Regional Public Facilities?
~.
The residents of the San Diego region depend on a variety of region-serving public
facilities as they go about their day-to-day lives. Although often taken for granted, many
of these regional facilities help meet basic needs for water, sewage treatment, and solid
waste disposal, thus ensuring our health, safety, and welfare. Other needed regional
facilities include the transportation system, justice facilities, and regional parks and open
space. Freeways, arterials, and transit systems provide mobility and facilitate economic
opportunity. Courts and jails help protect lives and property. The regional parks and
open space system provide areas for recreation, agriculture, and habitat conservation.
These facilities and others like them are provided by a variety of government agencies.
Without them the region would not be able to function; and if not adequately funded the
region's quality of life will suffer.
-
J
-
-
....
A Financinl! Plan Will Help Achieve the Goals of the Rel!ional Growth Manal!ement
Strategy
""I
"
This plan is the public facilities fmancing element of the Regional Growth Management
Strategy. The goal of the Strategy is to preserve or improve the region's quality of life
with respect to nine factors: air quality, transportation/congestion management, water,
sewage treatment, open space protection and sensitive lands preservation, solid waste
management, hazardous waste management, housing, and economic prosperity. A plan
to fmance the public facilities associated with these factors is needed to accomplish this
goal. As stated above, regional public facilities are important to the quality of life, and
to keep pace with growth, a way must be found to pay for them.
""\
i
,
,
""\
..,
What the Financing Plan Includes
"'I
The Regional Public Facilities Financing Plan includes:
...
i
.
A survey of thirteen regional public facilities which describes current funding
sources and fmancing methods, capital and operating and maintenance costs to 2010,
and a forecast of unfunded capital costs;
"'I
.
A summary of existing and potential funding sources and fmancing methods for the
thirteen regional public facilities; and
...
t
.
Recommendations regarding the most feasible funding/fmancing methods for each
public facility, and where appropriate, a discussion of related implementation issues.
"'I
Oril!ins of the Study and Who's Involved
""\
The recommendation to prepare a Regional Public Facilities Financing Plan was included
in the Regional Governmental Responsibilities and Revenues report of June, 1987. That
report recommended the reappointment of the Advisory Committee to study issues related
to the provision of regional public facilities. The Regional Public Facilities Financing Plan
.,
"'I
4 /'
/Ll)3
-
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Advisory Committee included staff from the cities, the County, LAFCO, County Water
Authority, the San Diego Unified School District, the San Diego County Office of
Education, and representatives of the League of Women Voters, San Diego Taxpayers
Association, and San Diego State University.
In May, 1990, the original committee was succeeded by the appointment of the Regional
Revenues Advisory Committee by the SANDAG Board. The Regional Revenues Advisory
Committee is made up of five city councilmembers and two County Supervisors; it also
includes staff members from local jurisdictions and agencies, and representatives of the
business community.
The Regional Revenues Advisory Committee has grappled over the past two years with
one of the region's most difficult growth management issues -- how to pay for the regional
facilities needed to accommodate growth. They have reviewed a large body of complex
information regarding the costs and funding options for regional facilities and have made
recommendations on how to pay for them.
Preliminary Committee Findinl!s and Conclusions
The reports reviewed by the Regional Revenues Advisory Committee during its tenure
describe the thirteen regional public facilities, fmancing and funding sources, local
government expenditures and revenues, and analyze impact fees and their effects on the
economy and housing affordability. (These reports can be obtained from SANDAG and
are listed in Appendix 1.) The Committee's Findings and Conclusions summarize this
information. Its Recommendations which describe the basic directions the region could
take in paying for regional facilities follow the Findings and Conclusions.
1. The Regional Revenues study addresses region-serving public facilities. It defmes
regional facilities as: water, sewerage, solid waste, energy, hazardous waste,
transportation, justice facilities, regional parks/open space, health, libraries, animal
control, social services, and fire communications.
2. Local government in the San Diego region spends a sizable amount of money each
year on both facilities and services. During the most recent year for which complete
data are available, 1988-89, local agencies spent nearly $4.9 billion. This includes
cities and the County, school districts, special districts, redevelopment agencies,
transit operators, and others. Expenditures per household by all of these agencies
were about $5,500, or about $2,000 per person.
Operating and maintenance costs of $4.19 billion comprised about 86% oftotallocal
agencies' expenditures for public services. The remainder, $666 million, was spent
on capital costs of facilities.
If school expenditures are deleted (school facilities are not included in this study),
total local government expenditures in 1988-89 were $3.2 billion. Operating and
5
JLj-)t
-
maintenance costs of $2.63 billion comprised about 82% of the total, and capital
costs equaled $583 million. (Table 4-2)
..,
3. Government's provision of public facilities to accommodate growth and the existing
population is essential to the region's quality of life. The provision of these public
facilities is accomplished by the transfer of money from the private sector to the
public sector through taxes and fees. This transfer of money may impact the
economy and may reduce housing affordability. On the other hand, a lack of
facilities may also have economic impacts.
..,
"""
..
'l
A community (or region) must determine an appropriate balance between the area's
economy and the need for governmental revenues.
..,
4. The state plays a significant role in fInancing local facilities. Since 1980,
California's voters have approved almost $13 billion in state bonds for local projects,
including water, sewer, schools, open space, and transportation. Other state funds
are used to pay for health, social services, judicial facilities, and schools. However,
state funding has been inadequate to keep up with the demands of an increasing
population. Also, San Diego County has not received its proportionate share of
funding from the state, an issue that is being pursued in court by the County.
..,
""I
1
..,
5. The residents of the region, through their various tax payments (including sales tax)
plus user charges and fees contribute to the capital funding of most basic facilities,
including water, sewage treatment, solid waste management, and transportation.
""I
~
6. Nevertheless, as determined to date, current and forecasted revenues for regional
facilities are less than the forecasted costs for their provision.
..,
The projected capital cost of those regional facilities with projected funding shortfalls
not paid by user charges will total $12.9 billion over the period 1989-2010. The
regional facilities included in this group are transportation, justice facilities, regional
parks/open space (including shoreline preservation), health, and social services. The
average annual cost, including $149.3 million yearly to improve service levels for
justice facilities, regional parks/open space (shoreline preservation) and health,
would be $614.9 million. The average annual cost would be $465.6 million to
merely maintain current service levels.
-
l
""l
'l;
,
,
,
Revenues contributed by taxpayers in the San Diego region ($111.3 million)
combined with anticipated state and federal funds ($135.9 million), will pay for
about $247.2 million of this total each year, leaving an annual unfunded amount of
$218.4 million -- assuming only maintenance of current service levels, or $367.7
million if the region decides to improve service levels for justice facilities, regional
parks/open space (shoreline preservation), and health. (Tables 1 and 2)
""l
-1
.
""l
1
"'I
,
;I
..,
6
/i -/7
.,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
7. Operating and maintenance costs are a bigger problem than capital costs, particularly
for regional services provided by County government, such as justice facilities,
health, and social services.
In 1989, the County spent $900.9 million on operating and maintenance costs for
justice facilities, health, and social services, and only $46.8 million for capital costs.
If additional money is invested to fund the projected shortfalls in capital facilities,
an increase in operating and maintenance costs would also occur.
8. Operating and maintenance as well as capital costs also are expected to rise for those
regional facilities and services fmanced by user fees.
For example, user charges for the period 1989-2010 for regional water, sewage
treatment, and solid waste disposal services are projected to increase from $547.5
million ($231 per capita) in 1989 to an average of $1 billion per year ($329 per
capita). The average annual increases projected are: $24 million for water, $217.0
million for sewage treatment and $265.4 million for solid waste disposal. These
figures do not include costs for local water, sewer, and solid waste collection
services which are also expected to increase signficantly. (Table 3-1)
9. A coordinated approach is essential to achieve an effective and equitable fmancing
strategy. Local and regional revenue programs should be compatible and
complementary with each other, and with state and federal revenues. A
comprehensive and fair approach should be used in raising new revenues for regional
public facilities.
10. Revenue sources available to local governments in California include these general
categories: grants and subventions, exactions (such as development impact fees),
charges for current services (or user charges), fees (such as fees for permits), taxes
(such as property and sales taxes which can be used for general governmental
purposes and to retire revenue and general obligation bonds), and contributions.
11. The expenditure of public revenues for facilities is undertaken as a benefit to the
entire community. To justify any new or increased tax, fee, or other source of
revenue, local governments must assure that they have evaluated all possible revenue
sources and that people who are paying for local government expenditures are
getting what they pay for.
12. A fair allocation of public facilities costs is a necessary step toward achieving
agreement on raising taxes, fees, or other exactions.
13. In the San Diego region, allocating public facilities costs between the existing
population and future population is an important issue.
7
/'-I-/~
""'!
14. Local jurisdictions assess development impact fees to pay for some of the capital
costs of public facilities needed to serve new residential, commercial, and industrial
uses.
...,
""'!
15. Regionwide, development impact fees represent about 6% of total local government
expenditures ($4.9 billion in 1988/89) and 30-50% of the revenues generated to pay
for the capital costs ($666 million in 1988/89) of public facilities. Other revenue
sources, mostly general and special taxes, pay for the remainder of these capital
costs. If school expenditures are deleted, development impact fees represent about
9 percent of the total expenditures, and about 50% of the capital expenditures.
(1lables 4-2 and 4-3)
""'!
....
""'!
16. The allocation of the unfunded regional costs for transportation, justice facilities,
regional parks/open space, health, and social services, based on the nexus
requirements of Government Code Section 66000, results in an average annual cost
of $218.4 million for the future population and an average annual cost of $149.3
million for the existing population. The recommendation section of the report
suggests alternative ways of allocating the total unfunded costs between existing and
future population. (1lable 3)
.."
....
,
Preliminary Committee Recommendations
...
I
1. Five of the thirteen regional facilities studied -- water, sewerage, solid waste,
energy, and hazardous waste -- will be financed by increases in charges for current
services (user charges), capacity and hookup fees for new development, and private
investment. These charges and fees may be substantial. As presented in Conclusion
No.8, charges for regional water, sewage and solid waste service could increase
from $547.5 million to $1 billion per year over the next 20 years. Shortfalls in
funding these facilities could occur depending on the ability of responsible agencies
to increase charges and fees.
""I
I
I
.,
.,
There are eight kinds of regional facilities with current and projected capital facility
revenue shortfalls. 1lwo of these facilities -- libraries and animal control -- were
determined to be more local or subregional in nature. The revenue needs and
coordination of these facilities are best addressed at the local level. No
recommendations are made in this report for regional fire communications facilities.
...
~.
""'!
"
1lhis report focuses on the remaining five regional facilities -- transportation, justice
facilities, regional parks/open space, health, and social services. These facilities
require money from other sources such as taxes, fees, exactions, or additional
state/federal funding. Identifying funding sources for a portion of the unfunded
capital costs of these five facilities is the main objective of this study.
.,
,
"
....
l
.
2. Any recommendation to increase taxes, exactions, fees, or other government
revenues for regional facilities which results from this project should consider the
proposal's impacts on population, employment and unemployment, personal and
.,
I
"'"
;\
8 Jt/~//
..,
f
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
household income, housing affordability, and operations and maintenance costs. The
quality of life impacts of reduced service levels which would result if the increase
is not implemented also should be considered.
3.
Conclusion No. 12 notes the importance of a fair allocation of public facilities costs
between the existing population and future population. Toward that end, three
conceptual funding allocations are presented for consideration. These alternatives
can be used to help set the amount the existing and future population should
contribute to funding the shortfall in revenues for regional facilities. The allocations
are based on three different, but valid ways of allocating the unfunded transportation
costs between existing and future population. The other unfunded costs (justice
facilities, regional parks/open space, health, and social services) are kept constant.
The average annual cost to maintain existing levels of service for transportation,
justice facilities, regional parks/open space, health, and social services is $218.4
million. Assuming the region elects to improve current levels of service for justice
facilities, regional parks/open space, and health, the average annual cost would be
$367.7 million ($218.4 million plus $149.3 million) (see Conclusion #6 above).
The three potential allocations are shown in the following table and present a range
of options for the Board to consider.
TIlREE POTENTIAL CAPITAL COST ALLOCATIONS
BETWEEN TIlE EXISTING POPULATION AND Future population
($ Millions)
Full Cost Marginal ADT Cost Total ADT Cost
Existing Future Existing Future Existing Future
PODulation PODulation PODulation PODulation PODulation PODulation
Transportation $ 0 $ 190.5 $ 29.9 $ 160.6 $ 149.2 $ 41.3
Justice Facilities 143.0 8.8 143.0 8.8 143.0 8.8
Parks/Open Space 3.7 14.4 3.7 14.4 3.7 14.4
Health 2.6 3.5 2.6 3.5 2.6 3.5
Social Services 0 1.2 0 1.2 0 1.2
Total $ 149.3 $ 218.4 $ 179.2 $ 188.5 $ 298.5 $ 69.2
Percent of Total 40.6 59.4 48.7 51.3 81.2 18.8
Percent of Trans-
portation Costs 0 100.0 15.7 84.3 78.3 21.7
4.
Presented below is a recommended approach to deciding if revenues should be
increased for regional facilities. The current study has completed all of the steps
described below except items "e" and "g."
9
I L/ c20
...
a. Periodically update the projected capital and operating and maintenance costs
of regional facilities. (This report is the first such "update".) Detennine if the
current tax and fee burden, projected over the next five years, would pay for
the capital and operating and maintenance costs for regional facilities.
Calculate the amount of the shortfall, if any, that exists or is projected over the
next five years.
""'I
.,
..,
b. Establish priorities among those regional facilities with projected funding
shortfalls that have no identified source of fmancing. (This report identifies,
without priorities, transportation, justice facilities, regional parks/open space,
health, and social services.)
-
..,
c. Set the existing population's additional share of regional facilities costs.
As reported in recommendation no. 3, above, the
existing population's share of regional facilities costs
could be set at one of three levels ($149.3, $179.2 or
$298.5 million per year). As an example, decision-
makers could propose that the existing population's
share be reduced, and set at the amount equal to the
revenue generated annually by a one-half cent increase
in the sales tax, or about $100 million. This would
represent a portion of the total annual cost identified
for the existing population (approximately two-thirds,
55 percent, or one-third, respectively).
.,
...
-
,
d. Set the future population's share of regional facilities costs.
Continuing with the example in c., above: the future
population's share of the average annual cost of
regional facilities respectively, could be set at one of
three levels ($218.4, $188.5 or $69.2 million per
year). Approximately, two-thirds, 55 percent, or one-
third of those amounts would represent an equitable
contribution proportionate to the contribution proposed
for the existing population ($145, $103, or $23 million
per year).
.,
.,
}
.,
..,
,
e. Implement recommendation no. 2, above, by evaluating the impact of
increasing revenues on population, employment and unemployment, personal
and household income, housing affordability, and operations and maintenance
costs; also evaluate the effects on service levels and regional quality of life
standards of not increasing revenues, and of phasing the imposition of revenue
increases. Modify this step to account for the quality of life objectives in the
Economic Prosperity element of the Regional Growth Management Strategy,
when completed.
""'I
\
.....
I
.
1
10 Ji -,) l
....
\
,
-
.
..~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f. Evaluate all possible revenue sources for both existing and future population
(from Conclusion no. 11).
g. Recommend to all affected agencies the proposed revenue sources for paying,
respectively, both the existing and future population's shares of regional
facilities costs.
5.
Two potential approaches to raising revenue for regional facilities are described
below.
a. The study suggests that a tax increase would be one way to fund the existing
population's share of regional facilities. (A list of steps that would need to be
taken to pursue a tax increase is presented in the report.)
b. Regional impact fees were also analyzed in various ways during this study.
The Advisory Committee authorized a detailed description of how a regional
fee program could work.
A regional development impact fee program can' be implemented by:
negotiation of a master agreement among the cities and the County that
establishes uniform application of a fee program; designation of responsibility
for administration of the fee program; and adoption of an ordinance/resolution
by each city and the County to impose the fee using each jurisdiction's police
powers. (A complete list of steps for a regional program is presented in the
report).
11
/1/ -d-d--
/~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DESCRIPTION OF
REGIONAL PUBLIC FACILITIES AND
PROJECTED CAPITAL COSTS
FOR 1989-2010
) L/'eJ- )
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DESCRIYflON OF REGIONAL PUBLIC FACILITIES
AND PROJECTED CAPITAL COSTS FOR 1989-20101
This plan looks at the funding needs for thirteen regional public facilities. A list of these
facilities with a brief description, and a table with their capital costs from 1989 to 2010
follows. Appendix 2 includes more detailed descriptions of the facilities and their costs.
1. Water - Water distribution to various retailers in the region by the County Water
Authority (CWA).
2. Sewerage - Sewage treatment and water reclamation provided by the four major
treatment systems: San Diego's Metro system, Oceanside, Encina, and San Elijo.
3. Solid Waste - Solid waste disposal facilities provided by the City of San Diego and
the County.
4. Energy - Natural gas and electricity provided by San Diego Gas and Electric
Company.
5. Hazardous Waste - Disposal facilities for hazardous waste provided primarily by the
private sector.
6. Transportation - Highways, transit, and significant regional arterials.
7. Justice Facilities - Countywide courts and jails provided by the County of San Diego.
8. Regional Parks/Open Space - Regionally significant open space includes recreation
areas such as beaches and regional parks; and sensitive lands such as steep slopes,
wetlands, and floodplains, among others.
9. Health - The County Department of Health Services provides services such as
physical and mental health care, drug and alcohol abuse prevention, and restaurant
kitchen inspection, among others.
10. Libraries - Eight library systems operate within the region, including the Cities of
San Diego, Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Escondido, National City, Oceanside,
and the County of San Diego.
lExcept where noted (e.g., Table I, p. 21) costs shown in this section are capital costs.
15
/1~d-i
-
11. Animal Control - Control of the local animal population through regulatory and
medical services to ensure the protection and health of animals and people is
provided by the County's Animal Control Department to ten cities, and by the Cities
of Chula Vista, Coronado, El Cajon, and Escondido.
""1\
-
12. Social Services - Social service programs are provided by the County of San Diego
to assist the indigent, disabled, and elderly in staying or becoming self-sufficient.
,
13. Fire Communication - The provision offrre protection and emergency services in the
unincorporated areas of the County requires the installation of a new 800 megahertz
communications system.
'"
The total operating and maintenance and capital costs forecast by the respective provider
agencies for the thirteen regional public facilities for the period 1989-2010, is $51,326.7
billion as shown in Table 1. Table 1 also indicates annual average capital costs which
total $1,037.4 billion. These costs vary in their accuracy by facility type. For example,
the transportation, water, and justice facility costs are more accurate because they are
taken from detailed capital improvement programs or master plans.
...
...
,
...
,
'"
Overall, the capital costs are more accurate than the operating and maintenance costs. In
most cases the operating and maintenance costs were taken from existing budgets and
inflated over the study period, they are not based on the proposed capital improvements.
..,
~
This plan focuses on the funding needs, or unfunded capital costs of five of the thirteen
regional public facilities: transportation, justice facilities, regional parks/open space,
health, and social services. For the purposes of this study, costs for water, sewer, and
solid waste are assumed to be funded by user charges, standby charges, and connection
fees; and energy and hazardous waste facilities are assumed to be funded primarily by
private investment. Significant increases in charges and fees for the cost of regional
water, sewer, and solid waste facilities are anticipated to rise from $547.5 million in 1989,
to an average of over $1 billion a year during the period 1989-2010. Based on a
population of 3.2 million in 2010 the resulting annual per capita cost would be $329. The
estimated increases in service charges and fees relate to the cost of regional facilities and
do not reflect cost increases for local water, sewer and solid waste collection services
which will also occur over the next twenty years. The estimates of the increases for the
regional portion of these facilities are contained in Appendix 3. Shortfalls in funding these
facilities could occur based on the ability of the responsible agencies to increase charges
and fees.
1
I
..,
.
.
.,
.
..,
~
.
"'\
1
Eight of the remaining regional facilities are projected to have capital facility revenue
shortfalls over the period 1989-2010. Two of these facilities -- libraries, animal control-
- were determined to be more local or subregional in nature. With respect to libraries and
animal control, although the County provides facilities for some cities in addition to the
unincorporated area, a number of the cities provide their own facilities. Because these
facilities do not serve the region as a whole, their revenue needs and coordination are best
addressed at the local level. For example, the County is considering impact fees for
animal control and library facilities in the unincorporated areas.
""!
,
,
4
.,
4
j
..,
16 ~
J t/ ().;
.
...
~
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 1
CUMULATIVE COSTS OF TIllRTEEN
REGIONAL PUBliC FACiliTIES AND SERVICES (1989-2010i
(Capital Costs Only in 1989 Dollars - $ Millions)
Operations/ Capital Costs Annual
Maintenance of New Average
Costs Facilities Total Costs Capital
Facility Type 1989-2010 1989-2010 1989-2010 ~
Water $ 382 $ 678 $ 1,060 $ 32.3
Sewerage 1,804 3,3743 5,178 160.5
Solid Waste 5,554 558 6,112 26.6
Energy 1,908 3,990 5,898 190.0
Hazardous Waste N/A N/A N/A N/A
Libraries 833 239 1,072 11.4
Animal Control 146 20.5 166.5 1.0
Fire Communications N/A 14.8 14.8 .7
Transportation 6,165 8,930 15,095 425.2
Justice Facilities 5,110 3,357 8,467 159.9
Regional Parks/Open Space -- 2 408.9 408.9 19.5
Health 7,638 192.3 7,830.3 9.1
Social Services -- 2 24.2 24.2 1.2
TOTALS $29,540 $21,786.7 $51,326.7 $1,037.4
1.
These costs do not include all costs from 1989 to 2010. For example, some agencies only
projected capital costs to 1994, or to 1999. Operations and maintenance costs (O&M) are
projected with inflation rates to 2010 where data were available. Often O&M costs reflect
simply the current O&M costs inflated 5 or 6 percent per year without increases assumed
for new capital facilities. More detailed information for each facility/service cost is
provided in Appendix 2.
2.
An estimate of operating and maintenance costs for social services and regional parks/open
space will be added.
3.
This estimated capital cost for sewer facilities includes the cost of "alternative 4A"
contained in the Metropolitan Sewerage System Facilities Plan.
17
J~d-?
-
....
The 800 megahertz fire communication system proposed by the County would serve the
unincoI]lOrated area and fire protection districts. No recommendations are made regarding
funding for fire communications.
""
The remaining five regional facilities -- transportation, justice facilities, regional
parks/open space, health, and social services -- are regional in nature and have been
determined to need additional funding from sources such as taxes, fees, exactions, or
additional state or federal funding. Identifying funding sources for a portion of the
unfunded capital costs of these facilities is the main objective of this study.
....
.
...
+
...
I
...,
.,
1
1
,
..,
'~
.,
;
.
...,
j
.
.,
,
..,
,
.
,
.,
j
.,
]
1
,';
18
li--). 7
...
,
1
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ALLOCATION OF COSTS FOR
TRANSPORTATION, JUSTICE FACILITIES,
REGIONAL PARKS/OPEN SPACE, HEALTH,
AND SOCIAL SERVICES
/t-/'d-lf
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
ALLOCATION OF COSTS FOR TRANSPORTATION,
JUSTICE FACILITIES, REGIONAL PARKS/OPEN SPACE,
HEALTH, AND SOCIAL SERVICESl
The projected capital cost of regional facilities with projected funding shortfalls not paid
for by user charges or private investment will total $12.9 billion dollars over the period
1989-2010. The regional facilities included in this group are transportation, justice
facilities, regional parks/open space, health, and social services. Their average annual cost
is $614.9 million.
As shown in Table 2, revenues contributed by taxpayers in the San Diego region ($111.3
million), combined with anticipated state and federal funds ($135.9 million) will contribute
$247.2 million annually toward the funding of regional facilities. Regional development
impact fees and new taxes are candidates for funding the remaining $367.7 million in
unfunded facility costs ($7.72 billion from 1989-2010).
Table 2
TOTAL FUNDING NEEDS FOR REGIONAL FACiliTIES
LESS FEDERAUSTATE & LOCAL REVENUE
1989-2010
($ Millions)
Annual Averages
Less: Total Less: Additional
Facility Total Cost Fed/State Funds Local Cost Local Revenue" Local Cost
Transportation $ 425.2 $ 133.4 $ 291.8 $ 101.3 $ 190.5
Justice Facilities 159.9 1.1.... 158.8 7.0 151.8
Parks/Open Space 19.5 1.4...... 18.1 N/A 18.1
Health 9.1 ~- 9.1 3.0 6.1
Social Services 1.2 ~- 1.2 ~- 1.2
Total $ 614.9 $ 135.9 $ 479.0 $ 111.3 $ 367.7
.. TransNet, taxes, and court fine revenue FY89.
.... Reflects annual average for $22.6 million received by the County in 1990 under the State Bond
Correctional Facility Construction program.
...... Reflects annual average for $29.6 million that the County expects to receive under Proposition 70.
Source: SANDAG Agends Report RB-29, Nov. 22, 1991, Attachment 2.
1 All costs shown in this section are capital costs.
21
/i~;L I
Conclusion No. 12 in the Introduction/Executive Summary notes the importance of a fair
allocation of public facilities costs between the existing population and future population.
Towards that end, three conceptual methods of allocating the remaining average annual
shortfall of $367.7 million are presented for consideration in Table 3. These alternatives
can be used to help set the amount the existing and future population should contribute
toward the unfunded regional facility costs. The allocations are based on three different,
but valid, ways of allocating the unfunded transportation costs between existing and future
population and are described beginning on page 24.
The other unfunded costs (justice facilities, regional parks/open space, health, and social
services) are kept constant. These costs are kept constant because, although there may be
other ways they could be allocated, it was felt that the allocation method currently used
is appropriate, i.e., the future population is held responsible for the cost of maintaining
the existing level of service.
Table 3
THREE POTENTIAL CAPITAL COST ALLOCATIONS
BETWEEN THE EXISTING POPULATION AND FUTURE POPULATION
($ Millions)
Full Cost Marginal ADT Cost Total ADT Cost
Existing Future Existing Future Existing Future
Poculation Poculation Poculation Poculation Poculation Poculation
Transportation $ 0.0 $ 190.5 $ 29.9 $ 160.6 $ 149.2 $ 41.3
Justice Facilities 143.0 8.8 143.0 8.8 143.0 8.8
ParkslOpen Space 3.7 14.4 3.7 14.4 3.7 14.4
Health 2.6 3.5 2.6 3.5 2.6 3.5
Social Services 0.0 1.2 0.0 1.2 0.0 1.2
Total $ 149.3 $ 218.4 $ 179.2 $ 188.5 $ 298.5 $ 69.2
Percent of Total 40.6 59.4 48.7 51.3 81.2 18.8
Percent of Trans-
portation Costs 0.0 100.0 15.7 84.3 78.3 21.7
These allocations present a range of options for the Board to consider in determining whether to
raise revenues, and represent a fair allocation of the costs between existing and future population.
22
Itj-- 5 t/
-
....
-
~
""'l
""!
'""l
,
j,
'.
.,
..,
...
-
,
""I
'\
"'"
,
,
.,
.,
j
...,
.
"
""
i
"'\
....
!
j
...
\
4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
The following principles and the nexus requirements in Government Code Section 66000
were used to allocate the unfunded costs. Additional infonnation regarding how the costs
for each of the five facilities were derived and allocated is provided in the next section,
with more detail in Appendix 2.
1. Costs Related to Maintaininl!: Current Service Levels. For facility improvements that
would maintain current service levels, costs are allocated to future population, or
they are allocated on the basis of the future population's pro rata share of the cost
of facilities needed to serve both it and the existing population.
2. Costs Related to Improvinl!: Current Service Levels. The cost of facility
improvements that would improve the existing level of service region-wide, or would
correct existing deficiencies, is allocated to the existing population.
3. "Fair Share" Credit for Future Non-Local Funding. Anticipated state/federal
funding for regional facilities is credited to both the existing population and the
future population. The credits are in proportion to the impact that each would have
on the total cost of each regional facility.
4. Credit for Existini Fundinl!: Effort. The estimated share of total local costs
attributable to the existing population is reduced by. the amount of local revenue that
the existing population currently contributes annually to the funding of regional
facilities. The annual contributions are based on 1989 revenue amounts as shown
in Table 2.
The population and employment figures used to detennine costs in this report are
shown in Table 4. It is important to note that they are based on the Series 7
Regional Growth Forecast and will need to be updated when Series 8 is adopted.
The costs for transportation, justice facilities, health, and social services are based
on the residential and employment population, while the costs for regional
parks/open space are based solely on the residential population. This allocation of
costs is made to reflect the use of these facilities and impacts on them caused by
residents and employees.
Table 4
SERIES 7 GROW1H FORECAST - POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT
19901 WQ Chanl!:e
Residential Population 2,375,200 3,154,490 779,290
Employment 1.026.700 1.464.094 437.394
Totals 3,401,900 4,618,584 1,216,684
11990 population is taken from the Series 7 Demographic and Economic Forecasting
Model
23
/'1~] J
-
Transportation
""I
The funding needs of the transportation system -- highways, regionally significant arterials,
and transit -- are based on the Regional Transportation Plan. The total cost of the system
from 1989-2010 is estimated at $8.93 billion, or an annual average of $425.2 million.
Over half of this cost is projected to be funded from federal, state and local revenues. In
1989, local funding for regional transportation projects totaled $69.4 million, of which
$63.8 million was TransNet money. The half-cent sales tax that supports TransNet will
expire no later than 2008, two years prior to the end of the study period. State and federal
contributions for regional transportation projects are projected to total $133.4 million a
year, and projected additional TransNet receipts of $31.9 million a year result in an annual
average unfunded cost of $190.5 million ($4.0 billion from 1989-2010) as shown in
Table 5.
....
~.
.,
...
I
.,
It should be noted that a decline in the level of service on the region's highways and
arterials would be expected to occur even if funding for the total $8.93 billion system was
available. To improve, or even maintain, the region's existing level of service additional
funds would be required (though the cost to do this has not been determined).
....
.,
...
,
Table 5
ANNUAL AVERAGE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COSTS
($ Millions)
,
~,t
..,
,
Annual Average Total Cost
$425.2
Less Federal/State Funds
-133.4
291.8
.,
j
l
Total Local Cost
...
1
R
Less Local Revenue
-10 1.3
.,
Additional Local Cost
$ 190.5
.,
~
j
Three methods of allocating the $190.5 million average annual shortfall ($4.0 billion for
the 1989-2010 study period) have been proposed and are described below.
.,
>
1. Full Cost Allocation
.,
In the first method shown in Table 3, the entire unfunded cost for transportation was
allocated to the future population. This allocation was made based on the fact that
24
.,
I
/t// J2
...
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
despite the projected expenditure of $8.93 billion for regional transportation projects
and optimistic transit and trip reduction assumptions, the total number of highway
and arterial miles operating at Level of Service (LOS) C or better during the peak
hour will decline from 68 percent in 1986, to 59 percent in 2010. This is a thirteen
percent decrease in LOS.
The assignment of the total shortfall to the future population is justified based on the
assumption that the existing LOS could be maintained by relying on existing sources
of revenue such as TransNet (minus future population's contribution) and increased
participation in trip reduction programs if there were no increase in population. The
existing LOS could be maintained despite the increase in trips projected to result
from the existing population. Stated in another way, the existing population could
maintain existing levels of service based on its contributions to TransNet, and other
funding sources, e.g., state and federal funds remaining constant.
Because the Committee recognizes that assigning the total $4 billion shortfall to the future
population is not a viable alternative, two other methods of allocation are proposed below
for consideration.
2. Marginal Cost Allocation
The second method of allocation (see second set of columns in Table 3) divides the
unfunded cost of regional transportation facilities between the existing and future
population based on their percentage of the increase in total average daily trips
(ADT) in the San Diego region from 1990-2010. Table 6 indicates a projected
increase in ADT generated by the existing population of 642,083 and a projected
increase in ADT generated by the future population of 3,455,098. The total increase
in trips projected over the study period is 4,097,181. The existing population will
generate 15.7% of the total increase in trips, while the future population will
generate 84.3%.
A cost allocation based on these percentages would result in an additional local cost
of $29.9 million for the existing population, and $160.6 million for the future
population.
25
/'-/-3)
...
Table 6
'""
MARGINAL COST ALLOCATION
-
,
ADT
ADT Percent Cost
ADT ADT Increase Increase Allocation
l22Q lli.Q 1990-2010 1990-2010 ($ Millions)
Existing
Population 5,917,281 6,559,364 642,083 15.7 $ 29.9
Future
Population 0 3,455,098 3,455,098 84.3 $ 160.6
Total 5,917,281 10,014,462 4,097,181 100.0 $ 190.5
...
ii
...
...
.
-
.,
3. Total Average Daily Trip (AnT) Cost Allocation
...
~
'[
The third method of allocation (see third set of columns in Table 3) divides the
unfunded cost of regional transportation projects between the existing and future
population on the basis of their respective impacts on total average daily trips (ADT)
in the San Diego region. In 1990, the region's residential population and work force
generated 5.9 million ADT, according to SANDAG's Regional Traffic Model. The
trips generated by this same population will increase by approximately 16 percent
by the year 2010. The future population will generate an extra 3.5 million trips by
2010.
40
~
;
..,
',;
1-'
,
,
.~
During the period 1990-2010, total ADT in the region will average almost 8.0
million, of which an estimated 78.3 percent will be generated by the existing
population and 21.7 percent will be generated by the future population. In other
words, near the turn of the century, an estimated 78.3 percent of total users of the
regional transportation system will be existing residents and employees, while 21.7
percent will be future residents and employees. These rates of use would apply to
the entire transportation system, including existing and new facilities. The allocation
of total transportation costs based on these percentage shares of ADT is shown in
Table 7. The additional local cost allocated to the existing population is $149.2
million per year, compared to $41.3 million allocated to the future population.
...
,
""\
'"'I
i
';;
.,
,
(
...
26
/ 'I ~ J 1-1
""!
,
I
..
l
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 7
TOTAL AVERAGE DAILY TRIP (ADT) COST ALLOCATION
Average Percent Cost
ADT ADT ADT of Total Allocation
1990 2010 1990-2010 ADT ($ Millions)
Existing
Population 5,917,281 6,559,364 6,238,323 78.3 $ 149.2
Future
Population 0 3,455,098 1,727,549 21.7 $ 41.3
Total 5,917,281 10,014,462 7,965,872 100.0 $ 190.5
The percentage contribution of the future population to total ADT in the region will
be small in the near term, and over the study period, will reach a maximum of 34.5
percent in 2010. A cost allocation based on 34.5 percent instead of 21.7 percent
would raise future population's cost share from $41.3 million to $65.7 million
annually, and accordingly, would reduce existing population's allocated cost from
$149.2 million to $124.8 million per year.
Justice Facilities
The impact of the future population on justice facility capital costs is estimated to be $8.8
million per year. This estimate is based on the extension of the current level of service
to the future population and current construction costs for three components of the justice
system: adult jail space, juvenile detention facilities, and court facilities. The cost
estimates and forecasting methodology are documented in Appendix 2.
The remainder of justice facility costs are related to correcting deficiencies in the existing
system. Cost estimates are based on the County Master Plan for Justice Facilities.
Funding of the plan was largely predicated on revenue from the half-cent sales tax recently
struck down by the state Supreme Court. (Unlike other costs shown in this report, the
portion of justice facility costs allocated to the existing population to correct deficiencies
were inflated based on the County's Master Plan.) The allocation for the justice facility
costs between existing and future population is shown in Table 8.
27 /'
)II- J ;;
~
-
Table 8
JUSTICE FACILITY COST ALLOCATION
ANNUAL AVERAGE COST, 1989-2010
($ Millions)
Existing Future
Cost Allocation Population Pooulation Total
Total Cost to Improve
Current Service Level $ 151.0 $ -0- $ 151.0
Total Cost to Maintain
Current Service Level -0- 8.9 8.9
TOTAL COST $ 151.0 $ 8.9 $ 159.9
Percent of Total 94.4 5.6
Credit for State/Fed. Funds -1.0 -0.1 -1.1
Total Local Cost $ 150.0 $ 8.8 $ 158.8
Credit for Existing
Funding Effort -7.0 -0- -7.0
ADDmONAL LOCAL COST $ 143.0 $ 8.8 $ 151.8
...,
,
"'"
'\
....
""'l
,
i
...
-
,
.....
1
~
....
,
-
"'"
Sources:
~.
1. Board of Directors Agenda Report RB-4, SANDAG, April 27, 1990.
2. County of San Dieeo Master Plan for Justice Facilities, County of San Diego.
~
\'\
,
""\
Regional Parks/Open Space
..,
SANDAG's Definition of Regionally Significant Open Space establishes 200 acres as a
minimum size for regional parks except for specific unique sites of historic, geographic,
or recreational interest. The 200 acre minimum allows room for 50 usable acres for at
least two recreational activities and additional open space for buffering, access, and visual
openness.
..,
f..,
"'\
28
....
j
I
/'I~ J ?-
..
\
,
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
l
The total cost of providing future regional parks/open space is $408.9 million over the
study period, or an annual average of $19.5 million. The cost includes $303.9 million (an
annual average of $14.5 million) to maintain the existing park standards and service levels
for the future population based on existing acreage and facilities. These costs do not
include the fiscal impact of removing lands from the property tax rolls. These costs would
be estimated if revenues are increased to pay for regional parks and open space.
It also includes $105 million for shoreline preservation. This amount was allocated to both
the existing and future population based on their share of the 2010 residential population:
2,375,200 or 75 percent for the existing population, and 779,290 or 25 percent for the
future population. An annual average of $3.7 million of the shoreline costs was allocated
to improve levels of service for the existing population, while an annual average of $1.3
million was allocated to maintaining the level of service for the future population. The
entire amount of state funding, $1.4 million per year ($29.6 million over the study period),
was credited to the future population because that money is for regional parks and open
space, not shoreline preservation.
The cost estimates and forecasting and allocation methodologies for regional parks/open
space are documented in Appendix 2.
Health and Social Services Facilities
The County of San Diego provides a diversity of health services throughout the region
including clinics, out-patient offices, and residential and hospital facilities. The annual
average projected capital cost to improve current service levels and extend service to the
future population is estimated at $9.2 million per year ($192.3 million from 1989-2010).
According to the County Department of Health Services it needs approximately 394,000
square feet of additional space to serve the existing population. Based on a land
acquisition/ construction cost of $300 per square foot, the total cost allocated to the existing
population is $118.2 million over the study period, or an annual average of $5.6 million.
The current inventory of County owned space is 691,198 square feet, or 203 square feet
per thousand service population based on a population of 3.4 million. An additional
246,987 square feet will be required to serve the projected increase in service population
of 1.22 million. Based on a land acquisition/construction cost of $300 per square foot, the
total cost attributable to the future population would be $74.1 million over the study
period, or an annual average of $3.5 million.
The cost allocated to existing population is reduced to $2.6 after a reduction is made for
an existing funding effort of $3.0 million per year. No credit for state/federal funding is
given because non-local funding of capital costs is not anticipated.
The County Department of Social Services provides programs to assist the indigent,
disabled, and elderly. Their facility needs are estimated to cost $1.2 million per year, or
$24.2 million over the study period. The entire cost is related to extending current service
levels to the future population. As in the case of health facilities, the estimated capital
29
Itj~ 37
-
cost for social services is based on a continuance of the current ratio of square footage to
population using a current cost estimate of $300 per square foot. An additional cost for
vehicle replacement is also included. The Department of Social Services has not provided
a cost estimate for improving current service levels; therefore, no cost is attributed to the
existing population. It is likely, however, that there is a need to improve service levels
for the existing population. This information will be added when it is available. The
existing service levels are based on 221,743 square feet of owned space, and 67 vehicles
whose replacement value is $15,000 each. Private social services are not included in these
calculations.
"'!
....
'"!
...
.
Health and social services facilities provide benefits to both existing and future population.
All of the region's residents derive general social benefits from the County's welfare
service, and some, who are not in need now, may require welfare assistance in the future.
A number of health services are used by many County residents regardless of personal
income or health insurance coverage (e.g., immunizations, AIDS testing, and alcohol
treatment programs). As with social services, historical trends indicate that over time,
some affluent residents will require public and/or mental health services.
...
.
"'"
...
The County's existing level of service (a ratio of the current square footage of facilities
divided by the existing service population) is used to derme the facilities needed to serve
the future population.
~
,
"
.,
if
.,
.
,
.
~
I
""
I
.,
,
.
-
\
.,
;l
30
)<-l3r
..,
1
,
j
I
I
I
,
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RECOMMENDED APPROACH TO DETERMINING
IF REVENUES SHOULD BE INCREASED FOR
TRANSPORTATION, JUSTICE FACILITIES,
REGIONAL PARKS/OPEN SPACE, HEALTH,
AND SOCIAL SERVICES
1'1- Ji
~
/
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
RECOMMENDED APPROACH TO DETERMINING IF
REVENUES SHOULD BE INCREASED FOR
TRANSPORTATION, JUSTICE FACILITIES,
REGIONAL PARKS/OPEN SPACE, HEALTH,
AND SOCIAL SERVICES
A recommended approach to deciding if revenues should be increased for regional facilities
follows. The current study has completed all of the steps described below except items
"elf and IIg. If
a. Periodically update the projected capital and operating and maintenance costs of
regional facilities. This report is the first such projection of these costs.
b. Establish priorities among those regional facilities with projected funding shortfalls
that have no identified source of fmancing. This study has identified five such
regional public facilities, transportation, justice facilities, regional parks/open space,
health and social services. Priorities among these facilities have not been set.
c. Set existing population's additional share of regional facility costs. Three
alternative methods of allocating costs to the existing population are shown in
Table 3. Existing population's share could be set at one of three levels ($149.3,
$174.2 or $298.3 million per year). As an example, decision-makers could propose
that existing population's share be reduced, and set at the amount equal to the
revenue generated annually by a one-half cent increase in sales tax, or about $100
million ($2.1 billion from 1989-2010). This would represent a portion of the total
annual cost identified for the existing population. (Approximately two-thirds, 55
percent, or one-third, respectively.)
d. Set future population's share of regional facilities costs. Continuing with the
example in c. above: the future population's share of the average annual cost of
regional facilities could be set at one of three levels ($218.4, $188.5, or $69.2
million per year). Approximately two-thirds, 55 percent, or one-third of those
amounts, respectively, would represent an equitable contribution proportionate to the
contribution proposed for the existing population ($145, $103, or $23 million per
year).
e. Evaluate the impact of increasing revenues on population, employment and
unemployment, personal and household income, housing affordability, and operations
33
jt/./YC
'",'
-
and maintenance costs; also evaluate the effects on service levels of not increasing
revenues. Modify this step to account for the quality of life objectives in the
Economic Prosperity element of the Regional Growth Management Strategy, when
completed.
-
i
oj
,
-
I
f. Evaluate all possible revenue sources for both existing and future population. See
Appendix 5 for Survey of Funding Sources for Regional Public Facilities.
"'!'
g. Recommend to all affected agencies the revenue sources to be proposed to the region
for paying, respectively, the existing and future population's share of regional public
facilities.
-
""
...
"'ll
....
....
;!i
~
,
.,
.
.
<i
;
.
...
-
1
j
.,
,
J
"'l
I
34
J tj~L/ /
~
,
,
..
~
.
I
t
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RECOMMENDED APPROACHES TO
INCREASET AXES OR IMPLEMENT A
REGIONAL IMPACT FEE PROGRAM
) z!~J/ eA
I
I
I
t
l
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
I
I
I
I
RECOMMENDED APPROACHES TO
INCREASE TAXES OR IMPLEMENT A
REGIONAL IMPACT FEE PROGRAM
Approach to Implement a Tax Increase
A tax increase is one potential way of paying for the existing population's share of
regional facilities. Implementation of a tax increase would entail a number of steps, the
last of which would be the placement of a proposal on a county-wide ballot. Prior to that
action, the following steps should be taken.
a. The existing population's share of regional facility costs should be determined.
b. A decision should be made regarding the facilities to be funded by a tax increase.
c. A proposed amount to be generated should be set and an evaluation of that amount
on population, employment and unemployment, personal and household income, and
housing affordability would need to be undertaken. An analysis of the effect of
building new facilities on operations and maintenance costs and the effects on service
levels of not increasing taxes should also be done.
d. The timing of placing the measure on the ballot should be coordinated with other
regional and local agencies who might be considering a tax increase.
e. The vote on the ballot measure should also be timed to coincide with an election that
ensures the fairest response to the proposal.
Approach to Implement a Regional Impact Fee Program
Implementation Responsibilities and Leial Authority
The implementation of a regional development impact fee program would involve a
carefully crafted legal structure and a significant amount of administrative coordination and
policy review. The agency (or agencies) responsible for implementation would have four
sets of tasks:
a. structuring the legal authority to collect fees inside cities and unincorporated areas;
37
jL-/-t}}
-
b. oversight of the collection of fees, compilation of administrative guidelines, and
development of an appeals process;
..,
,<~
c. annual updates of the fee program (Le., revised facility costs), capital improvement
program preparation requirements; and,
..,
d. setting funding priorities for new facilities.
...
j
In general tenus, there are three alternative methods of assigning responsibility for the
four implementation tasks. SANDAG could be given authority over all four tasks.
Alternatively, the County could administer the fee through master agreements with each
city (similar to the method cities use to collect impact fees for school districts). Another
alternative would require the County and each city to adopt their own ordinance/resolution
and incorporate regional fees as their own.
...,
I
.
...
,
,
,
All three of these methods could accomplish the four sets of tasks.
.,
I
I
Structurin~ the Legal Authority to Collect Fees
..,
,j.
SANDAG, as a joint powers entity, may be given any authority possessed by its member
agencies. Thus, in theory, SANDAG could be given the authority to administer an impact
fee program on behalf of all of the cities and the County. The member agencies, of
course, would have to decide to assign SANDAG some specific responsibilities. These
are described below.
..,
,~
~
,
..,
,
.
The most likely legal structure would involve each city and the County passing an
ordinance to adopt the regional fee program as their own. This city/county ordinance
structure has the following characteristics:
,
i
,
.
Each jurisdiction retains complete control over its participation in the fee program.
Although other structures could incorporate veto powers for each participating
jurisdiction, this structure recognizes each jurisdiction's police powers as the sole
authority to collect fees within its boundaries.
.,
j
.
...
I
ij
.
The program of projects recommended for funding must be analyzed to ensure that
it meets the requirements of state law, particularly the relationship (or nexus)
between project benefits and financial contributions. This issue is soluble, but, in
any jurisdiction, over any specific period of time, the perceived benefits of the
regional facilities fmanced by fees might not equal the money generated by the
program.
'..,.
L
J
"'I
I
j
.
The ordinances adopted by the cities and County must be substantively and
procedurally similar, if not identical. Key issues include exemptions and local
defmition of the "pipeline" of projects.
.,
J
.,
I
I
....
38 ) i-t/i/
~
;
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
. Revisions, updates, and modifications to local ordinances also require two public
hearings and the nonnal 6O-day waiting period. The waiting period can be reduced
by using a resolution to set the fee amount. However, most jurisdictions set fees by
ordinance.
The tasks that should be perfonned to begin a regional fee program are summarized
below.
. The cities and County must agree on policies that:
assure unifonn application of the fee program, including primarily exemptions
and the "pipeline" of eligible development;
detennine the linkage between the fee program and adherence by the local
jurisdictions to regional policies (e.g., Regional Transportation Plan, Regional
Growth Management Strategy);
. Finalize and approve the list of regional facilities to be financed with fee revenues
along with their estimated costs;
. Designate the agency(ies) to be given the authority to collect the fees and administer
the program;
. Draft a master ordinance for the cities and the County to implement the fee program
using each jurisdiction's police powers;
. Carry out a public involvement program to allow interested parties to comment on
each of these tasks.
Fee Collection and Oversil!ht Rei\POnsibilities
This second set of tasks involves specifying the actual collection process. Collection
should probably be done at the time a building pennit is issued, and -- if at all possible -
- the jurisdiction issuing the pennit should collect the money. Local governments make
a considerable effort to provide one-stop pennitting and this principle should be reinforced
with the regional program. (Most cities, for example, collect fees for school districts.)
The alternative method would involve collecting fees at a central location or designating
sub-regional locations. Some school districts, for example, require developers to pay them
directly and then show proof of payment to the city or county before the building pennit .
is issued.
Minimizing inconsistencies, training of staff, and establishing an appeals process are also
important. These measures are described below.
39 /
P/A/3
-
.
Prepare an administrative guidelines manual that will help building department
personnel consistently apply the regional fee to specific land use applications.
Update the manual as needed as the County and the cities encounter special cases
and the appeals process resolves conflicts.
-
,
...
.
Assign and train staff for oversight responsibilities. These duties will include
responding to inquiries for information, managing the appeals process, updating the
documentation, revising the administrative guidelines manual, managing accounts for
fee revenues, and training city and County personnel in fee collection procedures.
""
1
,
J
..,
.
Instruct city and County building department personnel in the application of the
regional fees to specific land use, the appeals process, and use of the administrative
guidelines.
""
1
.
Design an appeals process that will assure consistent interpretations of the fee's
application and similar resolution of analogous complaints.
.,
Oversight responsibilities could be allocated to more than one agency. For example,
SANDAG could take responsibility for the collection of transportation fees and the County
could oversee the other four regional facilities.
...
i
I
j
Annual Fee Updates and Periodic Revisions
.,
The regional fees would be calculated in current dollars; thus, each year some adjustment
would need to be made for inflation in construction costs. The adjustments are usually
made with a construction cost inflation factor (Le., the Engineering New Record publishes
an index). Some facility cost estimates, however, have large land cost components and
may require separating the building and improvement costs from the amount needed to
purchase land.
.,
i
.~
~
,
,
I
While adjustments for inflation are straight-forward, other adjustments would be more
complex. For example, the total cost attributed to future population for transportation is
affected by future state money (Proposition 111) and federal funding assistance and
dedicated revenues from local sales tax measures (TransNet). The amount of revenues that
would actually be provided in the future will differ substantially from the current estimates
resulting in the need to recalculate the fee amount.
..
y
.
....
...,
SANDAG could take responsibility for the annual updates to transportation facilities, and
the County or SANDAG could update the cost estimates for the other four facility types
(Le., justice facilities, regional parks and open space, health, and social services facilities).
Some form of the current SANDAG Regional Revenues Advisory Committee would
probably need to be established to review all cost estimates.
-
1
,
,
<<\
40
JV- 1-/ ~
....
j
)
...
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
j
I
I
t
I
Fundini Priorities and Timine
Establishing the order in which the specified facilities and improvements will be funded
would also need to be agreed upon. Because all jurisdictions will be participating in the
collection of regional impact fees, SANDAG should recommend a cooperative approach
for setting funding priorities.
41
/~l.L/7
~
:01
I
-
I
,
I
I
I
f
I
f
t
I
I
.~.
I
I
'I
I
,I
APPENDIX 1
LIST OF REPORTS
Jt//~/r
I
I
I
I
I
I
.1
,
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX 1
LIST OF REPORTS
1.
San Diego Region Local Government Expenditures and Revenues Fiscal Year
1988-89, A Compilation of Regional Expenditures by Agency Type & Public SelVice
and Regional Revenues by Major Source, April, 1991, Kenneth D. Fabricatore.
2.
San Diego Region Funding and Cost Allocation for Regional Public Facilities
1989-2010, March, 1992, Kenneth D. Fabricatore.
3.
Regional Public Facilities Financing Plan: Progress Report, SANDAG Board of
Directors Report R-8.
4.
Regional Public Facilities Financing Plan: A. Progress Report #2, B. Appointment
of Regional Impact Fee Advisory Committee to Discuss Policy and Economic Impact
Issues, SANDAG Board of Directors Report RB-4.
5.
Draft Report: Effects of Development Impact Fees on the San Diego Economy,
Housing Prices and Affordability, San Diego Association of Governments, February,
1991.
6.
Regional Governmental Responsibilities and Revenues, San Diego Association of
Governments, Revised June, 1987.
7.
Miscellaneous Reports Contained in the Regional Revenues Advisory Committee
Agenda Packets.
45
/ t/ ~ l-/ I
/
, .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX 2
DESCRIPTION OF THIRTEEN REGIONAL
PUBLIC FACILITIES, PROJECTED
COSTS, AND FUNDING SOURCES
I tj./ /,e;O
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX 2
DESCRIPTION OF THIRTEEN REGIONAL
PUBLIC FACILITIES, PROJECTED
COSTS, AND FUNDING SOURCES
The information in this appendix provides documentation for the operating and
maintenance and capital costs contained in Table 1 of the report. The accuracy of these
data varies by facility type. Some agencies have prepared detailed master plans or capital
improvement programs which provide good cost information, while for other agencies the
projected costs are based on maintaining the existing level of service (Le., square footage
of facilities) for projected growth. The capital costs are generally more accurate than the
operating and maintenance costs. The operating and maintenance costs are typically based
on current budgets inflated over the timeframe of the study period. Descriptions of the
County facilities were taken from the Public Facilities Element of the General Plan.
WATER
Description
The San Diego County Water Authority (CW A) is the major water supplier in the San
Diego region. The CW A provides 90 percent of the water consumed in San Diego
County. The agency's service area encompasses 907,634 acres and includes approximately
2.25 million people or about 97 percent of the county's population. The CW A is made
up of 25 member agencies, consisting of six cities, 17 special districts, Camp Pendleton,
and the County of San Diego, an ex-officio member. It is a member agency of the
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) which supplies an average of
90 percent of the CW A's water. This water comes from the State Water Project and the
Colorado River. As a member agency of MWD, the CW A currently takes about 30
percent of the total supply available to MWD. Under legal agreements between the
agencies, however, CW A has a right to only about 11 percent.
Proiected Costs and Fundin!!: Sources
Rapid growth within the Water Authority's service area has resulted in increased water
demand. Projections indicate that demand will increase more than 30 percent by 2010.
To meet that demand the CW A has pursued comprehensive management and expansion
of distribution and storage facilities. Their capital improvement program includes the
extension and construction of new pipelines and the enhancement of storage capacity. The
49
)L-/~ ;;/
\./
...
...
cost of the capital improvement program through 2000 is $678 million. The funding
sources for these costs include user fees, connection fees, and capacity charges. The
operations and maintenance costs are projected to total $382 million through the year
2010. This cost is based on inflating the 1989/90 operations and maintenance costs by 7
percent per year. These costs will be funded by user fees.
.,
"'I
For the purposes of this study it is assumed that the costs of the County Water Authority
are fully funded. This assumption is based on the ability of the CW A to raise needed
funds by raising user and connection fees and capacity charges.
.,
SEWAGE TREAlMENT AND DISPOSAUW ASTEW ATER RECLAMATION
Description
i
.
Sewage collection and treatment service is provided by 38 different agencies throughout
the urbanized areas of the region. Historically, additional service agencies have been
created as the need arises. The largest agency by far is the San Diego Metropolitan
Sewerage System (Metro) which currently serves more than seventy percent of the region's
population through 16 member agencies plus the U.S. Naval Air Station and Amphibious
Base (NAS Coronado). The Metro system operates the region's largest sewage treatment
plant, located at Point Lorna. The plant has an ocean outfall extending two miles out into
the Pacific Ocean. The daily flow at the plant in FY 1987/88 was about 182 million
gallons per day (mgd).
.....
""
"'I
!
..~
....
Three other agencies operate treatment plants with ocean outfalls: Oceanside, Encina, and
San Elijo. They have a combined capacity of 69 mgd.
""\
Proiected Costs and Fundine Sources
The capital costs projected for the Metro system include $2.8 billion for secondary
treatment and water reclamation facilities. (This cost represents alternative 4A in the
Metropolitan Sewerage System Facilities Plan.) Other Metro system capital costs through
1993/94 total $252 million for replacement, repair, betterment, and expansion projects for
the existing system. (The cost of lines to distribute the reclaimed water to individual
parcels is not included.) For the purposes of this study, it is assumed that the capital costs
for the Metro system will be fully funded by increases in user fees and capacity (developer
fee) charges.
,
"'"
t
..
J
.
The City of Oceanside Water Utilities Department projects $104 million for wastewater
service area improvements for existing and future population through the year 2010. Sixty
million dollars in wastewater reclamation costs are projected to serve the existing
population.
""I
,
1
..,
The Encina Water Pollution Control Facility projects $132 million in capital costs through
2009. This includes $114 million for Encina-Only Solids Management and $18 million
for facilities replacement.
.,
50
)tj~.5~
"'I
"
,
...
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The San Elijo Joint Powers Authority capital improvements program includes a $23.4
million Water Pollution Control Facility and a $3 million Outfall Expansion project (not
yet approved). The total capital facility costs planned for San Elijo are $26.4 million
through 1992.
Like the Metro system, it is assumed that the costs for the facilities for the three agencies
discussed above will be funded by user fees and connection/capacity charges.
The operating and maintenance costs for these agencies is projected to total $1,804 billion
over the study period 1989-2010. This cost is based on inflating the 1989/90 operations
and maintenance costs by 6 percent per year.
SOUD WASTE
The City of San Diego and County of San Diego are the two agencies responsible for solid
waste disposal facilities in the region. The County owns five sanitary landfills which are
operated by private contractors. It has approved the construction of a solid waste recovery
plant at the San Marcos landfill which could be in operation during the 1990's. The City
of San Diego owns and operates two landfills. The remaining cumulative capacity of the
existing landfills is eight years.
Solid waste collection in the San Diego region is provided by a number of private
operators under franchises with various cities and the County. The City of San Diego
provides its own solid waste collection.
New solid waste disposal facilities and recycling programs will be needed before 2005 to
provide additional capacity for the region. In addition to recycling programs being
implemented to reduce solid waste disposal needs (as mandated by State law), the City of
San Diego and the County are exploring alternative solid waste processing and disposal
technologies and new landfill sites.
Projected Costs and Fundini Sources
The $558 million in capital costs projected for solid waste includes both city and County
facilities. Countywide composting facilities are projected to cost $58.8 million;
Countywide recycling facilities $114.75 million; County landfills (over the next 10 years)
$300.91 million; and a City landfill $83.05 million. These costs do not include the costs
associated with debt fmancing or landfill closures.
Operating and maintenance costs of $5.554 billion include the costs for solid waste
collection and disposal throughout the region on a cost per ton basis. This cost was
inflated over the 21-year study period.
The operating and maintenance and capital costs for new landfill disposal sites and closures
will be funded by user charges, i.e., refuse disposal fees.
51
J~-5}
...
...
ENERGY
Reliable energy supplies and manageable energy costs are crucial to the region's economy
and quality of life. Energy, along with water, is a basic commodity which the region must
have to support growth and development. The region's energy supply infrastructure will
have to be significantly expanded in order to meet growth expected by 2010. The need
for new infrastructure will be particularly critical in meeting the growing demand for peak
electric supply (highest instantaneous demand for electricity, usually on a hot summer
afternoon).
...
....
-
The San Diego region is unique in California from an energy perspective. It will be the
only part of the state to require major peak electric energy supplies to meet the needs of
forecasted population and employment growth. The region needs to add over 1,600
megawatts of peak electric power to its system between 1986 and 2005. 970 megawatts
of this total are currently unplanned. The most likely sources of new supplies are
conservation and independent power projects (such as cogeneration) and utility purchases
of out-of-area power. Current trends in state and federal regulatory policy and the realities
of new power plant construction in the Southwest may result in problems for all of these
supply sources.
""I
.,
...
Proiected Costs and Fundinl! Sources
-
The capital costs of energy infrastructure needs projected in the region between 1986 and
2005 are about $3.99 billion. As with water and sewage treatment, energy infrastructure
is paid for directly by users through utility bills and connection fees. Conservation and
small power production facility investments by residents and businesses are the most cost-
effective supply sources, and the major sources of new energy supply in the region.
Increased reliance on these sources would lower the costs of energy infrastructure in the
future. Operating and maintenance costs are projected at $1. 908 billion.
..,
..,
1
1
II"!
HAZARDOUS WASTE
-
Hazardous waste is any waste material that has the potential to damage human health or
the environment. A vast array of consumer goods such as televisions, computers,
automobiles, and medicines generate hazardous waste. Hazardous waste may be toxic,
corrosive, reactive, and/or flammable. The San Diego County Hazardous Waste
Management Plan is the primary planning document for the management of the County's
hazardous waste. The plan establishes programs to manage hazardous waste safely and
is the guide for local decisions regarding hazardous waste issues. Historically, the
majority of hazardous waste generated in San Diego County has been disposed of directly
in land disposal facilities. In 1986, State Senate Bill 1500 was passed banning untreated
hazardous waste from landfills as of May 8, 1990. The management of hazardous waste
follows a hierarchy of preferred alternatives: fIrst, source reduction; second, recycling,
recovery and reuse; and third, treatment of the waste.
"'"
,
""!
...
.,
...
52
)I/~ 5 i
...
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Caoital Costs and Funding Sources
Current and future hazardous waste facility needs are identified in the County's Hazardous
Waste Management Plan. These facilities will be provided and funded primarily by the
private sector.
LIBRARIES
Libraries playa key role in educating and distributing information to the general public,
and often provide a focal point for community awareness. The region's libraries provide
reference and readers' advisory services consisting of books, magazines, newspapers,
government documents, large print books, art prints, audio and video cassettes, and l6mm
films. There are eight separate library systems in the San Diego region. The County of
San Diego operates thirty-one branch libraries, thirteen of which are operated within
eleven incorporated cities. The City of San Diego has a central library and operates thirty-
one branches. In addition, the cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Escondido,
National City, and Oceanside operate their own library systems. Only Carlsbad has a
branch library in addition to its main facility. All ofthese eight library systems maintain
their own service standards, and thus have varying levels of service. A regional aspect
of all eight systems is membership in the Serra Cooperative Library System, which
provides access to library materials for all systems throughout the region.
Capital Costs and Funding Sources
All of the library systems in the region have plans to expand to varying degrees depending
on their projected population growth, service standards, and funding availability. In
general, the region's libraries have had to make do with fewer dollars allocated to their
operations and maintenance budgets, while capital budgets have been severely cut or
e1iminated. The general fund and development impact fees are currently the major funding
sources for capital facilities.
The total costs projected for the eight library systems from 1989-2010 include $239 million
for capital projects and $833 million for operating and maintenance. The cost of a new
central library for the City of San Diego is included.
ANIMAL CONTROL
Description
State law mandates that each jurisdiction provide for the control of the local animal
population through regulatory and medical services designed to ensure the protection and
health of animals and people. This is accomplished through the following types of
programs: emergency care for injured animals, surveillance for rabies and quarantine of
biting animals, investigation and prosecution of anti-cruelty laws, control of vicious or
stray animals, licensing of dogs, adoption services, spay/neuter referral and information
53 //
)tj//0/
-
...
programs, public education and information programs, inspection and licensing of private
kennels, and humane disposal of old, injured, and unwanted animals.
-
The San Diego County Department of Animal Control provides the services listed above
to both the unincorporated area, and, by contract, to ten cities: Carlsbad, Del Mar,
Encinitas, Lemon Grove, Poway, San Diego, San Marcos, Santee, Solana Beach, and
Vista, and the Port District (approximately 96% of the region). The Department operates
three animal control shelters in Bonita, the Morena area of San Diego, and Carlsbad. The
remaining eight cities provide their own animal control services, or contract with another
city or humane society for services.
'"'l
'"'l
Proiected Costs and Fundine Sources
'"'l
All three County of San Diego animal control facilities are operating above capacity. The
County estimates that over the next 20 years they will need $14 million to fund their
capital needs. The remaining cities estimated $6.5 in capital needs. A total of $146
million in operating and maintenance costs is projected by the cities and County.
...
-
The County of San Diego is considering impact fees to fund some of the capital costs for
animal control.
'"'l
FIRE COMMUNICATIONS
The fIre communicati ms needs for fIre protection districts include the replacement of the
existing communications system with the installation of an 800 megahertz system by the
County of San Diego. The total cost of this system is projected to be $14.8 million.
-
'"'l
No funding sources have been identifIed for the new system. The imposition of an impact
fee was considered but determined infeasible because of equity issues. The proposed
communications system would require the installation of all new equipment, completely
replacing the existing system. Therefore, both the existing and future population should.
help Ilay for the system.
In the future, the 800 megahertz system will have to be expanded to cover newly
developing areas in the County. The County will prepare estimates for costs and the
installation timing for this expansion. Once these estimates are prepared, the
appropriateness of impact fees for a proposed expansion could be reviewed.
..,
-
'"'l
'"'l
TRANSPORTATION
Description
...
The transportation costs for the region are based on the Regional Transportation Plan
(RTP). The RTP was fIrst adopted in 1975, and establishes regional transportation policy
for the San Diego region. The RTP addresses all forms or modes of transportation,
including the automobile, transit, bicycles, intercity railroads, and aviation facilities. It
...
...
54 lJ r//
/7/;::;V
...
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
identifies the facilities and programs which will be needed to meet the increased travel
demand through the year 2010. This demand is increasing as a result of both population
growth and changes in travel patterns.
Projected Costs and Funding Sources
The three components of the regional transportation system included in this study are
highways, transit, and significant regional arterials. The projected total costs for these
facilities is estimated at $8.93 billion. There are a number of funding sources which are
currently available to pay for these facilities, including state and federal funds, TransNet
money (half cent sales tax), and the gas tax money from Propositions 108 and lll.
The total unfunded cost of these facilities is estimated at $4 billion. This unfunded cost
assumes state and federal funds, TransNet, and gas tax funds resulting from the passage
of Propositions 108 and Ill. This report proposes three alternative allocations of the
unfunded cost between existing and future population. Regional impact fees and a tax
increase are two potential ways of generating additional revenues to cover the funding
shortfall.
JUSTICE FACILITIES
Description
The County, as an agent of the State, is mandated by the State Constitution and state laws
to provide adequate court space and detention facilities. The courts, while located and
functioning in each county, are part of the state's court system. Responsibility for the
provision of detention facilities is determined by length of confmement, with County
facilities handling offenders with terms of twelve months or less, and State facilities
housing offenders with longer terms. Federal facilities handle those arraigned or charged
with Federal offenses (e.g., income tax evasion, drug trafficking, illegal entry). County
courts initially process all cases other than federal offenses.
The County of San Diego, acting as an agent of the State, is the agency responsible for
providing Court and Detention facilities for the entire region, including the unincorporated
area and all cities. Eight agencies directly staff court and detention facilities: Superior
Court, four Municipal Courts, the District Attorney, the Public Defender, Revenue and
Recovery, the Marshal, the Sheriff, and the Chief Probation Officer.
Currently there are 13 County operated detention facilities located in the region, with a
rated capacity as of January 1, 1990, of 3,377 beds. Six jails are operated by the Sheriff,
and seven minimum security and juvenile facilities are operated by the Chief Probation
Officer.
In 1989, County courtrooms and hearing rooms were provided in 10 facilities throughout
the County. These facilities typically house both Superior and Municipal Court functions.
55
/'1-57
-
A total of 130 courtrooms and hearing rooms were available in 1989. Court facilities also
include space for court related functions such as judge's offices and clerk's areas.
-
-
Projected Costs and Fundine Sources
Existing detention and court facilities are severely overcrowded, thus resulting in the need
to improve the efficiency of existing facilities (e.g. night court), and to construct new
facilities. To deal with this need, the voters of the County of San Diego approved the
imposition of a countywide half-cent increase in the sales tax to fmance regional justice
facilities and the costs associated with their operation in 1988. As required by Proposition
A, a Master Plan for Justice Facilities was prepared by the County to identify the facility
needs and operations and maintenance costs for the period of the sales tax. The capital
cost of the facilities identified in the Master Plan is $3.357 billion, with operating and
maintenance costs of $5.11 billion.
'"'I
'"'I
'"'I
-
The half-cent sales tax was successfully challenged in court (Rider et. al. v. the San Diego
County Regional Justice Facility Financing Agency and County of San Diego) thus
preventing the Agency's ability to use the funds collected. Because no new source of
funding has been identified, justice facilities are assumed to have a capital facility shortfall
of $151.8 million ($3.19 billion) after anticipated federal, state and local revenues of $8.1
million per year are subtracted.
.,
'""
As a part of this study, the future population's share of the cost to maintain existing levels
of service for regional justice facilities was determined.
'"'I
Three types of facilities comprise the County's justice system: 1) adult jail beds; 2)
juvenile detention, and 3) the court system (Le., the municipal and superior courts,
recorder, probation, district attorney, and public defender). These facilities as a system
provide justice services to all county residents and workers.
""
.,
Both new residents and employees comprise the service population for justice facilities.
To determine the facilities and costs to serve this growth, the following method was used:
'""
1. Quantify facilities + 1990 service population (per 1000) = facility standard/level6f
service (Table 2-1)
""
2. Facility standard/level of service x growth in service population (per 1000) -
number of new units x cost per unit = total cost (Table 2-2)
-
The total cost of providing justice facilities to serve future population at the 1990 levels
of service is $185.8 million. This amount is quite low when compared to the $3.357
billion cost of implementing the County's Master Plan for Justice Facilities. There are,
however, no funds to increase the current level of service (and thus the amount the future
population could be asked to pay) because of the Supreme Court's decision invalidating
the half-cent sales tax. Therefore, if it is decided to use impact fees to pay for justice
facilities, they could only be used to maintain the existing level of service.
.,
'"'I
-
56 /cf-.-5~
.,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I .
I
I
I
Table 2-1
1990 INVENTORY AND LEVELS OF SERVICE FOR
JUSTICE FACILITIES
Facilities
Adult Jail Beds
Juvenile Beds
Court Facilities (Judicial Positions)
Current
InventOlY
Current Levels of
of Service (per 1000)
5,162
219
113
Sources; County of San Diego and Recht Hausrath & Associates
Table 2-2
JUSTICE FACILITY NEEDS AND COSTS
1989 - 2010
Facilities
Adult Jail Beds
Juvenile Beds
Court Facilities (Judicial Positions)
TOTAL
Cost/Unit
(1990 $)
$26,150
90,000
3,535,200
Number of
New Units
1,849
73
37
Sources; County of San Diego and Recht Hausrath & Associates
REGIONAL PARKS/OPEN SPACE
Description
1.52
0.06
0.03
Total Cost
($ Millions)
$48.4
6.6
130.8
$185.8
An update of the Regional Open Space Plan is being prepared by the Regional Open Space
Technical Advisory Committee appointed by the San Diego Association of Governments'
Board of Directors. A definition of regionally significant open space has been prepared
as one of the fIrst steps in the revision of the plan. The definition sets forth four major
components of regionally significant open space, which includes recreational areas as well
as sensitive lands and agricultural areas. The four components are described below:
57
PI- >f
...
1. Region-DefIning Open Space. The major undeveloped areas along the border of San
Diego County defme and separate it from other regions. The fIrst impression upon
entering the San Diego Region should be the feeling of openness and a break in
continuous urbanization.
-
...
2. Natural Resource Conservation Areas. Certain undeveloped areas should be
preserved in their natural state because of their environmental quality or sensitivity
and overall value to the region. These areas include steep slopes, floodplains, and
wetlands. Other resource categories will be added when sufficient information is
developed to identify their locations and extent.
...
...
All jurisdictions in the region should have generally consistent policies for preserving
these natural resources in a coordinated manner. This action will assure that
adequate quantities of diverse habitat types are maintained, and that the plants and
animals found in these habitats are less likely to become endangered.
...
3. Region Serving Open Space. Numerous areas are developed with facilities that serve
the region as unique or outstanding recreational, safety, or managed production
(agriculture, mineral extraction) areas.
.,
...
4. Rural T .:lnds and Greenbelts. Areas outside the identifIed urban area should be
planned to remain in a low intensity, rural land use pattern. These areas provide a
contrast to complete urbanization and result in the visual appearance and feeling of
more openness in the region.
.,
Additionally, corridors of open space within and between communities should be
retained in order to provide identity and a sense of community.
...,
1
,
...
The second step in the Open Space Plan update will be the establishment of criteria to
identify regionally signifIcant open space throughout the San Diego region. One of the
fmal products of the plan will be a map indicating those areas in the region which meet
the defmition and criteria, and should be preserved. Institutional arrangements and
funding will also be addressed in the plan.
...,
...
Capital Costs and Fundinl~ Sources
There have been various estimates made by the City of San Diego and the County
regarding projected open space costs. These costs, however, will need to be revised once
the Regional Open Space Plan has been completed. For the purposes of this report the
cost of maintaining the existing level of service for the future population has been
estimated.
...
,
"'I
SANDAG's Defmition of Regionally SignifIcant Open Space establishes 200 acres as a
minimum size for regional parks except for specifIc unique sites of historic, geographic
or recreational interest. The 200 acre minimum allows room for 50 useable acres for at
least two recreational activities and additional open space for buffering, access, and visual
openness. These regional parks serve all age groups and provide a wide range of
activities.
.,
~
.
...
.,
58
/ 2j ---j> tJ
"'I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Regional park acreage has been divided into Developed and Undeveloped Regional Parks
and Regional Open Space Parks. Regional Open Space Parks are areas of environmental
significance and beauty, the primary purpose of which is to preserve sensitive environ-
mental resources; these parks are intended to have only minimal improvements.
Table 2-3 indicates the number of Undeveloped/Developed Regional Park and Regional
Open Space Park acreage located throughout the County in 1990. It also determines a
standard for park acreage based on the 1990 population (2,375,200), which is expressed
in acres per 1000 population. These figures do not include parks owned and operated by
state and federal agencies.
Table 2-3
1990 INVENTORY AND LEVELS OF SERVICE FOR
REGIONAL PARKS/OPEN SPACE
Relrional Parks/Open Space
Acreaie
Standard
(ner 1000)
Developed/Undeveloped
Regional Parks
Regional Open Space Parks
25,253
13.250
38,503
10.6
..i...Q
16.2
Table 2-4 indicates the acreage needed to serve the region's future population and the cost
of providing that acreage as follows:
1. Park acreage standard x growth in service population (per 1000) = number of acres
to serve growth
2. Number of acres to serve future population x cost per acre = total cost
The cost of providing additional regional parks and open space for the future population
at the same standards enjoyed by the existing population would be $303.9 million. This
cost is based on two components: 1) acquisition of raw land, and 2) development of this
land with the same mix of amenities and facilities found in the County's existing park/open
space system. The costs used were obtained from the County Department of Parks and
Recreation. The County estimates the value of existing regional park land at an average
of $22,690 per acre, and the cost of existing facilities in the County's undeveloped and
developed regional parks (excluding Regional Open Space Parks) at $2,114 per acre. (The
facilities include campsites, picnic areas, play areas, parking areas, restrooms and park
buildings, etc.). Undeveloped and developed park land was estimated at $24,804 per acre
($22,690 + $2,114) and regional open space park land was estimated at $22,690 per acre.
59
)'//~/
...
Table 2-4
""!
REGIONAL PARKS/OPEN SPACE NEEDS AND COSTS
1989 - 2010
.,
Acreage Total Cost ""!
Reiional Parks/Open Space Cost per Acre Needed ($ Millions)
Developed/Undeveloped ""!
,
Regional Parks $ 24,804 8,260 $ 204.9
Regional Open Space Parks 22,690 4,364 99.0
...
TOTAL $ 303.9
-
.
.
As discussed earlier in the report, $105 million in capital costs for shoreline preservation
is also included in the total regional parks/open space costs. This cost was allocated to
both future population ($1.3 million) and the existing population ($3.7 million) based on
their proportional share of the 20 I 0 population forecast.
""I
i
,
The total capital costs for regional parks/open space is, therefore, $408.9 million ($19.5
million annual average cost). This total was reduced by $29.6 million from State
Proposition 70, to $379.3 million or an average annual cost of $18.1 million. Future
population's total average annual share is calculated at $14.4 million; the existing
population's share is $3.7 million.
.,
'"'l
,
,
,
HEALTII
.,
Descriotion
'"'l
1<
I
County health care programs protect and improve the health of San Diego County
residents. Many programs are mandated by federal and state law, while others are
developed locally to meet local health needs. Health care facilities house programs that
prevent disease and health risks, treat existing disease, provide supportive environments
in which individuals may address their problems, and mitigate conditions which are
hazardous to health. Programs carried out from or in these facilities include a wide range
of activities such as immunizations, mental health treatment, drug and alcohol abuse
prevention, nutrition education, AIDS testing, restaurant kitchen inspection, and toxic
spills response.
'"'l
I
I
.,
,
.,
.~
;
The health facilities and programs described above are provided for all residents of the San
Diego region, including both the unincorporated areas and cities, by the County
Department of Health Services. Some of these programs are staffed by the County and
offered in facilities that are either owned or leased by the County. Other programs are
located in facilities that are provided through contracts with private and non-profit
agencies. The County owns and leases a total of 787,700 square feet.
.,
j
i
1
,
'"'l
,
60
,
/t/~v.A
'"'l
,
,t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Projected Costs and Fundini Sources
Some facilities that are owned or leased by the County are overcrowded and in urgent need
of renovation, replacement, or modernization. County health facilities generally have
suffered from lack of money for maintenance, and capacity has not been increased
sufficiently to meet the demands imposed by a growing population.
Due to the lack of funds available to the County to upgrade and expand their services, the
County Department of Health Services has not prepared a long-range capital improvement
program. They estimate, however, that approximately 50% more space is needed to serve
the existing population (394,850 square feet). Based on a land acquisition/construction
cost of $300 per square foot, the existing population would be responsible for $2.6 million
in costs (average annual) after a reduction is made for existing funding efforts ($3.0
million per year based on the budget for FY 1989).
The costs attributed to the future population are based on the County's inventory of owned
facilities (691,198 square feet). The 1990 inventory of 691,198 square feet is divided by
the service population of 3,401,900, which equals 203 square feet per 1000 service
population, or the 1990 level of service. The level of service is multiplied times the
projected growth in service population per 1000 from 1990 to 2010 (1,216,684), which
equals the number of square feet needed to serve the future population, 246,987 square
feet. This number is then multiplied times an estimated cost per square foot of $300
(including land, site preparation, furnishings and equipment) to determine the total cost of
$74.1 million or an average annual cost of $3.5 million. .
SOCIAL SERVICES
Description
The County Department of Social Services provides programs to assist the indigent,
disabled, and elderly. They provide a safety net of last resort to help individuals and
families escape from or remain out of poverty, and to stay, or become self-sustaining. A
number of services are provided to special groups such as the blind, abused children, and
refugees. Social service programs are mandated by state and federal statutes and
regulations and are largely funded from those sources.
Proiected Costs and Fundinl!: Sources
According to the County Department of Social Services, the total square footage of owned
facilities they operate is 221,743 square feet. Leased facilities are not included in the
calculation of a potential impact fee, as explained in the section on Health. The
Department also owns 67 vehicles. The facilities needs projected for the increased growth
in the service population between 1990 and 2010 is based on maintaining the existing level
of service for the 1990 population.
61
JI-I ~ ;; }
...
""I
Using the same methodology that was used for justice facilities and health, the existing
level of service is 65.2 square feet and .02 vehicles per 1000 service population. These
numbers are multiplied times the projected growth in service population per 1000 from
1990 to 2010 (1,216,684), which equals the number of square feet and vehicles needed to
serve new growth: 79,328 square feet and 24.3 vehicles. The number of square feet and
vehicles are then multiplied times an estimated cost per square foot of $300 (including
land, site preparation, furnishings, and equipment) and cost per vehicle of $15,000 to
determine the square footage cost of $23.8 million plus the vehicle cost of $.37 million.
The total cost of maintaining the existing level of service for the future population is $24.2
million or an annual average of $1.2 million.
..,
""I
...
Although no facilities or costs to improve the level of service for the existing population
have been identified, this information will be included when it is available. Operating and
maintenance costs will also be added.
...
~
""I
The report identifies regional impact fees as a potential source for funding the unfunded
capital costs for social services.
...
...
...
.,
""I
...
1
..,
1
,
.,
i
.,
.,
1
j
..,
,
62
"
Ji~~1
""I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX 3
ESTIMATES OF USER FEE INCREASES
RELATED TO REGIONAL FACILITIES
/'
)i / ?J "
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX 3
ESTIMATES OF USER FEE INCREASES
RELATED TO REGIONAL FACILITIES
User charges and fees for water, treatment and solid waste disposal services are projected
to rise from $547.5 million in 1989 to an average of over $1 billion per year during the
period 1989-2010, as indicated below. The estimated increases in service charges and fees
relate to the cost of regional facilities and do not reflect cost increases for local water,
sewer, and solid waste collection services.
Table 3-1
ESTIMATED USER FEE INCREASES
($ Millions)
Actual
1989
Forecast
Annual Average
1989-2010 Increase
Water Service Charges &
Connection Fees
$ 292.8
$ 316.8
$ 24.0
Sewer Service Charges &
Connection Fees
217.0
434.0
217.0
Solid Waste Disposal Fees
37.7
303.1
265.4
Total
$ 547.5
$1,053.9
$ 506.4
In 1989, the County Water Authority's expenses totaled $19.2 million, excluding water
purchases for resale. During 1989-2010, the agency's cost is projected to average $49.0
million/year, including an operating expense of $16.7 million and a capital cost of $32.3
million. The projected annual increase of $29.8 million would cause total water service
costs in the region ($368.3 million in 1989) to rise by 8.1 percent. Based on an equivalent
percentage rise, water service charges and connection fees in the region would rise from
$292.8 million in 1989 to $316.8 million per year over the period 1989-2010.
65
)t/-?v
\
...
In 1989, sewage treatment costs in the region totaled $47.0 million. This cost is projected
to rise to an average of $246.1 million/year over the study period and includes an
operating expense of $85.6 million and a capital cost of $160.5 million. The projected
annual increase of $199.1 million would cause total regional sewerage costs ($198.6
million in 1989) to more than double. Based on a comparable increase, sewer service
charges and connection fees would rise from $217 million in 1989, to $434 million/year
over the study period. Note that in 1989, revenue from sewer charges/fees exceeded
costs, thus adding to reserves.
....
...
....
!
""\
The cost of solid waste disposal in the region totaled $36.2 million in 1989. During 1989-
2010, the cost is projected to average $291.0 million/year, including an operating cost of
$264.5 million and a capital cost of $26.5 million. That would represent a 704 percent
increase in annual costs. Based on an equivalent percentage rise, solid waste disposal fees
would jump from $37.7 million in 1989 to an average of $303.1 million/year over the
period 1989-2010.
....
:~,
I
,~
""\
...
,
....
..,
..,
...
...
...
""\
...
1
""\
66
/'1~~ J
..,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX 4
SAN DIEGO REGION LOCAL GOVERNMENT
EXPENDITURES AND REVENUES
FOR FISCAL YEAR 1988/89
TOTAL EXPENDITURES AND REVENUES
Ji ---~ ~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX 4
SAN DIEGO REGION LOCAL GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES
AND REVENUES FOR FISCAL YEAR 1988/89
TOTAL EXPENDITURES AND REVENUES
In analyzing the cost projections and revenue needs for regional public facilities for the
time period of 1989 to 2010, the study looked at local government expenditures in the
most recent year for which information was available, fiscal year 1988-89. This
information helps put the projected expenditures for regional facilities into a context of
current expenditures and revenues and suggests options for funding these facilities in the
future.
Local government in San Diego county spends a sizable amount of money each year.
During fiscal year 1988-89, nearly $4.9 billion was spent by local agencies, including
school districts, cities, county government, special districts, redevelopment agencies,
transit operators, and other agencies. Revenues during the same time period exceeded
expenditures by $198 million, thus adding to reserves and fund balances. On an average
basis, expenditures per household in the region were $5,540, or approximately $2000 per
capita.
Expenditures by A~ency 1Jpe
Operating and maintenance costs accounted for 86 percent of total local government
expenditures at $4,191 million, while capital costs (for equipment, land and construction)
accounted for 14 percent at $666 million as indicated in Table 4-1. Cities spent the most
on capital facilities with expenditures of $264 million, accounting for 40 percent of the
total capital expenditures in the region.
Exoenditures by Public Service Cate~ory
Table 4-2 indicates operating and maintenance, capital and total expenditures by service
type for 1988-89. Aside from education, the County's public assistance programs had the
highest total expenditures of the local government services listed. The County of San
Diego spent $515 million on various public assistance programs, including social services,
welfare, and general relief. Police, fire, and emergency services cost $396.8 million,
followed by water utilities ($368.3 million) and transportation operations and facilities
($310.6 million).
69
JLI ~j, /
..
....
Table 4-1
LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN TIIE SAN DIEGO REGION
OPERATING, CAPITAL, AND TOTAL EXPENDITURES
BY TYPE OF AGENCY
FISCAL YEAR 1988-89 ($ Millions)
.,
....
Operating Capital Percent of
Agency 1J!>e Expenditures Outlays TOTAL* Total
School Districts $ 1,559 $ 83 $ 1,642 34%
Cities 1,025 264 1,289 27
County Government** 1,200 56 1,256 26
Special Districts
& Agencies*** 278 178 456 9
Redevelopment 41 72 113 2
Transit Operators 88 13 101 2
TOTAL $ 4,191 $ 666 $ 4,857 100%
Percent 86% 14% 100%
*Total expenditures exclude local inter-agency transactions and internal service
funds. See Appendix for details.
**Includes Airport and Solid Waste Disposal Enterprise Funds
.,
..
\
J
.,
..,
.
J
.,
I
,
.,
~
.,
I
***Agencies include County Water Authority, San Elijo JPA, Encina Admin.
Agency, Regional Transportation Commission, SANDAG, Regional Employment
Training Consortium, and Serra Library Cooperative; but exclude hospital districts,
housing authorities, and community college districts
,
i
.,
.
'-
.
Sources: Annual Reports 1988-89, Financial Transactions Concerning Cities, School
Districts, Counties, Redevelopment Agencies, Transit Operators, and Special
Districts of California; State Controller.
.,
"
l
.,
1
i
,
i.
.,
70
Jt!-7tJ
J
.,
,
,
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 4-2
LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN THE SAN DIEGO REGION
OPERATING, CAPITAL, AND TOTAL EXPENDITURES
BY PUBUC SERVICE CATEGORY
FISCAL YEAR 1988-89 ($ Millions)
Operating Capital Total Percent of
Public Service Expenditures Outlays Expenditures Total
General Government $ 258.3 $ 14.1 $ 272.4 5.6%
Police, Fire & Emer. Services 381.0 15.8 396.8 8.2
Parks and Recreation 111.0 48.4 159.4 3.3
Libraries 32.3 2.0 34.3 0.7
Community Development &
Redevelopment 187.9 99.8 287.7 5.9
Animal Control 5.2 0.1 5.3 0.1
Waler Utilities 256.8 111.5 368.3 7.6
Sewerage:
Collection 61.7 70.3 132.0 2.7
Treatment 36.5 10.5 47.0 1.0
Subtotal 97.2 80.8 179.0 3.7
Solid Wasle:
Collection 30.4 0.4 30.8 0.6
Disposal 35.4 0.8 36.2 0.7
Subtotal 65.8 1.2 67.0 1.4
Transportation:
Streets & Highways 105.7 68.9 174.6 3.6
Public Transit 93.7 12.7 106.4 2.2
Airports 22.8 6.8 29.6 0.6
Subtotal 222.2 88.4 310.6 6.4
PortlHarbors 35.5 62.7 98.2 2.0
Courts & Jails 222.4 43.6 266.0 5.5
County Health Services 164.7 2.0 166.7 3.4
County Public Assistsnce 513.8 1.2 515.0 10.6
Education--Schools 1,558.9 83.1 1,642.0 33.8
Other Public Services 77.0 10.9 87.9 1.8
TOTAL $4,191.0 $665.6 $4,856.6 100.0%
Sources:
1. Annual Reports 1988-89, Financial Transactions Concerning Cities, School Districts,
Counties, Redevelopment Agencies, Transit Operators, and Special Districts of California;
Slate Controller
2. City of San Diego Annual Budget, Fiscal Year 1991
3. County of San Diego Final Program Budget 1990-91
4. Annual Financial Report and Single Audit Reports, Fiscal Year 1989, San Diego Association
of Governments
71
/tj~ 7/
...
With respect to capital outlays for the regional facilities being studied in this plan, water
facilities were the most expensive item, costing $111.5 million during the fiscal year.
Transportation and sewerage each incurred capital costs in the $80-$90 million range.
Parks and recreation spent $48.4 million and courts and jails $43.6 million. The lowest
capital expenditures for regional facilities were for libraries ($2.0 million), animal control
($0.1 million), solid waste ($1.2 million), health ($2.0 million) and public assistance ($1.2
million).
...
...
i
...
Local Government Revenues
"'I
Direct local sources of local government revenue, as shown in Table 4-3, raised nearly $3
billion in fiscal year 1988-89, accounting for 58.5 percent of total revenues ($5.055
billion). State funding contributed $1. 7 billion, or 33.9 percent of total revenues, while
federal funds added $382 million or 7.6 percent. Over $1.1 billion in state and federal
funds accrued to local school districts.
.,
'"'I
Of the local sources of revenue, the property tax produced the most income -- about $986
million or nearly 20 percent of total local government revenues. Almost $800 million was
received from "charges for current services," which includes water and sewer service
charges, transit passenger fares, zoning/subdivision fees, and many other fees for services
rendered. Charges for current services raised more than twice the amount of money
collected from the local sales and use tax, from which local government received $352
million. (Excluded from this amount is $28 million raised from the 1/2 cent sales tax
allocated to the San Diego Regional Justice Facilities Financing Agency.) Another major
source of local government income was "use of money and property" ($275 million),
which includes interest earnings, rents, property lease income, and concessions.
.,
,
"'I
j
...
.,
.
...
~
:~
.
,
,
'""l
.,
1
'""l
72 li-7eA
j
,
"'I
.
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 4-3
LOCAL GOVERNMENT iN THE SAN DIEGO REGION
TOTAL REVENUES BY SOURCE
FISCAL YEAR 1988-89 ($ Millions)
Revenue Source
Revenue.
Percent of
Th!!!l
Local Sources:
Property Tax..
Charges for Current Services
Sales and Use Tax...
Use of Money & Property
Transient Lodging Tax
Licenses & Permits
Franchise Taxes
Fines & Forfeitures
Real Property Transfer Tax
Business License Tax
Special Benefit Assessments
Other Revenues & Financing Sources
Subtotal
$ 986 19.5%
798 15.8
352 7.0
275 5.4
45 0.9
36 0.7
36 0.7
33 0.6
20 0.4
15 0.3
15 0.3
350 6.9
$ 2,961 58.5
153 3.0
51 1.0
1,009 20.0
499 9.9
$ 1,712 33.9
100 2.0
282 5.6
$ 382 7.6
TOTAL $ 5,055 100.0%
Subtotal
State Funds:
Motor Vehicle In-Lieu Tax
Gasoline Tax
Aid to School Districts
Other Aid, Grants, & In-Lieu Taxes
Subtotal
Federal Funds:
Aid to School Districts
Other Aid & Grants
.Revenues exclude inter-agency transactions (see Appendix)
..lncludes debt service levies and receipt of prior year taxes; excludes taxes allocated to
community colleges ($66 million) and hospital districts ($8 million)
...Excludes $28 million allocated to San Diego Regional Justice Facilities Financing Agency
(Proposition A Justice Facilities Sales Tax)
Sources:
1. Annual Reports 1988-89, Financial Transactions Concerning Cities, School Districts, Counties,
Redevelopment Agencies Transit Operators, and Special Districts of California; California State
Controller
2. Revenue/Ratios Report for Taxing Agencies, FY 1988-89, Auditor & Controller, County of
San Diego
3. State Board of Equalization, Research & Statistics Office
4. Annual Financial Report and Single Audit Reports, Fiscal Year 1989, San Diego Association of
Governments
73
/tj-7}
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX 5
SURVEY OF FUNDING SOURCES
FOR REGIONAL PUBLIC FACILITIES
)lf~ 71
,., '
,^
/
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX 5
SURVEY OF FUNDING SOURCES
FOR REGIONAL PUBLIC FACILITIES
A description of each funding source, the types of facilities for which the source could be
used, the approval process, specific financing mechanisms, advantages and disadvantages
and current use are discussed below. A table listing the regional public facilities included
in this plan, a list of potential funding sources, and possible requirements for legal
authorization and new institutional arrangements that may be necessary is also included in
this Appendix.
A distinction is made between the terms, funding sources, and fmancing mechanisms in
this report. Funding sources are the source of the money used to pay for capital facilities.
Financing mechanisms are the method of payment, e.g., pay as you go, general obligation
bonds, etc. For example, an increase in property taxes to pay for capital facilities would
be categorized as a funding source; general obligation bonds could then be used as the
fmancing mechanism. This distinction can be somewhat confusing as these terms are often
used interchangeably. In addition, Mello-Roos Community Assessment Districts can be
both a funding source or a fmancing mechanism. A Mello-Roos assessment district can
be set up to collect money to fund capital facilities. It can also be used, however, to
fmance the payment of impact fees with bonds which will fund facilities.
Although this distinction in defmitions may appear somewhat confusing; hopefully, it will
enable the decision-makers to focus on the most viable funding sources for fmancing
regional public facilities. The funding sources discussed in the following section include:
1. Development Impact Fees
2. User Charges
3. Standby Charges, Connection Fees, and Capacity Charges
4. Assessment Districts
5. Mello- Roos Community Facilities Districts
6. General Taxes
7. Special Taxes
8. Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing
9. Toll Roads and Value Capture
10. Developer Exactions, Subdivision Ordinance, and Environmental Mitigation
77
1'1-75
\:
..
A. Development Impact Fees
...
1. Description
-
,
Development impact fees are fees charged to new development to pay for the
additional public facilities needed to serve it. Within the San Diego region,
all nineteen of the local jurisdictions now charge development impact fees for
a variety of local facilities. The types of facilities covered and the amounts
charged vary by jurisdiction. Region-wide impact fees for region-serving
public facilities are being considered as a part of the regional fmancing plan.
...,
'""\
California law allows local jurisdictions to charge impact fees to new
development to cover the capital cost of providing the services required by the
future population. Assembly Bill 1600, as codified in General Code 66000 et
seq., and a number of court cases over the last few years, have provided well
. defmed guidelines for impact fees. In general, a direct causal relationship
("nexus") between the new development and the facilities needed must be
demonstrated, and the fees charged must not exceed the cost of the planned
facilities and must be used solely for that purpose.
~
~
J
...
..,
'1
,
The general process for implementing impact fees is as follows:
..,
J
Projection of future population
Analysis of its impacts
...
I
j
Identification of the improvements necessary to mitigate these impacts
'""\
Estimation of the cost of the improvements
..,
+
Design of a mechanism that allocates the cost to new development
equitably (in relation to the impacts)
..
2. Type of Facilities
Impact fees can be charged for a variety of public facilities including: utilities;
transportation improvements such as streets, highways, and transit; parks; open
space; fire stations; libraries; etc. Among the regional public facilities/services
being studied in this plan, impact fees could potentially be used for funding
future population's share of a variety of facilities including transportation
facilities, justice facilities, libraries, public health, regional parks and open
space, and animal control.
,
'""\
..,
,
"
..,
78
11-7;"
..,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.
Ap.proval
Implementation of regional impact fees would require the agreement of all
nineteen jurisdictions in the region. The administration of such a fee could
take several fonns. Fees could be collected by the individual jurisdictions or
by a central agency. The setting of priorities and allocation of the funds as
they are collected would also have to be worked out. These administrative
issues are discussed in more detail in the body of the report.
4.
Financin2 Mechanisms
Impact fees are generally collected at the time building pennits are issued and
are accumulated until sufficient funds are available to build a project.
Impact fees themselves may be fmanced by the creation of a special assessment
district or Mello-Roos district under the sponsorship of a government agency.
Bonds are sold to fmance the impact fees and a tax is levied against real estate
in the district to pay the principal and interest payments. This enables projects
to be built sooner than the pay-as-you go method.
Certificates of Participation (COPs) are another fmancing method applicable
to an impact fee program. The local jurisdiction (e.g., city, county, JPA)
fonns a nonprofit corporation which then builds and leases the facilities to the
local jurisdiction. The nonprofit corporation issues COPs representing a right
to participate in the stream of lease payments made by the local jurisdiction.
The impact fees are then used to fund the lease payments. The local
jurisdiction is committed to make up any shortfall that may occur due to
insufficient impact fees.
5.
Advanta!:es
a. Ease of collection
b. Equitably allocates cost of facilities based on impact (California law,
Government Code 66000 et seq. requires a close nexus between fee
amount and facilities required to serve new development)
c. May improve public's willingness to improve existing facilities because
the future population will be funding its share
d. Higher priority given by some state and federal agencies (e.g., Caltrans,
UMTA) to local jurisdictions with strong local funding sources (e.g.,
sales tax, impact fees, user charges)
e. May be adjusted frequently to reflect new cost estimates, additional
facilities, improved levels of service, and other changes
79
It! ~ 7?
...
f.
No voter approval required
"""
g.
Not affected by Gann limit
'"'"
,
6. Disadvanta2es
...
a.
Can fund only the future population's share of projected needs, and thus
may only cover a small percentage of the total need depending on the
level of development remaining to be built and the level of existing
deficiencies
...
b.
New development may only be charged to maintain existing levels of
service -- if a higher level of service is desired, other funding sources
must be found to correct existing deficiencies
..,
...
;
c.
Pay-as-you-go fmancing of facilities with impact fees may cause long
delays before sufficient funds have accumulated
~
"""
d. Agreement of all nineteen jurisdictions would be required to implement
regional impact fees
...
e. Payment of impact fees cannot reflect the ability to pay, thus a flat rate
fee on a single family home may have a greater impact on the cost of
low-income housing
"'!
~
f. Cannot be used for operating costs, and therefore, might result in
facilities built for which operations and maintenance costs are insufficient
"""
,
,
g. Higher building costs may increase prices to end user/fmal owner; this
might, in turn, diminish competitiveness of business climate, thus
affecting job creation and the region's continued economic growth
.,
h. Potential developer opposition due to high cost of fmancing fees with
construction loans between issuance of a building permit and the sale of
the property
..
;
..,
,
7. Prior Experience
Impact fees have been applied throughout the San Diego region for a variety
of facilities.
...
\
j
8. Conclusion
"""
Impact fees have become the favored method of funding additional facilities in
high growth cities. Despite many of the difficulties posed by regional impact
fees, they are one possible way to ensure the provision of adequate public
,
,
I
...
80
jt/~ 7~
...
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
facilities for the future population in this age of dwindling federal and state
revenue sources. Without regional fees, or increases in other funding sources,
the San Diego region faces a lowering of its standards and levels of service in
a variety of service categories.
B. User Charges
1. Description
User charges are charges made to the beneficiary of a service to pay for either
capital and/or operations and maintenance costs. Federal, state, and local
govermnents are beginning to impose user charges on a wide variety of
"public" services (e.g, Coast Guard rescue operations, bridge and road tolls,
smog certificate, park entrance).
2. Tyee of Facilities
User charges are typically used to fund water, sewerage, solid waste, energy,
and transportation facilities. Toxic and hazardous waste disposal are also
funded by user fees.
3. Approval
Increases in user charges can generally be made on an as needed basis by the
governing agency (e.g., the County Water Authority and California Public
Utilities Commission). No voter approval is necessary.
4. FinancinlZ Mechanisms
Financing mechanisms used in conjunction with user charges include revenue
bonds and certificates of participation. Revenues derived from user charges
may be used to service bonds to fmance the capital cost of new facilities. The
governing agency authority sets rates and charges which are sufficient to pay
both operating expenses and service the debt for capital expenditures.
5. Advantal:es
a. No voter approval required to impose or increase user charges
b. Debt service may be paid from the revenues of the particular facility or
enterprise
c. Strong credit rating assured
d. Reliable source of funding for operations and maintenance costs
81
)L/ r 71
...
e. Charges may be structured to reflect time and quantity of use thus
encouraging conservation and easing congestion
...
6.
Disadvantages
-
,
a. Increases in user charges may be required for debt service on revenue
bonds or lease payments for certificates of participation
-
b. U npopu1arity of user charge increases can restrain their use by elected
officials
...
,
7. Prior Exoerience
...
User charges are assessed throughout the San Diego region to fund sewage
treatment, water supply, energy, solid waste, and transportation (via motor fuel
taxes, tolls, etc.).
...
~,
8.
Conclusion
...
User charges currently fund, and will continue to fund, a large percentage of
the regional public services/facilities in the San Diego region. An example of
a major public facility which will be funded by user charges is the Metro
secondary sewage treatment project. This project will in large part be funded
by increases in user charges in the City of San Diego and the other agencies
which use the system.
...
...
As a part of this report, user fee increases have been assumed to the degree
possible. Although these increases may be objectionable to users, they appear
to be a reasonable and equitable way to continue fmancing all or major
portions of most of the facilities listed above.
...
,
.,
.
C. Standby Charges, Connection Fees, and Capacity Charges
...
1. Description
These charges are most often used in association with utility systems (e.g.,
sewer and water). In the majority of situations, a connection or capacity
charge is merely another name for an impact fee and the procedure followed
for its design and implementation is identical. In some cases, the local
agency's existing infrastructure will have additional capacity that may be made
available to new development. It is appropriate, therefore, to require new
development to pay a fee representing a purchase of a share of the existing
system.
"'I.
...
....
I.
...
Standby chanzes are assessed on the basis that the property assessed is capable
of being served by the agency making the charge, and should therefore
...
82
) if - ytJ
...
.\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
participate in the cost of capital improvements necessary to make the service
available. Standby charges are assessed on an acreage or parcel basis for those
parcels less than an acre. They do not bear any relationship to the use of the
service.
Connection fees and capaci~ charl!es are charges which can be used to recover
costs for the capacity developed for new service. These types of fees are
similar to impact fees in that a benefit must be demonstrated. Such charges
are typically used to reimburse the local jurisdiction for the construction cost
of the facilities.
2. Tyoe of Facilities
The types of facilities that can be fmanced with these types of fees include
capital improvements for sewer and water services.
3. Approval
Standby charges, connection fees, and capacity charges require state legislative
authority. The County Water Authority (CWA) obtained legislative authority
to collect an annual standby charge of $10 per acre (on each parcel less than
an acre). This charge is now being collected. The CWA is also imposing a
connection fee or capacity charge on developers.
4. Financing Mechanisms
Funding sources such as standby charges, connection fees, and capacity
charges can be used to fmance facilities using certificates of participation.
They can also be used to build facilities on a pay-as-you-go basis.
5. Advantal!es
a. Charge new development for their share of available capacity in existing
facilities
b. No voter approval required
6. Di""r1vantages
Revenues from connection fees are considered unreliable and difficult to
estimate as they depend on the amount of new development and other political
and economic factors.
83
J1-~!
-
7. Prior Experience
...
The County Water Authority currently has a standby charge and imposes
connection fees and capacity charges.
-
The City of San Diego Water Utilities Department charges developers a
connection fee to cover the costs of increased sewage treatment capacity.
Within the Metro system, the use of connection fees varies from agency to
agency.
-
~
j
...
8. Conclusion
Standby charges, connection fees, and capacity charges are appropriate for
reimbursing the local jurisdiction for existing capacity available for the future
population. These charges are "buy-in" fees levied on new development for
its fair share of existing facilities. These fees must be based on their net cost
to the existing population. Since the existing facilities are not new, some
depreciation should be incorporated into the "buy-in" fees. In addition, the
cost of the available capacity that the buy-in fees are based on must be net of
any subsidies, grants, and other inter-governmental transfers.
..,
I
....
\
.,
However, these "buy-in" fees are usually not preferable to impact fees in cases
where new facilities must be constructed to accommodate growth. If sufficient
capacity does not exist in the existing infrastructure, then the jurisdiction
cannot simultaneously charge a buy-in fee and an impact fee to pay for
enlarging the system; if new development has purchased existing capacity, then
it does not need new capacity to accommodate it.
..,
;
j
...
(
j
,
D. Assessment Districts
...
~
1. Descriotion
.,
The special assessment district is the traditional means of geographically
isolating the fmancing of public facilities that benefit a particular area. A
number of assessment acts, including the 1911, 1913, and 1915 Acts, and the
1972 Landscaping and Lighting Act enable local agencies to construct or
acquire public improvements, apportion the cost through assessments on
benefiting properties in a designated district, and fmance the improvements
with bond issues. Special assessments levied on the basis of benefits received
are not regarded as taxes and generally can be imposed on developed and
undeveloped property without a public vote.
...
.~
.,
""I
!
..,
In contrast to development impact fees, special assessments provide a viable
means of directly securing long-term debt on public facilities. The use of
special assessment fmancing, however, is limited to facilities that directly
benefit the properties in the district. Facilities that provide only general public
benefits cannot be fmanced through special assessments. Where both general
..,
;
,
...
84 /t/-J'~
...
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
and "localized" benefits will result from an improvement, the courts generally
have upheld the validity of special assessments, although local agency
contributions may be required to compensate the district for the general
public's share of improvement costs.
Assessment district financing for expensive sub- regional facilities may be
underutilized by local government. Public agencies in California have been
reluctant to establish large special assessment districts, even though state law
allows the formation of multi-jurisdictional assessment districts and the joint
issuance of assessment bonds. This reluctance may be due to the difficulty,
both practically and legally, in assessing the general public for facilities that
serve a sub-regional population.
2. 1Jpe of Facilities
Assessment district funding can be used to finance a variety of public facilities
including: water and sewer, transportation, parking, libraries, fire stations,
storm drainage, landscaping and lighting, and parks, among others.
3. Approval
Assessments can be levied on both developed and undeveloped property
without voter approval. A majority protest by property owners to be assessed
can, however, stop certain proceedings.
Funding some types of regional facilities (e.g., solid waste facilities and open
space) with assessment districts would require new state enabling legislation.
4. Financine Mechanisms
Bonds are sold which are secured by assessments levied against real estate to
produce the revenue to make the principal and interest payments.
5. Advantae:es
a. Land secures assessment
b. Recovers annual administration costs
c. If assessment is less than approximately 12 cents per $1,000 of assessed
value, then special assessment districts are not subject to Gann limits
d. Provides secure, reliable source of revenue
e. May accelerate provision of facilities (relative to pay-as-you-go funding)
f. Can be used to fund existing deficiencies
85
)irr)
-
6. Disadvanta~es
...,
a. Less suitable for regional facilities due to requirement for direct rather
than general benefit
...
b. Likelihood for protest may increase with broad regional application
-
,
c. Large districts may be administratively cumbersome
..,
d. Considered to be a tax if assessment is for facilities of region-wide
benefit
-
7. Prior Experience
Assessment districts have been used by cities in the San Diego region to
finance a variety of facilities such a major collector and local streets,
community and neighborhood parks, underground utilities, flood control and
shoreline protection devices. Landscaping and lighting districts have also been
established.
...
.;,
,
'"'I
8. Conclusion
""'I
Although assessment district financing has been used quite successfully in
individual jurisdictions to pay for needed facilities, the regional nature and
general benefit most of the facilities identified in this study do not appear
adaptable to financing by assessment district. The one exception might be
library facilities due to the more localized benefits they offer.
.,
....
~
i
E. Mello-Roos Community Facilities Districts
.,
1. Descriotion
The Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (the "Mello-Roos Act")
permits any city or county, special district, school district, or any other
municipal corporation or district to establish a community facilities district
under the Mello-Roos Act to fmance facilities, a specified group of services,
and operation and maintenance expenses for a limited category of facilities
through the levy of a special tax that is approved by two-thirds of the qualified
voters.
...
,
f,
,
.,
~
.
"'"
I
"
Mello-Roos allows considerable flexibility in structuring the special tax. The
tax can be levied on the basis of physical property characteristics (e.g., lot
size, acreage, building size) or other criteria that relate the tax levy to benefits
received from the fmanced facilities. The tax may not be ad valorem or
related to income or retail sales. Because the tax can be adjusted annually to
account for the amount of development and the facility needs of each
....
'"'!
I
.
...
86
J Lj- y,/
.,
'1
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
development project within the district, the burden of the tax can be spread
equitably over initial property owners and developers as well as future owners
of homes and non-residential property. This feature of Mello-Roos fmancing
may be attractive to developers and property owners who would otherwise
have to pay impact fees or incur the full cost of exactions in order to develop
their property. Furthermore, the developer does not have to include the capital
cost of the Mello-Roos assessment in the asking price of the property, as is
required in the case of a special assessment. Rather, hel she informs the buyer
what to expect as a maximum annual Mello-Roos tax. A savvy buyer may
then calculate the equivalent capital cost of the Mello-Roos tax. Regardless
of these differences in disclosure, a lender will evaluate a potential buyer's
ability to pay the additional debt service of either a special assessment or a
Mello-Roos tax.
Cities, counties, and other local government entities, including joint powers
agencies, are authorized to use Mello-Roos fmancing within their jurisdictions.
The facilities fmanced, however, must be owned by the government entity that
forms the district. Regional public facilities by defmition serve more than one
jurisdiction. Although the Mello-Roos Act does not specifically authorize
inter-jurisdictional community facility districts, it does not preclude two or
more local agencies working together to establish separate but coterminous
districts, as long as the regional facilities fmanced in each district are owned
by the government entity forming the district. Alternatively, a joint powers
agency, (JPA) could be created for the purpose of establishing multi-
jurisdictional districts. The facilities fmanced by the JPA, however, would
have to be owned by the JPA, as an independent entity.
Mello-Roos districts may be used as a substitute fmancing mechanism to
impact fees, whereby the assessments are paid in lieu of fees. Taking this
approach one step further, a Mello-Roos district could be set up to fmance all
the facilities that would otherwise be funded through a city, county, or regional
fee program. This approach would require all new development within the
area served by the facilities to annex to the Mello-Roos district; thus, the first
new development project would form the first part of an "expandable" district,
and subsequent new development would be added to the district. Because
properties do not have to be coterminous to be part of the "expandable" Mello-
Roos district, the district could include new development throughout the San
Diego region.
2.
Tyoe of Facilities
Virtually all facilities that a local agency is authorized to construct and own
can be fmanced under the Mello-Roos Act. In this respect, the Act is more
flexible than special assessment districts. Mello-Roos can be used to fmance
facilities that have substantial public benefits, whereas special assessment
districts are limited to facilities that impart benefits largely confmed to the
87
/'
pI/If!;?
...
properties being assessed. The types of facilities that may be fmanced under
the Mello-Roos Act include parks, open space, schools, libraries, water and
sewer facilities, and transportation, among others.
....
...
3. Approval
...
The district may fmance facilities on a "pay as you go" basis, through the levy
of a special tax, until the facilities are constructed. Alternatively, it may issue
bonds, use the proceeds to fmance the facilities, and repay the bonds with the ....
special tax that it levies. The authorization to issue bonds must also be
approved by a 2/3 vote of the qualified voters voting in an election.
....
The voter approval requirement greatly inhibits the ability of local government
to use Mello-Roos in existing developed areas. In largely undeveloped areas
approval by two-thirds of the property owners (one vote per acre owned) is ...
,
necessary. The latter situation results in an enhanced ability to levy Mello- ,
Roos taxes and secure bond fmancing in districts where sizable acreage is
owned by a few cooperative land owners. ~.
4. Financine Mechanisms
AI
Facilities are fmanced by the sale of "Mello-Roos" bonds secured by a special
tax levied against real estate to make the principal and interest payments. An "'\
expandable Mello-Roos District would delay issuance of bonds until the pool
of property owners grew large enough to generate a sufficient cash flow.
5. Advantaees ...
a. Wide variety of eligible facilities
....
b. Separate Gann limit adopted for district
c. Provides secure source of revenue
-
d. Timely fmancing of facilities relative to impact fees and other pay-as-
you-go fmancing
....
,
e. Tax adjusted annually
.....
f. Assessments may conform more closely to the ability-to-pay rather than
based strictly on impact per capita
....
g. Developers may prefer Mello-Roos to special assessment because the
cost of a property must include the capital cost of the assessment but not
the capital cost of the Mello-Roos tax
....
,
...
88 }lj-~!r
..
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
6. Disadvanta~es
a. Two-thirds vote required by landowners or voters
b. Large districts may be administratively cumbersome
c. Notice process is complex
d. Taxes approved by developer/property owners may be misunderstood by
subsequent homeowner/taxpayers
e. Requirement for ownership by the government agency that is setting up
district, (e.g., joint powers agency)
7. Prior Experience
A Mello-Roos district was established in the City of San Diego by the Poway
Unified School District for school facilities in the Penasquitos and Rancho
Bernardo-Carmel Mountain Ranch communities.
8. Conclusion
The Mello- Roos Act appears to have the most potential in largely undeveloped
areas where the property owners agree to cooperate in the provision of the
facilities needed to develop their property. The facilities funded could be
either local-serving or a portion of a region-serving system such as libraries,
transportation, open space, sewer or water. A Mello-Roos District could be
set up to fmance either the payment of development impact fees or substitute
for a fee program in the form of an "expandable" Mello-Roos.
The Mello-Roos Act appears to have limited application for funding many of
the regional public facilities discussed in this report due to the requirement for
a two-thirds vote. This requirement greatly inhibits the ability of local
government to use this fmancing mechanism in developed areas.
Because many regional facilities are provided by more than one agency, the
requirement for ownership of the facility by the agency which sets up the
district would also be an obstacle to setting up a large, county-wide district.
Districts could, however, be set up to fund facilities such as libraries on a
more localized basis in newly developing areas.
89
/ y- Y 7
~
F. General Taxes
...
1. Description
.-~
Local government's ability to raise revenue and secure long-term debt from its
two most important revenue sources, the property tax and sales tax, is severely
constrained. Local public agencies are authorized to increase ad valorem
property taxes provided the revenue increase is used to pay bonded
indebtedness on public facilities and two-thirds voter approval is obtained.
Voter resistance to property tax increases renders this fmancing option difficult
at best.
....
""!
A sales tax increase also requires two-thirds approval, unless state legislation
creates a new local agency to administer the purposes of the tax increase, in
which case only a simple majority vote may be required. Proposition A (the
one-half cent sales tax increase for transportation) required a simple majority
approval and created anew, state-authorized agency, the San Diego Regional
Transportation Commission.
""I
I
...
\
""I
2. Type of Facilities
-
General or sales tax increases could be used to fund most types of public
facilities.
,
"'l
.
3. AWroval
.
A two-thirds vote is required for an ad valorem property tax increase. A two-
thirds vote is also required for a sales tax increase unless a new local agency
is created to administer the purposes of the tax increase.
...
A
""!
4. Financin~ Mechanisms
General obligation bonds or sales tax revenue bonds are used to fmance public
facility improvements in conjunction with property and sales tax increases.
Debt service is paid from the tax increases.
...
""'I
5. Advantal!:es
a. Provides funds in a lump sum
.,
,
b. Can be used to fund a wide variety of public facilities
"1
c. Can be used to fund existing facility deficiencies
d. Appropriate source of funds for facilities of general benefit, such as open
space, justice facilities, animal control, etc.
.,
...
90
1
.
1'1- ?~
"'I
j
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
e. General obligation bonds have a strong credit rating; least costly method
of fInancing
f. Familiar process with minimal administrative problems
g. Financing with general obligation bonds not subject to Gann limit
6. Disadvanta~es
a. Requires two-thirds voter approval with the exception of a general tax
for transportation funding through a JP A
b. Tax increases unpopular in general
c. Subject to debt limitation
7. Prior Exnerience
A half-cent sales tax for transportation was approved by the voters of San
Diego County in November, 1987. Bonds were sold to fInance the fIrst round
of projects in the fall of 1989. TransNet (the name given to the transportation
sales tax program) is administered by the San Diego Association of
Governments Board of Directors who serve as the Regional Transportation
Commission.
The half -cent sales tax for justice facilities approved by the voters of San
Diego County (Proposition A) in June, 1988, was successfully challenged in
court. The California Supreme Court ruled Proposition A invalid in
December, 1991. Yet to be determined is the disposition of approximately
$360 million in funds already collected. The court of appeals has taken this
matter under advisement and a decision is expected in the summer of 1992.
In November, 1987, the voters of the City of San Diego voted down two bond
issues for improvements to Mission Bay and Balboa Parks. In June, 1978, San
Diego voters approved the issuance of $65 million in open space bonds to be
used for open space acquisition allowing the assessment of property on an ad
valorem basis. The bonds in fact were fmanced with utility franchise fees,
instead of a tax increase.
8. Conclusion
Although it appears from past experience that gaining approval for a tax
increase would be difficult, it may be that it should be considered for funding
some types of regional facilities. Those facilities without revenue sources such
as user charges, which have substantial existing defIciencies, which provide a
general benefIt to the public, and/or have broad public support would be the
91
/1 -J";
~.
most likely candidates for funding with a tax increase. Open space, justice
facilities, and libraries share some of these characteristics.
.,
,
i
G. Special Taxes
..,
,
Unlike general taxes, special taxes have a narrow base and single out a specific type
of activity or transaction for taxation. Examples of special taxes include state-
collected, locally-shared taxes (subventions) on cigarettes, motor vehicle
registrations, and gasoline, and locally adopted taxes such as the transient occupancy
tax on hotel/motel room bills, business license taxes, utility user taxes, and parking
user taxes.
""I
..,
An increase in state subvened taxes in San Diego County would require state
enabling legislation and local voter approval, as would a new countywide special tax
for regional facilities. Charter cities have the authority to increase certain special
taxes without voter approval. But with the possible exception of the Transient
Occupancy Tax, the narrow revenue base for existing local special taxes limits the
revenue potential from reasonable tax rate increases.
..,
1
.,
1
"""
Although these types of special taxes may not be useful in funding major regional
public facilities, local agencies could impose or increase some of these taxes to
increase revenues to the general fund. The increase in the general fund could then
be used to fund facilities such as libraries which are a part of the regional system.
.,
.,
H. Toll Roads and Value Capture
;
,
1. Description
..,
I
j
Value capture techniques have provided local agencies throughout the United
States with some very lucrative funding sources. The concept, broadly
defmed, involves the private sector compensating a public agency for the cost
of a facility that generates economic value. In the case of transportation
projects, for example, interchanges, new freeways, and public transit stations
create adjacent markets for new development. The public agency constructing
the new facilities may capture value created with any of the following
methods:
.,
I
1
.,
1
Special assessment districts surrounding the facility
.,
j
Joint public-private development of adjacent sites including ground
leases, sale, rentals, or other partnership methods
....
Traffic impact fee benefit district
Tax increment fmancing districts
..,
I
92
...
'1
j
)t/-~(J
,
I
I
I
I
I
a
I
t
,
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Transportation utility fee districts
Sale of access rights or capacity rights
Pre-purchase and subsequent sale or lease of real estate (e.g., air rights
over depressed freeway)
Windfall profit tax on real estate transactions in special highway districts
Development dedications, exactions, and concessions, including
developer provision of: right-of-way, front-end "seed" money or venture
capital, collateral to improve credit worthiness, direct loans, equity
positions in the facility project, and guaranteed participation in
assessment district
Many of the methods listed above are either identical or slight variations of
funding sources discussed herein. Their mention here indicates the range of
methods available to a public agency to exploit the value added to adjacent
properties when it constructs public facilities.
2. Type of Facilities
Roads and public transportation facilities are the most common type of
facilities funded with value capture methods. The definition of value capture
may be expanded to include all types of public/private partnerships. For
example, funding and operation of waste-to-energy plants, recycling centers,
extraction of natural gas from landfills, and airport concessions may all be
considered methods of value capture.
3. Ap'proval
The public agency with jurisdiction over the project may impose value capture
methods. Such agencies (e.g., airport commission, turnpike authority) are
usually joint powers agencies (JPA) and are appointed by elected officials.
4. Financing Mechanisms
Financing mechanisms may be grouped into two general categories: long-term
debt instruments and equity participation devices (Public/private partnerships).
Examples of equity participation devices include certificates of participation
(COPs), property trust certificates, and common or preferred stock (Le., public
utility corporation of franchise company).
The second group of fmancing mechanisms concern long-term debt
instruments. Most traditiona1long-term debt require serial payments of equal
amounts over a 15 to 30 year period: general obligation bonds, revenue
93
/1-1 /
-
bonds, etc. Most toll road revenue streams are not flat, but rather come as an
inclining stream of revenues and are therefore not as easily applied to the serial
repayment schedule typical of most bonds. Recently, new long-term debt
instruments that allow deferred payment fmancing have been used to leverage
the inclining revenue stream of toll roads.
~
1-,
5. Advantal!es
"'"
a.
Leverages public sector funding with private investment for public
facilities
...
b.
Only those that use or benefit are charged or taxed for the cost of the
facility
-.
,
,
c.
Spreads the risk of infrastructure investment to private sector
...
,
d.
.
May encourage more efficient location, construction, and operation of
public facilities
""
e.
Tolls or other cost recovery system may be priced to encourage
conservation and most efficient use
-r
f.
Generates revenues for operations as well as capital funding
""
g.
Not subject to Gann limit, voter approval, or government budget
constraints
6. Disadvantages
'""!'
a. Revenue stream may not be bondable
..,
b. Access charges (tolls) may exclude some potential users
...
c. Bureaucracy required to monitor and manage private operators
d. Only works for facilities that benefit a specific group of landowners
'""!'
I
e. Not suitable for most regional systems of pure "public goods"
""I
1
7. Conclusion
...
Value capture methods are gaining popularity, but their utility for funding San
Diego's regional facilities is limited. The regional systems currently suffering
funding shortfalls (e.g., freeways, public transportation, justice facilities) are
not easily broken up into discrete benefit districts. While some individual
l
,
'"'I
,
,
...
94
/t//7;L
...
;
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
projects could readily be funded with vaiue capture, the greater portion of
these public facilities would be left at an even greater disadvantage.
I.
Countywide Increase in Motor Vehicle License Fees
Ordinarily an increase in a state-subvened tax in a county requires both enabling
legislation and local voter approval. Voter approval may not be required if the
revenue increase is structured as a service fee. In 1986, for example, the State
authorized a $1.00 fee on motor vehicle registrations in San Diego County for the
purpose of funding installation of emergency call boxes on the county's freeways.
Regarded as a fee rather than a tax, the $1.00 charge did not require voter approval.
Further increases in motor vehicle license fees might provide an expedient and
reasonably equitable means of fInancing regional transportation improvements. A
$5.00 fee per registered vehicle would raise nearly $10 million annually. State
enabling legislation would be necessary to pursue this option.
J.
Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing
The formation of a redevelopment agency results in the ability of local governments
to capture and use the property tax increments (the increase in assessed value over
time) for capital improvements and other costs within the redevelopment area.
Bonds can be sold or funds advanced to the redevelopment agency to be repaid from
. property tax increment. This source of funding does not provide a new source of
revenue, except at the expense of other taxing agencies; it is a reallocation' of
existing funds. It is also restricted to use in the defmed redevelopment area (which
requires specifIc fmdings such as blighted conditions) to be designated, and could
therefore be used for regional facilities on a limited, more localized basis.
K.
Developer Required Improvements
Many subdivisions or other types of large development projects require much of the
capaci rv of specifIc facilities. In such cases where new infrastructure is either
dedic"i~ to serving the single project or the development will require a large portion
of the facility's capacity, dev,> hpe~c may be required to dedicate the facility or pay
for a large part of its constr.. . '.,. ...,t in order to obtain approval for the project.
These types of facility provision are generally called exactions. While impact fees
are a form of exaction, the funding source discussed here concerns a developer's up-
front "dedication" offacilities prior to any payment of impact fees. Such dedications
must be reconciled with any facilities funded through an impact fee program. Thus,
a developer must be given credit towards any impact fees that would fund the same
facilities provided by the dedication.
There are common and somewhat overlapping methods of requiring developer
provision of facilities: (1) dedications, (2) subdivision ordinance requirements, and
(3) environmental impact report (EIR) mitigation requirements. Dedications are
facilities built by the developer as a condition of receiving a permit to develop the
95
/1-5)'
\';,C-
....
land. For example, the local jurisdiction may require a sewage treatment plant, a
branch library, a fire station, a freeway overpass, or some other type of facility that
will serve the specific development.
..;
-,
Most cities and counties require a minimum amount of improvements from all new
development through their subdivision ordinance and general/community plans.
These requirements usually include improvements to the project's adjacent streets,
sewer laterals, and landscaping. The facilities required in a subdivision ordinance
are generally excluded from an impact fee program.
"'"
..,
...
...
~
"-I
....
.~
~
.,
,
"'l
~
....
.,
....
.
...
-
~
....
96
)L/~c;1
i
"'l
1
I
I ~!.4-l 0 0) ~.... 0 0) .g 0)
CI:l <= 0 <= l>Il > <= 0 <= l>Il > >
O~ ..8 s.g 8 ~ .8 ~ .S 8 ~ .8 ~
~CI:l - -
0)<Qg,>> on O)~g,~ ~ 0) on
u~ =., , <Q a s 'u ~ ~ <Q
I =!-5,-rn 0)
~= 0)'t::~'P ~ lU 0;:::'_ I ~ ~ ~
~O) ~ ~lU~~
~~ U Po. CI:l ~u ~ CI:l CI:l
I . . . . . . . . . .
. ~~ ~~
I ~= o~ 0) 0) 0)
I I I
~u U
I ~~ ., ., .,
~ ~ ~
~~
. . .
I ~~ ~
~~ l:- >> .... l:-
" 8 - 8~
'C 'C 'C
0 ~ ~ ~
d! ~ .~ ~
~ ~ . >> ~
l>Il l>Il 'E.c l>Il
.5 'E 00)0) .5
~ :;l t;l on ]11 t;l
&1 &1 &1
I ~~ 5
. . . .
I ~~
a~ fa l:- .s ; on
~~i CI:l ~..~
~ on ,~ 0) '-'
I ro..~ on 0) on U .. j~
~ l>Il 0) '-' ...... ~ ..c:~]
o~ on,<=<:; j <= ~ <= on "0 0 = on ., = <=
0 0) <=..c: ~ <= ~ ., = 0)
....u CI:l jo"" .~ e on ].ElS .5 .. <il j 8.5 on
'U on <Q '.:l <Q
~ '':;:: ~ >. ~ l>Il on ~ ~.~
.. ., ~ 'u :@ n"]; .0 ~ = = .-. IU~
I e'~ ~ - bO 00 n .,
~ 'i ~ g ~ B itgCl:l 'I ] ~:9 ~ 'i~
'5 .s'~ ~ '.:= fI) lU Cot-! = glUe .- <=o.s..c:
,1ii~UUCl:l ~:~o ,g.....,z Cl ~: 2 c..> u
'00 ~ . . . . 0 0 0
~ Po. . Po.. . Po. . .
I
I g ~
....
u
:;l~ ~ CI:l
ol:lO <
t ~ffi ~ ....
Zu I
O::l ~
S <~
Ii! Po. 0 /'/-7.-5
I ~CI:l CI:l
97
CIl
,,::21
~!
~~
~~
~~
~"
~;
~
~
u
~ii:
Zu
9:::1
~~
o
Cl)
,
=
o
>>
,
~
,
i
.
.,
I
u
~
.
~
~
<
~
~
>>
-
'J::
~
1il
Cl)
..3
~
.
.,
~
- ~
e :l,
o
~~~
'" "0 '"
~=>.
CIllllf
. .
'" 'E
~ -g", "0
'" ,z ~ .~
i ~~-gp"
.w Q. t.2 ~
..~~~.5i3j
'1 ~ ~ -E ~ 5 ~
,~=,,~~,,~
&1 . . . . . .
~
~
~
2
~
,
'"
'"
~
~.... 0.<
= 0 C 01)........
llll.g8~~
., ~ a.>>~ 5
a !oS .- J, I .&J
o'1::'S:! c:s ~ ==
~ 8 ~ i~ ~
.. ..
., =
~.~ .,g 0 8 ,
..c = _ ~! 'C
U ....,.!"l !!!l.8 ,2,
00\:.= o.
:-.~ ~<~
5::;jat '=e:'=
8 >>'" >>e!'-"'a.",
~ ..0 = - 8. ",'- =
t: ~.g = 8 'S,S:!.g
~~:68u~'[:6
. .
?;>
'J::
,.g
-
1il
Cl)
.5
!
.
-
= '"
., .,
e "'':=
p",s S
o '" U
"ii8.e
6)r.t=i-=
""0-=
:;;) at !i.9
~ ~.5 ~
~ .
'"
~....
'J:: 0 ?;>
'iil .!:l r; 'J::
.- 0 0= 0
"0> -=
U3~at: -
~N ~ ~
6 ,g i ,.3
~ 50 e .~
::21 e p" ~
. .
-
=
"0 .,
1a ~
'"
'" ~
~~'"
'''=~
~'~'J::
., ~ -
"'" i!5..,~
...."'''0
.,
=
Ol
>
-g
'"
'"
-g
II
o .... .,
Cl)o==
I U3 0 =
5 B',= ~
~~a.e
t~~3
...
~
~
o
CIl
~
~
~
~
,-
- '"
= ~ '"
B ~ "0
0==
Po"'51,z
oCl~.,,,=
'Oil I::
=a>~
'.c: ~ 'C ~
.~:::J Po ~
~ . . .
1 e
=..3
o r;.
E" U
.
.
.,
=
'Cl = .g ~ ..,
Il .g II e
~.~ ~ ~
5.$:! 0 In ~ ...
'5;~~=
ui:t~CIlll
.. .
.
. .
""l
,
,
CIl
;:l
o
~
~!:J
~~
)i/J?
98
.,
Cl)'
!:l.t: .,
.c='5
u....,~
00\'
-......
'5 ::;j 'il
8>>"'>>
~..o=-
o =
I:I.:l ',:j :2
~~:68
..,
,
....
..,
i
,
.:.
.
.....
B
.,
~'"
~ ~
u 9-
Ol .5
~~
>>
-
'J::
~
1il
Cl)
,.3
~
-
!
i
.",
,
,
,
.
.
'"
-g
~I'~
',= S
~~
,
f5'
~1:I.:l~
.g 8 '"
i....,
o~~
'6:0 Q.-=
.. e.5 ~
:;;) at c:! ~
= ~ ~
~
Po. .
"i
....
1
,
~
.,
~
~
~
u
!=:
~
""!
,
~
i
;
.,
.
,
I
ICl~
~
I~=
~~
I
I~
I~i
~
.1 ~
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
=
o
"!
:.:I
~
~ ..
5-g
Cl.B
.
j
u
~
.
<
~
5
~
>
<"l
--
N
e
!
.
1.l
e
u
.6
~.~
t~
J:~
~
. .
~
~
~
u.....
~i:l
CI2 0
~~
=
o
'J::
o :0
O>ll :.:I
, ,Q
5 0
>.
J:t rn 13 !;12
'l'-g8"O
l&5t3]
. . .
o
l'-
..
. u
0.. 0 '5
J: .gf.~
,00 .....
c:
.g~i .e
...B<sCl2.."a
i~ >'8-=-g 8
o,c, s .~ Q G)
,~ CI2 U ~ Cl
~ . . .
--
CI2
~~
~~
9ffi
~~
,
~ 5
~ 'J::
~.g~ i
~.B8.g~
>'0)~0':l
J.Sb,Ql::..
iJ~~~)
. .. .
0) =
O>ll'.... 0)
; .2 ~ 0 '4),
.c: ",., = e ~ .2
u .... ,!;; 0 O>ll 0) '"
.s a- :s '5 <U ,Q ....
--e o...-.CO
'5 =; .~ u .~ ~ .~ ~
S >...>:.. f!,-"c.." 5
~,Q =... 8. ..'~ =.c
~...~ s< 8 '5'€'~ ~
<.M:.a8e:u s il:.az
.
.
::;.
'Q
t
O>ll
.6
~
..
... ....
'S 0
4l~rl
""C > .::
.. <"l ~
~NO
, I!!~
.9.~ 0)
Q) '" oQ.
~ ~~
.
.
,
8-
Q)
>
-8 ~
C;'"
=tl
.9 a.
.. en.5
li~ ~
o
.
=
"0 0)
;j ~
..
.. 1.l
~ ~ ..
'':Itl
~.::l'Q
0) ~ 'ill
~ FE:.a
.
99
o
O>ll
,
'"
o
>.
,
.. ..
"0 'l'
5 >.
~~
. .
..
I
u
~
>
if
.
.
~
>
<"l
--
N
..
.g
!
.
~
u
.6
~
J
"a ..
!:! -g
t3 .e
] !
>. CI2
..~ ~
'1 ~-g -3
,~ l5;j.e ~
~. .
.
I
=
o
0.... 'i
0>ll0=:.:I
~ B 'i ~
::;"'~ ~"'=
CIJ ~.- c
~.~.~ Q,) ~
l8i~]
. .
.
0)
0>llJ.
;'Q 0)
.c:",-=
u....~
o a-.
... .....
- ..... 4)
= =; ~ O>ll
~ ~.~ ~~
~.M:68~
.
.
::;.
'Q
~
~
O>ll
,3
~
~
<"l
--
N
..
.g
[
~
.
.
t
>
-8 ~
i;
.9 a.
.. en.5
I~ ~ =
~ ~ ~
~ .
1.l
e
u
.6
~
>.
~
l
.
;1-/ /77
<I]
c:l~
~<I]
~~
Z~
ti:~
~
o
h
o
~
6
>>
,
'" ~
'"8'
o~
j:Qj:l.,
. .
~
o
~
~
~
~
~
o
<I]
c:l
] ~
~ '" e~
"" .! _ e's:
'oJ = U e
] ~ 5.5 Po.
>> ~~~ 8-
1:: ,:= <) >>0
:fl:]~j i~
~I . .. .
,
~ 5
~ 0'" 'i
<t; bll 0 :.::I
'"Us~1 rn5.c
8'"8 6 ~'.-:l 0
~ .8 ~,g.9.-:::I
o ~..... (.) J: r.I.l
= = I '1;;.... 0.) "0
~5&8~~.8
.
. .
.
o
bll
,
=
o
>>
,
'" '"
"'''0
, =
&~
. .
.
~
>
M
--
N
'"
.g
I
.
III
~
U
.5
~
>>
1::
I:
] <)
'oJ 'iii
] ~
-- '"
>> '" =
'~I'I'"8I'i
.~ ~ ..e l:lI "0
&1. .
0'"
bllO=
, '" 0
:s 0,)._
o_-a.
>>'"
, U
~!oS '0
'1::~
~<)
j:l.,U
. .
<)
e.o =
.2 :s
U "E'~
o - ~
- rcl '"
-- ~ = ~
~ '\;j.51 i:!
~ ~~ 6
~"-lr.l.lU
bll 3 'J:: <)
< ~ .~ oS
.
~
'J::
,g
-
~
bll
,3
~
.
-
~ al
o Po.
.~ =
bll .:=
ei:!
.J~
J -
,~ ~ <) '"
=z<)ii3
~ "0,,"
o
j:l., .
~ ~ ~
::1 u
.... ~
u
~~ ~ u
~ <I]
Zu ~
9::1 ~ ) Y~9 y
~~ ~ 0
<I]
100
~
= <)
~ ~ J, ~ .5
l:: - 'J:: .a -5
~.8.0; ~ ll'~
<) <' bll - rcl '"
.~ e: .~ 5 ~ .~ ~ fo
f:,-,Po.'" e>>~ = s
<) ",'u = ~.&J .~ o.a
8'i:!'t:.g l:: '" 'iU U
u 5 a:6~.!:[.s~
.
.
.
o
bll
,
=
o
>>
,
'" ..
"0 '"
= '
~&
. .
1
c:l
] E
>> <I]
.. i ~
'_12 '"8 -3
.~ ~ ..e ~
~. .
-
...
...
,
...,
,
""I
...,
\
..,
...."
-
~
"~
.,
;1
...
'"
"0
=
..e
~
'"
.......t)"-
~.t: 0 ~
'J:: t! ~ el'J::
O:aOSO
-5 > ..c::
~~~~~
bll~N>>bll
,~ ~ .g i'~
~ ~ [a~
. .
i:!
"0 <)
; ~
'"
.. III
~ ~ '"
'I~ ~ :i .E
B ~ ~:a
o
j:l., .
-
~a
.51 =
bll .:=
ei:!
)~
-
~ <) ..
<) > <)
z-8.2
..,
...
""f
..,
!
J
oq
...
I
.
I
I ., ~
~
I ~=
z~
I' ~::s
I
~
I~
I~
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
,I
I
I
I d
u
I ~ it
~u
I m~
=
o
.-
<;;
0.... b/l
b/lO=:=
I v.lO.c
is B '=a.O
>><<1
,u -::l
"' u= .- l::
~ ;;;;I .~ a> ~
ia~~2
.. .
<)
b/l ,
!:l.t! <)
.c=.;
u ''''.!''l
OO\;S
-- -
- .~ 0
5:; ~ b/l
e>>~>>;
~,QO'S-=
t= rn .~ = u
b/l<)'~OO
<~'6uZ
.
~
>>
-
'r::
t
b/l
=
.-
~
<
~
5
.
~
~
o
~
.,
,
t
>
..g 8
,<;;""
=t)
o <<I
.- ~
.. ft.5
3~'S
- n <)
5 i e
'0
~ .
....
~
u
~
~
~'"
....'S
u 0
Ou
~.......
o
b/l
,
=
o
>>
,
'" '"
't:l <<I
= '
~~
. .
.
a
>
<'l
--
N
'"
.~
i
.
~
u
.6
~
'E.,5 ~ ~
u~=
'r:: = 0
"3 0'-
~ "::I ....
.- ~ :0
>> ~ ='=
1:: ;:::
"8. 3~,2;
:W~]!l~
~I . . .
>>
1::
!
.
~
Z
o
~
u
~
~
u
~
8
.=
0.... :0
b/lO=:=
~~l~
'" u= .- 'E
~ ~.~ \U ~
~8~~~
.. .
j
u
~
.
~
<'l
--
N
'"
.~
i
.
~
a
u
.6
~
>>
,,1::
]~
~~
~ .
101
J;/- / /
Item
Meeting Date
If.
12/15/92
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
SUBMITTED BY:
Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of AB939 Source
Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) and
Household Hazardous Waste Element (HHWE)
/'
Resolution No. /""~ Approving the SRRE and HHWE
and Authorizing that Both Documents (AS Amended) be
Forwarded to the County of San Diego for Inclusion
in the Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan
Principal Management Assistant snyde~
Conservation coordinato~
City ManagerZ9 (4/5ths Vote: Yes___ No-X-)
TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB939)
required that all cities and counties prepare formal plans aimed at
wastestream diversion goals of 25% by 1995 and 50% by the year
2000. Specifically, cities are required to adopt two "elements,"
one addressing source reduction, recycling and composting programs
(SRRE), and the other addressing the elimination of illegal
disposal of household toxins (HHWE). Once adopted, the city
"elements" are to be forwarded to the County for inclusion in a
Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan (CIWMP). Failure to
comply with the preparation of a plan and achievement of the
wastestream reduction goals may leave a jurisdiction subject to
State-imposed fines of up to $10,000 per day.
The law required that two public hearings be held prior to adoption
of both documents. The first public hearing requirement was met
when the preliminary documents were accepted at the City Council's
regular meetings of 11/19/91 (SRRE) and 12/17/91 (HHWE). At that
time, staff was directed to accept public comment during the
designated period, address CEQA requirements, and return to Council
for adoption of the final set of documents when appropriate. This
public hearing completes the second requirement and allows Council
to consider adoption of the plans to be forwarded to the County for
inclusion along with 18 other jurisdictions in the Countywide plan.
The original documents total more than 200 pages and, therefore,
are not being included in this report but are available in the City
Manager's office upon request. For Council's convenience,
Executive Summaries of the original documents are included in
Attachments A and B. Attachment C includes items received
subsequent to Council's 1991 action and constitutes recommended
amendments to the original documents now being considered for
adoption. .
/~i
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 12/15/92
15
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution approving the SRRE and HHWE
(original and amendments), subject to changes required by
subsequent legislation and updated information, and authorizing
both documents be forwarded to the County of San Diego for
inclusion in the Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Resource Conservation
Commission will review and discuss this report at its 12/14/92
meeting. A verbal report of the Commission's comments and actions
will be presented at the public hearing. Minutes can be forwarded
to the Council when available if so requested.
As was the practice with the draft documents, copies of the report
have also been provided for information to the Growth Management
Oversight Committee and the Chula Vista 21 Subcommittee.
DISCUSSION:
As noted during the previous public hearings, the planning process
for meeting the goals set by AB939 is volatile and dynamic,
although the goals (and penalties) are fixed. Since the law was
passed in 1989, the SRRE and HHWE documents as originally
envisioned by AB939 have been continually affected by legislative
changes and interpretation, economic conditions, public input and
program needs. The remainder of this report will describe the
significant changes that have taken place since this issue was last
visited by the Council, as well as the documents being recommended
for adoption at this time.
Siqnificant Events Since December 1991
Staff has received public and agency input, conducted CEQA
evaluation of the documents, and moved forward on individual
program components in the past year. Additionally, there has been
legislative activity which has affected the AB939 planning process
as well as local mandates which have influenced the City's program
planning.
PUBLIC AND AGENCY COMMENTS
The general public was given opportunities at three public hearings
to provide comments on the City of Chula vista's SRRE and HHWE.
Staff was also available to accept oral and written comments
through January 24, 1992 as authorized by Council. No substantive
comments were received from citizens of Chula Vista regarding these
specific documents. Comments received from the general public at
a regional (SANDAG) public hearing on 1/24/92 did not impact or
pertain to Chula Vista's plans.
/5~~
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 12/15/92
)f
The SRRE and HHWE were distributed to adjoining jurisdictions for
comments on how Chula Vista's plans were seen to impact other
cities, if at all. Comments received from the cities of San Diego,
National City and Imperial Beach indicated no concern and
reiterated the need for cities to continue to approach the waste
reduction and household hazardous waste problems within a regional
context.
Finally, comments were received from the staff of the State agency,
the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) as
required by AB939. Those comments are included in Attachment C
which amends the original documents. The comments are provided for
an individual jurisdiction to act upon in adoption of the
Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan which is not required
for San Diego County until 1994 (or later, depending on the
promulgation of State regulations.)
Briefly, the CIWMB staff had no comments on the HHWE and
recommended adoption "as is." Regarding the SRRE, CIWMB staff
concluded that the programs and schedules within the draft
documents adequately fulfilled the requirements of AB939 and the
CIWMB's regulations and guidelines for preparing the document.
The majority of the comments related to the waste generation and
composition component of the SRRE which was prepared on a regional
basis by the County since the disposal system is maintained
regionally. The use of historical waste generation data and the
choice of sampling methodology was of concern to the CIWMB staff.
It was recommended that the waste composition and quantity data be
revised in the Countywide plan to comply with State standards. The
County is presently conducting a solid waste generation study for
all cities within the County and it is planned that the results
will be able to address this concern. The remaining comments by
the State staff were minor in nature and are addressed in the
addendum to the draft SRRE also included in Attachment C.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The City's Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the
SRRE and HHWE are categorically exempt under class 6, section 15306
of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines since
the proposed project will not result in a serious or major
disturbance to an environmental resource. When the SRRE and HHWE
are adopted by Council, City staff will file the appropriate Notice
of Exemption as procedurally required.
15~3
Page 4, Item
Meeting Date 12/15/92
Jb
LEGISLATIVE CHANGES
During the past year there have been two significant Assembly bills
enacted which have affected the AB939 planning process as
originally established. AB2494 changes the formula of the
wastestream reduction from diversion-based to disposal-based. This
amendment was favorable to all cities in San Diego County where the
disposal system is operated countywide. Ultimately it lessens the
financial and administrative burden originally placed on cities to
document the amount of source reduction and diversion taking place
before the intended wastestream reaches the possible point of
disposal.
Instead, emphasis will be placed on measuring the amount of
material entering the landfill system, documenting jurisdiction of
origin, and monitoring expected reductions for goal attainment.
What this change means to the SRRE as a planning document is that
future guidelines and regulations will need to be promulgated in
order to implement this shift. Adoption of the SRRE at this time
needs to leave flexibility for such changes.
Another legislative change was the enactment of AB2292 which
recognized that the CIWMB' s implementing regulations for AB939 were
not finalized. This Assembly bill sets a county's submittal date
for the countywide plan at 18 months following acceptance of the
CIWMB regulations by the State's Office of Administrative Law. It
does not, however, change the goal deadlines of 25% diversion by
1995 and 50% by the year 2000. For San Diego County and the City
of Chula Vista, this change means that review and adoption of the
Countywide Integrated Waste Management plan (CIWMP) will take place
after the originally required date of January 1,1994.
Finally, a critically important legislative mandate was imposed
during the past year by the County of San Diego. The Mandatory
Recycling Ordinance was adopted by the Board of Supervisors to ban
(on a graduated timetable) receipt of certain recyclable materials
at the County's landfills. Cities using the landfills (directly or
through designated haulers) are subject to load checks and fines if
illegal materials are found entering, unless cities adopt and
enforce local mandatory source separation ordinances. The County's
Mandatory Ordinance is noted in the SRRE, however the City's
adoption of a local ordinance took place in January 1992.
PROGRAM ACTIVITY
Council is aware that the City has continued to move forward on the
implementation of individual recycling programs which are important
and needed to meet the 25% and 50% diversion goals, as well as the
County and the City's mandatory source separation requirements. In
the past year the City has also received two awards for outstanding
)5''/
Page 5, Item
Meeting Date 12/15/92
/~
leadership as a governmental agency implementing recycling
programs. Two new grants were received: 1) a Recycling Technical
Assistance Program (TAP) grant from the County for $11,400 which is
being used for outreach and technical assistance setting up
recycling programs in businesses, offices, restaurants and the
construction industry, and 2) a State grant of $25,050 for the RAD
Project, focusing on household hazardous waste and recycling
education in the community and school systems.
The City is also emphasizing public education in enforcing the
Mandatory Ordinance, an activity that has gained a lot of momentum
in the past year. The groundwork is being laid for future programs
in multi-family residential recycling by conducting a study of 60
local apartment complexes and working with property owners to
identify and resolve problems with multi-family recycling programs.
And, of course, the City has ongoing and seasonal programs such as
the single-family residential curbside program, Christmas tree
recycling, and beach clean-up program.
Conclusion
The original documents of the SRRE and HHWE (provided here in
Executive Summary form in Attachments A and B) outline programs
currently underway or needed in order to meet goals. The proposed
amendment to the original documents is reflected in Attachment C
which contains letters and suggested page revisions which are
germane to the original documents. Together they represent the up-
to-date status of the City of Chula Vista's plans for source
reduction, recycling, composting and household hazardous waste
programs.
It is timely to adopt both the SRRE and the HHWE as amended,
subject to future legislative changes and updated information.
Once adopted, the documents will be forwarded to the County of San
Diego to be included in the Countywide plan which will then require
approval by a majority of the cities with a majority of the
population.
FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact as a result of the
recommended action to adopt the SRRE and HHWE. The fiscal impact
of individual programs is and will continue to be addressed either
in the annual budget cycle or midyear as the programs are brought
forward. The ongoing administrative cost of planning, implementing
and monitoring future programs is also addressed during the City's
annual budget cycle.
The fiscal impact of not moving forward on the SRRE is the
possibility of State-imposed fines of up to $10,000 per day.
/5-511~'"
RESOLUTION NO.
J/'9~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ADOPTING THE SOURCE REDUCTION AND
RECYCLING ELEMENT (SRRE) AND HOUSEHOLD
HAZARDOUS WASTE ELEMENT (HHWE) AND AUTHORIZING
THAT BOTH DOCUMENTS (AS AMENDED) BE FORWARDED
TO THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO FOR INCLUSION IN
THE COUNTYWIDE INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT
PLAN
WHEREAS, the California Integrated Waste Management Act
of 1989 (AB939) required that all cities and counties prepare
formal plans aimed at wastestream diversion goals of 25% by 1995
and 50% by the year 2000; and
WHEREAS, specifically, cities are required to adopt two
"elements", one addressing source reduction, recycling and
composting programs (SRRE) , and the other addressing the
elimination of illegal disposal of household toxins (HHWE); and
WHEREAS, the law required that two public hearings be
held prior to adoption of both documents; and
WHEREAS, the first public hearing requirement was met
when the preliminary documents were accepted at the City Council's
regular meetings of 11/19/91 (SRRE) and 12/17/91 (HHWE); and
WHEREAS, at that time, staff was directed to accept
public comment during the designated period, address CEQA
requirements, and return to Council for adoption of the final set
of documents; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing has been held on 12/15/92 which
completes the second requirement and allows Council to consider
adoption of the plans to be forwarded to the County for inclusion
along with 18 other jurisdictions in the Countywide plan; and
WHEREAS, the City'S Environmental Review Coordinator has
determined that the SRRE and HHWE are categorically exempt under
Class 6, section 15306 of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) Guidelines since the proposed project will not result in a
serious or major disturbance to an environmental resource.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby approve and adopt the SRRE and
HHWE and authorizing that both documents ( amended) e forwarded
to the County of San Diego for incl n in t e countywide
Integrated Waste Management Plan.
a'A'
Presented by
Stephanie snyder, principal
Management Assistant
F:\home\auomey\SRRB
Bruce M. Boogaard,
Attorney
/5'? /IS" 'l
ATTACHMENT A: SRRE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This is a summary of the Source Reduction on Recycling Element (SRRE) prepared for
the City of Chula Vista by Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc. (COM) dated October 1991.
The report is divided into the following ten sections:
1.0 Statement of Goals and Objectives
2.0 Initial Solid Waste Generation Study
3.0 Source Reduction Component
4.0 Recycling Component
5.0 Composting Component
6.0 Special Waste Component
7.0 Education and Public Information Component
8.0 Facility Capacity Component
9.0 Funding Component
10.0 Integration Component
1.0 STATEMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
This section provides a brief overview of the regulatory background that relates to the
SRRE, as well as the goals and objectives of each component program that will help the
City of Chula Vista meet the mandated 25 and 50 percent diversion required by State
Assembly Bill 939 and comply with the county mandatory recycling ordinance. Refer
to Table ES-l for a summary of component goals.
The short-term objectives of Chula Vista's source reduction program are to educate the
public about source reduction activities and to modify city procurement policies. The
medium-term objective is to encourage source reduction behavior through the use of
public information and business outreach programs, economic incentives and rate
structure modifications, point-of-purchase signage, as well as the promotion of source
reduction legislation.
22119.053-TC-eoITIl2/CHUU\ VST/CHUU\ VST.FNL ES-I
.
J5~J
Table FS-l
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SUMMARY OF COMPONENT GOALS
COMPONENT PROGRAM W ASTFSTREAM REDUCTION
Short-Term Medium-Term
(1995) (2000)
Source Reduction 1 2
Recycling
Residential 6 11
Commercial/Industrial 10 15
Composting 8 21
Special Waste 0 1
TOTAL 25 50
2209 .053-TC-COIT/12/CHULA VST/CHULA VST.PNL ES- 2
..
IS~ / tJ
The city's short-term recycling objective is to divert 49 percent of the readily recyclable
material that is currently being disposed, primarily through the implementation of
mandatory recycling programs for each land use sector in compliance with the San Diego
County mandatory recycling ordinance. The city's medium-term recycling objective is
to capture 80 percent of the readily recyclable material that is currently being disposed.
The city has also laid out some objectives for developing markets for recyclable material,
including establishing a local waste exchange clearinghouse, attracting recycling firms
to the south bay and promoting the purchase of recycled materials by the public and
private sectors.
The city's short-term composting objective is to remove at least 30 percent of the
industrial, commercial and residential yard and wood waste stream. The medium-term
composting objective is to remove at least 79 percent of the industrial, commercial and
residential yard and wood waste stream. The city will also provide market development
assistance for compost and mulch and will use these products in city parks and open
space areas.
The objective of Chula Vista's special waste program are to comply with the county
mandatory recycling ordinance, ensure proper handling and disposal (including adequate
disposal capacity), and where feasible minimize, reuse and recycle all special wastes
generated within the jurisdiction. More specifically, the short-term objectives include
continuing the recycling of asphalt and compo sting of sewage sludge, continued
sponsoring of citywide garage sales and community cleanups, and encouraging the use
of retreaded tires.
2.0 INITIAL SOLID WASTE GENERATION STUDY
The Solid Waste Generation Study is divided into three subsections and includes
descriptive information about the City of Chula Vista, current solid waste practices,
current and projected solid waste quantities, and disposal stream composition data.
2209.053-TCCOITII2lCHUU VST/CHUU VST.FNL ES- 3
.
15'/1
The City of Chula Vista contracts with Laidlaw Waste Systems to provide solid waste
collection and disposal services for all residential, commercial, industrial and other waste
generators within the city limits. The waste material is hauled to the Otay Landfill
located in southwestern San Diego County, east of Interstate 805 and north of Otay
Valley Road. The landfill is owned by San Diego County and operated by Herzog
Contracting Corporation.
Diversion practices in 1990 in the City of Chula Vista included all material that is picked
up by the residential curbside program, taken to drop-off and buy-back centers, donated
to nonprofit organizations for recycling or reuse, and salvaged by scrap dealers. The
estimated diversion through recycling activities is approximately 2442.6 tons per year for
a total recycling rate of 1.3 percent. In addition, Chula Vista's residential curbside
recycling program, which began in 1991, diverted an average of 274 tons ofrecyclables
per month between February and June, 1991.
Although there are no composting facilities within the jurisdiction, the city's sewage
sludge is being composted on Fiesta Island, diverting 11,315 tons of material away from
disposal. In 1990, source reduction, recycling, and composting activities provided the
City of Chula Vista with a diversion rate of approximately 7.2 percent.
The determination of a per capita solid waste generation rate provides a numerical value
which can be applied to population increases to project future solid waste quantities. The
City of Chula Vista has a base year waste disposal of 7.3 pounds per capita per day.
Waste disposal projections (without increasing diversion rates) for the short- and
medium-term planning periods are provided in Table ES-2.
Quantitative field analysis methodology was used to characterize the waste categories and
waste types generated by the City of Chula Vista. The results of the waste sampling are
provided in Table ES-3.
2209.053-TCCOrrIl2lCHlJLo\ VST/CHlJLo\ VST.PNL ES-4
"
JS~/~
Table FS-2
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
POPULATION AND SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL PROJECTIONS
WASTE QUANTITY
POPULATlONl .
YEAR (TONS/YEAR)
1990 135,163 180,071
1991 137,863 183,668
1992 140,563 187,265
1993 143,263 190,862
1994 145,963 194,459
1995 148,663 198,056
1996 150,691 200,758
1997 152,719 203,460
1998 154,747 206,162
1999 156,775 208,863
2000 158,803 211,565
2001 160,211 213,441
2002 161,619 215,317
2003 163,027 217,193
2004 164,435 219,069
2005 165,843 220,944
2006 167,253 222,822
The San Diego Association of Governments Series 7 forecasts for 1990, 1995,
2000 and 2006 were revised specifically for preparation of the San Diego County
Source Reduction and Recycling Elements. This revision incorporates 1990
census figures, series 7 growth rates and current trends in housing completions.
2209.053-TCCOIT/l2/CHULA VST/CHULA VST.FNL ES- 5
",
IS'!;>
Table ES-3
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SOLID WASTE COMPOSITION SUMMARY
Percent
Waste San Marcos Sycamore Otay Miramar Total (%)
Component
Cardboard 0.0 0.0 12006.3 10.2 12016.5 6.7
Newspaper 0.0 0.0 8133.6 4.5 8138.1 4.5
Mixed Paper 0.0 0.0 11585.1 9.2 11594.3 6.4
HB Ledger 0.0 0.0 2578.6 1.4 2580.1 1.4
Glass 0.0 0.0 4748.2 4.3 4752.5 2.6
Film Plastic 0.0 0.0 3565.4 2.6 .3568.0 2.0
Hard Plastic 0.0 0.0 4357.7 2.9 4360.6 2.4
Diapers 0.0 0.0 3809.4 0.0 3809.4 2.1
Other Misc. * 0.0 0.0 58744.2 29.0 58773.1 32.7
Tin Cans 0.0 0.0 2175.1 0.0 2175.1 1.2
Aluminum Cans 0.0 0.0 401.3 0.5 401.8 0.2
Yard Waste 0.9 117.7 31162.2 18.1 31298.1 17.4
Wood Waste 0.7 26.9 17418.2 11.3 17456.3 9.7
Concrete 0.6 25.0 1133.4 33.9 1192.4 0.7
Asphalt 0.1 2.9 59.8 2.1 64.8 0.0
DirtlRock/Sand 0.9 129.0 3113.4 73.4 3315.9 1.8
Roofing 0.1 44.8 652.5 0.6 697.9 0.4
Drywall 0.2 22.1 457.6 1.2 481.0 0.3
Mixed 2.4 454.9 12478.0 90.6 13023.5 7.2
Construction
Special Wastes 0.0 0.0 286.2 0.0 286.2 0.2
Total 6.0 823.4 178866.2 295.9 179991.4 100.0
... "Other Misc." category is equivalent to "non-ferrous", "natural" and "synthetic textiles",
"organics", "residuals", "putrescibles", "salvage/composite" and "inert materials" categories.
. 2209.053-TC-COITIt2/CIIULA VST/CIIULA VST.FNL ES-6
~
/5-~/i
3.0 SOURCE REDUCTION COMPONENT
Source reduction programs typically focus on:
. reducing use of non-recyclable materials
. replacing disposable with reusable materials
· reducing packaging
. reducing amount of yard waste generated
. purchasing repairable products and recycled products
. increasing the efficiency of the use of materials
Source reduction program alternatives were evaluated according to the following criteria:
. . Effectiveness in reduction of waste
· Hazards created
. Ability to accommodate change
· Consequences on the waste (Le. shifts)
. Whether can be implemented in short- and medium-term planning periods.
. Need for expanding/building facilities
. Consistency with local conditions
. Institutional barriers to implementation
· Estimate of costs
. Availability of end uses of diverted materials
The program and implementation schedule in Table ES-4 is recommended for the City
of Chula Vista.
2209.053-TC-COITII2ICHULA VST/CHULA VST.FNL ES-7
.,
J5~ IS"
4.0 RECYCLING COMPONENT
4.1 PRIORITY WASTE TYPES
The general waste categories that will be targeted as part of Chula Vista's recycling
program are paper, plastic, glass, metal, construction debris, and yard waste. The
targeted percentages for recovery for the short- and medium-term objectives are to
remove 49 percent of the materials identified for recycling by 1995 and 80 percent by
the year 2000.
4.2 EXISTING CONDmONS
The City of Chula Vista has had a citywide residential curbside collection program since
February, 1991 (a pilot program started in 1989). Current participation rates are
approximately 82 percent of all the single family and multi-family households that receive
curbside solid waste collection. Material recovery has averaged 274 tons per month.
The city's internal office recycling program diverted over 17,000 pounds of recyclables
between July and September, 1991. The city has a number of ongoing recycling
programs for the various land use sectors in the city. Current city programs for the
residential sector include annual citywide garage sales, quarterly community clean-ups
in targeted neighborhoods, and an extensive public information campaign, a block captain
program, and curbside collection of recyclables.
.
Ongoing programs targeted for the commercial and industrial sector include the
development of a business recycling data base, targeting of businesses for the
development of office source reduction programs, (business recycling outreach program),
and the recycling of asphalt and composting of yard waste from city operations. The I
Love a Clean San Diego group has developed an disseminated a school curriculum which
addresses recycling, source reduction and composting. This group also offers a hot line
service which anyone in the county may call with recycling questions. The city has been
2209.053- TC-COITI121CHULA VST/CHULA VST.PNL ES-8
'"
J5'/~
participating on a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) of key county and city staffs
(from allover the county) and solid waste consultants. The TAC was formed to address
countywide solid waste issues and meets twice a month.
4.3 EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES
Alternative recycling programs were evaluated according to the same criteria listed for
source reduction alternatives. The alternatives and issues evaluated included:
· Source separation
. Residential curbside collection
· Drop-off centers
· Buy-back centers
· Scheduled collection
. Central processing facilities
. Materials recovery facilities
low technology
medium technology
high technology
. Marketing of recyclables
Another approach at addressing the requirements of AB 939 is through the development
of a regional MRF, that would be operated in conjunction with the Prison Industry
Authority (PIA). The PIA proposes a 1000 ton per day waste recycle energy plant that
would use inmate labor from the Donovan Correctional Facility. The goal of this
program is multifaceted. The inmates would separate recyclable materials from the
mixed municipal solid wastestream. The organic fraction of the wastestream, in turn,
would be used to produce electricity and steam using biogas produced through anaerobic
digestion. In segregating the recyclables from the remainder of the wastestream, the PIA
proposed using a series of mechanical and handsorting operations that would allow for
the separation of paper, glass, aluminum, plastic, ferrous metal, wood, and related
2209.053- TC-COITIl2lCHUl.A VST/CHUl.A VST.FNL ES-9
,
)5' J'?
materials. The organic, or non-recyclable portion of the solid waste stream, would be
anaerobically digested, in conjunction with sewage generated by the prison. This process
would provide steam and electrical energy for the prison facilities, as well as the
availability of electricity for sale to local utility users.
This project is only in the formative stages and the impact that the PIA program will
have on the overall SRRE approach, in terms of scope and time of implementation, must
still be identified.
4.4 PROGRAM SELECTION AND IMPLEMENTATION
The backbone of Chula Vista's short-term recycling program is the planned
implementation of mandatory recycling for all land use sectors (single family residential,
multi-family residential, industrial and commercial/public uses) according to the schedule
established by the San Diego County mandatory recycling ordinance. The details for
each of these programs are still under evaluation by the city. Chula Vista will also
establish a business recycling outreach program, a waste exchange program, and a
backyard composting program. The city's in-house office recycling program will be
expanded. The city's recycling program also includes the encouragement of recycling
companies to locate their operations within the city and an extensive public information
nd education campaign. A comprehensive listing of the various aspects of Chula Vista's
recycling program and a schedule for implementation are provided in Tables ES-5 and
ES-6. In addition, the County of San Diego is planning an extensive public information
campaign in conjunction with implementation of the County Mandatory Recycling
Ordinance.
4.5 PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
The programs and implementation listed in Tables ES-5 and ES-6 are recommended for
Chula Vista to achieve the mandated diversion goals.
2209.053-TC-COIT/121CHULA VST/CHULA VST ,FNL
ES-IO
'If.
J5'~/r
Table ES-4
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SOURCE REDUCTION COMPONENT
SHORT-TERM IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
Activity Completion Date
1. Inlenn.tion and Public Education
Continue civic center source reduction/recycling program
Consumer public education program
Continue business recycling outreach program
Implement point-of-purchase signage
2. City Leadershio
Lobby for state legislation
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Develop and implement city procurement ordinance
3. Rate Structure Modifications
June 1992
Evaluate variable can rate program
December 1993
Sponsor community cleanups and citywide garage sale
4. Technical Assistance
Quarterly/annually
Apply for TAP Grant for waste exchange program and continuing
business recycling outreach and civic center recycling programs
Develop and implement city waste exchange program or establish
cooperation with state program
Implement backyard composting program
October 1991
June 1992
November 1991
6. Monitorim!
Establish business Source ReductionIRecycIing database
October 1991
MeeJium- Tenn activities will be established based upon the result of the programs and activities conducted
during the short-tenn period.
2209.0S3-TC.cOIT/I21CHlllA VST/CHlllA VST.FNL
ES-ll
..,
/.?~ /1
Table ES-S
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
RECYCLING COMPONENT
SHORT-TERM IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
Activity Projeded Date
1. City Mandatory RecVC1in2 Ordinance
Ordinance drafted November 1991
Ordinance enacted March 1, 1992
2. Residential RecvcliDl! Pro2r8.ms
Implement backyard composling pilot program November 1991
Continue block captain program Ongoing
Continue to promote and expand single family curbside collection of Ongoing
recyclables
Decision on type of RFP for collection/composting of yard waste November 1991
Issue RFP for residential yard waste collection March 1992
Residential yard waste contract award July 1992
Enforcement of yard waste collection program January 1993
Determine approach to multi-family residential recycling program January 1992
Multi-family recycling contract award (if appropriate) July 1992
Implement multi-family recycling program (enforce mandatory
recycling) July I, 1993
Continue to sponsor community cleanups Quarterly
Continue to sponsor citywide garage sales Annually
Begin enforcement of mandatory single family recycling March 1992
2209.053.TC-COIT/121CHULA VST/CHULA VST.FNL
ES-12
...
15--';'0
Table ES-S (con'l)
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
RECYCLING COMPONENT
SHORT-TERM IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
Activity Projected Date
3. CommerciaVOffice Recvclim!: Pr02I'8ffiS
Apply for county TAP grant to continue city office recycling and October 1991
business outreach programs
Continue to expand city office program and business outreach Ongoing
program
Develop a recycling data base Ongoing
Determine approach to commercial recycling program January 1992
Commercial recycling contract award (if appropriate) July 1992
Begin enforcement of mandatory commercial recycling July 1993
Begin enforcement of mandatory industrial recycling October 1992
Establish waste exchange program June 1992
4. Draft a recVClin2 desi2ll ordinance fOT sDace allocation January 1992
2209 .0S3.TC-COIT/12/CHUlA VST/CHULA VST.FNL
ES-13
'lj.
J~,).J
Table ES-6
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
RECYCLING COMPONENT
MEDIUM-TERM IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
Artivity Projected Date
1. CommerciaUOffice and Industrial RecVClin2 Pro2I'8.ms
Evaluate existing program effectiveness June 1995
Evaluate possible equipment/program changes July 1995
2. Residential Curbside Multi-Material Recvclimz Pro2J'8.ms
Evaluate existing program effectiveness May 1995
Evaluate possible program changes May 1995
3. Pilot Multi-Familv RecVClinE Proi?:ram
Evaluate multi-family recycling program effectiveness January 1996
Evaluate possible program changes January 1996
4. Materials Recoverv Facilitv
Evaluate city's success in attracting MRFs to the area and evaluate May 1995
the need for additional facilities
5. Transfer Facilitv
Consider cooperation with county transfer facilities (currently in the July 1995
planning process)
6. Education and Public Information
Assess effectiveness of information program January 1995
Modify informational materials in combination with programmatic Ongoing
changes
2209 .053-TC-COITI12/CHULA VST/CHULA VST.FNL
ES-14
'"
IYol,;2.
4.5 MONITORING AND EVALUATION
In order to assess the effectiveness of a residential recycling program, it is essential to
gather and evaluate a variety of operational data. The key items to be monitored are:
. Set-out rates
· Participation rates
· Recovery quantities
. Materials capture rates
. Compliance with processing specifications (e.g. level of contamination,
minimum quantities)
. Vehicle performance and collection
· Costs and revenues
In the short-term, the commercial and industrial recycling programs will be based on
voluntary participation with guidance and direction from city staff. When mandatory
recycling goes into effect, businesses may still be allowed to make their own recycling
arrangements with permitted haulers. Therefore, in order to assess the effectiveness of
a commercial/industrial recycling program, it is essential to work closely with the
business community in establishing and measuring program effectiveness. The items that
can be monitored include:
. Material capture rates (number of trailer pulls and tonnage records)
. Periodic commercial/industrial establishment surveys (e.g., in conjunction
with business license renewals, as the city recently began to require)
. Commercial waste stream audits
2209.053.TC-COIT/121CHULA VSTfCHULA VST.FNL
ES-15
,
J5..~:J
5.0 COMPOSTING COMPONENT
5.1 EXISTING CONDffiONS
According the 1990 waste characterization study, approximately 27 percent of Chula
Vista's disposal stream is composed of yard and wood wastes. The city does not have
a comprehensive yard and wood waste compo sting program at the present time. The
Chula Vista Public Works Department is mulching yard waste from city parks and public
green open spaces. Some mulching also occurs at the Otay LandfIll where Chula Vista's
yard waste is disposed, but it is not known how much of Chula Vista's yard waste is
being mulched. In addition, sewage sludge from Chula Vista is being composted on
Fiesta Island (see Section 6.0 of this Executive Summary).
5.2 EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES
Composting alternatives were evaluated according to the criteria listed for source
reduction alternatives. The alternatives evaluated included:
. Waste storage/collection
source separation/collection
commingled collection
mechanical separation
mixed solid waste composting
· Feedstocks
high carbon/low moisture
high nitrogen/high moisture
2209.053- TC.COIT/l21CHm..A VST/CHULA VST.FNL
ES-16
'",
J S-:'- ,;L t/
. Composting technologies
preprocessing
aerated static pile
in-vessel
windrow I static pile
. Program scale
local
subregional
regional
. Marketing and distribution
local
bulk sales to wholesalers
turnkey contract
5.3 PROGRAM SELECTION AND IMPLEMENTATION
The selection of a composting program has been based upon the objectives previously
defined; consideration of existing conditions in Chula Vista; the requirements of the
county mandatory recycling ordinance; and the need to maintain program flexibility. The
composting programs and implementation schedules planned for the City of Chula Vista
are presented in Tables ES-7 and ES-8.
5.4 MONITORING AND EVALUATION
The monitoring of the composting program will be closely linked with the recycling
program and parameters will be similar.
2209.053-TC-COIT/12/CH1JLo\ VST/CHULA VST.FNL
ES-l7
>.
/5'015
6.0 SPECIAL WASTE COMPONENT
6.1 TARGETED MATERIALS AND ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION
Special wastes are materials that require special handling or disposal because of physical,
chemical, or biological characteristics. Most of this material cannot be diverted and will
continue to be disposed in an environmentally sound manner (e.g. asbestos, street
sweepings, and infectious waste). Septic tank pumpings and incinerator ash are not
generated in Chula Vista. Auto bodies and grease trap pumpings are already being
diverted. Only those special waste types with feasible new diversion alternatives were
evaluated. These include sewage sludge (existing diversion), white goods/bulky items,
construction/demolition debris, and used tires.
6.1.1 SEWAGE SLUDGE
The San Diego County Metropolitan Wastewater Treatment Facility (Metro) is
responsible for treating and disposing of Chula Vista's sewage sludge. Digested sludge
from the Metro facility is air dried at Fiesta Island in Mission Bay. The dried sludge is
shipped to a private contractor, Corona Chino Farms. Chula Vista's sewage sludge
generation is estimated atl! ,315 tons per year, for which Chula Vista has taken existing
diversion credit.
6.1.2 USED TIRES
Used tires create a number of problems when buried in landf1lls. Alternatives available
for used tire diversion include incineration, retreading, and crumb rubber uses.
However, due to air quality problems, potential health hazards and the lack of end uses,
none of these alternatives are currently considered viable for the diversion of significant
quantities of tires away from landfill disposal. The city will reevaluate these alternatives
at the medium-term planning stage.
2209 .053-TC-COIT/12/CHULA VST/CHULA VST.FNL
ES-18
,,"':
J5"'02~
Table ES-7
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
COMPOSTING COMPONENT
SHORT-TERM IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
ACTIVITY PROJECTED DATE
1. Continuous Composting of Sewage Sludge. Ongoing
2. Draft City Recycling/Composting Ordinance and November 1991
City Procurement Ordinance.
3. Backyard Composting Program
a. Implement pilot program. November 1991
b. Expand program. 1992-1995
4. Residential Yard Waste Collection/Composting
Program
a. RFP decision. November 1991
b. Issue request for proposals. November 1991
c. Begin public education. December 1991
d. Begin greens collection. January 1992
e. Enforce mandatory yard waste separation. January 1993
5. Commercial/Industrial Composting
a. Continue business outreach program. Ongoing
b. Begin enforcement of mandatory industrial
recycling/ composting. October 1992
c. Determine whether to issue an RFP for
commercial recycling/composting. November 1991
d. Issue RFP April 1992
e. Begin enforcement of mandatory
commercial recycling/composting. July 1993
6. Eastlake Composting Facility Pilot Program Ongoing
7. Compost Marketing
a. Continue to use compost on city-owned
parks, golf course and landscaped areas. Ongoing
b. Assist composting contractors in
identifying end use markets in Chula Vista
and in pursing those markets. 1992-1994
2209 .053-TC.COITI121CHULA VST/CHUI.A VST.PNL
ES-19
....
J5~cJ. ?
Table FS-8
CHULA VISTA
COMPOSTING COMPONENT
MEDIUM-TERM IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
ACTIVITY PROJECTED DATE
1. Evaluate Effectiveness of Residential, Industrial January 1995
and Commercial Composting Programs
2. Modify Programs as Needed to Improve June 1995
Effectiveness, Including Public Information
Materials/Methods
3. Expand Programs to Include Other Organic 1995-1999
Wastes (e.g., food waste) and Other End Uses
(e.g., farm uses)
4. Continue to Expand End Use Markets for the 1995-1999
Compost
5. Require Large Scale Planned Developments in the 1995-1999
City to Provide Internal Yard Waste
Collection/Composting and Use Own Compost
6. Consider Participation in Sub-Regional and Ongoing
Regional Composting Programs
7. Continue Composting of Sewage Sludge Ongoing
2209 .053.Tc.corr/I21CHUlA VST/CHUlA VST.FNL
ES-20
"'"
/5-r d-%'
6.1.3 WHITE GOODS/BULKY ITEMS
White goods include items such as refrigerators, air conditions, washers, dryers and other
bulky appliances. Under the County Mandatory Recycling Ordinance, these are targeted
materials for recycling in the residential and commercial sector. The City of Chula Vista
will continue to sponsor annual citywide garage sales and quarterly community cleanups.
The city will also include information about options for the sale or donation of used items
as part of its public education program.
6.1.4 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLIDON DEBRIS
The major options for this special waste category include the reuse and recycling of
concrete, asphalt, dirt, rock, sand, land clearing brush, and scrap metal. These materials
are targeted for industrial recycling under the county mandatory recycling ordinance.
The major methods of asphalt recycling are cold or hot recycling. Concrete, sand, rock,
dirt and metal recovered from construction and demolition activities can be reused as
subgrade material. Land clearing brush can be mulched or composted. There will be
more economic incentives to take clean construction land demolition material to private
recyclers as landfill tipping fees increase.
6.2 PROGRAM SELECTION AND IMPLEMENTATION
The selection of a special waste program has been based upon the objectives defined in
Section 3.0 of this Executive Summary. The special waste program and schedule
planned for Chula Vista are summarized in Table ES-9.
2209.053- TC-COIT/l2JCHIllA VST/CHIllA VST.PNL
ES-21
.
/5 (:).J
7.0 EDUCATION AND PUBLIC INFORMATION
7.1 EXISTING CONDmONS
The City of Chula Vista has a multi-faceted education and public information program
that includes flyers, brochures, a recycling hot line, media releases and interviews, and
public presentations. The city is beginning its business outreach and backyard
composting programs with associated fliers and contacts through working with the local
chamber of commerce and local garden clubs. The I Love a Clean San Diego
organization also has ongoing public education and information programs.
7.2 SELECTION OF ALTERNATIVES
The best overall strategy is a comprehensive mix of techniques that includes:
Public Education
. Direct mailing of brochures and newsletters to city residents and
businesses.
. Canvassing at stores and residences door-to-door.
. Targeted brochures to households whose first language is not English.
. Public service announcements on local television and radio stations.
. Community leader presentations at civic, neighborhoOd, church, social
service and business organization meetings.
. Information booths at shopping malls and community events.
. Recycling classes and field trips as part of school curriculum for grades
one through 12.
. Speaker's bureau of experts, public officials, and other informed persons
that would be available to make presentations on recycling.
2209.053. TC-eoIT/l21CHlJL\ VST/CHULA VST.FNL
ES-22
11;
;5';1'0
Promotions and Events
. Promote a recycling day or recycling week.
. Sponsor recycling contests among schools, youth groups, civic groups or
neighborhoods.
. Recycling awards to individuals, neighborhoods, businesses and
community organizations.
. Encourage Christmas tree recycling or use of live trees.
. Hold specific material recycling drives and citywide garage sales.
. Obtain celebrity spokespersons.
. Continue to offer a reduced recycling service fee to senior citizens and
low income households.
. Continue to run block captain program.
Publicity and Reminders
. Advertisements in newspapers, on billboards and buses, in grocery stores
and community centers.
. Canvassing at stores and residences door-to-door.
. Press releases and interviews for articles in local newspapers and
magazines and local news television broadcasts.
. Posters, bumper stickers.
. Caps, buttons, t-shirts.
. Point-of-purchase signage.
. Messages on shopping bags.
. Notices on utility bills.
. Telephone surveys.
2209.053~ TC..COIT/l2JCHUlA VST/CHU!.A VST.FNL
ES-23
,.
/.5'-- Y /
. Radio and television public service announcements shared among
neighboring cities.
. Participation in local TV and radio talk shows.
7.3 PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
Implementation of the public education/information program should begin within the first
month of each recycling program phase or approach. It is recommended that the city
initiate each program with an extensive four month education campaign in which
newsletters and brochures are sent to explain the programs. It is also recommended that
the city hold several public discussions in which residents come to voice their opinions
about the programs. Tables ES-lO and ES-ll outline the proposed tasks and schedules
for short- and medium-term implementation of Chula Vista's education and public
information programs.
7.4 MONITORING AND EVALUATION
Monitoring and evaluation of the public information program will be closely linked with
monitoring of other program components and will particularly focus on:
. Public awareness
. Participation rates
. . Material capture rates
. Buyback center receipts and expenditures
2209 .053-TC-eoIT/121CHULA VSTJCHULA. VST.FNL
ES-24
'\ii.
/~J,2
TABLE ES-!I
CITY OF ClIDLA VISTA
Special Waste Component
Implementation Schedule
Activity Projected Date
Short-Term Task
l. Enforce County Mandatory Recycling
Ordinance (includes some special
wastes)
a. Single family residential March 1992
b. Industrial October 1992
c. Multi-family July 1993
residential/commercial
2. Continue private sector reporting Ongoing
requirements for special wastes
3. Continue to sponsor annual citywide Ongoing
garage sales and quarterly community
clean-ups
4. Investigate second use markets for used April 1992
tires, demolition waste, rubber and
grease trap pumpings as part of the
city's business outreach and waste
exchange program.
5. Continue to recycle asphalt from city
street demolition/maintenance Ongoing
6. Encourage the siting of additional January 1994
construction demolition recyclers in the
city.
Medium-Term Task
l. Evaluate special waste diversion January 1995
progress
2. Evaluate private sector reporting January 1995
methods
3. Consider a co-composting program January 1995
(yard waste and sewage sludge)
4. Evaluate business outreach and waste January 1995
exchange programs
2209.053- TC-COIT/12/CHUlA VST/CHULA VST.FNL
ES-2S
,.
)5>53
Table ES-IO
City of Cbula Vista
EDUCATION AND PUBLIC INFORMATION
SHORT-TERM lMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
Activity Projected Date
l. Mandatorv Recvcliol! Prol!1"lllIl-Snecific Activities
Promote Backyard Compostiog November 1991
Follow-up Public Information and Workshops December 1991
Promote Yard Waste Collection Program November 1992
Follow-up Public Information and Workshops February 1993
Promote Commercial Recycling Ongoing
Promote Multi-Family Recycling May 1993
Follow-up Public Informatioo and Workshops (Commercial and August 1993
Multi-Family)
Promote Industrial Recycling Ongoing
Follow-up Public Information and Workshops November 1992
2. General Public Education
Newsletters and Direct Mailing Ongoing
Public Service Announcements Ongoing
Promote School Curriculum Changes Ongoing
Community Speaking Engagements Ongoing
Develop Non-English Materials and Announcements March 1992
2. Promotions and Events
Continue Special Rates for Seniors and Low Income Households Ongoing
Recycliog Events Yearly
Citywide Garage Sale August
Christmas Tree Recycliog Program January
Competitions and Awards Yearly
3. General Publicitv and Reminders
Develop and Conduct Community Survey 1992, 1994
News Releases Ongoing
Radio, TV, Newspaper and Magazine Interview and Ads Ongoing
2209.053-TCCOITII2ICHULA VSTICHULA VST.FNL
ES-26
..."
I~Jt/
Table ES-ll
City of ChuIa Vista
EDUCATION AND PUBLIC INFORMATION COMPONENT
MEDWM-TERM IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
I Activity Projected Date I
1. Public Education
Evaluate and update material for public distribution Ongoing
Medium-term program kick-{)ff and existing program
effectiveness update August, 1995
2. Promotions and Events
Evaluate and update yearly promotion events Yearly
Target-group programs Ongoing
3. Publicitv and Reminders
Recirculate community surveys 1996, 1998
Radio and television public service announcements and features
Ongoing
Evaluate staffing requirements
May, 1995
2209 .OS3-TC..cOIT/12/CHULA VST/CHULA VST.FNL
ES-27
..
15~J~
8.0 FACILITY CAPACITY
The City of Chula Vista currently disposes of most of its municipal solid waste at the
Otay Landfill, which can be divided into the Otay Landfill and the Otay Annex Landfill.
The county of San Diego expects to submit a closure plan for these landfills during the
latter part of 1991, although the actual closures of these landfills are not expected to
occur during the SRRE planning period. The cities rea1ize the importance of minimizing
the quantity of solid waste deposited in the county's landfills in order to extend the life
of the facilities. Towards addressing the potential future usefulness of the existing
landfills, the county is proposing to expand the San Marcos Landfill and the Ramona
Landfill.
9.0 FUNDING COMPONENT
This section covers typical component facility costs and program funding alternatives
available to the city. The capital and annual operating costs associated with the various
SRRE components are estimated in Table ES-12.
Funds for future SRRE programs will come from any or a combination of the following
sources:
. Recycling surcharge at disposal facilities in the form of tipping fee
increases
. Establish residential recycling surcharge fees for collection
. Commercial/industrial recycling service fees
. Variable rate structure
. Business license fees
. County and state grants
. Market development and materials revenue
2209.053- TC-COIT/l21CHtn..A VST/CHUlA VST.FNL
ES-28
,.
/s- .3 (,
N
....
,
""
~
'"
:c
~
E-
oIJ
E-
~
f
S
~""
~E-
Q~
~ ~(,,)
.~ ~ Z
>~o
~z_
=ZE-
..c<<
(,,)~E-
...l:l.Z
=....~
>....: ~
.-.:<~
(,,),,~
~~
l:l.
Q
~
E-
<
~
E-
~
~..,
<""
E-~
00
E-(")
~
o
N
....~
N
o
lI"l
....
..
~
'"
"Q
~1
- ::I
r-- 0
N..c:
r.J
~
~
E-
""
o
(,,)
E-
~
..s
c
80
.6
N--
....:9
, 0
..c:
o .,
lI"l '"
.::1
..... 0
......c:
""
~
<
"
~
~
E-
~
~
~
o
(,,)
c
o
,-
-
al
.....
.....
o
(,,)
.,
"Q
'l;l
of
::I
U
<<l
.-
-
fB
"Q
'l;l
~
~
~
..c
.....
N
....
~
....
';is
c
B
~
~~
....
c
B
8
00
.....
....
8
lI"l
....
'"'
c
.9
~
.....
"0
u
bJl
C
,-
"Q
::I
g
.-
~
6
~
e
ll..
B
~
~
>-
~~
::E~~
N"1~
......... .....
............
~
....
--
'"
c
B
~~
8 r---
.... r--
~-
lI"l C
~ B
, c--
~BfB
c....
_ bJl '
V) .;; 0
N.,....
...."Q ....
.e>
.-
.....
.-
~
....
e-
I
'"
<<l
'1::
~
::E
'"
~
~
"'~ @
'l1:"'}-o
o-;;~
u8~
~::E-
~ oCl 13
uou
~
~~
........
.... --
c
o
.....,l:l
0<<1
00 .....
_ ::I
ooc:>.
:!:l8.,
~;S
'g.
u
&
--
lI"l
....
,
.....
....
~5
',l:l
g
'"
'S
's
"Q
<
~
~
."
'e
"
.
u
.
,s
l!'
'e
a
~
~
i
.
,s
.2
1
'e'
Co
"
'S
i?
~
u
-=
.
~
'6
;;:
1!
-'!
."
.
."
'0
~
"
.
.
.
e
.
~
.
-=
..
'C
2
e
]
u
.
~
>>
""
~
.
-g
e
.
.
"
.
u
X
.
I:
~
.
u
=
~
e
.
x
.
f.
IYJ'}
,:,
"C
.
l!'
:E
u
~
,.
~
e
j
.
,s
1!
.
.,go
~
~
.
u
~
.
~
"E
.
>>
.
-ll
.2
.~
~
e
"
.
""
"
:E
-il
"
,s
~
a
.
.
,.
0'
.>j,
d
.
."
e
~
1
8-
.
>>
~
~
..
ii
g
.c
..
J!
l!'
~
e
~
1'l
"
oS
l!'
'g
~
'"
c
.
e
.
Co
"
.
;;
.
u
S
'c,
.
u
]
..
~
.
1!
.
.
~
~
l!
.~
1!
.
g
."
i
=
.
1
.
""
..
1
.
~
Co
~
8-
"
.
5-'
.;
:;;
;;
.
~
.
'"
.
:!j
'U
>>
~
..
>>
'0
.
Co
.
u
~
'0
...
1
~
.
c
.
e
ll.
o
'"
.
.
e
a
.
:c
.;
u
=
;;
':
.
;;
u
'2
.c
u
2
.
.~
'2
~
e
.
u
"
J!
~
S
~
e
-il
~
.
'"
c
.
~
:E
.
,s
1!
.
.
.,g
'2
.
e
e
.
u
"
.
t'
-'!
S
.
:;;
.
,.
0.
Co
.
.
.c
."
g
~
~
e
~
I;i
>
~
'"
u
f;;
>
:s
o
'"
Si
~
1:;
8
to
..
"'
~
~
N
'"
N
~
1!
.
c
.
.~
u
.
."
.
,.
:;;
.
Co
Iii
'2
c
.
0.
.
.
."
.
]
=
o
'~
"
'2
's
].
.
:s
~
o
1!
.
"
.
~
.
,s
"
,s
'"
~
Iii
.
.
,.
The City of Chula Vista is presently supporting all of its current programs related to
recycling through franchise fees which are passed on as user fees, county grants and
redevelopment funds. Similar mechanisms which utilize existing rate structures to the
extent possible will be implemented by the city to support programs for the short-term
through 1995. The city does not intend to build and operate its own recycling equipment
and facilities but expects the private sector to provide equipment and facilities through
a competitive bid or free market process.
Several regional issues, such as the county's plans for building transfer stations in the
South County and providing central regionally-based facilities, preclude a complete
analysis of all the funding alternatives available to the City. The participation of several
cities within a subregional area and the unincorporated county under a joint powers
agreement (JP A) is one of these regional issues that could be considered. The feasibility
analysis for any capital facilities will require an economic evaluation and assessment of
the funding mechanisms dependent upon the structure of the IPA.
10.0 INTEGRATION COMPONENT
The development and selection of alternatives for a source reduction and recycling
program were based on an evaluation of existing practices and conditions, and the
projected growth and needs of the city. Chula Vista's goal is to have an integrated solid
waste management system capable of meeting both state-mandated reduction goals and
the needs of its citizens in the most environmentally sound, efficient, and cost effective
manner.
This section presents the results of the evaluations conducted for the SRRE, summarizes
the technologies and programs selected, and presents the schedule for program
implementation. Targeted programs are shown in Table ES-13.
2209.053.TC-eoIT/121CHULA VST/CHULA VST.FNL
ES-30
,y;
/s';Jr
g ..
il!!' N
~ ~. ~ ..
~ J
H
H
r
~ ]1
'!!1
" H
~
.l!'j
I ~1
e !
:~
-~ -
n
~ .JIll.
~ ~ @
. s
. ~ t:
~!~
..
'"
N
..
~
j @ 1
j -~ j[ 1 h :! 1
;gt- 1~ eli -11ijHh
If 1 1 -a.Jlll:l!
os .pJ ~ IS.
I I-~-n Ii j!_~
-~ J IU :UH~H
i 1 ~ ! t 1 ~ 1 1 -~ 1 ] :B i ~
~ hu ~~.. ~~..1l ~u]
. .. . . .
@ ~ ji';I_~I" @I
~ i f 1 I] i ~ 1 ~ ~ [ I-~ -~ _I i
1 I 1 ~ L 1 f f ! ~ ! i H t fh 1 i
h1t hI i[~-I g -i j 1 i -iill 111 [11
1~~~ ;[1" ~ifl 111 ~ Iii I~jl'ijf-I Ie)
iiit]]-.~~- ]"~r~ tli~~ ~Lt ]~~~t!~~!i ]~~
11l~ i Hf~ ~li ]--P~ ".1" .~~6HI.;s o.lI.
IIJIII1- il~fJ 111!l ~il llilfl~III~111
"~li!l. !l~i~ l~s_ J jis i~l]iJli!Sti~i
J~~i!flltftil ~iJt l~iJtij!!i JitJlil]
~
o
.."
~~~
~n ~
!:l..o Z 0
.. 0 "
~ ~ ~
u" e:
~ ~
51
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
~ lo!~_1f HI ~
.
" I & -j
~ ,,~h ) ~
.. ....fl~i1 1 1 i Ii U & q I 11 ~
I
IhhHji ~z~~!HhhL~~
o ...>-~ II..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I H If
~
!
u ..:! '" '"
~
/yJJ ~
!
:lhl e ~
~n."
il J ::
~
o
"
e
I
1. .!Jl.al
] ~.i b ! 1 n ro
ll.!i H 1 IIi} ~
] .1:; t :i1 1 )~ 11111 f
. 1r r 1 .I.a ['$
I I) S I 1 .i.. .J.i.J.J
.~ i PI U - ~ q :0
05 [f [~! S h !
j u. l~!.iU.~hll
.Eh'n ,U.,;u U.s 8u P:~
.. . .. ..
..
~
..
o
s!J I j
~~ u !1l ~
.fl .s j n I I
~H .11[1
.ai sl .df 1
p. f~ ir~1;~
0.1;5.s1) :q~~.!
U':~:ll~~ I-....j
a i! 1 .. .1 a i ~ r a a
~~:hp hPH
~.s:Ud ",",ul~~
. . . .. .
R s .J
.li i 8 !!i &
.il..?o' . ~ 1 ~ :i 5J]
Ii ':111 i ].~!!i
M ~ a:8 i iJe'] ~ 1 i 15J
ro1 .1 r~ .fiH:!! 1 h
~.]..8 ~",~~]I!- ilu,!"
1,18 M acIS ~ a6.ll~ ~ ~ IE tt.:
r ~ 1 .f ~ ioe.a ~ ~ II i ~ ~]
i~ j [1 i~ ~j~! ~M! ~ f1
.11 JI~l tl!~>r11'i~f l .s~
~ olf'" Ill!.! dhu i :ll-'!
1 !~~~ sr~iji-Ili- ;,i!
.Plc':hjU.p.dL~d'.!~ Ii!:"!
~~UlUUulHUrH,d dh
~
o
.."
~H
~~~
:::J u 0 ~
~ ~ ~ 8
~ ~ i!l
u.. I!!
~ ~
III
............ ..
~
"
~ i I
..
~ . ..
~ !~!
. . .
I .J
u
u ,.;
1
"
]
..
1 .f Hlt
~ . ~
~~ 1 o.ti:8
~I ~j[~11
:. ~ 1.ltsg e-
~[ r .e~~l .~
r~ :: ~el...g
d '" 1 M"=i "
i~ l 111'$ Ie
li l'lJ!:H.d
fa ~ ..1>.5
~ ... .s'" e ~
.~ s allju.5S~
.S SIr-5o.Ies;!!
q~.tnf~ ,'!n
:llu~uo,!l,.s ru~
.. .. ..
!
.1; j -i
ro h 1 l
~.llli-.1 t
;i1-idi~1
!"p~:S1!u~"
. . . .. . .
~
:i
~
'"
vi 'IJ>
/5-ijp
~
i
:;lId e
~ ~ ...
ita~
~
g
e
I
~
..."
~~i
~~~
eJ <.18 ~
~ ~ ~ g
~ ~ !
<.I1;l ~
i ~
.,
., 1
t i'i .~
! II: HI}
l1It..it.
I tJtqp{
1.~hil1ils
BUlhi ]
. . .... .
i
. 1
li i
iU illl &:i
'1 f] 0 ~ j 0 ~.I
Hi ~li~ l~ &.j t
~ ~i fl'~ ~.~ ~ [ ] 9 1
t ja:il : l;'s ~ i!l' il .~ ~ ~
t. ~.a- ~'ii l
~!hl jtM~~ ~~i.~1 i
.s~.~ ~ ,:iI ~~i~ I;
i~. i.~s ~LM .t1~...
Jjllll~l'~iIJ~]I!t
l dH~<.I<.I~<.IL
.
. . . . . .
. . . . . . .
..
:;:
..
lQ
I
I
~
=
~ .
~ ~
... Jl
I ..
~
.
I 1 i
'1 '1 ...
/5-'1/ .
ill~ ~
.ch
<.I
IL
ATTACHMENT B: HHWE
INTRODUCTION
This Household Hazardous Waste Element (HHWE) bas been prepared to comply with
California AB 939 requirements. HHWEs of countywide integrated waste management
plans specify how each City or unincorporated area (County) will safely collect, recycle,
treat and dispose of household hazardous waste (HHW) generated by households in that
jurisdiction within short-term (1991-1995) and medium-term (1996-2000) planning
periods.
Chula Vista is offered participation in the San Diego Regional Household Hazardous
Materials Program (Program) by the County of San Diego Waste Management
Department at direct no cost to the City. The Program has existed since 1985 and is a
joint effort between the County of San Diego and the City of San Diego, administered
by the San Diego County Department of Health Services (DHS). The Program includes
HHW collection and education and public information.
The County of San Diego offers Chula Vista participation in this Program because the
City disposes of its solid waste at County landfills and indirectly pays for part of the
Program through tipping fees, a portion of which pay for the County of San Diego's
HHW program. Because the County receives money for the Program from Chula Vista
through the tipping fees, the County is responsible for describing how it will safely
collect, recycle, treat and dispose of household hazardous waste (HHW) generated by
households in Chula Vista. Therefore, the County's HHWE is attached as Appendix A
to fulfill the specific requirements of the element for Chula Vista, and additional
information specific to the City's goals and objectives, existing conditions, program
alternatives and selection, implementation schedule, monitoring and evaluation, and
funding are described below.
Based on data from a recent waste composition study (1990), a total of 1,590,053 tons
of residential waste is disposed each year at landfills within the county. Of this waste,
2209-11I\IIHW\C\lVIIIHW
1
.,.,
I.Y'I~
95,849 tons are from Chula Vista's residential wastestrearn. According to results of an
EPA study conducted in Marin County, California and New Orleans, Louisiana,
approximately 0.4 percent of household (residential) waste is hazardous. Applying this
percentage to the City's residential wastestrearn, approximately 6,360 tons of HHW are
disposed each year in San Diego County, 383 tons (6 percent) of which are from Chula
Vista's residential wastestrearn.
GOAlS AND OBJECTIVFS
Consistent with the overall Program goal, Chula Vista's goal is to prevent illegal disposal
of HHW. To achieve this goal, the City has specified objectives for the respective
planning periods.
SHORT-TERM OBJECTIVES (1991-1995)
The short-term City-specific objectives include
. Utilize/advertise permanent facilities in San Diego County.
. Continue in-house and County-supplied education and public information
programs.
MEDIUM-TERM OBJECTIVES (1996-2000)
The medium-term City-specific objectives include
. Continue in-house and County-supplied education and public information
programs.
:t209-111\HIIW\CIIVIHIIW
2
'"
J5*'tJ;J
EXISTING CONDmONS
Appropriate Technologies, a permanent collection center in Chula Vista, offers a drop-off
service Monday through Saturday for residents who first oblain a "control number" (for
tracking) from the DHS hotline service. They offer a pick-up service for handicapped
residents. The facility makes arrangements to pick up the HHW at the handicapped
individuals' homes once they have oblained their "control number" from the DHS HotlIDe
Service. Applopriate Technologies is permitted to operate as a treatment, storage, and
disposal (TSD) facility.
Chula Vista utilizes the education and public information services offered by the
Program, as well as distributing informational flyers which have been developed in-house
(See Appendix B). In addition, residents are encouraged to participate in any of the
additional collection events offered countywide through the Program. Table I shows a
schedule of the Program's collection events for fiscal year 1991-92.
PROGRAM SELECTION
In addition to using the two existing permanent facilities, one of which is located in the
City of Chula Vista, the City plans to utilize most of the Program components offered
by the County. These include six future permanent facilities throughout the county and
education and public information services which are already paid for by the City through
tipping fees paid at the County landfills. The City will also continue to disseminate
information on proper disposal and use of non-toxic alternatives which is developed in-
house.
2Z09-1111IIIIW\CIlVIIIH
3
..
/5-0/0/
PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
Additional pennanent collection facility implementation dates and locations will be
determined by the County (see Section 5.0, Appendix A). Education and public
information will continue to be administered by the County.
..
MONITORING AND EVALUATION
Monitoring and evaluation will be conducted by the County as described in Appendix A.
Chula Vista will be responsible for an annual City participation rate in the Program
according to its percent of HHW determined to be disposed of illegally in county
landfills. Table 2 shows an estimate of the tonnage of HHW disposed at landfills in the
county by jurisdiction and the percent of the total tonnage of HHW disposed by each
jurisdiction.
FUNDING
The Program is paid for through tipping fees Chula Vista residents pay at solid waste
landfills in the County of San Diego.
2209-11I\HIIW\CIIVIIIIl
4
...
/5-- '-/5'
ATTACHMENT C: Amendments to
SRRE & HHWE
December 15, 1992
County of San Diego
Department of Public Works
Solid Waste Division
5555 Overland Avenue, M.S. 0383
San Diego, CA 92123-1295
RE: City of Chula Vista, SRRE and HHWE
This will transmit the Source Reduction and Recycling Element
(SRRE) and Household Hazardous Waste Element (HHWE) adopted by the
City of Chula Vista in compliance with AB939. The draft SRRE and
HHWE, which were distributed to the County in December 1991 are
hereby amended with the enclosed attachment comprised of the
following material:
1) Letter from Camp Dresser & McKee Inc. reI State
Staff Comments of the Preliminary Draft SRRE
(June 23, 1992)
2) Letter from California Integrated Waste
Management Board re: Board Comments on the SRRE
and HHWE (June 2, 1992)
3) Ci ty of Chula Vista Memorandum re: Revisions to
Potential Development Data (November 30, 1992)
These documents, as amended, are being forwarded to the County at
this time for inclusion in the Countywide Integrated Waste
Management Plan subject to future legislative changes and updated
information.
The City of Chula Vista will continue to actively work with the
AB939 Technical Advisory Committee, CIWMB staff, and with
surrounding jurisdictions to assure that the programs and
facilities chosen for implementing the goals of AB939 meet the
needs of the residents of Chula Vista and allow for regional
cooperation. '
Sincerely,
John D. Goss
City Manager
~.
)5--'/~
Ci ty of Chula Vista
SOURCE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING ELEMENT
HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE ELEMENT
December 1992
Prin~.d on aecycled Paper
>.
/5- ~?
CDM
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE INC.
environmental engineers, scientists,
planners, & management consultants
430 North Vineyard. Suite 310
Ontario. California 91764
714986-6811
June 23, 1992
City Manager's Office
276 Fourth Avenue
ChuJa Vista, CA 91910
Attn:
Stephanie Popek Snyder
Principal Management Assistant
Subject:
State's Staff Comments of the Preliminary Draft Source Reduction and
Recycling Element (SRRE)
Dear Ms. Snyder:
Camp Dresser & McKee Inc. (CDM) has been meeting regularly with the California
Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) staff and County of San Diego staff
regarding CIWMB comments on the preliminary draft SRRE and HHWE for the
jurisdictions within San Diego County.
CIWMB staff have no comments on the HHWEs for cities within San Diego County and
this document may be adopted as written.
Regarding the SRRE documents, CIWMB staff concluded that the programs and schedules
within the preliminary draft documents adequately Culml the requirements of the California
Integrated Waste Management Act (lWMA) and the CIWMB's regulations and guidelines
for preparing the SRREs.
The majority of CIWMB comments relate to the waste generation and composition portion
of each SRRE since historical waste generation data information was used in preparing the
preliminary draft SRREs. CIWMB staff recommended that the final SRRE documents be
provided with revised waste composition and waste quantities which comply with the
state's standards.
The CIWMB commented that this revised waste characterization study be performed prior
to adoption of the final document. The County of San Diego is now in the process of
conducting a solid waste generation study for the cities within the county. This study is
estimated to be completed in mid-summer 1992, after which, all SRRE documents will be
j5tj~
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE INC.
Stephanie Popek Snyder
City of Chula Vista
Page 2
tentatively finalized for inclusion in the County Integrated Waste Management Plan
{CIWMP).
The remaining comments for each city's document were minor in nature and CIWMB staff
recommends that an addendum be written to address these comments. The addendum
includes city specific, CIWMB, and Task Force/Citizen comments, although, typographical
and grammatical errors are not included. Each city within the County of San Diego should
proceed forward with adoption of the document as a final draft, with the inclusion of the
addendum. If adoption has already occurred you may wish to submit this addendum as
an information item to your City Council. As mentioned previously, all comments in the
addendum will be included in the consolidation of the SRRE documents for inclusion in
the CIWMP. Your city will have an opportunity to adopt the fmal plan at that time.
If there are any questions or comments, please contact either your team leader, Lewis
Laine, or myself.
Very truly yours,
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE INC.
~.
Robert A. Hawfield,
Project Manager
cc: Lewis Laine, CDM
Reed Bennett, County of San Diego, Solid Waste Division
John Nuffer, California Integrated Waste Management Board
Steve Sachs, San Diego Association of Governments
Attachments:
Addendum j
.
.
Annual Waste Generation Estimates for 1990, 1995, and 2000 - Under current II
conditions and after SRRE implementation
.
Table 8-3 - Revised Waste Disposal Capacity I
...
/y,/l
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SOURCE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING ELEMENT
ADDENDUM
JUNE 23, 1992
This Addendum serves as a supplement, which will incorporate the changes and
corrections, to the preliminary draft Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) for
the City of Chula Vista, dated November, 1991, submitted by CDM. The program and
implementation schedules, as outlined in the preliminary draft SRRE, meet the state's
guidelines and requirements. The majority of the comments received from the State
addressed the need for more accurate waste composition data for each jurisdiction. The
County of San Diego is in the process of gathering this data, which will be incorporated
into the Final SRRE.
According to the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (lWMA), each city
is required to review and respond to comments made by the public regarding the proposed
Source Reduction and Recycling Element and the Household Hazardous Waste Element
(HHWE).
This document incorporates the waste quantities and waste composition data which includes
the random survey data diversion quantities for commercial/industrial services for the base
year of 1990. An updated waste characterization study is being performed by the county
which addresses the comments from the CIWMB. In addition, comments from the Local
Task Force, Citizens Advisory Committee, and Technical Advisory Committee are
included.
1
,~
1>~>tJ
CALIFORNIA INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD
COMMENTS
Initial Solid Waste Generation Studv
Waste quantities/composition will be revised after the waste characterization study is
completed by the County of San Diego. These quantities will be incorporated into the
County Integrated Waste Management Plan (CIWMP), which will be completed early
1993.
The County of San Diego, Department of Public Works, Solid Waste Division has access
to extensive regional data on waste composition in San Diego County. A customized
ScaleWare data system was installed and now operates at each landfill, except for the
Borrego Landfill. This system automatically generates reports on quantities disposed by
truck type. This data, in conjunction with hauler surveys, makes it possible for each city
in the county to estimate the specific characterization of it's wastestream.
The County of San Diego will refine the ScaleWare data system to provide weight records
by jurisdiction and the projection of waste quantities and composition which will be based
on a city by city analysis of weight records and revised waste characterization data.
Waste Diverted
Comment:
Pages 2-13 (Diversion Practices): Please provide data from the recently
completed diversion survey. Also, please report diverted material by
weight, waste category and waste type and by source of generation.
Response:
The attached revised tables for 1990, 1995 and 2000 incorporate the
random survey results of existing diversion quantities for commercial and
industrial establishments. These tables do not reflect modified waste
2
..
J Y 5'/
quantity or waste composition data, which will be included in the final
SRRE document after completion of the waste characterization study
conducted by the County of San Diego.
Comments on Other Comoonents or SRRE
Comment:
Response:
Comment:
Response:
Please include in this component a solid waste facilities need projection
estimate which estimates the additional disposal capacity, in cubic yards per
year, needed to accommodate anticipated solid waste generation within the
city for a 15-year period...
Table 8-3 attached, reflects disposal capacity needs for the city in cubic
yards per year, assuming successful implementation of SRRE goals.
At some point in the planning process, the city should set limits, levels or
thresholds for the criteria identified in the Recycling Component...
This comment has been noted by the city and will be addressed in the final
SRRE for incorporation into the County Integrated Waste Management
Plan.
LOCAL TASK FORCE AND ADVISORY COMMITTEES COMMENTS
This Addendum includes public comments received at two public hearings, one of which
was required by IWMA in order to adopt the waste management plan. A Technical
Advisory Committee (fAC)/Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) meeting was held on
January 17, 1992 and a regional SANDAG hearing held on January 24, 1992. The Local
Task Force (SANDAG) hearing held on January 24, 1992 served as the first public hearing
for all the San Diego Region's city plans. Comments received at the TAC/CAC meeting
3
...
)y';-e7
and SANDAG hearing are addressed in this Addendum, and will be considered in the
preparation of the Final SRRE.
The following are the comments from the TAC/CAC and LTF, and responses to their
respective comments. These comments have covered all sections of the SRRE document,
and the changes which are recommended will be incorporated in the final SRRE. These
are referenced and listed below.
TAC/CAC Meetinl! - JanuarY 17.1992
Comment:
Response:
Comment:
Response:
There seems to be a large variation between jurisdictions of the percentages
of waste diverted from the landfills.
The documented percentages of waste diverted from the landfills and
quantities recycled by each jurisdiction is a result of the specific recycling
programs provided by each city and their respective differences. Frequency
of curbside collection may vary from weekly to bi-weekly, and the types of
recyclables collected also varies from city to city. Some curbside collection
programs serve only residents (single and multi-family), and others may
also serve businesses. The level of participation practiced by the
participants is also a factor in diversion rates. Additionally, there exists a
different level of commercial or industrial development in each city, which
would influence the waste composition and diversion rates.
How is backyard composting going to be approached?
The City of San Diego plans on implementing a pilot backyard composting
program in conjunction with their hauler and the County of San Diego.
Some cities within the county have similar programs and others will pursue
4
'"
/5'5":3
Comment:
Response:
Comment:
Response:
Comment:
Response:
a strong public education campaign which presents the advantages of
backyard composting and recycling of yard and wood wastes.
Cities must work with local businesses to promote voluntary recycling in
order to eventually impose mandatory recycling. Also, requirements to be
in compliance with the recycling programs by businesses should not be a
condition of obtaining a business license.
Mandating compliance of recycling programs as a condition to obtain a
business license will be a solution considered by many of the jurisdictions.
However, businesses will initially be encouraged to develop their own
recycling and waste diversion plans voluntarily, before further action will
be considered by the cities.
Should recyclables be collected by one truck and the material sorted by a
second truck, and should the method of recycling be decided upon
regionally or locally, rather than mandated by the County?
The materials recycled should be kept consistent regionally, but the decision
for the method of recycling should be made at the city level. Each city
currently has the authority to decide the method of collection, provided
designated recyclables are not taken to the landfill.
(From the Environmental Health Coalition) Source reduction is mandated
by the State as the highest priority of diversion in AB 939, yet the actual
percentages documented do not account for a substantial percentage of
diversion for each city.
There appears to be a need for better defined source reduction activities
identified by the State in order for more reliable quantification of source
5
'"
/5-5''/
reduction. Cities could take the initiative of implementing additional source
reduction activities, and then add these documented diversion quantities to
the SRRE. However, it is anticipated that source reduction will not result
in a significant percentage of waste reduction.
SANDAG Hearine - JanuarY 24. 1992
Comment:
Response:
Comment:
Response:
Comment:
Response:
(From the Environmental Health Coalition) Source reduction quantified by
each city is not adequate and it is suggested that a Source Reduction Task
Force be formed in order to implement source reduction programs.
This may be taken into consideration by each city.
The Sierra Club made three points and are as follows:
a. The quantity of waste going into the landfills needs to decrease,
b. More defined categories of waste products, not identified in the
SRRE as recyclables, need to be diverted from the landfills and
recycled, and;
c. The responsibility of recycling should remain with the individual
The City concurs with these comments
(From the Polystyrene Packaging Coalition) Polystyrene should replace
. styrofoam. and be added to the list of projected waste quantities to be
diverted and recycled.
The City concurs with the comment, although quantifying the amount of
polystyrene diverted from the landfill may be difficult.
6
'..'
-'
/S'"-5'!?
Comment:
Response:
Comment:
Response:
The State should be encouraged to reduce the restrictive regulations which
have been mandated for composting facilities. This effort should be done
by the TAC and CAC.
This action will be considered and decided by the CAC/TAC and the LTF.
Waste composition data for each jurisdiction is not adequate and the data
needs to be further broken down, especially the miscellaneous category.
The County wiIl be conducting more detailed waste composition studies,
which is estimated to be completed mid-summer 1992. This study will be
incorporated into each city's SRRE and submitted for inclusion in the
CIWMP required to be adopted by 1994.
7
i/It
/y>?
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
1990 WASTE GENERATION COMPOSmON
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS UNDER CURRENT CONDmONS
DISPOSED DIVERTED GENERATED DIVERTED
WEIGHT '" WEIGHT '" WEIGHT '" '"
(TONS) (TONS) (TONS)
PAPER
CARDBOARD 12.017 6.2% 12,719 6.6% 24,736 12.7% 6.6%
NEWSPAPER 6.138 4.2% 67 0.0% 6,2D5 4.2% 0.0%
MIXED PAPER 11,S94 6.0% 307 0.2% 11.901 6.1'" 0.2%
HG LEDGER 2.580 1.3% 0 0.0% 2,580 1.3% 0.0%
COMPUTER 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
PLASTIC
FILM PLASTIC 3,568 1.8'" I 0.0% 3._ 1.6% 0.0%
HARD PLASTIC 4,361 2.2% 22 0.0% 4.383 2.3% 0.0%
GLASS 4.753 2.4'" 130 0.1'" 4,8B3 2.5'" 0.1'"
METALS
TIN CANS 2,175 1.1'" 0 0.0% 2,175 1.1'" 0.0%
ALUMINUM CANS 402 0.2% 139 D.'''' 541 0.3% 0.1'"
MISC. METALS 0 0.0% 36 0.0% 36 0.0% 0.0%
YARD WASTE 31,298 16.1'" 0 0.0% 31.298 16.1'" 0.0%
WOOD WASTE 17,4S6 9.0% 0 0.0% 17,4S6 9.0% 0.0%
CONSTRUCTION
CONCRETE 1.192 0.6% 0 0.0% 1,192 0.6% 0.0%
ASPHALT 65 0.0% 0 0.0% 65 0.0% 0.0%
DIRT/ROCKS/SAND 3.316 1.7% 0 0.0% 3,316 1.7'" 0.0%
ROOFING 698 0.4'" 0 0.0% 698 0.4'" 0.0%
DRYWALL 461 0.2% 0 0.0% 461 0.2% 0.0%
MIXED 13,024 6.7% 0 0.0% 13,024 6.7'" 0.0%
OTHER
DIAPERS 3,809 2.0% 0 0.0% 3.809 2.0% 0.0%
MISCELLANEOUS 58.n3 30.3% 5 0.0% 58,n8 30.3'" 0.0%
SPECIAL WASTES 266 0.1'" 645 0.3% 931 0.5'" 0.3%
TOTALS
179,986
14.071
194:057
7.3'"
SOURCE REDUCTION
RECYCUNG
COM POSTING
SPECIAL WASTIE
TONS
o
13,426
o
645
14.071
DIVERSION
0.0%
6.9%
0.0%
0.3%
7.3%
REMOVAL OF RECYCLABLE MATERIAL FROM RECYCLABLE WASTIE STREAM 18.3%
REMOVAL OF WOOD AND YARD WASTIE FROM WOOD AND YARD WASTIE STREAM 0.0%
..
CHLVST2.wal
/5;57
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
1995 WASTE GENERATION COMPOSmON
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS WITH SRRE IMPLEMENTED
DISPOSED DIVERTED GENERATED DIVERTED
WEIGHT % WEIGHT % WEIGHT % %
(T'ONS) (T'ONS) (T'ONS)
PAPER
CARDBOARD 13.015 6.2% 13.991 6.7% 27.006 7.7% 6.6%
NEWSPAPER 4.847 2.3% 4,_ 1.l1'l(, 8,887 4.5% 1.9%
MIXED PAPER 7,134 3.4% 5.755 2.7% 12,890 6.4% 2.7%
HG LEDGER 1.514 0.7% 1.281 0.6% 2.784 1.4% 0.6%
COMPUTER 0 O.O'J(, 0 O.O'J(, 0 O.O'J(, O.O'J(,
PLASTIC
FILM PLASTIC 2,_ 1.0'J(, 1,772 0.6% 3._ 2.0'J(, 0.6%
HARD PLASTIC 2,583 1.2% 2,165 1.0% 4,748 2.4% 1.0'J(,
GLASS 2,929 1.4% 2,359 1.1% 5,289 2.6% 1.1%
METALS
TIN CANS 1,276 0.6% 1,080 0.5% 2,356 1.2% 0.5%
ALUMINUM CANS 213 0.'% 373 0.2% 586 0.2% 0.2%
MISC. METALS 39 0.0% 0 0.0% 39 0.0% 0.0%
YARD WASTE 23,059 11.0% 10,839 5.2% 33,_ 17.2% 5.2%
WOOD WASTE 12.861 6.1% 6,_ 2.9% 18,_ 9.6% 2.9%
CONSTRUCTION
CONCRETE 899 0.3% 592 0.3% 1.291 0.7% 0.3%
ASPHALT 38 O.O'J(, 32 0.0% 70 0.0% 0.0%
DIRT /ROCKS/SAND 1,_ 0.9% 1,648 0.8% 3,591 1.6% 0.8%
ROOFING 756 0.4% 0 O.O'J(, 756 0.4% 0.0%
DRYWALL 521 0.2% 0 0.0% 521 0.3% O.O'J(,
MIXED 14.106 6.7% 0 0.0% 14.106 7.2% O.O'J(,
OTHER
DIAPERS 2.476 1.2% 1,850 0.8% 4.125 2.1% 0.8%
MISCELLANEOUS 56.935 27.1% 6.726 3.2% 63.861 32.3% 3.2%
SPECIAL WASTES 310 0.1% 899 0.3% 1.006 0.2% 0.3%
TOTALS
149.134
81.045
210.179
28.9%
SOURCE REDUCTION
RECYCUNG
COMPOSTING
SPECIAL WASTE
TONS
1.850
41,811
16,_
8119
81.045
DIVERSION
0.8%
19.9%
8.0%
0.3%
29.0%
REMOVAL OF RECYCl.ABI..E!AATERIAl. FROM RECYCl.ABI..E WASTE STREAM 52.4%
REMOVAL OF WOOD AND YARD WASTE FROM WOOD AND YARD WASTE STREAM 32.0%
..
CHLVST2.W01
/5- 5'r
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
2000 WASTE GENERATION COMPOSmON
FOR ALL WASTE GENERATORS WITH SRRE IMPLEMENTED
DISPOSED Dl\lERTED GENERATED DIVERTED
WEIGHT % WEIGHT % WEIGHT % %
(TONS) (TONS) (TONS)
PAPER
CARDBOARD 13,550 5.2% 14,341 5,6% 27,891 7,7% 5.6%
NEWSPAPER 1,602 0.7% 7,fr75 3.5% 8,178 4.5% 3.5%
MIXED PAPER 2,519 1.2% 10,783 5.0% 13,312 5.4% 5.0%
HG LEDGER 484 0.2% 2,402 1.1% 2,896 1.4% 1.1%
COMPUTER 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
PLASTIC
FILM PLASTIC 670 0.3% 3,_ 1.5% 3,892 2.0% 1.5%
HARD PLASTIC 844 0.4% 4,059 1.9% 4,llO3 2.4% 1.9%
GLASS 1,038 0.5% ",424 2.0% 5,462 2.6% 2.0%
METALS
TIN CANS 408 0.2% 2,025 0.9% 2,_ 1.2% 0.9%
ALUMINUM CANS 219 0.1% 386 0.2% 605 0.2% 0,2%
MISC. METALS 40 0.0% 0 0.0% 40 0.0% 0.0%
YARD WASTE 5,499 2.5% 29,508 13.6% 35,008 17.2% 13.6%
WOOD WASTE 3,067 1.4% 15,459 7.6% 18,526 9.6% 7.6%
CONSTRUCTION
CONCRETE 223 0.1% 1,110 0.5% 1,333 0.7% 0.5%
ASPHALT 12 0.0% 60 0.0% 73 0.0% 0.0%
DIRT/ROCKS/SAND 622 0.3% 3,087 1.4% 3,709 1.6% 1.4%
ROOFING 781 0.4% 0 0.0% 781 0.4% 0.0%
DRYWALL 538 0.2% 0 0.0% 538 0.3% 0.0%
MIXED 14,568 5.7% 0 0.0% 14,568 7.2% 0.0%
OTHER
DIAPERS 1,078 0.5% 3,182 1,5% 4,261 2.1% 1,5%
MISCELLANEOUS 58,732 27.0% 7,015 3.2% 65,747 32.3% 3.2%
SPECIAL WASTES 391 0.2% 699 0.3% 1,090 0.2% 0.3%
TOTALS
106,837
110,449
217,286
50.8%
SOURCE REDUCTION
RECYCUNG
COMPOST1NG
SPECIAL WASTE
TONS
3,182
60,601
45,968
699
" 0,449
DIVERSION
1.5%
27.9%
21.2%
0.3%
50.8%
REMOVAL OF RECYCLABLE MATERIAL FROM RECYCLABLE WASTE STREAM 73.6%
REMOVAL OF WOOD AND YARD WASTE FROM WOOD AND YARD WASTE STREAM 84.3%
..
CHLVST2.Wa1
j5--51
TABLE 8-3
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
DISPOSAL CAPACITY NEEDS ANALYSIS
CAPACITY
DISPOSAL NEEDS
QUANTITY1 CAPACITY CUMULATIVE
YEAR (TONS) NEEDS% (CY) (CY)
1990 179,986 359,972 359,972
1991 183,582 367,164 727,136
1992 174,595 349,190 1,076,326
1993 164,763 329,526 1,405,852
1994 157,185 314,370 1,720,222
1995 149,134 298,268 2,018,490
1996 138,226 276,452 2,294,942
1997 127,601 255,202 2,550,144
1998 117,842 235,684 2,785,828
1999 114,970 229,940 3,015,768
2000 106,837 213,674 3,229,442
2001 107,784 215,568 3,445,010
2002 108,731 217,462 3,662,472
2003 109,678 219,356 3,881,828
2004 110,636 221,272 4,103,100
2005 111,583 223,166 4,326,266
2006 112,531 225,062 4,551,328
IIncorporates projected reduction in the wastestream from recycling activities
2Assumes 1000 pounds per cubic yard in-place density
'"
/5.,~tJ
STATE OFCAUFORNlA
Pete Wilson. Go~mor
CALIFORNIA INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD
8800 Cal Center Drive
Sacramento, California 95826
June 2, 1992 ~
stephanie Snyder
Principal Management Assistant
City of Chula vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
RE: Board Comments on preliminary Draft Source Reduction and
Recycling Element (SRRE) and Household Hazardous Waste Element
(HHWE)
Dear Ms. snyder:
Please find below comments by staff of the California Integrated
Waste Management Board (the Board) on the Preliminary Draft Source
Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) and Household Hazardous
Waste Element (HHWE) prepared for the City of Chula vista. Staff
reviewed the Elements for compliance with Public Resources Code
(PRC) section 40000 et seq. and Title 14 of the California Code of
Regulations (CCR), Chapter 9, Planning Guidelines and Procedures
for Reviewing and Revising Countywide Integrated Waste Management
Plans (The Guidelines).
Those comments which reference the PRC or CCR pertain to mandatory
requirements and should be fully addressed in the final SRRE.
Comments which request clarification, additional information, or
definition of terms should also be addressed in the final Element.
other comments or recommendations are provided for your
consideration.
Staff found the HHWE to be acceptable and have no comments on this
document. Comments on the SRRE are provided below. These comments
generally refer to issues which are common to most jurisdictions in
San Diego county. They focus on the initial Solid Waste Generation
Study (SWGS).
Comments on xnitial Solid Waste Generation study
summary of Comments
Staff found the SWGS to be insufficient in terms of providing the
data and information required by CCR section 18722 (Solid Waste
Generation Studies--General Requirements) and CCR section 18724
(Additional Requirements and Guidelines for the Initial Solid Waste
Generation Study). Specifically, the SWGS requires more precise
information on the composition, quantities and diversion of waste
for the city. Also, it is unclear that the information presented
in the SWGS constitutes a representative determination of the solid
wastes generated, diverted and disposed within and by the City as
required by CCR Section 18722(h) (2)(A).
..
.. Printed on ~Ied Paper ..
/S'iP!
city of Chula vista SRRE & HHWE Review
June 2, 1992
Page 2
Methodology of SWGS
Pages 2-31 (Methods Used For Solid Waste Characterization): This
section describes the methodology which was used to determine the
quantity and composition of solid waste disposed by the city. The
methodology involved two separate activities. First, a hauler
survey was conducted to determine how much total waste, in tons,
was being disposed by the City at county landfills. The second
activity involved identifying and allocating waste disposed by
sector based upon truck type.
Please explain how this methodology and associated assumptions
provides a solid waste generation study which is representative of
all residential, commercial, industrial and other sources of
generation wi thin the ci ty, as required by CCR section
18722 (h) (2) (A).
Please describe the sampling methodology for the waste sorts which
were conducted at local landfills to characterize the City's waste
stream. The description should include the number of samples
collected, the approximate weight of the samples, and how the data
specific to the City was disaggregated from the regional data, as
required by CCR sections l8722(f)(5), 18722(h) and 18724(b).
Please provide an outline of the system which the
gather data on the quantities and composition
generated, diverted and disposed as required
18722 (0) .
City will use to
of solid waste
by CCR section
Waste Generated
Please identify in the SWGS the solid waste generated, by waste
category and type, as required by CCR section l8722(j).
Page 2-10 (Public Services and Utilities): Please note that
the base amount of solid waste from which diversion levels are
calculated should not include sludge, according to PRC section
41781(b)(5). with the passage of AB 1520 (Sher, 1991), the Board
has until July 1, 1992 to determine if sludge will qualify for
diversion credit. since sludge may count toward diversion in the
future, the City should identify sludge generation in its initial
solid waste generation study, as required by CCR section 18724(d),
but not include it in the waste generation equation contained in
CCR section 187229(g) (2).
Pages 2-28 , 2-29 (Per Capita Solid Waste Generation Rates): The
estimated future solid waste disposal quantities for the city were
based on an estimated present disposal rate of 7.3 pounds per
person per day. Please explain the methodology and assumptions used
to produce this estimate so that it represents all residential,
110:
/yt~
city of Chula vista SRRE & HHWE Review
June 2, 1992
Page 3
commercial, industrial and other sources of waste generation in the
city, as required by CCR section 18722(h).
Waste Disposed
The waste disposal information contained in Tables 2-8 and 2-9 does
not identify the waste categories and types that are required by
CCR Section 18722 (j). Please disaggregate the "Glass", "Hard
Plastic", and "Mixed Construction" categories into the required
waste types.
It is noted on Table 2-9 that the "Other Misc." category represents
32.7 percent of the disposed waste and contains multiple waste
categories and types, such as "non-ferrous" metals, "inert
materials", and "natural" and "synthetic textiles." This approach
to waste characterization limits the city's ability to identify and
target waste types with diversion potential. For example, the city
cannot count for diversion those waste types contained in the
"Other Misc." category because those waste types have not been
"identified" in the SWGS, as required by CCR section 18724 (d).
Specifically, the City cannot count materials such as tires, food
waste, or non-ferrous metals.
Waste Diverted
Pages 2-13 (Diversion Practices): Please provide data from the
recently completed diversion survey. Also, please report diverted
material by weight, by waste category and waste type, and by source
of generation within the City as required by CCR section 18722(i).
Page 2-23: Table 2-4 lists 4.8 tons of "Organic (food wastes)" as
being commercially recycled. This category should also be listed
on other tables throughout the SRRE to claim it for diversion
credit.
Comments On Other components of the SRRE
Disposal Facility Capacity component
Please include in this component a solid waste facilities need
projection which estimates the additional disposal capacity, in
cubic yards per year, needed to accommodate anticipated solid waste
generation within the City for a l5-year period commencing in 1991,
as required by CCR Section l8744(b). The "Disposal Capacity Needs
Analysis" included in the City's SRRE is for the county of San
Diego.
1J>
/~- tJ
.' .
City of Chula vista SRRE & HHWE Review
June 2, 1992
Page 4
Monitoring and Evaluation of Programs
Before program monitoring begins, the City should set limits,
levels, or thresholds for the criteria identified in the Recycling
component. without such specific quantitative standards, progress
toward the component objectives and overall diversion goals may be
difficult to track.
If you have questions, please call me at (91G) 255-2555, or John
Nuffer, at (916) 255-2310.
sincerely,
~:9' ~~
Judith J. Friedman, Manager
Local Assistance Branch, South section
Planning & Assistance Division
cc: Jack Doyle, Chairman, LTF
Robert A. Hawfield, Jr., Project Manager, CDM
Reed Bennett, San Diego County Public Works Department
"'"
/.>--t J(
November 30, 1992
TO. Lance Fry, Assistant Planner
FROM: Stephanie Snyder, Principal Management Assistant~
SUBJECT. SRRE Review- Revisions to Potential Development Data
Thank you for your suggested changes to the data and format of
Table 2-3 (page 2-8) of the Draft SRRE you reviewed in November
1991. At that time, you provided corrected dwelling unit counts
and a revised, more detailed, format. Your comment was that a more
detailed inventory may better serve the program planning needs in
the long run. You also felt it was helpful to have information on
current commercial and industrial projects in Chula Vista and their
status relative to the development approval process.
As you know from our recent discussions, the legislation regarding
requirements for implementing AB939 have been changing in the past
year since your recommendations were made. In addition, the
deadline for the submittal of the Countywide plan (which will
incorporate Chula Vista's SRRE) has been extended beyond the
January 1994 date. Because of these changes, I am recommending to
the City Council that the SRRE be adopted with a few amendments,
subject to future legislation and updated information.
I am including this memo as part of the attachment which will go on
to the County. It will serve as a reminder to check the need to
update the potential development data at the time the Countywide
plan is recommended for adoption, if it is determined that data of
this nature (in the format you have suggested) is still important
to the SRRE for recycling program planning purposes.
'"
/y(,5-
File No.
x
PUBLIC HEARING CHECK LIST
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HWNG DAT' ,:1: :q~
SUBJECT ~u. L~ ~\& ~ . ( '7~VU:;t "- ~~hjJf~_
\
LOCATION ~I.'-.~ L,\U,\iJ~. L?~
SENT TO STAR NEWS FOR PUBLICATION.. BY FAX"" \\~\~'t~AND_; BY MAIL
\\\\'\\S~
,
PUBLICATION DATE
MAILED NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS
~\~
NO. MAILED
PER GC 54992 Legislati\:,c Staff, Construction Induslry Fed, 6336 Greenwich Dr Suite F. San Diego, 92122
LOGGED IN AGENDA BOOK \ \ \ \ \ \ q d-
\
COPIES TO:
Administration (4) -...,.
Planning
Originating Department
~gineering
-fu~~
'"
City Clerk's Office (2)
'"
POST ON BULLETIN BOARDS
\\
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS:
~~0
,
.'N~~
\J
CA. 6D
&u- ~~~ -
.58-
J~- /p? 7
MEMORANDUM
November 10, 1992
FROM
.
.
Beverly Authelet, City Clerk
Stephanie Snyder, Principal Management Assistan~
Public Hearing Notice
TO
SUBJECT
.
.
Please place a notice in the Star-News for the Nov. 14-15 edition
to announce that the City will hold a public hearing in the City
Council chambers at 6:00 P.M. on Tuesday, Dec. 15, 1992 for the
purpose of adopting the final versions of the City's Source
Reduction and Recycling Element and the Household Hazardous Waste
Element as required by AB 939, The California Integrated Waste
Management Act of 1989. Further information and review of the
documents can be obtained by contacting me in the City Manager's
Office at 691-5031.
Please let me know if you need any other information to place the
notice. Thanksl
cc: Athena Bradley
~
') t,~
'\'.
\.
" \'.."~
/~-- b y--
~~\) :)1,,\..,
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BY THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
CHULA VISTA, CAUFORNIA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL will hold a public
hearing to consider the following:
Adopting the final versions of the City's Source Reduction and Recycling Element
and the Household Hazardous Waste Element as required by AB939, The California
Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989.
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, December 15,
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: November 11, 1992
PUBLISH ON: November 14, 1992
Beverly A. Authelet
City Clerk
)S'Jb 1
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM: /0
MEETING DATE: 12/15/92
ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing: Considering Abating the Scheduled 1993 Business
License Tax Increase to Retain Business License Taxes at the Current
Calendar Year 1991 Level
Resolution 16921: Abating the Scheduled Calendar Year 1993 Business
License Tax Increase for One Year and Retaining Business License
Taxes in Calendar Year 1993 at the 1991 level, as Provided for in
Ordinance 2408, with the Exception of Taxes on Specific Businesses
Which Were Adopted by Council Ordinance After January I, 1991
Related Items. but not Dart of the Dublic hearina:
A. Ordinance 2537: Amending Title 5 and Chapter 9.13 of the Chula
Vista Municipal Code Related to Business License Taxes and
Regulations
B. Resolution 16922: Amending the Master Fee Schedule to Include
Investigation Fees for Live Entertainment Licenses at their Current
Level, as Specified in Section 9.13.050 of the Municipal Code.
Director of FinaRce~~
Revenue Manager~ ~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager Jib ~ 7/ (4/5ths Vote Yes__ No-X)
Public Hearina and Tax Abatement Resolution - This Public Hearing is being
conducted to discuss the advisability of abating the Business License Tax
increase scheduled for Calendar Year 1993. On October 25, 1990 Council passed
Ordinance 2408 which adopted increases in the City's business license tax rates
which were to be phased in over a three year period. These tax increases were
adopted with the concurrence of the Chamber of Commerce. Ordinance 2408 also
provides Council with the option of abating the scheduled business license tax
increase during any year, for a one year period only, to any level not below the
1991 tax levels. Failure to pass an abatement resolution would result in
Calendar Year 1993 business license taxes being set at the scheduled 1993 levels,
which would be an approximate doubling of the current tax levels for the vast
majority of bus i nesses. Gi ven the current economic climate, wh ich has not
improved since last year's tax abatement hearing, staff is recommending that
Council abate the scheduled CY 1993 increase and retain business license tax
rates at the CY 1991 level for one more year.
SUBMITTED BY:
Ordinance 2537 Amendina the MuniciDal Code Related to Business License Taxes -
The primary purpose of Ordinance 2537, which amends the business license tax
ordinance, is to complete implementation of a comprehensive business license
enforcement program. The Chamber expressed concern with the lack of uniform
enforcement of the City's business license tax ordinance in discussions with
staff, in 1990, regarding increasing the business license tax rates. Staff has
addressed these concerns by developing a comprehensive automated business 1 icense
enforcement program. Now that this program is in place, passage of Ordinance
)fo - (
PAGE 2, ITEM: /b
MEETING DATE: 12/15/92
2537 is required to empower the City to collect business license taxes from non-
licensed businesses at the same rate at which taxes are collected for licensed
businesses. Ordinance 2537 is a taxation ordinance and thus becomes effective
upon adoption. These proposed ordinance changes will increase General Fund
revenue in the current and future fiscal years, without increasing the tax burden
on existing licensed businesses.
Other changes in Ordinance 2537 are primari ly administrative in nature and
include: 1) making specific tax changes for specialized licenses to reflect
legal and equity concerns brought to staff's attention during the year; 2)
correcting the ordinance in areas where the Municipal Code conflicts with state
law; and 3) making several administrative changes. The overall fiscal impact of
adopting this ordinance will be to increase General Fund revenue by a minimum of
$11,100 this fiscal year, and more substantially in future years.
Resolution 16922 Amendina the Master Fee Schedule to Include Investiaation Fees
Resolution 16922 adds live entertainment investigation fees to the Master Fee
Schedule. This resolution is an administrative change only. Passage of
Ordinance 2537 will remove these fees from the ordinance and reference their
inclusion in the Master Fee Schedule. This resolution places the existing fees
from Section 9.13.050 into the Master Fee Schedule, retaining them at their
current level. Failure to adopt this resolution, if Ordinance 2537 passes, would
result in the elimination of current fees.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council:
1) Conduct the public hearing;
2) Adopt Resolution 16921 to abate the scheduled CY 1993 business
license tax increase for one year, retaining taxes at the current CY
1991 levels except for those whose tax rates were set by Council
ordinance during 1991 and 1992, and instruct staff to send a letter
to all businesses, with their license renewals, informing them of
Council's decision to abate the 1993 tax increase;
3) Adopt Ordinance 2537, making necessary administrative and legally-
advised changes to the Business License ordinance; and
4) Adopt Resolution 16922, making administrative changes to the Master
Fee Schedule (only if Ordinance 2537 is adopted.)
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Although th i s matter has not been forma 11 y
sent to any Board or Commission, a letter (Attachment IV) from the Chamber of
Commerce President received by the Mayor in November 1991 (regarding
implementation of Calendar Year 1992 scheduled tax increase), stated that "we
(the Chamber) support the quality of life in our city and we know there are high
financial responsibilities in running the city, but we must be realistic about
adding any new financial burdens on our businesses at this time." The Chamber
urged that the Council "Join with the Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce and show
your support for our businesses by deferring any increases for one year or until
economic indicators show improvements." It should be noted that the Chamber had
It~2
PAGE 3, ITEM: / fo
MEETING DATE: 12/15/92
supported a three year phase in of a business license tax increase in 1990, after
working with City staff to modify staff's recommended tax structure. The Chamber
of Commerce and the Downtown Business Association have received copies of this
report and have been notified of the public hearing.
DISCUSSION:
PUBLIC HEARING AND RESOLUTION 16921 - ABATING 1993 BUSINESS LICENSE TAX INCREASE
Summary of Business License Tax Structure
On October 25, 1990, the City Council approved a business license tax increase
to be phased in oyer a three year period, starting with 1991. Table I summarizes
the current business license tax rates and scheduled increases, for most business
types, as approved by the Council in Ordinance No. 2408. Attachment I shows the
current Master Tax Schedule. All business license taxes are currently set at the
Calendar Year 1991 level, except those which have been changed by Counci 1
Ordinance subsequent to the adoption of the Master Tax Schedule in October 1990.
Ordinance 2408 provides Council with the ability to conduct a public hearing and
abate the schedu led bus i ness 1 i cense tax in any year, for no more than one
calendar year, to no less than the 1991 calendar year tax rate. If no such
public hearing is conducted, and no resolution passed abating the taxes, taxes
for all businesses will automatically be set at the Calendar Year 1993 level, as
of January I, 1993 (Attachment I).
TABLE I
SUMMARY OF TAX SCHEDULE FOR MOST BUSINESSES - ALL TAXES SHOWN AS ANNUAL
AS PRESENTED IN THE MASTER TAX SCHEDULE
CY 1991 Scheduled Scheduled
CURRENT CY 1992 CY 1993
3USINESS CLASSIFICATIONS - GENERAL ONLY RATE . Rate Rate
'lew businesses (l'st year only) located within the City with 5 $25 $35 $50
r fewer employees - includes general businesses and
nanufacturers and professionals (tax applies to each
rofessional)
Existing Manufacturers $52.50 + $79 + $105 +
$3.25/emp $4.90/emp $6.50/emp
Existing in-City and out-of City businesses as well as new $52.50 + $79 + $105 +
usinesses with more than five employees $6.50/emp $9.75/emp $13/emp
Rental Businesses (apartments, motels, hotels) - only tax those $12 + $12 + $12 +
Mth 3 or more units $1.20/ea unit $1.20/ea unit $1.20/ea
> 3 > 3 unit > 3
n-City Peddler (tax applies to each peddler) $25 $25 $25
Existing Professionals (tax applies to each professional - $105 $155 $210
mployees working for professionals are not taxed
Vending Machines (per machine) $15 $25 $30
This column contams the rates In ettect durmg CY 1Wl and 1992 and also recommended or CY lW3.
)0-3
PAGE 4, ITEM: I~
MEETING DATE: 127 5)92
In late 1991 Council held a public hearing and subsequently passed a resolution,
abating the scheduled Calendar Year 1992 increase and retainin9 the Business
License Tax at the CY 1991 level (Attachment II).
Tax Abatement Ootions Available to Council
Tonight, Council has the option of retaining the tax rate at the current CY 1991
level, doing nothing and allowing the taxes to go up to the scheduled CY 1993
level, or abating the taxes to any level in between (e.g., abating Calendar Year
1993 taxes to Calendar Year 1992 levels).
Current Economic Conditions Facina Chula Vista Businesses
On November 19, 1991 Council passed a resolution abating the scheduled Calendar
Year 1992 business license tax increase for one year, to retain the taxes at the
Calendar Year 1991 levels, due to the economic recession and concerns expressed
by local businesses. As of November 1992, the City has five fewer businesses
licensed than it did last year at the same time. This probably represents an
actual decrease in the number of businesses within the City, as many new
businesses have come into the City this year due to new development and, for the
first time in years, staff are aggressively implementing a program to ensure all
new businesses are licensed. Chula Vista's business license tax is based on a
flat rate plus additional taxes for each employee. Most other cities' business
license taxes are based on gross receipts. Gross receipts-based tax structures
automatically adjust for recessionary and inflationary times. When the business
license tax report was completed by staff in 1990, staff recommended a gross
receipts tax, but both the Chamber and the Downtown Business Association strongly
opposed this method of taxation. At their request, the flat rate structure was
retained and Ordinance 2408 phased in the tax increase over a three year period,
with annual adjustments in 1994 and beyond only to be made for inflation. Given
the flat rate tax structure, the relative tax burden on a business will be higher
during poor economic times and lower during prosperous times. Although Chula
Vista's business license tax is lower than the vast majority of cities within the
State and County, and should eventually be increased to the levels set in the
ordinance, a one year abatement of the scheduled increase would lessen the burden
on struggling businesses during these difficult economic times.
Fiscal Imoact on Citv Revenues and FY 1992-93 Budaet if Tax is Abated
This fiscal year's budget assumed that the business 1 icense tax would be
increased, resulting in an additional $144,000 in General Fund revenue. Since
all business licenses are renewed in January, abating the tax increase for one
year will only affect the current fiscal year's budget. Staff believes this one
time loss of revenue can be addressed this fiscal year through a number of other
items: increases in business license tax revenues expected this year based on
last year's actual revenue received, increases in the business license tax on
card tables starting in January 1993, increases in business license tax revenue
expected from adoption of proposed Ordinance 2537, increases in revenue
anticipated as result of having a sales tax audit performed.
!~/1
PAGE 4, ITEM: ~~
MEETING DATE: 1 /15/92
In late 1991 Council held a public hearing and subsequently passed a resolution,
abating the scheduled Calendar Year 1992 increase and retaining the Business
License Tax at the CY 1991 level (Attachment II).
Tax Abatement Ootions Available to Council
Tonight, Council has the option of retaining the tax rate at the current CY 1991
level, doing nothing and allowing the taxes to go up to the scheduled CY 1993
level, or abating the taxes to any level in between (e.g., abating Calendar Year
1993 taxes to Calendar Year 1992 levels).
Current Economic Conditions Facina Chula Vista Businesses
On November 19, 1991 Council passed a resolution abating the scheduled Calendar
Year 1992 business license tax increase for one year, to retain the taxes at the
Calendar Year 1991 levels, due to the economic recession and concerns expressed
by local businesses. As of November 1992, the City has five fewer businesses
licensed than it did last year at the same time. This probably represents an
actual decrease in the number of businesses within the City, as many new
businesses have come into the City this year due to new development and, for the
first time in years, staff are aggressively implementing a program to ensure all
new businesses are licensed. Chula Vista's business license tax is based on a
flat rate plus additional taxes for each employee. Most other cities' business
license taxes are based on gross receipts. Gross receipts-based tax structures
automatically adjust for recessionary and inflationary times. When the business
license tax report was completed by staff in 1990, staff recommended a gross
receipts tax, but both the Chamber and the Downtown Business Association strongly
opposed this method of taxation. At their request, the flat rate structure was
retained and Ordinance 2408 phased in the tax increase over a three year period,
with annual adjustments in 1994 and beyond only to be made for inflation. Given
the flat rate tax structure, the relative tax burden on a business will be higher
during poor economic times and lower during prosperous times. Although Chula
Vista's business license tax is lower than the vast majority of cities within the
State and County, and should eventually be increased to the levels set in the
ordinance, a one year abatement of the scheduled increase would lessen the burden
on struggling businesses during these difficult economic times.
Fiscal Imoact on City Revenues and FY 1992-93 Budaet if Tax is Abated
This fiscal year's budget assumed that the business license tax would be
increased, resulting in an additional $144,000 in General Fund revenue. Since
all business licenses are renewed in January, abating the tax increase for one
year will only affect the current fiscal year's budget. Staff believes this one
time loss of revenue can be addressed this fiscal year through a number of other
items: including increases in business license tax revenues expected this year
based on last year's actual revenue received, increases in the business license
tax on card tables starting in January 1993, increases in business license tax
revenue expected from adoption of proposed Ordinance 2537, and increases in
revenue anticipated as result of having a sales tax audit performed.
I~/S
Summar v of Ordinance Chanoes
The taxation ordinance amending Title 5 and Section 9.13 of the Municipal Code
related to business license taxes and regulations (Attachment III) is provided
to address ordinance deficiencies which staff were made aware of as
implementation of the business 1 icense enforcement program began. Ordinance
changes offered will not increase the tax burden on any businesses licensed in
Chula Vista, and will have a positive fiscal impact on the City's General Fund.
Ordinance changes include:
o Changing the ordinance to enable the City to collect business
1 i cense taxes from non- 1 i censed bus i nesses at the same rate for
which taxes are collected for licensed businesses. This enforcement
program was requested by the Chamber of Commerce in 1990 when they
agreed to support the business license tax increase.
o Amending the ordinance to el iminate contradictions with recently
passed State law and ensure that the City's ordinance is compatible
with new State requirements.
o Adjusting taxes and classification assignments for specific business
classifications to address specific equity concerns brought to
staff's attent ion from bus i ness owners and to reduce potent i a 1
liability arising from problematic tax structures.
o Mak i ng admini strat ive, 1 anguage, and sect ion changes to ensure
consistency within the Code, clarify definitions, and provide the
public and staff with easy access to needed information.
Each of the ordinance changes mentioned above are described further in the
sections below and summarized in Table lIon the following page.
/~/t
PAGE 6, ITEM:
MEETING DATE:
TABLE II: SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE CHANGES AND ASSOCIATED FISCAL IMPACT
110
12115/92
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF SPECIFIC CODE
PURPOSE OF ORDINANCE CHANGES SECTIONS FISCAL
ORDINANCE CHANGE AFFECTED IMPACT
ENHANCED Numerous changes to ensure City 5.02 +$12,000
ENFORCEMENT/TAX is able to collect taxes and (120,230)
COLLECT! ON FOR penalties from unlicensed 5.04
UNLI CENSED businesses at the same rate at (001,002,
BUSINESSES which licensed businesses are 003,040,
charged. 050)
TAX ADJUSTMENT FOR Change of classification of 5.42.010 -$100
SPECIFIC electrologist from "professional"
BUSINESSES to "general" for equity purposes.
Addition of new classification to 5.02.010.M +$200
cover delivery trucks that ,
deliver merchandise purchased 5.65.010
outside Chula Vista to Chula
Vista customers. This change is
being made for equity,
consistency and improved
enforcement abilitv.
50% reduction in annual tax on 5.08.090 -$1000
billboards as recommended by the
City Attorney.
Increase in license tax on garage 5.32.030 Nominal
sales which do not obtain a positive
permit prior to the sale from $3 fiscal
to $5 (no tax if permit obtained impact
prior to sale). Increase is
needed to cover costs of
enforcina tax provisions.
LANGUAGE CHANGES General language added to 5.02.060, $0
NEEDED TO COMPLY authorize City to require 5.02.120,
WITH STATE LAWS businesses to comply with State 5.04.150.0
law, even if not specified in ,
Code and specific language 5.04.160
allowing licenses for out-of-city
contractors to be prorated on a
quarterly basis as required by
State law.
TOT AL FI SCAL If ordinance is adopted in +$11,100
IMPACT entirety, fiscal impact on
General Fund this fiscal year
/t, ~ 7
PAGE 7, ITEM: }I~
MEETING DATE: lii15/~2
Ordinance Chanoes Related to Tax Collection Enforcement
The major ordinance changes are proposed to address a deficiency in the existing
ordinance which prevents the City from collecting business license taxes from
businesses which are operating unlicensed within Chu1a Vista. . All changes will
basically allow the City to collect taxes due from businesses which are operating
unlicensed at the same tax and penalty rates paid by licensed businesses. These
ordinance revisions are consistent with the business license tax ordinance's
intent that business license taxes are designed for revenue generation purposes
unless otherwise stated. The proposed changes are also consistent with the Model
Business Tax Ordinance which is being drafted by the California Municipal
Business Tax Association and the ordinances of the vast majority of cities State-
wide. Adoption of this ordinance will require all businesses operating within
the City to pay taxes, without hav i ng payment of taxes confer any 1 icense.
Businesses which are in compliance with Code provisions, including tax payment,
will be issued a license. Businesses which do not yet have their license
app 1 i cat ions approved wi 11 be issued a recei pt for tax payment on 1y, and be
issued their business license once all licensing requirements are met.
Since the City began implementing a business license enforcement program this
fiscal year, many unlicensed businesses have been discovered. This large
increase in business license applications has created a backlog and has slowed
down processing time on these applications. Under the current ordinance the City
can not collect taxes from these businesses until they are licensed. Due to the
City's priority on economic development and attracting new businesses, license
applications from new businesses wanting to come to the City are given top
priority and every attempt is made to process these applications within strict
time frames. As a result, existing businesses without licenses may take some
time to process, especially since some of these businesses require multiple
contacts to address issues (e.g., zoning, building codes) which were never
resolved prior to the business opening.
Failure to pass these ordinance changes by January 1, 1993 will prevent the City
from collecting full taxes from these businesses for Calendar Year 1993 (since
tax is due on January 1 and payment must be received by January 31). Not only
would this result in a significant loss of revenue this and next fiscal year, but
it sends a negative message to businesses; that those who follow Code provisions
will pay more tax than those who do not comply with the licensing requirements.
The lack of uniform enforcement of the business license tax was a significant
concern raised, by the Chamber when staff met with them in 1990 to discuss
recommended increases in the business license tax. Staff has addressed these
concerns by developing a comprehensive automated business license enforcement
program which, combined with these ordinance changes, will serve to more
equitably distribute the tax burden among all businesses operating within the
City. Staff is estimating that the ordinance changes related to enhanced
enforcement will produce a minimum of $12,000 additional general fund revenue
thi s f i sca 1 year. Revenue increases in future years are expected to be
significantly higher, but are difficult to estimate at this time. Staff are now
tracking the amount of revenue generated from the newly instituted business
license tax enforcement program and will be able to provide estimates on
increased General Fund revenue from these changes later this fiscal year.
I (, ~j"
PAGE 8, ITEM: !~
MEETING DATE:~
Implementation of the ordinance changes will also provide an ancillary benefit;
rapidly increasing the pace at which the City will have a comprehensive data base
of business information for the entire City. Completion of this comprehensive
data base will be invaluable in economic development efforts, as it will provide
ongoing information on the number of businesses and the number employed by type
of business. Tracking this information over time will provide the City with a
total picture of business activity (e.g., which types of businesses are coming
and going, which types of businesses employ the largest numbers of people, which
types of businesses are lacking to achieve a balanced business profile, whether
the City is losing or gaining jobs in comparison to population), enabling the
City to design economic development and business retention strategies
specifically tailored to the City's needs.
Ordinance Chanoes Related to Tax Chanoes for Soecific Businesses
four other ordinance changes are proposed to address business and staff concerns
which were identified since the 1992 business license tax rates were set:
- After a review, requested by the City's two electrologists, staff
recommends that electrologists be categorized as a general business rather
than a professional. Electrologists are licensed by the State Board of
Cosmetology similarly to barbers and cosmetologists which are also
categorized as a general business. The fiscal impact of this change is
estimated as a loss of $100 in general fund revenue annually.
- Upon a request from an out-of-City furniture store, City staff reviewed
its current tax rate for out-of-City companies who only enter the City to
deliver merchandise, purchased outside the City, to addresses within the
City. Under the current tax schedu le, these compan ies are charged
similarly to out-of-City contractors with a base tax and an additional
charge per employee. This tax structure is not commonly used by other
cit ies and makes 1 icens ing enforcement for these bus inesses extremely
difficult. To make our tax structure more similar to that of other cities
and enhance enforcement ability, staff is proposing charging out-of-city
merchandise delivery trucks on a per vehicle basis. This tax is proposed
at a level of $25 annually per truck operating within the City. Licenses
would be kept in the truck when it is in the City. Since most larger
stores utilize more than one vehicle within the City, there should be no
impact on the revenue received from existing businesses in this category.
Overa 11 wi 11 increase though, as it wi 11 be eas ier to check deli very
trucks and do necessary follow-up if it is found the vehicle is not
licensed. The estimated fiscal impact of enhanced enforcement ability is
an annual increase in general fund revenue of $200.
- Last year, at City Council's direction, staff substantially increased the
business license tax on billboards. Subsequently, the City Attorney was
contacted by an attorney representing the billboard companies, regarding
whether the tax was so excessive as to violate first Amendment rights.
Subsequent review of the City's tax schedule for other "first Amendment-
protected groups" and other cities' tax schedules, resulted in a City
/ (,,~ 9
PAGE 9, ITEM: Ii,
MEETING DATE:~
Attorney recommendation that the tax rate per billboard be reduced 50%.
This tax reduction is expected to decrease general fund revenue by $1000
annua 11 y.
- Currently there is no tax for those residents obtaining a garage sale
permit from the City prior to conducting the garage sale and a tax of
three dollars for those residents who fail to obtain the garage sale
license prior to conducting the garage sale. The three dollar tax is not
sufficient to cover postage, supply, telephone and staff costs needed to
collect the tax. This tax is generally collected upon receiving
complaints from neighbors that a residence is conducting frequent garage
sales. Increasing the tax to $5.00 will merely provide sufficient funds
to recover the cost of collecting the tax. This ordinance change will
have mi n ima 1 f i sca 1 impact on the genera 1 fund annua 11y, as the do llar
amount of the increase is sma 11 and th i s tax is not assessed very
frequently. Residents obtaining a permit prior to the garage sale would
still not pay any taxes.
Ordinance Chanaes Needed to Conform to State Law
Currently the City Code prohibits issuing quarterly licenses except to those
businesses specified by the code. A recently enacted State law requires that we
prorate business 1 icense taxes quarterly (at a minimum), for out-of-City
contractors working in the City for specified short amounts of time. Ordinance
changes are provided to allow for this change. Recently passed state law
requires that the City obtain affidavits from each licensed business that they
maintain adequate workers' compensation insurance. General language was added
to the Code to enable the City to comply with new State requirements.
Ordinance Chanaes Which are Administrative in Nature
Other ordinance changes are being proposed as an ordinance clean up; these
changes include:
- Recently a definition for Holistic Health Practitioner was added to Code
Section 5.36.030. At the time this change was adopted this new
classification was not added to the list of "Professionals" due to an
oversight. It is proposed that this be done at this time. This change
has no fiscal impact on current businesses or the City.
- When the Master Tax Schedule was developed to consolidate the tax rates in
one place, staff inadvertently omitted Section 9.13.040 related to live
entertainment business 1 icense taxes and investigation fees. Proposed
changes have no impact but serve to provide consistency in the Code by
having all taxes 1 isted on the master tax schedule and all fees included
within the master fee schedule. This item is a technical correction and
has no fiscal impact.
- Other changes are made as needed to correct spe 11 i ng errors, correct
inaccuracies in classification between fees, taxes, and assessments, and
/ b / II)
PAGE 10, ITEM: I {o
MEETING OATE: 12/15/92
to provide for consistent wording throughout the document. These changes
are administrative in nature and have no substantive impact.
Fiscal Imoact of Prooosed Ordinance Chanaes
As previously detailed on Table II, the overall net fiscal impact of adopting the
proposed ordinance changes, is estimated at a minimum increase of $11,100 this
fiscal year. The changes related to enhancing the City's ability to collect tax
from unlicensed business will have a larger positive fiscal impact in future
years, the magnitude of which can be better estimated later this fiscal year.
B. RESOLUTION 16922 AMENDING THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE
This resolution is a technical correction. Passing the above-mentioned ordinance
takes the fees for Live Entertainment License investigations out of the Municipal
Code, and references that they be included in the Master Fee Schedule. Having
all fees included in one reference guide makes consistent implementation of fees
and public information much easier. This resolution is required to place the fee
amounts specified in the Code into the Master Fee Schedule. Failure to pass this
resolution, if the ordinance passes, will eliminate existing fees for live
entertainment license investigations.
FISCAL IMPACT: Adoption of Resolution 16921 abating CY 1993 Business License Tax
rates to the current, CY 1991, levels would reduce General Fund revenue by
$144,000 in the current FY 1992-93. Adoption of Ordinance 2537 will result in
a net increase of $11,100 in General Fund Revenue in the current fiscal year, and
have larger positive fiscal impact in future fiscal years.
SUMMARY OF TABLES AND ATTACHMENTS
Table I: Summary of Tax Schedule for Most Businesses
Table II: Summary of Ordinance Changes
Attachment I: Master Tax Schedule
Attachment II: Resolution and Public Hearing Agenda Statement Regarding CY
1992 Tax Abatement
Attachment III: Proposed Ordinance Amendments to Title 5 and Section 9.13 of
the Municipal Code
Attachment IV: Letter from The Chamber of Commerce Regarding CY 1992 Tax
Abatement N,1 '~AN#I e-b
/b-//
RESOLUTION NO.
1~702/
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ABATING THE SCHEDULED CALENDAR
YEAR 1993 BUSINESS LICENSE TAX INCREASE FOR
ONE YEAR AND RETAINING BUSINESS LICENSE TAXES
IN CALENDAR YEAR 1993 AT THE 1991 LEVEL, AS
PROVIDED FOR IN ORDINANCE 2408, WITH THE
EXCEPTION OF TAXES ON SPECIFIC BUSINESSES
WHICH WERE ADOPTED BY COUNCIL ORDINANCE AFTER
JANUARY 1, 1991
The City council of the City of Chula vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, economic indicators have not improved during the past
calendar year, and the City Council has indicated a concern with
implementing scheduled tax increases during a recession; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 2408 passed by Council on October 25,
1990 offers Council the ability to abate the CY 1993 business
license tax down to the current 1991 levels; and,
WHEREAS, passage of this resolution will set the CY 1993
business license taxes at the current CY 1991 levels for all
businesses except those which have had tax rates set specifically
by Council ordinance during CY 1991 and 1992.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the
City of Chula vista does hereby abate the scheduled Calendar Year
1993 Business License Tax increase until January 1, 1994, except
for those businesses which have had their tax rates set
specifically by Council during Calendar Years 1991 and 1992, as
provided for in Ordinance 2408.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that staff is directed to send a letter
explaining Council's action to all businesses with their business
license renewal forms.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Bruce M. Boogaard, City
Attorney
Lyman Christopher, Director of
Finance
P:\homc\attomey\Abate.blt
J? -/:A
'.
Chapter 5.07
MASTER TAX SCHEDULE
-
Sections:
5.07.010
5.07.020
5.07.025
5.07.030
New business - Applicable tax rates.
Applicable tax rates by year.
Maximmn annual tax.
Master tax scbedule.
5.07.010 New businesses - Applicable tax rates.
The applicable tax rate for a new business with 5 or fewer employees is detailed in Section 5.04.140 (for
general businesses with fixed locations in the City); Section 5.34.020 (for manufacturers); or Sectioo 5.42.010 (for
Professionals), except as otherwise provided for and specifically enumerated in the Master Tax Schedule, Section
5.07.030. Said rate shall only be applied in the first license year of operation or part thereof, provided that if the
first license year is less than three months, new business rates shall also be applied in the following license year.
(Ord. 2408 ~I (part), 1990).
5.07.020 Applicable tax rates - by year.
A.
1991 Calendar year rates.
.
Effective January I. 1991, the business license tax rates shall be those rates detailed in the Master Tax
Schedule, Section 5.07.030, in the column thereof labeled "Tax Rate: 1/1/91 - 12/31191".
B.
1992 Calendar year rates.
Effective January I, 1992, the business license tax rates shall be those rates detailed in the Master Tax
Schedule, Section 5.07.030, in the column thereof labeled "Tax Rate: 11119,2 - 12/31192".
C. 1993 Calendar year rates.
Effective January I, 1993, the business license tax rates shall be those rates detailed in the Master Tax
Schedule, Section 5.07.030, in the column thereofIabeled "Tax Rate: 111193 - 12/31193".
D. 1994 and Subsequent Calendar Year Rates.
Effective January I, 1994, and for each calendar year thereafter, all tax rates for the categories of taxpayers
detailed in the Master Tax Schedule, including both base tax rates and add-on tax rates (e.g., rates per
person, per-machine, etc.) shall be increased by six (6%) percent per year above the taX rates and add-on
rates applicable in the preceding year.
E.
Power to Abate in 1992 and thereafter to 1991 floor.
Notwithstanding anything else to the contrary in this section contained, commencing for the 1992 calendar
year and continuing thereafter. the City Council is hereby authorized for no more than one calendar year,
but is not required, to lower the tax imPosed by this section but to no less than taxes imposed in the 1991
calendar year.
.
#71 -::r:, /
It ,.j;J
(R 9192)
F.
Procedure to Abate.
--.
To lower the tax authorized by this section, the City Council shall conduct a public hearing at which it
public]y deliberates on the advisability of doing so, notice which public hearing is published in a newspaper
of general circulation at least twice not sooner than 20 days and not later than 5 days prior thereto, of its
intent to deliberate upon said matter. Failure to publish notice of the public hearing, as herein required, sball
not affect the right of the City Council to conduct the public hearing and to reduce the authorized annual rate
of increase as berein imposed.
G. Nothing contained in this section shall affect the effective date of this ordinance.
(Ord. 2408 U (part), 1990).
5.07.025 Maximum Annual Tax.
--
Effective January I, 1991, the maximum annual business license tax paid for any single business license sball
not exceed $7,000.
Effective January I, 1992, the maximum annual business license tax paid for any single business license sball not
exceed $12,000.
Effective January I, 1993, the maximum annual business license tax paid for any single business license shall not
exceed $16,000.
Effective January ], ]994, the maximum annual business license tax paid for any single business license shall not .-"",.
exceed $20,000.
Effective January I, 1995, and each calendar year thereafter the maximum annual business license tax shall be
increased by five percent (5%) per year above the level set in January, 1994.
(Ord. 2408 ~ 1 (part), 1990).
.-"",
Ihl~ -2-
://; ~I i
(R 9/92)
'.
.
!
t
j
~
~
.~
..
u.
..
:l~
I:::
.. -
~
~
C;l
..
:l~
I:::
..-
..
U.
..
--
..'"
....
I:::
..-
i
~
s
-
..
r::
~
~
8.
....
..
..
r::
..
~
~
8.
....
..
it
S
-
..
~
..
~
8.
....
..
Ii
i
';:
M
..
~
{l
~
o
o ..
U 0
u r::
u U ..
::l- u
U)J:l....
..-
"'..
'- ..
r:: ~ r::
.. - ..
~~ >
...U~
..~-
~ 0 ~
~... L:
ti..I-
r:: ~
a.
.. ,
~~....
>c,
..
_1>15
h'~
._ L N
... 0'",
8 ell i
L B. ~
...00
Ii
j
Ie
o
...
o
....
~
..
~U..
o >- ~
~ui!.
~ 0 0
C).CU!:&..
1/'1..&::)(.,0
L" .... CI u
l! 0 ...- 15
, .. >- ,,-'.-
... Co/) C...........
ClJ C.o toll CD .
L." ID L. L.....
o ~+ .~:;: 8.2
I/'l_Gl_ OL.
...Q.~8:~....~
_1&..<<1....0....
..
~
~
~
..
~....
o>-~
~ui!.
~00
II'l " GI C L.
,..,..1::)(1&10
,"....&au
~ o"'::a
4l' .. >- G.l .-
.... II) c..........
CIt CD.Q en lIII .
L." CDL.L.....
o~+.~:;:8.2
U"I.... 1lI_ 0 l...
i.. a... ..
..... ca Q...c ......a::
_ L. m+l 0'"
..
~
~
~
..
... L. tI..
IU O>'L.
.... .... /II 8.
I/'lt~!t!L.
N.c:: xai 0
'-tilt... CD U
~ 0...:: fS
/II.. >-. ....
....0C-......
G.l ca..o III cu .
L.G.I ClL.&......
0>-+ y.... 0..0
lI'l2G.1::....8f
.... Q. ~ 8:~ .... ~
_ Ii L. ftI..... 0...
,;.
..
u
r::"2
'- ..
..r::
15';;
'- ~
....
..~
2~
i';: ,
.~ fi
~ a...
-
~..~
';'i ~
~r::
~~ G.I
0" >-
00_
U _
r:: 0 ..
'''' CO U
o
~ b.~
llH
z....
o
;!
...
o
....
..
..
..
~
~ ~
......'"
..
r::
r::
..
~ ..
"':1"20
G.I 11).-..0
L >..........
Q 0._ ,
e..... U>4-
~ Q.8.~
_lictlU"l
..
..
-
~
"
~ ..
......'"
..
r:: r::
.. '-
~..
... 1Il"2 .
.. t.... ~
L >-.........
g~'~,;
~ Q.iS. ~
_ Ii ~"/'l
. ~
CU'';:;
~j
..
0~
.2Ill
..
o .
~g5
.... ...
0'" ~
;;;;8.
.1
Q,I'Z
...-
~i!
..
..
0~
.2Il;l
U .
8....15
..... 0
~ . ~
.. ~ 8.
..
. 15
.'Z
"'-
~i!
..
U
0~
.2Ill
.. .
~o~
.......
N . ~
~;ll8.
.~. .~
)0..... 11.I'-
...I-G.l>
_CItCl)O
U>l/lL.
c:: ~ c.
.... -! '; ~
15 ...B'x
....... L.
~6t~i
Ul-.c......
o ...oca
....-'0 L
i'~:::: ~
l(&lcu....c
.... L. 2-"
.... ..."E u >-
a.ex....
c So. ".....
.. ..
..a::..... Ul .. U
.~::5 Xl:;:
:o~ f.~.~
CIl 0 !l! > ~
=:i;:-i ell
o ....
.5;,; ~ ~~
~.. '-
.15 '!l:: '!l.!:
....CD......
lll!~l!t
:z'... t.._.t::.
o
:P
...
o
.,;
..
r::
.0
.."Z
....... en
f:g L. &t
.. U ~
U ~..
_.c......
!MO.,
... -
o ..0
c:gSB
~~ for;
tit.. 8.;:
. ~
&I';:; en
....- ..
..~ ~ ~
~ u..
~..
U ..
1loIl..c 0.,
!~+:c
~ ..
o 15"
~1C0i
~ . ~!:f
tit S; 8. CD
..
r::
. 0
..... cti
....... CIt
..~ ~ ~
~ u..
~..
.. ..
CIl..c 0 ill
!~+:li
U ..
~o S.~
N"':fa
~;ll 8...
o
r::
o
~.. >-
ou_
iH
~
.... .........
_0....
....u
-5 "'": 8-
......:1' ell
:00
...,; "2
.. ..
....
.. r::
"0'-
r::... u
].-""; ~
...~
o
L.~"2
o~."
~ .-
ct) ~ ~
...... '-
~ ~ a.
.... ."
L. V .. CI
00"
___lD
.. :0 ~
:Oi ~ I
t.~ -5
..~ 0
~
...
o
....
If--rr-:::J; - J
r::
o
'Z Ii
~-
8..~
~
~..
0>
>-~
-tl8.
....
~~
u
....~
ou
-~
....
15
'Z Ii
~-
8..~
~ii
0>
~~
~~
u
....~
ou
-~
....
15
';;.;
~-
8..~
~
~ u
0>
>-~
{l8.
....
~~
u
....~
ou
-~
....
u
..
~
'"
o
o
u
u
u
c
u
:g
...
~
..
~
..
o
~
o
~
~
'"
..
8.
~
....
~
o
.;
o
....
~
8.
....
o
....
..
~
o
>-
..
."
~~
8.::
....~
;a
~
8.
....
~
..
U
>-."
~~
8."
.....8
0_
....-
;;:c
~
8.
....
....
\:l
~
o
>-
-l'l
~
8.
....
~
!."
~~
8."
.....8
0-
....-
;;:c
~
~ u
8.t
t;i
~
8.
....
....
N
..
~
o
>-
{l
N
~~
8.._
~""i
&.~ .,
...... u
~ ~
... ~
~
>-..."
r:: ~
~.. ..
8..~ .8
....--
Ie 8:::
......0
~
~ u
8.t
~~
r::
o
~
.B
.;:
..
..
o
u
I
..
~
o
~
..
:g
0.
:::
;;;
"2
..
-ll
~
!
:::
~
..
%
;;;
~
.;
o
....
~
8.
....
~ ~
l;H
~.-
~ u ~
..~."
u......
>- ..
r::r::
~ 0..
8.';; 'll
...." Ii
o..~
-~..
..~..
15
..
u
..
~
~ ~
u
~ >
o
~
~ ~."
Z &.~
>-....r::
~..
~ 2"2
8.~u
....u..
....~..
......
15
'- ..
..r::
~l
..
~..
0..
~ ~
::8.
>-....
~
~ z ~
!.L.~
..... ClI....
....~~
....."
..
~
u
.~
~
o
"2
..
..
r::
..
'E
..
..
c
..
l!
..
i
g
.;
o
....
o
l(]
~
.,;
.
uo
'i8.
"
~ . .
~!~
L.._o
..~ .
uU5:
>-1 ......
~ ....0
!.L....._
..... 8. .. c:
o __
oo..c-o
~~~.n
.
uo
'i8.
u
~ . .
~!S!
1-'-0
..~ .
..uo
>-I~.....
~ ....0
8."".........
...... 8... c:
"'.......--
""'0..0..0
-'" ..
MM"''''
.
..0
'i8.
u
~ . .
~!S!
L.,._o
..~
uuo
>-l!~.....
~ ....0
8..""....-
.... 8. II c:
0..............
"'0..0'0
-'" ..
........,..
.g
..
"
~
c
..
r::
~
J
o
:;
N
....
----
/ b r/-,:::>
N"
C);; '5
.."
~
":18-
...-
.~ 5~
5u":
~~tIIt
E.'"
]~~u~
00 u
......!fi
N"
;qi
lil"
~
"118-
...-
.~ 5~
5......:
~..
,...S+.....
~
J:!l-&!&...
~ 0 III G.I
j"'.!~
N"
0;;'5
.. "
~
II n 8-
...-
.~ 5~
5u":
~..
..... S +,.,
~
-8~=;
:5,.,!~
..
..
..
o
%
.!l
u
..
o
:E
..
i
..
~
i!.
c
o
o
!
.~
..
-
..
~
Ii
..
o
-
~
~
....
1
'i
u
~
J
II
~
..
~
..
I
~
I:i
.,;
~
..
~.
..
=~
II::::
~-
..
~o
..
=~
II::::
~-
~
s
-
t).
..
.-
..t,
II::::
~-
~
s
-
~
..
II U
~ ii
o >
~ ~
~ !
o 0
'" 0
~ ..
+
~
.. 0
i~c;
u._
._~.....
_ u-o
U.,;
.
.... ""
..~o
..--
~i~
...... 0
g~~
N"''''
....~
+
~
.. 0
C~_
.co
u._
.....J::.....
- u-o
~Il";
.... " "
..~o
..--
~.oo
>-.. .
.... .. 0
Ie ;;,~
-"''''
....~
+
.. 0
c ~_
.co
U._
._..1::....
- u-o
U.,;
..
.... ""
..~o
..--
~.oo
>-.. .
~t:~
'" 0
-"''''
....~
~
..
'"
..
o
~
~
..
'"
~"
:ii
..>-
..-
......
.. ~
~..
U
....~
0_
0.0
"'..
.." ~
>-
~..c::
-..
.0..
....
~iJ
~~
......
~!
>-
.....L:
-~
.0..
.. ..
~a
c ~
11:ii
......
~!
~
:ii
..
~
."
..
..
u
o
'"
o
o
N
'"
.!:
..
c
~
..
~
~
o
'"
N
..
..
it._ m
>-~"
.." ..
0... ..
o
.. ~
.. +-
.. .0
~ ~ ..
~g.::!
g<<!-c
~i i
~
~
~
u..
:'f!
'p.
8.>-
-I!~
.. ..
>--
. ~
_", ~
.....
'"
_~u
"c~
~
~
..
u..
.'.....i
....
.~ 8.
8.>-
-I!~
.. ..
>--
. ~
-"'~
,...
'"
_~u
"c~
~
~
..
-..
u._
~E
.~ 8.
E
.. >-
8.-1!
~
..-..
>-,
on~
-..~
. ..
on
_~u
"c~
~
..
.~
~
0.
~
..
'"
~
..
o
~
c
8.
'"
..
:a
c
~
..
l!
..
'"
"
..
~
,..
o
go
.0
N
'"
~.
....
~ ~
..
~O~
~.. ..
ii..'l!
~~ !
-..-
0...
~ ..
'~]'8
ca.... ....
+' Ill'_"
..
:i'8:::
~..
.. ..
~ ..
..
~O~
~.. ..
c
....'l!
.~~ C
.... L.._
0...
~ ..
.- Il '8
" C
aI........
... f'''' ~
o.Q '" CI
:z 0" II}
.!..
.. ..
~ ~
..
~o~
~.. ..
ii..."
U 0 ..
_'_ l:
-' L.'_
0...
~ ..
.~] '8
c._ ...
..... ,-..
.. -
~'8Z:=
~
..
'"
~
0>
..
..
..
'"
o
'"
o
N
'"
on
mr -:r;- Lj
....G.lQ,I....
ca_.J::: 0
-.0..
~.. ..
I- C).~a~t:
In _.... >-!
....a~~
I CD)(!D ~
.,..>.caai
....:: i.....~ S
L. G.I __''''_
o~+.~...~2
11\.... 1IIi!:.L.L.
....Q.~~.=~~
-Ii Co. co.... 0...
...G.lcu.....
e-..c 0
-.0..
~.. ..
ULoID...
In'''' 0 GI L.
,..,-.... >-[
L." ~ Cfl III
I CI ~ g 6
~;;~~uS
L. t IV_::._...:
o~+.:!...~2
1I\_G.ly,CtlL.L.
... Q.~ ii.:=: ~~
_Ii L...... 0...
...GI......
co_...:: 0
-.0..
~.. ..
u'-C!O'"
U'\.... 0 G.I '-
N_... >-!.
,-"8:...
I! Ill" (I'l L-
a; )( co
.... III ~f f: c
IS). ._ 0
'- G.I __._....
0>- + CI ... 0
o ._... CD II
U'\-G.li!:ChL.L.
....Q.~o...=!l!~
_ Ii '- 0_ 0-...
~
~
!!
~
~
..
"
~
Z
..
~
..
~
..
U
..
~
2
..
:E
o
N
o
~
'"
on
Jb/~
..
~
~ ..
.. ~
.. ..
.. .u
U ..
,,~~
11'\.02
c~ c.. ~
. .- E...
.J::.. . CI
"':"20"-
..tJ'_N_
'- >-.... 0 CD
112'<;__ ~
~ ~ 8."'l ii
_Ii 11111\ L.
..
~
.. ..
.. ~
.. ..
.. .u
u ..
,,~~
lI\~cnEcn
i .S ~::
.t:... '.
"'::110"-
III G.I....N-
~ >-_0 l'llI
S~ 'u"; ~
:: t i:1 ~
..
~
~ ..
.. ~
.. ..
.. . U
xld:
It\~cn2Ul
:& .= 2::
~.. '1IlII
...Uli ~
G.I $....2_
~ >-"'0 Cl
112'9,__ ~
~ ~i5."'l ~
_ i Ulll'l L
:~
...-
....
...-
~i
JIl..
08.
~ 015
"'''' ~
o ...
..~ 8.
+ ~
~.-
....
...-
":jl
~..
~
JIl"
8.
go 5
. <> ~
Ii!: ...
.. il 8.
+ ~
~.-
....
...-
~i
~
JIl"
8.
~It\ 5
'N ~
N ...
~Zl 8.
~
..
..
..
..
..
"
~
c
~
..
::
..
..
~
..
U
..
~
..
:E
~
~
"
"
..
JIl
....
.~
....
o
on
N
..
~
~
"
"
..
JIl
....
..
..
~
....
o
on
:II
~
~
~
o
"
"
..
JIl
..
..
..
~
....
o
on
N
..
~
~
~
~
"
"
..
..
...
on
o
-
on
"'l
'"
""",'
15
15
..
..
~
....
..
..
~
....
'"
'"
N
..
~
S
-
.. ~
t ~
()' ~
:g i
1;; ~
.... ....
o 0
on 0
~ ;;
~
."
..
..
...
c
..
ii
>
~
....
,.
..
."
....
o
on
N
..
~
:ii ~
.... ~
,... "
x:s ~
o
" ~
..+-
.. .0
~ ~ ..
~~.~
o"i
~H
......
..
..
II
....
o
]
..
~
....
o
on
N
..
.~
..
..
~
~
'B
..
~
....
o
on
N
..
15
..
..
U
2
..
..
..
~
..
8
N
..
.. ~
CD .~
~
~ 1
~ i
t; _r
.... ....
o 0
on 0
~ ;;
15
i
..
II
'"
o
]
..
'"
~
..
~
.2'
~
1
..
~
c
1!
..
c
..
ii
>
~
~
..
."
....
o
on
N
..
..
:ii ~
.... ~
>-~"
[t; ~
o
" ~
.. +-
.. .0
~ ~ ..
.z:- g.~
~~c
...culi
15
15
..
..
U
o
....
..
..
~
..
'"
o
N
..
~
..
..
c
I;
';
~
o
'"
o
~
on
'8
0.
o
;;
o
N
o
:i
..
..
~
l!
o
u
,,"
o
"
'"
rg
U
..
U
~
~
]
l!
..U
c..
~~
>
w
-..
.. >
'u'c
8.:'
"'u
~
..
l!
..
'"
U
~
a.
..
..
~
~
'B
..
~
..
o
on
N
..
~
..
~
II
'"
1!
..
'"
~
~
'"
..
o
..
2
..
..
a.
..
0>
..
~
~
..
:E
~
~
on
on
on
o
o
N
N
on
o
:g
.0
N
on
.."
..
~
...
o
~
..
0.
;0
'"
.0
"'l
'"
o
;;
..
...
on
""'"
'.
.
!
..
..
j
e
~
~
,
'j
~
~ .!l "
.. .. 6 0 ..
,,~ .. ;jl ....
~:! ii 0 0 ~ ';; 8.!!
.;;; ~ , Xl
~ co C1t.~ 5 , ~ 8. ';:.- ~ ~
Xl + .. ,. ..
IS IS + ooJ....... e .. -~.. ...c u u
S .D ~ - 0 u ~.~u ~ ._ L. CLt U ..
~ ~ 111\:1"'''' 0 ~ 8- "E 8.$ ~ :;;; 1 .c
~ ,il .... u en t...... .. .. ...c ~
co._ L. ~ 0 "- 8. ~ " L.." C 0 ..
- t..-'._ ., .... .. >.- .... >0,." L. ~ .... ....
~ .... 8:- .. .. .... .. ..~ ...... ............. .. .... .. ..
. .. .. ~ .. .. .. !i ~:.]] .. .c .. .. ..
.. .. .. C1CUClt.....s:: ~ .. .. .. Z~!~ .. ~ ~
=~ ~ ~ ..... '&::0'" .. ~ 11 CLt....... &I ~
- ..~ .... ,. .... >-caca'" >-.-.- .... ....
.... .... .. ..~ 0 .... 0 "'.- O......L.L.L. ......&::.I:.&:: .... <> 0
Il, ~ Ie o.c.. .... N <> 0 ' e ~~ ~ oJ ouuu 0 0 0
N ~~o ~8- ~ ;;; ;; 'E _N .. :l u:: :l N N
~- .. .. .. 0_ .. .. .... "- .. ..
Xl.. j .!l ..
0 ..
~a .. ;jl ....
0 0 ~ ';; 8.!!
~ .. ~ , ~
~ ca..~ 5 ~ , .. " ..
.. + .. ,... ~ 8. ';:.-
e IS + ....-.- .. IS .. -~.. ...c u u
- 0 .D ~ - U ~.~u ! '_ L. G.I U ..
S ~ ~ ClCO"'. 0 ~ !. "E 8.$ ~ :;;; .c 'Ii
~ ~ ... u en L..... .. ~ ...c ..
f::.= 8.2 "- ~ " L. " C 0 .. > >
- .... .. >.- ... >0,., L. ~ .... ....
.. .... .... 8:.... 0 L. .. .... ~ ..~ ...... ......... GI .... .. ..
... .. .. ~ .. .. .. !i ~:.]] .. .c .. .. ..
.. .. .. lOil!O........c: ~ .. .. .. Z!~b .. ~ ..
=~ .. .. ... .&::0... .. ~ 1lG.l.......... ~ ,.
,. ,. - ..~ .... ,. .... >-10<<1... >-.-.- .... ....
.... .... .. ..~ ~ .... <> "'.- O.....L.L.l.. .......:.1:.1: .... 0 0
Il, '^ ~ ~.c" .... ~ '^ <> . e ~ '^ ~ oJ U"\uuu 0 0 0
N "'~o ~!. ;;; :l ;;; tit'e _N .. :::IU:: :l N N
~- .. .. 0_ .... "- .. ..
~ .!l ..
.. .. 6 0 ..
" .. .. ;jl .. ..
,... e 0 0 ~ ';; 8. !!
e~ .. ~ , ~
- .. ...~ IS ~ , .. ~ 8.';:._ .. ..
t. ~ + .. ,... u
IS e + --.- .. IS .. -..... ...c u
- 0 .D ~ - U Cl.I u._ G.I ,_ l-" U .. i
S ~ ~ "ctI..... lU 0 ~ 8- ....- u c "E 8.$ ~ :;;; .c
,il ,il +-' U en t.._ .. .. ...c ..
aI'- L. ~ 0 "- 8. .. " '- l\,I co .. > >
- L._'_ CLt .... .. >.- ... >0"" 1- ... .... ....
~ .... .... 8:- .. .. .... .. ..... ...... .......... G.l .... .. ..
. .. .. ~ .. .. .. !i ~:.]] .. .c .. " "
~ .. .. aJlUl>>_..c ~ " .. .. laGlll.l... .. " ..
,,- ~ ~ .... ..co+-' ~ ~ llGJ......G.l GI ceo ~ ,. ,.
..t. - ..~ .... .... >-m<<l... >-.... '''' .... ....
.... .... .. ..~ ~ .... 0 "'.- O......l-L.L. .....&::.&::.&:. .... 0 <>
Il, ~ Ie lI'l.c:L.lUL. 0 ~ 0 ,e rJ'lLl'l ~ 0 ~ ,^uuu 0 <> <>
N t}tb.e~8. ;;; N ;;; tit 'E _N "i} ;;;u:: :l N N
~- .. .. .. .... "- .. ..
3
.. E
z
..
..
,. .. .. u ..
~ ~ :c 0 u
U c 1 ~
~ 0 0 ..
e ;S ;S ;; u
U N N ~ ~.
,. ": ": .. ..
e ~ e
~ ~ ~ 'tl ~~ - ..
'0 - ~
,. u U :I
~ 0 .. .. ~ ~] ~ ~
~ l; .. .. i~ .. -
,. -
e e .. c.. '8 :I
.. ;; .. ~
l; :;;; u' 8. 0 ..
] ] 3 .. -
" IS .!. _0 .. '8
" " ~ i e
:;;; " .. i~ 0 0
~ - - .. .. z -
" .. .. 8. 0 ~
" ~ 'tl 'tl - -~ , ,
" ~ .. 'tl
~ .~ ~ ~ .. ~ ~ e .. .. ~ Xl
~ ~ .. ! _0 .. ~
~ " .c
.. .. ~ ~ ..e = .~ u
~ .. -.. ... 0; '0
& ~ !!'ii " ~ .. ~ ;;; 'Ii .c
0 e ~ il .. :I :a~ ..
i ~ 0 0.. " ... .. > >
~ ';).... ~ i!! '2
.. .. ~ ~ ~ ~IS .. .D ~ ~
.&: " " ~ .. ~" w ~ .. ..
~ ~ ..e ..3 u H ~ 1
M -.- -" .. ..~ ;; 'x '8
erg fii ou
" -:I .. ..
.. ... ... ..... ..... .. u.. ~ ~ >:E ... >
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '0 0 0
.~ ;S N ;S - '" N N ;S ;S - N
0 0 0 0 c: 0 0
~ '" 0 N '" .. <> ~ :il :0 N '"
~ ": ~ ": ~ ": '^ ~ "! N
'^ '^ ~ '^ ~ '^ ~ ~ '^ ~ .;
1
I1rr::c -5
It, /?
.
.
.
;177:LL -
COUNCIL AGZImA STATZMJ:R'1'
ITEM TITLE:
Item II
Meetinq Date 11/19/91
Resolution Abatinq the Scheduled
Calendar Year 1992 Business License Tax
Increase for One Year and Retaininq
Business License Taxes in Calendar Year
1992 at the Calendar Year 1991 Level, as
Provided for in Ordinance 2408
2) Report Reqardinq Increasinq Various
Taxes and Fees Related to Billboards,
Special Events and Card Rooms
1)
Sl1BMITTED BY:
Director of Finan~
Revenue Manaqer '-~
~
city Manaqerf? (4/5ths Vote Yes
i/
No X)
REVIEWED BY:
At the November 5, 1991 Business License Tax Abatement
Hearinq, the City Council indicated concern with raisinq the
business license tax to the scheduled Calendar Year (CY)
1992 levels qiven the current economic recession. Ordinance
2408 passed by Council on October 25, 1990 offers Council
the ability to abate the CY 1992 business license tax down
to the current CY 1991 levels for one year. passaqe of this
resolution would set the CY 1992 business license taxes at
the current CY 1991 levels. This action would abate the
increase for one calendar year only, and leave the proposed
1993 increase at the same level (e.q., the three year phase-
in would be retained with the entire increase scheduled for
1993 occurrinq in 1993). fThis would provide Council with
:maximum flexibility at the 1993 abatement hearinq where, .
dependinq on economic conditions, Council would have the
option of abatinq the tax to the 1991 levels or the 1992
-levels (4 year phase in); or allowinq the tax to increase to
. the scheduled 1993 levels. . If this resolution is passed,
staff recommends sendinq a letter explaininq Council's
action to all businesses with their business license renewal
forms, since last year all businesses were informed that
their tax would be increasinq this cominq January, and as
such may be expectinq an increase.
~atinq the CY 1992 Busin.ss License ~ax increase will
~educe FY 1991-92 revenues by approximately $146,750. After
a review of FY 1991-92 budqeted revenues and expenditures,
it appears that the $146,750 revenue reduction can be
addressed while still retaininq a balanced budqet. This can
be accomplished throuqh the followinq .ean~: 1) Utilizinq
the $59,642 revenue .urplus~er budqeted expenditures in
,
77-/
/6~/7
l
.
Page 2,
Meeting
Item J )
Date 11/19/91
"""\
the FY 1991-92 bu~get, 2) utilizing the $80,100 in
bu~getary savings resulting from allowing the Boys an~ Girls
Club to operate the new Youth Center, 3) Utilizing an
a~~itiona1 $3500 in revenues expected from updating-the City
Attorney Department'. full cost recovery rate use~ for
reimbursements from special fun~s to the General fun~, and
4) Increasing revenues by $3840 by increasing select fees
and business license taxes later this fiscal year.
At the November 5, 1991 Business License Tax Abatement
Hearing, the City Council in~icated some interest in raising
taxes and/or fees of some specific businesses. Staff has
researche~ three areas an~ are recommen~ing that proposals
to increase the fees re1ate~ to special events and to
increase the business license tax for billboar~s be brought
back for Council consi~eration at a public hearing to be
held at the December 10, 1991 meeting, to ensure all public
notification requirements are met. Staff is also evaluating
the feasibility of increasing the business license tax on
car~ rooms. Police Department staff are currently reviewing
a proposal from card room owners re1ate~ to changes in the
card room ordinance and an associated proposal to increase
business license taxes. Due to the complexity of the
issues, staff ~oes not think all pertinent information can
be reviewed, a recommen~ation formulated an~ notice given by
the December 10 meeting. Since card room business license
taxes are collecte~ quarterly, staff proposes to bring back
options for an increase~ tax on car~ rooms to Council at a
public hearing in time for any ~esired increase in tax to be
implemented for the second quarter (April 1) of 1992.
"",,\,
RECOMMENDATION:
1) Adopt the Resolution abating the Calendar Year 1992
business license tax rates to the level of the 1991
Ca1en~ar Year business license tax rates.
2) Accept report regarding increasing various taxesan~
fees related to bi1lboar~s, special events (inc1u~ing
concerts) and card rooms
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS aBCOMKBKDATIOH: Not Applicable
DISCUSSION:
Abatina CY 92 Business License Taxes ~o CY 91 Levels
On November 5, 1991 Council conducted a Public Hearing as
require~ by Ordinance 2408 to hear public testimony and
"""\
1I-~
J~-/I
.
.
.
Page 3, Item / I
Meeting Date 11/19/91
deliberate as to whether or not the scheduled CY 1992
increase in the Business License Tax should occur as
scheduled or should be abated to a lower level, not to go
below the current CY 1991 rates (Attachment 1). During
discussion, Council indicated concern with proceeding with
the scheduled business license tax increase due to current
economic conditions. Council requested staff to come back
at this meeting with a recommendation to abate the business
license tax rates to their current level for CY 1992 (FY
1991-92) and provide options for addressing the anticipated
$146,750 decrease in revenues in the FY 1991-92 budget which
would be associated with this abatement.
~his agenda statement provides the resolution to abate ~e
scheduled 1992 business license tax increase for one year
and provides a report on the feasibility of increasing taxes
or fees for certain businesses which will only offset a very
small portion of the revenue reduction. Staff recommends
that the remainder of the revenue needed to maintain a
balanced budget be obtained through utilization of the
$59,642 surplus of revenues over expenditures in this year's
budget and the additional $80,100 available this year due to
Boys and Girls Club operating the Youth Center rather than
City staff.
If Council adopts the Resolution, staff recommends sending a
letter to all licensed businesses with their business
license tax renewal notice, informing them of Council's
decision. On October 10, 1990 staff sent letters to 6500
business license holders informing them of the proposed
increase (at that time a two year phase in rather than the
three year phase in eventually adopted by Council). Since
many businesses are expecting a large increase this year
based on this correspondence, ~ letter informing them of the
changes in the business license ordinance, as well as the
one year abatement of the scheduled increase, would be
helpful.
Evaluation of increasina Billboard Business License Tax
currently, the city of Chula Vista has four companies which
have a total of 21 billboards. Under the current business
license tax table Chula vista would be expected to receive
$495 in business license tax revenue from billboards in
Calendar Year 1992. A survey of other cities in San Diego
County, indicate that Chula Vista's current business license
tax on billboards is relatively low (see Table 1).
7l~
/6' dO
Page 4, Item II
Meeting Date 11/19/91
It appears that the tax on billboards can be raised
substantially since billboards are c~rrently being taxed at
a much higher level in several nearby cities. Staff is
intending to come back with an ordinance to raise business
license taxes for billboards at the December 10, 1991
Council meeting. This will give staff the opportunity to
publish and post the public hearing notice as well as
notifying the affected four companies by letter. Staff will
be recommending an increase in the business license tax from
$75 plus $15 per billboard over two, to $75 per billboard,
beginning in Calendar Year 1992. For example, a company
with eight billboards would pay $165 in tax currently versus
$600 in tax if the proposed rate were adopted. If Council
adopts staff's recommendation, the fiscal impact will be an
additional $1080 collected in business license tax in FY 91-
92 (CY 1992).
-.
Evaluation of Increasina SDecial Event Business License Tax
Special events include concerts, circuses, carnivals,
parades, etc. CUrrently business license taxes for special
events (for profit) are $250 a day. A survey of other San
Diego County cities (See Table 2) indicates that Chula
Vista's business license tax for these events is
comparatively high. Chula Vista does have a special tax of
$5 per day for non-profit organizations staging an event of
three or less days duration. This enables desirable
community events to be held at a minimal cost to the
organization.
"""
Given that our current tax rate appears adequate, staff
believes enacting fees to be paid for any additional staff
services required as a direct result of an event is a more
equitable manner of ensuring that all costs are recovered.
As such staff is recommending returning to Council on the
December 10, 1991 meeting to propose an addition to the
Master Fee Schedule requiring that special events pay all
costs for additional staff services (e.g., investigation,
traffic control, Bet up, clean up) at full cost recovery,
unless the fees or a portion thereof are waived by the
Waiving Authority. This recommendation will have a positive
fiscal impact that is difficult to quantify. A reasonable
estimate for the remainder of FY 1991-92 is $1500.
Evaluation of Increasina Card Room Business Lieense Tax
CUrrently there are two operational card rooms in the City,
one with six tables and one with eight tab~es. Per Council
request, Police Department staff are in the process of
~
:1 J, 'I
/~ /021
.
Page 5, Item II
Meeting Date 11/19/91
evaluating the feasibility and desirability of a request
from the card rooms to modify the city's card room
ordinance. In their request for an ordinance change, the
card rooms indicated a willingness to have their taxes
increased if the requested changes are adopted. Although
staff believes that a tax increase could be handled
independently from the Police Department's review of the
requested ordinance changes, more discussions and research
are needed prior to formulating a recommendation for a
business license tax increase. Since card room business
license taxes are collected quarterly, staff proposes to
bring back options for an increased tax on card rooms to
Council at a public hearing in time for any desired increase
in tax .to be implemented in the second quarter (April 1) of
1992.
In Chula Vista, card rooms currently pay a business license
tax of $30 per table monthly. As shown in Table 3, the
City's current business license tax on card rooms is on the
low end of the spectrum in comparison to other San Diego
County cities. With 14 tables, the City currently receives
$420 per month in business license tax, or $5040 annually.
In addition to business license taxes, card rooms are
. required to pay the following fees:
o New card rooms pay a $500 non-refundable
investigation fee when initially applying for a
license
.
o Card room managers pay $50 for an initial work
permit and $30 annually for work permit renewal
o Card room employees pay $30 for an initial work
permit and $10 annually for work permit renewal
As an example, a doubling of the tax from $30 per table per
month to $60 per table per month would result in additional
revenue of $1260 this fiscal year and $5040 in FY 1992-93.
Other Issues Ymnactina the FY 1991-92 Budaet
Even though council adopted a balanced FY 1991-92 budget,
and this report outlines how the budget can continue to be
balanced even with the loss of the scheduled CY 1992
business license tax increase, there are still many revenue
and expenditure issues outstanding that may impact the
current budget. Staff are in the process of reviewing a
number of issues related to the current budget (e.g.,
recently notified health insurance increases, reimbursement
;0.,.5"
It- -2~
Page 6, Item 1.1
Meeting Date 11/19/91
of booking fees to the County, Port District reimbursements
for public safety services, continued economic slump) which
could impact revenue and expenditure projections. Staff
will be coming back to Council at a later date to address
these budget issues comprehensively as the big picture
becomes clearer.
~
FISCAL XMPACT:
The fiscal impact of abating the scheduled CY 1992 increase
in business license taxes will be a reduction of $146,750 in
estimated FY 91-92 revenues. However, this reduction in
revenues can be met through the current budget and later
adoption of increased taxes on billboards and card rooms and
increased fees for special events at the levels mentioned in
this report. If these actions are taken, abatement of the
Business License Tax increase can be accomplished while
maintaining a balanced budget.
Listina of Tables and Attachments
~
Comparison of Chula Vista Business License
Rates for Billboards with Rates in Other San
Diego County Cities
Comparison of Chula Vista Business License
Rates for Special Events with Rates in Other
San Diego County Cities
Comparison of Chula Vista Business License
Rates for Card Rooms with Rates in Other San
Diego County Cities
Attachment 1 - November 5, 1991 Council Agenda Statement
Related to the Public Hearing Regarding
Business License Tax Rates
Table 1
Table 2 -
Table 3 -
""""
'.
.n:~
/~ '-;23
Tax levy for
Eight Billboards.
n/a
n/a
$50
$55
Taple 1
Comparison of Business License Taxes for Billboards
November 1991
Ci_
Business License Tax
Carlsbad
Billboards prohibited
Billboards prohibited
$50/business
Coronado
Escondido
Oceanside
$25/yr/business + $10/ea. sign over 5 signs
National City
San Diego
$50/yr/bus. + $15/ea. sign over 3 signs
$20/yr/sign
$75/yr/bus. + $15/ea. sign over 2 signs
CHULA VISTA
(Current)
vista
$110/yr/bus. + $40/ea. sign over 5 signs
$35/yr/bus. + $70/sign
$100/yr/sign
La Mesa
Imperial Beach
Average tax (excluding Chula Vista):
.
$125
$160
$165
$230
$595
$800
$288
. Note: Represents the tax level for a typical number of billboards.
:hula vista's two largest billboard companies have eight and six
;,illboards respectively.
.
Jti7
/ t -.,;21
""""
Table 2
Comparison of Business License Taxes for Special Events
November 1991
City
Carlsbad
Business License Tax
CHOU VISTA
n/a
$250/day: $5/day for non-profit
n/a
$5/day
$25/event
$lOO/day + $10/show
Coronado
Escondido
Imperial Beach
La Mesa
National City
$20 for resident businesses: $25 for non-res
No tax on non-profit
Oceanside
$lOO/day:
$48/event
Business license (based on qross receipts)
$lO/day for exhibit booths
San Diego
Vista
-..
""'"'"
/t ~:<3
17-8'
.
"
~
~
.
.
..
= ~
18' .
l:: I-
..
..O~ t ~
. -
E 8 . .. t t t t t t t
. e- ~ I ~ t .. .. .. .. .... ..
.lC" .. - 1!!!!!!
o .. . ..
- .
~.. i 0
- - 2Ssogo~
or ::~
. ; 1 i -::l"'!"'~
.. .. ... ... - ......
. .. .. ~ . .;It:;:
l .. . l:.
.. .. ..
J" .. 1 iI
~ .. ..
.... ~ s s ..
i - .. .. i .. t t t I: I: t
i--
.. . . .. ..I iiiiiii
i .. 0 0 .. o .
i IU~ i IC~ ... ... .. ~ ... .. ..
. .. .. _N""....,..IO~
I , , , ~
-
&
! .. ..
"'... ;:: ..
I: - .. I
~ i . . i
t .. I I
.. '" -
. I
I
-
.. &
I 1 1 - 1 1 1
I ..
.. 1 :: ..
:i :Ii I> :i :i
~ - - i i i
. - 11 ~
i - .. .. -
i 1
'$- ~
i! c !t ;:;
.. f
.. :1 -I -
1 . -
'" -t 1 i J I
. .. i ii' .
- ~ - Ie :; ..
i I. .. .; ! .
;:; . I ;
.. ... - ...
:y" It ~ {r
-..,
TInS PAGE BLANK
-..,
-..,
JF/~
J ,{,-oI. 7
.
.
.
COUNCIL AGBlmA 8TATZMZNT
ITEM TITLE:
Item ~'I J
Meeting Date 11/5/91
Public Hearing: Regarding Business License
Tax Rates
SUBMITTED BY:
Director of Fina~~1
Revenue Manager .
City Manage~ (4/5ths Vote Yes__ No-X)
REVIEWED BY:
On October 25, 1990, the City Council approved a business
license tax increase to be phased in over a three year
period starting with 1991. Table 1 shows the current
business license tax rates and scheduled increases as
approved by the Council in Ordinance No. 2408.
The council also approved a procedure for annual public
hearings commencing with the 1992 rates. Today's public
hearing offers Council the opportunity to review and discuss
the second year of the scheduled three year increase in
business license taxes and to receive comments from
representatives of the business community.
As noted in the City Manager's budget message, the FY 1991-
92 adopted City budget assumed implementation of the
scheduled second year business license tax adjustment with a
resulting $146,750 in additional revenue.
RECOMMElmATION: That Council conduct the public hearing but
take no action to abate (see option below) implementation of
the scheduled (reference Table 1) business license tax rate
increase to be effective January 1, 1992.
oDtion - In accordance with Ordinance 2408, Council is
authorized, for no more than one calendar year, to lower or
abate the scheduled business license tax rate, but to no
less than the tax rate in the 1991 calendar year.
BOARDS/CODI8SIONS RECOKKZlmATION: Not AppliCable
DISCUSSION I
CUrrent Eeonomv
AI though the curren.t national economy would .eem to arvue
against a business license tax increase, there is.ome
evidence that the local business environment has weathered
the recession much better than other cities across the state
and in San Diego County. Using sales tax revenue as one
barometer, Chula Vista's sales tax revenu~s have increased
~~;... ci" rr -/1
"~ft L-I--'
)b'/,;z~
PAGE 2, ITEM .lP.
MEETING DATE 11/5/91
in spite of the national recession. In FY 1990-91 the
City's sales tax revenues were $11,808,279 an increase of
8.2' over FY 1989-90.
.......
In terms of number of businesses, the City currently has
6,697 businesses on record versus 6,661 a year ago in
October 1990.
It is recognized that some parts of the economy have not
fared as well'1 such as tourism and the City's Transient
Occupancy Tax revenue, but Chula Vista's overall sales tax
base seems relatively strong when compared with other cities
and the problems they are facing because of the recession
and decreasing sales tax revenues.
So, in light of Council's policy decision last year to phase
in the business license tax increase, staff's recommendation
is consistent with that policy direction. On the other
hand, if Council's evaluation of the impact of the economy
on business is not as optimistic as the above description,
and the following discussion, there is an option built into
Ordinance 2408 for Council to set the rate at or in between
the current rate and the second year increase.
Summarv of 1990 Staff Renort and Recommendations
In June 1990 staff submitted a supplemental budget memo and .......
report to Council (Attachment 1) providing a detailed review
of the City'S business license tax rates and revenues. This
review was one of a number of steps being undertaken by
staff to review and enhance the City'S revenue base,
especially with regards to funding to be used for general
City services. The report showed that City business license
tax revenues have lagged significantly behind inflation and
have provided a declining level of support for general City
services. It also found that the City of Chula Vista's
business license rates and revenues were substantially lower
than other comparable cities state-wide an~ within San Diego
County.
After presenting the original report staff received input
and feedback from various groups in the business community.
The business community indicated a preference to retain the
current rate structure rather than the alternate rate
structure (gross receipts) proposed in the staff report.
Based on these discussions, staff modified its
recommendation to retain the current rate structure and
phase in the rate increase over a two year period. The
recommended rate was set at a level which would result in
roughly equivalent revenue to that estimated under the
proposed alternate rate structure. This recommendation was
1 A. you will... fn th. following public he.rfng, .n fncr.... In the Tr.n.l.nt Occup.ncy T..
f. not being r.coomended. . ,
e"""
lrj.}, ;,::"- ~~ ',I 'J
1."";" '" -.. ~~ '....
)t -c1. /
.
.
e
PAGE 3. ITEM 21J
MEETING DATE 11/5/91
supported by the Chamber of Commerce and was presented to
Council on October 16, 1990 for the first reading and
October 25 for the second reading (Attachment 2). On
October 25, 1990, Council passed the ordinance supported by
the Chamber, with the JIlodifications of extending the phase
in period from two to three years and including a procedure
for annual public hearings commencing with the 1992 rates.
In 1990, when the report was written, general business
license tax rates had not been increased since 1978. In
1954 the general business license tax rate was set at $12.50
plUS $3 per employee. In 1978, 24 years later the basic
rate was increased to $25 plus the same $3 per employee.
During this same time period the Consumer Price Index (CPI)
and the cost of providing general City services increased at
a JIluch higher rate.
o Since November 1954 the CPI increased 386', while the
average cost for a Chula Vista business license
increased only 46'. From 1978 to 1989 the CPI
increased by 121', while the cost of an average
'business license did not increase at all.
In FY 1954-55 business license revenues supported 6.3'
of the City'S general operating budget. In FY 1978-79
support dropped to only 1.8'. By FY 1989-90 business
license revenues supported less than l' of general
services.
o
Between FY 1954-55 and FY 1989-90 City expenditur.s for
police services rose sharply, as seen by a 7,871'
increase in the Police Department's budget. During
this same period business license revenue rose only
817'. From FY 1978-79 to FY 1989-90 police
expenditures rose 314', with business license revenues
increasing only 86'.
The report also compared the City of Chula Vista's business
license revenue and rates to that of other comparable size
cities throughout the state (100,000-150,000 popUlation in
FY 1987-88) and larger cities (over 50,000 population in FY
1987-88) within San Diego County. The report looked at
three compari.on JIleasures: 1) percentage of general fund
revenues generated by business licenses, 2) business
license revenue generated per capita, and 3) average cost
of a busine.s license for different size bu.in.s.... As
detailed below. business license tax revenues in Chula Vista
were .ignificantly lower than the comparison cities. These
low revenues were primarily a result of the City'S low
business license rates.
o
'.
~," . Iz~ 1,3
;;...... ~
/?~;; p
PAGE ". ITEM ;(u
MEETING DATE 11/5/91
""""
Percentaae of General Fund Revenues
A Ralph An~erson an~ Associates survey showe~ that business
license revenues of California Charter cities average~ 5.8%
of General Fun~ revenues in FY 1987-88. In FY 1987-88 Chula
Vistas business license revenues represente~ only 1.29% of
general revenues, tenth lowest among the 78 charter cities.
By FY 1988-89 Chula Vista's business license revenues ha~
decline~ further, representing only 0.9% of general
revenues. Accor~ing to the survey, only 11% of all
California cities received less than l' of their general
revenue from business licenses.
Per CaDita
Chula Vista's business license revenues were also low when
compared on a per capita basis. Among the 18 similar sized
cities in California, Chula Vista generate~ the second
lowest business license revenue per capita. Chula Vista's
business license revenues were also low compare~ to other
San Diego County cities. Among the ten cities within the
County with populations of 50,000 or more Cas of FY 1987-88)
Chula Vista received the second lowest business license
revenue per capita.
Averaae Cost of a Business License
-..
The report also reviewed business license rate structures
employed by comparison cities and compare~ the average cost
of a license f9r various sized businesses. Since the
majority of cities used gross receipts rather than the
employee-based rate structure used by Chula Vista, an
analysis was conducted to estimate the average number of
employees for various levels of gross receipts. Rate
comparisons were made for five retail business categories,
based on a range of gross receipts or equivalent number of
employees, based on each jurisdictions business license rate
schedule. This comparison found that Chula Vista's business
license rates were among the lowest among similar-sized
cities throughout California as well as cities within San
Diego County. On the state wi~e level Chula vista's rates
were second lowest among the 18 state-wide comparison
cities, and thir~ lowest among the ten San Diego County
comparison cities.
For example, for a business with gross receipts of $100,000-
$200,000 C5.5 employees) the cost of a busine.s license
range~ for $20 to $311 among the state-wi~e comparison
cities and from $25 to $111 among the County comparison
cities. Chula Vista's average rate of $42 was only 33'
-.....
-....
\ ,--~ ';
.)...lio-.>
,'.-,1: :'
IT-Ilf
If}, /J !
.
.
.
PAGE 5. ITEM ~
MEETING DATE 11/5/91
of the average rate of $127 charged ~y state-wide comparison
cities and 63' of the average rate of $67 charged ~y County
comparison cities. As a ~usiness' gross receipts and number
of employees increased, Chula Vista's rates were
progressively lower when compared to other cities.
Rate S'trueture
The report also examined Chula Vista's ~usiness license rate
structure. For general ~usinesses, Chula Vista's rate
schedule charges a ~asic flat rate for all ~usinesses of a
given type and an additional variable rate ~ased on the
number of employees. A review of comparison cities'
~usiness license rate structures indicated that 14 of 17
comparison cities in California and five of nine comparison
cities in San Diego County had rate structures ~ased solely
or primarily on gross receipts.
A review of various rate structure alternatives led staff to
~e1ieve that a gross receipt-based rate structure was more
preferable than an employee-~ased rate structure. Gross
receipts ~ased rates are self adjusting for inflation, and
thus will generally result in revenues remaining
proportional to City expenses over time. Gross receipts-
~ased rate structures are also more sensitive to an
individual business' economic condition, since each year's
rate mirrors the individual business' annual performance.
Based on the aforementioned analyses and comparisons, last
year's staff report presented two major recommendations: 1)
Business license rates in the City of Chula Vista should be
raised to be more comparable with past years support of
general fund services and more comparable with rates of
other San Diego County cities: and 2) Chula Vista's rate
structure should be altered to be gross receiptS-based
rather than employee-based.
After presenting the initial report staff received input
from various groups in the business community concerning the
recommendations contained in the report, specifically a
change to a gross receipts based tax. After meeting with
the business community, although there were mixed opinions,
the predominant opinion was to retain the per employee rate
structure due to privacy concerns. In response to these
concerns staff revised the recommendation in the initial
report to:
o
Retain the existing employee-based rate structure,
adjusting it to generate approximately equivalent
revenue that would have been received under the
initially proposed gross receipts rate structure.
In conjunction with this change, rates for
professionals and manufacturers ~ere raised
proportionally to the existing rate structure.
~~-~
->-",1'.,
...",~
.J:P1f"
/t-Jc?-
PAGE 6. ITEM ~/)
MEETING DATE 11/5/91
o
Phase in the increase over a two year period.
'"""
o Delay any inflationary increases until the third
year.
o Provide a lower flat rate for new small (5 or
fewer employees) businesses during their first
year of operation.
o Established a maximum annual business license tax
to be paid by any single business.
AdoDtion of Existina~Business License Ordinance
On October 16 (first reading) and October 25, 1990 (second
reading) Council was presented with six options for
increasing ~he business license rates, with staff
recommending the option outlined above which was endorsed by
the Chamber of Commerce Executive Board (Attachment 2). On
October 25, 1990 Council passed option E of Ordinance 2408.
The rate increases provided for by this ordinance are shown
in Table 1. Major ordinance provisions included:
o
A three year, rather than two year, phase in of
the recommended increase, with 50' of the increase
occurring in 1991, 75' of the increase occurring
in 1992, and 100% of the increase occurring in
1993.
'"""
o A lower, fixed first year rate for new small
businesses (5 or fewer employees).
o A six percent annual growth rate in 1994 and
thereafter.
o Annual abatement hearing procedures are provided,
commencing for the 1992 rates at which time
Council may set lower rates, with the 1991 rates
being the floor.
o Setting a maximum tax that any single business
would have to pay in a calendar year. Maximum
amount is $7,000 in 1991 and $12,000 in 1992.
Current sta~us of Business License Revenues and Ratas
Allowing the business license rates to increase as shown on
Table 1, would enable the City to meet the revenue .stimates
included in the current budget. The scheduled increase
would also bring business license revenues more in line with
what they were in previous years (as a percentage of total
qeneral fund revenues) and in comparison with other
comparable cities. . ,
'"""
~ ~~:--~;-!r. ~/"
) j, ~;>;J
.
.
.
PAGE 7, ITEM ;2.0
MEETING DATE 11/5/91
Increasing the business license tax to the scheduled 1992
rates would bring business license revenue almost up to the
level they were in 1979, in terms of support provided to
general City services. As mentioned earlier business
license revenues supported 6.3\ of the City'S general
operating budget in FY 1954-55. By 1978-79 the level of
support had dropped to 1.8\. By FY 1989-90 business license
revenues supported less than 1\ of the City'S general
operating budget. In FY 1987-88 the average level of
support among California charter cities was 5.8\. The
initial rate increase in FY 1990-91 brought the level of
support up to 1.4\. If the scheduled increase is
implemented the level of support will reach 1.7\, a bit.
lower than 1978 levels.
During the time between June 1990 when the original staff
report on the business license tax was submitted and now,
other cities used for comparison in the report have also
increased their rates further. Table 2 shows a comparison
between Chula Vista's current rates, scheduled rates, and
other County cities' rates for general businesses as of
January 1992. Since June of 1990 all of the comparison
cities have maintained the same rate, with the exception of
the city of San Diego which has increased their rate
substantially. As seen in Table 2, the Chula Vista's
scheduled rate increase will place Chula Vista's rates near
the average in San Diego County.
Table 3 shows Chula Vista's current and scheduled business
license rates in comparison to the rates charged by
comparable-sized cities in California. Since the report was
written in 1990, 8 of the 17 comparison cities have raised
their business license rates. Both the current and
scheduled 1992 rates for Chula Vista are substantially below
the average rates in similar size cities in California.
.'
.'-...-;-&~
lEI')
)'~3f
PAGE 8. ITEM ~O
MEETING DATE 11/5/91
..........
Imnact of 1992 Rate Yncreas8 en Businesses
Below are example. of different types of businesses and a
demonstration of the impact of the scheduled 1992 business
license tax rate increase:
Business License Tax
Business Tvne .12ll .an
1. Small retail business with fixed $85.00 $127.75
location and 5 employees
2. Department store with 150 $1027.50 $1541.50
employees
3. Professional (physician, $105.00 $155.00
attorney, etc.)
4. Manufacturing firm with 150 $540.00 $814.00
employees
5. Categories with no change in
business license tax rate include:
- Rental businesses - apartments, motels
- Special events - circus. concert, carnival
- Public dances
- Pawn Brokers
Peddlers
- Trailer Parks
- Vending Machines
""'"
FISCAL IMPACT:
As pointed out in the City Manager's FY 1991-92 budget
message, the scheduled rate increase is expected to generate
additional business license revenues in the amount of
$146,750. This revenue has been included in the current
budget's revenue estimates. An action to abate the increase
would result in an estimated revenue reduction of $146,750
in the current fiscal year.
""'"
... -~ ~-(,,-' .-'
-ffi/r
.-
/~ -]-->
.
.
.
PAGE 9, ITEM ~
MEETING DATE 11/5/91
Listina of _Tables and Attachments
~able 1 -
~able 2 -
~able 3 -
Master ~ax Scheaule indicating a 3 year phase
in of rate increase
Comparison of proposed Chula Vista business
license rates with other San Diego County
cities as of November 1991
Comparison of proposed Chula Vista business
license rates with other California cities as
of November 1991
Attachment 1 - Report of Chula Vista's Business License ~ax
- June II, 1990
Attachment 2 - October 25, 1990 Report to Council regarding
business license tax ana presenting six
orainance options for tax increase.
'.
/trJ~
..:' ~: n:: If
""'"
THIS PAGE BLANK
"""\
"""\
:> ,- -~: "71;". ~
. -.... - LL.!!4JJI. ..
Jt ~J 7
-
'. f"I
...
o
-
..~
Wi!:
e
"
-
-
i
!
j
.
II
..
.
i i. . I
.1 -i I. I i~ :: .
-
- t"i~ . I::! i~ f fl
! I .-1 .:: ,a ill - . t . .
-- .
.--- el .1 . .1-
i ..t-i . J!j , - I--
I. "'we ... Jl 'j '. Iil! l.!l Ii!.
e:-fj
.. ,!f;,.. ..
. . II nl
- lilt 1111': I~ ~--
'i l -j- I=~ l.~
.. .- I..; I..; r .i~
I::: :: =1;) II -- -- . _.I :1 -..
..- -- -- - -- __a --...
-h l~ Ie . Ie. . I I . .
j-- ~l =(1 I
.,'= i - - 1~.
- . f j
- 1"- .. .. - i~
t U . - l
f.EE.i - . .
. . .
- -- --- .1 - . 't12
i ..- , el eu ,
U:I~ JI~ , l~i _D
- ..i l.i
! JE r- ',!
-- 't l~ I!':: I.';'~
.. .....~~I . i!~ IiI
. . in
- ,..--- It II ill ~--
'!: l -.. -! r'" 1r I..~
..-.... ..j
'" -r" .=~ '. ...--
-- ::11 ~J:: ::.1:: _u~
.... ... -ll:f-fJ ::~- _.I :!I
..- - -- - .. -.. -. - . -- __a -... --..'"
~ l~
"1.1 I, ~. , I- .
ju '. aii I .
~,... at I .. -
-....~ 11 .1 . .. i~ 11 il I~-
e t- ...
-iti . . . id
- -- --- .1 ~12
e ..- . el eu u
.....1 Jl~ . ~-I r-
- (..... .. .'
.. & ~., . =: =-- ...~ .. l~~i
- ..- .1 't I:! I!
. I t .....~~I. -.z .1- .I-It
It II: ... ih
.. ,..--.. r' i- - ,
n: . -.. -! .... ir lH ....l.~
I --... ~ ...!
... en __.. '. '1.1 :11-- ,......--
-- ..:C: t~ f I .. IJ: :1111 !,r U :11.1- _.t~
.... ... I..; "'1=
..- - __e_ .. -.. -. -- - . __l --"II'
. .. 1
:.! ~
.. .: .1 ~I
~.. .
.
- .~ :-HE Ii'
. ~c ...- wt:: u!
-. -. e
-. - .. .: .&
-~ ..- lu
.. - -,-= ..
.. .- h.ii . .i
,,~ :t ;:iI
-...
. .- ;!~n -
"'- II .1__ !:I.. j
fi :1 __I-r a-= . i
..
ll. - -I sU j
.... ~i~i r
-- Jt i
1;1 Ii .-
il- i ~ -
IE1~: -
-.,;1 - i 'I
-
--.. :;1 IiI }, 5
't: ._f'B . - I
il ~ J E;: -
Iii .. - !-:. 1: J 5 I
s 11 11 'C~i . 1
. _1'_ i=:' -"'.1 I ~ ;!
- IIi -1 fjlr1 e- . 1 I J
I- _l.. -II -
j JH I =i~ JiI. i -
.:1 ,un - I
II.. -
-
;-
a I I . I . I IS .
I - - - ;;
- & & & . i i i Ii Ii
i .;. .,; .;. .;. .;. .;. - .;. .;.
: ..
"
I
..
,
.\
.zz; ~ I
/6 /} ~ TABLE 1
-'
(
-.
..,
....
o
N
II
ell
..
II.
--
-
~
..:
..
::
1
I
i
!
J
~
a
.
..
i
e
-
..
~
-
i: .
..
'e
.-
....
~-
.... . I
=-1 i 0
s. .. ..!! !~!!
.:: I 1 J! :~: i I
:h .. t II"; !
11= i' li2 ~~ ~
.......'::: tt~it..
j.:U l = i!~ ill
E
;
H
.. .
'E
IS
t
S
-
. .
I~
:::::
~-
....
..=1
.. . ..
-':1
..-
~u
!i=
...
ju:t
..J &
.. irl i
j - ..-,
J! -.-:-
.. t i.~
- ...... ,..
.. .. eo:.o
.. i E.i~
..... .... :;:::1
8 .....
i :: :::::!:
..
. i
.. il 1
j.. .! !.!~
'" -.-
.. i l.~
- .... .......
1 .. ....
.. :: ".0
-" ... 1:...
~ 8 ~~~
.... - -~II\
- - ---
..
-
l' i
. . ~
! , =
.. .. -
! i !
i i I
~ ~ 5 I
:. !! l! 2
.,;.;.; .,;
,
-
..
tl
j- ...
! !
.... I!
!II ..
0;
i I
s.. ...
Hf
fU :=
..
j
J
~
..
1- ..::
I:
.. ..
.
l-.!!
..~
IIi
Ii
to,
-
.10-
_.10
--
-
..
....
. ....
.. ...
--
~ ~
Iii ~~
;= If
-.. I
...-
t ..! to.
8~i ~:i:
::f: __
.
..
!!
t..::
I!!
..
r..!
l.t
.....w~
!Ii
..1.
i
!
i.
t
~
i
i
..
. .
1: j
-.
.. ..
i!i
E I
Iii z
.,; ...
-
c.
....
....
..
--
...u
-
....
n
to.
:i:-
_J.
..-
..
-
i
~
I
r
I
..
i
.
j
I
I
z
oft
-
..
....
::
--
~
!!HI!1:
;1 i · 1
- ...
It "u
I:S i !:!~.!
:.!J ule".
I. cr..-
.. ~ iii> __
-I" .Un':
1-.. ..-.. I
..,~: ='-I~'
... __ .. I...
;i ,. 11
it if""
I:S i.:!~.!
_H U1ii
-I. cr..-f
.. 1:: .. --
-I" ';~I"':
. -.,.!
.-- ---
...- - - ..
,~.. ..1ll!'!!1
... -_ .. 1"...
..
;;
'j..
I.!
...
J!H
-~.
.. -
:;It
.-..
...-
Ii::
.
:i
f
II
~
~
oft
~<"/:.'.." ~ ~ .,
~l~-:. '..,.L.I---'-,. ~
~_.
.. j 1:
J!:!!i
...1_;
".r'"
e..-f
... -..
... ,
....,....
.-.. . p.
."..:.....r
==uu
..
i
j
I
t
1i
j
~
.
oft
H .
I~ - .!
il I :1
... i
..- -
JI~~ II
....! =
1"";11 1:11
r 1: ..
~!j i Ii
.'~
..-
s7i
..
. = I
:12
~i=
...
..
f.....
..~t
..J Ii
..
';
i
,
..
';
-
i
J
~
j
,
..
I
r
I
.
..
i
j
.
j
I~ - :!
il I · I
... a
ii~ i Jr~
.... -
Ii";!: d
=!ih 51
I~ - . ~!
i!.1 a I
..- r-
ll~i J-_!
..~..
,~ Oil .:11
ftft.... I
.~I~ !lit
::.!~ e ~..
~
J
J
..
;;
,.;
-
oft
!
.
j
J
.-.,
J6 ~J/ '
&
.
..
.....
e
.'
,..
...
...
o
-
~
..
~
T
i
i
!
I
e
..
...
h .I !d
;;-; - !
I .! I . .. p;
I s... -
I .. 1 . . ..:.! rli . .
; J 1 . Eli I - ]
.. i. -"I . ..
; . ...- -
.. - w '::1- ii~. if I - 1 1
I ') - ..
'i 't' r. ..: .. , 't'
ii -i-I. .. .. .....-., "tl~ .1 j
f .l I - II .Ii.!h !
.. . --- . lit!
.. ~i:€U ..
! I i 11- ':ltrit I I
I:: :It ~ .. ~ . c :=1 I !a!1 'l
.. :I .. :'i
.... - - - - - . .. - - -
h .I !d
;... - !
I ! ,. I a .. in
! So''' -
! .. . . ... ':'f rli .. ..
. . Eli i - -
II - I I I i. --I .. .. ..
S ; ....- - -
- :a ..... __w 1f.. - ! t
~ - -"E- r1 c. "I ..
.. 'i ... r.. 't' . -- ..
i: . .. 1 't' -.~I . 1 .. .... ..... 'I'" , 1
1 . I - II iln.. .. .. .. I
.. - i j ..--- :I tlU !
,~ .. -.. ..! ;r
~ ~ --... i II- I
... ... IIl}Ei! I.....~ ~ :It ....
.- Ie '" III ,c :lSI I =a! I ~
.... .. .. .. .. ::'i
-- - .. .. .. .. .. . .. - - - - -
..
I! !d
-- - ! .I
! :a;'; J 1-"
.. .. .oo
.. ! c. .. .. .. fll
.. I - . .o' .. . . ......t .. ..
~ . .. to.. i ] -
~ - I ~ .~ 1 ~ .. ..-; .. :t
.. . I- ..-- if..
S .. " .. ..... t ~~.... - ! t
! ... 1- ...._~ t
. ~ ! :..&0 I "1 c. -I
.. 'i 't' ..: .. -o' o'
ii I .. J -.~I . ... .. ,(... J j
i. . j ! .. .. II j't' n .. .. .. f
.. o' to ..--.. ! l"U
,- .. - \,I .. t .. ........
~ ... ~ ... ---. i 11- ,t: it :l\1.... i
f 8 ... ... -.. .. s 'l
.- '" '" lCi':P '" , c :::H i :::a!.
.... '" .. .. .. .. .. ::i
-- .. .. .. .. .. -.. .. .. .. .. - - -
. r ! ,
l - c
. . '5 I
... -
o' i i i ! ..
.. ~ ;:; !
.. ;; ;; .
.. ~
.. ... ~ .: .: - . .
" '": - . ..
c ..; J .i
- .. '" .. .
J ~ I l l 1 ';
I ! ;; =
i c .
.. ~ - J !
t 1 .
l I J I .. e
.. .. i! - .I J
- . - !
, t .. - . .!
! ~ ~ ..
. 'Ii . .
1 . .. : .. i 1
! I . - 'i i- e e
as - - oll - - -
i _I - .. ..
't . 1 . - .. ; i - - -
J i l- t ~ I J .. I- 'i ;; i i
i .
I. I -.. .. if 1 !
t .... .. .. t 1 r
j u !: ...
I - - - -
I Ii - I i - II i I I
.. U I !
I , -
...
! - . !! I . I I II II . ~ !! II
. I - .. -
. . "! . .
- iii - Ii i i i i i. i. Ii lli Ii
i .. -
- .
..; ..; ,,; ,,; ,,; .,;: ..; ..; ..; ..; ..; ..; ..; ..
r
!
.i
. ; ~~C-" ~. .zz;.;. ~
/t-VO
~
!l'HIS PAGE Swnt
-""
-""
.
:
,_, '~-"7'T: ~ Ll
~ ',~- ~;. CL.~7
/~/W
. .
.
il .. il lei!! I ~ !.\~I.~ I ~
s:i
. . ,/
II - - -.."'..... ~
. .
15
- il N ~I Ie;~! .. 5 ii!E!.~ I ~
~ s -
- - ...
- ii
- s
'; . . i.
I .ll:
! . t..:
.. II N . ~r;!!! . '" S~li~ ~ !i
to i - -
ii ( N ... ;:
f 10;
~fi - il
..
f IC"N'" I !:l lRl.=1C I ,;!
D . or: ~
II '" '" '"
'" - - - - . ..
! N II
!~ ..
-
. i ..
I . I 1C2~lC t =lClClC~ N ~!
~ . .. ..
Ii! - ~..
I 5' 5' - ..
.. ..-
.. ~ ..
..
. (1
I '; .. f i f .. II!
It ! f
... 11 H~ 11
I . . . . ..
0;
- . . . . . :;
J III I I 11.1.1.1. J1 :5
! -----
t Jill! - k
111 I I Ii Ii ';
I ';
IIII! )~ I
! I';';'; " " !
- . .
..... c i ..
..
'; tiEl !I IS.Ii! .I
! I l:a . ..
I - I ::
difie . . . . . . . il
I I... ~ ~ '~IIe~l:a I
II - - -
. ;.
- I~
-
.1 ~ ~ I I
. -
JIll ij =1 u.... . I !
. -I ll)!1 E-
N ..
i i ...J to
to - ..! i_ i- I.. ;~ . I
~ .....
e .
.
/t/~~ TABLE 2
- ~~. JZ;.J.> .
-- -
".
. .
.
t.
-
-
';
I
!
..
-
...
.
1
::
-
.
...
';
. I
I
..;
..
J
il
Ii
i5
il
ii
.;"
..
~
-
HI
~ !~15S~i!=f5EE51! I;!
- ~N~M~~~~.~.=~~i~ Ii
.-
Sil.E~~~I!.~~E.i.!.~~~ I~~ J
- ______N~~~.~ ~~ t~
!i
1-;
11
,;!
ii
d!
r:
..
'"
-
'"
s~~aa~.i!~5;.I~~~~ I~i
- - ----
::l
-
~ ~ ~ ;I ~ iU! I ~ ~ ! ~ ~ i ! 5 IE a
....
t
Ie I! ~ Ie ~ :n~ ~ ~ IQ Ie :: ~ ~ ;e ;;
-
~
-"'"
. ..
~...
1 ~ . ..
:If
f 1 ~
ii II!
. ... - ..
.. 0
I! I
- ~ &
&a:i
J~l
; i I
I:ii
~li
toE!'
. I,;
.. f I:
1-:;
....Iii
. I
Iii I
Ii
II
TABLE 3
~
...
i
!: I ~
ri
..
'I.'
! ;1
5 G
I 2
I ~
:;
.
f
j
t
I
il
ii
~:i
...
i
_ E E
(
-
..
,
'"
,,:
~ ~ I
N
..
-
..
.
I 0 I; ~
5 5
l. '- f_i
It fI ~~
.. .1 ..
I:
..
';
!
~i
II
I I
1 I
'; ';
. .
I
1
';
.
!I!!!I!!!!!!!!!!
IIJ!JI!JJ!!!!!!!
J:iii:JiJliIJIJI
~ i i =ll.I.E~!~i!!!IE
~ ~ m s~~i~m~~===~~iIW
- ~ ~ -----~-----~~---
i I
! -t. ~I ~i litl!llljil!)jJ!lt
... i_ i- I _ I j 11_1
.
.
.
..;;~_? ~.-. rr= ~ / t /./7
:~>,~.~. ,.c',..~ ~7J
. .
.
.
.
.
RESOLUTION NO.
1(,'11'1
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ABATING THE SCHEDULED CALENDAR
YEAR 1992 BUSINESS LICENSE TAX INCREASE AS
PROVIDED IN ORDINANCE 2408
The City Council of the city of Chula Vista ~oes hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, at the November 5, 1991 Business License Tax
Abatement Hearing, the City Council indicated concern with raising
the business license tax to the scheduled Calendar Year (CY) 1992
levels given the current economic recession; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 2408 passed by Council on
October 25, 1990 offers Council the ability to abate the CY 1992
business license tax down to the current CY 1991 levels; and
WHEREAS, passage of this resolution will set the CY 1991
business license taxes at the current CY 1991 levels.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula Vista does hereby abate the scheduled Calendar
Year 1992 Business License Tax increase until January 1, 1993 as
provided for in Ordinance 2408.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that staff is directed to send a
letter explaining Council's action to all business with their
business license renewal forms.
Presented by
Lyman Christopher, Director of
Finance
Bruce M. Boogaa d Clty
Attorney
C:\RS\CY 1992 Bu. Lie Tax
-;r:
.--',) ?
/ t "'-/1
.
.
.
Chapters:
5.02
5.04
5.06
5.07
5.08
5.10
5.U
5.13
5.14
5.15
5.18
5.20
5.22
5.24
5.26
5.28
5.30
5.32
5.34
5.35
5.36
5.37
5.38
5.40
5.42
5.44
5.46
5.48
5.50
5.52
5.54
5.56
5.58
5.60
5.61
5.62
5.63
5.64
~
A-t+AC~1VV)2f1+ 3
Title 5
BUSINESS LICENSES TAXES AND REGULATIONS
Business Licenses Generally.
License Taxes Generally.
Downtown Improvement District Assessment Payments.
Master Tax Schedule.
Advertising.
Ambulances.
Amusement Arcades.
Rental Businesses.
Art Figure Studios.
Repealed.
Billiards and Pool Halls.
Cardrooms.
Circuses, Shows, Concerts, and Special Events.
Merchandise Coupons.
Puhlic Dances.
Fireanns Sales.
Franchises.
Garage Sales.
Manufacturers.
Bathhouses.
Massage Parlors.
Narcotic or Drug Paraphernalia Shops.
Pawnbrokers, Secondhand and Junk Store Dealers.
Peddlers.
Professions.
Race Tracks.
Real Estate SalesRIeRoersOns.
Closing-Out Sales.
Trailer Parks.
Pay Television.
Taxicabs.
Tobacco and Weed Sales and Smoking.
Tow Trucks.
Vending, Newsracks. Weighing, Music, Amusement, Video Machines.
Pool and Billiard Tables.
Vending Vehicles.
OlTsite Multiuser Hazardous Waste Facilities.
Consumer Commodities Price Marking.
Out-ilf-Citv Deliverv Vehicles.
NOTE: Footnotes are numbered thronghout the text and are located at the end of this title.
(R 9/92)
/~~v~
I
Sections:
5.02.010
5.02.020
5.02.030
5.02.040
5.02.050
5.02.060
5.02.070
5.02.080
5.02.090
5.02.100
5.02.105
5.02.110
5.02.120
5.02.130
5.02.140
5.02.150
5.02.160
5.02.170
5.02.180
5.02.190
5.02.200
5.02.210
5.02.220
5.02.230
5.02.240
Chapter 5.02
BUSINESS LICENSES GENERALLY'
-..
Purpose and intent-Definitions.
Required-Exemptions.
Separate license for each place of business-Scope-Exceptions.
Application-Contents required-Fee.
Issuance-Prerequisites and procedure generally.
Issuance-Compliance with state and local regulations required.
Issuance-Effect of prior licensing by state.
Issuance-Void when.
Issuance-Approval of police chief required.
Denial of license-Criteria-Notice required.
Criminal conduct-lneligibility for city licenses and permits.
Denial of Iicense-Appeal-Hearing-Notice required.
Form and contents of license.
Use of fictitious name prohibited when.
Validity-License nonassignable and nontransferable.
Change of location permitted when-Fee.
Posting-Required.
Exhibition on demand II) Jlslice required.
Revocation-Criteria.
lnterstate commerce identification card required when- Application-Contents-Fee.
Unlawful activities not authorized-Licensing prohibited.
Certain machines and contrivances-Licensing prohibited.
Specific provisions of chapter to control.
Enforcement and inspection duty of Jlsliee sIHeet'S.
Failure to display license sr reeeiJlt deemed violation.
""""\
5.02.010 Purpose and intent-Definitions.
The provisions of Title 5 and Section~ 8.20.020 and 9.13.030, except as specifically noted, are enacted to
raise revenue for municipal purposes. For the purposes of this chapter, the following words and phrases shall have
the meanings respectively ascribed to them by this section:
A. "Average number of employees" means, for the purpose of determining the average number of employees
employed during the year, the number of persons employed at or near the fifteenth day of each month during
the year in which business is transacted within the city shall be added together, and the sum total shall be
divided by the number of months or fractions of months such business was in operation, fractions omitted.
B. "Business" includes every pursuit, trade, occupation, avocation, employment, business or calling.
C. "Employee" is defined as any person acting within the scope of the employer's business within the limits of
the city.
D. "Established place of business" is the place actually occupied either continuously or at regular periods by any
person required to be licensed pursuant to this chapter and where such person's books and records are kept
and a large share of his business transacted.
........."
:2.
)6 ---i/t.
(R 9/92)
.
.
.
E.
"Occasional sale and delivery" is defined as those trips or deliveries beginning or ending at points within the
city occurring not more than once in any given quarter during the calendar year.
F. "Peddler" includes any person, whether a resident of the city or not, who goes from house to house or from
place to place conveying goods, wares or merchandise, or offering the same for sale, or making sales and
delivering articles to purchasers. It does not include vendors of milk, bakery products, produce, groceries,
ice cream or ice, who distribute their products to regular customers on established routes.
G. "Rental business." An owner will be deemed to be engaged in rental business ifhe holds out for rent or lease
feowthree or more residential units located on one parcel or on contiguous parcels of land.
H. "Retail business" or "retail sales" is deemed to include all sales of goods, wares, merchandise or services to
a consumer.
I.
"Solicitor" includes any person, whether a resident of the city or not, who goes from house to house or from
place to place soliciting or taking orders for sales of goods, wares or merchandise, personal property of any
nature whatsoever for future delivery, or for service to be performed in the future, whether or not such
individual bas, carries or exposes for sale a sample of the subject of such order or whether he is collecting
advance payments on such orders; or who solicits, takes or attempts to take public opinion polls, consumer
surveys or by such contracts attempts to secure similar information. Such definition includes any person who
uses any building, motor vehicle or other place within the city for the primary purpose of exhibiting samples
and taking orders for future delivery, or one who, as an invitee of a purchaser or prospective purchaser or
otherwise, solicits a sale or who exhibits any sample or gives a demonstration or makes a delivery within this
city after a purchaser or prospective purchaser bas been solicited or contacted by telephone, correspondence
or other method of communication from within the city. Such defmition includes the term "canvasser";
provided however, that said definition does not include insurance salesmen who are, by law, exempt from
licensing requirements. .
J.
"Transient merchant" includes any person, whether a resident of the city or not, who engages in a temporary
business of selling and delivering goods, wares and merchandise within the city and who, in furtherance of
such purposes, leases, uses or occupies any building, motor vehicle, public room in a hotel, or shop or other
place within this city for the exhibition and sale of such goods, wares and merchandise, either privately or
at public auction; provided however, that such definition shall not be construed to include any person who,
while occupying such temporary location, does not sell from stock, but exhibits samples for the purpose of
securing orders for future delivery only. The person so engaged is not relieved from complying with the
provisions of this cbspter merely by reason of associating temporarily with any local dealer, merchant or
auctioneer, or by conducting such transient business in connection with, as a part of, or in the name of any
local dealer, merchant or auctioneer.
K. "Wholesale business" or "wholesale sales" is deemed to include all sales of goods, wares, merchandise or
services to a retailer.
L. "Vending vehicle" means a vehicle from which any goods, other than foodstuffs are sold, given away,
displayed or offered for sale at retail.
M. "Out-of-Citv Deliverv Vehicle" includes all vehicles enterin2 the Citv to deliver merchandise ourchased
outside of the Citv to a location within the Citv more freauentlv than once ner Duarter ner vear.
(Ord. 1801 U (part), 1978; Ord. 1293 !1 (part), 1970; Ord. 1243 !1 (part), 1969; prior code U8.1).
<R 9/92)
/t."I-?
3
5.02.020 Required-Exemptions.
.-..,
It is unlawful for any person, or for any person as agent, clerk or employee, either for himself or for any
other person, within the corporate limits of the city to transact, engage in, or carry on any business, show,
exhibition or game hereinafter specified without first having procured a license therefor, as in this title and Section~
8.20.020 and 9.13.030 required; provided however, that insurance salesmen and brokers are not required to obtain
a business license by virtue of lawful exemption from such provisions and further they shall not be required to
obtain a solicitor's identification card as set forth in this chapter. (Ord. 1801 U (part), 1978; Ord. 1243 U (part),
1969; prior code U8.2).
5.02.030 Separate license for each place of business-Scope-Exceptions.
A separate license sball be obtained for each separate business, or each branch establishment or separate place
of business in which a business, show, exhibition or game is transacted, conducted or carried on, and shall authorize
the licensee to transact, conduct or carry on only that business, show, exhibition or game described in such license.
Any person conducting more than one business in the same storeroom shall not be required to pay more than one
license tax; provided further, that such additional business so conducted by him shall be one that is ordinarily and
customarily conducted in connection with such other business. (Ord. 1801 ~1 (part), 1978; prior code U8.3).
5.02.040 Application-Contents required-Investil!ation Fee~.
Before any license is issued to any person, such person shall make written application therefore to the finance
officer of the city. Such application shall:
A.
State the nature or kind of business or enterprise for which the license is required;
.-..,
B. State the place where such business or enterprise will be transacted or carried on;
C. State the na~e of the owner of the business or enterprise;
D. Be signed by the applicant;
E. Shall contain, when intended as an application for a license as a solicitor, peddler or transient merchant, the
following information:
1. Physical description of applicant,
2. Complete permanent home and local address of the applicant,
3. If employed, the name and address of the employer, together with credentials therefrom establishing the
exact relationship,
4. The source of supply of the goods or property or property proposed to be sold, or orders taken for the
sale thereof, where such goods or products are located at the time such application is filed, and the
proposed method of delivery,
5. Two copies ofa recent photograph of the applicant, such picture being approximately two inches by two
inches and showing the head and shoulders of the applicant in a clear and distinguishing manner,
6. A statement as to whether or not the applicant has ever been convicted of any felony and if so the nature
of the offense, .......,
Lf
J;j,--'1Y
(R 9/92)
.
.
.
7. The last cities, not to exceed three, where applicant carried on business immediately preceding the date
of application and the addresses from which such business was conducted in those cities,
8. At the time of filing the application, the Required Fee(s) shall be paid to the director of finance to cover
the cost of investigation of the facts stated therein,
9. Where a written order or contract is used, the applicant shall attach to the application one copy of the
proposed form of all such orders or contracts to be used or submitted to purchasers or prospective
. purchasers within the city,
10. At the time sucb application is filed, the applicant shall furnisb his fingerprints to the police department
of this city.
(Ord. 2506 f1 (part), 1992; Ord. 2408 f1 (part) 1990; Ord. 1801 f1 (part), 1978; Onl. 970 f1 (part), 1966; prior
code f18.4).
5.02.050 Issuance-Prerequisites and procedure generally.
Upon application tberefor as provided in this chapter, it shall be the duty of the finance officer to prepare and
issue a license pursuant to this chapter; provided however, that the finance officer shall not issue any such license
until it has been noted on the application therefor that the location of the proposed business has been reviewed by
both the department of building and housing inspection and the planning department any other department deemed
appropriate by the finance director, and has been approved in accordance with the provisions of the building code,
the zoning ordinance... and any other applicable code. (Ord. 2191 f1 (part), 1987; Ord. 1293 f1 (part), 1970;
prior code f18.5).
5.02.060 Issuance-Compliance with state and local regulations required.
No license shall be issued unless a full compliance is had with all the laws of the city and state, and where
laws of the state require a person to be liceused under and by virtue of its laws, the same shall be a condition
precedent to the granting of a license by the city, and if an applicant so required to be licensed by the state has
failed to comply with the laws of the state, no license shall be issued by the city. No license issued under the
provisions of this chapter shall be construed as authorizing the conduct or continuance of any illegal or un]awful
business operated in contravention of any of the laws of the city. (Ord. ]293 f1 (part), 1970; prior code f18.6).
5.02.120 Fonn and contents of license.
Al] licenses issued under and by virtue of this title and Section~ 8.20.020 and 9.13.030 shall be printed in
blank form and shall set forth the name of the party to whom the license is issued, the nature of the business that
he is licensed to pursue, the location of the place of business, the length of time for which the same is granted, the
date of issuance, """ the amount of tax paid therefor. and anv conditions which have been imoosed bv the city.
Such licenses shall be issued in duplicate, the original of which is to be delivered to the licensee.
(Ord. 2065 f1, 1984; Ord. 1801 f1 (part), 1978; prior code f18.12).
(R 9/92)
//.t//
G
5.02.140 Validity-License nonassignable and nontransferable.
~
Each license granted or issued under the provisions of this title and Section~ 8.20.020 and 9.13.030 shall
authorize the licensee to transact or carry on the business or calling therein designated, and at no other place, and
such license shall not be assignable or transferable. (Ord. 1801 f1 (part), 1978; prior code f18.14.)
5.02.150 Change of location pennitted when-Fee.
A change of location shall be allowed to the owner of any license under the provision of this title and Section~
8.20.020 and 9.13.030, upon the payment to the director of finance of the Required Fee(s) and upon the approval
of the director of planning. (Ord. 2506 f1 (part), 1992; Ord. 2408 ~I (part), 1990; Ord. 1801 ~I (part), 1978;
prior code ~18.IS).
5.02.160 Posting-Required.
All licenses issued under the provisions of this title and Section~ 8.20.020 and 9.13.030 sball be posted and
kept in a conspicuous place at the place of business of the licensee named therein during the period such licenses
are in force and effect, except as in the cbapter otherwise specifically provided. (Ord. 1801 f1 (part), 1978; prior
code f18.29).
5.02.170 Exhibition on demand II)' I'aliee required.
Every licensee under the provisions of this title and Section~ 8.20.020 and 9.13.030 shall produce and exhibit
the license issued to sucb licensee whenever requested to do so by any police officer. .....firefighter. .....fire marshal. ~
business license enforcement officer. code enforcement officer. or desitmee of the Director of Finance of the city.
(Ord. 2408 f1 (part), 1990); prior code ~18.30).
5.02.220 Specific provisions of chapter to control.
All specific provisions of this title and Section 8.20.020 shall control over general provisions thereof. (Ord.
1801 ~I (part), 1978; prior code ~18.37).
5.02.230 Enforcement and inspection duty sf paliee at1ieers, fiFeHghteFS, aad fiFe marshals.
All police officers, firefighters, 8B<I-fire marshals. business license enforcement officers. code enforcement
officers. and desitmees of the Director of Finance of the city shall bave and exercise the power and dut)'l-Ari'.to
enter free of charge for inspection of licenses, at any time during regular business bours, any place of business for
which a license is required by this chapter, and to demand the exhibition of such license for the current term by any
person engaged or employed in the transaction of such business, all in accord with the right-of-entry provisions at
Section 1.16.010 of this code and if such person shall then and there fail to exhibit such license, such person shall
then be liable to the penalty provided for a violation of this chaptert
Br-AIl DOlice officers. firefi~hters. and fire marshals shall have and exercise the DOwer and dutv +io cause
complaints to be filed in a court of competent jurisdiction against all persons violating any of the Iicensin~ orovisions
of this chapter.
All police officers, of the city shall have and exercise the power and duty to make arrests for violations of this
chapter. ~
)b/30
(R 9/92)
G>
.
.
.
5.02.240 Failure to display license 9r .....ipl deemed violation.
Failure to display a license 9. ....ipt as provided in this title and Section~ 8.20.020 and 9.13.030 shall
constitute a violation of this chapter. (Ord. 1801 tI (part), 1978; prior code ~18.72).
Chapter 5.04
LICENSE TAXES GENERALLY
Sections:
5.04.001 Evidence of DoiO!! Business
5.04.002 New businesses-taxes-when oavable.
5.04.003 Pavrnent of License Tax does not Confer License or Permit Ril!hts.
5.04.~010 Rates-Generally.
5.04.0llCI15 Amounts and terms to be as provided in chapter-Rebates.
5.04.0l~0 Payment-Due when-Term-Delinquent when.
5.04.0241~ Payment-Quarterly licenses-Method.
e.91.0A9 Cel1eeH8R sf Rl8Rf!58.
5.04.08J0 Penalties for failure to pay business license tax on or before delinquency date.
5.04.040 License tax deemed debt to citv-oeriod-aoolies to licensed and unlicensed businesses
5.04.040~ License tax deemed debt to city-Actions for collection.
5.04.050 Assessment error not to prevent collection of tax.
5.04.1160 Revocation of license-When.
5.04. UO~ Revocation of license-Notice required-Hearing.
5.04.~70 Collection and Disposition of funds eelleeled.
5.04.0;~0 Payment-Waiver authorized when.
5.04.0;l!5 Promotional events and charitable organizations.
5.04.06.20 Duplicate licenses-Fee.
5.04.140 Rates-For businesses with fIXed location in city.
5.04.145 Rates-For Offsite, Multiuser Hazardous Waste Facilities.
5.04.150 Rates-For new businesses with no fIXed location in city.
5.04.160 Renewal procedure-Rates.
5.04.170 New businesses-Licensing procedure.
5.04.180 Records-Inspection required-Violation-Penalty.
5.04.001 Evidence of doiO!! business
When anY oerson or firm bv use of sims. circulars. cards. teleohone book. or newsoaoers. advertises. holds
out. or reoresents that such a oerson is conductinl! a business within the City'. or when anY oerson holds an active
license or oennit issued bv a I!ovemmental al!encv indicatinl! that such oerson is in business within the Citv. or
when any oerson indicates any other evidence of transactinl! and carrvinl! on business as maY he defined elsewhere
herein and such Demon fails to deny bv a sworn statement i!iven to the Director of Finance that he is not conductinl!
a business within the City. after hein\! reauested to do so then the fore\!oin\! facts shall he considered orima facie
evidence that such DersoD is conductin2 a business within the Citv.
(R 9/92)
J~r5/
I
A license issued durin2 anv orior vear to the same owner. tenant. or occuoant for the same olace of business
shall be orima facie evidence in anv court or administrative oroceedin2 that the business was continuouslv ooerated ""'"
bv the same oerson or firm from said Drior vear to the current vear.
5.04.002 New businesses-Taxes-When Pavable
Initial business license laxes are due and oavable orior to issuance of the license for which aoolication is
m9t1e. The DaVrneD! of such taxes shall not in anY way constitute a right or oermission to begin onerations of said
business. However. laxes will be refunded for anv business which is denied a license and never ooens for
ooerations or conducts business within the Citv.
5.04.003 Pavrnent of License Tax does not Confer License or Pennit Ri2ht..
Payment of business license taxes is a reouirement. not a license. to transact and carry on any business
activity within this Citv. The business license tax receiot is evidence onlv of the fact that such lax has been oaid.
Neither the oavment of the lax nor DOssession of the business tax receiot authorizes. oermits or allows the doin2
of anv act which the oerson Davin. or holdin. the same would not otherwise be entitled to do: and anv business
license. oennit. variance or other instrument of aooroval or evidence that any conditions exist as reouired bv any
other section of this code or bv anv statute or code orovisions of the slate must first be obtained or como lied witb
before the doin. of anv act or thin. for whicb it is reouired.
5.04.~0 Rates-Generally.
The amount or rate of license taxes to be paid the city by any person, for transacting, engaging in,
conducting, or carrying on any business, show, exhibition or game as specified in this title and Section~ 8.20.020
and 9.13.040, shall be as hereinafter provided in this title and the section~ cited above. (Ord. 2408 U (part), 1990;
Ord. 1801 f2 (part), 1978). .-,
5.04.090!;! Amounts and tenDs to be as provided in ehaptertitle-Rebates.
No greater or lesser amount of money shall be charged or received for any license than is provided in this
title and Section~ 8.20.020 and 9.13.030, and no license shall be sold or issued for any part of time other than is
provided in this title and the section~ cited above, and there shall be no rehate given for any unused portion of the
term except as in this title and the section~ cited above otherwise specifically provided. (Ord. 1801 f2 (part), 1978).
5.04.0110 Payment-Due when-Tenn-Delinquent when.
Except as otherwise provided in this code, all business licenses taxes shall be paid in advance in lawful money
of the United Slates, at the office of the director of finance; provided, however, that the licenses required to be paid
by the provisions of this code shall be due and payable from and after the first day of January of each year. Such
licenses shall be delinquent thirty days after the same are due and payable, except monthly or quarterly licenses
which shall be delinquent ten days after the same becomes due and payable. (Ord. 1801 f2 (part), 1978).
5.04.020~ Payment-Quarterly licenses-Method.
The quarterly licenses provided in this title and Section 8.20.020 shall be due and payable to the city on the
first days of January, April, July and October, in advance, and all such licenses shall expire with the last days of
March, June, September and December of each year; provided, however, that any person desiring to do so may
pay for and procure all four quarterly licenses at the time the first quarterly license becomes due and payable under
the provisions of this code. (Ord. 1801 f2 (part), 1978).
I.01.OJO CalleeH9R ef AfoReyS.
.-,
'6
Jt~
(R 9/92)
.
.
.
'l4ie Pinatar af FiBRBB8 skallsBlleet all mamea faf sueR liesB88B.
5.04.08J0 Penalties for failure to pay business license tax on or before delinquency date.
A. For failure to pay a business license tax on or before the delinquency date, the director of finance shall add
a penalty of ten percent and shall add an additional penalty of ten percent on the first day of each month
thereafter; provided, that the amount of such penalty to be added shall in no event exceed sixty percent of
the business license tax to which the penalty rates herein provided for have been applied.
B. The director of finance for good cause may extend for not more than thirty days the time for paying any sums
required to be paid hereunder provided a written request therefor is filed with the director of finance prior
to the delinquency date.
(Ord. 2408 11 (part), 1990; Ord. 1801 12 (part), 1978).
5.04.040 License tax deemed debt to citv-oeriod-aDDlies to licensed and unlicensed businesses
Anv Derson who shall commence. en2a2e. transact and carrv on anv trade. callin2. Drofession. occuoation
or business within the Citv without first havin2 nrocured a business license from the Citv to do so. shall be assessed
taxes and ""nalties. which amount shall be calculated for the ""riod be2innin2 with the Duarter in which the
commencement of business activity within the City began and ending with the exniratioo of the current annual
licensin2 ""riod. Provided. however. that the start of such ""riod shall not exceed three vears Drior to the date of
notification of violation. Such taxes and ""nalties to be collected. and the amount thereof to be enforced. in the
same manner as business license taxes are collected and the Davmentthereof enforced for licensed businesses.
5.04.040~ License tax deemed debt to city-Actions for collection.
The amount of any license tax imposed by this title and Section~ 8.20.020 and 9.13.030 shall be deemed a
debt to the city, and any person, or any person as agent, clerk or employee, either for himself or for any other
person transacting, engaging in or carrying on any business, show, exhibition or game hereinafter specified, without
having a license from the city to do so, shall be liable to an action in name of the city, in any court of competent
jurisdiction, for the amount of any delinauent$e license tax lIy tRis title &REI hy the aeetieR aited Have
ilRflBSed. .nenslties. and administrative costs incurred in connection therewith. including attorneYs fees. Court
actions to collect license tax due are not limited to the current year's tax, but may include any license tax that would
have normally been due during the preceding three years. (Ord. 1801 12 (part), 1978)
5.04.050 Assessment error not to prevent collection of tax.
In no event shall any mistake or error made by the director of finance in stating the amount of a license
provided in this title and Section~ 8.20.020 and 9.13.030 prevent the collection by the city of an amount that shall
be actually due from any person transacting or carrying on a business subject to a licenSe under this title and by the
section cited above. (Ord. 1801 12 (part), 1978).
5.04.U060 Revocation of license-When.
Any license for which license tax is due and payable and has become delinquent shall thereby be revoked
without further action. No person shall engage in any business subject to be licensed under this title and SectioD!
8.20.020 and 9.13.030, after such license has become delinquent.
(R 9/92)
/16)
4
5.04.~O~ Revocation of license-Notice required-Hearing.
The director of finance shall deliver a notice in writing either personally or by mail to the person or business
holding such license, slating that he is recommending to the council the revocation of his license, and a brief
summary of the reasons therefor. Such notice shall conlain the date, time and place when each such
recommendation shall be made to the council. At such time and place as slated in the notice the licensee may
appear and be heard by the council. In the event that the licensee appears and contests the revocation, the council
may set a time and place for hearing of such recommendation for such revocation. At such time and place as set
by the council, hearing shall be had. The council shall rule upon such revocation and may revoke the same and
its decision shall be final. (Ord. 1801 f2 (part), 1978).
5.04.~70 Collection and Disposition of funds eell""ted.
:\U BloReys 9allaeted ellsr this title MS Seeti9B &.29.029 sliall he deposited iB die gSBSF8l fuRs eftke eity
II}" $Ita Elifeeter sf [maBee. (<Md. 1&91 12 ~aFt), 197&).
The Director of Finance shall collect all monies specified under this Tille and Sections 8.20.020 and 9.13.030
fur all business license laxes and Denalties and deoositthese monies into the General Fund within five business davs.
) b :5~/
(R 9/92)
}o
~
"'"
~
.
.
.
5.04.150 Rates-For new bw;inesses with no fIXed location in city.
10 the event no fixed or established place of business is maintained within the city and except as otherwise
provided herein and specifically enumerated, the tax shall be:
A. For wholesalers, an amount as presently designated, or as may in the future be amended, in the Master Tax
Schedule, Section 5.04.150;
B. For retail route deliveries and retail routemen, an amount as presently designated, or as may in the future
be amended, in the Master Tax Scbedule, Section 5.04.150;
C. For all other businesses, including services, except as otherwise provided herein and specifically enumerated,
as presently designated, or as may in the future be amended, in the Master Tax Schedule, Section 5.04.150.
ll" Business license taxes for businesses with no fixed location within the citv will be offered on an annual or
auarterlv hasis
(Ord. 2408 A1 (part), 1990; Ord. 1801 A2 (part), 1978).
5.04.160 Renewal procedure-Rates.
A.
For every person operating any business classified under Sections 5.04.140 and 5.04.150, who is applying
for a renewal of license, such licensee shall when applying pay a license tax as presently designated, or as
may in the future be amended, in the Master Tax Schedule, Section 5.04.160. Licenses for business with
no fixed location within the citv mav be issued on a auarterlv or annual basis.
B. The provisions of this section do not apply to licenses due under Chapter 5.40 of this code.
(Ord. 2408 A1 (part), 1990; Ord. 1801 A2 (part), 1978).
5.06.020 Downtown Improvement District Assessment.
An additional assessment is imposed upon businesses located within said area. The additional assessment shall
be as follows:
A. Class A. Professions: accountant, anesthesiologist, architect, appraiser, assayer, attorney, auditor,
bacteriologist, chemist, chiropodist, chiropractor, consultant, dentist, medical doctor, engineer, e1eetrelagist,
entomologist, esthetician, geologist, holistic health Dractitioner. hypnotherapist, oculist, optician, optometrist,
osteopath, pharmacist, physical therapist, physician, physiotherapist, psychiatrist, psychologist,
psychotherapist, podiatrist, real estate broker, real estate salesman, roentgenologist, social worker, stock and
bond broker, surgeon, surveyor, taxidermist and veterinarian. Each professional working as a sole
practitioner shall pay the Required IleeAssessment(s).
B. Class B. All other businesses located within the downtown parking and improvement area, known as the
downtown business area, shall pay the Required IleeAssessment(s).
(R 9/92)
/t-55
II
Said additional Downtown Improvement District Assessment shall be collected at the same time with the
general business license tax.
-.,
~
~
)bJ?
(R 9/92)
r:L
e
e
.
Chapter 5.07
MASTER TAX SCHEDULE
Sections:
5.07.010
5.07.020
5.07.025
5.07.030
New business - Applicable tax rates.
Applicable tax rates by year.
Maximum annual tax.
Master tax schedule.
5.07.010 New businesses - Applicable tax rates.
The applicable tax rate for a new business with 5 or fewer employees is detailed in Section .5.04.140 (for
general businesses with fixed locations in the City); Section 5.34.020 (for manufacturers); or Section 5.42.010 (for
Professionals). except as otherwise provided for and specifically enumerated in the Master Tax Schedule, Section
5.07.030. Said rate shall only be applied in the first license year of operation or part thereof, provided that if the
first license year is less than three months, new business rates shall also be applied in the following license year.
(Ord. 2408 fl (part), 1990).
5.07.020 Applicable tax rates - by year.
A. 1991 Calendar year rates.
Effective January I, 1991, the business license tax rates shall be those rates detailed in the Master Tax
Schedule, Section 5.07.030, in the column thereof labeled "Tax Rate: 111191 - 12/31191".
B.
1992 Calendar year rates.
Effective January I, 1992, the business license tax rates shall be those rates detailed in the Master Tax
Schedule, Section 5.07.030, in the column thereof labeled "Tax Rate: 111192 - 12/31192".
C. 1993 Calendar year rates.
Effective January I, 1993, the business license tax rates shall be those rates detailed in the Master Tax
Schedule, Section 5.07.030, in the column thereof labeled "Tax Rate: 111193 - 12/31193".
D. 1994 and Subsequent Calendar Year Rates.
Effective January I, 1994, and for each calendar year thereafter, all tax rates for the categories of taxpayers
detailed in the Master Tax Schedule, including both base tax rates and add-on tax rates (e.g., rates per
person, per-machine, etc.) shall be increased by six (6%) percent per year above the tax rates and add-on
rates applicable in the preceding year.
E. Power to Abate in 1992 and thereafter to 1991 floor.
Notwithstanding anything else to the contrary in this section contained, commencing for the 1992 calendar
year and continuing thereafter, the City Council is hereby authorized for no more than one calendar year,
but is not required, to lower the tax imposed by this section but to no less than taxes imposed in the 1991
calendar year.
(R 9/92)
jt :>?
/3
F.
Procedure to Abate.
-"""\
To lower the tax authorized by this section, the City Council shall conduct a public hearing at which it
publicly deliberates on the advisability of doing so, notice which public hearing is published in a newspaper
of general circulation at least twice not sooner than 20 days and not later than 5 days prior thereto, of its
intent to deliberate upon said matter. Failure to publish notice of the public hearing, as herein required, shall
not affect the right of the City Council to conduct the public hearing and to reduce the authorized annual rate
of increase as herein imposed.
G. Nothing contained in this section shall affect the effective date of this ordinance.
(Ord. 2408 U (part), 1990).
5.07.025 Maximwn Annual Tax.
Effective January I, 1991, the maximum annual business license tax paid for any single business license shall
not exceed $7,000.
Effective January I, 1992, the maximum annual business license tax paid for any single business license shall not
exceed $12,000.
Effective January 1, 1993, the maximum annual business license tax paid for any single business license shall not
exceed $16,000.
Effective January I, 1994, the maximum annual business license tax paid for any single business license shall not """
exceed $20,000.
Effective January I, 1995, and each calendar year thereafter the maximum annual business license tax shall be
increased by five percent (5%) per year above the level set in January, 1994.
(Ord. 2408 ~I (part), 1990).
~
J b -:5''i
(R 9/92)
I~
.
.
i
!
!!
ei
~
.
..
C>
.n
..
u.
..
:l~
Ilt:.
..-
..
u.
..
:l~
Ilt:.
..-
..
u.
..
..-
"'It
Ilt:.
..-
~
~
S
-
..
~
0..
8-
~
~
S
-
..
~
U
0..
8-
'"
..
t.
S
-
..
~
..
0..
8-
'"
..
s
i
.~
I
~
~.-
....
..,..
N
u.-
>r:
.- ..
..0>
= 5
u
~~
...c
..
"'..
c';:
....
~~
..u
uo..
0..0..
II .d
..~ u
g~=
Q.
~. ~
~ ~ ~
-'~;.
h~
j li
"'....
&
j
IC
o
0#
~
'"
o
~
~
en ~ 2
t...........i
~~ao~
_...._ L-
~o ...
Ii dP~.!.
L. <<I""
II ....(1)...
~ + U ii 0
... ~:i5.~ is
... CI .,.....-
OL.l,) ....
........ CD
In ... -' 14 L.
.... ~ 8:.= !If
_.... Ill.... 2)
'"
:l
~
..
0.. 0..
o
~
..~
en ,&.....
t.......'=:i
>-Glc.....
0...::: 0 !If
-'...... 0-
t::l....
r:xo
L Cl co .
Cl.l ............
~ + G.I : 2
.... QI..... >-'-
~.c u
L.IlJI'OG.I.c
OL.U!a+"
U"I..........G:i....
Cl D..(.lL.
:::;:: fi-= 8.
~
'" ..
N 0..0..
M .... 0
~
u~
en .s::,....
tL....~
)o.GlL.I...
~-B~ 2-
II- 0 0
~ >- Xl....
r: x 0
'- <<Ila .
I ...1........
.,+.,:2
..... ~::o >- t
L.<<II04I.J:
o '-.~ ~....
1I'l"'_Gl'"
lIlII c.. U L.
:::;:: fi-= 8.
.. .
"'2
..~
il'~
~ ~
-..
.~~
u-
..
.=.~
~
...-
~ u
'_ 8-
~..
..
ll'l!
-..
'2.=
xu
'_ 0..
~..
~
~
.!::'2
~..,
..;:
.. 0
.. 0..
..0.
!..
.- ..
H
..
~~
..~
20
o
;!
0#
~
'"
x
..
..
..
..
.. .
~~
-..
~.=
"''2
r:.-
..~
~-
...~O
u /i,-o
0...._
llu';
.. 0
~..
_0..'"
x
..
..
..
..
.. .
)o.U
o ..
-..
~.=
"''2
r:._
..~
~.-
~U
.. 8-:i:
0...._
ll...;
~ 0
~..
_0..'"
o
o
'" 0
;;~
..
+ 0..
u8-
~
..-
~iJ
...-
.ll.~
~~
"'~
OU
-..
....
~
U
..
..
IC
~
+ 0
r:
uo
~..
.. 0..
0..8-
u
..-
.ll"
~
0'_
O~
~~
~
U
..
U
o
'"
;li
+ .
U~
~..
,,0..
0..8-
..
..-
.lliJ
0'_
"'~
~j
..
~
..
0..
-g>'l!
",.... "
,::.~ 'g r:
... 1..._....
'u ~ g f
.....- III
r:- ~
.- -8 ...
15..~~
_... CA....
'iilB
~.::'- a
._] ..
"B ~ L.'!!
)(GI GI:J:
_'-.s:.'-
..... +"411'
o ~"O'5i
CL-_O+"
..- ..
of;.. .. = 10..
"ill~...
Cl)o. it'
..~ _u~
.:J: (t) lIC
cn ~GI-
! .. III ..Cii
'''' It) '- III U
!/lJl8-~:;:
15 :s GI....-
.......>~
!.~ f ~ lit
o
'"
-
g
'"
o
o
. +
'"
;6oi
..u
+ 0.. x
., 8.~
~
.._ u
0..,:;;
..1;..
en.... u
.ll.~'~
O~"
0"
0..
"'~..
ou~
-..~
....0
~
u
..
..
0..
Ie]
.~
000
..
+ +
GI~ui
~..u
.. 0.. X
0.. 8- ..
u ~
..-..
.ll !J:g
0'''' u
0.......
~H
~
u
..
..
0..
o ..
"'~
.~
;lIO
+ +
.. ~ ,;
~....
.. 0.. X
L. 8.~
..
..- ..
.ll!J:g
0'- U
11\ ...._
N'-l
~ilO
'2
x
~..
. ..
g'; .
L.ti
O~~
.. ..
'200..
X .. ~
.... O'l!i
.....~i
~5!;
~~-
0..
=~~
.. .~
pr~
-"'9
]~i
0.. 0# ..
0_
~ or:
..g;;
u 00..
~'" ..
..~~
0..
G.2~
I ~'-
..>
u 0
o ~
"'- -
:i:
.;
o
.n
~
'Z .;
0.._
8..~
o..ii
0>
)0.0..
-88-
,
o..~
U
,0..
0..
-~
..~
~
'Z .;
0.._
8..~
o..ii
0>
)0.0..
-88-
,
o..~
U
,0..
0"
-~
..~
~
'Z Ii
0.._
8..~
~
0....
0>
)0.0..
-88-
,
o..~
8-2
'0..
0"
-~
....
Ii
~
~
..
..
..
u
u
U
<C
U
:g
'"
0..
..
~
~
o
0..
o
0..
..
...
..
8-
..
]
~
0..
8-
,
o
'"
..
0..
o
)0.
-8
0..0..
U
'0..
iH
0..
8-
,
'"
:l
0..
o
)0.
..
..,
Ie
o
.;
~
'"
..,
0..
..
~
:;;
0..
8-
,
0..
..
~
0..
8-
~
0..
..
..
~
..,
0..
..
~
:;;
0..
8-
,
...
..
0..
8-
,
0..
..
~
0..
8-
,
o
'"
:;;
0..
~
..
l
+
~l!'
r:._
B
-u
u
..
..,
0..0..
8-"
,.8
0.._
..-
...~
)o..c
0..0..
8-8-
"
IC~
....
0..
8-
,
'"
N
..
0..
o
10
..,
0..
8-
...
~
~
~
.6
0..
~
..
Q
U
i
'"
0..
o
.~
~
..
o
'"
:::
'"
'l!
..
..
..,
0..
!
:::
~
..
:
..
lil
o
l!i
'"
0..
U
>
li~
._,
..~
u r:
~1
o..~
o~
..
0..
,,0..
~8-
,
o..~
U
,0..
0..
-~
..~
0..
.~
0..
~~
'- ~
~ r:
~1
~
o..~
0..
0.. 0..
::8-
)0.,
~
0..0
8-~
,..
..~
..~
N
.:
~
.<:
~..,
'- ~
~r:
u ..
~~
~
o..~
0..
0.. 0..
::8-
)0.'
~
0.. 0
8-~
,..
"'~
..~
..
0..
U
>
~
Q
'l!
..
..
t
~
~
<C
..
~
..
i
g
l!i
'"
o
'"
"u
+-
.c
Ji"~
....~
u-o
0..1'
.. -
, -0
0.. '
.. .",
~!
_ 0
o..~_
8-uo
;:;2~
20.. 0
tit !.'C
0.. _
8-~
'0
o '
:l:i:
+.n
i;
u.c
0.. ..
..~
,
0.._
ll"
0.. -0
8-!:;
,.~
"'~-
...u-o
;;l!~
0.. _
8-~
'0
o
'" 0
..-0
+.n
'I;
u.c
0....
..~
,
:as!
~li
~
0.. _0
8-!:;
,.-
O~_
",u-o
;;1",
i
u
0..
<C
i
..
i
o
'"
N
.,;
-
o
-
~
N
-
'"
'"
+
u
..
.ll
~'"
,,0..
~" ~
. ..
..~
f,JIl........
.!::55
5 ~ 0..
",s8-
0.. 0
Jio..N
l! 0 0
::U'''IM
+
u
..
.ll
~'"
"0..
i H ~
o
. ..
~~
.....-
,~5 5
5..0..
",s8-
0.. 0
f 6~
:;)",;
+
u
..
.ll
N'"
;;0..
o ..
tilt II >
o
" ..
..~
en........
.!::55
5 u 0..
",s8-
0.. 0
Jl 0.. N
l! 0 .
="",;
tt:
--
..
..
..
o
:
..-
..
~
o
:E
..
i
~
0..
8.
<C
..
..
!
.~
'"
G
~
ii
'"
o
~
~
'"
!t~
..
i
~
II
....
Ii
j
~
~
11\
~
..
..'
..
:~
II:::.
....-
..
..,
..
:~
II:::.
....-
~
s
-
Cj,
..
.-
..~
II:::.
....-
j
'g
u
~
~
s
-
~
s
-
6
'i
';:
~
co
6
'Z
~
C>
C
C>
";
on
6
..
...
8.
...
...
.
..
>
...
on
N
..
6
..
...
8.
...
...
.
~
...
on
:;j
"
o
..
...
8.
...
...
.
~
...
on
N
..
>
..
u
"
>
..
~
...
D.
..
:a
.
"
.
..
~
~
...
..
i
0..
C>
N
C>
.,;
~
on
6
..
...
8.
...
...
.
~
...
~
... ~
~~ 2
.... ...
o ~..
...o.c
~~ L....
. ...
+ ~ t L.
...=...!.
......(t)L.
fit i 0
...~.~ e
ID ca_....
- u ..
........... ID
-.....
~ 8:.:: 8.
fit CD.... 0
~
~
1
..
..
..
~
o
...
D.
...
...
.
~
...
o
N
..
~
..
..
..
~
o
...
D.
...
...
.
~
...
on
on
to
'i
"
o
..
..
..
~
o
...
D.
...
...
.
~
...
on
o
to
.
:0
~
..
..
c
C>
C
N
~
on
u
..
.,
"
]
i
..
.
~
:!
o
..
..
.. ..
~..
0"
....
0....
6
..
...
8.
...
...
.
~
...
o
on
..
6
..
...
8.
...
...
.
..
>
...
on
'"
..
6
..
...
8.
...
...
.
~
...
on
:;j
"
o
..
...
8.
..
~
.
.,
..
..
.
..
..
"'
.
..
..
o
C
'"
";
11\
..
.
..
...
o
o
to
...
8.
lil
"
-.
....
~
'"
'i!
i
..
.
...
1l~
D.
:il
.~ ;
.c .c
u ..
~ ~ 0
'- .c
~-5 W
'- ~ ..
l..;
>..D.
.......
..... ...
= en Z ~
> 8. >._
... ....c
OL.OU
1:1 8.1:1 ~
o
..
C>
..
~
...
..
.c .c
u ..
I! ~ 0
'- .c
~ti ~
'- ~ ..
l..~
~f.....
........
IDCIlID4I
~ &. ~.=
... ....c
U"IL..C)C,l
~ 8.::: II
o
..
~ ...
..
.c .c
u ..
~ ~ 0
,- .c
~-5 ~
'- ~ ..
l..;
>..D.
.......
..... ...
ID CIl ca...
!t 8. ~.=
... ....c
U"I 1..0 U
to 8.1:1 ~
"
'0
~
~
.c
u
.
Z
~
..,
;;
I
..
i-E
.
...
u
.- ..
H
z'"
'i~
'_ i
.c ..
...
'- ...
~~
'i~
:po
.....
>0
o
~
o
"l
on
..
:D
.
..
'<:
.
!
...
C>
1:1
..
:D
.
..
...
...
.
!
o
'"
..
..
:a
.
..
...
...
.
!
o
'"
..
::
:a
.
....
..,
...
.
-
;;
'l!
.
'8
0..
o
~
:i!
on
~
u ~
u
.c
~ ii
~ ~
. ...
~ !
C> on
N N
.. ..
~
~
1
...
...
.
~
...
o
o
N
..
..
u
.c
~
...
...
t
...
C>
C>
N
..
~
~
"
..
.,
..
..
u
ii
~ ~
. ~
:: ;;
] Q
ii l.
>
1
~
~
'2
..
>
o
C
N
"l
on
.c
u
.
..
C>
on
i
+
..6
....
....
~8.
..-
ll~
0'_
on..
~~
...
.c
u
II
o
on
i
+
~! ~
E ~ i
.. >
..- ...
ll~ i
0'_ ~
on.. ...
,.... 0
~:R ~
..~ ..
u
.
~
o
.
..
c3
o
C
on
"l
on
~ 6
u ..
.
.c u
! ~
... ...
~ Z
;;; ~
o 0
N N
.. ..
~
u
.c
~
'<:
.
.!:
...
C>
C>
N
..
~
e
.
..
...
u
..
~
..
~
..
~
~
"
..
.,
"8
o
~
,
..
~
u
ii
>
~
i
>
o
N
o
.,;
N
.;
.......,
6
..
.
2
...
...
.
~
...
o
o
N
..
6
..
.
u
~
...
...
II
>
...
C>
o
N
..
~
'-
.......,
6
..
...
8.
...
...
II
>
...
~
..
..
..
... ...
o
~
t ... ~
.I:. .1:.'_
......
o .
......
~.e ~
+ ::~
"0
.. .
......t.......
. .0
L GI ... It
...:a >- t
cca.....c::
_ U 0'"
.........1:
-....
a ~=!
~
'"
'i!
C>
tll
..
'i
..
...
o
o
to
o
"1"
-.
....
~
o
... ...
..
+ cu >,..
-.....
CU U'''' ID
~:.e u 5-
..... "
>.-...
..... ..
Ul:ai ~
.!CP+'lIll
o~:! ~
onon~
_N 0
.... ..
i
'm
..
...
..
..
"
"'
.~
~
""""'.
"
o
..
...
8.
...
...
.
~
...
~
..
...
.. ..
.c .c
.... ...
o ~..
...o.c
>0 ..
,,~ ...
. ...
.... ...
+~>-!
.. . ..
~+oI~t;
..... ..
...:c.~ 5
CD m_._
-u ..
........... c
-.....
~ 8:.= !Ir!
M 1:1..... 0-
~
'"
'i!
o
tll
~
.
..
...
C>
C>
to
o
..
"
-.
....
..
u
8-
..
i
..
.
...
1l~
D.
o
.. ,
..
u
8-
..
...
8.
+..>
-.....
It u.......
....-u ...
:! ii c i
... ~.- a.
.......,
ll:Ica4l....
.Q"....Ul
>...
c.....L.L.
LI'l"'!Ir!Cll
;;~ o~
o
C!;
::!
0.
It/~tJ
:0
..
'"
>
..
u
"
~
o
N
";
on
6
..
!l
.
u
i
..
.
:!!
o
..
>
...
;;
:0
.!!.
...
o
~
..
'i
..
..
g
~
OJ
~
u
..
'"
...
.
a.
...
~
.
...
....
i
..
.
...
o
1ll;.
..
u
8-
..
...
8.
o , ...
.. ..
+ >..
.... ...
...-....lIlI
~.~ua.
'-i.= ...
.. > ..
lIl'L:'i ~
1: as +'1'''
.. . ..
0>- L. c::
~~8.o
"'NO'"
>
..
~
...
D.
..
:a
.
"
.
..
II
.,
"
OJ
"
~
-ll
l!'
'i
o
..
o
z
.
...
..
i
0..
..
.
~
s
'; =
:: ~
~'-
n
a...
o
-
o
N
";
on
o
'"
o
.;
";
on
o
N
~
C>
u:
on
..
..
!
!1
..
'"
.
u
"
.
....
o
N
C>
~
on
on
.
.
~
s
-
..
",
!~
Ill::
..-
..
" ,
..
:I~
Ill::
..-
..
" ,
..
:It
Ill::
..-
~
s
-
t
S
-
"
..
~ 1
- ....
~ l;
= ~
.... ....
Ii: 8
N _
.. ..
j
Ct
:g
..
..
....
o
'"
~
..
!
Ct
:g
..
..
....
o
lC
..
o
c
~
+'"
~
..
Ii!
..-
-'"
-..
8: Ii!
..
.... .
""~
"_0
~ilc
...... ,
0...._
!:io'"
'" '
..'"
o
~
~
+~
..
.! ~!
.. -'"
1 l~
.... ....
~ ...1It_
II ......c
~ Uc
.... ......
g ICe;-:'O
...... -,." .
... .....'"
.!
.~
1
....
..
!
....
8
;
o'
C
o
'"
+~
..
Ii!!
...-
._'"
l~
.... .
""~
"-0
~io
...... ,
0...._
"'0'"
-'" '
....'"
"
i
8.
,,'
::D
..
..
....
..
"
..
..
f~
......
8~
~.l
"
::D
~
8.
..
i
..
~~
I~
iJ
"
i
8.
,,'
i
..
~!:
I~
C;-~
~il
..
~
~
-l!l
....
o
'"
N
..
i
i
....
o
'"
~
i
~
~
o
'"
N
..
t
..
c"
-..
""
:D:D
~::
~g
.. ..
..
~l;
....'"
87;
~+
"
l!
Iz
..
C ..
-..
" "
n
" ..
,."
....'"
0"
00
N
..+
"
l!
i:
..
C ..
-..
.. "
:ri:c
.. ..
,...
8.'-
~~i
..
~l;
....'"
87;
N
..+
.
~
l~
.~
i.b
".....
C~:
.. .."
--..
-..-
....
-
:~l
.. ..-
..0..
-..
i !l:8
~
'"
..~
....
..
-..
u..
~~
..u
i::
&-
~J
*!
..-
-
,
'"
..
I
1':
.'8
..
'8:::
..'"
r:'.
.."
=1"
- -
_0..
....
..
......
"0"
-..
0"_
a"'..
~
'"
..
..
..~
- ..
u
~..
..
....
lE.
&..
;1
"',.
;-l!l
,
'"
..
I
H
.'8
..
'8:::
"::I
L
~.!
-..
.. ..
-
_0..
....
..
.. ....
..0..
-..
i a..
c
..~
....
..
-..
u..
~~
..u
!:
&.-
d
~i
..-
'-
o
-
--
i.. :: 0 2
......
.... "
... l. 'S
'iio;"..
li+-n
&...~C,,)
!.. &-.- '-
.. _ 0
.."
.......:c~~
&.. II II &...-
0..... C,,)-"
....-.....
'" - '-
....~ R-,! It
_... ...15"
'"
::I '-
..0
"..
.,::D~1i
i~:i
-"''-
8:" l!
i-.~IS'
Ii ~__
ell::..:
,+;:2
.....,...)o.&..
.. "
"'Cl-..c
o&..~,....
"'....uti...
II .. U '-
=;:: rt= !
'"
N
.. '-
"0
.. ..
_'-c
".D'_ 0
I.~:i
il~!
'- i:: 0 .
I + ~ "i
.....,.... ~c..
.. "
...c.....lIt.c
OL..:!!''''
"'''lli..
.. ....
==--= !.
"il
i ::
~"
-'-
'iil ~
1- ..
iil!
.c .. . .
.. '-
"0
.,..N.....
""'COel
i '- 'I
..;1;
-.. '
-...",...
..
..
..
i.. ..
, '-
.."
,,'-
-..~
t ..
c..
.- ..
-
"'ili!..
i;:l~
,c_I.
"l! '-
.. ~2.....
L..o",
l!~;;\ ~
..... . i
_L.II'l&..
..
..
..
;;
i~f
-..~
t.= i
-
"'ili!
Ii;: Ii! B
.1:'- . .
"l! ..
115.2.....
....0.
i"';1
..'"
-.. '
-&.."'&..
..
&
o
'"
~
+
~Ii
....
....
,,&
..
.!-
8J
...
lS-
;j
..
&
Ii:
tl
: Ii
....
f"
..&
..-
.!~
0_
0"
f~
..
&
lC
~
+
"Ii
....
....
..&
"
..-
.!~
0'_
"'..
Nii
~1I
"
I
'"
'"
..
.!
-.:
!
o
r:l
"
I
'"
"'.
!
..
~
~
lC
..
"
I
'"
'"
..
.!
....
..
..
~
....
o
'"
N
..
!
..
..
II
'ii
:g
..
..
~
ril
Ii
..
..
~
....
..
..
~
~
..
!
..
..
II
'ii
:g
..
..
~
ril
Ii
..
..
II
:;:
..
!
~
..
!
..
..
II
'ii
:g
..
..
....
o
ril
!
..
..
II
:;:
..
..
~
8
N
..
"
....
Chapter 5.42
-..
PROFESSIONS"
Sections:
5.42.010 License tax required.
5.42.010 License tax required.
A. Every person conducting. managing. carrying on or engaged in any business hereinafter enumerated in this
section shall pay a license tax as presently designated, or as may in the future be amended, in the Master Tax
Schedule, Section 5.42.010:
I. Accountant;
2. Anesthesiologist;
3. Appraiser;
4. Architect;
5. Assayer;
6. Attorney at law;
7. Auditor;
8. Bacteriologist;
9. Chemist;
10. Chiropodist;
II. Chiropractor;
12. Consultant;
13. Dentist;
14. Doctor of medicine;
15. Engineer-Civil, electrical, mining, mechanical, chemical, structural consulter hydraulic;
Ie. Blestrelegist;
1+2. Entomologist;
181. Esthetician;
1911. Geologist;
l2... Holistic Health Practitioner:
20. Hypnotherapist;
21. Oculist;
22. Optician;
23. Optometrist;
24. Osteopath;
25. Pharmacist;
26. Physical therapist;
27. Physician;
28. Physiotherapist;
29. Psychiatrist;
30. Psychologist;
31. Psychotherapist;
32. Podiatrist;
33. Real estate broker;
34. Roentgenologist;
35. Social worker;
36. Stock and bond broker;
~
.........
(R 9/92)
/6 --?~
18
.
.
.
37. Surgeon;
38. Surveyor;
39. Taxidermist;
40. Veterinarian.
B. Eacb professional person mentioned above, whether or not required to be licensed as sucb by the state to
carry on his profession, sball, eacb individually, wbether or not operating as an individual, partoersbip or
associate, pay sucb license lax; provided further, that if sucb professional person mentioned above should be
an employee of a professional corporation, said professional person sball pay the same license lax as required
berein, but the corporation sbaIl not be required to pay any license lax.
(Ord. 2408 fl (part), 1990; Ord. 1801 flO, 1978; Ord. 1602 fl, 1974; 000. 1243 fl (part), 1969; prior code
fI8.58).
/&/lj
(R 9/92)
\9
Chapter 5.46
~
Sections:
5.46.010
5.46.020
REAL ESTATE SALESMENPERSONS
License tax required.
Disclosure of Mello-Roos Districts, Assessment Districts and Open Space Districts.
5.46.010 License feelM required.
Every person conducting, managing, carrying on or engaged in business hereinafter enumerated in this
section, shall pay a license tax as presently designated, or as may in the future be amended, in the Master Tax
Schedule, Section 5.46.010.
Real estate salesmoBoersons
Chapter 5.60
VENDING, WEIGHING, MUSIC, AMUSEMENT,
AND-VIDEO MACHINES AND NEWS RACKS'"
Sections:
5.60.010
5.60.020
5.60.030
5.60.040
Vending, weighing, music, amusement and video machines and news racks - License
Tax-Receipts to be attached to machine.
Repealed.
Repealed.
Repealed.
......,
5.60.010 Vending, weighing, music, amusement, and video machines and news racks-License Tax-Receipts
to be attached to machine.
Every person conducting, managing or carrying on the business of operating or maintaining any vending,
weighing, music, amusement, or video machine or newsrack operated by a coin or a slug shall pay a tax as
presently designated, or as may in the future be amended, in the Master Tax Schedule, Section 5.60.010, in addition
to any other license tax required by this Chapter. Postage machines are exempt from license taxes.
The City Finance Officer shall issue a separate receipt for each such machine, which shall be attached to and
maintained thereon for the full term for which the receipt is issued. (Ord. 240S ~I (part), 1990; Ord. ISOI ~12
(part), 1975; prior code US.52).
~
(R 9/92)
)6 ~ (; f
1..0
.
..
.
CHAFfER 5.65
OUT-OF-CITY DELIVERY VEmCLES
Sections:
5.65.010 License Tax Reouired
5.65.010 License tax reauired.
Eyerv out-of-Citv comoany deliyerin2 merchandise Durchased outside of Chula Visla to any Chula Visla
address more than once oer Duarter oer year shall Day a license lax as Dresentlv desirnated. or as maY in the future
be amended. in the Master Tax Schedule. Section 5.65.010.
/6/?5
(R 9/92)
"Z...\
-..
Chapter 9.13
LIVE ENTERTAINMENT LICENSING AND REGULATIONS
Sections:
9.13.040
9.13.050
EntertailUl1ent li~-Exemptions.
Application BRd depasit for Iicense-lnvestil!stion fee
9.13.030 EntertailUl1ent license-Required.
No person shall conduct, permit or assist in the conducting or the permitting of any entertainment, as defined
in this chapter, to be shown, staged, exhibited or produced in any premises to which the public is admitted unless
and until a wt=KleB live entertainment business license has been obtained (F8IB the Bhief af paliae.
9.13.040 EntertailUl1ent Iicense-feetax-Exemptions.
The annual feetax for an entertainment license shall be the amount oresentlv desilmated. or as mav in the
future be amended. in the Master Tax Schedule. Section 9.13.040. in addition to anv other license tax reauired bv
Title 5. sum af t':'s MlIu:lrsa fifty sellaFS fer tae first year and ~~:e BURIiFSEl 8ellafs far Baeh &BBH&I fBBir:'sl,
p~rovided however, that no such license need be obtained where such entertainment is conducted by a bona fide
charitable, civic, religious, benevolent, patriotic or educational organization or by the United Service Organization.
Any determination as to the exempt status of any applicant shall be made by the chief of police.
9.13.050 Application BRd depasit for license-Investil!stion fee
"'"
The appliC8fttion for any license or HeaRses oermits in this chapter shall be made to the ewer af palieedirector of
finance and shall be accompanied by a aepasit is tlte BIBallS! af eBe BURiIFsa fifty ElellaFS, wlHiMi depssit Bkall 138
B9R FefHadat!le the reauired reefs). If tile lissase is iS8\lss, Mill depesit shall he Bf'f1lied iB tile ,~'mj}Bt af tile
liesasB fee.
"""'"
(R 9/92)
/? ---i,?
7-.2-
111/ItC+f-HEItlT ~
CHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
AN
INVESTMENT IN
TliE FUTURE
November 4, 1991
00
f2 r;l R n ~7 IS
lS U!J LS U \~! !\ ;{:"
t<<)V 5 199\ Ii J i
~_~__--.J - .1'
CITY CUUj\~lt Offj~ES
CH~il; ~iSTA. CA I
President Elect
Mike Green
Honorable Chula Vista Mayor Tim Nader
City Council Members
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
President
Jim Biddle
Vice Presidents:
Truman Brooks
Pat Cavanaugh
Nanette Myers
Chuck Peter
Dear City Council:
The Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce is ~ concerned about your
plans to implement phase two of your three-phase business license
increase plan.
Members:
Russ Bulien
Rod Davis
Sarah Even
Diane Flint
.aslak
cMlllln
Dave Michelson
Tom MIchelli
Ben Richardson
Norm Richins
Jo Sanzone
Linda Soucy
Mary Anne Stro
John Vugnn
We believe that now, due to the state of our economy, is not the time to
increase fees. We support the quality of life in our city and we know
there are high financial responsibilities in running the city, but we
must be realistic about adding any new financial burdens on our
businesses at this time.
Join with the Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce and show your
support for our businesses by deferring any increases for one year or
until economic indicators show improvements.
Peat President
Larry Cunningham
The ChulaVista Chamber of Commerce is always willing to work with
the city to improve its financial well-being. Please feel free to contact
l,IS if we can be of assistance.
Chief Executive
Officer
Donald R. Read
Sincerely yours,
11 l'h- f! {]JJt
~es E. Biddle
President, Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce
JEB:ce
~
/~ -~ ?
2 3 3 F 0 U R T H A V E N U E . C H II L A V'S T A. C A L I FOR N I A 9 1 9 1 0 . TEL: (6 1 9) 4 2 0 . 6 6 0 3
f!7T1bI f1fNT D. - ..1-
ORDINANCE NO. 2537
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
AMENDING TITLE 5 AND CHAPTER 9.13
VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING
LICENSE TAXES AND REGULATIONS
CHULA VISTA
OF THE CHULA
TO BUSINESS
SECTION I: That Chapters 5.02, 5.04, 5.06, 5.07, 5.42, 5.46,
5.60, and 5.65 of Title 5 of the Chula vista Municipal Code are
hereby amended to read as set forth in Attachment III, a copy of
which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as if
set forth in full.
SECTION II: Pursuant to the provisions of Charter Section
312(d)(3), this ordinance shall take effect and be in full force
immediately upon the introduction and adoption hereof, which
occurred at a single meeting of the City Council upon the passage
hereof by at least three affirmative votes, because it increases
and fixes the rate of taxation for business license taxes.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Bruce M. Boogaard, City
Attorney
Cheryl Fruchter, Revenue
Manager
f:\HOME\A TIORNEY\TITLES.ORD
/ ~/} - J
RESOLUTION NO.
lIP ~..2.2
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE
TO INCLUDE INVESTIGATION FEES FOR LIVE
ENTERTAINMENT LICENSES AT THEIR CURRENT LEVEL
AS SPECIFIED IN SECTION 9.13.050 OF THE CHULA
VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE
The City Council of the City of Chula vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, Ordinance 2537 deleted specific reference to the
amount of fees to be collected for live entertainment business
license investigations; and
WHEREAS, inclusion of these fees in the Master Fee Schedule is
required to retain the fees at the current levels as specified in
section 9.13.050 of the Chula vista Municipal Code; and,
WHEREAS, passage of this resolution will retain the fees at
their current level, and accomplish the Council's goal of having
all city fees included in the Master Fee Schedule.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby amend the Master Fee Schedule to
include:
Application for Live Entertainment License - Investiqation Fee
Anv applicant for a live entertainment license shall deposit
a non-refundable investiqation fee of $150 to cover the costs
of police investiqation. If the license is issued the
investiqation fee will be applied towards the first year's
business license tax as specified in section 9.13.040 of the
Master Tax Schedule.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Lyman Christopher, Director of
Finance
Bruce M. Boogaard, City
Attorney
F:\homc\attorney\live.mt
/&[J - /
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item I 7
Meeting Date: 12/15/92
Item Title:
Public Hearing
Concerning the
Comprehensive Housing
Affordability strategy Annual
Plan for Fiscal Year 1993
Submitted By:
Resolution It ~3? Authorizing the Submittal of
the Comprehensive Housing
Affordability Strategy Annual
Plan for Fiscal Year 1993
to the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development
if No Significant Changes
Result from the Public Comment
Period
. . IS.
communlty Development DlrectorL.
City ManagertJ
(4/5ths Vote:
Yes
No---X
Reviewed By:
The National Affordable Housing Act of 1990 requires all
jurisdictions applying for funding from the Department of Housing
and Urban Development to submit a Comprehensive Housing
Affordability strategy (CHAS). The CRAS is a planning document
which identifies the ercy's housing needs and outlines a strategy
to meet these needs. The CRAS must be updated annually. The
CHAS Annual Plan for Fiscal Year 1993 is attached.
Recommendation: That the City Council conduct a public hearing,
and adopt the resolution authorizing the submittal of the
Comprehensive Housing Affordability Stratedy Annual Plan for
Fiscal Year 1993 to HUD as long as no significant changes result
from the public comment period.
Boards/Commissions Recommendation: The Housing Advisory
Committee and the Commission on Aging are reviewing the draft
CHAS Annual Plan for Fiscal Year 1993, and if they have any
comments, these comments will be incorporated into the CRAS.
DISCUSSION:
Process:
The National Affordable Housing Act of 1990 requires all
jurisdictions applying for funding assistance under most programs
administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) to submit a Comprehensive Housing Affordability strategy
(CHAS) to HUD for approval. The full CHAS is submitted to HUD
17- /
every five years, but the CRAS is updated annually with an Annual
Plan which describes the City's goals for each fiscal year. The
City's full CRAS was adopted by the Council on April 21, 1992 and
approved by HUD on June 19, 1992. .
The CHAS is a comprehensive planning document that identifies the
City's overall needs for affordable and supportive housing and
outlines a strategy to address these needs. The National
Affordable Housing Act requires the City's CRAS to contain
elements which describe the City's housing needs and market
conditions, to set out a five year strategy which establishes
priorities for meeting these needs, to identify resources
anticipated to be available for the development of housing, and
to establish an investment plan that outlines the planned uses of
resources.
The Act also requires a citizen participation which mandates a
thirty day public comment period as well as a pUblic hearing on
the CHAS Annual Plan for Fiscal Year 1993. The public comment
period will end on December 28, 1992, and the summary of citizen
comments will be incorporated into the CHAS after the public
comment period ends.
The CRAS is exempt from environmental review under CEQA. This
statutory exemption is found in state Code section 15267.
Plan:
The City's CHAS and the Annual Plan for Fiscal Year 1993
identifies the following housing priorities:
1. Preserve Castle Park Garden Apartments, Palomar Apartments,
Rancho vista Apartments, and Oxford Terrace Apartments (HUD-
financed projects) because they are "at-risk" of converting
to market rate rentals;
2. continue the city's housing rehabilitation program entitled
the Community Housing Improvement Program (CHIP);
3. continue to implement the City's Affordable Housing Program;
4. Assist low, moderate, and middle income residents to purchase
a home;
5. Develop a transitional housing shelter;
6. continue to support non-profit corporations to develop
affordable for-sale and rental housing;
7. continue to assist mobile home park residents who are faced
with rent increases and park closures;
/?~~
8. continue to utilize the San Diego County Housing Authority
to represent Chula vista in providing public housing in Chula
vista; and,
9. Continue to utilize CDBG funds for supportive services for
residents with special needs.
When the City Council reviewed the CHAS in April of 1992,
questions were raised regarding whether the city should continue
to utilize the San Deigo County Housing Authority or become a
housing authority. Upon the formation of a housing authority,
the CHAS will be amended to reflect the formation.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
/73
City Council 12/15/92 Agenda Item #17
[This letter provided for your information.]
315 4th Avenue, Suite E . Chula Vista . CA 91910 . (619) 420-3620/9790/5051
December 14, 1992
Mr. Chris Salomone
Director, Community Deve1opment'i)epartment
Ci ty of Chula Vista-
276- Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista; CA 91910
Dear Mr. Salomone:
South Bay Community Services recently received and reviewed the
City of Chula Vista's Comprehensive Housing Affordability
Strategy (CHASl Annual Plan for Fiscal Year 1993.
As a neighborhood-based nonprofit working to house homeless and
lower-income youth and families, SBCS v~ews itself as a partner
with the City of Chula Vista in achieving the housing goals
described in the CHAS.
We approve of the -strate<3yand objectives outlined in the 1992-
1996 CHAS and wholeheartedly endorse 'the 1993 Annual Plan.
Sincerely,
Dan' Marcus
Community Development' Coordinator
cc: Alisa Duffy Rogers
4-
DEe 1992
Rc~ei',t:;'/,1 ,
"r.:",';' ,,','\'y,':b"":;
~npart.""
.
)75
unlRdw..,
01 San[l;e!J>Couty
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY STRATEGY
ANNUAL PLAN - FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR 1993
Contact Person: Alisa Duffey Rogers, Community Development
Specialist (619) 691-5047
/7/} ---I
I. ANNUAL PLAN
A. Summary of the Comprehensive Housing Affordability
Strategy Development Process - To be inserted at
the conclusion of the public review process
B. Strategy Implementation
1. priority: Preserve the city's four apartment
complexes which are at-risk of converting to
market rate rentals.
Tvoe of Households to be Assisted: These four
complexes total 386 rental units and represent
permanent housing for very low and low income
households whose size varies from 1 to 6 members.
Proqrams and Resources: These units represent a
considerable amount of the City's affordable
housing stock. As a result, the
City/Redevelopment Agency is currently providing
both staff support and technical assistance to a
community-based non-profit corporation in order
to ensure the availability of a priority
purchaser.
city/Agency staff is also monitoring the
filing of all notices by the owners of these
complexes as well as all of the activities
mandated by either the Title II or Title VI in
order to ensure that the City/Agency has input
into the preservation process.
If an owner decides to sell, funds for
predevelopment and gap financing as well as FHA
insurance for 95% of the acquisition price should
be available from HUD. If predevelopment and gap
financing are not available, local Redevelopment
Agency funds maybe utilized in order to leverage
the Federal FHA insurance for the issuance of
MUlti-Family Revenue Bonds.
One Year Goal: Continue to work with community-
based non-profits and the current owners in order
to preserve these affordable units. If
necessary, the City/Agency may be willing to
commit any of the above referenced resources.
/7/1-.2
Support of Applications: The City would support
and certify as consistent with the City's CRAS
any application for funding from a non-profit
corporation for the acquisition these at-risk
units as long as the non-profit is community
based and pledged to provide the residents some
control over the management and operation of the
rental complex.
The City would need to evaluate the
application of a tenant organization who proposed
to convert these units to something other than
rental units before support or certification of
CRAS consistency would be given.
Service Deliverv and Manaqement: If any of these
at-risk units are sold, a non-profit corporation,
the city/Agency, and HUD will be the entities
necessary for preserving the affordability of
these units. Nonetheless, the non-profit
corporation will be primarily responsible for the
management of these units.
2. priority: continue to support non-profit
corporations to develop or rehabilitate rental
housing for very low and low income households.
Tvpe of Households to be Assisted: The
City/Agency would tend to support rental
housing for very low and low income households
whose size varies from 1 to 6 members.
Proqrams and Resources: The Agency or the city
will continue to invest local funds in quality
projects by non-profits which provide rental
units to very low and low income households. The
city may also use its allocation of HOME funds to
assist non-profits with both new construction and
the rehabilitation of units. The City's HOME
allocation totals $750,000, and most likely
several hundred thousand dollars will be
allocated to support the development of housing
by non-profit corporations in FY 93.
If HOME funds are used, local Redevelopment
Agency funds will be used to both leverage and
match HOME funds. In the past, the Agency has
committed funds to non-profits early in the
development process so that non-profits could
leverage the Agency's funds and receive
financial commitments from the state of
California, HUD, private banks, and non-profit
financial intermediaries. The Agency will most
/7;1'3
likely continue to take this risk so that local
funds are utilized to the fullest extent.
other funding sources for non-profit corporations
for very low and low income rental units include
the Low Income Housing Tax Credit, the Local
Initiative Support Corporation, the Low Income
Housing Fund, Savings Association Mortgage
Company (SAMCO), California Community
Reinvestment Corporation (CCRC), and the Federal
Home Loan Bank Board. The City/Agency vould
probably support a non-profit corporation who
applied for these funds.
One Year Goal: By continuing to support non-
profit housing corporations, 28 units of very
low and low income household will be produced.
The local funds for this 28 unit project were
committed in FY 92, but the units will be
completed and occupied in FY 93. The City/Agency
may commit additional funds this year, but due to
the length of time necessary to finance and
construct a project, no additional units will be
completed in FY 93.
Support of Applications: The City would
certify as consistent with the city's CHAS any
non-profit's application to HUD for
the construction or rehabilitation of units for
very low and low income households as long
as the non-profit can demonstrate capacity or has
a development team with proven capacity.
Service Deliverv and Manaqement: Non-profit
corporations are aware of the availability of
local Agency funds and HOME funds. It is their
responsibility to propose a viable project in
order to receive funding.
If units are rehabilitated or constructed, it
will be the responsibility of the non-profit to
properly maintain and operate the units.
However, the City/Agency will continue to monitor
the projects to ensure that the projects are
managed well.
3. prioritv: continue to utilize the San Diego
County Housing Authority to represent Chula vista
in providing public housing in Chula Vista.
Tvpe of Households to be Assisted: Public
Housing provides permanent rental units for very
low income households whose household size varies
from 1 to 6 members.
J 7/J~'f
Proqrams and Resources: When the Housing
Authority identifies a site, City staff will
assist by facilitating the development process
and assisting with site approvals from the city
Council. In some cases, the City has waived fees
for public housing projects, and in some cases,
the Agency has paid the fees for public housing
projects. The Redevelopment Agency has also
written down land costs and made grants for
project amenities.
Public housing development is federally funded.
However, these Federal funds are often augmented
by local funds as described above. In FY 93, the
Agency could allocate $25,000 in order to
supplement any Federal public housing funding.
One Year Goal: continue to support the San Diego
Housing Authority to develop public housing in
Chula Vista. During FY 93, the City/Agency staff
will continue to assist the County in processing
a 16 unit project which should be completed in
the next 18 to 24 months.
SUDDort of ADDlications: The City/Agency would
certify as consistent with the city's CRAS any
application by the County to receive funds for
providing public housing as long as the
application is reasonable.
Service Deliverv and Manaqement: The County is
responsible for providing and managing any public
housing constructed or rehabilitated in the city.
However, the City has a strict Memorandum of
Understanding with the County which allows the
City to monitor the maintenance and management of
any public housing project.
The City is investigating the possibility of
forming its own Housing Authority. If this
Housing Authority is formed, the City's CRAS will
be amended to reflect this formation.
4. Priority: continue the housing rehabilitation,
rental rehabilitation, and mobile home
rehabilitation programs in order to preserve the
City's aging housing stock.
TVDe of Household to be Assisted: The Agency's
rehabilitation program is designed to serve very
low and low income households whose size varies
from 1 to 6 members. To date, the program has
served predominantly very low income households.
J7~,,5-'
Proqrams and Resources: The Agency offers 3%
deferred loans to very low income households and
5% loans to low income households to order to
rehabilitate their single family dwellings. For
mobile homes, the Agency offers grants to up
$2,000 for very low income households, and any
additional rehabilitation costs are eligible for
a 5% loan. For rental units, the Agency provides
a 5% loan to property owners in exchange for
restricted rents which are affordable to low
income households.
The current Agency program is funded by local
Agency funds. In FY 93, the Agency expects to
allocate $300,000 for its rehabilitation
programs. In the future, HOME funds may be
used to supplement Agency funds. If HOME funds
are utilized, Agency funds will be used to both
leverage and match HOME funds.
One Year Goal: Rehabilitate a total of 20 single
family homes/mobile homes and 2 rental units.
Support of Applications: Not applicable.
Service Deliverv and Manaqement: Redevelopment
Agency/City staff will deliver and manage the
Agency's rehabilitations program.
5. Prioritv: continue to implement the City's
Affordable Housing Program (AHP) so that more
rental and for-sale units are made available to
low, moderate, and middle income households.
Tvpe of Households to be Assisted:
promotes the development of rental
for-sale housing opportunities for
and middle income households whose
from 1 to 6 members.
The AHP
and
low, moderate,
size varies
Proqrams and Resources: The city of Chula
vista's Housing Element of the General Plan
states that any development over 50 units must
provide 10% of the units for low and moderate
income households, with at least one half of
those units (5% of project total units) being
designated for low income households.
To date, for-profit developers have provided
these units with little assistance from the City
or the Agency, and the City has gained more
affordable housing as a result. In the future,
the Agency or the city may assist developers so
17~.('
that more low income units are built.
However, this assistance is neither required or
guaranteed under the AHP.
For rental units, the City could provide tax
exempt financing, and this type of financing
should be available in fiscal year 93.
In addition, the city has suggested that for-
profit developers joint venture with non-profit
housing developers in order take advantage of the
favorable financing available to non-profits.
However, any joint ventures are at the discretion
of the for-profit developer.
The city is also considering assisting developers
to provide for-sale units. If assistance is
provided, the city will probably allow for-profit
developers to utilize the City's Mortgage Credit
certificate Program. The City/Agency does have
mortgage credit certificates available for FY 93.
If tax exempt financing is provided, federal
funds would effectively leverage the funds of
private investors.
One Year Goal: continue to pursue the City's
Affordable Housing Program so that private
developers provide housing to low, moderate, and
median income households. In FY 93, 5 low income
for-sale units should be produced and 12 moderate
and middle income for-sale units should be
produced.
Support of Applications: If any non-profit or
for-profit housing developer applied for any
Federal funds requiring the City's certification
that the application is consistent with the
City's CRAS, support and certification would be
given as long as the developer has experience or
assembles a development team with experience.
Service Deliverv and Manaqement: As explained
above, it is the responsibility of developer to
provide, and, if rental units are constructed,
manage the affordable units constructed under the
AHP.
6. priority: continue to assist mobile home park
residents who are faced with paying increasing
rents as will as the closure of their mobile home
parks.
/71'9 r?
Tvpe of Households to be Assisted: Mobile home
parks provide permanent rental housing for very
low and low income families and seniors whose
size varies from 1 to 6.
Proarams and Resources: Currently, thirty-three
mobile home parks provide affordable housing to
many of the City's residents. Unfortunately,
this form of affordable housing is threatened due
to the number of park closures which have caused
a shortage in the number of available spaces. In
order to control the rents and preserve the
affordability of these spaces, the city Council
passed a Rent Review Ordinance.
The city's Rent Review Ordinance only allows park
owners to increase space rent each year by the
percentage change in the Consumer Price Index.
without this control, space rent would probably
increase dramatically as a result of the shortage
of available spaces. If space rent did increase
dramatically, park residents could face a severe
cost burden.
since very few spaces are available and park
closures are common, the City also regulates park
closures by requiring park owners to provide
relocation assistance to park residents who are
low income.
One Year Goal: continue to assist mobile home
owners by enforcing the city's Rent Review
Ordinance and the city's Ordinance governing park
closures. continue to encourage senior citizens
to take part in the Mobilehome Rental Assistance
Program (MRAP) administered by the San Diego
County Authority.
Support of Applications: Not applicable.
Service Deliverv and Manaaement: City/Agency
staff are responsible for the monitoring and
enforcing of the City's ordinances regarding
mobile homes.
7. priority: Assist low, moderate and middle income
residents to purchase a home.
Tvpe of Households to be Assisted: The Mortgage
Credit Certificate Program is designed to provide
homeownership opportunities for low, moderate and
middle income households whose size varies from 1
to 6 members.
/~-y
Proaram and Resources: Currently, the Agency
administers a Mortgage Credit certificate Program
(MCC) which allows eligible buyers to take 20% of
their mortgage interest as a tax credit on their
federal income taxes. To be eligible for the
Program in non-targeted census tracts, a
household must be a first time home buyer, buy a
home in Chula vista, and earn less than 115% of
the County Median Income. (A targeted census
tract is one where 70% or more the households
earn 80% or less of the county Median Income.)
If someone buys in a targeted census tract, they
do not have to be a first time home buyer, and
they can earn up to 140% of the County Median
Income. In order to assure low income households
access to a MCC, the City set aside 10% of its
allocation for low income buyers (80% or less of
the County Median Income).
In conjunction with the MCC Program, the Agency
is working with mortgage lenders who offer the
Community Homebuyers Program. The Community
Homebuyers Program is an effective way to assist
people to qualify for a mortgage loan. The
Program increases debt to income ratios,
decreases the amount of the down payment to 5%,
and does not require reserve funds. In addition,
the Program requires applicants to attends a home
buyers seminar which focuses on the escrow
process, money management, and home maintenance.
This seminar provides the supportive services
many first time home buyers need. The Community
Homebuyers Program in conjunction with the MCC
Program provides many people, who otherwise might
not qualify for a mortgage loan, with the tools
necessary to become a homeowner.
The city/Agency has approximately 125 MCCs
available for FY 93.
Because the MCC Program provides Federal tax
incentives to home owners who need the additional
income to qualify for a loan, private lenders are
able to make conventional loans to these home
owners. As a result, Federal funds are
effectively leveraging private mortgage funds.
One Year Goal: continue to administer the MCC
Program and provide homeownership opportunities
to 21 low, moderate, and middle income
households. The City has 125 MCCs available for
FY 93, but expects to issue 21 in FY 93.
) 7/J'/
Support of Applications: The City would certify
as consistent with the City's CRAS any
application for federal funding from a non-profit
or the San Diego County Housing Authority as long
as the application further enhanced the city's
existing program for homeownership.
service Deliverv and Manaaement: City/Agency
staff is responsible for administering the MCC
Program. However, the Program is dependent upon
the participation of lenders. To date, lenders
have been quite willing to participate in the
Program.
8. priority: continue to fund supportive services
for residents with special needs with Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds.
Tvpe of Households to be Assisted: The social
services providers which receive CDBG funds are
required to provide services to very low and low
income residents of the city.
proarams and Resources: Many non-profit social
services providers struggle to perform their
services for the residents of Chula vista because
of budget constraints. Since the City believes
the supportive services these non-profits provide
are important to residents with special needs,
the City funds these non-profits to ensure that
their services will continue to meet the needs
of the residents of the city.
The City will grant up to 15% of its CDBG
allocation and housing program funds in FY 93 to
local non-profits who provide supportive
services.
CDBG funds are federal funds which these non-
profits use to leverage private donations.
One Year Goal: continue to fund supportive
services for residents with special needs by
allocating up to 15% of the City's CDBG funds for
these supportive services. The services provided
with CDBG funds are elaborated on in the
Community Profile section of the CRAS.
Support of Applications: If any of the agencies
funded with CDBG funds applied for additional
federal funds for providing their services, the
City would support and certify the application as
consistent with the CRAS as long as the funds
received benefited Chula vista residents.
17-4.'1t)
service Deliverv and Manaqement: The city
council allocates funds to varies social service
providers. However, once funds are allocated, it
is the providers responsibility to deliver their
services to Chula vista residents. The city does
monitor these providers to ensure that CDBG funds
are utilized properly.
9. priority: Transitional housing.
Tvee of Households to be Assisted:
transitional housing is developed,
population will be very-low income
children who have recently resided
emergency shelters.
If
the target
families with
in
Proqram: In the past, the City has encouraged
the South Bay Directors Council to apply for
Stewart McKinney funds and other funding sources
which are available for the development of a
transitional shelter.
In March, a local non-profit housing corporation,
South Bay community Services, applied for
McKinney funds and was denied. In support of
that application, the Agency appropriated
$250,000. South Bay Community Services intends
to apply for McKinney funds in the next funding
cycle, and the funds originally committed to this
project are still available for FY 93.
One Year Goal: continue to support the
development of a transitional housing project by
providing technical and financial assistance to
South Bay Community Services.
Service Deliverv and Manaqement: The City will
continue to support the efforts of South Bay
Community Services to provide transitional
housing. However, if this housing is
constructed, it will be the responsibility of
South Bay Community Services to deliver services
and manage the facility.
C. Strategy Implementation Specifically for the
Homeless
1. Actions to Address emergency shelter and
transitional housing needs of homeless
individuals and homeless families
In addition to the development of a transitional
housing shelter, the City/Agency will
J?/Jy!
(
,
)
en
-0:
:x:
Q.
>-
c lil'
E ~
! Ci)
~c b
&~=
e~.g ~
ll~<D "E.Q
~ oU
.:;) :::.-
i~~~
ga~ .5~
~E ~a;
0" 0 8
:r:O: I...J
o~ CD...
E5 .~S
CD E c: CI)
SE me
~8 ~.Q
0.._ '-0
CD 0 0.2
~~ gu;
::$00..5
x
x
N
@.
o
'"
o
o
'"
6
::>
:r
E
-"
M
en
en
......
I
'"
en
en
......
x
x
i:~
-"~~
lD~>.-.
~w~~_
~~_2l!;.
c,,~l1\
::Jo--
h.3
......
'"
co
co
~
'"
c
C
~
'"
e
"
go
-
,
"
i
-"
e
&
a:
Z
.9
i
i
"
w
~
5
~
II
~
;;
~
::>
i
c
c
m
'"
'"
15
..
'"
..
Q.
'" g~~
...., ~ ~n
Vl c:~~
.~
:> i5(ij
'" -"lle
~ ~,,>--
:::l .!!~~-
a: ~ ~o(
..c: -~- -
u c ~ 0 OJ
~~;- co ""
4- < 1;~ r-
0
<( c:
l'll ...., . .E
(') a: .~ E C E
u OJ ~ .. m '" D>
~ e '" CJ . ~ c c
- E r- iD E .,. '" e
"" .. II: " "'"
..c c: .!! c .. 0 " .. iD
g ii w '" 8> :r 0 <.> iD "
~ Q) e ...... . e '51 . " c
jj l! " ." > ... iii
E w. ". ll''' 0:: ::! " "
i " e " :58 i>: "'"
<ll OlE ii!';j :r"lO E.!!:! i N '" 0 N
(f) - - ~ J!i :r 1<1 "
CI) , 'Sf w '" 8a. 0,," g' w w w w .,. :L it 0
<( , .. E :::;; <D '" :BE ~E E :::;; Q. 0.. Q. '" ii E" Q; g ..
Q) ;; " 0 0 UJ oe its ,,1\ <3 0 0 0 0 UJ ..ii ~ 0( :c
J: > ~ ;; 0_ :r <.> w 00.. UJu. :r :r :r :r w t=- o..:r UJ UJ UJ :2>
u.o..
(J .E e d .-' N ... ~ .0 iii
" .c iii ~
z u. .-' N ..; ... ..; .0 '" .,; .,;
I ?"/9' je:2,
5 ~ III
1~t5~2 >< >< >< ><
~ 8: 1;~ 0
0>
.. 0
0
"t
i~(a 0
::>
~~ ~ co co I
~p--
a:W~l::- '" '" Cl E
~ 0:': ..... en .-< N N '" <0- j;;
c~u::~- '" ..... Cl <0- \D
ur \D en en <0- <0- N
.-< .-< '"
.-<
~ 0>
~ e
" "
go ~
- 0:
~
u
i
~
~
g
a:
Z
9
i
u
8-
"
W N
~
~ <;
e '"
~ "
~ 0>
a: ..
<; "-
m
::>
i ... ...
e
e CV) CV)
.. CV) CV)
0:
...
Cl ... ...
Cl CV) CV)
.-< CV) CV)
"
... ...
<0- <0-
CV) CV)
g >:.~
cCi..E
~~~
ie-
;e~=
~,,>--
o::.!!~l::-
-g C~u:~~ '" CV) CV)
:::JCD_~
0" ; <0- '" <0- <0-
:> ~ 1;...J <0- CO CO
e:
;:
e:
0
0 0 I 0 "- ~
~ a: 0 "- ~ ..
"- U) 0 a: .. >- 0; .. "
e: ? 1l 0 '" 8'
:'" .a 0 " :::;; i;; ;;; S 0; .. e
.- 'D .. i;; ~ '" '" '" e ~ .., U >- ~
Q. "- e -C e_ e c " S 0 "C 0
!- " .. " 13 c Cii:ii " " w 0- u. U) -' 0- Ul
e " a: E "
~"i I => => => i;;0 0:: -~
,e: => J!! 0 " 5E 0 0 0:: ::!
,0> 0 ~=> ~ .. > 0 I"- :I: I €~ S~ S 0; S 0;
E Ul R-E a; i;; ]j ]j uo2 .2 .2 80. 0 .. i;; i;; i;; 08- 0 '0 {!. ~
'" =" I-- I :<iE I-- I-- 0;
l- Ee !Ii ~ e e ~~ :;; :;; ~
:~ c 88 " " => => 02 I E ~ ~ " Jl8 ~ 01 ..; ..;-
'6 U) II: a: "- "- 0"- :J u. 0 .., .., .., ..,
:~ c ,...: <ri gj d .;
~ iii ,...: ~ ~ d N N M -.i .; <ri 0
'- LL N '" '" N '" '" '" '" '" ..,
I 7-4 '13
" en
<I:
:r:
2.
,.,
" g>
e rn
E ~
D. (jj
0
Oc ~
:>"
e E
Co. :Coo
" 0 me:
.zCB .,,0
:5~ .E~
"" -."
"c <1:",
"" oot:
010> e:::J
cc ._,
'ii"i= "'-
"c ::Jm
o.!l1 i8
;J;a.
o~ Q)--'
_c >~
.- 0
"" "'-
"E e:",
EE Q)e:
1:0 i5.Q
"()
D._ ~U
eo 0.2
~l'l E_
U!lE 0'"
::JO O.!:
m
M
CD
:c
{:
en
c(
:I:
o
Ul
c:
o
Ul
'-0)
CDc:
Do .-
oll~
UlO
-o:I:
O~
~:!::
CD::
Ul-o
~CD
0_
:I:Ul
'-"0
OUl
-c(
.!!CD
lU,e
00
CJ_
"' N ...... M
_Ncn ...... ...... N
ScCij- 0 0
008z ...... ......
...--.:;; -
g
M '"
0>
0>
...... ]i~- N ...... M
I ...... ...... N
N 08~ 0 C>
0> I- - ...... ......
;: 0>
IL ......
0
m(ijUl
c c;!al::;-
0 E ,,-
z j?U>Z
~ g
E N
0 ., ...... N
0 IL ......
"
c;
E 0
0 "iij
;J; "
" 5:
:2:
"
c
0
lD
_c
.l!l~_
o "'"
I-E
0
;J;
~ 0
" lD
>. ;:;-
" 0;E.
D
0 " =
lD E <
c 0
~ I c
" I€~-
E -"Cl
F ;0=-
.c
1l; ()
0
o>lD
-Ei-
-",g~
XE
Wo
I
0 ..
]llD- ...... ......
ocW ...... ......
I- ,,- 0 C>
a: ...... ......
0
-"
"0
.cc_
531e.
="
<1'
0 a;-
S "J! 15 ..
0> E- M M
c .lil-m~2.
" to to
a: a:O ...... ......
e
=al:;< ..
LO
~]!g~ '" LO
"'''''' '" '"
a:_ '"
15.g
~~o
lD:!~< .. M
" - M 0
W:5 I~ '"
'" _I
+>
Vl
,~
:>
'"
~ al
'" ". . e. "
,,~ E~
..c: :2D. E~ ElL 8~ E
" u is'' OIL o~ 8e;;-
0 a: 15 o~ ,,- ,lfa
1l ..... ,,- "0 .5+
0 H -0 l~ ;o~ .'"
i > !~ .3 0+
~ .3 ....1-
"
, +> -"'c ~j;! ~j;! ~2 ;;;$
'l5 .~ gj- .c_ -c
U "0 e- Oe {!.S
" <~ >!:!.
E >-
.. ..: ... ..; ..;
Z
,;
:0
~
Ci
0-
.,
""
J'i
~
"
E
8
E
11
o
"
'6'
.,
o
::J
I
c
o
J
o
a! N
+> ~
'" ~
.~ 0
+> C>
e: 0
0
a! ""
l- e
a! ::J
..... ;J;
..... E
.~
-0 .2
..c:
U
.~
..c:
3
Vl
-0
I-
0
U
a!
l-
e:
.~
'"
+>
C
.~
'"
E
+>
0
C
0
-0
a!
3:
~
LL
::;:
.....
0
""
......
M
3
0
~ Vl
a! -0
.o~
0
Vl ..c:
.~ a!
Vl
a!::J
E 0
o..c:
U
C a!
.~ E
0
a!U
VlC
o.~
..c:
33
0
Vl~
-0
~ >,
01-
..c: a!
a!>
Vl
"'.....
00
..c:
Vl
a! a!
-0 .~
::JI-
~ 0
U C">
Ca!
.~ +>
'"
>,u
'"
EO
3
Vl +>
a!
I- a!
::J..c:
C">+>
.~
..... e:
a!
a! a!
Vl 3
a!+>
..c:a!
...... .0
..
/ '}/J-J'-I
financially support with CDBG funds varies
organizations which provide services to the
homeless in FY 93. These organizations and
their services are listed below:
a. Lutheran Social services - Project Hand
Emergency Assistance Center works with the
Interfaith Shelter Network to operate a
shelter program in the South Bay. Thirteen
churches vOluntarily provide shelter space
and meals for twenty weeks a year;
b. METRO Good Neighbor Center - The Center
provides emergency assistance services such
as food, clothing, shelter, and case
management to needy families; and,
c. Lutheran social services and the METRO Good
Neighbor Center administer the South Bay
Voucher Program. The Program provides
homeless families and single adults with
vouchers for a two week stay in selected
motels.
2. Efforts to prevent low income individuals and
families with children from becoming homeless
Like all cities, Chula vista has residents which
are "at-risk" of losing their homes if the rent
becomes too expensive. Chula vista's largest
at-risk population resides in the City's 33
mobile home parks. In an effort to prevent
these households from becoming homeless, the
City will continue to enforce the City's
Mobilehome Rent Review Ordinance.
3. Efforts to assist homeless persons (including
persons with special needs who require services
to achieve and maintain independent living) make
the transition to permanent housing and
independent living
As previously stated, the City/Agency is
attempting to assist a non-profit corporation to
develop a transitional housing project. If this
non-profit is awarded McKinney funds in the next
funding cycle, this transitional shelter should
be operating before the end of the federal
fiscal year.
In addition, the City supports, with CDBG funds,
the Project Hand Emergency Assistance Center
which employs a full-time caseworker to assist
clients in finding the resources they need to
/7~"lf
become self-sufficient.
D. strategy Implementation Specifically for Non-
Homeless Persons with special Needs
1. In order to address the needs of non-
homeless persons with special needs in FY
93, the city is funding various agencies
which provide services to the following:
a. Elderly
- Woodlawn Park Community Center
senior Adult Services
Chula vista Human Services Center
South County Council on Aging
Norman Park Senior Center
b. Frail Elderly
- Adult Protective services
- senior Adult Services
- Chula vista Human Services Center
- Norman Park Senior Center
c. Persons with Mental Disabilities
- Kinesis South
d. Persons with Physical Disabilities
- Community Service Center for the
Disabled
e. Persons with Developmental Disabilities
- Chula vista Park's and Recreation
Department assists with the Special
Olympics
f. Persons with Alcohol or Other Drug
Addictions
- Chula vista Human Services Council
- South Bay Alcohol and Drug Coalition
g. Persons Diagnosed with AIDS and Related
Diseases
- AIDS Foundation of San Diego
- Community Service Center for the
Disabled
E. Geographic Distribution
The City and the Agency does not geographically
target any housing programs. All programs can be
implemented or utilized in any area of the City.
J '74'lt
F. Other Actions
1. FY 93 Actions to Remove or Ameliorate Public
Policies which have a Negative Impact upon the
Availability of Affordable Housing
As detailed in the CRAS Five Year strategy,
Chula vista does not have any public policies
which have a significant negative impact upon
the availability of affordable housing in the
city. Listed in the CRAS Five Year strategy are
procedures which mitigate some public policies
in order to promote the development of
affordable housing. These procedures have not
been altered for FY 93, and they are listed
below:
a. The City has and will continue to use "fast
track" processing to expedite projects, such
as those providing affordable housing in
order to provide developers with a
substantial savings of time in achieving
complete project approval and the start of
construction; and,
b. In order to mitigate the financial effects
of City fees, the City/Agency will continue
to consider subsidizing or reducing certain
fees for affordable housing projects where
such subsidies or reductions are necessary
to create the required project economics.
2. FY 93 Actions to Remove or Ameliorate
Institutional Barriers which have a Negative
Impact upon the Availability of Affordable
Housing
In the CRAS Five Year strategy, the
institutional barriers to affordable housing
were described as well as the steps proposed to
remove or ameliorate these barriers. The City
will continue to implement those steps in FY 93.
Those steps include:
a. Working with lenders to improve their
lending practices;
b. Developing a Community Reinvestment Act Plan
which contains a needs assessment and a
strategy to meet those needs outlined in the
needs assessment;
/?AI?
c. Working with for-profit developers in order
to enlist their support of the Affordable
Housing Program;
d. Working with non-profit developers to
develop capacity; and,
e. Working with commercial lending
institutions, non-profit housing developers,
and supportive service providers, and the
County of San Diego to continue existing
partnerships and find new methods of
producing affordable housing.
3. Public Housing Improvements
The San Diego County Housing Authority owns and
manages the 105 public housing units in Chula
vista. These units are less than ten
years old and are in excellent condition.
Therefore, the County does not intend to make
any improvements to these properties other than
normal maintenance and repairs.
4. Public Housing Resident Initiatives
As previously stated, the San Diego County
Housing Authority owns and operates all of the
public housing units in the City. The County
Housing Authority is currently forming a Public
Housing Resident Association in order to
increase resident awareness and involvement in
the enhancement of their housing environment and
operations.
~
)7,f'/~
No~ice of Exemption
Appendix I
To: [l
Office of Planning and Rcs=h
1400 Tenth Street. Room 121
Sacramento. CA 95814
From: (public Agency) Citv of Chula Vista
?7F. FOllrth Avenlle
~
County Clerk
County of San Di ego
PO Box 1750
San Diego, CA 92112-4147
Chula Vista. CA
(Address)
91910
Project TItle: City of Chill" Vi<;t" Comprehensive Housinq Affordability Strategy Fed.FY 1993
Project Location - Specific: ri ty_wi np
Project Location - City: Chu 1 a Vis ta
Project Location. County: San Di ego
Description of Project: The update of the Comprehensive Housinq Affordabil ity Strategy
identifies programs which provide financial assistance for the development and/or
acquisition of housing. Actual housing construction is not proposed as part of
this strateqy.
Name of Public Agency Approving Project: Citv of Chula Vista
Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out Project: Ci ty of Chill a Vis ta
Exempt Status: (chuk OM)
o Ministcrial (Sec. 2108O(b)(l); 15268);
o Declared Emergency (See. 2108O(b)(3); 15269(a));
o Emergency Proj&t (Sec. 21080(b)(4); 15269(b)(c));
o Calegorical Exemption. Stale type and section number.
00 Statutory Exemptions. StaleCodc number. 15267; Financial Assistance to Low or Moderate Income.
Reasons why project Is exempt: The project (plan) does provi de for the fi nanci a 1 ass i stance
for thp npvelopment and/or acquisition of residential housing, as stated by Statutory
Exemption 15267.
Lead Agency
Contact Person: A 1 i sa Duffy Rogers
Area Codc[fcIephonelExtcnsion: (619) 691-5047
If IiIed by applicant:
l. Auach certified document of exemption finding.
2. Has a notice of exemption becn filed by the public agency approving thc project? 0 Yes
Signature: ~~ ~dD~
ONo
Dale: Dec. 9. 1992 Title: Environmental Facilitator
(XJ Signed by Lead Agency
o Signed by Applicant
Dale received for filing at OPR:
///7'/;
Revised October 1989
COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. } U 9 :3 "
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF THE
COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY STRATEGY
(CHAS) ANNUAL PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 1993 TO THE
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
IF NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGES RESULT FROM THE PUBLIC
COMMENT PERIOD
The city Council of the city of Chula vista does hereby
resolve the following:
WHEREAS, the National Affordable Housing Act of 1990
requires the development of a Comprehensive Housing
Affordability Strategy (CHAS) by jurisdictions requesting
funding from the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development. The Act also requires that the CHAS be updated
annually.
WHEREAS, the city Council adopted the CHAS and
authorized its submittal to the U. S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development on April 21, 1992.
WHEREAS, the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development approved the City'S CHAS on June 19, 1992.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER that the City Council of
the City of Chula vista does hereby authorize the submittal
of the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Str tegy Annual
Plan for Fiscal Year 1993 to the Department f ousing and
Urban Development.
Presented by
L~
Chris Salomone
Community Development Director
i
Bruce Boogaard
City Attorney
17/J- /
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item / rr
Meeting Date 12/15/92
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: GPA-92-01 and PCZ-92-B; Proposal to amend the
Montgomery Specific Plan/Chula Vista General Plan and rezone
approximately 1/3 acre located in southwesterly quadrant of West Main
Street and Del Monte Avenue, from "Low/Medium Density Residential"
and R-I-6-P to "Research and Limited Industrial" and I-L-P - Margarita
Romero, applicant
[j
Resolution / J. If 3 7 Approving
General Plan Amendment GP A-92-0l
Montgomery Specific Plan/
/I. Ordinance e:<.5 J r Adopting PCZ-92-B
~/
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning /I/fL
REVIEWED BY: City Manager@
(4/Sths Vote: Yes_No X)
This item involves consideration of a proposal to amend the Montgomery Specific Plan/General
Plan by the redesignation of a certain 1/3 acre parcel of land, located in the southwesterly
quadrant of West Main Street and Del Monte Avenue, from "Low/Medium Density Residential"
and R-I-6-P to "Research and Limited Industrial" I-L-P (Margarita Romero - applicant).
The proposed Montgomery Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment and rezoning would enable
the applicant to submit project plans for the development of the site. No specific proposal has
been submitted by the applicant as of this date. The applicant is now requesting a plan
amendment to resolve the conflict between the existing industrial use of his property and its
residential designation on the Montgomery Specific Plan Diagram/Chula Vista General Plan.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the Negative Declaration IS-92-39,
prepared on June 1, 1992, is appropriate for the proposed project.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council:
1. Find that adoption of GPA-92-01 and rezone PCZ-92-B will have no significant
environmental impact and adopt the Negative Declaration IS-92-39 issued.
2. Adopt the Montgomery Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment GPA-92-01 and rezone
PCZ-92-B.
)7-)
Page 2, Item J r
Meeting Date 12/15/92
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
1. The Resource Conservation Commission at its meeting of November 9, 1992, voted on
a motion to recommend approval of Negative Declaration IS-92-39, Margarita Romero,
to include the following comment: "a Phase I Hazardous Waste Assessment be
reviewed." Motion failed 3-0-1; McNair abstained, noting that the abstention should not
be interpreted as lack of support, but that as a new member receiving her packet on the
day of the meeting, she was unable to adequately review the documents presented.
2. The Montgomery Planning Committee considered GPA-92-01 and rezone PCZ-92-B at
its public hearing of November 11, 1992. The Committee approved GPA-92-01 and
rezone PCZ-92-B by a 4-0 vote and recommended that it be adopted by the City Planning
Commission and City Council.
3. The City Planning Commission, at its meeting of November 12, 1992, by vote of 5-0,
recommended that the City Council adopt GPA-92-01lPCZ-92-B.
DISCUSSION:
I. The subject property consists of a parcel of land which is located in the southwesterly
quadrant of West Main Street and Del Monte Avenue.
2. Existing General Plan/Montgomery Specific Plan designations (please see Exhibit A).
North:
South:
East:
West:
Research & Limited Industrial
Low/Medium Density Residential
Low/Medium Density Residential
Research & Limited Industrial
3. Adjacent Zoning and Land Use (please see Exhibit B).
North:
South:
East:
West:
I-L"P
R-I-6-P
R-I-6-P
I-L-P
Industrial
Single-family dwellings
Single- family dwellings
Industrial
4. The subject site is presently a legal non-conforming use. The project area is presently
used for storage purposes.
This property is located at the southwesterly quadrant of Main Street and Del Monte
Avenue, and is not an integral part of the single-family area to the east. The adjacent
uses consist of an auto salvage/storage business at the southern boundary of the property
J ~/,;L
Page 3, Item I r
Meeting Date 12/15/92
and a single-family residential subdivision to the immediate east. To the north is an
auto sales establishment, while an industrial storage yard lies to the west. The site is not
suitable for single-family residential development.
5. The land to the east of the proposed project site is a single-family subdivision, better
known as Whitington's Subdivision No. 10. This area's single-family character is subject
to the impacts of adjacent non-residential uses, and should be protected through the
establishment of a Precise Development Plan as well as the application of Design Review
Procedures. Please see Attachment A for the proposed design review standards to be
applied to this property.
CONCLUSION
The proposed Montgomery Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment would not adversely affect
the single-family dwelling fabric, provided the recommendations, as outlined elsewhere in this
report, are part and parcel of the overall amendment and rezoning.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
(gpa92~Ol.al13)
J ~'J /18-4
ATTACHMENT A
PAGE A
PRECISE PLAN FINDINGS
Pursuant to Section 19.56.041 of the Zoning Ordinance, the following circumstance is evident
which allows application of the "P" Precise Plan modifying district to this site.
The property or area to which the P modifying district is applied is an area adjacent and
contiguous to a zone allowing different land uses, and the development of a precise plan will
allow the area so designated to coexist between land usages which might otherwise prove
incompatible.
This circumstance applies to this property, due to the adjacent residentially designated and zoned
areas to the south and east of the project site.
J 8"<.5'~
ATIACHMENT A
PAGE B
"P" DISTRICT REGULATIONS FOR
PRECISE PLAN MODIFIER
In order to effectuate the implementation of the proposed rezoning (I-L-P) the following
constitute the district regulations and design standards and guidelines shall be adhered to by any
Precise Plan submitted to develop the property.
Design Standards and Guidelines:
. Building heights, placement and color of structures shall compliment existing neighboring
structures.
. Service entries and loading areas shall be shielded from public view and adjacent
residential areas by being placed towards the rear and non-public view sides of the
building.
. Entry into the property from Del Monte Avenue shall be located at the northerly end of
the parcel so as to minimize friction between residential and industrial traffic.
. Glare to surrounding residential areas shall be minimized through use of directional
lighting for illumination of parking and loading areas.
. A solid masonry minimum 6 ft. high wall shall be constructed along the interior and rear
property lines.
. Fencing design shall reflect the building architecture in materials and articulation.
. Signage review shall be integrated into the overall site and architectural design process
in order to coordinate signage design with the building architectural style, colors,
materials and landscaping.
. All roof-top mechanical equipment shall be screened or otherwise kept from public view.
Screening and shield elements shall be integrated within the overall building design.
. Service, utility, trash collection and parking lot areas shall be screened from view (public
streets, parking areas, pedestrian walks, etc.) by permanent walls and landscaping.
Screening walls and landscaping shall be integrated with respect to forms and materials
with the surrounding architecture and architecture of the main building.
. The area between the wall and the edge of the sidewalk shall be permanently landscaped.
Such landscaped area shall be provided with an automatic irrigation system and shall be
permanently maintained and kept free of debris.
/~/~
ATTACHMENT A
PAGE C
. The Zoning Administrator could require construction of a 6-foot high decorative masonry
wall across the entire frontage width of the parcel, if deemed necessary, for visual
screening and noise attenuation purposes. The use of buildings near the parcel frontage
may eliminate some of the need for front fencing.
Said wall should be constructed at a minimum of 20 feet behind the front property line.
. All mitigation measures identified in the Negative Declaration (IS-92-42) must be
complied with.
(gp.92-01.pc)
/Y~7
~~[~~' -V;;J!i~3:fi~':~>~'f1:~;'..\
..;S ~,,,,,~",\./~~~"'_,o)~,'Ji,,"-:'~;~~_\~-J>".t"
. d '"!iJ.[""':l;......J'4)i:'~':j);.;~ ..~ "" ,~-
"'<JJ1C'i:', 1:~1c;f:"
W
I
GENERAL PLAN DESfGNA TIONS
~~.
-
mmJ
fZ2l
F-;~~~
'#.:::.~~
LOW/MEDIUM RES. (3-8 dulse)
GPA-92-0 1
EXHIBIT A
MEDIUM DENSITY RES. (8-11 dulse)
RETAIL COMMERCIAL
RESEARCH/LIMITED INDUST.
PROPOSAL: CHANGE FROM LOW/MEDIUM
RESIDENTIAL DENSI.TY TO RESEARCH t
a LIMITED INDUSTRIAL '_
I I
Q .00'
/~:.r fr' f'EET
.PARKS & OP.EN SPACE
PUBLIC & QUASI PUBLIC
CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT-ADV. DIV. 5-1-112 C.Covarrublaa
> II AFIifT m~DIITIJIIIIIJ~111 ilmii ~H~
ct t
TREMONT STREET ;::~:~:~:}-~:::j
"-1 :ea~ I f-1 t i I I [[IJ]]]ll]
<i ,::- ~ '-~ OT AY
~H~"" e. I m 1- 5fl ~ ITIIIIIDIJI] ": ;~'~.;:~, ~~'~. ~~~:.I
MONTGOMERY '1 ..., ST~::I
0 I III c I liOIJJl9JIIIJlcmmJ]
z
'" II:
w II I - I ~ITIIIIIIJI]~BIJIJIIII]JJ]
II: ~ %: -
... ., ..... (Il
ZENITH STREET
I tJ!J I 111111 I lfTR
. -r III III I II 11II1
STREET
~~U J ,.....p~.I~j
ANCURZA @
- 7".s; '" a:
~ z c_
- I V" z
- C:~R. ~~ -
I -........ \- "- I' ~
ALVOCJ WAY
~
IlP ~ I
- - -f-
CITY OF I _ _~SA~L,A_ ~
- "" Ei'T'lT' - , ,----- .....-,
. ~- ---~
\ I ~--7~
I-- ;
PCZ-92-B
" EXISTING ZONING AND
LAND USE . DESIGNATIONS
~ I ..
3.-1'0 _ _ AGRICULTURAl. ZONE
Jl-1-5-P SINGLE FAMILY PRECISE PLAN (1<<*"500081)
R-1-+-P SINGLE FAMILY PRECISE PLAN (1<<*"8000.1)
R-2-P TWO FAMILY Pl'IECISE PLAN
UHP MOBLE HOME PARK
CCP CENTRAL COMM. PRECISE PLAN
L LIMITED INUSTRIAL
LP LIMITED IND. PRECISE PLAN
ftROPOSAL: CHANGE R-1-6-P
TO UMITEI) INDUSTRIAL
EXHIBIT B
t
.Ao'
,
o
FEET
J~~
CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT-ADV. DIV. 6-1-82 C.Covarrublaa
EXCERPT
, (,
#1';\
DR-41)--
MINUTES OP A SPECIAL MEETING OP THE
MONTGOMERY PLANNING COMMITTEE
4:00 P.M
Wednesday, November 11, 1992
Public Services Building
276 Fourth Avenue
Conference Rooms 2 & 3
ROLL CALL
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Chair Castro, Members Platt, McFarlin, Scheuer
MEMBERS ABSENT:
None
STAFF PRESENT:
Associate Planner Frank J. Herrera-A
Environmental Facilitator Diana Richardson
APPROVAL OP MINUTES
MSUC (Platt/Scheuer) (4-0) to approve the minutes of the October 7,
1992 meeting as presented.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
GPA-92-01 and PCZ-92-B: Prooosal to amend the Montaomerv Soecific
Plan/Chula vista General Plan and rezone aooroximatelv 1/3 acre
located in the southwesterly auadrant of W. Main Street and Del
Monte Avenue from "Low/Medium Densitv Residential" to "Research and
Limited Industrial" and I-L-P - Maraarita Romero. Aoolicant
Staff Presentation
Associate Planner Frank J. Herrera-A provided background on the
proposal, which consists of amending the General Plan and
Montgomery Specific Plan from low-medium density residential to
research and limited industrial, and rezoning the site from R-1-6-P
to I-L-P. Mr. Herrera-A indicated that the proposed Montgomery
Specific Plan/general plan amendment and rezoning would enable the
applicant to submit project plans for the development of the site,
although no specific proposal has been submitted at this time. He
added that an Initial Study, IS-92-39, had been conducted, and the
environmental review coordinator had found that there is no
significant environmental impacts to the project.
The Precise Plan modifier was discussed, and Mr. Herrera-A stated
that measures would be taken to protect the easterly residential
property. The subj ect site is presently a legal nonconforming use,
utilized for storage purposes. This property is located at the
southwesterly quadrant of Main Street and Del Monte Avenue, and is
not an integral part of the single-family fabric to the east of
said interface. Mr. Herrera-A stated that the site is not suitable
)~-/ /
Db
'lA'/'-.,
lrj'
MONTGOMERY PLANNING COMMITTEE
-2-
NOVEMBER 11. 1992
for single family residential development, and concluded that the
Montgomery Specific Plan/General Plan amendment and rezone would
not adversely affect the nearby single family dwelling fabric,
subject to the recommendations outlined in the staff report.
Committee Questions
Member Scheuer questioned mitigation measures remaJ.nJ.ng to be
addressed at the time of a development proposal. Mr. Herrera-A
responded that traffic circulation would need to be looked at, as
well as other measures depending upon the proposed project. Mr.
Scheuer asked if this would include drainage and infrastructure?
Mr. Herrera-A responded that this was correct.
Member Platt questioned the change to I-L-P; Mr. Herrera pointed
out that the area in question is adjacent to industrial uses,
adding that it was felt that the site would not support a
residential use. Additionally, it was felt that the uses on the
western portion of Del Monte Avenue may eventually be redeveloped
to industrial uses.
Member McFarlin questioned the thresholds standards policy,
including required fire flow for the future proposed industrial
buildings. Mr. Herrera-A responded that where there isn't the
ability to put in a fire hydrant due to the lack of water capacity
in the area, the buildings would be sprinklered. Environmental
Facilitator Diana Richardson added that typically, the Fire
Department has allowed sprinklered buildings to be used in place of
certain levels of water flow. Member McFarlin also questioned
threshold standards for police and parks, as well as drainage
improvements; these were addressed by staff.
Member Castro questioned the proposed structure size in the Initial
Study application, when there is no specific proposal. Mr.
Herrera-A responded that this was used hypothetically to determine
projected drainage and other uses. Mr. Castro asked for
clarification as to the current status of the property; Mr.
Herrera-A confirmed that the use is open storage.
Public Hearinq
Mrs. Margarita Romero and Mr. Roy Fierro both spoke in favor of the
project.
Committee Action
MSUC (Scheuer/McFarlin) (4-0) to accept negative declaration IS-92-
39.
MSUC (Scheuer/Platt) (4-0) to accept the GPA and rezone.
J 8/"'-;,;:z
-.
~/~
,
, MAIL TO:
.
City of Chull Yista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chub Vista, CAt2010
Attn: Doug Reid
t ~OTICE
OF PROPQ~EDNEGATIVE DECLARATION
(FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT)
rE 0 lo. 11 ffi'.
Ir Annell. J Ev.ns, Cler. J2.,
JUN 0 4 1992
BY (};to.....,1
fJE 'iV
.
......
IIOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Chu1a Yista fs considering a
reconrnendation that the project herein tdentified wf11 have 110 significant
envirollllltntal tllpact tn compliance with Section 15070 of State CEQA
tuidelfnes. A copy of the Negative Declaration (finding of 110 significant
tllpact) Ind the Initill Study, which supports the proposed findings,_ are on
file tn the Chula Vista Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chul. Vista,
CA 92010. These documents Ire Ivailable for public review bEtwien the ~ours
of 8:00 1.11. Ind 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.
Anyone wiShing to comment on the proposed Negative Declaration should provide
their written cOlllTlents to the Chula Vista Planning Department, 276 Fourth
Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010.
This proposed finding does not constitute approval or denial of the project
itself; it~ determines ~the project could have significant environmental
tmpact. I'i'OJtcts whi ch coul d have signi ficant impact must have an
. Environmental Impact Report prepared to evaluate those possible tmpacts tn
compliance with Section 15064 of State CEQA Guidelines.
If you wish to challenge the City's Iction 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 Marvann Miller It (619) 691-5101.
This notice is required to be filed with the County Clerk's office for a
period of not less than thirty ,(3D) days.
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUIlBER: 629-060-08
PROJECT LOCATION:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
126 Del Monte Avenue
General Plan Amendment and Rezone to allow for a
contractor's storage
Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency
DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY:
IHITIAL STUDY UO. 15-92-39
DATE: June 2, 1992
Y''^-~
.EI/ 7 (Rev. 1/90)
WPC 0006Y
/15> !J
~LBD I. 'fD OnICZ OJ' TD OOUJin Ol&Rlt.
l!l..DmGOOOu.u O. 0 1992
~Jrn . 0 ~ I992Il..KOV~D JUl 0 6 I
l\Wl'tTRlfIlD TO .GneT Oli '11'1 lerv
____ (1M. ,__ _ . .
- 1-
negative declaration
....
A. Proiect Settina
The project area is an undeveloped parcel covering 1/3 acre (14,500
square feet). The site is level and is sparsely vegetated with weeds,
grasses, .and two palm trees. There are no sensitive plant' or animal
resources on the site. The only existing structure is a wooden storage
shack located on the parcel's southeast corner. The project area is used
for storage purposes, consistent with adjacent parcels to the north and
west. South of the site is an auto salvage business, and to the east is
a single-family residential subdivision. The site was previously used
for a roofing contractor's yard.
B. Proiect Descriotion
The proposed project is a request for an amendment to the General Plan
designation from the existing Low-Medium Residential to Research and
Limited Manufacturing, an amendment to the Land Use Element of the
Montgomery Specific Plan from Single Family Residential to Industrial,
and a rezoning from Single-Family Residential to Limited Industrial with
a Precise Plan modifier.
The amendments and the rezoning are to allow for the possible future'
development of an industrial project consisting of such uses as a storage
building and office. Such a land use could have potentially significant
impacts such as traffic, noise, glare, etc. In addition, due to the
possibility of toxins present in the soil from the site's previous use as
a contractor's roofing yard, a Phase I Hazardous Waste Assessment must be
conducted prior to any future development of the site. Further
environmental review will be required before construction takes place.
Development of the parcel will also be subject to precise plan review.
C. Comoatibilitv with Zonina and Plans
This project involves an amendment to the General Plan and the land Use
Element of the Montgomery Specific Plan to allow for the future
development of an industrial warehouse. The project would also require
rezoning of the site from Single-Family Residential to Limited Industrial
with a Precise Plan modifier. These changes in land use designation and
zoning would not be inconsistent with the surrounding industrial uses. "'"
Precise Plan review will ensure project is compatible with the
single-family use to the east of the site. ~,~
~~
/91') Y ~:II~ _~_
city of chula mta planning department Cl1Y OF
envlronmenta' review Mellon OiULA VISTA
PROJECT NAME: Del Monte Avenue Rezone and General Plan Amendment
PROJECT LOCATION: The site is located at 126 Del. Monte Avenue, 200 feet
south of its intersection with Main Street
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 629-060-08
PROJECT APPLICANT: Margarita Romero
CASE NO: IS.92-39
DATE: June I, 1992
.......
-2-
.' D.
Comoliance with the Threshold/Standards Policv
1. Fi re/EMS
The Threshold/Standards Pol icy requires that fire and medical units
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 project is in compliance with this Threshold Policy. However,
the Fire Department has indicated that the 4 inch water main on Del
Monte Avenue will not provide the required fire flow for the future
proposed industrial buildings. To avoid the cost of upgrading the
water main, the applicant must incorporate a fully automated
sprinkler system at such time when building plans are submitted.
Implementation of this mitigation measure will also avoid the need
to pave the yard area and provide a turnaround on the property for
fire apparatus.
Police
2.
.
The Threshold/Standards Policy requires that police units must
respond to Priority 1 call s within 7 miniatures or less and
maintain an average response time to all Priority call of 4.5
minutes or less. Police units must respond to Priority 2 calls
within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time to
all Priority 2 calls of 7 minutes or less. The Police Department is
currently maintaining an acceptable level of service based on the
threshold standard, and the proposed project will not increase the
need for police protection. Therefore, the project is considered to
be compatible with this Threshold Policy.
Traffic
3.
The Threshold/Standards Policy requires that all intersections must
operate at a Level of Service (LOS) "C" or better, with the
exception that Level of Service (LOS) "D" may occur during the peak
two hours of the day at signalized intersections. The intersection
of Main Street and Del Monte Avenue is currently operating at LOS
"B". The project will generate an estimated 12 Average Dally Trips
(ADT). The project will not affect the LOS, and is considered to be
compatible with this Threshold Policy.
4. Parks/Recreation
5.
The Threshold/Standards Policy for
acres/l,OOO population. The proposed
net population increase, and will
Threshold/Standards Policy.
Drainage
The Threshold/Standards Policy requires that storm water flows and
volumes shall not exceed City Engineer Standards. Storm runoff from
Parks and Recreation is 3
project will not result in a
therefore comply with the
.
/'t>l.5'
-3-
-3-
the project site will flow southerly along Del Monte Avenue to an
unimproved drainage channel. The drainage facil ities are adequate
to serve the project, and are therefore in compliance with the
policy.
6. Sewer
"'"'\
The Threshold/Standards Policy requires that sewage flows and
volumes shall not exceed City Engineering Standards. Existing sewer
lines are adequate to serve the project. The project is considered
to be compatible with this Policy. The State Water Resources
Control Board has specific regulations regarding the discharge of
pollutants from commercial and industrial facilities. The applicant
must file a Notice of Intent to comply with the National P.ollutant
Discharge Elimination System (N.P.D.E.S.) General Permit regulations.
7. Water
The Threshold/Standards Policy requires that adequate storage,
treatment, and transmission facilities are constructed concurrently
with planned growth and that water quality standards are not
jeopardized during growth and construction. The proposed project
will have no effect on water availability or quality, and is
considered to be compatible with this Threshold Policy.
E. Identification of Environmental Effects
An initial study conducted by the City of Chu1a Vista determined that the
proposed project will not have a significant environmental effect, and
the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report will not be required.
A Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with Section 15070
of the State CEQA Guidelines.
The following impacts have been determined to be less than significant.
A discussion of each of these less than significant impacts from the
proposed project follows.
1. lnill
Due to recent drought conditions, as a condition of project
approval, the app1 icant must agree to no net increase in water
consumption or participate in whatever water conservation or fee
off-set program the City of Chu1a Vista has in effect at the time of
building permit issuance.
2. Traffic Circulation
The proposed plan amendments and rezoning actions will not in and of
themselves affect the Level of Service or Average Daily Traffic. At
such time when a specifiC development project is proposed, the
project would be associated with a temporary increase in
construction vehicle traffic during the construction phase of the ~
project. However, these impacts will be short-term and temporary.
~
/ f{-- / ~ - 1./-
.
.
.
-4-
After project completion, Average Daily Traffic will increase from
22,900 to 22,912, and the level of service on Main Street will
remain at "8".
3.
In accordance with the revisions set forth by the City Engineering
Department, at the time construction is proposed, the applicant must
implement specific site improvements to compensate for the
incremental effect of development on public thoroughfare. These
revisions include: .
a. Construction of a curb, gutter, sidewalk and a driveway
approach (using asphaltic concrete pavement).
b. Installation of one street light.
c. Relocation of one utility pole.
d. Dedication for any future street widenings deemed necessary by
the City Engineering Department.
These measures will insure traffic impacts are mitigated to a
level of less than significant.
Geol oav/Soil s
The City Engineering Department requires that a complete
geotechnical report be issued. With compliance to specific site
preparation standards identified in the report, and standard
development codes requiring correction of adverse soils conditions
prior to the construction of buildings, no significant adverse
geological impacts will result.
!iQ.ill
The proposed GPA and rezoning would not in itself have an impact on
ambient noise levels. However, the proposed project would be
associated with potential noise impacts during the construction
phase of the project. Noise impacts would result from the use of
construction equipment which can range up to 70db(A) and above for
earth moving equipment. However, these impacts will be short-term
and will terminate upon completion of the project.
In the future, operation of the warehouse and any associated sales
must conform to the provisions of the City's Noise Control Ordinance
which establishes maximum allowable noise levels and hours of
operation. With conformance to these regulations, noise impacts
will be less than significant.
Licht and Glare
When constructed, the proposed industrial warehouse could involve
the installation of low power sodium vapor lights which will operate
from dusk to dawn. These lights should be of a type which could be
4.
5.
/g--/ ?
_ $'_
-5-
~
shielded from surrounding areas. Project lighting must be focused
downward towards the site. With compliance to these conditions,
light and glare impacts are deemed to be less than significant.
6. Risk of Uoset
The proposed project would not involve the use of explosives, other
than fuel used for construction equipment at the time development
takes place. The grading contractor must abide by all applicable
health and safety requirements for safe use of such equipment. The
previous use of this site as a roofing contractor's yard may
indicate the presence of hazardous Dr toxic material 1n the soil.
The risk of upset will be mitigated to a level of less than
significant through compliance to all conditions set forth in a
Phase I Environmental Assessment. See Human Health '7, below.
7. Human Health
Due to the possible presence of toxic or hazardous materials on the
site, before actual construction takes place in the future, the
appl i cant must submi t a soil s report and a Phase I Envi ronmental
Assessment to determine the existence Dr degree of soil
contami nat ion. Wi th compl iance to speci fi c si te preparation
standards ident ifi ed in the report, human health impacts will be
mitigated to a level of less than significant. .~
F. Mitiaation necessarv to avoid sianificant effects
The proposed project is not associated with any significant Dr
potentially significant environmental impacts. Implementation of the
aforement i oned condi t ions will be suffici ent to satisfy both the
Thresholds/Standards Pol icy and the approved standards for the City of
Chula Vista. No specific mitigation measures will be required for the
project.
G. Findinas of Insianificant Imoact
Based on the following findings, it is determined that the project
described above will not have a significant environmental impact and no
environmental impact report needs to be prepared.
1. The project has the potential to substantially degrade the quality
of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below
self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
conmunity, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important eXillllples of the
major periods of California history or prehistory.
The project will not have a significant adverse effect on the
quality of the natural environment, reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, or eliminate a plant Dr animal community. The
Initial Study indicates that there are no endangered species,
cultural resources, or sensitive biological resources on the project
site.
-
/8" -/?
_iP
.
.
.
-6-
2. The project has the potential to achieve short-term environmental
goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals.
The proposed General Plan Amendments and rezoning would not result
in any environmental effects which would adversely impact short- or
long-term environmental goals. Future development on the site will
be subject to further review to ensure compliance with long-term
goal s.
3. The project has possible effects which are individually li.ited but
cumulatively .considerable. As used in the subsection, .clllDulatively
considerable" ..ans 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. .
The development of the proposed site could have an incremental
effect on the surrounding area. However, this effect will be
mitigated by the specified road improvement measures and by the
dedi cat i on for future road expans i on, if necessary. Therefore, the
proposed project will not have any effects which are cumulatively
considerable.
The environmental effects of a project will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
4.
The proposed project will not resul tin substant ial adverse effects
on human beings directly or indirectly. The potential impacts from
hazardous or toxic waste will be mitigated to a level of
non-significance through compliance to the recommendations set forth
in the Phase I Environmental Assessment report which must be
prepared as a condition of project approval at the time when
construction is proposed. No other public health impacts were
identified in the Initial Study.
H. Consultation
1. Individuals and Oraanizations
City of Chula Vista: Roger Daoust, Engineering
Current Planning
Ken larsen, Director of Building and Housing
Carol Gove, Fire Marshal
Captain Keith Hawkins, Police Department
Martin Schmidt, Parks and Recreation Department
Richard A. Reynolds, Sweetwater Authority
Diana lilly, Planning
Chula Vista City School District: Kate Shurson
Sweetwater Union High School District: Tom Silva
Applicant's Agent:
Jerry Stafford
4155 C Street.
San Diego, CA 92102
IY~/I
- 1-
-7-
2. Documents
-
Chula Vista General Plan
Title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code
3. Initial Studv
This environmental determination is based on the attached Initial
Study, any comments received on the Initial Study and any COlllllents
received during the publ ic review period for the Negative
Declaration. Further information regarding the environmental review
of this project is available from the Chula Vista Planning
Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010.
11/j~~_:, ('_!e:! (i J It;.U...,,
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR
WPC 0303p
....,
~
/1:" ;2C
-~-
.
DISCUSSION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKlIST FORM
The following discussion is associated with the Initial Study Checklist form.
1. Earth
The future warehouse construction would involve the grading of 14,500
square feet, and the placing of 50 cubic yards of gravel fill. The
City Engineering Department requires that a geotechnical study be
performed on the site. With compliance to standard site preparation
regulations, earth and soil impacts will be less than significant.
2. Ai.!:
3.
.
4,5.
6.
.
Significant air qual ity impacts would not result from future warehouse
operations due to the small size and localized nature of the project.
Emissions would consist mainly of dust due to grading activities, which
would have to be suppressed by implementing standard dust control
methods, including watering the soil and street sweeping.
Water
The proposed project would not result in a significant change in water
quality or availability. The City Engineering Department has indicated
that existing surface runoff will adequately be contained through
comp1 iance with standard engineering standards, such as the criteria
set forth in the Subdivision Manual and the Grading Ordinance. In
addition, the applicant must comply with whatever City water
conservation or fee off-set program the City has in place at time of
building permit issuance to ensure water availability impacts are less
than significant. The site was previously developed and is in an area
where services and facilities currently are available. Water
avai labil ity will be verified through the Ca1 ifornia American Water
Company prior to building permit issuance.
Plant and Animal life
The site is currently disturbed and sparsely vegetated with native
weeds and grasses. No endangered plant or animal resources are present
on the site. Of the two palm trees on the site, the app 11 cant has
indicated that when the warehouse is constructed, one palm tree will
remain, and the other will be relocated. Thus, biological impacts will
be less than significant.
~
When a specific development project is approved, grading operations
will involve temporary noise impacts, however standard limits on
grading and construction activities will be imposed (grading allowed
weekdays 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 7:00 a.m. to
8:00 p.m. Saturday and Sunday). Noise resulting from day-to-day
operations must conform to City noise ordinance standards regarding
hours of operation and decibel levels to ensure impacts to nearby
residents are less than significant.
jJr/ d /
-1-
7.
Licht and Glare
Future construction of a warehouse could involve the installation of
Low Power Sodium vapor lighting which will operate from dusk to dawn
for security purposes. Lighting must be a type which could be shielded
from surrounding areas to ensure impacts to nearby residents are less
than significant. lighting must be directed downward at an angle of
less than 45 degrees.
S. Land Use
....
The proposed project would change the current zoning on the site from
Single-Family Residential to Industrial and change the General Plan
designation from Low-Medium Residential to Research and limited
Manufacturing. This designation is consistent with past use~ of the
site, and is compatible with surrounding industrial uses. With
compliance to all requirements set forth by the City Fire and Traffic
Departments regarding improvements and the provision of infrastructure,
land use impacts will be less than significant.
9. Natural Resources
There may be an incremental increase in the use of fossil fuels with
the future operation of the proposed industrial use, however, this
increase will be minor and is not considered a significant impact.
Risk of UDset
10.
......
The proposed project will not involve the use of explosives, other than
fuel used for construction equipment when building takes place. The
grading contractor must abide by all applicable health and safety
requirements for safe use of such equipment. The previous use of this
site as a roofing contractor's yard may indicate the presence of
hazardous or toxic material. A Phase I Environmental Assessment Report
is required to assess the nature of these substances. Compliance with
all requirements of this report will ensure the risk of upset is less
than significant. See #17, Human Health.
11,12. PODulation/Housinc
Although the area is currently zoned single-family residential, past
uses of the site have been industrial in nature. No residents
cu~rently live on the site, and housing ~tock will not be effected.
13. TransDortation/Circulation
The proposed GPA and rezone would not itself affect transportation or
circulation facilities. When a speCific project is approved,
construction vehicles could have a temporary, short tern impact on
traffic during the construction phase of the project.- However, these
impacts will terminate upon completion of construction. Average Daily
Traffic will increase from 22,900 to 22,912, and Level of Service on
Main Street will remain at "S" after project completion. The
Engineering Department requires that street improvements be constructed
to ensure transportation impacts are less than significant.
....
-2-
J? <;2:J-
_1&-
.
.
.
14.
Publ ic Services
..
Routing forms from City staff indicate that no public services would be
significantly impacted by this project.
IS.
Enerav
An increased demand on electricity would result from future industrial
operations, however, the increase would be slight and incremental, and
is not deemed to be significant.
16. Thresholds
The proposed project is in conformance with all City Threshold
Standards. Fire and street improvements will be required to ensure all
City Thresholds are met.
17. Human Health
Before actual construction takes place in the future, as a condition of
project approval, the applicant must submit a soils report and a Phase
1 Environmental Assessment to determine the existence or degree of soil
contamination due to previous on-site hazardous waste storage.
Compliance with all recommendations set forth in this report will
mitigate human health impacts to a level of less than significant.
Aesthetics
18.
The rezone and general plan amendment will not have an aesthetic
impact. New building construction will be required to conform with
design review guidelines to ensure aesthetic impacts to surrounding
residents are not significant.
19.
Recreations
The project site is an undeveloped lot currently used for storage
purposes. The proposed rezone, CPA, and industrial operations will not
effect any current recreational opportunities.
20. Cultural Resources
The site has been previously disturbed and is not expected to contain
significant cultural or historic artifacts.
WPC 0348p
_II,
-3-
J%/d"]
ADDEHDtJM TO IrEGATIVB DECLARATION
-
PROJECT NAME: Del Monte Avenue Rezone and General Plan Amendment
CASE #: IS 92-39
This addendum to the Neqative Declaration reviews the proposed
project's impacts to Elementary and Secondary Schools.
The proposed project would redesiqnate and rezone a 0.3 acre lot
from Sinqle-Family Residential Uses to Limited Industrial Uses.
The project would not qenerate any additional students, and thus
would have no impacts upon elementary and secondary schools in the
area.
~
-'"
) cz- ~.;2 t(
-/2-
y,>-:,;.L7
APPLICATION CANNOT BE ACCEPTED UNLESS SITE PLAN
IS fOLDED TO fIT INTO AN B-1/2 I 11 fOLDER
fOR OFFICE USE
.
INITIAL STUDY
City of Chula Vista
Application fOnl
Cue No.
Deposit
Receipt No.
Date Rec'd
Accepted by
Project No.
IS -CP'3'1
.00
A. llACKGROUND
1. PROJECT TITLE
2. PROJECT LOCATION (Street address or description)
126 Del Monte Ave. Chula Vista Ca. 92011
Assessors Book, Page' Parcel No. MB 43-53, APN 629-060-08
3. BRIEF PROJECT DESCRIPTION A) r...nprA 1 PlAn Ampndment b) Zone Change
c) See remainder of I.S. and Site Plan for more information.
.
4. Name of Applicant Maaarita Romero
Address
City Chula Vista State Ca.
5. Name of Preparer/Agent Jerry Stafford
Address
City C:~n ni "gn State r..
Relation to Applicant None
Phone _____
Zip 92011
Phone~
Zip Q?ln?
6. Indicate all permits or approvals and enclosures or documents
required by the Environmental Review Coordinator.
a. Permits or approvals required:
-X- General Plan Amendment 1'- Design Review Application __ Public Project
-X- Rezone/Prezone __ Tentative Subd. Map __ Annexation
__ Precise Plan __ Grading Permit __ Redevelopment Agency
__ Specific Plan __ Tentative Parcel Map __ O.P.A.
__ Condo Use Permit __ Site Plan' Arch.Review __ Redevelopment Agency
__ Variance __ Project Area Committee D.D.A.
__ Coastal Development Use Permit __ Other
Permit
b. Enclosures or docunents (as required by the Environlental Review
Coordinator).
__ Grading Plan Arch. Elevations
__ Parcel Map ::: Landscape Plans
__ Precise Plan __ Tentative Subd. Map
__ Specific Plan __ Improvement Plans
...__ Other Agency Permit __ Soils Report
or Approvals Required __ Hazardous Waste
Assessment
__ Hydrological Study
__ Biological Study
__ Archaeological Survey
Noise Assessment
::: Traffic I~act Report
..L- Other (Site Plan)
-/3~
WPC 9459P
-6-
I <t'/~~
B. PROPOSED PROJECT
1. land Area: sq. footage 14,500 or acruge 1/3
If land area to be dedicated, state acreage Ind purpose.
-
2. Complete this section if project is residential.
I. Type development: Single family Two family
Multi family Townhouse Condominium
b. Totll number of structures
c. Maximum height of structures
d. Number of Units: I bedroom 2 bedrooms
3 bedrooms 4 bedrooms Totll units
e. Gross density (OU/total Icres)
f. Net density (OU/total Icres minus any dedication)
g. Estimated project population
h. Estimated sale or rental price range
i. Square footage of structure
J. Percent of lot coverage by buildings or structures
k. Number of on-site parking spaces to be provided
1. Percent of site in road and paved surface
""'"
.
3. Complete this section if project is commercial or industrial or mi!td
Jill.
I. Type(s) of land use Industrial
b. Floor area 400 SF + 1200SF Height of structure(s) 1 storey (8')
c. Type of construction used in the structure
Concrete Block
d. Describe major Iccess points to the structures Ind the
orientation to Idjoining properties Ind streets
See Site Plan
e. Number of on-site plrking spaces provided two
f. Estillated number of .ployees per shift two . NUllber of
shifts 1 Total 2
g. Estillated number of custOGers (per day) and basis of esti.ate ~
There will be no visiting customers on a routine basis. contact by ph.
h. Estimated number of deliveries per day
4
-
';
/y~d..~
_,1/-
IIpe 11459P
-7-
.
. c.
.
i. Estimated range of service area and basis of estimate
~nl1nty U'irl,p
j. Type/extent of operations not in .nclosed buildings
StoraRe of construction materials and firewood in season.
k. Hours of operation 7:00 AM to 4:00 PM
1. Type of exterior lighting Dusk to Dawn LP Sodium VaDor
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
PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
1. If the project could result in the direct emission of any air
pollutants, (hydrocarbons, sulfur, dust, etc.) identify them.
Emissions would occur from an average of two trips a day by
DY tWO compa~y trUCKS ana tne occaslonal Vlsltor. lne entlre
~it~ uil1 hD ~'c~ncA A"~ 8~A~D~ u~th 'po~' 8r~elo1 ~~r
dust control.
2. Is any type of grading or excavation of the property anticipated ves
(If yes, complete the following:)
a. Excluding trenches to be backfilled, how .any cubic yards of
.arth wi 11 be excavated? None
b. How many cubic yards of fill will be placed? 50 CY of navel
c. How much area (sq. ft. or acres) will be graded? 14.500 SF
d.
What will be the
- Maxl.um depth of cut
Average depth of cut
Maximum depth of fill
Average depth of fill
2" for
1-1/2"
1-1/2"
1-1/2"
levelin2
"
"
"
WPC 9459P
-8-
/%>;2 7
'"
-/~'"
3. Will there be Iny noise generated from the proposed project site or
from points of Iccess which may illpact the surrounding or adjacent -...,
llnd uses? No
4.
Describe 111 energy consuming devices which Ire plrt of the proposed
project Ind the type of energy used (11r conditionin~, electrical
Ipplflnc.e, heating equipment, etc.) Electrical-220v ror room air
condltloner, alr compressor ana welaer.
GaS-KeSlaentlal type serVlce lor wall lurnace, not weter.
5.
Indicate the lmount of natural open spice thlt is plrt of the project
(sq. ft. or Icres) None
If the project will result in Iny U1plo.)'lllent opportunities describe
the nature Ind type of these jobs. None
6.
Will highly flammable or potentially
substances be' used or stored
site? No
8. How many estimated lutomobile trips, per day, will be generated by
the project? 5
7.
explosive materills or
within the project
9. Describe (if Iny) off-site improvements necessary to implement the
project, Ind their points of Iccess 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; Ind pedestrian Ind bicycle facilities.
None
D. DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SETTI~G
J. Ceo 1 oav
Has a geology study been conducted on the property? No
(If yes, please Ittach)
Has I Soils Report on the project site been aade? No
(If yes, please Ittlch)
2. Hvdroloav
Are Iny of the following features present on or Idjlcent to the
s1te? No (If yes, plelse explain in,detlil.)
a. Is there Iny surflce evidence of I shlllOw ground water
table? No
b. Are there Iny wltercourses or drai~age improvements on or
adjacent to the site? No
-
I~~ 02 ~
- /~-
WPC 9459P
-9-
.
.
.
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
e. Describe all drainage facilities to be. provided and their
location. None
3. Noise
a. Are there any noise sorces in the project vicinity which Ilay
illpact the project site? No
.c. IJllloav
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
No
(Please attach a copy).
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. Two 1-1"" dia. talm
trees to be left in place. See Slte Plan tor loca ion.
5. Past Use of the Land
a.
Are there any known historical or archeological resources
located on or near the project site? No
b.
No
Are there any known paleontological resources?
c.
Have there been any hazardous ..terials disposed of or stored on
or near the project sUe? No
d.
What was the land previously used for?
Contractors vard-(RoofinR Contractor)
"-
-11-
WPC !l4S9P
-10-
J8'~;27
6. Current Land Use
I. Describe 111 structures Ind llnd uses currently existing on the
project site. There is a 'lean-to'. 8 stef~fe ~~~~ ~~~ !
:mall house t~ iler .on th~ sii: :~~n: ;;;~ ~~";~d~~:~le
8urDlus materIals. The BIte __ ___ _u____t__ __ ____
~
b. Describe 111 structures Ind land uses currently existing on
Idjacent property.
Horth Used auto sales office & lot. residential dwelling
and a stora~e area for non oDeratin~ vehicles.
South ShOD structure for auto reDair
[1St Residential area.
West Tlre salvaRe and reDair area with lar~e ODen shed.
7. Social
I. Are there Iny residents on site? (If so, how .any?) None
b. Are there Iny current employment opportunities on site? (If so,
how many Ind what type?) None
8. Please provide Iny other information which .ay Isslst in the
evaluation of the proposed project.
The DroDosed use will be comDatible with current land use.
The low volume operations of the building contractor will be
effectively concealed by a 6' high block wall to be constr-
ucted along the entire perimeter of the property.
'-.
.......
WPC 9459P
;8";- 3D
./ J g ~
.]1.
,
E. tERTIFICATION
.
, .--,/1/' '=-:::>
4~;j~'; -
~~~ /;~d4: lId/.MJ"
Owner/owner fn escrow*
--
or
.
HEREBY AFFIRM, that' to the best of my beltef, the statements and informat ion
herein contained are in all respects true and correct and that all known
information concerning the prOject and its setting has been included in this
appltcation for an Initial Study of possible environmental fmpact and any
enclosures for attachments thereto.
DATE: 3-23-92
*Jf acting for a corporatfon, fnclude capacity and company name.
.
-1'1 -
WPC 94S9p
-12-
/8"" J /
CITY DATA
Case No. 92- ~9
F. plANNING DEPARTMENT
1. Current Zonin9 on site:
North
South
East
West
.
-.
'\
- - ,
- 1- -
/...
Does the project confonll to the current zoning? '""P""y...f r?'il-l"~t-c 0-
~!}V'-d? If'' z.t;,~u"'\;'
2. Ceneral Plan land use
designation ons1te: ~Hetl;I.II'\11 ~~ .~~
:~~~~ \" ~:~~~I~',7.' ~.; ,h..'l4
East .e,~u;:t~~H~~r""
West ..:-In < rd L.......I.,{ }-1r''''..f.....--I1.-...j
Is the proje~t compatible with the General Plan Land Use Diagram? \)~~~
\LL.i~)"'.:.JZ) c...- c..'1'/~\.I.1-rJ Vla.'V\..._ 4'Y'0"\.1' .....~...____'1.
.
Is the project area designated for conservation or open space or adjacent
to an area so des i gnated? tJ<"'
Is the project located adjacent to any scenic routes? JlJ~
(If yes, describe the design techniques being used to protect or enhance
the scenic quality of the route.)
-.
3. i~hools
If the proposed project is residential, please complete the following:
Students
Permanent Temporary Current Generated
[_clcilv CaDac1tv [nro'l~nt .from Pro1@ct
ichool
Elementary
Jr. High
Sr. High
4. Remarks:
~/A
,
D~:~~O~I~f'Plj~nni~g ~r: R~~~~s~ntaC~ )-
't: Ie .9L
Date
.....,
WPC 9459P
-13-
) 'jJ>3 d--
- ')-v ~
G. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
Case No. rS-'b-~
.
.
.
1. Dr.fnlcu~
a.
Is the project site within a flood plain? .Je>.
If so, state which FEMA Floodway Frequency Boundary
U/A.
.
b.
What is the location and description of existing on-site
drainage facilities? ~\JIZF''''''' f="<.,okl"tC> ~l_ M~ "'\oFJ,1UE.
c.
Are they adequate to serve the project? )f~..
If not, explain briefly._ fJ~.
.
d.
What is the location and description of existing off-site
drainage facilitiU? ~~~'& ~ .A.~G, 'bFEL- Un..1'r:
A~lJtJ~ ~r~IZ.J,.V '7T> U~/MJ>IU:J~D t::N~uUJ:'-.
.
e.
Are they adequate to serve the project? YI:O~..
If not, explain briefly. AlIA.
,
2. 1ranSDortatfon
WPC 9459P
a. What roads provide primary access to the project? MAuJ 9r"Pr.....-
b. What is the estimated number of one-way auto trips to be
generated by the project (per day)? I~~~
c.
What is the ADT and estimated
project completion?
Before
A.D. T. ,:J.:J. qoo
,
level of service before and after
After
~~.q,.:1..
.
L.O.S.
.. g "
118"
If the A.D. 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. YP;;.
-14-
- :}/-
J%'~ .3;]
YS-5:l.7
f.
Case No. J5..q.;z-:a
e. Are there any intersections at or near the point that wnl
result in an unacceptable level of Service (lOS)? ND.
If so, identify: location IJ /A .
Cumulative l.O.S. .
Is there any dedication required? .:fjE.S.
If so, please specify. 1)EI~ IwfDfJ""; "'''l!'oJVI: l!t........ 'N.~_J""L
~JtDfN~~. C.'J~I"""II%lT' ~ICA~/AA1 ,.. .~?J'.fto. '7t> ~&I!.'r Tl+1E.
'*'t.F-WI~TH flII~lIfIllfil.l6"'7'S W ~(Z> 'l:Ebk:AT10,,",.
rs there any street widening required? y~c.
If so, please specify. AI--.t~ ~A"""_ p.a(W.,../:J: "., '-',
f"l0lJn:: ~VEAlUE
.......
g.
h.
Are there any other street flllprovements required? y~s.
If so, please specify the general nature of the necessary
~::~tt/g~~~;~=~:~~~';;~~~J
~~/~A~ ~ E. Ln"'1l-'"rY 'R:>~ .
3. Soils
ao Are there any anticipated adverse geotechnical conditions on the
project site? fiN I4JOk/M
b. If yes, specify these conditions. ~.4
-..
c. Is a sons report necessJry? ~~
4. Land Form
a. What is the average natural slope of the site? ~~
b. What is the maximum natural Slope of the site? ~~
S. Noise
Are there any traffic-related noise levels flllpacting the site that
are significant enough to justify that a noise analysis be required
of the applicant? Aln.
6. Vast@ G@neration
How .uch solid and liquid (sewage) waste will be generated by the
proposed project per day?
/Jtol """"Ml . 'Iol5c)FFI~I~1l1" / . \
S01fd~/'tlF'o-""'QIJ. Liauid L/:l.a.f ~1I""~k..Y'""., !1ibU$~_
What is the location and size of existing sewer lfnes on or
downstream from the site? .8" lI'l!. 'P ,''' %>El.. MD"'rE. A\IE;Nu~ A~b ""'"
IA II V<<:::p '1)oIAlAl""~~U _ Ar AI-VOt:.4 ~~
Are they adequate to serve the proposed project? ~.
IIPC g4S9P
/ g-> J '/--
-J-~-
-15-
Y$-5"~7
Case No. .zs..q.2-31f
.
7. R@mlrks
Please identify and discuss any remaining pote~1al adverse il1pacts,
.itigatfon llleasures, or other issues. TEi.lAI./r A gtJl'-""IAJ~ '"".__~~)
'ilit -r:~W:':l'/z/~c?:!:.'-'-: ~,,:~~::,}~~ '"';.t:::::;~
WITU' N.~]).~..<'~ ~1::,l.1J:'.i..1 1A1'1::>l.H:"r-~AL. t:f::.LAlr ~':A.JJ'~rl,I"'JL/~.
City Ensi er or Representative
f(A/f('j.
Date
.
.
.
.
"PC 9459P
-16-
/'f -/:,/
/ <. (~"
// ,/
- .J.3-
.
PROJECT LOCATl
126 Del Monte Ave.
Chula Vista Ca 92102
II
PQwer Pole I
12 KV
. .\ I'" "\ \" j"~ '\\
xist, Pavement-
Z,
1".20'
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
,Map Book 43-53
APN 629-060-08
Lot 90 Whittington
Subdivision No. 10
OWNER:
Margarita Romero
144 Tina Dr,
Chula Vista Ca 92102
I PREPARED BY:
IJerry C. Stafford
'4155 C St.
San Diego Ca. 92102
No. Parking
Spaces required: 3
No. parking
Spaces Provided: 3
Exist.
Exist.
Zone:R-1-6-P
C.P: Low/Medium I
Density Res
"
100'
1
W~ PL
CONSTRUCT ZO'x40'
Cone. Block Sto-
rage Bldg. (800 s.!.)
I-Storey REMOVE ,",,'
Surplus
Lumber~ ~ " j
I ''''~
~l,palm
~ to remain
RELOCATE I' P~lm
REMOVE
Surplus
Tile
REMOVE Exist Ch. Link Fence
Construct 6' cone.
Block Wall Around
Entire Perimeter
"
/
,,/
,
-
~
V1
Constr. 3 Parking
Spaces-(lO'x20' )
CONSTRUCT ZO'x20'
Off. Bldg.(400 s.!.)
I-Storey
REMOVE:
Surplus
Tile
I
II
'~
REMOVE:
Lean-to
Storage Shack
Trailer
REPLACE Exist.
W/ZO' Of nt
Gate
ZO' Gate
IrO)
REMOVE
CONSTR.
E. PL
6' Chain Link Fence
6', block wall
EXIT/ENTRANCE
-.
." \\\ \\' ."
8"S
,
L
l., E L H 0 N T E
A V E.
4"W
l-l/Z"HP C
Is I T E P L A N~ (Proposed Project)
Curb, Gutter & Sidewalk
! %"" /' ~1k
..0__...__.______
..
.;2
.
.
.
H. FIRE DEPARTMENT
- 13 -
Case No. \S-'1~-3q
1. What is the distance to the nearest fire station and what is the Fire
Department's estimated reaction time? One and three-quarters of a mile.
Approximately 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? Yp<
3. Remarks
t.~'v~
f HW<f~ll
Flre ars a
4/22/92
Date
/8""" J 7
- J.~~
-13(a)-
Case No. 1'5-q~. 51
-.,
H-1. PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT
1. Are existing neighborhood and community parks near the project
adequate to serve the population increase resulting from this
project?
Neighborhood ~
Community parks ~
2. If not, are parkland dedications or other mitigation proposed
as part of the project adequate to serve the population increase?
Neighborhood ~
Community parks ~
3. Does this project exceed the Parks and Recreation Thresholds
established by City Council policies?
~
~f.~~~.
Parks and Recreation Director or
Representative
-,
Lf-. 'Zl s:t'-
Date
.
-
1~-3r
-~....
_ J.-lt ...
.
~.
I I
I . I
'1_=.- ~jr'r
's,.,
ISi7:1
. .
'h! .
Ihi'i
j',lJ-
" .U
'I!!;!
J.~~I.!
n-r"
uld
I!
"
II
.1-
o 'J
Ii
,:
.
.
. .:
II
11
.. 1-
Iii
!
~
~.~. ~J
\. >.. .l,
-1.
I
· "I
II
,.ii
1-1
#1 i-
f i
'J "'
I"i.
~E
-,-
tl.
.. .,:-
I I I I I
I I I I I
"I II's u r ~ '
I! - ill i 11- .I !
i1; I lOt: i ~Ij 11 1
I I 'l totl II "
i t, ~ ;il I ,'.1;; ._
.. 0;' J 'i~ ., ..1 ..! Ii
: Ii J tf i In . Iii !~
!. ..; j. . .;
.
;:
.
I
I
..
..
~
I
K
J. \1 ;'1 \.-.
: I I I I
I 51 I I I
- CliO! 1 'j
~- -I ' , Ii' i 'f " (;
, , _ lil) ~ Ii :.
C" I 1 II. PI,)
'-,' I 'It' t II ~ I
II . . ! - !, Ii I. -) 'j
~ 1 ' ! ! ! I i il! Iii, II ,t~
I II -Iii 11:: ... · .; ..
.: .. .. . .. II.: .
"
..
.
.:
) r--- JJ
I
I
-~/} -
, .
.
.-,
~I .1 ;'1 \1 II 1 \1 1 :.1
1 1 1 1 1 'I 1 ~I 1
I I I I I I I I I
I '.r" ra ~~I , I I .,
i Jh~ ~J tI " it
~ i IljJ II Ii, e i J I
" . f ,
r I.:: .. .
"' fili~ .1 .~! I i .. 1;1 ,
~Ii i If I Ii
, ~I' I! ....
a.. 'hlt- " ' II Ii .. .h
" -'I
i = -; ~ f 'i:,: ~ -I.
I: s al.il I .': J:ai If : J Ii .1 io;
-
I! . I i=i In rl 11 :.1
. ! ,dr .. !Ih II Ii-
I . i II!
.- . .. .- j . .
~.
.. .. ..: . 'I
5
.
1 'I )1 "I ':>1 "1 ..:.a
I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I
I t~!, I Uli )1 ... f' ra III
.. .
- i ..I ~!
i:u 11 u=
f , I! ~r
I ~ u. ,! I nh Ii
!I.:~ -
~ I , 1- d 'Ii I.j
Iii . .
.Ii Uti ,1 II: 1 r'~ , .
IIi Ii! ..
I'll. ~l ,Ii, , ,,11 ~, ~'i
~I ~'r .n
dd~ ... · J 'I t ~i' i .fP .~..
I! Ul~ I! ItllI I'~ lei lid'
~ I j i jlj -
ail.! nu ,I
... .. ,- ..
.- . . 1
.: " . E . . .
.. If
oi /'8"~!I tJ I - ,;-9-
I
.
--_._-----.~-
.
.
.
\, ~I
~I \, :'1 '..1 \1 ~I
, , I~
Ii ~.
:t -! i'
d IJ~
~ .~
.: ~ .. c" ~
~- i1 ~ t-
~.: .. ~
t= -.- i ; .
:~ !~ iE;~ j = ~i -I
i~ -o.~ ~',.rE j I~ '; oe
i~ ;~ R &r t ~ ~ IE
:: E~. i~~i r ~ j == ~! ~
c. ~. t E: - '; w _ W - w !
~-~o ~ . ~ ~- 1- g
---...
..-
'Iii! ri .A
I
I
I
I
,
-
i
I
I
..
.,;
::
~I
I ~
! ;
';
'i':i
.;; ;-...~
.. -1-" WI
i t. ~J'
lt~ -
- J-;:"~
... --".1
:I ~ ~..:- e
=: '! i-!'i
- . i ",,-'... t
· ~.. .. .!i....:
J: ~ tMl'U
.. ~ -.,..~...
i o! i: ihi
. r !- -
. . '-...=~
;.. e~ 1 !.iI_J~1
~ w.... i....
~ -; . c';J",,';
ie ;
j".; ii ri
.;
=
..'II
I
1&
~,
..
I~
..,
'i!
!""i
,u~
c
....
.!~~
~H
HI
..
.; ~
~I
J&
:L
ocr-
~ii
- ~I
.~..
..0
U!
.4
U.
-=1
:!i
- .
a~
MoO
,;.1
1 ._
:1-
._ 0
,-;.
.-;;
-.
j
,
~
..
lol
--
!~
:J
I.
!
E
!;
~
-1'.1'
=-~
aMI
J&
'f'i
1'--
iH
::i
,_ - r~ I' 'U
i_I' - I
- i!i. ~
_ i 11 i i..
i ~ r. 1 1"
i i:~ ~ II
j j= i) jl
t;1 I~ _!
If.. I.. ;: =:-
. .- i
_ 3:. =~ I
.....loot w- ...""
ii H s~ H
H.. ..
i
=
-
i
!
ii
.. - '=
..
i!l
I
..
.,;
! I
- -
I !
J ..
_ t
..
:: ~~r
a ..
M
f ~
... 4
:d
~I
1/
I
-
-
..I
,
11;1
)P~
1-
~I;I
.. .
.. r
Eap
!i t!
...I i
- -
- ..
- 0
ire:
.......""
lif.
,,;
>1 'l,
jr;J-lj I
':.1
\,
-I"i
f'
S
ii
U
!..
..
--
=;:;
a
=
,
,J
.;-~
j....!
i ~~
t-
.1
:!
!
.
~
o
:"1
:
.
.,
.. ~
..
-'I
1-
i~ t
!i1'"
c~
o.i
...
!
"
~
- ),'1.
.
\I
I
I
. >.
\. \
-
, JU~~i'iUII.t
1'lii!J t il-~~
I U~1I11J II · -I
Ji=!!I.l"lIfj
, S':i.i:jflj=..
I I~..'.' Ii
.J_~~_ ! =
! H,Hrtl.;lt
f ~. jlli~lil:f. .
I
I I I
i!iJI~!= 'II$IJ~=~: Iii
I !,.ft' 1-, i-
'il-~JI il!';II,~i iJ~
· I!~ Ji- ,,- J=
I s ~,_ . _ J !,I ~
Ji'II!I! ~ J~I~I:i! J!.i
I I 'lj": IJ Jlli' I~.~
If-I-:I' j :iit 'ji. ilj
'11_-ti-! ' ii!.1 E 'j~i
l.iIJiil! ISltl'IJ! IiI;
I
I
~
.
..
..
r:
I
".
.
--
"1 \1 \1 "-I \1 ". ..
I ~ I
I I I
i II' 0; .lil':~ .Ii, ,-Jt f' --e- II
Jl i i]lt 'l _! "-E
ifi -.. r- 1:.
"U - 1 Ii
I -I "i~ .f# It
't · r' I' I ~ Ii
:1 iJlt J-t
Ii ~='.ae .
, I I:'i ,t ...,lIi I-~ Ma III
I!.. III - II;t Iii
: .. n.h III
5 ,I! 'I "'!!l :.J J :111 II II -J
IiI 'j t.. 511 .-If
S I J ,. . I 'Ii.. 'Ii
Iii ! ji';; Id J:: J.II
J - '" I :0;1 iit: iil
Ji .. ji!=i .
.11'=
. _ z. .. . .; ..
.: Ii I! . -.
.. I
.
. /3<-- f .;z
_ 317-
,.'
.
III. Det,,.in.Uon
(To be coapl.t.d bl the Le.d Ag.ncl.)
On the b.sis of this tniti.l tv.lu.tion:
I find th.t the proposed proj.ct COULD NOT ..v. a significant tff.ct on
the .nviro~nt. and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prtp.r.d.......[ ]
I find th.t although th, propos.d proj.ct could "av. a significant
.ffect on the tnvironlltnt. there will ftot.be a signifjcant .fftct tn
this elSe bec.use the attig.tion _lSures described on an attached
sheet h.ve been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
~ILL IE PREPARED...................................................[ ]
I find the proposed project MAY ".ve a signific.nt .fftct on the
environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT fs rtquirtd........[ ]
. .s' f\l- -,1-
Date
)'1t~ (J,AU.t ~ . ~
Sign.ture
For ~ flJl iJ
IV. S1JtI,ARY OF ISSUES
List .11 signific.nt or potent1all1 significant fllp,cts tdentified in
the Initial Study checklist form.
YES
MAYBE
./
t/
I 1:0 ~ l
-
\ _' ..:- I",
.-' ,...{: " '9
Jc-. ',' ~/.:, ;'. '" .. ..( /
,J
.
.
/y,-V
- 3/-
,
II.
""'"'
(~ter 1706, Statut.s of 1.80 - AI 3151)
- It fa lIereby found that this project involv.s .0 potenUal for.
any adverse effect, either individually or cuaulatively on
wildlife resources and that a -Cert1ficat. of lit blllptionO
ahall be prepared for this proj.ct.
_ It fa h.r.by found that this proj.ct .could pot.nUally illpact
wildlif., individually or c.-ulaUv.ly and th.refor. f.es in
accordance with SlcUon 711.4 (d) of the lish and .... Code
ahall be paid to the County Cl.rk.
~ .
, fuih ~ .1'1A-1~
'Environmental ev ew Coordinator
5.Z 9- '12-
bate
,
.-.
.
.-
--
Jg'>t/tf
_ ~J. -
ROUTING FORM
.
DATE:
April 20, 1992
IT~C~J\/~D
;"
---te .
-
rY"c"""t
ken Larson, Building I Housing PLANN
John LiPPi.tt, Engineering IEIR OnlY} ING
Cliff Swanson, Eng1neer1ng EIR only
Hal Rosenberg, Engineering EIR only
Roger Daoust, Engineering IS/3, EIR/2)
Richard Rudolf, Assistant City Attorney (EIR only)
Carol Gove, Fire Department
Marty Schm1dt. Parks I Recreat10n
Keith Hawkins, Pol1ce Department
Current Plann1ng
Frank Herrera, Advance Plann1ng
Bob Sennett, City Landscape Architect
Bob Leiter, Planning Director
Chula Vista Elementary School Distr1ct. Kate Shurson
Sweetwater Union H.S. District. Tom Silva (IS I EIR)
Other
FR6f1l: rl:;~ Ma rvann Mi 11 er Environmental Section
. SUBJECT: IW App11cation for Initial Study (IS- 92-39 IFA- 577 lOP 923 )
D Checkprint Draft EIR (20 days)(EIR- IFB- lOP )
0 Review of a Draft EIR (EIR- IFB- lOP )
D Review of Env1ronmental Review Record FC- IERR- )
.
The orofect cons1sts of: General Plan Amendment and Rezone on 14,500 sq. ft. lot
he existing four inch water main on Del Monte Avenue will not provide-the-required
fire flow for the proposed building. A fully automatic fire sprinkler will be
required for the proposed building and to satisfy lack of all weather surface on
the property for fire department apparatus. The automatic fire sprinkler system
will save the applicant the costly alternative of upgrading the water main to
provide the required flow and the cost of paving the yard area in addition to
providing a turnaround on the property fQr fire apparatus. . Horsfall XSOS7
~oc.t10n: 126 Del Monte Avenue .
Please rev1ew the document and forward to .. any comments you have by Mav 4. 1992 .
COIl'Illents:
.
"'
/ ;r- '15
- 3~.
SWEETWATER AUTHORI1,
505 GARRETT AVENUE
POST OFFICE BOX 2328
CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 91912.2328
(619) 420-1413
FAX (619) 425-7469
RECEIVED
GOVERNING BOARD
SUE JARRETT. CHAIRMAN
BUD POCKLINGTON. VICE CMAIAMAN
WAYNE W. SMITH
EDWIN J STEELE
GEORGE H WATERS
MARGARET A. WEl.SH
CARY F. WRIGHT
WANOA. AVERY
TREASURER
ClAN J. REEVES
SECRETARY-ADMINISTRATIVE AIDE
-
April 29, 1992
PLAN/IJ/lJG
City of Chula Vista Planning Dept.
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Subject: WATER AVAILABILITY
126 DEL MONTE AVENUE
A.P.N. 629-060-08, INITIAL STUDY NO. 1S-92-39
Gentlemen:
This letter is in response to the subject initial study for the referenced
project within the Sweetwater Authority service area. There is a 4-inch C.I.
water main in Del Monte Avenue adjacent to the proposed developm~nt. Our
records indicate one existing service to the proposed development. Enclosed
is a copy of 1/4 SEC. 23A map which shows this facility.
At this time, we cannot comment on the adequacy of the existing system to
provide domestic service and/or fire protection. As plans develop for
structures, the Owner must submit a letter to the Authority from the
appropriate fire agency stating fire flow requirements. Based on this
requirement, this project may result in a need for new water systems or
substantial alteration to the existing water system.
-.
If the Owner provides the required fire flow information and enters into an
agreement for water facility improvements with the Authority, water service
can be obtained at a pressure range from a maximum of 83 p.s.i. to a minimum
of 58 p.s.!.
If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Tom Justo at 420-1413.
Very truly yours,
SWEETWATER AUTHORITY
,~
Richard A. eynolds
Chief Engineer
RAR:TJ:ln
k:\lo,oloi\wp51\dolmonto.lt'
-
enclosure photocopy of 1/4 SEC. 23A map
A Public Agency,
Serving National City, Clru/o Vista and Surrounding Areas
)~/lj?
- 3 'f-
'y.~ -:t ) i." 92-
~u~
:: ~--:
..........................
-- -
.-,......... ~
cmOf
CHUlA VISTA
.
PLANNING DEPARilvlENi
JulY 17. 1992
.
92011
RE: Initial study 92-39
.
Dear Mrs. Romero:
As a follOW up to the meeting held July 13, 1992 regarding the
Initial study for your proposed general plan amendment/rezone at
126 pel Monte Avenue, Chula vista, the following is a synopsis of
how the city will proceed with the processing of your project.
AS indicated, the Initial study conducted on your property
identified the potential for soil contamination from the past use
of the site as a roofing cOlllpany. AS a result, the city is
concerned that soil on the site may be contalllinated with roofing
coatings or other toxins.
AS a result, the potential for hazardoUS waste impacts
requires that a Phase 1 HazardOUS waste Assessment be conducted
prior to any future developlllent of this site. The Phase 1
Assessment is required to conduct a thorough historic survey of
past uses on site to identify specific chelllical by_products of
those uses.
If the Phase 1 AssessllIent identifies the potential for
contalllination, a Phase II HazardOUS Waste Assessment could be
required to test for particular chemicals identified during Phase
1 and to recollllllend a relllediation plan to show hoW these chelllicals
would be relllediated prior to future developlllent.
It is the city's understanding that you are only interested in
applying for the general plan alllendment and rezone at this time
therefore, the completion of a Phase 1 Assesslllent will not b~
required as a condition of your general plan amendlllent application
but will be required before actual construction takes place in the'
future.
.
.
)?/f?
_ 3t-
~76 FOU~TH A'.'f/CHULA VISTA CALifORNIA 91910/lh191 691.S101
.
Page 2
Margarita Romero
JUly 17, 1992
-,
Th.r.ror., tho "t,..t'on ....ur. r''''r'.. ... Ph... ,
........nt .iII boc... ''''CU.. pr'cr to ... 1o,u.nc. or .ny
or'.'n. or Oo".'n. P'..it. on tho pr.....y, .n. 't ..." .. ...
own'r'. "'oon".'i'ty to notiry .nyon. P'.nn'no to .""op tho
"to or ..... oo""'no ""!r...nto, """
P,.... ,.t me know 'r you h... .ny ....t'on.: ',.... ..i.
answers Your concerns regarding Your propOsed project.
Sincerely,
''';:'1;:~~'11
' ';"';;'c'
.~ ,.
~ tlAu.<. t, "hut..u~
Maryann C. Miller
Environmental Review Coordinator
cc: Bob Leiter
Doug Reid
-
-
.
)?-iY"
-3"-
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
JC5EPH D. CUMMINGS. Ph.D.
LARRY CUNNINGHAM
SHARON GILES
PATRICK A. JUDD
GREG R. SANDOVAL
SUPERINTENDENT
.KlHN F. VUGRIN. Ph.D.
.
.
CHULA VkrA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DIsrRICT
84 EAST "J" STREET . CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910 . 619425.9600
EACH CHILD 18 AN INDIVIDUAL OF GREAT WORTH
FtECEIVED
April 23, 1992
Ms. Maryann Miller
Environmental Review Dept.
city of Chula vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula vista, CA 91910
PLANNING
RE:
Change
Dear Ms. Miller:
This is to advise you that the project, located at 126 Del
Monte Avenue, is within the Chula Vista Elementary School
District which serves children from Kindergarten through
Grade 6.
District enrollment has been increasing at the rate of 4-5
percent over the past several years, and this is projected
to continue. permanent capacity has been exceeded at many
schools and temporary relocatable classrooms are being
utilized to accommodate increased enrollments. The District
also buses students outside their attendance areas, both to
accommodate growth and assist in aChieving ethnic balance.
State law currently provides for a developer fee of $.26 for
non-residential area to be charged (Chula Vista Elementary
School District $.12/square foot: Sweetwater Union High
School District $.14/square foot. Fees increase to $.27
on May 18, 1992) to assist in financing facilities needed to
serve growth.
If you have any questions, please contact this office.
Sincerely,
~~~
Kate Shurson
Director of planning , Facilities
KS:dp
cc: Margarita Romero
Jerry Stafford
....?'1 '
) <6 ~1/c;
'II
I \
'I L:
<( ,
r()! . I ......
f\J1 \~~ ~ ~J
~HER~b~~)JI
i:
,j}
".
.... ~
Jlr
ia
.
JI!;:
., .
..:!~
. ..
.. ~
~:I.
!----.J
~~t.J I
1i:
-.-
.- -
.c"
-0
~.
'Th
I I".
. ,
;11 ~ r.:lll ~!~.
... I ~
..0. &1110' ~a ~;y I
~~C.. '
,1 ..
:i ..~
..,
,'"
I.'" -, .~.
i.
'~"~ I
-. - ~T mTJNO
..0 1.11 '.,. ~Jt -:-.~!".O-.IIOC"G.&d -II)" 6&'..._ ."GIe
i
Ii" ~
t \:,
'---- ., ~
~ ~
l!Illl' _.1. .-. 11111 \\'f-:p
....,::; ~~I, ').. '\
-- '''- ~\
"~
~
)
l' '\
..
~R~~
~ SITE 1 \"'
v--.~. - Ii i
'. ill! m
.
-: f , I" Ii... "
I
I,
,I I .
:~ If
"
I
I..' ,- A.C....
l f ~L ~
I.. l-
I'
f
1~1 ~: !
III -
5
I...
i J...,
~l
t I S I~
E ;.
.' ii
I
....c:. ~ ',. r.
I U . I
~
a
"'. I
If s = j ~ I
jj li J ~ I ~
LL litH U
. TIlT. +-
~! I- ~,'
l~.!.E I ~
2';." e
.:n
. hx.'al
. ..t. ana. . WAAIClOI.J
'u n...... z:; Av'E
10M, "'=':_" 10'. C.. ~,
. . t. 'I,
........
I.,
4
.
kl~ !
.II!!~ ~ ~
rFII I
'" I
'.+&' - .-
s.
IU
-'
<:
u
,
~ I
I I
M .
(\') c:
...... .2
C; ~(t
..c: C"\j>
'''~ C'--.: ~
c: ~ ." ~ '-=
. ~ :. '7. "': X
>.. .. ~ w w) C,;I
-r.:':: '~'LO
l. r ...- .) ....
c/') ~ L c' lo...
_ 0 _.J...:..-.4 0
- "'- c' . J .,~
.Q c: - (') < Co.
r5::-l?c,t)c/)
ut="::::i>.
.2 0 ~"..i l'l:
:1 ~. ~: .~-' :;: :'..
7fC:.:~ic'c.
E r: C l..' ~
'x c_ ~ ._' '"-
o ';':' :: ~ t; ~
~ .' '" l ~ . ~ :>
::".';' ,"-'- ~ 0
5:- .~~ ,0 r~ 25 ~
". r._.._ So _ _
/g----50
I~j
'"
I
f
a ....."~"" E.
"'--
I ;! _.,
i ~ WWli i
Mot.., I-L ... ....
I-y ::
- "
Z~i I I
r; N ...--
l\ ...... _ lie"
l7~: .._-~,.
/' : ~ \m,"'~;'l %25_
/ W ~fiU.- f
~!'6 0-" ",'''224
~ ......., 0:,.. t
...... d.t Z:' ZU f
...c.t =1' -:-
<i ..- :I~ ZZZ~
_0, U ~
~ ........ "ll ZZ ~
:q .._...._ '5
III S'" ZZO!,
....... it '1Z II &0
w.o, "'7~
f--
--
" :!.
....", ...
-" ~
__ - i I I 628"
IJ'L\ QC
"0 J J.
F:<,
-
183C '
OF
s.
~A"TRR. CI~
\
- 3g-
.. ,
,
c:=<c
*
...-.-
-
.
.
THE C171' OF CHULA Y.1STA PAR7l'DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
-
ASullement of disclosure of ccnain ownership interests, payments, or campaiifl contributions, on all matters
-"hich will require discretionary action on the pan of the City CoUDCil, PlanriinS Commission, and all other
official bodies. The followinS information must be disclosed:
1. Ust the Dames of aU persons havinS . financial interest in Ihc CODtract, i.c.. contractor,
lubcontrac:tor, materia! supplier.
None
2. If any persoD 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 OWDinS any partnership
interest in the partnership.
None
3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit orsaniiation or a trust, list the names
of any person serving as director of the non-profit orsanization or as trustee or beneficiary or
truslor of Ihe trust.
.
None
4. Have you had more than $250 wonh of business transacled with any member of the City sta!f,
Boards, Commissions, Commillees 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 10 represent you before the City in this matter.
None
6. Have you and/or your officers or asenls, in the aggregale, conlributed more than $1,000 to a
Councilmember in the current or preceding election period? Yes _ No L If yes, sUlle which
Councilmember(s):
~ iI clclined IS: "Any iNiMt/unl, pml, ",opnnnmhip, joim_'lIfr, tuS<<iIrliOll, 6<<iIIl dIIb.frtumllll t1tfIUIbtuilln, ""PD'nli01l,
~$lill~. 1nUl, mri\'n.ly1ldiclJlr. this tuId IJIO' DII/n CDlIIlIY, city.III CDllIlll); c~ IIlJ1Juciptllil)', amcl .111116 pD/il"n1abdil'isiUJI,
Dr 1J/I)'IIIhn f?OUP Dr c01llbinnliiJ1lIJ"inG IU n unit,.
)r~/
.- ...., .
(NOTE: Atl.'lc/l .1I11ilion~1 p.'!:cs lIS ncccss.,I)')
.c: 3-23-92
-3~/
1.\-1 P" \:D"t"I ner: ""'~
.
.
.
)g'
Excerpt from Resource Conservation Commission Minutes of November 9, 1992
7. Review of Negative Declaration IS-92-39 Margarita Romero; Barbara Hall questioned
whether the Montgomery Planning Committee reviewed and supported this proposal.
She further opposes the industrial area being located against a residential
neighborhood. RCC suggests the Phase I Hazardous Waste Assessment be reviewed
and the owner should be responsible for completion prior to granting of the General
Plan Amendment end Rezoning. It was moved and seconded (Kracha/Fox) to
recommend adoption of Negative Declaration to include the comments listed; 3-0-1,
motion failed; McNair abstained, noting same reason as above.
/~<5A
.
Draft Minutes of Plannine Commission Meetin~ - November 12. 1992
ITEM 1.
PUBLIC HEARING: GPA-92-Ol AND PCZ-92-B: PROPOSAL TO AMEND
THE MONTGOMERY SPECIFIC PLAN/CHULA VISTA GENERAL PLAN
AND REZONE APPROXIMATELY 1/3 ACRE LOCATED IN
SOUTHWESTERLY QUADRANT OF WEST MAIN STREET AND DEL
MONTE AVENUE, FROM "LOW/MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL" AND
R-I-6-P TO "RESEARCH AND LIMITED INDUSTRIAL" AND I-L-P -
Margarita Romero, Applicant
Principal Planner Howard presented the staff report and stated that staff recommended approval
of the resolution recommending that the Council adopt the General Plan Amendment and the
Montgomery Specific Plan Amendment and make the wning changes in the ordinance.
In reply to Commissioner Carson, Mr. Howard stated the Montgomery Planning Committee had
met the previous night and voted 4-0 to adopt the Negative Declaration and recommend approval
of the project.
Commissioner Ray asked if there was any consideration given to requiring the hazardous waste
assessment prior to the rewne to determine before rewning for any other use whether there
were any hazardous toxins in the ground that would have to be taken out at the owner's expense.
.
Principal Planner Howard answered that it had been discussed with the owner, and the
conclusion was that since there was not specific project at this time and that the precise plan
would require that a specific project be brought forward and studied, that would be the
appropriate time to see if there was any problem with hazardous materials on the site. There
was no evidence of a specific problem at the site, but there had been enough problems in the
Montgomery area to warrant the condition on any new development which would require grading
to have a Phase I hazardous waste assessment. There was no apparent immediate danger there.
Commissioner Ray's concern was by including the condition, a liability would be created for the
City if something happened later. Assistant City Attorney Rudolf explained that there was no
factual information to believe there was any problem in the area; however, if there were
knowledge that there were significant environmental problems, it would be better not to approve
it and require the assessment first before consideration.
In reply to Commissioner Ray, Principal Planner Howard stated that any site in the Montgomery
area which had been used for anything other than a residential purpose would include the
condition.
.
Commissioner Ray, regarding the 6' high wall, asked if there was a potential for a 10' bay for
deliveries on the back of the facility which would cause a noise problem. Associate Planner
Herrera-A said the siting of any door would be to the rear of the property on Main Street which
would be facing away from the residential or any of the areas that would be impacted.
/g'--5;J
.
.
.
Commissioner Tuchscher asked if the 6' wall might be higher or lower depending on the
proposal. Mr. Howard answered that the 6' was from the Zoning Ordinance for the I-L-P zone
requirements; however, staff could require a minimum 6' wall, which would give them more
discretion when the Precise Plan came forward. Commissioners Ray and Tuchscher agreed that
would be satisfactory.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Margarita Romero, 144 Teena Drive, Chula Vista 91911, the owner of the property, said she
had not been able to comply with the City requirements to keep the property clean. She wished
to rezone the property to comply with surrounding uses.
Chair Fuller asked Ms. Romero if she had received any objections from any of the neighbors.
Ms. Romero answered negatively.
Roy Ferriero, 2221 Prospect St., National City, said he was a general building contractor.
He wished to expand to Chula Vista, and was trying to buy the property from Mrs. Romero to
use as an office and storage area if it was the correct zoning.
No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
MSUC (Martin/Tuchscher) 5-0 to approve Resolution GP A-92-01lPCZ-92-B recommending
that the City Council approve the attached draft City Council resolution.
Jg'~1
j1~
File No.
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING DATE IS ,qq
su.,,'" (i~ ~~-::LCv'6P ~ \V\~"l~P 'I-
II
SENT TO STAR NEWS FOR PUBLICATION ..~; BY HAND ; BY MAIL
PUBLICATION DATE (,,) /5 /C1d- -
.
PUBLIC HEARING CHECK LIST
MAILED NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS~ ~ 0.... /J
NO. MAILED
PER GC 54992 Legislative Staff, Construction Industry Fed, 6336 Greenwich Dr Suite F. San Diego, 92122
LOGGED IN AGENDA BOOK I..l- /d-I l1d-
COPIES TO:
Administration (4)
/
Planning
/
Originating Department
Engineering /
Others
City Clerk's Office (2) ~
10-./ J.../q;y
POST ON BULLETIN BOARDS
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS:
.58.
/i~ ~:)
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BY THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL will hold
a public hearing to consider the following:
Considering an amendment to Chula Vista General Plan and Montgomery
Specific Plan by redesignation of certain 113 acre area, located on
southwesterly quadrant of West Main Street and Del Monte Avenue from
LowJMedium Density Residential" to "Research and Umited Manufacturing".
Considering an amendment to Chula Vista General Plan and Montgomery
Specific Plan by redesignation of 3 areas: Adobe Plaza, East Somerset and
property southwest of Anita Street.
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,
December 15, 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: December 2, 1992
Beverly A Authelet
City Clerk
J?~b
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY
COUNCIL of Chula Vista, California, for the purpose of considering an amendment to the
Chula Vista General Plan and the Montgomery Specific Plan by the redesignation of a certain
1/3 acre area, located on the southwesterly quadrant of West Main Street and Del Monte Avenue
from "Low/Medium Density Residential" to "Research and Limited Manufacturing" on the
Chula Vista General Plan Land Use Map and from "Low/Medium Density Residential" to
"Research and Limited Industrial" on the plan diagram of the Montgomery Specific Plan.
Consideration will also be given to an application to rerone the above sited property from
"R-I-6-P Residential" to "I-L-P" (Limited Industrial).
A plot plan and legal description are on file in the office of the Planning Department. A
Negative Declaration IS-92-39 was prepared under the aegis of the Environmental Review
Coordinator. A finding of no significant, unmitigable impacts associated with project
implementation has been recommended to the City Council and is on file, along with the Initial
Study, in the Planning Department. Any petitions should be submitted to the City Clerk no later
than noon of the hearing date.
If you wish to challenge the City's action on this General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan
Amendment, and/or Rezone 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 prior to the public hearing. Correspondence should be directed
to City of Chula Vista, P. O. Box 1087, Chula Vista, CA 91912.
SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL on Tuesday,
December 15, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Services Building, 276 Fourth
Avenue. Any person desiring to be heard may appear.
DATED:
CASE NO:
December 2, 1992
GPA-92-01; PCZ-92-B
Beverly Authelet
City Clerk
(gpa92-01.not)
Jrr-~?
- -_.-........-...,--_..,-_-~..."^_".--w.....-.o-.''''''''_
"
<I
'"
-' W
'"
.. -l 'u
0 "" I-
0< '" ....
<I '" 0
" <I Z
'" c.:..... <I
~ 1-';,,) -
>: '"
"'" Q.
W <1<1
00 OV'l1-
0'" " '"
~o ',,<1
-lw '"'0-'
-l-....:> ""<1-'
" ~Cll':4
.....~ r~ ~'.'(
"',~ "'''0
N<l .",JU......
.0:< <MV
~----
0
'"
...
N W
"" "-
~ 0)
"" -'
0 <I <I
"" '" "" Z ""
I- ,< ., ,. <I ""
'" 0)
0 0) .:>
'" ...
l- I- '.
W '"
'. ~ -'
<I <I -' W
0 ~' <l
0'" 0" O:E 0"-
0<1 ';;>~ 0<1 0<1
.0>: 0>: <he ""'"
- ,~ " 0
""0 ""W ""'" ""'"
"., <-' , " q".:)
'.-' ""0 ~, ~~ -lQ.
"'" -l':U l'~ "'''
NV NW N" N<I
<"" -Q,'lJ' .oV .ov,
a Q
'" '"
I I
N N
"" ""
I ,
,< ""
UI 0 0
-
0 I- "" l- V 0
" '" '" '" 0
0, 0 0 .. ~
" '" '"
v ,... I- o. '"
~ <I '"
~ ~ ~ >: z
'" -' -' ~ <I
<I, "- '"
00 0", 0>: 0 0
0 0.. 0'" ow 0"-
, '-, "'>- "'''- 0"- N'" <>0
-... N '"' 00 0
-l ~.~ ""'" -'" N~ N>-
"" "'" "W " "I-
"".... ,~ :'1: ..-1."- ""... ""Z
"',. "'''' "'''' "''' "'''
"0 "" ,~'" NW "0
"''''' "'v "'v <>> .t>V
\
1,
: J(~S~
,
t
-~.:
0 w
'" Z
I -
" '" <>
"" '" v
, "
-l 0
0 -'
.... "" ""
I- -'
'"
0 '"
v '" z
,... <I >
>: '"
<I >- ...
- -'
-' -
0-' 0>:
~- ~<I
"". "'''-
- ,"
""'" ""'"
J"iU "'W
"">: ""3
"'W "'0'
"'" "'"
o Q OV
i
)
..
'<
"
'"
'"
w
Z
Z
"
>
>-
,
'"
'"
~
'"
"'"
0'"
,-,
~'"
--"';1-',
0-'
"'::>
~"
,"'oJJ:1
,o~
..
'"
'"
~
>-
0",
0'"
",,,,
'"
N<.::l
0"
"'W
~"
"'''
"'"
)<1 r-sJ
"~~,.._"..,..,,. .",.,.'_,-.,.,.~"," --"-"-'
:)
...
-'
'"
~
"
"'"
00
"
"''''
"''''
~"
'<-"
~"
"'"
,o>
".~,?<.^~";',.,". ><.^^^~",.".
>PO<XXX X>(XXXX
XXXXXX XXXXXX
XXXXXX XXXXX)(
XXXXXX XXXXXX
XXX><X.X X>(X)(XX ..
XXX><XX xxxxxx '"
XX>()O<X XXX)(XX
XXXxxX XXXXXX
X'>o(XX;<:'< XXXXXX
XXXXXX XXXXXX
XXXXXX XX><XXX
XXXXXX XXXXXX
X'>(X>(>(X XXX.o(X><
XXXXXX XXXXXX ..,
XXXX'>o(X XXXX>O<
XXXXXX XXXXXX '"
X.>('.o(:<)o("o( X:>(X>(XX ~
XXXXXX XXXXXX U
XXXXXX X)(XXXX Z
XXXxXX XXXXXX ow
"o(XXX-<X >(X.>(>(X'>( ~>.
XXXXXX XXXXXX ..~
)(>(>('<XX X>(XXX;.( "
XXXXXX XXXXXX "'-'
XX><>(X'>( >(XX><><X ::>J
XXXXXX XXX XXX "'-
X"(">(XXx ><><)(XXX ,"~
XXXX><X xxx XXX ",W
-<<<-<-<0( ,< -< <X>(>( 00
.......;....,,'" "';<"":',-<;"';
XXXXXX XXXXXX '"
><XX:<XX XXX)(XJ(
XXXXXX XXXXXX W
.>(X><X'XX >(X>(>(XX Z
XXXXXX XXXXXX "
X:.o(><'o(-'<< :<X>(X--<>< Q
XXX XXX XXX XXX > '"
X.<;.(XX.>( ;>(:<XXX'>( ~
XXX>(XX XXXx:XX: ,
>(-'<X'<X:< ><><X,>()(X ,,>
XXX XXX XXXXXX
)(:>(:>(X><< )(X:<X)(>( "-
XXXXXX XXX XXX
<<><<-<X >(:<X><X)( ,
XXXXXX XXXXXX
)('>( ,<:>( XX <><XXX:>( ~
XXXXXX XXXXXX "-
<-< -<:.< ,>( ,-( ;>(:-(X -<X:>( U
XXXX><X XXX XXX '"
,>(;0(>(>(<>( XXXXXX 0"
xxxXXX XXXXXX 0'
>(.-<:-< < --<--< XXXXJ(X ~
XXXXXX X>(XXXX ~>-
:<X,-(>< X>< "<X>(>(>(X "'''
XXXX:><'X XXXXXX 0,"
-('>( '>( ,<<< J(-<X>(X)( "',j:L:,
XXXXXx ><XXXXX ~W
J(X>(XX >( <.>(XX)(X N-'
XXXXXX XXXXXX ,oU
",--"'''',-"'-''',;>0
X>(X>(:<>( >(;<:<X,'>( -< '"
:<XXXXX X>(XXXX '"
XX->(:>(.>(X >(><.>(XXX
XXXXXX XXXXXX 1:
X><XX><>< >(XXXXX >-
XXXXXX XXXXXX W
;>('>(,<XX>( )(;>(;>()(_'<X Q
XX)(XXX XXXXXX '"
.>(XXX.>(.>( XXXX>(>( ,
XXXXXX XXXXXX
:>(XX.>(>(X XXX>(X.x "
XXXXXX XXX XXX w
XX><>(X:< >(X>(XX>< ,
XXXXXX XXXXXX 'i:
X>()(>()('>( <:O<XX"X'o(
XXXXXX )(>(XXXX >-
-< -<:< >(;-(--< >(X:<XX< ~
XXXXXX XXXXXX -'
>(>(>< >( X;< -<XX>(X-< U
XXXXXX XXX XXX OU
< <:>(XX'-< X><:.(><X>< :.J,~
XXXXXX X><XXXX ",,,,
_>()(:-<XX,X >('>()(X:>(:>( ..<.J
XXXXXX XXXXX>< '"
<:-<<-<XX X<X><X.x ;:);!'
X><"xxxX XXX><XX "'JC.l
X:X.C><XX X.>(X'XX~< '"X
X><XXXX XXXXXX
,e<<-<><XX X><X:<X>(
'(",C.C< ,C<,<'<:'<",
xxx X XXXX)<X '"
XXXX >(XX'><XX
XXXX XxxXXX
XXX>( xxXXXX
XXX)( XXXX)<X
XX>(X X)(><X;-<X
XXXX XXXXXX
'""' >(X>(>( >(XXXXX
0 XXX X xxxXX)(
I XXXX XXXX>(X
'" XXX>< XXXXXX
,> X>(XX :>(X><XXX
I XXXX XXXXXX
, X-<)(X ><)('-<XXX
c. XXXX XXXXXX
, XX" XX><X>(X
"XX XXXXXX
X;'<X ><XXXX:O<
xxx XXXXXX
XXX XXXXXX
XXX XXXXXX
XXX XXXXXX
XXX XXXXX>(
XX>< XXXXXX
XXX XXXXXX
XXX \ XXX XXX
')<'XX XXX XXX
XXX XXXXXX
",XX XXXXXX
w
~
'"
'"
Z
'"
::>
,
...
1:
=>
>
"
...
0-"
0::>
"''''
'"
,"'oJ.J
'"""
'-"';Z
~'"
"''"
"''''
'""'
~
6232123900
........: '
6232124"00
~TR
__191;
6290601100
~
911
~
6290606600
~
6291410700
........ t
:".1
0232,l.21900
fiIt-iA ESPt:R.4Nlll G
.......911
on212 28 00
bAUMOAKD'EK RObERT E/EST~ER
02j2123200
~
I
0232124200
MONTIJU IC.ACIU/MARIA C
b2 90000800
kOME~O ANTuNIO/MARGAkITA
b2 '10604900
.......
6290007200
uO(')o~ /iAKOLD F/P:UbY c.: lRS
6291411200
~CECIO R
)~;;,tJ
'm.._~~
I
I
--I
!
I
I
i
I
.
6<Jd22uOU
~
_li
, 623<124.00
i.......
6290600900
JACKSDN FkAhCLS/MARIE
6<90603300
~
62906()5.00
~StS
6.90606100
BARD FAMILY TkUST Ob-~e-go
~uR~O~ATEC
~l1J
6<90607 '00
~kU8Y C TRS
CJ232.l2~5i.JO
~
,""
~
o2321230UO
VI l..LAL~ANOO lYiI GU!:;L
o232123"tuO
~ONZAL~S R~YNAlDG 0 EST OF
-'
02900010UO
JACK>ON fRANCI>I',ARH
t>2 '10 bOOI) vD
tiARD FAMilY TRUST 06-20-90
02900107UO
fENTON H G MAHRlAl CO
62'1 J,41.0?OO 02'114106vO
QUILLOPu MAl'\.IA G <Ac.^ CUMfZ "\., ALl..EN bUlJPY r.../jEANNE E
R
~
(
"
6<91411300
PIZARRO TtO A/MARIA
.."'"
02914.tl10'UO
MIRANDA~AOUL J/PATRICIA
oZ.,l"tll"+lJO
~('ARITA
) 1'-- ~ /
0291412500 '
~01-12.-'!0
0291520500
~
LABL 00]78 GP'-42-01
~X~XXXXXXXXXXX
_XXXXXXXXXXXXX
X xxx X xx xx xx xl. X'I. XX "xxx XXXx "xxx
X xx X X XX XX xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xX xx
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
X xx X X xX XX X X XX X X X X X X XX X X xx X X X X
X xx X X xx xx XX xx xx xx xX xX xx xx xX xX
X xx X X xX XX xx /.x XX xx xx XX xX xx xx xx
X xx X X xx xx xx xx xx xx xX xx xx xx xx xx
X xX X X xx xx xx XX xX xx;xx xX AX xX XX XX
02]20<1200
~YVO"'.;E 8
02]20<1800
~-28-90
&,4
02]2022900
~
____911
'"",
-~~=
-'-i
\1
!,
01/12/90 !.
..1
.~
"1
.,
0291413100
~
_______ LVD
0291420300
........
k/ G~~~:L U~
(
--------'~~
R/ ADkIANA. I,
I.
,
xx XX XX XX XX XXXX XX XX "".XXXX XXJ:
.XXXXXXXXX.XXX.XXXXXXXXXXXXX~
xx xx XXxx xX XXXXXx xX xXxx XXXXXX X
xx xx AX XX XX XXxx xX XX XXXX)l,XX XXXX
xX XX XX XX XX AX xX xX XX XX XX XXXXXXx
f"X AX xX xX xX "XXX -<XXX XX xX AXXX XXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
xX /..XXX XX AX xX f"X xX XX XX xX xX XX XXX
xX xX XX xX XX XX XX XXXX xxxX XXxx XXX
xX XX"AX;(X xX XX XX xX xX XXXX i\XXXXXX
XX XX AX XX XX AX XX XX XX XX xX xXXX i\XX
XX XX >.X XX xX AX xX J\XXX XX xX xXXX xX X
G/YVONNE b
1
b2320219UO
___ABETH M
2024
._~
0232023000
~lM
,
~,
/~-be2
or':;:
.
c,
TR
(,L AS S
&291420400
........1
o24141i8liO
"HlTTlNGTON FRANK L/LOKRAINE
-- tH..... .
u2915303\)0
~ ~..........~~ ~..~.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXA xXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX~
X XX XXXX xX XX AXXX XX XX.xX XX xXXX AX,. XX XX xxxX >..XXx xXXX XX XXXXXX xXXXX)
X ),XXX X X xX XX XXXX ",X XX XX).,X;...X XX XX} AXXX "XXX XxXX XXXX' xXXXXX XX XXXXX>
X xX XXX X xX xX XX xX XXXX "X xX XX xX XX} "XXX XXXX AXXX XXXX XX XXXXXX XXXXX>
X;XX XXXXX.X XX AX,;,X xX XX AX i-X ,\X'XX ;...X ^ ^X XX XX"XX AXXX xXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX X>
X XX XXXX xX ^ X ^X XX).X xX XX AX ;.;XXX XX, AX xX ",X XX AX XX xXXX XX XXXXXX XXXXX:
x xX XXXx XXxX "X XX xX XX AX AX AX XX XX ^ AX xX XX XX XXXX XXXx J,.)(XXXX XX XXXXX!
X >-X X'XXX XXXX;",X XX XX XX xX AX XXXX AX ^ AX xX xX XX AXXX ;';XXX XX XX XXXXXXXXX\
X XX AXX X XX >,X xX "X AX XX AX AX >.XXX XX ^XxxXXXXX "X XX xXXX XX XX XXXX XX xx,,~
X XX XXX X XX xX AX AX xX XX xX xX "X AX xX I ....X>'X XXX)( XX XX ).,XXX AX XX XXXX XXXXX>
X XX XXXx XX XX xX XX XX XX X X XX XXXX XX f ;..XXX XX^ X;..X XX XX XX XX XXXXXXXX XXX,,
XxXXXXX XXXX"XXX xX XXXX;';X "XXX XX" ....XXX XXXX xxxX XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX)
623<021400
~/YVUNNE B
b232022300
~RIAE
__1'
6232022 100
~
~&24
"
,~""
02,)2uZZ4UO
........A
,,2624
o23202.32uO
.........E
!
i
.
/ (' --t,J
i
.
~
j
b232123900
LOPEZ VICTOR M/MARIA ,
1
b 232124 bOO
HERRON KENNETH
62321232ao
.......
02,2124200
L
6290604600 b290b04900
ROMERO ANTONIO J/MARGARITA ~ ~AMIkEZ OL!VIA
"n,,=,~"
.--.
~EE
b 291411100
b291411500
.......
b291411900
IiiIiiiiiiiiI
I
08-2 e~~~-I
I
[
n__" I
.I
_J
I
I
b2'11411600
~CHLAG MAR~AkET L
)<;1 ~~ y
I
I
1
.
l
623d24400
HERkON KENNETH E TR
629060090U
JACKSuN FRANCIS/MARIE
l
62%605400
OlAY LAND ENTt:RPRIStS
629C607400
.....Uby
C T kS
6'9l4l050u
Q01LLOPu MAKIA G (AKA G~MlZ M~
l.
~.~
C
."._.._----~
o232l23400
~EST CF
o
9ll
l
t;l;:'71'tllSUO
~l
)~r~S
A
/-
I
;
ORDINANCE NO.
$.:JY
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE
ZONING MAP OR MAPS ESTABLISHED BY SECTION 19.18.010 OF
THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE REZONING 0.3 ACRES LOCATED
ON THE WEST SIDE OF DEL MONTE AVENUE, SOUTH OF MAIN
STREET, FROM R-1-6-P to I-L-P
WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a rezoning was filed
with the Planning Department of the city of Chula vista on April 9,
1992 by Margarita Romero; and
WHEREAS, said application requested that 0.3 acres located on
the west side of Del Monte Avenue, south of Main Street, be rezoned
from R-1-6-P (Single Family Residential with Precise Plan) to I-L-P
(Limited Industrial with Precise Plan); and
WHEREAS,
November 12,
Council enact
the Planning commission held a public hearing on
1992 and voted 5 to 0 to recommend that the City
an ordinance to rezone said property to I-L-P; and
WHEREAS, the City Council set the time and place for a hearing
on said rezoning 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 500 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
advertised, namely 6:00 P.M., December 15, 1992, in the Council
Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the city Council and said
hearing was thereafter closed; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has concluded
that there would be no significant environmental impacts and
recommends adoption of the Negative Declaration issued on IS 92-39.
NOW, THEREFORE the City Council of the City of Chula vista
does hereby find, determine and ordain as follows:
SECTION I: Environmental
The City Council finds that
significant environmental impacts
Declaration issued on IS 92-39.
the project would
and adopts the
have no
Negative
SECTION II: Findings
The City Council finds that the rezoning is consistent with
the City of Chula vista General Plan as amended concurrently with
this action and that the public necessity, convenience, general
welfare, and good zoning practice support the rezoning to I-L-P.
) ~/f -I
The City Council finds that, pursuant to section 19.56.041 of
the zoning Ordinance, following circumstance is evident which
allows application of the "P" Precise Plan modifying district to
this site:
The property or area to which the P modifying district is
applied is an area adjacent and contiguous to a zone allowing
different land uses, and the development of a precise plan will
allow the area so designated to coexist between land usages which
might otherwise prove incompatible.
SECTION III: Rezoning
section 19.18.010 of the Chula vista Municipal Code (being the
zoning map) is hereby amended to rezone the Property to I-L-P
(Limited Industrial with Precise Plan Modifier) as shown on
Exhibit B attached hereto. The District Regulations for the P
modifier district are attached hereto as Attachment A.
SECTION IV: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full
force on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
Br":: ~~q~
City Attorney
F:\home\attomey\rom.ord
/ r /J ;.)..
RESOLUTION NO.
/~ 'J 7
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN AND THE MONTGOMERY SPECIFIC
PLAN FOR 0.3 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF DEL MONTE
AVENUE NORTH OF MAIN STREET ("DEL MONTE AVENUE")
WHEREAS, duly verified applications for a General Plan Amendment
and Montgomery Specific Plan Amendment were filed with the Planning
Department of the City of Chula vista on April 9, 1992 by Margarita
Romero; and
WHEREAS, said applications requested that approximately 0.3 acres
located on the west side of Del Monte Avenue south of Main Street
(the "Property") be designated "Research and Limited Industrial" on
the General Plan Land Use Diagram and Montgomery Specific Plan Map
(with associated rezone, collectively, the "Project"); and
WHEREAS, the Planning commission held a public hearing on November
12, 1992, and voted 5 to 0 recommend that the City Council approve
the Project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council set the time and place for a hearing on
said Project and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose,
was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation
in the city and its mailing to property owners within 1000 feet of
the exterior boundaries of the Property at least ten days prior to
the hearing in accordance with Government Code sections 65358,
65090 and 65091 (a) 1 and 2 and Chula vista Municipal Code section
19.12.070; and
WHEREAS, an Initial Study (Case No. 92-42) was prepared for the
proposed project; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator
adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Monitoring Program for the proposed project; and
recommends the
and Mitigation
WHEREAS, the General Plan Amendment has not been amended more than
three (3) times this calendar year and the City Council intends the
General Plan Amendment approved by this action to be heard,
considered, consolidated and treated as one General Plan Amendment
along with the Abode Plaza General Plan Amendment and the Rancho
Del Rey Business Park General Plan Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised,
namely 6:00 P.M., December 15, 1992 in the Council Chambers, 276
Fourth Avenue, before the City Council and said hearing was
thereafter closed.
I~!J-I
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT from the facts presented to the
ci ty Council, the Council finds that the proj ect would have no
significant environmental impacts and adopts the Negative
Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program issued on IS 92-39.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT from the facts presented to the City
Council, the Council amends the General Plan and amends the
Montgomery specific Plan to redesignate 0.3 acres located on the
west side of Del Monte Avenue, south of Main Street from "Low
Medium Residential (3-6 du/ac) to "Res r hand imited
Industrial".
Presented by
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
IY/J~
Bruce M. Boogaar
city Attorney
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item A
Meeting Date 12/15/92
Public Hearing: GPA-93-03 and PCZ-93-C; Proposal to amend the Chula
Vista General Plan/Montgomery Specific Plan and rewne approximately
13.48 acres located on the eastern portion of Broadway, between Main
Street on the south and Anita Street on the north; Subareas 1 & 2 from
"Research and Limited Industrial" and "I-L-P" to "Retail Commercial"/
"Mercantile & Office Commercial" and "C-C-P"; Subarea 3 from
"Research and Limited Industrial" and "I-L-P" to "Medium Density
Residential" and "R-2-P."
fJ.
Resolution /" 9.J r Approving
Plan/General Plan Amendment GPA-93-03
Montgomery
Specific
/I
.;1">'7
;@t
Ordinance
Adopting PCZ-93-C
Director of Planning
City Manager ('
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_No X )
The subject request is an application for the redesignation and rezoning of 13.48 acres, amending
the Chula Vista General Plan/Montgomery Specific Plan. The three areas in question are listed
below:
a. Abode Plaza (Sepehri property privately initiated) 4.56 acre area located on the
northeasterly quadrant of West Main and Broadway (Subarea 1), and;
b. East Sommerset (City initiated) 4.00 acre area located on the southeasterly quadrant of
West Anita and Broadway (Subarea 2);
from "Research & Limited Manufacturing" to "Retail Commercial" on the Chula Vista
General Plan Land Use Map and from "Research & Limited Industrial" to "Mercantile
& Office Commercial" on the plan diagram of the Montgomery Specific Plan.
Consideration will also be given to an application to rezone the Subareas 1 and 2 from
"I-L-P Limited Industrial" to "C-C-P Central Commercial" with a "P" Modifier (please
see Exhibits A & B).
c. Property south of Anita Street with 4.92 acre area, located at the northeast boundary and
adjacent to the southeasterly quadrant of West Anita Street and Broadway (Subarea 3);
1'-/
Page 2, Item / ?
Meeting Date 12/15/92
from "Research & Limited Manufacturing" to "Medium Density Residential" on the
Chula Vista General Plan Land Use Map and from "Research & Limited Industrial" to
"Medium Density Residential" on the plan diagram of the Montgomery Specific Plan.
Consideration will also be given to an application in this instance to rezone Subarea 3
from "I-L-P Limited Industrial" to "R-2-P one and two-family residence zone" with a
"P" modifier (please see Exhibits A & B).
The General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan Amendment, and rezone for Subarea I is proposed
in order to allow development of a retail commercial center. The General Plan Amendment,
Specific Plan Amendment, and rezoning for Subareas 2 and 3 would be consistent with existin~
~ and no new development is proposed for these areas at this time.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the Mitigated Negative Declaration
IS-92-42, prepared on August 26, 1992, constitutes adequate prior review of the proposal.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council:
1. Find that adoption of GPA-93-03 and rezone PCZ-93-C will have no significant
environmental impact and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-92-42 issued.
2. Adopt the Montgomery Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment GPA-93-03 and rezone
PCZ-93-C.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
1. The Resource Conservation Commission at its meeting of November 9, 1992, voted on
a motion to recommend approval of Negative Declaration IS-92-42 Abode Plaza; motion
failed 3-0-1; McNair abstained, noting that the absention should not be interpreted as lack
of support, but that as a new member receiving her packet on the day of the meeting, she
was unable to adequately review the documents presented.
2. The Montgomery Planning Committee at its public hearing of November 11, 1992,
recommended adoption of Negative Declaration IS-92-42 Abode Plaza et al; motion failed
3-1; Scheurr abstained. No further action was taken on GPA-93-03/PCZ-93-C.
3. The City Planning Commission, at its meeting of November 12, 1992, by vote of 5-0,
recommended that the City Council adopt GPA-93-03/PCZ-93-C.
DISCUSSION:
I. The subject land is designated "Research and Limited Industrial" on the plan diagram of
the Montgomery Specific Plan and Chula Vista General Plan.
1'-..2
Page 3, Item J'
Meeting Date 12/15/92
2. Existing General Plan/Montgomery Specific Plan Designations (please see Exhibit A).
North:
South:
East:
West:
High Density Residential
Research & Limited Industrial
Research & Limited Industrial
Mercantile/Office Commercial
3. Adjacent Zoning (please see Exhibit B).
North:
South:
East:
West:
R-3-P Multiple Family Residential
I-L-P Limited Industrial
1- L- P Limited Industrial
C-T-P Thoroughfare Commercial
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
The Environmental Review Coordinator conducted an Initial Study, IS-92-42, of potential
environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the project. Based on the attached
Initial Study and comments thereof, any environmental impacts would be reduced to a level of
insignificance through mitigation measures as may be proposed and appropriate. Therefore, the
Environmental Coordinator has concluded that there would be no significant environmental
impacts, and recommends adoption of the Ne~ative Declaration issued on IS-92-42.
ANALYSIS
Subarea 1
Subarea I is the 4.56 acre parcel which has been proposed for a change in General Plan and
zoning by the owner in order to allow for the construction of a retail commercial center. The
present General Plan designation and zoning is Limited Industrial; however, the site currently
contains a trailer park (being closed), several small used auto sales businesses, and a small sheet
metal shop. The proposed change to a commercial plan designation and zone is recommended
by staff for the following reasons:
1. The proposed use is compatible with commercial uses on the west side of Broadway,
both north and south of Main Street, and is compatible with mixed commercial and light
industrial uses on the east side of Broadway, both north and south of Main Street.
2. The proposed project site, located at the comer of Broadway and Main, is suited for
commercial uses due to its location adjacent to both of these prominent thoroughfares.
/9-3
Page 4, Item /'7
Meeting Date 12/15/92
3. The proposed commercial use of this property would allow for new and attractive
development, built in conformance with Chula Vista design guidelines, in place of the
existing marginal and deteriorated uses on the site.
Subarea 2
Subarea 2 is a 4.0 acre parcel containing the three-year-old Sommerset Commercial Center.
This Center was approved by the issuance of a conditional use permit in the existing Limited-
Industrial zone classification which the property is designated. However, the same rationale for
redesignation and rezoning Subarea 1 to Commercial applies to this property as well, given its
location. Additionally, administration of the conditions of the conditional use permit, which
restricts users to those allowed in the Limited Industrial zone classification, is cumbersome, and
serves no strong positive purpose, given the site's suitability for less restrictive retail commercial
purposes.
Subarea 3
Subarea 3 consists of 4.92 acres fronting on Anita Street. Existing uses include five single-
family residences, the Farm House Trailer Park, a small motel, and a small portion of the
Granada Mobile Estates Park. Despite the existing uses, this area is designated and zoned for
Limited Industrial development. Redesignation and rezoning of Subareas 1 and 2 to Commercial
would result in this area remaining an isolated pocket of industrially designated land surrounded
by commercial uses to the west and south and residential uses to the north and east.
Commercial uses on this property (other than the existing small 40-year-old motel) are
inappropriate given the lack of frontage on a circulation element street. Therefore, staff
recommends that this area be redesignated to Medium Residential (6-11 du/ac), in conformance
with the adjacent residential area to the west of Subarea 3, and rezoned to R-2-P (One and Two-
Family Residential).
While the owners of the eastern half of this subarea (Granada Mobile Estates and three smaller
properties) have assented to the change in land use category, the owner of the Farm House
Trailer Park and Motel objects to the change, primarily because he believes that his property is
unsuitable for future residential use due to the impacts of the adjacent Sommerset Commercial
Center to the west. In response, staff believes that many of the problems related to the interface
between residential and commercial uses can be resolved through proper site planning and
environmental review if and when the Farm House property is redeveloped. Also, the owner
has been directed to discuss existing zoning enforcement problems related to excessive noise
coming from the Sommerset Commercial Center with the Code Enforcement Division of the
Building & Housing Department.
The Chula Vista Elementary School District, in a letter dated October 16, 1992, has requested
that action on Subarea 3 be either deferred until the City and School District have agreed on a
19-'-/
Page 5, Item
Meeting Date 12/15/92
I~
school impact mitigation ordinance, or conditioned to require participation in a Mello-Roos
financing or other alternative financing mechanism to fully mitigate school impacts. Staff does
not believe that action on Subarea 3 should be deferred or conditioned as requested by the school
district because most of this area consists of existing residential uses which include five single-
family residences and 38 trailers/mobilehomes. Staff estimates that maximum additional buildout
of this area, if the lots containing single-family homes were redeveloped at densities allowed by
the Medium Residential (6-11 du/ac.) plan category, would be 10 units. The lots containing the
trailers/mobilehomes are already built to maximum residential density allowed in the Medium
Residential plan category. This would result in an additional three elementary students. Based
upon the most recent enrollment figures at Montgomery and Otay Elementary Schools available
to the City, these two schools can accommodate three additional students.
CONCLUSION
The proposed Montgomery Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment would not adversely affect
the development of the Montgomery Community, provided the recommendations, as outlined
elsewhere in this report, are made part of the overall amendment and rewning.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
(GPA93-03.Al13)
/7-5 /1'1-'
ATIACHMENT A
PAGE A
PRECISE PLAN FINDINGS
Pursuant to Section 19.56.041 of the Zoning Ordinance, the following circumstances are evident
which allow application of the "P" Precise Plan modifying district to this site.
The subject property, or the neighborhood or area in which the property is located, is unique
by virtue of topography, geological characteristics, access, configuration, traffic circulation, or
some social or historic situation requiring special handling of the development on a precise plan
basis.
The subject property is located in the middle of the Montgomery Community which
operates under zoning regulations which require design review approval for all new
commercial projects. The development should reflect that same requirement.
The property or area to which the "P" modifying district may be applied is an area adjacent and
contiguous to a zone allowing different land uses and the development of a precise plan will
allow the area so designated to coexist between land uses which might otherwise be
incompatible.
The three subareas are all adjacent to zones which allow differing land uses, and the
Precise Plan designation would serve to buffer potential land use conflicts.
J1-?
ATIACHMENT A
PAGE B
P DISTRICT REGULATIONS
FOR
PRECISE PLAN
In order to effectuate the implementation of the proposed rezoning (C-C-P) the following
constitute the District Regulations and design standards and guidelines which shall be adhered
to for any Precise Plan for development of the property.
Design Standards and Guidelines:
. All mitigation measures identified in the Negative Declaration (IS 92-42) must be
complied with.
. The project shall show compatiblity with adjacent uses through the use of landscaping,
building design, fencing, and other measures as necessary.
/9-r
,
.., ._..-._ ._I.T..o
~~~::::I~~::~::. :::.
........................1..
.~::::::~::~:::::;:;:;:;::..::::.
..................... .
~:::*::~::::::::::::::~:::.. :::.
~~:;:;:;:~;:;:;:;:;:~;:;~::. .::~
.;:-::.:.:.:~;::.:.:.::;: 00..
:......:.......;.:..:....
Jl~~.:::::.:.:.:.:.:.:.
'::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.
~:;::::::'$:::::::::::::::.:.:
J.~~:::~:::::::::::::$::~
....:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:...:.:..
~:~::::::::::::-;::::.e:::::::.
...:........... I.
.~:~:::~::::::::.::..
. ::::::::~:::>.:::::::.';;..:.
f;11;;;;;~;;;~;;;~;~;;~;~;~~~.
'.... ............. ..eo....
......~
ROJECT
AREA-
- ,
I
I'
~
I
W H I
E
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS
..'''4
. i'<:it:~:,.
LOW/MEDIUM RES. ($-6 du/ac)
MEDIUM RES. (6-11 du/ac)
MED/HIGH RES. n 1-16 du/ac)
HIGH RES. ('8-27 du/ac)
Em
ftm
fZ2]
GPA-93-03
EXHIBIT A
D
-
~:;:~n
MERCANTILE/OFFICE COMM.
THOROUGHFARE COMM.
LIMITED INDUSTRIAL
OPEN SPACE
. PROPOSAL: CHANGE FROM
LIMITED INDUSTRIAL TO COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL
J9-q
CITY' OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT-ADV. DIV. to-07-82 C.CO~RRUB1AS
I
o
FEET
t
~~~
. . ~ ..~ <
I
400'
MHP
R-3
r.. 3A
- - - -,
R-3-P
L _~ J
,
l----~
,
,
,
l- - ~--
,
,
,
L _ _ _ _ __
,
,
,
I
~- -
I
P~OJECT
,AREA
,
ILP
1- -- --
, L.__...J
,
;,
"
, ,
: '
, ,
, ,
(_..J I
, ,
,
,
,
<J'>
<:
.:::;
,0 Cr-- -
CTP
,_.--,
,
,
[j
ILP
,
,
i
ILP
\
,
,
,
,
\
AIVRf
"
....:
,
EXISTING ZONING DESIGN A TIONS
S94
-MHP
'--'
'"
:I:
'--'
,..
r - - - - --
I
,
PCZ-93-C
PROPOSAL: CHANGE FROM LIMITED
INDUSTRIAL TO CENTRAL
COMMERCIAL AND
RESIDENTIAL .
R-2-P TWO FAMII.:Y' PRECISE PLAN
R-3 MUL TI-FAMIL Y' RES.
R-3-PMULTI-FAMLlY- RES. PRECISE PLAN
MHP MOBILE HOME PARK
CTP THOROUGHFARE COMM. PRECISE PLAN
lLP LIMITED INDUSTRIAL PRECISE PLAN
8U OPEN SPACE
EXHIBIT~
19,-/t/
I
o
FEET
I
400'
t
CITY' OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT-ADV. DIV. lCH)7-82 C.cOVARRUSIAS
IOARO OF EOOCA liON
IOSEplj.I:> CUt.MJ.;~.GS. Ph.D.
LAi=\P1Y CUNr-oj~.;GHAM
SHARO~,; GIJ..ES
PATI;,CK AJUOO
GI;EG I; SANDOVAl.
SUPERINTENOENT
Jl><N F. VUGRI;. Pn.D.
.
.
CHULA VISTA ELEMENI'ARY SCHOOL DIS1RIC'I:
fl
84 EAST "J" STREET. CHULA VISTA, CALIFOIL"'IA 91910 . 619425.9600
EACH CHILD IS A." INDI\'IDUAL OF GREAT WORTH
October 16, 1992
~l;;.1 ."
'-'a ~
DC,. '-_
ll~ 19r>c
P. ,,~
"1",.., .
# L'~'I'
'",'
Mr. Robert Leiter
Director of Planning
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
RE: General Plan AmendmentJZone Change for Abode Plaza
PCZ.93-C I GPA 93'()3
Dear Bob:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed General
Plan Amendment (GPA) and Zone Change for Abode Plaza.
This proposal involves amending the General Plan and Zoning to
permit residential development in an area previously zoned for
industrial uses. The home schools for this area, OIay and
Montgomery, are heavily impacted and operating at or above
permanent capacity. This change, if approved. will exacerbate the
situation.
Since the proposed actions are legislative in nature, the District
requests that the City require any residential development on this
parcel to fully mitigate impacts on school facilities. Based on the
General Plan designation of Limited Industrial, it was never envisioned
that children would be generated from this area, and any change which
permits residential development must be fully mitigated.
When the City agreed not to process additional rezonings in Central
and Westem Chuta Vista until such time as a school mitigation
ordinance is in place, we expected this agreement to hold for rezonings
in other areas which would produce similar impacts on schools. If the
~ {-
/9-//
--
.
~.
October 16, 1992
Mr. Robert Leiter
Page 2
RE: General Plan AmendmentlZone Cha~ge for Abode Plaza
City wants to proceed with this project absent the school mitigation
ordinance, requiring full mitigation in the form of participation in Mello-
Roos financing, or other altemative financing mechanism, would
alleviate District concems.
If you have any questions, please contact me.
Sincerely,
~ ~j)~~~. ~
Kate Shurson r
Director of Planning and Facilities
-.
KS:dp
cc: Board of Education
John Linn
~
/9-/.:2-
....~---
. -
)
Sweetwater Union High School District
.
ADMINISTRATION CENTER
1130 Fifth A..nu.
Chula Vilta, California etett.2US
(llle) 6el.5500
OM.ion of P18nnlng Ind Flcilitie.
October 15, 1992
Mr. Frank J. Herrara
City of Chula Vista
Planning Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mr. Herrara:
Ie: PCZ.93.C/Abode Plaza
.
The above subject project will have an impact on the Sweetwater Union
High School District, Payment of school fees will be required pursuant to
Government Code No. 65995 (Developer Fees) prior to issuance of
building permit.
~
Thomas silva
Assistant Director of Planning
TS/ml
.
_ ,3/
/9- J}
i
ADDENDtlH TO IlEGATIVB DECUllATION
/~/
.',
PROJECT NAME: GPA 93-03/Abode Plaza
CASE I: IS 92-42
This addendum to the Negative Declaration further reviews the
proposed project's impacts to Elementary and Secondary Schools.
The proposed project would redesignate and rezone a 4.92 acres
located in Subarea 3 of the project from Research and Limited
Industrial uses to Medium Density (6-11 du/ac) uses. This 4.92
acre area contains 38 existing trailers/mobile homes and five
single-family residences. Buildout of the General Plan would
result in the potential .for an additional ten dwelling units. This
would result in an additional student generation of three
elementary school students and two high school studants. The
Sweetwater Union High School District, in a letter dated October
15, 1992, has stated that school fees pursuant to state law are
required to mitigate impacts. However, the Chula Vista Elementary
School District, in a letter dated October 16, 1992, states that
additional mitigation is required in the form of participation in
a Mello-Roos financing district, or other alternative financing
mechanism, in order to alleviate district concerns.
In the City's analysis, the increase of ten potential dwelling ""'"
units over existing residential development in this area
constitutes an insignificant increase in student generation (three
students) for the Chula Vista Elementary School District.
Information from the District received as part of the City's Growth
Management Oversight Process indicates that enrollment as of
10/4/91 at Montgomery Elementary School, with a capacity of 432,
was 427 students. Enrollment as of 10/4/91 at Otay Elementary
School, which also serves this area and has a capacity of 660
students, was 619 students. Thus, these two schools, while
essentially at or close to full enrollment capacity, have the
ability to accept the three additional elementary school students
expected to be generated by the buildout residential development of
Subarea 3.
-
,
/?~/t/
-4-
.
.
.
.
.
MmGATED NEGATIVE DECLARAmON
.
PROJECT NAME: GPA 93-03/Abode Plaza
PROJECT LOCATION: East side Broadway between Main Street and Anita Street
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 622-112- 1,2,3,4,5,13,14 622-111-38,50
PROJECT APPLICANT: City of Chula Vista/Sam Sepehri
CASE NO: IS-92-42
DATE: August 26, 1992
A. Proiect Settino
The project site is located on the east side of Broadway, between Main Street and
Anita Street in Chula Vista. Existing uses include medium density residential,
commercial shopping center, a metal shop, an auto sales yard, and a trailer park.
Surrounding uses include a thrift store to the east, a gas station to the south
across Main Street, commercial development to the west across Broadway and to
the northwest. and residential uses to the north. See Location Map, following
page.
B. Proiect Descriotion
The project proposes a General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan Amendment and
Rezone over this area. No change to existing uses would occur over the north and
northeast portions of the site. and a commercial shopping center is proposed on
the southerly portion. This center is called Abode Plaza. Abode Plaza is a
proposed development of a ~OO square foot shopping center over 4.56 acres
(see Site Plan following Location Map). The buildings would be built on the
perimeter of most of the site with parking located in the interior. Maximum
building height would be 30 feet.
r-
bo CX)(/4
/
C. Comoatibilitv with Zonino and Plans
The project site is designated by the General Plan as Industrial (Research and
Limited Manufacturing), and by the Zone Code as I-L-P (Umited Industrial-Precise
Plan). The applicants propose a General Plan Amendment (GPA), Specific Plan
Amendment (SPA) and rezone to accomplish the existing and proposed uses. The
proposed changes are shown below:
: ..:..
LocIItionlExistinll Use Proposed ProPD..clGPA Proposed SPA .... PrQllO_d ~one
Use ~ ..
Corner Aniu St./ No c:henlle Reteil Commerc:iel Merc;entile end C-C.p lCentrel
Broedwey/Commerc:iel Offic:e Commerc;iallPrec:ise
Center Commerc:iel Plen
Anite StreetIResidentie' No c:henge Medium Density Medium Density R-2-P
Residentie' Residentie'
/
/ 1-/~
- s;-,
~
r/~
~.
I
$.
0
n- .
-
8-
]- ~
- lI'l
-t.
. .
.
or
,)
...
J'
-.- 'l.~
1
1.'-
--
I
t u
~ ..
(]) :r e~
'"
oil
...
..
~
...
.., -.rr" .".-'" - ..
..
io;:;
0>-,
2~
~~ @
fiZ e
0"
AU
"
';~\:u 2=~ I I
'l(~O~ "'''''_'
, L ..',... .
. JII".........
.E:;~:;~ :::/;i'~
.. ~o ... .
~ '
..........",
, .,el ... '1' Ltr
'::I;;:-@:;t.1 t I
&._. ooi(
.. ..
~ ~ ... I
A ~@a -::I: ''''
t .~.. la, ,11/
~ ~.. - "
:@! :/:u~'1 t I~I
,,,,"
t '."
.
.
..
... LU
0(..- u u a::
~.... .. ..
..~ 0~ -<
z.. '.4~cl
:.,." @" t-
. - ,,; c.> ..
.....001
. -,'"
u-.. .....
0"-
.0 U 0
:I or a::
~l'! Q..
...
o,..Q~"''i
M_0~ 0"
-~ .
:~
o
r.i:\-
\V.;
:J.S " ".1'._ S\f^lIS . . . .
o' r
J @~
~ 0 0 . .
0 . . . .
. . .
ui o'
Ef- U .'tlr, _
I ... ;,. ..
0~
I: ..
"
" .;
., . . ~... u
. ~ .. or
.. . ." li @-
.. ..,
.~ 0~ t. ..;
J. ..
!
.
.
o
'"""I
--_.._~
i9
"
-.I
~ -!~
_II ,
--~
W'"
~~.
~~
I
f~
f -
c
\J
Ow
(
-,
.
'.
.
.
'.
I ~ r-;!l c a:~t;. "'$"
" ..~ a " ~ .;it Ii-
~ -!l of ~ - ~~"~
X ~t ~, I !9~. ~
~, "",II. ~
~ 0;. _'"If
-= . -
.. -
li\
..
i~B;u i ~~
~~ ~~~
:t I c
fig ~l~'
t 1 o~
~~ ~IS!
~I~ r1i
I I
I: I'
. .
.~s NIVIIl
~
z
g, ]!!ill
...
<,
> ~
W
...l
W D.
...
z
0
a:
u.
.
.
~
'.'!
i"
/ ,
1'7-/7
-1-
'.
:
.
-,
Page 2
Corner Main Abode Retail Commercial Mercantile and C-C-P CCentral
StreetlBroadway/Mixed Plaza Office CommerciallPrecise
Commercial Use Shopping Commercial Plan
Center
D. Comoliance with the Threshold/Standards Policv
1. Fire/EMS
The Threshold/Standards Policy requires that fire and medical units 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 1.5 miles away and would be associated with a 3 minute
response time. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Policy.
The Fire Department requires that certain measures be implemented by the
Abode Plaza development - see Section F.
2.
Police
-..
The Threshold/Standards Policy requires that police units must respond to
84% of Priority 1 calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average
response time to all Priority 1 calls of 4.5 minutes or less. Police units must
respond to 62% of Priority 2 calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an
average response time to all Priority 2 calls of 7 minutes or less. The
proposed project will comply with this Threshold Policy.
3. Traffic
The Threshold/Standards Policy requires that all intersections must operate
at a Level of Service (LOS) "C" or better, with the exception that Level of
Service (LOS) "0" may occur during the peak two hours of the day it
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.
The Abode Plaza portion of the project contributes to cumulative impacts
at the intersection of BroadwaylMain Street, and must pay standard signal
fees for the upgrade of the signal. Additionally, the applicant must dedicate "'"
right-of-way to meet the half-width design standard of 41 feet for Main
Street and 48 feet for Broadway. Associated improvements to the curb,
gutter, median and possibly drainage improvements must also be made.
;c;r-I'6 -<6'---
. ,
.
.
.
.
Page 3
4.
Parks/Recreation
The Threshold/Standards Policy for Parks and Recreation is 3 acres/1,OOO
population. The proposed project does not affect this Threshold Policy.
5. Drainage
The Threshold/Standards Policy 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 Engineering Standards. The proposed project must prepare
a drainage plan to be reviewed by the City's Engineering Dep.artment in
order to achieve compliance with the Threshold Policy. Storm drainage
improvements on adjacent roadways may be required of the Abode Plaza
applicant.
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 Policy requires 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 Abode Plaza project applicant will coordinate
water infrastructure planning with Sweetwater Authority. Approval of
project and offsite infrastructure by Sweetwater Authority.will demonstrate
compliance with this Threshold Policy.
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.
The project now mitigates the potentially significant environmental effects
previously identified. and the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report will
not be required. This Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in
accordance with Section 15070 of the State CECA Guidelines. Specific mitigation
measures have also been set forth in the Mitigation Monitoring Program which is
attached as Addendum . A . .
-9/
/9--)7
.
Page 4
-,
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.
Air
Emissions from project related vehicular trips would incrementally contribute
to a regionally (cumulative) significant impact on the San Diego Air Basin.
Demolition of existing structures and finish grading would produce dust
emissions.
Water
No drainage calculations and plans have been submitted for the Abode Plaza
portion of the project; until they are, the potential for inadequate drainage
exists.
The adequacy of the existing water infrastructure to provide domestic
service and fire protection to the Abode Plaza portion of the project is
currently unknown, and until known, the potential for impacts on the ability
of Sweetwater Authority to service the site exists.
~
T r a nso ort at i on/e irc ul a t i on
The proposed Abode Plaza portion of the project incrementally contributes to a
cumulative impact on the Broadway/Main Street intersection.
Fire Protection
Project design for the Abode Plaza portion of the project does not incorporate
facilities/design to facilitate adequate service capabilities of the City'S Fire
Department.
Human Health
If contamination from hazardous materials is present on the Abode Plaza portion
of the project, the potential for human health hazards exists.
F. Mitioation necessarv to avoid sionificant effects
Specific project mitigation measures are required to reduce potentially significant
environmental impacts identified in the initial study for this project to a level of less
than significant. . .......
Mitigation measures will been made conditions of project approval, as well as
requirements of the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program (Addendum -A"I.
Ai!
/ '1 ~ ;20
-/0-
.
.
.
G.
.
Page 5
The Abode Project applicant must incorporate any vehicle' reduction
measures required by the City once the City adopts its own congestion
management program (such measures could include payment of a vehicle
reduction fee, ridesharing, vanpooling, bicycle storage facilities, etc.).
Abode Plaza site soils must be watered during grading and street sweeping
along Broadway and Main Street site frontage must occur.
Water
The applicant for Abode Plaza must submit drainage calculati,ons and
associated plans with grading plans. These plans will be subject to review
and approval by the City Engineering Department prior to the issuance of
grading and building permits.
The applicant f,or Abode Plaza must provide fire flow requirements to
Sweetwater Authority, and must coordinate with them for provision of
water supply.
T ran S Dort at ionIC irc ul at io n
The applicant for Abode Plaza must pay standard signal fees to mitigate the
cumulative impact at the intersection of Broadway/Main Street.
Fire Protection
The Fire Department requires of the Abode Plaza portion of the project:
fire flow of 5,000 gallons per minute.
five fire hydrants: one at each entrance, one in front of Building A,
and one in front of Building B.
PIV valves.
Driveway entrances 20 feet wide.
Human Health
Prior to demolition of all structures within the Abode Plaza portion of the
site (with the exception of mobilehome!5), an asbestos survey must occur,
and remediation plan developed and implemented as necessary. Once
demolition occurs, a site assessment must be performed to determine
whether hazardous wastes are present. and all recommendations
implemented prior to issuance of grading and/or building permits. These
activities are regulated by the County Department of Health and the City's
Fire Department.
Findinas of Insianificant ImDact
Based on the following findings. It is determined that the project described above
will not have a significant environmental impact and no environmental impact _} / -
report needs to be prepared. / ~ - c:< J .
-
.
.
-....
Page 6
1. The project has the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wUdiife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below
self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or andangered plant or
animal, or eliminate Important examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory.
The project would not affect biological or cultural resources, nor would it
degrade the Quality of the environment.
2. The project has the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals to
the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals.
No long term environmental goals, such as agricultural production or mineral
extraction, exist for this site.
3.
The project has possible effects which are Individually limited but
cumulatively considerable. As used In the subsection, .cumulatively
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.
.......
The project incrementally contributes to cumulative impacts on air Quality,
energy/natural resources supply, and traffic circulation at the intersection
of Broadway/Main Street. With implementation of standard building
requirements and mitigation measures identified herein, the incremental
contribution from the project is reduced to a level below significant.
4. The environmental effects of a project wUI cause substantialadver.. effects
on human beings, either directly or Indirectly.
The project does not have environmental effects which directly or indirectly
adversely affect human beings.
H. Consultation
1. Individuals and Oraanizations
City of Chula Vista:Roger Daoust, Engineering
John Uppitt, Engineering
Cliff Swanson, Engineering
Hal Rosenberg, Engineering
Bob .Sennett, Planning
Ken Larsen, Director of Building and Housing
Carol Gove, Fire Marshal
) 9 /).;).- Captain Keith Hawkins, Police Department
Martin -Schmidt, Parks and Recreation Department
Diana Richardson, Community Development Dept.
.~
-/ 2-~
..
.
.
.
.
Page 7
Chula Vista City School District: Kate Shurson
Sweetwater Union High School District: Tom Silva
Sweetwater Authority: Tom Justo
Applicant's Agent: Casey Raicer
2. Documents
City of Chula Vista General Plan (1989)
City of Chula Vista Municipal Code
Site Assessment/Mitigation Case Listing (3.23.91)
Southwest Redevelopment Plan
3. Initial Studv
This environmental determination is based on the attached Initial Study, any
comments on the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration, and reflects the
independent judgment of the City of Chuta Vista. Further information regarding the
environmental review of the project is available from the Chula Vista Planning
Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010.
.Ii, 1/) . ')
t:JiUULJ ~~1"'-
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR
WPC:F:VlOMEICOMMDEVI '".82
/1/;13
-/3.....
.
ADDENDUM '1'0 DGA'1'IVE DECLARATION
PROJECT NAME: GPA 93-03/Abode Plaza
CASE #: IS 92-42
-
This addendum to the Negative Declaration further reviews the
proposed project's impacts to Elementary and Secondary Schools.
The proposed project would redesignate and rezone a 4.92 acres
located in Subarea 3 of the project from Research and Limited
Industrial uses to Medium Density (6-11 du/ac) uses. This 4.92
acre area contains 38 existing trailers/mobile homes and five
single-family residences. Buildout of the General Plan would
result in the potential for an additional ten dwelling units. This
would result in an additional student generation of three
elementary school students and two high school students. The
Sweetwater Union High School District, in a letter dated October
15, 1992, has stated that school fees pursuant to state law are
required to mitigate impacts. However, the Chula Vista Elementary
School District, in a letter dated October 16, ~992, states that
additional mitigation is required in the form of participation in
a Mello-Roos financing district, or other alternative financing
mechanism, in order to alleviate district concerns.
In the City's analysis, the increase of ten potential dwelling
units over existing residential development in this area
constitutes an insignificant increase in student generation (three
students) for the Chula Vista Elementary School District.
Information from the Oistrict received as part of the City's Growth
Management Oversight Process indicates that enrollment as of
10/4/91 at Montgomery Elementary School, with a capacity of 432,
was 427 students. Enrollment as of 10/4/91 at Otay Elementary
School, which also serves this area and has a capacity of 660
students, was 619 students. Thus, these two schools, while
essentially at or close to full enrollment capacity, have the
ability to accept the three additional elementary school students
expected to be generated by the buildout residential development of
Subarea 3.
-..
,
-.
/ c; -' J-L,/
- I<{ -
.
.
.
.
ADDENDUM . A.
Mitigation Monitoring Program
15-92-42
This Mitigation Monitoring Program is prepared for the Abode Plaza project. AB 3180
requires public agencies to ensure that adequate mitigation measures are implemented and
monitored on Mitigated Negative Declarations, such as IS-92-42.
This program requires monitoring of potentially significant and/or significant environmental
impacts. The mitigation monitoring program for this project ensures adequate
implementation of mitigation for the following potentially significant impacts: air quality,
water, transportation/circulati~n, fire protection and human health.
Due to the nature of the environmental issues identified, the Mitigation Compliance
Coordinator (MCCl. shall be the Environmental Review Coordinator (ERCI for the City of
Chula Vista. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the conditions
of the Mitigation Monitoring Program are met to the satisfaction of the ERC, prior to the
issuance of any permits by the City of Chula Vista. The ERC will thus provide the
ultimate verification that the mitigation measures have been accomplished.
WPC:F:\HOME\COMMDEV\ 18S. 12
! 9 ;'d-~
_IS~
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING CHECKUST'
.......
PROJECT NAME: GPA-93-03/Abode Plaza
IS NO.: 92-42
The following measures pertain to the Abode Plaza portion of the project.
Issue Area
Air
.'
Mjtioation Measure
A. Adherence to future relevant congestion management programs required by City.
B. Dust control must occur - watering of site soils and street sweeping on Main and
Broadway.
Project Phase (Proiect Desion: Construction: Post Constructionl
A.
Post Construction
.......
B. Construction
Resoonsible Partv or Aoencv
A. Planning Department
B. Engineering Department or Building and Housing Department.
Verification of Comoletion
Person:
Date:
Comments:
Issue Area
Water
Mitioation Measure
.......
A. Submission of drainage calculations and plans subject to Engineering Department
review and approval prior to issuance of grading and building permits.
WPC F:\hoIM~V\1".'2
/c; -J-~
-I to
-
"'"
.
.
.
.
Page 2
B.
Coordination with water district, and service ayailability letter submitted to City
prior to issuance of grading permits.
Proiect Phase (Proiect Deslan: Construction: Post Constructionl
A. Project Design, Construction
B. Project Design, Construction
C. Project Design
ResDonslble Party or Aoency
A. Engineering Department
B. Planning/Building and Housing Department
C. Planning/Engineering Department
Verification of Comoletion
Person:
Date
Comments:
(ssue Area
T r a nsportation/C irculat ion
Mitiaation Measure
Payment standard signal fees.
Proiect Phase (Proiect Desio": Consfruction= Post Construction)
Prior to issuance building permit.
ResDonsible Party or Aaency
Engineering Department
Verification of ComDletlon
Person:
Date:
Comments:
WPCF:__""".U
/9~;2.?
~/7-
~ -~-~
.
~
Page 3
Issue Area
Fire Protection
Mitiaation Measure
Provision of: 1) 5,000 gpm fire flow; 2) prOVISion 5 fire hydrants as specified; 3)
provision Post Indicator Valves (PIV); 4) provision driveway entrances 20 feet wide.
Prelect Phase (Prolect Deslan: Construction: Post Construction)
Design and Construction
Reseonsible Party or Aoencv
Planning/Building and Housing Department
Verification of Com Diet ion
Person:
Date:
Comments:
-.,
Issue Area
Human Health
Mitiaation Measure
Asbestos survey, remediation plan and implementation, if necessary. After demolition of
existing structures, Phase I hazardous waste site assessment and implementation of all
geotechnical site assessment recommendations prior to issuance of grading and/or
building permits. .
Proleet Phase ('ralee! Desion: Constroetlon: Post Construction)
Design and Construction
ReSDonsible Party or Aoency
PlanninglBuilding and Housing Department
Verification of ComDletion
-
Person:
Date:
Comments:
/1/~g'
-/g-
WI'C F:__.Yll....2
e.
\1
/
I
\,
/
I
\1
/
I
I
-~
f~
u
~~
I~
,.
'I'
''iiI
..~
-~
~
--
:.
Ii
-.
,;
.. .~~....
-liOI
I::: ....
-=.e:-
,-_ w_ c
--...
-j -
.. -11
':1....1
I r';.~
;. f.~~
;-e-. ~
l, ,...1=
... "".Iii
..- -~
le... ~
- ......
- 0-
__... c
f~-:~s-
101 0_. .
"Q.'5l"""
6~';1::':
· -,
~-
-
1"1"
~
~
- ..
. .:f
. =.: =
..: .
."'....c
-"l~
f- =
i i
- .
",H
.- ...
"'-0
o
p u'"' _
.--r
.r:.
2'01=
1:...
...-...
i
I
.. --
.. =~
. ~~
"r I.!
~~
- .0
5 !i
..
.:
c ..
.:
..
.;
.
Ii
1:;-:
- -I~
.. ..
II-j
!
a
:!
-
()
,
....
'5'-
,J,
'.
I. ,
. ..-rl . . .
- ..~ J .. .. -
\;)
-
-
.
\,
I
,~
=
-
.-
1&
-~
!..
I~
I
..I
-
....
.
I
i
i
r
E
i
-
}
1
)'
I~
-II::
-~
-.5 ~-
....1
-.
-
-
-
,
\
/
J
\.
/
J
I
j
::
II
i
.
.
'..~
p- ..
'. -
~!!..
=...1
~it
I..~
c.
-..
~:;
.. II
.;:
..0
...~
--
I~-
-t-
~ 0
. ~
t...,
.. -
-..-
c.u
I
-
~
E
I
.. u
'I
...
u
-
..
~
-
ill I
I \/
a J
i ,
i II
~ ::..
':iu
Iii
. ..l!
;I .1'
= ii
5 1.=
i ..
,
-
u
j It~
.. !i=
i &; !
.. ,.
- -.. ~
1 I~:
. . 't'
tj-II
i f~!
15;.
,
..
. ..
.;
J
.:.1
I;
-I'
--
~I
\.
/
I
f';
~i
.
i!
.
I~
-..
b~
i..r;
.0
.= ,!
-Fo
f~=
~~
... -..
...-
.,;
\, \
/
I
II
-' '=
Ii .i
i~ I!
.Si. .
/7,-(A 7
. .;
I
,
1
\,
J
\1
/
J
",
I
~
,
I
.r
..
.
~~
.
.~
1=
--
~.
lJ
C'"
.:
\,
/
I
'.l!
I'
If!
h.
I
-I'':
1 ;
-...~
I.i
..1-
i--
. ~..
,f!
..
.
.:.
..
.
.
..
'"
-
..
~
~
.
I
r -17 ~
.
\ \, \ \, \, \ .-.
\, \, ,
, , , , , , , \, ,
I I I I I I I I I
.
i ~=r~ i''i ~.~ , - - .,
- .
;; .;-~ -=1 - I .
ii~j - ~ I
- . .. -..
.. ..- - - ..I
.. -l -- - r z
- .. -. .. --
..- - IE" - . -r
- ~. 'I Ii ~ - E E"
z - - r - a
- - .. - -
f - ~-:: u .. i i _2
. - -- - :I ...
I ;1'.1- 1.= .
I - z I"~ -
i --- .. II I' -- ..
-I - d Z~ .. - - =z Dr .
- -t 'Ii .. -.. -- .. I -. .
.r .. - = .. I.
! .. - ..Ii .-'.1 .... I
~~"I~.! . . 'Ii :1:-
-.. .. -
- - ....:~~ -z D" I:; ~ .. roO ......
. - !~.t; -. - -=:
d ;; II: ~ ... . ..... 2 Ii!
...- ...--- . - ---
-I ... .u. Ii:: .. - Eo;; ..-
;. -. - - -- - -
i t -=c .. .- --- i~ - . 11 -'I
f~ iH ,- . - r --
e!,... ... ;; 1= .. .
:; . - Af' ..- .. ..- I! -::-
.~~t cc__ ,s.
.. wo_ 0 .i:i -.... - ...:! - &~'I
i .; ..
.." ...
- !O~ rc
i i ....
... .; ... .; ... .; ... ,,-
.. ... ..-..
..; .. ~ .. ....
..
-
- .......
..
~
0\, \, \, \, \, \, \, \, \,
, , , , , , , , ,
I I I I I I I I I
Ii __ .0.. - r.... I'~ :I: .. . t'i I!!
1::- . - :tro :-.
- 1: - ..
I 1i;11 =t= Ii -.. -
~ l'i.lo - ~=
, .... . - 1;i
i .J.. F; -.. .Ii - -1; 'hi
r.... I 1; Ii':- i" .
- -- ..: -"j::. 11 Ii....
--- it ...f -Ii .
II .. - ~ . -.I-
- .... -. '10;;
1; 1"..1 i~ji I =l.i I:J .
-. I.': J= at :r
.Ii u. ... i- ..
al --- ~ I
... - IIi -'':41
-i; aJi; fJ! . i- 1;=
1;1 a a,;;..i 1;' 1; .1
il; h. .'I~ 1:- 1;-" JU
fi,l? - , i' i .f" .1
.j n . .=1 -,-
i~ . 1'; i..1 J!f 11-1.
I; 51":! ft:: ~ = ..1.= f'l. jii
-if 0-.. j,;;t 4 -- !ih
.=r . ::... -I"'" - ."n -.
--.... c_ 15; .I: .... .. -.. I'i.
i """'"
. .; ..: .. .- . E . .- .;
- -
.. .
- -d-t -
)7')0 ;;
a:
.
'.
.
. ..
\1\1
, ,
I' I
,
-
i
I
~
I
:l
.;
.. i'
I ..
.
~ ;
- ..
- .
- -
.. c~
Jo ;1
I~
! Ii
- -.
;~
IE ..
,\, \J \1
\, , , /
I I I I
..:
..
/
'I
~I
/
I
!~ II~ ~ _i
Ii ...t ! =
~~ ~~. ~ -
~ f-~~ ~ !
it I; ~:
3~ ~:~ -t~ i
u- ..:: 1..-
-~ -
~: ==. ~! ..~ =
::!- ati.. i ... -i I
-~ ~. o~fE i ~ ,- i~
i~ !i _JSjl; I ! - ~ I-
. t~ 'l;!. _ ::! l! ==u d ,
~.. l!-: ~ r,!! ~ - ; l; .. ': l! .c
~~ -. u~=~ ~ Z ~. ~~ a_ S
_....-....
-. ..
.6> _
Z i ~~.; .
. . ...
- = 1": I
. .-'O.~
.. -'1-."
-. t_::!.1
r-,&-
: !::.i:i
I. ':.::11
,l!.I~
-- --
! !i~!!
- l-!'!-
i li!'J
..t _u
. ....-x
1 'Ii I'; -=
.;: J-
.~ .
, ...1561.
11
;; ..
..
-
II
~,
'i
1-
'a=
Jli
_tll
C
in
_ff
ill
..
.; ..
)1
,
I
~~
;1..
....t
....
_.::1
.~...
---
Ii!
..
-.-
;;_1
-I.
iiJ
i:;.!
::1-
.--
,--: -
~-:
-~
o
-
-
\,\,
/ ,
I I
.;
,\,
/
I
,\,
,
I
....
!.:
':;'1
-:;1
I~
a;
-il
..--
.-J
J
..
01'1
,--
J~i
..
-
~I
./
I
,
..
o. !
. ..
-
i i
..
. -
f ~
a i
- .-
= .E1
. :1
. ..-
p
.: .!-
::
~I
/ /
I~I
,
1'1 !
)f~ !j
:,1 I.~
- =
In- ~t
-j~r :!
...~ =~
- . .-
U't: -!
-:::.~ .:t
..- 0'. ...&'
.l:Z: -~
~.
..
t~
. ~;:;
==
, , I
\/ \'~I
I I I
'->1 .
,
I
a ..
!
..
i
.;
-
/9- J / .
...
if
-.
i-
II
u
.,
-
ui
1='
..h
.....
o
.
I:
o
...
~
..
..
~
o
:
o
!
-
..
-;;1-
,
~
".I..1~=~~- ~',.1 to
. -----. I ...
i ~_.. - ..
.~~ I~r_.=
i';IHI~ j::.!::
j" ~:-..,'i!' _I~f
--- ... ,.
-- ~ -'- ..
jo... ..~._
.. ':'1;: t 'I- ....
i. I~ -Ii'::! .. .......
= ... _...~..c
.. -J- ~ V-Ie':';
~ ~~i-... 'li!"~f"
. ... .. ...-.~ .. .....
II!. f._I 1_1t'
.. ~-.'" "_0
- ~..f n..:: 1.1~
1 ..r!...::c:=Z.~ ~
- "i f':~'=":.! c;: r~ ~ t
· .. --~....i"..D.
~ R ..~ o....-...1!--
! .:::':...::.",t..a:.
J
"
.
.
-
..
..
..
.
f
u.
'!!
ou
..-
o.
.-
-
o
I
!
~'!
_0
o.
~~
~...
0-
..~=
o
1=.1
it::
!ii
-
-
ii
fi
~
.
'i
.
::
\/ '-I
I I
..
.
~'E
.0
:r
Ii
..
-
:
..
I
..
..
"
~I,;~
.." i"B
.... r:::
... ..~
E::.__
=.&;1
.......;
1. u- C
--_v
1...=
'" -t
..;, I.
.... .--
~=c
=';-tlt
-liue
- .. .
- .I..
-';.1-;
J!&:~.
I~.-!
,A"'..,_
. _c
...
.: I.;~
......
'\1
I
I
~I
I
I
".I.r !!.:~=
-........-,
i =-: -'I
-....1;
i~ !!:~I r .
.I. cl!:l
-! - ..
.:: .=,.=
l......-Z' ..
.~.-~
....1 -.-1'-
a:- i. c---:-
... :!-lit
(U~cE. -i
-~~,.t.::r
~.... -.....1
-.. ... ---
.. "1- ~'5.!,' .
!I.:: ~ t~..'; ~
......5_. __
..
\,
c.
-.
~..
-~
.-
.~
.c_
....
I:
....::
..1
f~l
.. &-
.. .
_!II
-=-
- ..
-I!
i~~
-Ill'
1: too
j-=
c.
..
.:
..
,\,
I
I
.I.~
... "
...
...=
-..
..
=~
I~
fi
-.1'-
1=; i
. ~ i
J :!I:!i
-,-
..~.
1":::
_e.a.&
i~U
J
i .;
.:
.~c... __
tI.._~u_._
i I ih..
__..c
"1-i~'.I~'
-- -'.If
-'iE'.=~i
. -2.....
.- ....fi=~
.....IX..=~..
-ute .
..- l.~1
~= - .
"'U'" ~..
- ...-I~..-
.~lt....X':
1!! .fft5
.. .......ai--
.....'" -.
-. ~. .-
- 1_.. _e:
!It "... ~o..
......: IJ:;;
.;
"I
,\,
~
\,
I
I
.
-,
i
..
..
I
I
.-:i
~..
-
.-
.i.l
-..,
=~~
I",'
r-:....
~-~
-!.~
Ihi
'v'
:!~H
v.~
=-i.~
... t..
- ...
"
.
J1~ 3.;2,
-- .
,-=r
:-
~..1
_fJ~
e. ::;
&. u
i t
JVI!
-
..- ..
lI!-..
.;;, -.....
(..~-
V~~
-....
'I. t
.J ...;
......L
_Wf;~
.-...
.':'1.
.
\1
I
I
-..-
ouo
--..
...., .
1-:::
if:
:!~j
..
h-
.:1
':;"'-
I~~
!
..:-
;; I.~
."%.
.adi
rl
-~
..
~~
:~
1:';
1::
...
:....
.. .'
_If
-110
I.i
'.
!ii
-..
_~f!
__.:I
5f~
"
...
..
.
0-
..
~
-
..
"~
-"
'-
/
I
z
.
-
!
:
I_?;)...-
.
.;
.
.
'.
III. Oetersination ,
(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 significant effect in
this case because the lIitigation Ilelsures described on In Ittached
sheet have been Idded to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
WILL BE PREPARED~..................................................[~]
I find the proposed project HAY have I significant effect on the
environment, Ind an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required........[ ]
.
r'b/t;& r 'I, /,/'1.2..
Date .
~IQ) R~rnJ
Signature
For t?--iJ &f- ~ I), s 7-tJ._
IV.
SUMMARY OF ISSUES
List all significant or potentially significant impacts identified in
the Initial Study checklist form.
YES
HAYBE
-t
'I
aw . Fn.-J:L
.
W'J..b-r
.~ U ctra.J:Ua. tJ -
~ b.J'Y\)'/r4LJ
&in", Af'I.:In,.i7.0 /Ct/'Ci' Itdl ""-
~N ~(vU...u'.' ~~
V. APPLICANT ACCEPTANCE OF.MITIGATION MEASURES
~h? 5/;P'&~4?/ t:J?'Y'/7'"~~
.~~~;;~'
'i
1--
'J..
oJ..
/t? - tf'...;J 2
Date
/9/'3J
- ?--3 -
........ ....-
fl. DE MINIMIS FEE DETERMINATION
(Chapter 1706, Statutes of 1990 - AS 3158)
...x. It is hereby found that this project involVes no potentfal for
any adverse effect, either individually or cumulatively on
wildlife 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 lialDe Code
shall be paid to the County Clerk.
.
-~
~ ~~1t.-
Environmental Reg,iew Coordin tor
.():-hw ., If'l2-
Date '
-
-.
)9~J'f
-- .;;2 If -
u",. ___...__
--
.
.
.
.
DISCUSSION FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
All answers check in the Checklist Form are discussed below. If mitigation measures are
required, these are shown in Italic print.
1. b!1!:l
The project site is flat and is already covered over with development. thus. no
change to topography. erosion and sedimentation. or new overcovering of the soil
would occur. Development is proposed in the 4.56-acre Abode Plaza portion of
the site; no soils report has yet been prepared for this development. which is a
standard requirement of the City's Engineering Department for new structures.
The applicant for Abode Plaza must submit a soils report which would be reviewed
and approved prior to the issuance of grading and/or building permits.
2.
Ail:
No changes to existing land use are proposed over the majority of the site. thus no
impacts to air emissions would occur. However. air emissions are expected to
result from both vehicular traffic associated with the Abode Plaza portion of the
project, and from this project construction. The proposed shopping center is
expected to generated 2,606 average daily traffic trips (ADTI. with current uses
generating 309 ADT (net difference + 2.297 ADT). Emissions from these trips
would incrementally contribute to a regionally (cumulatively) significant impact on
the San Diego Air Basin. The Abode Plaza project must incorporate any vehicle
reduction measures required by the City once the City adopts its own congestion
management program (such measures could include payment of a fee to be used
in a vehicle-reduction program. ridesharing, vanpooling, bicycle storage facilities,
etc.). Implementation of this measure would reduce this impact to a level of less
than significant.
During construction of the Abode Plaza development. dust generation could occur.
The site is flat. and no rough grading is proposed. however. demolition of existing
structures and finish grading would produce dust emissions. Standard dust control
measures must be implemented including watering of site soils during grading, and
street sweeping along all adjacent streets.
3.
Water
The project site is not located in a flOodplain. and is already covered over with
urban development. No drainage calculations and plans have been submitted for
the Abode Plaza project. and until they are. the potential for inadequate drainage
exists. The applicant for Abode Plaza must submit drainage calculations and
associated plans with grading plan. These plans will be subject to review and J/
-;L r
/9-;3.5
~
.
-
Page 2
approval by the City Engineering Department prior to the issuance of grading or
building permits.
The proposed Abode Plaza development would consume water, though commercial
development typically uses less water than residential development. It is not
expected that a net increase in water consumption would occur. However, any
new development must use low water use facilities and drought tolerant
landscaping. Also, the applicant would be required to comply with any water
conservation program the City has in place at the time of building permit issuance.
The adequacy of the existing water infrastructure to provide domestic service and
fire protection is currently unknown, and until known, the potential for impacts on
the ability of Sweetwater Authority to service the site exists. The applicant must
provide fire flow requirements to Sweetwater Authority, and coordinate with them
for provision of water supply.
4.5 Plant. Animal Life
The site is already covered with urban development and no significant natural
biological resources exist.
6.
fi2ia
......,
No change in the noise environment would occur from the change in land use
designation only. The anticipated increase in traffic from the Abode Plaza
development (net increase 2,297 ADTI would incrementally increase noise along
Main Street and Broadway, however, this associated noise increase would not be
perceptible, and thus, would not be significant. Additionally, the proposed new
commercial uses are not considered sensitive to this traffic noise.
7. Lioht and Glare
No new light and glare would occur from the change in land use designation only.
The proposed Abode Plaza commercial development would introduce more light
into the area than what exists from the current development on this portion of the
site. Lighting of proposed uses is not considered unusual in this already urbanized
portion of the City. Direct lighting from the development would not be allowed to
intrude into the adjacent mobile homes to the north; lighting will be reviewed and
approved by the City's Planning Department prior to the issuance of building
permits. Performance standards for lighting are that light be directed downward
into the commercial site, and not directed outward.
8. Land Use
The project site is designated by the General Plan as Industrial (Research and
Limited Manufacturing), and by the Zone Code as I-L-P (Limited Industrial-Precise
Plan). The applicants propose a General Plan Amendment (GPAI, Specific Plan
......,
-,;;J.J.-
/9 -_5 ~
.
.
Page 3
Amendment (SPA) and rezone to accomplish the existing and proposed uses. The
proposed changes are shown in the following table:
Location/Existing Use Proposed Propo"" GPA Proposed SPA Prl!PO~ Rezone
Use ........ .
Corner Anita St.I No change Retail Commercial Mercantile and C-C-P (Centra'
Broadway/Commercia' Office CommerciallPrecise
Center Commercial Plan
Anita StreetlResidential No change Medium Density Medium Density R-2-P
Residential Residential
Corner Main Abode Retail Commarcial Mercantile and C.C-P (Centra'
StreetlBroadwaylMixed Plaza Office CommerciallPrecise
Commercia' Use Shopping Commercial Plan
Center
9.
Natural Resources
.
No change to natural resources would occur from the change in . land use
designations only. Project construction for Abode Plaza will result in a very minor
incremental increase in the rate of use of natural resources, including timber,
mineral resources and fossil fuels. This increase contributes to a cumulative
demand on these resources. Energy conservation requirements are required as part
of the standard building permit process. No other measures are required, however,
the developer should incorporate energy conservation facilities as much as feasible
throughout the center (such as low-energy use appliances and lighting).
10.
Risk of Uoset
No risk of upset would occur from the change in land use designations only. For
Abode Plaza. it is not anticipated that hazardous materials would be present in
substantial amounts. However. if a retail establishment is proposed that deals with
hazardous materials. such as a paint. automotive or hardware store. such
establishment would be subject to the requirements of the County's Department
of Health. and the City's Fire Department, both which regulate, these materials.
11,12
PODulation. Housina
.
Housing and population would not be substantially affected by this project as the
existing mobile home park on the Abode Plaza site has been in the process over the
past two years of relocating its residents. and must meet all City policies for
relocation prior to any action taken on the proposed project. Other uses onsite are
not being proposed for any change, in fact, the change to residential designation
on the residential portion of the site solidifies this use more than the existing
designation.
/9 -] 7
- (;)1-
.
-.
Page 4
13. TransDortationlCirculation
No traffic impact would occur from the change in land use designation only. See
"Traffic Impact Study" attached. The study states that a total of 2,606 average
daily trips (ADT) would be generated by the Abode Plaza project. that this portion
of the site currently generates 309 ADT. and that the net increase is 2,297 ADT.
The projected increase would not decrease Level of Service (LOS) along Broadway
and Main to unacceptable levels (below LOS C). The intersection of Broadway and
Main Street is currently at LOS "C", however, in the near term (1992) the LOS
decreases to "0" without the project. With the project, this LOS remains at "0",
though the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) calculation deteriorates from 0.84
to 0.87. Thus, the project in incrementally responsible for a cumulative impact at
this intersection. The Abode Plaza applicant must dedicate half width right-of-way
on both Main Street and Broadway. and must widen these roads along the project
frontage to standard widths. The development must also install curbs, guners,
sidewalks. pedestrian ramp, street lights, fire hydrant. and median rehabilitation
along this frontage. This applicant must pay standard signal fees to mitigate the
impact on Broadway and Main.
14. Public Services
-.,
No public services would be affected by the change in land use designation only.
For Abode Plaza:
a. Fire Protection - In order to provide service to Abode Plaza. the Fire
Department requires:
fire flow of 5.000 gallons per minute
5 fire hydrants - one at each entrance. one in front of Building A and
one in front of Building B.
P/V valves
driveway entrance 20 feet wide
b. Police - No impacts to police service are expected.
c. Schools - State law requires a standard developer fee of $0.27/square foot
for non-residential development in order to compensate for indirect
generation of students. The Abode Plaza development would actually result
in a lower generation of students than the existing residential trailers.
, -.
d. Parks and Recreation - No impacts are expected.
/0; <> ~
- ~8' -
.
.
Page 5
e.
Maintenance public facilities - Requirements to improve Broadway and Main
Street frontage would improve the existing conditions.
15. Enerav
See No.9.
16. Thresholds
With implementation of standard building requirements .and mitigation ""easures
contained herein. the project would meet the Threshold requirements.
17.
Human Health
.
No human health impacts would occur from the change in land use designation
only. For the Abode Plaza site. none of the existing businesses have been listed
by the County's Depanment of Health Hazardous Materials Management Division
IHMMD) as having contamination. However. the potential for contamination
exists. particularly from the existing automotive sales businesses on-site. If
contamination from hazardous materials is present. the potential for human hazards
exist. In order to avoid this potential impact, prior to demolition of 1111 structures
(with the exception of mobilehomesJ, IIn IIsbestos survey must occur, IInd
remediation plan developed IInd implemented. Once demolition occurs, II site
IIssessment must be performed, IInd 1111 recommendations implemented prior to
issuance of building permits. These activities lire regulated by the HMMD and the
City's Fire Department.
18.
Aesthetics
No change to site aesthetics would occur from the change in land use designation
only. For the Abode Plaza site. the proposed project is considered to provide an
aesthetic improvement as compared to the variety of uses which presently occur
on the site.
19. Recreatian
The proposed land use designation change and proposed shopping center would
not affect recreational facilities.
20.
Cuftural Resources
.
The project site is already entirely developed, and the proposed Abode Plaza
project does not propose any rough grading. Thus. the potential for finding cultural
or prehistorical resources is extremely limited.
21. Mandatorv Findinas of Slanlficance
~ ;)-9 -
19-39
.
-
Page 6
a. The project would not affect biological or cultural resources nor would it
degrade the Quality of the environment.
b. No long term environmental goals. such as agricultural production or mineral
extraction, exist for this site.
c. The project incrementally contributes to cumulative impacts on air Quality,
energy/natural resources supply, and traffic circulation at the intersection
of Broadway/Main Street. With implementation of standard building
requirements and mitigation measures identified herein, the incremental
contribution from the project is reduced to levels below significant.
d. The project does not have environmental effects which directly or indirectly
adversely affect human beings.
-
WPC:F:\HOME\COMMOEVl.200.82
-
/7/YC
--3 0 -'
. ..
ROUTING FORM
.
.
DATE: May 13. 1992
,;'
TO:
Ken Larson. Building a Housing
~ohn Lippitt. Engineering IEIR OnlY}
Cliff Swanson, Engineering EJR only
Hal Rosenberg. Engineering EJR only
Roger Daoust, Engineering JS/3, EJR/2)
Richard Rudolf, Assistant City Attorney (EJR only)
Carol Gove. Fire Department
Marty Schmidt, Parks a Recreation
Keith Hawkins. Police Department
Current Planning .
Frank Herrera. Advance Planning
Bob Sennett. City Landscape Architect .
Bob Leiter. Planning Dir~ctor
Chula Vista Elementary School District, Kate Shurson
Sweetwater Union H.S. District. Tom Silva (JS & EJR)
Other
FROM: . Ma rvann Hi 11 er Environmental Section
. SUBJECT: lID Application for Initial Study (15-92-42 IFA- 580 IDP-933 )
D Checkprint Draft EJR (20 days)(EJR- IF8- lOP )
0 Review of a Draft EIR (EJR- IF8- lOP )
D Review of Environmental Review Record FC- IERR- )
'.
The project consJsts of: Abode Plaza - 65.000 sq. ft. shopping center on
4.56 acres.
Location:
Please review the document and forward to we any comments you have by. 5/21/92
COIIII1ents:
.
.
~':>~
tp:?.. ~S tIC ~~~
/9/'11
--3/-,
..
-13(a)-
.
-
Case HO.~
H-1. PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT
1.
Are existing neighborhood and c
ade ate to serve the population
proje ?
Hei orhood
COllllluni
nity parks near the project
ncrease resulting from this
2. If not, are parkla
as part of the pro
Neighborhoo
COlll11unit parks
3. oject exceed the Park and Recreation Thresholds
d by City Council policie ?
......."
~ ~~-;
Parks and Recreation Director or
Representative
5,~.,~
Date
......."
/1/1)
-3~""
. .
.
ROUTING FORM
.
DATE: May 13. 1992
....
TO:
ken Larson, Building a Housing
~ohn Lippitt, Engineering IEIR OnlY}
Cliff Swanson, Engineering EIR only
Hal Rosenberg, Engineering EIR only
Roger Daoust, Engineering IS/3, EIR/2)
Richard Rudolf, Assistant City Attorney (EIR only)
Carol Gove, Fire Department .
Marty Schmidt, Parks a Recreation
Keith Hawkins, Police Department
Current Planning
Frank Herrera, Advance Planning
Bob Sennett, City Landscape Architect .
Bob Leiter, Planning Dir~ctor
Chula Vista Elementary School District, Kite Shurson
Sweetwater Union H.5. District, Tom Silva (IS a EIR)
Other
FROM: . Marvann Miller Environmental Section
. SUBJECT: lID Application for Initial Study (15-92-42 IFA- 580 IOP-933 )
D Checkprint Draft EIR (20 days)(EIR- IFS- lOP )
0 Review of a Draft EIR (ElR- IFB- lOP )
D Review of Environmental Review Record Fe- IERR- )
".
.
The project cons)sts of: Abode Plaza - 65.000 sq. ft. shopping center on
4.56 acres.
Location:
Please review the document and forward to .. any comments IOu have by. 5/21/92
Conments:
.
~~.-u
~" ~S
f<) ~~~
19-'-13
-33./
-13(a)-
.
-.
Cue No._lt;-~.42.
H-1. PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT
1.
Are existing neighborhood and co
ade ate to serve the population
proje ?
Hei orhood
Coornuni pa rks
nity parks near the project
ncrease resulting from this
2.
edications or other mitigation proposed
adequate to serve the population increase?
3.
oject exceed the Park and Recreation Thresholds
d by City Council policie ?
-,
~ ~R-;
Parks and Recreation Director or
Representative
5,~"L-
Date
-,
/9/Lj'j
_ 3 f......
.
.
..
- 13 -
.
Cue No. l5-'tZ-qZ
H. FIRE DEPARllENT
1. What is the distance to the nearest fire station and what is the Fire
Department's estimated reaction time? I" M'L~1 ~ /\"\..., ~"""~
'T'M,;"' ,
2. Will the Fire Department be able to provide an adequate level of fire
protection for the propose~ facility without an increase in equipment
or personnel? 'f(S .
3. Remarks
ft'h""&
Date
S -/9-f~
/9--Ljj
_ 3.5,
.
CHULA VISTA FIRE DEPARTMENT
BUREAU OF FIRE PREVENTION
~
PLAN CORRECTION SHEET
Address 1689 BOO1I!WAY AVE
Plan File No.
CheckerVE:IAS(1JEz Date 5-19-92
Type Constr.
Occupancy
No. Stories
Bldg. Area
The following list does not necessarily include all errors and omissions.
PROVIDE AND SHOW ON PLAN:
1) IID,JUIRSn FIR:: F"1JY" 5,000 GPH.
2) 5 FIRE HYDI'JWl'S r.ElJUIRED. l.ClCATICN, em: Kr EACH PNl'RANCE, OOE IN FlUlT OF. mDG.
'A 1\N!) em: IN rnctlT OF BLDG. 'B.
3) PIV V!>J}r..s RECUIRED.
-
4) DRIVEt-vAY ENTRlIl-;CE TO BE 20 I r'lIDE.
5) OI'HER RECUIRE:l.lENrS TO B=: roRl'Hro~G WHEN AOOITICN1\L mFORrMICN IS AVJIILABLE.
-..
FPB-29
/7/'I~
,,-
-36--
_ OF EIlUCAlIDN
.lOSEPH D. CLUlINGS. PI\l).
LARRY CUNNINGHAM
SHARON GLES
PATRICK A. JUDO
GREG R. SANDOVAl.
SUPERINTENDENT
.IlHN F. YUGRIN. Ph.D.
.
.
CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT
84 EAST "J" STREET. CHULA VISTA, CAUFORNIA 91910 . 619425-9600
EACH CHILD IS AN INDIVlDUAL OF GREAT WORTH
RECEIVED
May 18, 1992
.~'. /' :
. ..(,
Ms. Maryann Miller
Environmental Review Dept.
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
PLANNING
RE: 1S-92-42 I FA-S801 DP-933
Location: Northeast corner of Broadway , Main
Applicant: Sam Sepehri
Project: Abode Plaza/6S,000' Shopping Center
Dear Ms. Miller:
This is to advise you that the project, located on the
Northeast corner of Broadway & Main, is within the Chula
vista Elementary School District which serves children from
Kindergarten through Grade 6.
District enrollment has been increasing at the rate of 4-S
percent over the past several years, and this is projected
to continue. Permanent capacity has been exceeded at many
schools and temporary relocatable classrooms are being
utilized to accommodate increased enrollments. The District
also buses students outside their attendance areas"both to
accommodate growth and assist in achieving ethnic balance.
state law currently provides for a developer fee of $.27 for
non-residential area to be charged (Chula Vista Elementary
School District $.12/square foot: Sweetwater Union High
School District $.lS/square foot) to assist in financing
facilities needed to serve growth.
If you have any questions, please contact this office.
Sincerely,
~ s,~~(,')
Kate Shurson
Director of Planning & Facilities
KS:dp
cc: Sam Sepehri
casey Raicer
/9/1'7
_ 31--
Sweetwater Union High School District
ADMINISTRATION CENTER
'130 FIlth Avenue
Chula Villa, California '1'11-2896
(819) 811.6500
.
""'"'"
DIvI,lon of Planning .nd F.clllties
May 18, 1992
Fi
. '~C~/I/~O
Ms. Maryann Miller
City of Chula Vista
Planning Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
,01.-4
IVrv/lVG
Dear Ms. Miller:
Be: IS 92-42. Abode Plaza
The above project will have an impact on the Sweetwater Union High School
District. Payment of school fees will be required pursuant to Government
Code No. 65995 (Developer Fees) prior to issuance of building permit.
~
Cordially,
!b-~
Assistant Director of Planning
TSlml
~
/1/L/r
.
- 3~-
'.
.
.
.
.
TRAFBCIMPACT$~UDY
COMMERCIAL $j["PlE: BROADWAY
AND MAIN ST~lEiJE'f-NE QUADRANT
CHULA VIST A, CA.LIIFORNIA
October 14, 1991
Owner:
Abode Construction
1689 Broadway
Chula Vista, CA 92010
(619) 429-0186
Prepared By:
ENTRANCO- Federhart
2505 Congress Street
San Diego, CA 92110
(619) 299-2007
) 9 rL/7
_31J
Summary
Existing Conditions
Project Description
Project Plus Near-Term Conditions
Project Plus Long-Term Conditions
Recommended Improvements
Appendices
CONTENTS
Page
1
2
5
7
11
12
13
/9/50
.
~
-
.......
-L/ ()-
Summary:
.
'. ENTRANCOeFederhart was retained by the client, Abode Construction, to examine
the traffic impacts associated with the development of a sixty five thousand square
foot commercial center on the northeast quadrant of the intersection of Main Street
and Broadway in Chula Vista. This project would be developed under a
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) given the current zoning of the property.
Having consulted the traffic engineering staff at the City of Chula Vista and having
obtained recent data and studies pertinent to the area, an analysis of the near-term
and long-term impacts of the requested CUP was prepared.
It was determined that there is no significant impact of the proposed development
upon the circulation system assuming the completion of abutting improvements as
part of the project. It is observed that less than desirable daily traffic volumes will be
experienced'in the near term (1992) on Main Street west of the project.
.
-Complete signal upgrades on the NE quadrant,
-Complete curb, gutter and sidewalk abutting improvements,
-Contribute to established City of Chula Vista fee programs.
.
/9/~/
-4(.-
1
Existing Conditions:
.
-....
The current use of the property incorporated within the site consists of three uses.
Four independent, small, used vehicle dealerships are nearest the comer. To the
north and fronting on Broadway is a metal fabricating/welding firm of
approximately one thousand square feet plus an outdoor yard. Behind both these
uses are fifty one mobile home units. The total siteocc:upies 4.56 acres and is
currently zoned I-L. A copy of the site plan is reproduced in the appendix.
Traffic generated from the site currently is included in Table 1 in the next section,
but it is estimated from the above list of uses calculated at the current generation
rates published by SANDAG. The total daily traffic is estimated at 309 trip ends,
currently. This estimate may be slightly high since not all of the used vehicle
dealerships on the site do not appear to be highly active.
The two abutting roadways are Main Street forming the southern boundary and
Broadway forming the western boundary. Each of these streets consists of four
travel lanes with exclusive left turn lanes at their signalized intersection adjacent to .......,
the project. Both streets are incomplete in their availability of curbing, gutter and
sidewalk along the site since their construction dates to a time long before the area's
incorporation into the City of Chula Vista. As newer development has occurred
along each of the streets the abutting improvements have been able to be obtained
At this time some of those continuous improvements are still lacking in the area on
both streets, but four travel lanes are typically available. An exception is Main Street
as it progresses into the City of San Diego to the West nearer 1-5 and beneath the
railroad tracks at Industrial Street. Here, only one travel Jane is available for some
westbound stretches.
Traffic volumes on dty streets has been recorded by the City of Chula Vista annually
up until June of 1991 in their Traffic Flow publication. This document states that
the average daily traffic (ADT) on Broadway is currently 15,240 vehicles, that it was
somewhat higher in 1989 (16,720 ADTI but lower in 1987 (13,020 ADTI. On Main
Street the latest count in 1989 reported 22,130 ADT and 19,400 ADT was recorded
earlier in 1987. West of Broadway the current traffic volumes were measured at
21,170 ADT in 1991. These volumes are consistant with acceptable limits for four . .......,
Jane major roadways.
/9 /~ J--
- 4- ;;;---
2
'.
.
.
.
The City of Chula Vista has undertaken a program to design improvements to
portions of Main Street to the north using CIP funds, but the project does not extend
far enough to the south to impact this site.
Transit service to the area is provided by Chula Vista Transit operating routes on
both Main Street (route no. 932) and further away on Anita Street (route no. 701).
The San Diego Trolley operates along the railroad to the west, but the nearest station
is accessible for most people only through a bus feeder route due to the distance.
Intersections within the vicinity of the proposed project within the City of Chula
Vista which are signalized consist of the one adjacent to the project, Broadway and
Main Street, and the one just to the north at Broadway and Anita Street. A third
signal exists at Industrial Blvd. to the west, but it is largely within the jurisdiction of
the City of San Diego. The Broadway and Main Street signal has two approach lanes
on each leg for through traffic, center left turn lanes with phases in the signal timing
for protected turns and, on the southbound approach on Broadway, an additional
right turn only lane recently established as part of a newer development on that
quadrant. Chula Vista's recent Traffic Monitoring Program (May 31, 1991, JHK cSt
Associates) identified the traffic volumes at this location in the afternoon peak
period. Using this data we have calculated an lCU ratio of 0.73 currently. A higher
V Ie ratio is reported in the JHK report, but our calculations are in the appendix and
available for scrutiny. It should be recalled that three of the quadrants at this
intersection have yet to be fully improved, including the proposed project site on
the northeast corner.
..
At Broadway and Anita Street the same study established that this location operated
at LOS "A" with an lCU of 0.57 in the afternoon peak period as documented in that
earlier study. Our work derived a LOS "A" at a lower lCU level of 0.36 due to the
use of actual geometric conditions (on the west approach) as currently configured in
the field. These values and other existing traffic data are reported in the
comparative tables within the later sections of this study.
- If 3_ ...
3
/j~5j
II
INTERSTATE ,
STREET CONFIGURATIONS
IN TIlE VICINITY OF
BROADWAY AND MAIN ST.
0iULA. VISTA
INDUSTRIAL/'
aLVO.
. =Traffic
.. IV.....
/ . InJ ,... <<.'TE
.. 1IJpk..
/.IAI.....
AWN ITREET _
.ROADWAY t, 1 ~ t ~
(~;j; \" t=- ,
:::; ~Y'~{1 r ,/1
'. ./
I
I
I
1
I AAIl.AOAD
1/ tR'CKS
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
!
.
""'"
ANITA aT.
"LV.. IT
nf\Jlyp.
II IAJ ,kg.
'.
BS
"""'"
"~
/
I e ENTRANCO I
........,
__4i-
/1~/
4
.
'.
Project Description:
The proposed use for the site is commercial, for which a prospective list of desirable
tenant types has been prepared and included in the appendix. They tend to be users
of larger amounts of floor area. The list includes sporting goods stores, furniture
stores, clothing warehouses, appliance centers, food bazaars, yardage stores and other
commercial uses. The site pIan organizes them into four separate buildings. Access
is proposed to be derived from both Broadway and Main Street.
The calculation of traffic to be generated by the project is shown in the following
table, and the total 2,606 daily trips using the 40 trips per one thousand square feet
(ksO of floor area published by SANDAG and the City of San Diego in their traffic
generator publications. The 40 trips per ksf is a rate consistent with the intensity of
uses allowed by the zone and the conditions proposed for the project on tenant
types. The,appendix contains a summary of those trip generation studies.
Compared to the existing uses this represents a 2,297 daily trip increase, or 199 trips
in the PM peak hour, that will additionally be present compared to existing uses.
. Compared to the anticipated uses in the general plan, there represents no increase
since the proposed use is consistant with the adopted land uses. For this reason the
analysis will focus on the short term impacts of the project.
,
.
///~3
.;-
_ '1...5 ;-
,
5
. .
Abode Trlpgen 91-46
.
-.
Table 1
Trip Generation Calculations
CHULA VISTA COMMERCIAL SITE
BROADWAY AND MAIN STREET
Use Quantity Units TripslKSF DailyTE PM In PM Out
~~~~;:RQ;;;ji;i('j'i~\;'~;!;~;;ij.@@1~1!0.!i!!~:l!1~!M\~!:1i~'fI%;*f~~
Metal Fab. 1000 ft. sq. 4 4 0.256 03S4
Mobile Home 51 units 5 255 18.36 12.24
TOTAL 309 20 15
< il;...... ii il;.ti;Blill:g(ij~!.:lt~'~'~!;!;!lltil~~:!~~1
E"'~'" 'a}
onunero 65161 ft.sq.
TOTAL 2606 117 117
NET DIFF, 2297 97 102
-.,.
"""
J9/~c(?
__46-
6
. .
.
.
Project Plus Near-Term Conditions:
Near term for the analysis is the year 1992. Values for future traffic in that year are
based on a study provided to us by the Chula Vista Planning Department staff for
the Palomar Trolley Center EIR. The traffic study in that report analyzes the 1992
impacts of that project upon near term growth. The latest version of the report is
dated June of 1991. For this study we have assumed the Palomar Trolley Center is
constructed and fully operating, and this is used as a "base" condition for adding the
incremental traffic of the commercial center proposed for this report at Main Street
and Broadway. The analysis focuses on the immediate intersection at Broa~way and
Main Street and the connecting links. Due to the conforming nature of the land use
and the relatively smaller size of the project this is appropriate.
.
Daily traffic volumes, reported in the following table, are expected to increase by a
maximum of 690 ADT on each of two segments of roadway, Broadway north of the
project and Main Street west of the project. On Broadway and Main Street east and
south of the project the volumes shall only increase by 460 ADT. This is a modest
increase, however, the portion of Main Street west of Broadway is only partially
improved and is estimated to have a daily recommended maximum volume of
22,000 ADT while it will be handling 22,500 ADT without the project and 23,190
ADT with the project. This is viewed as a less than significant impact in view of the
operations of the signal where these two roads intersect.
The directional distribution for determining these movements was obtained by
preparing a "select zone assignment" at SANDAG for an adjacent commercial zone
using the Chula Vista model.
.
The intersection of Broadway and Main Street is calculated to have a current LOS of
"COO, which is acceptable (refer to the appendix). Without the project in the near
term the LOS becomes a "0", and it remaIns so with the project since the increment
added by the project is less than one percent. These r s differ somewhat from
the Palomar Trolley Cen ons which suggested that ain Street
"become WI y ving an additional through lane in each direction at the
""-.
intersectio e do not concur Wl a recommen a on in view of the dramatic
physical consequences on all comers of the intersection nor based on th~ the
expected congestion levels. A review of the Growth Management Plan statistics for _ 11-
/1./ ~7
7
.
the duration of the PM peak show that the second PM peak hour handles only 79% """""
of the peak hour. Thus, we expect less than two hours of LOS "0" operation in the
near term.
A check of levels of service at the Broadway and Anita Street intersection reveal that
LOS. A" will be experienced in all phas~ of the project using existing geometries.
-.
"'"""
j 7 /,;:~
-~/
8
'..
.
.
.
TABLE 2
COMPARISON OF DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Pres. Ult.
Current Des. Des. Near Term
Roadway LJ' ADT Vol. Vol. No Pr~. Proi.
upts
Broadway Ani ta to Main 15,240 30,000 30,000 18,600 19,290
5/0 Main 12,670 30,000 30,000 15,500 . . 15,960
Main St. Indust. to B'way 21,170 22,000 30,000 22,500 23,190
elo Broadway 22,130 30,000 30,000 25,200 25,660
TABLE 3
INTERSECIlON CAPACITY UIlUZATION
Broadway at Broadway at
Main Anita
KY l.QS KY 1.Q2
Currently .74 C .34 A
Near Term no Proj. .84 D .39 A
Near Term wi Proj. .87 D .40 'A
.
9
/9/~1
_19/
.
.......
DISTRIBUTION OF TRAFFIC
BROADWAY AND MAIN ST.
CHULA VISTA
ffi
" 3% 3%
INTERSTATE I I
I 30%
I
INDUSTRIAL ./ I SILVA' .,
I RAILROAD
ILYD. V TRACKS
I
I
I
I .......
I 30% 20% r
I
I
I ./
I 17TH IT.
I
I
I
I
I
I 20%
I
I \
!
\
24%
F~e 4
-..
l1--ee o'
Sbr
-
10
..
.
.
,
.
Project Plus Long-Te.nn Conditions:
As stated earlier, the focus of the analysis in this report is the near-term. However,
the Chula Vista General Plan Circulation element designates both Broadway and
Main Street as four lane major streets. As such, they are recommended to handle a
maximum daily traffic volume of ~,oOO ADT. Broadway is also identified as a
bicycle route in the element, but not Main Street. The net increase due to the
proposed project on the circulation element is zero since the proposed use is
consistant with the adopted land use plan.
_s}-
Jl--d>/
11
.
Recommended Improvements:
.
-.
The improvements to the circulation system remmmended to be provided consist
of the following:
-Contribute to all appropriate fee programs adopted by Chula Vista,
.Provide all missing abutting improvements to Broadway and Main Street, and
-Facilitate the improvement of the signal in its ultimate location at Broadway
and Main Street.
Sincerely,
~~
Arnold Torma, T.E.
Senior Traffic Engineer
......,
AT/cc
......,
j 9 -t,;2,
-- s;;J.--
..
.
.
.
. __.-n
Appendices:
Intersection Utilization Calculations
Typical Tenant Types
Directional Distribution Plot
Daily Volume Counts
J~--d,)
.
.
_~3 ~
.
Abode leU's 91-46
INTERSEC'IlON CAPAC'n'UTlLIZAnON WORKSHEET e .
COMMEROAL CENTER AT BROADWAY AND MAIN STREET "'""
PM PEAK HOUR ENTRANCO
liQ'.a:~~tAAI:I);.~:llrW)"'.?H";''i'i((NMMlkN';."",""J'''' .x......., ." , :::~:~~(< ..:;<::J.,:..... .
.-Demand- _VlCRalios-
Near Tam Near Tam NurTam Near Tam
MOVEMENT I..ns. CaplLn Now No ProJ. wlProJ. Now No ProJ. WlProj. Critical
NMthbound:
Left 1 1500 274 315 315 0.18 0.21 0.21
Through 2 1700 498 572 591 0.20 0.23 0.23 yes
Right comb. 1500 172 198 198
Southbound:
Left 1 1500 213 245 274 0.14 0.16 0.18 yes
Through 2 1700 508 584 584 0.15 0.17 0.17
Right 1 1500 95 109 109 0.06 0.07 0.07
Eastbound:
Left 1 1500 122 140 169 0.08 0.09 0.11
Through 2 1700 728 836 836 0.26 0.29 0.30 yes
Right comb. 1500 145 167 167
. Westbound:
Left 1 1500 209 240 240 0.14 0.16 0.16 yes
Through 2 1700 826 949 980 0.30 0.34 0.35
Right comb. 1500 178 204 224
VlC- 0.74 0.84 0.87 .......
ADT all legs 71210 81800
Cunent NearTenn NearTenn NearTenn NearTenn
Lns. CaplLn Vols. No ProJ. wlProJ. Now No ProJ. WlProJ. Critical
MOVEMENT
Northbound:
Left
Through
Right
Southbound:
Left
Through
Right
Eastbound:
Left
Through
Right
Westbound:
Left
Through
Right
ADT alIlegs
1 1500 30 34 39 0.02
2 1700 416 467 527 0.14
comb. 1500 47 53 59
1 1500 66 74 74 0.04
2 1700 588 661 681 0.17
1 1500 64 72 72 0.04
1 1500 125 140 140 0.08
1 1700 187 210 210 0.16
1 1500 82 92 96 0.05
1 1500 58 65 70 0.04
1 1700 94 106 106 0.07
comb. 1500 21 24 24
V/C= 0.34
46200 51900
0.02
0.15
0.05
0.19
0.05
0.09
0.18
0.06
0.04
0.08
0.03 yes
0.17
0.05
D.2O yes
0.05
0.09 yes .
0.18
0.06
0.05
0.08 yes
0.39 0.40
.......
Page 1
J7---ty
~ s-f --
"
.
,
'.
.
.
.
JMll-31-aooC .21 :.26 FRCJI'1
TO
A-(.2.IIQ/,oD'''' 2/11" ''1/~
pr5' l2--
~
~7
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
George Krempl. Director of Planning
Daciel ~l. Pus'. Principal Planner ~~
Potential Commercial-Type. HI_La Uses
~~~~,~: /9
June ~, 1986
"
Pursuant to your instructions. Adva:'!ce Planning has compiled the follcwing
list of cc:t'J:1ercial-ty::e land uses wtlich could be -established within the "l-L,"
Limited Industrial Zene. t!1rough tne cenditional use pennit process. However,
since this proeess calls fer the quaSi-judicial application of plarning
principies and standards. and the Dredication of land-use decisions upon local
,conditions. neighborhood patterns, traffic. and potential' environmental'
impacts, some of the listed uses could be appropriate in certain I-L
districts, and inappropriate in others.
Th~ 1 isted uses do not indude those wllieh the Chu'a Vista Hunicipe' Code
cxplicit)y authorizes through thl.' con~itional use permit process in the II_L,"
such a:; re::taur~nts ~rHj servic\i stations. The list is confined to land' uses
,which the Coae generically cate~ori:es as manufacturer's outlets. retail
dil~ribution center~. r~tail centers which speCialize in bulky goods.,or uses
which ~Ie supportive to tr.cse outlets or ccnters. .
Lane-vS!! pl~nning is a concept'~~l dYMmic aft. and cannot be effectively
prac~lced under a proGram of ri;id co~trQls. The follo~in9 list. therefcre.
sl~cul ~ b,: regarded a s a !iu~ c;e, In t;l;e fut:Jre. so!::e or the suggested 1 and uses
lTIilY b!!CC:11p. unt~I\.~bl e. while SOme unl i sted uses may become suppor!:abl e
activities. '
List ofPctentia1, CO~r.lerci~l-Type l;se;: !-L ZO:1e
1. Hess-Sal es DC;lart:O'.ent and Speciaiti Stores
2. Furniture Stores
3. Large Sporting Goods Outlets
4. Volume Bookstores
S. Boat Salc5 and Marine Supply Stores
6. Retail Cloth~ng Warehouses
7. Major Appliance Centers
8. lIome Decorat~ no Centtrs/Home In:provements Centers '
9. Food 8azaars
10. Cycleries
11. Yardagc Stores
12. Wilderness O~tfitting Centers
13. Retail Impor~ Centers
14. "Fa nners Na.rkets"
15. Large Art Supply Centers
16. Highway-Oriented Retail uses
,17. Retail "Catalog Sales" Centers
18. CO~70crcial/lndustrial Fi~ancial Institutions
DMP:fp
WPC 2eE1P
",
-~ b CJO
""
.{cJJ_o.:/
~ (; 7'=rITC'O,..j
13lbC, , ,
t/.
_ 55--
/r;-(,,~
I . .
.
/y'.EW OLD
Jt:OUNT COUNT
QATION STATION STREET 1m ~ lm' ,wQ illl "
,. BROADWAY
...,
BO City Limits-C St. 19070 26850 N.C. 19000 23560
11 B1 C-O Sts. 20470 N.C. 20160 N.C. 21260
12 82 O-E Sts. 21640 22640 N.C. 18900 N.C.
13 83 E-F Sts. 24090 N.C. 22330 N.C. 20810
14 ' 84 F-G Sts. 27920 26320 N.C. 23040 N.C.
15 85 G-H Sts. 25830 N.C. 24490 N.C. 21650
16 86 H-l Sts. 25120 28620 N.C. 26520 N.C.
17 87 I-J Sts. 25930 N.C. 25910' N.C. 25000
18 88 J-K Sts. 24400 27780 N.C. 25600 N.C.
19 89 K-L Sts. 24990 N.C. 22370 N.C. 24230
20 62 L-Moss Sts. 25930 24930 N.C. 23760 N.C.
21 * Moss-Naples Sts. 24800 N.C. 31250 23620 23770
22 * Naples-Oxford Sts. 27150 22500 N.C. 21880 N.C.
23 * Oxford-Palomar Sts. 25830 N.C. 30500 24990 18800
24 * Palomar-Anita Sts. 15640 18750 N.C. 18480 N.C.
25 * Anita-Main Sts. 13020 N.C. 16720 N.C. 15240'
* . Main Street to CVCL N.C. 12670 N.C. N.C. N.C.
BUENA VISTA WAY
.
142 * East H St.-Calle Santiago 4660 N.C. 4950 N.C. _ N.C.
143 BV Tierra Bonita-Telegraph Cn Rd 1550 1740 1930 N.C. 1600
2" C STREET
C5 Broadway-Fifth Ave. 11300 N.C. N.C. 9180 N.C.
201 C4 Fifth-Fourth Aves. 11530 N.C. 10590 N.C. 9750
202 C2 N. Glover-Second Aves. 3060 N.C. N.C. 2850 N.C.
CORRAL CANYON ROAD
151 * Port Renwick-East H St. 3930 7430 7400 N.C. N.C.
169 Country Vistas - Port Renwick N.C. N.C. 4920 N.C. N.C.
CREST DRIVE (See Oleander Avenue)
',0
o STREET ' ,
203 06 Woodlawn Ave.-Broadway 2730 N.C. 2670 N.C. 2600
204 05 Broadway-Fifth Ave. 3740 N.C. N.C. 4780 N.C.
205 04 Fifth-Fourth Aves. 4020 N.C. 4160 N.C. ' 3620
206 03 Fourth-Third Aves. 2450 N.C. N.C. ,3240 N.C.
207 02 Third-Second ,Aves. 2850 N.C. 3560 N.C. 3020
E STREET
* "E" Street west of 1-5 Freeway 10090 N.C. 12320
208 * "1-5"-Woodlawn 37150 N.C. N.C. 31660 27360
209 E6 Woodlawn Ave.-Broadway 31330 N.C. 33590 N.C. N.C.
~- E5 Broadway-Fifth Ave. 22150 N.C. N.C. 19970 N.C.
E4 Fifth-Fourth Aves. 22500 N.C. 22780 N.C. 17880
'C 3403E -4- Revised 5/16/91 _ s-'1-
/7 -- t?
. ..
.
.
.
THE C17l' O. . cHUU VISTA PARTY DISCLOSU!-'8TATEMENT
;
.atement of disclosure of certain ownership interests, paymenu, or campaign contn"butions,pn aD matters ,""
~ich will require discretionary action on the pan of the City CouncD, PJanning Comm;'~ion, and all other
official bodies. The foDowing information must be disclosed: . -
1.
List the names of aD persons having a financial
subcontractor, material supplier. .
~.....,#.A?~AJ ~/.r~~~~
.~t'P<?/'4's:? ~~/.?~~.
interest in the contract. i.e., contractor,
hl.8c70.E L:kFv'L!'-b,..Ph~~~p
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 pannership
interest in the pannership. .
~/Y"'R21 j/~R~P
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,90mmissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months? Yes_
No d If yes, please indicate person(s):
.
5.
Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultanu or independent
contractors who you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter.
(-'~ ~~;r .~Q/""""://?' .
6.
Have you andlor your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contn"buted mor~an $1,000 to II
Councilmember in the current or preceding election period? Yes _ No ~ If yes, state which
Councilmember(s):
(NOlE: Alllch addllional pages lIS aecess:,,)')
Dmc:: 9_..!) _ 9 ?
.
,
It!::un is defined as: "Any indil-idunl,Jim~ co.pnnnrnllip,jDint ~tu,., ~.lDCin ub,""temnlorrnniultion, e<<porntion,
rs,,"r, mISt, ~cri_, I)",dicnlt, tllis nlld nn)' otller COUllty. df).1IIIfI "" . df)~ "wnicipn \ tlistrict or 111116 political subdil-isioll,
or nil)' Olller f'OUP or cOlllbinnliDflllcting lIS II unil.'
J 1 ~t '{
Signature of contractor/applicant
~4'&:='.6' >tr.#'#~'
Print or type n:lme of contractor/applicant
/R...n.cd: lI.t;lO.'JO) ~
.- ..) () ,-
1.'.11.'. \:Dlsnosr-.:T""
I
\
i
.... Excerpt from Resource Conservation Commission Minutes of November 9. 1992
8. Negative Declaration 15-92-42 Abode Plaza; Barbara Hall again questioned whether the
Montgomery Planning Committee reviewed and supported this proposal. She opposes
the industrial area located up against a residential neighborhood and that some homes
would be removed. The owner should be responsible for completion of Phase I
Hazardous Waste Assessment prior to granting of the General Plan Amendment and
Rezoning. Kracha agrees the mitigation measures are acceptable. It was moved and
seconded (KrachalFox) to recommend adoption of Negative Declaration 15-92-42
Abode Plaza; motion failed 3-0-'; McNair abstained. notice same reason as above.
.
.
19---tl
,
.
Draft Minutes of Plannin~ Commission Meetin~ - November 12. 1992
ITEM 2.
PUBLIC HEARING: GPA-93-03 AND PCZ-93-C: PROPOSAL TO AMEND
THE CHULA VISTA GENERAL PLAN/MONTGOMERY SPECIFIC PLAN
AND REZONE APPROXIMATELY 13.48 ACRES LOCATED ON THE
EASTERN PORTION OF BROADWAY, BETWEEN MAIN STREET ON THE
SOUTH AND ANITA STREET ON THE NORTH; AREAS "A & B" FROM
"RESEARCH AND LIMITED INDUSTRIAL" AND "I-L-P" TO "RETAIL
COMMERCIAL "/"MERCANTILE & OFFICE COMMERCIAL " AND "C-C-P";
AREA "C" FROM "RESEARCH AND LIMITED INDUSTRIAL" AND "I-L-P"
TO "MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL" AND "R-2-P." - City Initiated/Sam
Sepehri
.
Principal Planner Howard presented the staff report. Staff recommended approval. Mr.
Howard noted that Mr. Luecht, the owner of the Farmhouse Trailer Park, requested that his
property be left as an industria1 designation. Mr. Luecht had indicated at the Montgomery
Planning Commission the previous evening that he had problems with his existing residential
development in proximity to the Sommerset Commercial Center to the east; he felt long-term
residential uses on that site were inappropriate, and requested that the existing industrial
designation remain. The Montgomery Planning Committee voted 3-1 to approve the Mitigated
Negative Declaration, which constituted no action; therefore, they could take no action on the
project. Three of the members indicated general support of the project; the fourth had some
concerns about traffic in the area and the intensification of uses adjacent to the seniors in the
mobilehome parks to the north and west. They were also generally favorable to Mr. Luecht's
request to keep his property designated industria1.
Chair Fuller asked if staff was using old figures when stating the enrollment for schools. Mr.
Howard answered that they used the most recent figures from the School District which had been
obtained as part of the Growth Management Oversight process. He had spoken with Kate
Shurson of the School District who felt any change from industria1 to residential, regardless of
the existing uses of the site, should require mitigation even though there was only a minor
increase over the existing uses. Even if there were not an additional 10 units, she said the
School District would still object to not requiring full mitigation.
Answering Chair Fuller, Mr. Howard said the Montgomery Planning Committee orally indicated
agreement with Mr. Luecht that he should be allowed to retain his existing condition.
Commissioner Martin asked if there could be 10 additional dwelling units. Mr. Howard
answered that the site had a portion of the Grenada Estates Mobilehome Park which had II
trailers; the Farmhouse Trailer Park had 27. Those were essentially at the maximum density
which would be allowed under the proposed designation of 11 units per acre. Commissioner
Martin commented that the Twin Palms Trailer Park had at one time generated students.
.
Commissioner Carson, regarding traffic, asked why in the mitigation it was not stated that the
applicant needed to dedicate the half-width right-of-way, develop and install curbs, gutters, or
/9-7tJ
.
.
.
pay the standard signal fees, or if it was understood. Environmental Facilitator Richardson
answered that the signal fees were the mitigation for the cumulative impacts to the intersection.
The other requirements for improvement was a standard condition placed on the project, and not
a mitigation for that particular impact.
Commissioner Ray asked who monitors the mitigation and how often it is rechecked. Ms.
Richardson answered that the Environmental Review Coordinator was responsible for
implementing the monitoring program, and is checked as often as required as development
proceeds. Commissioner Ray was concerned about mitigation, that in future years the mitigation
is torn down, and enforcement. Ms. Richardson said the only way the City would have
knowledge of mitigation problems would be by complaints. The City's responsibility did not
extend beyond what is required by the mitigation measure. Assistant Planning Director Lee said
the monitoring of a mitigation varied, depending upon the mitigation measure as to whether it
would be monitored for a certain length of time.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Sam Sepehri, the applicant, said he and his consultant were available for questions.
No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
MS (Martin/Carson) to approve Resolution GPA-92-01lPCZ-92-B recommending approval
of the attached draft City Council resolution.
Commissioner Ray was concerned about Mr. Luecht's opposition. He asked that the item be
trailed and that Mr. Luecht be specifically notified again or that someone from staff once again
speak with him and specifically let him know the Planning Commission's actions.
Principal Planner Howard expressed his surprise that Mr. Luecht was not in attendance; he had
attended the Montgomery Planning Committee meeting the previous evening and had strongly
opposed the action.
Commissioner Ray asked that the motion be revised to exclude Mr. Luecht's portion of Subarea
3. Assistant Planning Director Lee said he would be notified of the item as it goes before the
City Council, and also of the Planning Commission's action. He noted that because of the
configuration of the property and the adjacency to the residential area, it did not make good
planning sense to leave the property as industrial.
Chair Fuller viewed the area as being very unique, and agreed with staff that it should be looked
at as a total package.
Commissioner Ray withdrew his request, and asked staff about other residential areas adjacent
to industrial zoning. The Assistant Planning Director agreed that was an overall problem.
There was a specific application in this area, and although this property had originally been
zoned as one parcel, the property had been developed separately and two pieces were rather
isolated and facing a residential street.
J ~ - 7/
.
.
.
Commissioner Tuchscher believed it was appropriate to change the zoning on the industrial area;
he thought it became an island that would present serious concerns from a planning standpoint
in the future. He commented that the Adobe Plaza site plan concerned him. He was
comfortable with the land use question, but was not comfortable with the building proposal. Mr.
Howard noted the project would be going before the Design Review Committee who would
review the project and amend it as part of their hearing process.
Chair Fuller said she wished to put the applicant and the Design Review Committee on notice
that she did not want another project to emulate the Genesis Square project.
VOTE:
S-O to approve the General Plan Amendment, including staff recommendation
on all of Sub-Area 3.
/~/?;2.,
~ Excerpt from Resource Conservation Commission Minutes of November 9, 1992
8. Negative Declaration IS-92-42 Abode Plaza; Barbara Hall again questioned whether the
Montgomery Planning Committee reviewed and supported this proposal. She opposes
the industrial area located up against a residential neighborhood and that some homes
would be removed. The owner should be responsible for completion of Phase I
Hazardous Waste Assessment prior to granting of the General Plan Amendment and
Rezoning. Kracha agrees the mitigation measures are acceptable. It was moved and
seconded (Kracha/Fox) to recommend adoption of Negative Declaration IS-92-42
Abode Plaza; motion failed 3-0-'; McNair abstained. notice same reason as above.
.
.
/9/73
. Draft Minutes of Plannin~ Commission Meetin~ - November 12. 1992
ITEM 2. PUBLIC HEARING: GPA-93-03 AND PCZ-93-C: PROPOSAL TO AMEND
THE CHULA VISTA GENERAL PLAN/MONTGOMERY SPECIFIC PLAN
AND REZONE APPROXIMATELY 13.48 ACRES LOCATED ON THE
EASTERN PORTION OF BROADWAY, BETWEEN MAIN STREET ON THE
SOUTH AND ANITA STREET ON THE NORTH; AREAS" A & B" FROM
"RESEARCH AND LIMITED INDUSTRIAL" AND "I-L-P" TO "RETAIL
COMMERCIAL "/"MERCANTILE & OFFICE COMMERCIAL " AND "C-C-P";
AREA "C" FROM "RESEARCH AND LIMITED INDUSTRIAL" AND "I-L-P"
TO "MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL" AND "R-2-P. " - City Initiated/Sam
Sepehri
.
Principal Planner Howard presented the staff report. Staff recommended approval. Mr.
Howard noted that Mr. Luecht, the owner of the Farmhouse Trailer Park, requested that his
property be left as an industrial designation. Mr. Luecht had indicated at the Montgomery
Planning Commission the previous evening that he had problems with his existing residential
development in proximity to the Sommerset Commercial Center to the east; he felt long-term
residential uses on that site were inappropriate, and requested that the existing industrial
designation remain. The Montgomery Planning Committee voted 3-1 to approve the Mitigated
Negative Declaration, which constituted no action; therefore, they could take no action on the
project. Three of the members indicated general support of the project; the fourth had some
concerns about traffic in the area and the intensification of uses adjacent to the seniors in the
mobilehome parks to the north and west. They were also generally favorable to Mr. Luecht's
request to keep his property designated industria1.
Chair Fuller asked if staff was using old figures when stating the enrollment for schools. Mr.
Howard answered that they used the most recent figures from the School District which had been
obtained as part of the Growth Management Oversight process. He had spoken with Kate
Shurson of the School District who felt any change from industrial to residential, regardless of
the existing uses of the site, should require mitigation even though there was only a minor
increase over the existing uses. Even if there were not an additional 10 units, she said the
School District would still object to not requiring full mitigation.
Answering Chair Fuller, Mr. Howard said the Montgomery Planning Committee orally indicated
agreement with Mr. Luecht that he should be allowed to retain his existing condition.
Commissioner Martin asked if there could be 10 additional dwelling units. Mr. Howard
answered that the site had. a portion of the Grenada Estates Mobilehome Park which had 11
trailers; the Farmhouse Trailer Park had 27. Those were essentially at the maximum density
which would be allowed under the proposed designation of 11 units per acre. Commissioner
Martin commented that the Twin Palms Trailer Park had at one time generated students.
.
Commissioner Carson, regarding traffic, asked why in the mitigation it was not stated that the
applicant needed to dedicate the half-width right-of-way, develop and install curbs, gutters, or
/9 ~?f
.
pay the standard signal fees, or if it was understood. Environmental Facilitator Richardson
answered that the signal fees were the mitigation for the cumulative impacts to the intersection.
The other requirements for improvement was a standard condition placed on the project, and not
a mitigation for that particular impact.
Commissioner Ray asked who monitors the mitigation and how often it is rechecked. Ms.
Richardson answered that the Environmental Review Coordinator was responsible for
implementing the monitoring program, and is checked as often as required as development
proceeds. Commissioner Ray was concerned about mitigation, that in future years the mitigation
is tom down, and enforcement. Ms. Richardson said the only way the City would have
knowledge of mitigation problems would be by complaints. The City's responsibility did not
extend beyond what is required by the mitigation measure. Assistant Planning Director Lee said
the monitoring of a mitigation varied, depending upon the mitigation measure as to whether it
would be monitored for a certain length of time.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Sam Sepehri, the applicant, said he and his consultant were available for questions.
No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
MS (Martin/Carson) to approve Resolution GPA-92-01/PCZ-92-B recommending approval
. of the attached draft City Council resolution.
Commissioner Ray was concerned about Mr. Luecht's opposition. He asked that the item be
trailed and that Mr. Luecht be specifically notified again or that someone from staff once again
speak with him and specifically let him know the Planning Commission's actions.
Principal Planner Howard expressed his surprise that Mr. Luecht was not in attendance; he had
attended the Montgomery Planning Committee meeting the previous evening and had strongly
opposed the action.
Commissioner Ray asked that the motion be revised to exclude Mr. Luecht's portion of Subarea
3. Assistant Planning Director Lee said he would be notified of the item as it goes before the
City Council, and also of the Planning Commission's action. He noted that because of the
configuration of the property and the adjacency to the residential area, it did not make good
planning sense to leave the property as industrial.
Chair Fuller viewed the area as being very unique, and agreed with staff that it should be looked
at as a total package.
.
Commissioner Ray withdrew his request, and asked staff about other residential areas adjacent
to industrial zoning. The Assistant Planning Director agreed that was an overall problem.
There was a specific application in this area, and although this property had originally been
zoned as one parcel, the property had been developed separately and two pieces were rather
isolated and facing a residential street.
~
/9 / 7~
..
.
.
Commissioner Tuchscher believed it was appropriate to change the zoning on the industrial area;
he thought it became an island that would present serious concerns from a planning standpoint
in the future. He commented that the Adobe Plaza site plan concerned him. He was
comfortable with the land use question, but was not comfortable with the building proposal. Mr.
Howard noted the project would be going before the Design Review Committee who would
review the project and amend it as part of their hearing process.
Chair Fuller said she wished to put the applicant and the Design Review Committee on notice
that she did not want another project to emulate the Genesis Square project.
VOTE:
S-O to approve the General Plan Amendment, including staff recommendation
on all of Sub-Area 3.
/9//~
r
~\'I
Excer:pt from Draft Plannine Commission Minutes of 12/2/92
ITEM 6:
PUBLIC HEARING: RECONSIDERATION OF GPA-93-03, SUBAREA 3A
ONLY, LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF ANITA STREET EAST OF
BROADWAY - City Initiated
Principal Planner Howard noted that the Planning Commission had taken action on this item on
November 12. Mr. Luecht, the owner of the Farmhouse Trailer Park, shown as Subarea 3A,
through some misunderstanding did not attend the previous Planning Commission hearing and
requested a reconsideration. Staff recommended the reconsideration be granted in order for Mr.
Luecht to give his public testimony on this item.
MSC (TuchscherlRay) 6-0-1 (Moot abstaining) to reconsider GPA-93-03.
Chair Fuller opened the public hearing and noted there was a request to speak from Mr. Steven
Luecht.
Steven Luecht, 523 Anita Street, CV said the reason he had not come to the meeting before
was because of his lack of understanding of the process. He had gone to the Montgomery
Planning Committee meeting and thought that was the final decision. He noted the name of the
property was the Farmhouse Motel and Trailer Park. Mr. Luecht was concerned about the noise
emanating from the Sommerset Plaza; a permit was given to a company who installed burglar
alarms for cars and high-powered stereos which have to be tested, the doors are roll-up doors
which face his trailer park. Zoning Enforcement had done a decibel reading on his property,
which was 89 decibels. Another problem was with the muffler shop which was also noisy.
Nothing had been done about the noise level from the alarm/stereo shop. Mr. Luecht said the
property which was there was not compatible with his property as residential because of the
noise problem. He felt it should be changed to an industrial use.
Commissioner Martin believed the area should be residential and asked Mr. Luecht if the noise-
emanating businesses were moved, would he not agree that it should be residential.
Mr. Luecht said the noise was not only from the two places, but from all of them with trucks
unloading, people listening to their burglar alarms, etc.
Commissioner Ray asked if the subject area was looked at to be rezoned for limited industrial.
Principal Planner Howard said that was the existing General Plan designation in zoning, so it
was always an option.
Commissioner Ray wanted to know why the whole area was not considered as one piece and
rezoned at one time. Mr. Howard said that at the time the Montgomery Specific Plan was
adopted, the commercial development was not on the comer, and the idea was to perhaps
combine the whole area into a unified industrial development. However, in 1988, approval was
given for a CUP to allow a limited commercial use in the area although it was limited to uses
allowed in a light indiJstrial zone.
/9"/7
-2-
Assistant Planning Director Lee noted that this property was zoned residential when it was in
the County; when the City looked at the Montgomery Specific Plan, the depth of the industrial
area was expanded with the anticipation of combining properties. Since that has not occurred,
the remaining property is facing Anita Street and, in staff's judgment, residential development
is best for that area. Noise issues have to be solved between properties regardless of where the
boundaries end.
Commissioner Ray asked if the City had initiated anything further to try to alleviate some of Mr.
Thompson's concerns regarding noise. Mr. Lee answered that zoning enforcement is handled
through the Building Department, and felt Mr. Thompson should contact the Building
Department and follow-up on that, possibly meeting with the Director or Assistant Director.
Chair Fuller clarified that the property was zoned residential in the County, then brought into
the Montgomery Specific Plan as limited industrial, along with the other two properties.
Assistant Planning Director Lee concurred.
Chair Fuller asked the Montgomery Planning Committee's reasoning for supporting the limited
industrial use. Associate Planner Herrera-A said the area would be expanded in order to
facilitate the development of the industrial area for that parcel in combination with the property
at the northeast comer of Main and Broadway. The property to the east was zoned multi-family
residential.
Associate Planner Herrera-A noted the action taken by the Montgomery Planning Committee was
a non-action since their vote on the Negative Declaration was 3-1. By not having a fourth vote,
the motion failed and the public was not heard. Their straw vote, however, had been forwarded
to the Planning Commission. .
At Chair Fuller's request for the density allowed under medium-residential, Mr. Herrera said
it would be 6-11 dwelling units per acre for a total of approximately 28 dwelling units. If it was
a new development, they would be allowed 20-25 units under the General Plan, which was
staff's recommendation.
Commissioner Tarantino asked the status of the mitigation for the students that would be
generated out of the 22-28 dwelling units. Mr. Howard answered that there were existing units,
and if the area was built to the maximum density, there would only be an additional 10 units
over what was existing. The student generation rate was only three additional students and could
be accommodated by the existing schools.
No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Tuchscher said his opinion had not changed; it was important to consider the area
east of Sub-area 3 as well as the areas west. In light of the development that was currently to
the west and planned to the south, he did not feel it was appropriate to leave a pocket of
industrial between some commercial and residential. He felt it was appropriate for medium-
density residential.
/5\ ~ 7 Y
-3-
MS (CarsonlTuchscher) to recommend to the City Council that Sub-area 3A be redesignated and
rezoned for residential use.
.
RF.<;TATEMENT OF MOTION
An affirmation of the action taken previously that Sub-area 3 be redesignated and rezoned for
residential use.
Chair Fuller noted that two Commissioners were not part of the original action, so both
Commissioners would need to abstain from voting.
Chair Fuller said she did not like the idea of piece-mealing the property, but was not
comfortable with her original support to rezone back to residential. She asked if there was ever
any consideration of allowing the property to be part of the commercial as in Sub-area 2. Mr.
Howard said their had been no consideration in the environmental documentation. If the
Commission directed it to be reviewed, the Initial Study would have to be redone and the
Negative Declaration readvertised.
Commissioner Ray stated he was comfortable with the decision made previously and would vote
to go ahead and rezone back to residential. He suggested a secondary motion to recommend that
City Council direct staff to help Mr. Luecht get some enforcement for the noise and other Code
violations occurring as a result of the conditional use permits granted at the time the businesses
opened.
Commissioner Martin concurred. Assistant Planning Director Lee advised that the applicant
follow-up his initial contact with Building and Housing by contacting the Director or Assistant
Director, if he was not getting results from the Zoning Enforcement Division.
At Chair Fuller's request, Principal Planner Howard said Sub-area 1 was applicant initiated;
Sub-areas 2 and 3 were both City initiated. Chair Fuller asked if the owner of Sub-area 3 had
requested a change for commercial at the time of initiation of this change, it could have been
considered the same as Sub-area 2. Mr. Howard concurred, but did not know if the owner had
an opportunity; he did not come forward at that time.
Commissioner Tuchscher felt Sub-area 3 had three problems from a commercial standpoint--no
visibility, no frontage, and too much depth. If it were zoned commercial, there would be
nothing positive coming from it; he thought medium-density residential would be a viable land
use and a good buffer to properties further east.
Commissioner Ray did not believe there was good access to the property for commercial
businesses, except for Anita Street.
RE<;TATEMENT OF MOTION
To rearrll1D the action taken by the Planning Commi,;.~ion to recommend to the City
Council that Sub-area 3 be redesignated and rezoned for residential use.
VOTE:
5-0-2 (Commi,;.~ioners Tarantino and Moot abstained)
Chair Fuller noted that the Commission had reaffirmed their action taken at the November 12,
1992, meeting. /7 /" ') I
^ - ~- "- . ."",..,''='''''"-,~,,,,;~_.._-
EXCERPT
D
M ~;;
-';~..
,'-
.;'" )'
MONTGOMERY PLANNING COMMITTEE
-3-
NOVEMBER 11. 1992
GPA-93-03 and PCZ-93-C: ProDosal to amend the Chula vista General
Plan/Montaomerv SDecific Plan and rezone aDDroximatelv 13.48 acres
located on the eastern Dortion of Broadwav. between Main street and
Anita street: Subareas 1 & 2 from "Research and Limited Industrial"
and I-L-P to "Retail Commercial/Mercantile & Office Commercial" and
"C-C-P": Subarea 3 from "Research and Limited Industrial" and
"I-L-P" to "Medium Densitv Residential" and "R-2-P"
Staff Presentation
Associate Planner Herrera-A introduced the proposal for the
redesignation of 13.48 acres, amending the Chula vista General Plan
and the Montgomery Specific Plan as well as rezoning the area. He
described the various subareas indicated in the report, adding that
the Abode Plaza project, for the establishment of a 60,000 square
foot commercial area, will be processed in conjunction with the
General Plan amendment and rezone. Mr. Herrera-A noted that the
environmental review coordinator has reviewed the overall GPA and
rezone proposal, and issued a mitigated negative declaration, IS-
92-42.
Committee Ouestions
Member Scheuer expressed concerns about potential impacts to the
Granada Mobile Home Park, as well as other parks in the area. He
felt that a large number of mobile home parks, and senior citizens,
were within the vicinity, and expressed concern that density was
becoming too high in these areas, adding that more environmental
impacts would result than could be mitigated, particularly traffic
and emissions. Mr. Scheuer added that he felt that everything
that was being done in Montgomery was simply increasing both
density and commercial areas, while no open spaces or other
amenities were being developed.
Member McFarlin expressed concerns about traffic impacts, as well
as impacts to existing small businesses. She also questioned
drainage, adequate supplies of water for fire flow, and potential
school impacts.
Member Platt asked about the timing of improvements and upgrades at
Broadway and Main Street, referencing required improvements for the
Pacific Scene project. Mr. Herrera-A advised that timing of
improvement installation was dependent upon the timing of the
projects themselves, and could not be estimated at this point.
Member Castro questioned the densities that would result from this
proposal. He also asked why a plan amendment was being considered
for a property whose owner opposed the plan; Mr. Herrera-A
responded that staff had no objections to bifurcating the proposed
area and removing Mr. Leucht's property from the project area.
/t--y[J
UNA
l/'i~..
"l'
MONTGOMERY PLANNING COMMITTEE
-4-
NOVEMBER 11. 1992
Audience Discussion
Mr. steve Luecht, property owner of Farmhouse Motel & Trailer Park,
addressed the committee. He stated that he objected to the
proposed residential designation on his property, because impacts
created by businesses in the existing adjacent commercial center
make it difficult to keep tenants in the residential units. He
described street and other improvements that he had put in, all to
commercial standards.
Mr. Platt asked
the property,
commercial; Mr.
as commercial.
if Mr. Leucht was talking about just one portion of
or the entire property being designated for
Leucht responded that he wanted the entire property
Mr. Castro indicated that this particular parcel could possibly be
bifurcated from the project area when the committee came to
consideration of the recommendation.
Member Scheuer stated a motion to accept the negative declaration
for discussion purposes only.
MSUC (Scheuer/Platt) (4-0) to bifurcate Mr. Luecht's two acres from
consideration of the proposal as submitted by staff. Mr. Herrera-A
clarified the remaining areas under discussion and consideration.
MSUC (SCheuer/McFarlin) (4-0) to consider the negative declaration.
In discussion, member Scheuer stated that there has been no
improvement in the Montgomery area, and that higher densities are
being allowed that just create more problems. Member Platt stated
that he felt this was an improvement, and that the corner property
was appropriate for commercial. Member McFarlin stated that she
was concerned about bringing in new businesses without taking care
of old problems that have been there historically. She agreed that
the area needed upgrading, but felt that the existing vacant spaces
should be addressed.
Member Castro noted that four votes would be needed for approval,
adding that if the negative declaration is not approved, the
committee would not go forward with a voted on the General Plan
Amendment and rezone. Member Scheuer indicated that he would not
vote for the negative declaration, as he had concerns about areas
of mitigation as well as the proposed GPA.
MSF (Scheuer/McFarlin)
negative declaration.
PCZ-93-C.
(3-1, Scheuer opposed) to accept the
No further action was taken on GPA-93-03/
/7/8" )
,
File No.
(j//l
..
PUBLIC HEARING CHECK LIST
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING DATE )y( ~eR V5) I'1Ci ~
SUBJECT ~~ CVvv<>. ~~ C-II (;- P ..... m~~ ~D
I . ~ ~
6 .A.J.~.~~ ~ ~.
SENT TO STAR NEWS FOR PUBLICATION 8-; BY HAND_; BY MNL
PUBLICATION DATE /d./S /a,J-
MNLED NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS~ ~ NO. MNLED
PER GC 54992 Legislative Staff, Constructirn Industry Fed, 6336 Greenwich Dr Suite F. San Diego, 92122
LOGGED IN AGENDA BOOK I d- / d- J ctd-'
COPIES TO:
Administration (4)
Planning ,//
~
Originating Department
Engineering V'"
Others
City Clerk's Office (2) ~
)d- lri-/q,J-
.
POST ON BULLETIN BOARDS
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS:
.58-
%-
/;--7:2-
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BY THE CHUlA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
CHUlA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE CHUlA VISTA CITY COUNCIL will hold
a public hearing to consider the following:
Considering an amendment to Chula Vista General Plan and Montgomery
Specific Plan by redesignation of certain 113 acre area, located on
southwesterly quadrant of West Main Street and Del Monte Avenue from
Low/Medium Density Residential" to "Research and Limited Manufacturing".
Considering an amendment to Chula Vista General Plan and Montgomery
Specific Plan by redesignation of 3 areas: Adobe Plaza, East Somerset and
property southwest of Anita Street.
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 Oerk's Office at or prior to the
public hearing.
SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL on Tuesday,
December 15, 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: December 2, 1992
Beverly A Authelet
City Clerk
~. /;--Y3
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BY THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING for the purpose of considering an
amendment to the Chula Vista General Plan and the Montgomery Specific Plan by the
redesignation of the three areas listed below:
1. Abode Plaza (Sepehri property) 4.56 acre area located on the northeasterly quadrant of
West Main Street and Broadway, and;
2. East Somerset (City initiated) 4.00 acre area located on the southeasterly quadrant of
West Anita Street and Broadway;
from "Research & Limited Manufacturing" to "Retail Commercial" on the Chula Vista
General Plan Land Use Map and from "Research & Limited Industrial" to "Mercantile
& Office Commercial" on the plan diagram of the Montgomery Specific Plan.
Consideration will also be given to an application to rezone the above sited property from
"I-L-P Limited Industrial" to "C-C-P Central Commercial" with a "P" Modifier.
3. Property southwest of Anita Street with 4.92 acre area, located at the northeast boundary
and adjacent to the southeasterly quadrant of West Anita Street and Broadway;
from "Research & Limited Manufacturing" to "Medium Density Residential on the Chula
Vista General Plan Land Use Map and from "Research & Limited Industrial" to
"Medium Density Residential" on the plan diagram of the Montgomery Specific Plan.
Consideration will also be given to an application to rezone the above sited property from
"I-L-P Limited Industrial" to "R-2-P One and Two Family Residence Zone" with a "P"
modifier.
No.1, Abode Plaza, 4.56 acre would entail a 65,000 sq. ft. shopping center. Nos. 2 and 3,
GPA-93-03, would redesignate the General Plan, Montgomery Specific Plan, and wne to be
consistent with existin~ uses, and no new development is proposed.
A plot plan and legal description are on file in the office of the Planning Department. A
Negative Declaration IS-92-42 was prepared under the aegis of the Environmental Review
Coordinator. A finding of no significant, unmitigable impacts associated with project
implementation has been recommended to the Montgomery Planning Committee and City
Planning Commission and is on file, along with the Initial Study, in the Planning Department.
If you wish to challenge the City's action on this General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan
Amendment, and/or Rezone 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 prior to the public hearing. Correspondence should be directed
~ /~~~r
to the City Clerk, City of Chula Vista, P. O. Box 1087, Chula Vista, CA 91912 no later than
noon of the hearing date.
SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY CLERK on Tuesday,
December 15, 1992, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Services Building, 276
Fourth Avenue. Any person desiring to be heard may appear.
DATED: December 2, 1992
CASE NO. GPA-93-03; PCZ-93-C
Beverly Authelet
City Clerk
(gpa9303b.not)
.f$
-----
/l--rr~
. \
<
,
".- \
, .
\
c''';;'-
\ C-A,-J
'<.,'.,
i--~>
I. 'cc.,6222201500
6222201600
,'~
:~54
911
L
)
".. . ----_._.._-_..-.-------...-.-.---~,
6222201900
C AR B A J A L M I C AEL A R
..';c;"r.-..;m~F".'.,., .."..
6222202000 "
GONZALES GERONIMO M/JOSEPHINE
91950
11
~i
<I
""i'i~jif".",~,_(~.,
" /'
(
:6222202300
DOMINCUEZ JOSE/LEONORE
1
1
",.',
.,....'c..'.'1,'~<JI.""<i"""'.
(
'6290100400
T HR I F TV 0 I L C 0
C/O ARC 0 PS n T A"X"''lrEM7/10 541
o C51
r
,~62 90200100
ESPINOZA PEDRO/AIXA
91911
r;.'^,--__
~,
L L
A
-'~_._"----_._--------,.._--'_.~-_..-
"",-'~""-='" .,-' .;,.;,....,....,;...--
6290400900
N/ S MA TERI ALS ,INC"
12'
, .._-~-..-~--_.._.._----._--'\
I'~---'
#' /; --?'?
,",...
, .
c;.;...--'
'..-~
\c----,d
(
6222202100
'.VARGAS EUSTULIO
6222202500
CASA DE ANITA HOMEOwNERS ASSOC
I AT ION INC
C/O PAUL MILLER CO
--;----:-c--.--T~~-~-
.6290201100
OTAY LAND ENTERPRISES
105
r
,.''''''''''....'~,.,..
-j,-"------~-~._----_.~._-.
(
16290402100
.NICKOLS MIL TON C/SH IRLE Y J TRS
I,,,.
R
,
\;"6222201800
CEDA NO S AL V ADOR
~~~
: .',i~;~":,',<:,:,~;:',<,- ,.,-. . ':~;' :
',-,
.
>..J
'1
-..j
'-I
i \:J
;",.'-_Y!'cl',"N
,
b2 22 2022 00
URIARTE jOE F/ALICIAM
..J
'\
'<;"I
,
,- -
I,j
/--'---,---,--..,-,
6290200300
CAZARES ALEJANDRO/MARIA L L ~
o
fJ
( c.
'--i-";:'---ro~-.
6 2 9020.1:2 00
UGLE,JAMtS/SUSAN
2
'.
TRUST 12-14-8 \j
,
i-V
/'. -""-'7"',---,-,,..--...,--=--
'\
',J
~
'J"
iiu,ttt:..t,l;~""
_.,--,---;--;,~.~.,_.-:,_..~
0290"02200
LOk~ OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE S
AN DIEGO CALIF STAKE CHURCH OF
LI ISION
Q
.~
\
i
I i.J
'.
.u
, JC;~}Y?
I~-
" ,:/."
I:"~
;':~,::h( ,
:':'-.'!,
""" .,
..., .
.. .-~,:)"
,.,.
,
-
I:'
~.
~.~
:y:.
~< .
':1~;
~,~
'%[
.:i'8
'I
"
!
1
i
!
I
!
!
i
I
t
f
L
II
I
!
~-
~
6220431UOiJ
HOMEFtD BANK
CIO MeRYIN F POERHO
6220Q20302
GONZALEZ ROSARIO D
~
J,
RICHARD W/GERALDINE1'
/-'---------- -~_._~.~ '---'--~------
6220912600
FAUCHER LOUIS H TR
IIIiiiiIIIIII
f1
"
\~~
CLARICE TRUST 0-
:.___L~l.:~'__~
~.~",,,.'.. ,._~-:~-:""",.(\
r------...-.--.---..-..~-.--
6220920310
.......
bUD '12 0311
6220Q203H
.....-.
bUO 92 0315
OARC IA MAR IA C
1
(-----...---
6 220Q2032 2
~07-09-92
.....
.'c_,
'.,
if. .
62209,0326
......
b220920327
~TTE D
~
I'
HILOA' .:
)
k/SHEILA B
# .
J.
.'
(
'i" 't
.!
/
~/1~ Yrr
.Ji4
r
I
l
~;
I
f
I
I
I
!
i-
d
11 j
I
,
~ .~
I j
I
i '
t
l
I
,
I
,
I
I
\
I
,
!
I .
L
II
~
I
I b 22 0913 900
:NOLIING H'RRY/HORTE'C~ M
......
0'
-----_.__.,..__._--------~-~-
--~.,-~.,
622092030'
........5
---~~
,
'622U920308
.........TH G
,~-"..,,-~,~~..~-
i1
I
I .--.-~~..._-..---.-...---
(6220920316
........
---_._--------"~
,
6 2209203 20
~A
__1.
,
)
---_._~,
1(6220920328 ----.
.......
-.............--..
/02 ,,09Z0333
GALVAN JGSEPH
1
M IRUST 005-0'-9
""
,
,
,i
--
~ /1_.l{71
-~
J
v
,
I
'.J
J
'""
J
~
~
'J
,~
J
v
~
v
~
~
'""
~
~
-'
~
"---,
~
.
-~~',
b 2209 2031, 6
~
,
6220920350
GALLAkOO ANTONIO k/MILLAN NORt
A E
o
"'-'"
,
6 22092035 I,
.........'
"t
1:
~,~
~
l
,~
~'
f
\
--'~- ---...~---
)
1 ~
I'
.1
; .
y'{
1 I
.~ (,
,
~
~~ ----_.,---
b 22 09 20410
1iIiiiiiIiii~
TERAN
i
i
I
I
!
j
/
6220920H9
~ORTtl JOSt F M/MARTINt2 TERE
A F
6220920363
PAINTER EVELYN P
T
6220'120403
::"
,~:-
6220'12 04 07
~,ARTlNtl ERIC J
622092 0411
,,,,,,'.......
6220'12 0415
~
-
. ';;4
:"'!'
'~l
':~, '~,
_'<'1":"..,
'~-",";::f\l~?
I
)
,- ....~:.,;
i~y~At". .
V"::;::'~~_':\,- .,~'
!~f
Ii\.,
. ":U'f';'"
,-",,"",,,.- .
. ;,,'>:~ ;.
~ij::'
..,',<.
',',!'~r'_ .
~c
'~.',
;.1
"
-,,,.,
,._..:-J;'
"c,:;;
"t-
,~
1
j;i
Ii
II
"
"
~ //~JO
..4~
-i
,
-nr
,
'"
~'
ii
I
I
!
\
,0220920340
....~
'__IU
,
!(
,,0220920344
~
!f
0220n0346
i,~
1,-
i "._no___....._no~_._____ ,.
02209<0410
'SANTOYO ARTURU/MARY
C{O CuLUWcLL ~A~K~R'
i
"".
o
, ----.,
! '-..)
""'~
,7,!'~
:_~
TRS
1
;:_'-'-":. Ct--<.,~..,~.-
022092'03,.,1 "---'-'--~
.........
, . .. --"-"'-------,
0220920401' ,
WAN SON SHERMAN M/RAMONA T
o
o
iV
\
\
6220'9.2P"Q5
SILVA ANTONIO snRANClA N J
c
------ ---....,
0220920413
........
0'220920417
KA6AGO DcMI::TkIlJ
I",G ~IT
~ /'1--J /
~:1
-'---,
..-.-------....
.."
'-"
v
v
'-"
v
'-"
v
v
v
v
i
v
v
....--
'~
~
,.,j
1
-1
;J.:
i
~
~
(
".
J
.\' I
, I
6220920422
~
,
62209 ;;0426
PHILLIPS JOHN H TR
r-~~~---~--~-'~~~'---
6220920430
.......
----------~--~._- ---- ...._---~~ ---~-----------
,.~".""
;i;',li,_,-.,!' .
, ,',.;>',
.' . ~::~~1--_t.,:. ).
>:' .'j~:~':;:"~;:::'~
.,.,.,."'~,.,
"..,.--...",. ".-
".<:': ';-'\:;~~~:,~<1
, . '~<
/;-<-;
,
6220920427
,~
y;
t,.
.:,,\f.~"
.d;
;'''.
\:.".:',',.- .
'\:.,>):~
6220920431
.........
o
,
tl
_)1,'
\~
.1
:!'
"
,,.----~-_.__..-..- ._-------=----- --~ -'-'- .. _. - -, /.....__._~--_.._.._"
6 220920442
~STER 0
6220920446
BROWDER JOSEPH K
6221111300
.......... S
~
E/L! NO. L TR I
"
6,2209.2 04 43
JUNE S JI LL F
""''-''''
"I't:';;:,';-:j,
r
6220920447
SI<I,OuYAL C<CILlO A
:f
tl'
",.,."
"Ii
Ii
'.
'-':"1
'~
0221110800
"ODRE kl~H.RD E/SANORA K
ll,2.2.L.lJ.aO 00
'MU'RALE'S"SEkGIO A/CECILIA
0221113800
SE P"HR I SOhRAB/FAR IBA
C/U SAM SEPEhR(
/
" '-'<-"-'C"_
~ /1--~;2
i
I
l:
I
t
t
,
I
,
!
I
~
~
,(622U920436
,~
....--914::
6221110500
IIIiiIiiiiiI
"
I 'C
i
I
i ,. --~----,-----"._.,,-
(: 6~21114t>OO
\ :FISCHIoR ANNUL" "/ES1H"R TkUST
l,2-l9-8,
--
PL AN
l
",,, "~,". ,-,
&220920403
iiiiIIiiIiIal
JIDVAI .-'
'"-,,-_--.L-__ ..__._....__m___._
6220920500-
~S ~NC
.,22l110600
bUKNHAM AMERICAN PROPERTIES IN
t;
.."._.....,......--~-_._--------'----_._-_... .-.--------..--
.,2 2H132 00
..EDA~L()1lH",'AKA R ITO UON KEVDCA
. 'G, TKUST
&221114lbO
CAKRINGTON EARLEAN
'./U GBP".kRU~"RTI ES
.,221lH900
NOkTHEKN TKUST OF CALIFOKNIA T
K
~/7--~ )
~~
~(
"",~",~,,'
.....'\,"~,_.,,'t.. :-,
'.~.' .... ::.'" .
. -',
.,)
.,)
'--"';
G .,)
--'
<;.
'--'
'--'
--'
'--'
'--'
,J
:..,
--'
j
J
J
'-'
o
j
--'
"
,
"'"
1.~--:..
15000
R US T
:;::,. ....,
l/M
CAL~FuUdA
,
.
6<21121200
NORTHERN TRUST 01= CAlI~ORt\lA
R .
C/O NOR THERN TRUST (.0 C-2"
~
-\
1
"
,\
~ORTHI
~
v
----~~'\
i
I
I
~-'-I
CHARLES G/EUNICE E'
!
622112180C
RSR PARTNERSHIP
C/O KkAMEKE ZUCKeR
L
!
I
TRS-~J
t
_.~-------';----,
10
:~
,
"~ICTORIA C
-- '
\
I
I
,
?I //~C;i
"'''"
.
,
6221120JOU
--
_11
6Z211l2liOO
C(jOKE RDBt:RT t L Ili/cRf,;ESTINE
J
61214UZOOQ
~,
'\
622<200500
NYGKEN f<;,ObEkT
6222200900
lLAMA~ AL~RtD C/R~BcCCA H
D22.111~9uO
~
_11
K REVOCABLE TkO
b22190U80Q
U,O~ JOhr~ L'
M
0222'- Quo....O
uRiAS IGNACIiJ k/ELVI/o!.A M
6,22201300 oZ-i2iOi4vO
KINNfo,NOi~ KUkTLEIGH/C.t.TALII~A V ",OJA) J'E~U$/RAQUI:L H
( V
~ /~~~~
Steven Luecht
~
91911
City Council
276 4th Ave.
Chu1a Vista, Ca.
91911
Subarea 3A
This property consists of the Farm House Motel and Trailer
Park. It's uses are a small trailer park, two single
family residents, and a nine room motel.
In 1987 after being annexed into the City of Chu1a Vista,
when the zoning was still residential, I tried getting a
permit to remove my old house and build a new one. I was
refused, given the reason that, the city believed
residential zoning would not be appropriate for this property
and zoned it I.L.P.- Limited Industrial. After some thought
I agreed with the city and then focused my 1ang range
plans and financial expenditure on a non-residential use.
In 1992 the Planning Commission reversed itself and is
now recommending this area by redesignated to medium
residential, to be in conformance with the adjacent area.
I submit after the rezoning of subarea 1 and subarea 2
that subarea 3A will have it's west 650 ft. and it's south
166 ft. boardering the new Commercial Zoning. Rezoning
subarea 3A to commercial would be conforming to the adjacent
area. Also understanding that a good portion of subarea 3A
has been and still is sucessfu11y operating as a commercial
intentity.
Being the owner of this property for 17 years and seeing
the area developed around it be1ive that a new development
of medium residenta1 could only be focused towards low
income housing, and be yet another trouble spot for the
City of Chu1a Vista.
After the development of subarea 2 noise pollution has
greatly increased from it's many tenants. The City has
taken dec1pta1 readings and found the noise generated
to far exceed the allowable 60 to 89 deciptals.
/7 - I (p
The buildings on subarea 2 are positioned so that all
recieveing doors face towards subarea 3A. This area is
used by semi's and other large trucks producing
undisirable noise. This alley is also abused by unrelated
speeding traffic.
The Planning Commission's report under subarea 3A states,
"Commercial uses on this property is inappropriate given
the lack of frontage on a circulation element street."
Understanding the fact that the Farm House MOtel has been
sucessfully in existance since 1952 proves this conclusion
to be totaly incorrect.
A verbal statement made by staff that the depth of this
property made it inexcessable, if this were a problem a
joint adventure with Summerset Plaza could easily element
an excessability problem on the south end.
After rezoning subarea 1 and subarea 2 to Commercial property,
staff does not wish to have isolated zoning of the present
I.L.P.- Limited Industrial zone.
Therefore I request the "city initiated" rezoning of subarea
3A be reexamined and included into the Commercial Zone
to conform with the surrounding subarea 1 and 2 and it's
own exsisting use.
The Adobe Plaza project of subarea 1 is not going to proceed
for a minium of 1! years to 2 years, stated by it's owner
Mr. Sepehri. Therefore allowing plenty of time to process
these changes.
Steven Luecht
bl;
);-9)
ORDINANCE NO. $3 J
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE
ZONING MAP OR MAPS ESTABLISHED BY SECTION 19.18.010 OF THE
CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE REZONING 13.48 ACRES LOCATED
ON THE WEST SIDE OF DEL MONTE A VENUE, SOUTH OF MAIN
STREET, FROM I-L-P TO C-C-P AND R-2-P AND ADOPTING P DISTRICT
REGULATIONS
WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a rezoning was filed with the Planning
Department of the City of Chula Vista on September 4, 1992 by Sam Sepehri; and
WHEREAS, said applications requested that approximately 4.56 acres located on the east
side of Broadway north of Main Street and south of Anita Street(" Subarea 1 ") be rezoned from
I-L-P (Limited Industrial with Precise Plan Modifier) to C-C-P (Central Commercial with
Precise Plan Modifier); and
WHEREAS, upon analysis of the proposed project, the Planning Department, in order
to provide for a sound land use plan for the area, initiated an expansion of the proposed rezone
to an additional 8.92 acres located north and northwest of Subarea 1; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Department divided the expansion area into two areas, one
consisting of 4.0 acres located on the southwest quadrant of Broadway and Anita Street
("Subarea 2"), and one consisting of 4.92 acres located on the south side of Anita Street
immediately east of Subarea 2 ("Subarea 3"); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 12, 1992, and
voted 5 to 0 to recommend that the City Council approve rezone; and
WHEREAS, on December 2, 1992, at the request of a property owner, the Planning
Commission reconsidered the proposed zoning ordinance amendments to a portion of Subarea
3 and voted 5 to 0 to reaffirm their previous decision to recommend rezoning of Subarea 3 to
R-2-P; and
WHEREAS, the City Council set the time and place for a hearing on said rezone
application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication
in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners within 1000
feet of the exterior boundaries of the Property at least ten days prior to the hearing in accordance
with Government Code Sections 65358, 65090 and 65091 (a) 1 and 2 and Chula Vista Municipal
Code Section 19.12.070; and
WHEREAS, an Initial Study (Case No. 92-42) was prepared for the proposed project;
and
I~/}'/
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator recommends the adoption of a
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for the proposed project;
and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 6:00 P.M.,
December 15, 1992 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council and
said hearing was thereafter closed.
NOW, THEREFORE the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby find,
determine and ordain as follows:
SECTION I: Environmental
The City Council finds that the project would have no significant environmental impacts
and adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program issued on IS
92-42.
SECTION II: Findings
A. The City Council finds that the rezoning is consistent with the City of Chula Vista
General Plan as amended concurrently with this action and that the public
necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice support the
rezoning to I-L-P.
B. The City Council finds that pursuant to Section 19.80.070(d) of the Zoning
Ordinance, the proposed R-2-P (One and Two Family Residence) Zone for
Subarea 3 would generate less traffic than the existing I-L-P (Limited Industrial)
Zone, based upon the following calculations:
~
Trips Generated
Limited Industrial
984 (based upon trip generation rate from
SANDAG of 200 trips per acre for industrial uses)
One and Two-Family
540 (based upon maximum density Residential of 11
dwelling units per acre (54 dwelling units) and trip
generation rate from SANDAG of 10 trips per
residence)
C. The City Council finds that, pursuant to Section 19.56.041 of the Zoning
Ordinance, following circumstance is evident which allows application of the "P"
Precise Plan modifying district to this site:
The property or area to which the P modifying district is applied is an area
adjacent and contiguous to a zone allowing different land uses, and the
development of a precise plan will allow the area so designated to coexist between
/9~c)..,
land usages which might otherwise prove incompatible.
SECTION III: Rezoning
Section 19.18.010 of the Chu1a Vista Municipal Code (being the zoning map) is hereby
amended to rezone the Property as follows:
Subarea 1: From I-L-P (Limited Industrial with Precise Plan Modifier) to C-C-P (Central
Commercial with Precise Plan Modifier).
Subarea 2: From I-L-P (Limited Industrial with Precise Plan Modifier) to C-C-P (Central
Commercial with Precise Plan Modifier).
Subarea 3: From I-L-P (Limited Industrial with Precise Plan Modifier) to R-2-P (One
and Two Family Residential with Precise Plan Modifier).
For all three subareas, the P Modifier District Regulations attached hereto under
Attachment A is hereby adopted.
SECTION IV: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day
from and after its adoption.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
F: \bome\attomey\pcz93C
/9/9,3
RESOLUTION NO. / ~ 9:J r
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN AND THE MONTGOMERY SPECIFIC
PLAN FOR 13.48 ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF BROADWAY
NORTH OF MAIN STREET AND SOUTH OF ANITA STREET("ABODE
PLAZA ")
WHEREAS, duly verified applications for a General Plan Amendment and Montgomery Specific
Plan Amendment were filed with the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista on
September 4, 1992 by Sam Sepehri; and
WHEREAS, said applications requested that approximately 4.56 acres located on the east side
of Broadway north of Main Street and south of Anita Street("Subarea 1 ") be designated "Retail
Commercial" on the General Plan Land Use Diagram and "Mercantile and Office Commercial"
on the Montgomery Specific Plan Map; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 12, 1992, and voted
5 to 0 to recommend that the City Council approve the General Plan Amendment and the
Montgomery Specific Plan Amendment; and
WHEREAS, on December 2, 1992, at the request of a property owner, the Planning
Commission reconsidered the proposed amendments to the General Plan and the Montgomery
Specific Plan for a portion of Subarea 3, and voted 5 to 0 to reaffirm the previous decision to
recommend designation of Subarea 3 as Medium Residential (6-11 du/ac.); and
WHEREAS, the City Council set the time and place for a hearing on said General Plan
Amendment and Montgomery Specific Plan Amendment application and notice of said hearing,
together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in
the city and its mailing to property owners within 1000 feet of the exterior boundaries of the
Property at least ten days prior to the hearing in accordance with Government Code Sections
65358,65090 and 65091 (a) 1 and 2 and Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 19.12.070; and
WHEREAS, an Initial Study (Case No. 92-42) was prepared for the proposed project; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator recommends the adoption of a Mitigated
Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for the proposed project; and
WHEREAS, the General Plan Amendment has not been amended more than four (4) times this
calendar year and the City Council intends the General Plan Amendment approved by this action
to be heard, considered, consolidated and treated as one General Plan Amendment along with
the Del Monte Avenue Plan Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 6:00 P.M.,
December 15, 1992 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council and
J;[]-/
said hearing was thereafter closed.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT from the facts presented to the City Council,
the Council finds that the project would have no significant environmental impacts and adopts
the Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program issued on IS 92-42.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT from the facts presented to the City Council, the Council
amends the General Plan and the Montgomery Specific Plan to redesignate 13.48 acres located
on the east side of Broadway, north of Main Street and south of Anita Street, for Subareas 1 and
2, to "Retail Commercial," and for Subarea 3, to "Medium Density Residential."
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
(Submitted without City
Attorney review)
/1!J-c2-
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item c2//
Meeting Date 12/15/92
SUBMITTED BY:
Public Hearing Consideration of establishing
Underground Utility District No. 125 along Orange Avenue from Fourth
Avenue to Third Avenue
Resolution / t. 93 ') Establishing Underground Utility District
No. 125 along Orange Avenue from Fourth Avenue to Third Avenue and
authorizing the expenditure of Utility Allocation Funds to subsidize
private service lateral conv~~~~s
Director of Public Works rIP
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
City Manager rj
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_No..xJ
On November 3, 1992, by Resolution No. 16860 the City Council ordered a Public Hearing
to be held on December 15, 1992 to determine whether the public health, safety or general
welfare requires the formation of an underground utility district along Orange Avenue from
Fourth Avenue to Third Avenue.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council:
1. Conduct a public hearing on the formation of the conversion district.
2. Approve a resolution forming the district and authorizing the use of
approximately $28,000 in utility allocation funds to subsidize 19 single-
family residential service lateral conversions.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The Underground Utility Advisory Committee consisting of representatives of SDG&E, Pacific
Bell, Cox Cable T.V., Chula Vista Cable, and the City staff agreed to propose to the City
Council the formation of a district to convert the overhead facilities along Orange Avenue
from Fourth Avenue to Third Avenue. This project is on the Council's approved priority list
and is ranked as the 16th utility conversion project in the City's adopted program. However,
proposed construction of the public library at the southeast corner of Orange and Fourth
Avenues significantly increased the points thus moving the project up in said ranking and
made the subject street section top priority. The proposed utility undergrounding district
along Orange Avenue is about 1,500 feet long running from Third Avenue west to Fourth
Avenue (please see exhibit A). The estimated cost for undergrounding the utilities is
c2c; "l
Page 2, Item :1.. 0
Meeting Date 12/15/92
$400,000. East of the proposed district undergrounding of overhead utilities has been
completed. The Average Daily Traffic (ADT) count on Orange Avenue between Third and
Fourth Avenues is approximately 10,000. Staff recommends the formation of this
conversion district along this section of Orange Avenue because:
1. Orange Avenue is a major east/west thoroughfare connecting 1-5 and 1-
805 in the southern portion of Chula Vista. The undergrounding of
existing overhead utilities will contribute to the creation of an
aesthetically pleasing major street.
2. Orange Avenue is classified in the General Plan Circulation Element as a
four lane major street.
3. Undergrounding has been completed on Orange Avenue east of Third
Avenue thus making the proposed district an extension of an
undergrounded section.
4. The proposed construction of a public library at the southeast corner of
Orange and Fourth Avenues significantly increased the ranking of the
subject street section in the City's adopted Utility Conversion Program
thus making it a top priority project.
Section 15.32.130 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code requires the City Council to set a
public hearing to determine whether the public health, safety, and general welfare requires
the undergrounding of existing overhead utilities within designated areas of the City and to
give persons the opportunity to speak in favor of or against the formation of the proposed
undergrounding district. The purpose of forming the district is to require the utility
companies to convert all overhead lines, to remove all existing wooden utility poles within
the district and to require property owners to convert service connections to underground.
The conversion work by the property owners involves trenching, backfill, and conduit
installation from property line to point of connection. Chula Vista City Council Policy No.
585-1 established a mechanism that reduces the property owner's cost for the conversion
from the distribution lines to the residence. The mechanism is based on the following
provisions:
1. Funding is limited to facilities which the customer traditionally
supplies/installs such as trenching and conduit from property line to point
of connection.
2. Funding shall not exceed the estimated cost of trenching and conduit
installation for up to 100 feet of the private service lateral.
Council Policy No. 585-1 currently limits the funding reimbursement to single-family
residential properties only. There is an action item before the City Council tonight that
02t/--~
Page 3, Item c;ll}
Meeting Date 12/15/92
proposes the expansion of the applicability of said policy to include all uses. This will not
have any affect on the subject district because all the properties that receive overhead
electrical service are single-family residential properties.
There are 19 properties located within the district which are eligible for this subsidy. The
property owners are required to cause the work to be done. SDG&E will contribute $30 per
linear foot for the trenching and backfill on each eligible property. This amount should cover
all the trenching costs as well as other conversion costs to the meter box. However, there
may be cases where the property owner is not reimbursed 100% for costs. The total
reimbursement for the 19 properties is approximately $28,000. A list of the 19 property
owners that will be subsidized is shown on exhibit B. -
The Director of Public Works, subsequent to the formation of the district will submit to the
Council a resolution setting the date for the property owners to be ready to receive
underground facilities and the date for the removal of all wooden poles in accordance with
the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code. A submission of the resolution to the City Council
will occur after the utility companies have agreed on a schedule for the project.
All property owners within the district have been notified of tonight's hearing. A
transparency showing the proposed boundary of the district is available.
FISCAL IMPACT: The cost to underground utilities along Orange Avenue from Fourth
Avenue to Third Avenue is estimated to be $400,000. SDG&E's allocated funds (rule 20-A)
will cover the estimated costs of the project. A subsidy of approximately $28,000 for 19
single-family property owners within this district is included in said amount.
SMN
File: AX-125
WPC F:\home\engineer\AGENDA\ORANGE.UUO
c:2() ~ J I J.()-1
.,
THIS PAGE BLANK
02cJ--f
RESOLUTION NO. I ~ 9 .J /
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA ESTABLISHING UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT NO.
125 ALONG ORANGE AVENUE FROM FOURTH AVENUE TO THIRD
AVENUE AND AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF UTILITY
ALLOCATION FUNDS TO SUBSIDIZE PRIVATE SERVICE
LATERAL CONVERSIONS
The city Council of the city of Chula vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 16860, a public hearing was
called for 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, the 15th day of December, 1992, in
the Council Chambers of the City of Chula vista at 276 Fourth
Avenue in said city, to ascertain whether the public health, safety
or welfare requires the removal of poles, overhead wires and
associated overhead structures and the underground installation of
wires and facilities for supplying electric, communication or
similar or associated service within that certain area of the City
more particularly described as follows:
All that property along orange Avenue from Fourth Avenue
to Third Avenue and enclosed within the boundary as shown
on the plat attached hereto as Attachment "A" of subject
Underground Utility District.
and
WHEREAS, notice of such hearing has been given to all
affected property owners as shown on the last equalized assessment
roll, and to the utility companies concerned in the manner and for
the time required by law, and
WHEREAS, such hearing has been duly and regularly held,
and all persons interested have been given an opportunity to be
heard.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city Council of
the City of Chula vista hereby finds and determines that the public
health, safety and welfare requires the removal of poles, overhead
wires and associated structures, and the underground installation
of wires and facilities for supplying electric, communication or
similar associated services, the above-described area is hereby
declared an Underground Utility District, and is designated as such
in the City of Chula vista. Attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A",
and incorporated herein by reference is a map delineating the
boundaries of said District, and attached hereto as Exhibit B is a
listing, by parcel numbers of parcels included within the district.
1
c2tJJ
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the city council shall, by
subsequent resolution, fix the date on which affected property
owners must be ready to receive underground service, and does
hereby order the removal of all poles, overhead wires and
associated overhead structures and the underground installation of
wires and facilities for supplying electric, communication or
similar associated service within said Underground utility
District.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby
instructed to notify all affected utilities and all persons owning
real property within said Underground utility District of the
adoption of this resolution within fifteen days after the date of
said adoption. Said city Clerk shall further notify said property
owners of the necessity that, if they or any person occupying such
property desires to continue to receive electric, communication or
other similar or associated service, they, or such occupant shall,
by the date fixed in a subsequent resolution provide all necessary
facility changes on their premises so as to receive such service
from the lines of the supplying utility or utilities at a new
location, subject to the applicable rules, regulations and tariffs
of the respective utility or utilities on file with the Public
utilities Commission of the State of California as of the date of
adoption of this resolution. Such notification shall be made by
mailing a copy of this resolution to affected property owners as
shown on the last equalized assessment roll and to the affected
utility companies.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby finds
that the Underground Utility District herein created is in the
general public interest for the following reasons:
1. Orange Avenue is a major east/west thoroughfare
connecting I-80S and 1-5 in the southern portion of Chula
vista. The undergrounding of existing overhead
utilities will contribute to the creation of an
aestheticaly pleasing central business district.
2. orange Avenue is classified in the General Plan
Circulation Element as a four lane major street.
3. Undergrounding has been completed on Orange Avenue
east of Third Avenue thus making the proposed district an
extension of an underground sections.
4. The proposed construction of a public library at the
southeast corner of Orange and Fourth Avenues
significantly increased the ranking of subject street
section in the City'S adopted Utility Conversion Program
thus making it a top priority project.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the expenditure of $28,000 of
2
c:;. tJ - (,
John P. Lippitt, Director of
Public Works
"al service
allocation funds to subsidize 19 single-family resid
lateral conversions is hereby authorized.
Presented by
aSA
F:\home\attomey\underg
3
..2tJ -7 po - 8
TInS PAGE BLANK
c2/)-~
"'LtJt::j-UL
~
z
w
>
<
anNaA'"
\
II
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
r&I :
.
. .
. .
. ,
, .
. , .
\ ' ,."
. ~ \, , ...
,,-
31V:>S ON
)2
OI:fIHJ.
VSO ~3H)
HJ.l:fnO:l
)
.
.
.
:
.
.
.
.
.
:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
>-
ac
c
Q
~
o
ID
...
(,)
~
...
fn
Q
Q
11.I
fn
o
D.
o
ac
D.
It)
C'i
...
o
Z
I
I-
U
-
a:
I-
o
. -
< Q
- CJ
~ Z
~ Q
x z
w ::)
o
a:
CJ
a:
w
Q
Z
::)
>
I-
-
...
-
I-
::)
...
.;
a
..
=
I
Q
.
w
>
<
Q
a:
-
:E:
~
Q
Z
<
.
w
>
<
:E:
~
a:
::)
o
&I..
Z
W
W
~
~
W
In
I
W
::)
Z
W
>
<
w
CJ
Z
<
a:
o
C\I
at
.....
.,
C\I
.....
...
...
..
.
B
~
~
.,
-
-
-
-
-
~
o
-
~
~
~
~
~
=
~
~
~
=
~ -
~ ~
- -
=~-
~~=
~='"
--
~~~
~-
"'--
-
-~~
""'==
---
==~
lDa__
= -
"'"'"
_ClC~=
- u.I -c_
-~ =
_ *' '3: =-
:z:,;,1-0
- =~
~-=
~~~
~~O
-~
~~=
=~o
u.I=;::
=~=
~-2
~
-
~
~
o
-
~
'"
-
-
=
o
'"
~
o
=
~
~
~
=
.
>
-
-
-
o
~
o
~
-
-
~
~
-
=0
--
~
~
,.
-
-
.~
=
~
-
l!:
~
o
=
~~
=-
.",~
~:!!
~
::!::
l::
~
;::
=
~
-~
-~
~=
~
=
00
~-
~
~ .
~=
~-
-~
= .
_0
~-
;;;;~
~
~
--
;;;;
~
~
-
~
~
--
~~
--
~~
:2~
~~
f=
~
:5:5
==
==
~~
~
~
~
=
~
~
-
!!'
=
~
-
-
~
-
-
~
.~
~-
~
--
o
=-
~
= .
=~
~ca:
-
-
~
-
~
~
~
~~
;1=
--'
-~
=~
~~
~
-
=
;:;
~
=
-
-
-
-
~
-
-
--
- -
- -
- .
.~.~
- -
~~
u u
00
00
u u
~
-
~
ill
~
=
=
-
i!!.
~
=
~~
<> <>
--
~~
~~
~~
~~
~~
~~
.~
~-
~
~
~
=
~
~ .
-
~
l::
~
ww
~~
--
==
~~
==
==
0"'"
~~
--
--
~~
<> -
~~
. .
~~
--
~~
, ,
--
--
-~
<> <>
__1610"
0000
_0
;;;;;;:;;
;;;;;;;;;
.cc:...c...c
uuuu
cc..c..c
----
~~~~
----
-CoCc:..c
.....1-"--
=-=-=-=
:Z::Z::Z::Z:
uuuu
L.U L.U ..... LU
-->>-
-c -c -c oC
:z::z::z::z:
----
ClCClC.ClCClC
=-=-=-=-
000000
t.A..16.L.L.~
-on-CD
----
___CN
:5
~
=
~
=
~
f!5=~;!
~=~
>-U....I_
1.1.11.&.1 -c >-
=~~
~ --
=- -C :::II .....
-c_c.o=-
- =
- -~
-
_ O~
:z: 00 >- 0
~~-
000_>
~~cn_
;::~mC::;
-
-
-
-
--
- -
- .
- >
.;:":::
-~
~
u
~:;
_ u
00000
~a:~
~
~<>~
-~~
~~~
---
~~~
...:......-
cncncn_
.....Ll.lu.lL.U
----
oC-C-c..c
:z::c::c:z:
----
a: ClC ClC ClC-
5555
L&.....L.L......
~~;;~
----
-_on ..
---.....,
I I I I
0000-
~==c;
I I 1 I
....--
~
----
--""-
000__
:;;~~~_CN__,,"~
;;;;;....
----
----
----
----
;;;;;;;;;
. - . -
.c-c-CoC-c-c-c..c-coC
uuuuuuuuuu
c.c...c.c.e..c..c...c.c..c
----------
=~=~=~===~
-=-->------
-c -c -c oC
.....1.........1-
=- =- =- =-
:Z::::C:Z:::C
uuuu
..c...c..c-c
-J ...... ....I --'
:::.=-=-=
==::c:z::
uuuu
_L.LIIU.llL.UL.U..........I.&.lL.U.....
cn_________
-c-c-c-c-c-c-c-c-c
-
-
l!l!
~
-
L.U ..... LLlI L.U LU LLI .....
CDCDUII<DCDCD<D
-------
-c-CoC-c-c-c-c
ClCClCClCacClCClCClC
000000.0
__0_____
-------...,
~-------
-
-
~-
-~
=~
o ~~
- =~
- -
~ --
~ 0-
__~:z
~~ -
- <>...... =-
=0 = _ a:;
~o~
_u.Ja::=
~=
-
~--
~~
-~
_0
==
0_
--
-~~
----
oC__:Z
~~:za
=..c=-:_
- -
:5~-
~~~
~~=
--~
==~
=082_2
_ a:: -.: a:;:a
oC....c <>...... <>
a:;::t _ CD_
u.JO=:O:Z:O:Z:
CD u.J ....c a:; -c
-
-
~ <>
~-
--
~-
~
l::
~
-
=
-
=
:!l
~
~
=
=
-
=
~
-
o
o
-
-
u
>
-
.
"
-
~
- -
u _
-
- .
>
.--
0_
O~
~
~ .
_ u
_ 0
.0
_ u
____000_0_
""00""0__""""
~~~~~~~~~
---------
...,_c:o...,c:o_o...,...,
_...,cco_...,_...,__
~~~~uuuuuu
----------
u.Ju.Ju.J..............................1.&,l
. . . . . -
""":..............""":"'":"":"'":"":"'":
----------
..........................................................
:-.:-.:-.=-:-.=-=-:-.=->-
..c-c..c-c-c_c_c-c_c-c
.........................................1,&,1...........
CD CD CD CD CD CDICDCDCDCDI
:z:a=-=:a_:a:z::z::z:=-
-c-c..c-coc_coc..c-coc
a:; a:; a:; a:; a:; a: a:: a: a:: a:
00000_0000
__0_______
0______""""_
----------
-...,-------.....
'i''i''i''i'"""
----------
.............,....._-----
____c:o_c:o_c:oc:o
I I 1 I I I I I I I
----------
=,====::~=:::::
~~~e::~~::!==
;;:;;;
;;;;;
:5:5
==
==
~~
~~
~~
--
--
==
~o
_0
~-
~~
--
-
~~
=~
='"
~-
-
=
~
~-
--
=-
!if;:
~-
~~
=
~
~
G
~
o
>
-
.
~
c
-
u
,
-
-
-
-
-~
-
~
u
c
..
u
::~~
~O_
;;;;;;
---
---
~~~
-c-c.c
~--
~~~
~--
:5~~
===
===
~~~
~~~
~--
---
==~
~-'"
==-
==-
<> 0 =
~~o
--~
- - <>
~~-
-
o
~
!il
~
=
~
=
--~
~-'"
~~o
--=
--
--
~~~
~-S!~
~~~
~
~~-
00
=
--~
~-~
--0
~~=
-
-
-
.
>
-
~
~~
:::!::.::-
~~ 0
o
--
== -
__ u
a: a: .....
~~~
~~ .
"
~~
== .
==-
~-~
= =-
~~ u
u
o
o
u
<> <> <>
.,c;..c:i_
....-...CL.
---
~~~
~-~
---
~~~
"'~~
---
---
===
000
--~
- - <>
~~-
~--
"~
<> 00
c;c;;;;
. , ,
~~~
~~~
---
::-...
~;;:;~~=
-
;;;;;;;;;;;.....
;;;;;;;;;:;~
_coC_c_c .
~~~~..c
~
-c.c-c.c
----
~~~~g
=->-:-.::>~
..c_CooC_c_
---.......
~~~~
u~u~
g
-
~
_____c
____CD
~
_ CIo IIQo _ cc
a:: cz: a:; a:
-c....c-coC<>
-----
~~~~:ii
::t ::t ::t ::t -c
ClOO<::1l~
___CD""
_ g, en G'O_
----
~
~
=
=
~
~
-
-
-
~
-
~
:5
~
- -
,. -
~ -~
.......::t....c_a:;
...... a: _ _ CD
----
=- cz: 0_
-;;c1i8......
...... O..oC _
:z _ a::: _
_ ..oC_=
....... >- =- CL.
oa:: .............
a:::z:_=_
-c..... ..c 0
~=-cu_
---
01:) __
::~~
;~u....
c c c:.,.
..... 0 u
..a::..a:: u.....
ICC.i::
.......,. .,.
c:o.ca.c: ....
c:oc:o_c:o_
...,0=00=0..........
__0__
~~-
~2~~~
~
UUUc..;JU
-----
............................
. . . . -
",":"":,,,":,,":,,":1
-----
. . . . .
-----
-----
-----
a: a::: a::: a:: a::
..c:..c: -c __
-----
~=~~~
::t::t::t::t::t
Od<::1ldd
-----
_....,,0000
-----
_en___
.....----
I I I I I
__O_c:o
G'Ocncncncn
......-............-
I I I I I
cnc:noocncn
;;;;;;
-----
""......---
-
- .
~
~
-
-
~
o
~
~
~
<>
.0
~
-
"
-
o
-
.
.
~
~
-
-~
-
=
-
-
..
-
:!:
--
~ 0
.
=
~
U ~
--~
=.~
" -
-- =
o
-
o c
-....;::
C-_
- .
. U
u.
-=
-
~ "
~~ dt'-/t?
File No,
PUBLIC HEARING CHECK LIST
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING DATE ~ 1:5') l'l'l'l.
MAILED NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS
-
NO, MAILED
PER GC 54992 Legislative Staff, Construction Industry Fed, 6336 Greenwich Dr Suite F. San Diego, 92122
LOGGED IN AGENDA BOOK loJ I.> I q<r
COPIES TO:
Administration (4)
Planning/
./
Originating Department
Engineering /
Others
City Clerk's Office (2)
,,/'
Id /d / Cj..}-
POST ON BULLETIN BOARDS
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS:
.58.
dO ~ / /
MEMORANDUM
November 23, 1992
File # AX-125
KY-078
TO:
Beverly Authe1et,
City Clerk ~J
civil Enginee?
FROM:
samir M. Nuhaily,
SUBJECT: Notice of Public Hearing for the Formation of a utility
Undergrounding District along orange Avenue between Third
and Fourth Avenues
Please have Resolution No. 16860, calling for a Public Hearing for
the subject District, published per section 15.32.140C of the Chula
vista Municipal Code. The public hearing is scheduled for December
15, 1992. A copy of said Resolution is attached.
Thank you.
MI:rb
Attachment
(MI\RESO.MEM)
d- 0./ / rJ.-
\
RESOLUTION NO. 16860
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA DECLARING CITY I S INTENTION TO UNDERGROUND OVERHEAD
UTILITIES ALONG ORANGE AVENUE FROM THIRD AVENUE TO
FOURTH AVENUE AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE
FORMATION OF A UTILITY UNDERGROUNDING DISTRICT ALONG
SAID ~T~EET SECTION
WHEREAS, Chapter 15.32 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code establishes a
procedure for the creation of underground utility districts and requires as the
initial step in such procedure the holding of a pubHc hearing to ascertain
whether public necessity, health, safety, or welfare requires the removal of
poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures and the underground
installation of wires and facilities for supplying electric, communication, or
similar or associated service in any such district; and,
WHEREAS, on October 22, 1992, an Underground Utility Advisory Committee
(UUAC) meeting was held in the Public Services Building to consider the proposed
boundary of an underground utility district along Orange Avenue from Third Avenue
to Fourth Avenue; and,
WHEREAS, it has been recommended that such an underground utility district,
hereinafter called "District", be formed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chu1a
Vista as follows:
I. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held in the Council
Chambers of the City of Chu1a Vista at 276 Fourth Avenue in said City on
Tuesday, the 15th day of December, 1992, at the hour of 6:00 p.m., to
ascertain whether the public necessity, health, safety or welfare requires
the removal of poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures
and the underground installation of wires and facilities for supplying
electric, communication, or similar associated service in the District
hereinabove described. At such hearing, all persons interested shall be
given an opportunity to be heard. Said hearing ..y be continued from time
to time as may be determined by the City Council.
2. The City Clerk shall notify all affected property owners as shown on the
last equalized assessment roll and utilities concerned of the time and
place of such hearing by llaiHng a copy of this resolution to such
property owners and utilities concerned at least fifteen (15) days prior
to the date thereof.
>>//3
Resolution No. 16860
pa,ge 2
The area proposed to be included in the District is as shown on Exhibit A) 0.... U:.f'I
r' 'IIlW"---~ . '.. r' L . . (I... wh':'\- ',,, <'" -'ilL ,""-!4
0+' ~ ~ u"-I'-L
o-t>
o '.c.<.<<.-
3.
Presented by
hn P. Lippit
irector of Public Works
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
d-fJ//Y
-
Resolution No. 16860
Page 3
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista, California, this 3rd day of November, 1992, by the following vote:
YES: Councillll!lllbers: Horton, Moore, Ri ndone, Nader
NOES: Councillembers: None
ABSENT: Councillembers: None
ABSTAIN: Councillembers: Malcolm
/-~../.
=- w/
Tim Nader, Mayor
ATTEST:
~.4tg~,,,,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA I
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. 16860 was duly passed, approved,
and adopted by the City Council held on the 3rd day of November, 1992.
Executed this 3rd day of November, 1992.
.;2(} ---)~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ~
Meeting Date 12/15/92
ITEM TITLE: Resolution Il,pq 4 b Approving and Authorizing Execution of an
Implementing Agreement with Major Retailer A (Home Depot), Rancho
del Rey Commercial Center, and Related CEQA Findings
SUBMITTED BY: Community Development Director{ :5 ,
REVIEWED BY: City Manager 1) (4/5ths Vote: Yes No X)
BACKGROUND: On November 24, 1992, Council held a public hearing and subsequently
adopted Resolution 16900 and held the first reading of Ordinance 2535 relating to the conversion
of the western 55 acres of the Rancho del Rey Employment Park to a Commercial Center land
use designation and related regulatory actions including CEQA considerations. The second
reading of this ordinance was approved on November 30, 1992. Approval of the ordinance
included adoption of a Development Agreement with the applicant/developer of the Commercial
Center for all portions of the site excluding the easternmost parcel designated for Major Retailer
A. This Development Agreement covers the parcel to be purchased by Home Depot, and
requires an Implementing Agreement be entered into between Home Depot and the City prior
to the issuance of a building permit. The proposed Implementing Agreement (attached)
implements the Development Agreement and provides for benefits to Home Depot as well as
performance assurances to the City.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute
the proposed Implementing Agreement with Home Depot, and making certain CEQA findings.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The following boards and commissions
reviewed the actions taken by Council on November 24, as discussed in the November 24
agenda statement:
o Resource Conservation Commission - Endorsed project
o Design Review Committee - Endorsed amended Employment Park design guidelines
o Economic Development Commission - Endorsed project
o Planning Commission - Certified FSEIR and recommended approval of resolution and
ordinance, including Development Agreement
No group has reviewed the attached Implementing Agreement document. However, the key
terms of the agreement were outlined in the November 18 Planning Commission staff report.
~/A-)
Page 2, Item ;2.-1 A
Meeting Date 12/15/92
DISCUSSION:
Home Deoot - General Information
Home Depot is a 12 year old company and is the nation's largest chain of warehouse-size do-it-
yourself stores (see article, Attachment A). Home Depot has outgrown its current 95,000 square
foot facility at Terra Nova Plaza (80,000 square feet general merchandise plus 15,000 square
foot garden center) resulting in problems with parking, storage and productivity. The proposed
agreement allows Home Depot to build a new 125,280 square foot facility (104,740 square feet
plus a 20,540 square foot garden center) at the Rancho del Rey Commercial Center.
Home Depot owns the store at Terra Nova and is actively negotiating with several retailers to
lease or sell the property. Home Depot is highly motivated to secure a replacement tenant due
to a high carry on the property. The Terra Nova Plaza is subject to stringent development
standards with limited allowable uses (see Attachment B). Examples of potential replacement
tenants include clothing store, electronics, office supply and furnishings.
Home Depot indicates that they have been searching for a second location for two years but have
been unable to find one in Chula Vista. As a result, they have decided to relocate and expand
their operations within the same general market area.
Proposed Agreement Terms
The key terms of the agreement remain as presented to the Planning Commission on November
18 and to Council on November 24 with one exception (#1 below). These terms are outlined
as follows:
1. Section 3 of the Agreement has been revised regarding the City's right of approval of the
replacement tenant at the Terra Nova Plaza. Current language as proposed requires the
developer to use its best efforts to minimize the time the existing facility will be vacant
and to ensure that the replacement retailer is recognized as a prominent, leading business
in its retail field. (Note: allowed uses are delineated in the Terra Nova Plaza
Development Standards which are incorporated into the Agreement as Attachment 5.
Uses not clearly identified as eligible may be reviewed by the Chula Vista Planning
Commission for consistency with adjacent uses). Also, staff is still trying to develop an
acceptable compromise to give us more leverage in determining who the replacement
tenants will be.
2. Home Depot will open the H Street store within 18 months of closing escrow.
3. In the event the new H Street store closes prior to ten years from opening, the City will
receive economic damages equal to $75,000 for each year of early closure.
4. Home Depot will provide a proactive approach to recruiting training andlor hiring
employees from the local community, including a significant effort to work with local
~/A~2.
Page 3, Item :2J A
Meeting Date 12/15/92
education and training providers such as Sweetwater Union High School District and
Southwestern College.
Environmental Review
The Rancho del Rey Commercial Center Final SEIR has analyzed impacts associated with the
proposed Implementing Agreement. This same FSEIR was certified by City Council on
November 24, 1992. The proposed Implementing Agreement carries out the Development
Agreement that was identified in the Final SEIR. Thus, no new environmental issues arise from
approval of this Implementing Agreement, and the Rancho del Rey Commercial Center Final
SEIR is the appropriate CEQA document. Likewise, the Candidate CEQA Findings (as modified
at the November 24 meeting), the Statement of Overriding Considerations, and the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program remain the appropriate documents to accompany the
proposed action.
Economic and Fiscal Impact
The proposed new store will employ approximately 175 people (150 full time and 25 part time).
This is a 20% increase over the existing number of employees at the Terra Nova Plaza. (The
entire Rancho del Rey Commercial Center will create an estimated 1224 jobs.)
In terms of revenues, the Commercial Center will generate first year Net New Revenues of
$1.21 million. The new Home Depot alone is projected to generate $584,000 in Gross Sales
Tax Revenues. After accounting for the loss of revenues from the Terra Nova store, the H
Street Home Depot is projected to generate $195,000 in Year 1 Net New Sales Tax Revenues.
(This assumes a replacement tenant that generates less than 20% of revenues currently generated
by Home Depot, or $102,000, a highly conservative assumption.)
1/~"/1tIlH&JJrs NIJTe/) "4r..s(!,,#AlE~
C:\WP51\DYE\HOMEDEP.113
~IA~..3 /2.lH-/()
RESOLUTION
I~ 9i/t?
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING AN IMPLEMENTING AGREEMENT WITH HOME DEPOT
U.S.A., INC. TO CARRY OUT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR
DEVELOPMENT OF A RETAIL STORE AT THE RANCHO DEL REY
COMMERCIAL CENTER
TIlE CITY COUNCIL OF TIlE CITY OF CHULA VISTA does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, on November 24, 1992, the City Council approved Resolution 16900
and the first reading of Ordinance 2535, collectively certifying the FSEIR, amending the General
Plan, EI Rancho del Rey Specific Plan, Rancho del Rey Sectional Planning Area (SPA) I,
Planned Community District Regulations, Rancho del Rey Employment Park Design Guidelines,
and PFFP, and approving the Air Quality Plan Water Conservation Plan, Tentative Maps, street
name change and Development Agreement, and making certain Findings and Statement of
Overriding Considerations; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council held the second reading of the Ordinance
(approving the Development Agreement) on November 3D, 1992; and,
WHEREAS, A General Condition of Approval of the Commercial Center project
requires that an Implementing Agreement be entered into between each of Major Retailers A,
B, and C and the City prior to each retailer commencing development; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed Implementing Agreement with Home Depot
implements the approved Development Agreement and provides assurances to the retailer and
the City as approved by Council; and,
WHEREAS, the Rancho del Rey Commercial Center FSEIR has analyzed impacts
associated with the proposed Implementing Agreement and was certified by Council on
November 24, 1992 and carries out the Development Agreement as identified in the FSEIR; and,
WHEREAS, no new environmental issues arise from approval of the
Implementing Agreement and the candidate CEQA findings (as modified at the November 24
meeting) the Statement of Overriding Considerations and the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program remain the appropriate documents to accompany the proposed action.
NOW, TIlEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista does hereby approve and authorize the City execution of an Implementing
Agreement with Home Depot, U.S.A., Inc. for the development of a major retail store at the
Rancho del Rey Commercial Center.
Presented by:
~ ~-(h-O
Approved as to form by:
~
Chris Salomone
Community Development Director
c2//l-4
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
(Submitted without City Attorney review)
ATTACHMENT A
,
"1.:
~'_'. .,:<,:i7'"i~l:~u -..b;~~ 7_.-~, ~~C.2"'~3l:S'!'!'Jj,~-iif__~oa;"
... - - ~ 'ftif.1 - -.." -' "- b~ "-"'j ~ - '") -...~ , . ~ 6 ........ i..1 :;:;: ~ :-;:.!.,2
:-.a:i_ ~.s h ~'.!:i ~"a~ ~ a .s~'~:; ~cb ~ ~.~ g 4i ;,; ~~/~ ~: lii:r
- 13~JlI8 ~ C:..]:E 0.0 .",~.,' c. .8 "".0 ,Q:o. <:.....s...
~::'-~~f~ ,,~~i-ctt:::l.!! "+J.... -I-t~~ ~- d Q) ..t"-fc: .-c -0,
.}-g~A I"c::a.~ ~~...7"" ~Q)' s::,,~ggms co ~alOl .OO-H4J~
~...~. -.... 0 0 ~r- '0 tI)!'~ e 8 col! u 0 l:I~ 8. ~fi:~ i~.~ ~ .
#AW;' ~E;J '-.iai 1'8"'!~._ >.~.s21;.;:Scul;l:su_,~'C:~~
: V#M ~'..-.l " .,,:,, tl:S ~~~O..s ;; 8 !'l~' l;l _~:l :....S;~.",lg ;;.':g
Q ",'" iii 0 c: 2,'" C"IC')" - Gl .." ", - ^ tl..
.i~:;:138.. 'ill....~.e-';!~-.J''-''t.I~ 1i ~~....'~]~ ~o
'fi., ,,0 ", ....c" ... ",. -- c. .. ... .. 0 ...... -, 'E +-'
~.,,"Wl.,-\""'~"..... .- 00tj 00coB..c ,,>--.C - 0 ...d:+-l Q) Q) .. -: .
~ .. ~ '" .a.!!. J::' '" .ei.... c: 10 +-' S ..., ..s.c:;J '" +-' 0 ~
..:,'~ ~'ff,=5 :fl ~ :9~'~ <l~'5 ,g .~.~:S lIJ 0 'a.~ ... .S ~ B ~ Z Q.
~11~::a"'""" . .c:~ ~8;Ji3!l:..~1i"''''1iir:: .'" 9"'>.
...'';,~.,~ 13 ~", -l:l ~= 8.m~-g~:g ~ ~ c.t! ~ 8 ~~:g~..s 8.
;~U;~~~1l,~ ~il;j~l~~'~"':: ~~~I~~~r;~
"'~:}f~_)it~fi 5~:"t.1';:' 4J ~o;t!.~" '~J,~Gi~ bO~'E 5~+$~' ~.8 -'~ fa i
~~..,.r",..c:'. .",,g~.' '~.. g;~"~lii,..8<lgj-i-<~.~o'''''b o'!> ..s~-
~C"':"~ '" : S +-,-,'''''---- . ... +-' "" 8 ..,-, -- ",~.o.B "'-6l,"'" c.> 15"'" 8.'<;1 0... +-' c:
...."-...-..~O ..c..-=:.. ~,ftI~_ "C bO "1j9 c4J,~--. 0, -t::cP
',/'''' ._ _ . !l.'.,- 0 -. --...._ 1:t;:.."" c: .......... --" a> .... c: 00:>0 .. e
.. ..~~ 104' ;:.. ..... .....,.- " +.t +' ......., :;:::] f 4J ~.: +J ." ::a .....,.a" ... s:o
.- ..,-!:t1~~::>.~ ~ .s;a~;1 .5\~' ~ f:-8--~.,t!~~ c:.;... 'e'-~~ ~r5.fn ::.,s :::.11~~
~.. "'\;;';<:)"~. """.~ 8." ~.4J (/)""'" m'<~dj C'lS:,~ ~.:!.f;~:O 0.., C'lS,~"ct1 ~,e
~.""o..:"'" c:~...'S; ",gj '" -. "",.,.c: "'---- -'" s..sJ!!"'.c: l" ~ c.
caj4ji......l.tl.c:.S:a,:."'o "'" 0 "'Bl! ~.!!l c:.Sal~.a>::a 0'''''' ~ ',~ ".5
::~- ~~,'.~.;.' 8 4J F;~'o' C'i:S.ct C'lS -o4oJ.:J-~ Cd 0 +',..... =:S;, ,,,!!.-=: 4J J.
'.>.' ,a- .Ul....~ca-"'<<I.- 4J ooO'J.....Oc::.c:s:::OolO"t:lOC'lS~.~c.' .~QJ
~, '!:'~-: ~. .~ 4) "'"" $.4~~4J 4J ~ ~ 4J OJ J:: go 0 . ~.E go. ~ of +-'.c .. 0 fJ . cu e
-- <!-.813b'.s ~.'__~ ~ oj ~ ~l!B~.E~~.s"",~~ E -:.~ ~ ~ 8.",~B.2
. ,__;.."_-U),g.~ ~ e..tlOj:$ ~ cD en 15 rJJ 4J 4J 4J~ '(;-'GJ~~< ~:P.c: ~ 5 0 t
----.--,' ,;,..s--8" ""''''''''iliS' ...",EjSos"'l:!s l'ls,?,:tclc.>41+-''''..s
---f#A_ "8" 1l..s u::5",; ., 0 '0 .!!~:a .:ijllJ': ..~ 0 J1lXl'(,; 5l ~.~ e1l 0
- V,>.' C:.'" laO]'B. 'eH:j(J) ~:E e]~: 8 g ~~:r:-& ~ ~g +-' ~ ",< >.
~CIJ~~~9,1h ~~S '" c. Q~", u.~ ",'+3 c:~ ",..s>.B..s..s Iii
.c:..:~.:.o~'~ 5 ."~-o ....~!3:~ C::SC 1;,; X >.CJ..".5 COlt) JJ Coco 1-4~~
f '---:~g.] CO ~..Eig ~ >"5': CO ~~. ~ ~~] ,_'C 'B:::'.g.s.s~ ~~
~.. 00 .t:1-.ia..q. ~ 0 ~ >. -::I ~. ~ C1)m..5 '4.).... ~.
. ~_ -.g: g UJ ~':b~ OOns 3 CO +" Q).g.s~ 8. CI) co...., ~ ~ g.~c::
'ca- ~ >. !:l 1:: 11.'....-..' .~ :;:.~ ~3 --.. i. ..s:E :l go ~..s~. S 0 'lil ~ 8
+-'.0 ~ . '":''' '._ '" _' '" ~ '" . '" e '" '" '" ...
. CU CO "i! ~:~4) rn -d 4> 0' . -: +"' ca.-"t:J cJ -:S ..0 .;:::1. GJ - Q, 8-
A' $!"",~.!!,g.. ~~15 . 13 li,,,,,.sc:~~g ~ >~-Ei5'~ .s~ :g
~ 1l...l!6'" r::8,1::~ -".."'1i""'''!;Q ..c:8~0 eo
........ ~ :a -!:l-B '" ~ ,,,,a> "'c: '~"'13 "",,,,",,,
~- ...~ ~__-4);J-- e ~~ e ~-Q):_;'_']'.aB-s.J~ ;,~: ":'-~""'o:fi; ~~8.
. '. -- .~ ~~!f !I1:ij i5~ 8.~ '" 1::g~'a~~ P ~~1c:l;J,!
....0 '5 8'.2 l!'~'o :.1l'lil . ",'" ~~ gog ~::~~E-':=~ ~6 m ~
,+-I.~: +J-;Q) en.!S or;;' 0 >Ocn CO,_ '0 ~-o 0 5:1" - ..... oj.~
C:s:,C: or..!l:S ","~c:5l' 013 ",+-'Zc.:r:'t:i3 " ..c~
ca. e 5l8Jlla;., .Q.~~..s ~ ~,3,> ,~c.-S-5.~8.:c t'~ ~~ '"
..... <<I (/).. co I . b c:: \1'- QJ I bCl I I I I , >. CO +"' bO d>
~ .'5 =,~cu:d~ 2'4.J~iE8 '5.~~"85 .d~'G)~~ gj.s>
Q' -...~__,g-%c.>",0l ,s..s...c:i"l ~~c:~~"a +:lS, ~.8e
, ~ cu (I) ~ t:O 1j-:S~.o)< tlIJ"C o~4)d ~ -a g _ ~ 0 CJ..
. .; 6 ~] "".~ 13g,~ ]~~~.g]]-gg'8 ~ ., !ii'~
I ~%~ Qj -sco~e; ~g'.}~4) ~~~~5g~~ts.~ --5Qe
- CI) . :.!] ~ .: ~ 2 '" ~ el ~ 8. g ..s ~:g .~ ~ g l;] ~ ~ '5 ~ ~.2
- :s & m ~ 0 co 8 C':I co 8 -c:: Cd .... 0'"0 d"O 2.CI:I 0 co
, E "", ~ d' '" 0 "'Jl ~. ~.!l';: '", ::l't""'.~ l3'':sla c.'" ~li~
--- Ci'i Z 0 Q '" o.€i ~ ~ ~ ~ '" "" 13 c: r:: >'> 13 "". ~ >.
~~O cu~~~~ e~ ~w t~~~~2~~O~~~~~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ b ~ ~ u g ~ ~ ~ .~] .~ 2 go ~.s ~.~ e & ~ m :; e ~ Q) :]
_.~_~~ ~~=t;~u~~~.8 '54)~~~g~~: ~,"i:t~. 8:]23.g
:c !!l"; ~ ~<-~.. ~ ~tl~...] ~~ t-8 gjtj E:021'1j< ~1::i!-.28'E-!:l
. ~~1~~*' ~ U?_'~ 0 ~ g.&, ,'~ O:~~~:-~~~~,~'~~~'?:..~~ ~~.::rJJ~ _ ~.;~
. . '
,-
1
"
~
:::;
-~
Eo;
~
~
~
o
~
CJ
-~
!'<l
~
~
.~
~,~
I..
.~
,
. I
-'I
CiI
,-
"';' ""'4
.,,-J .1
~ JA -s;
0-
..,.. ,~. ::;.
~J ~~j:i~~:::
~'''''C.''''_.
-~, ,,'+3..s it
..rIJ.::..! 4). .J:;...-
0,~"";S:__
.c:., "+-'-liO- <
!l:. .::.", -'-
,. ,='-0 C(
G.J~. ~:.....~ c::
8! ':"8 '0+=
tJ...~....'t."
S' ",,,,,... 5.
o 's c.> c:
. fIJ ~Q.,;a Q) ~
..S.28~
'--ll' --S ",,>
_::0-;: E-o-"'.... i;,
-l! on -E 1::0 ~
..~+J N.. ;:::I....::.
!
'~...."C >.Gi
igg'fi~ g
_. ~~~~~:j{r;i:~i~{;I:;!>~' ,.,
~\.~ 0 ~ bb
-15 >'!l:.s
-J~~' ~.(I)"
'....c: l3"",l
.. :,0"'.13'.
v....., ........ 1
.bO='co....('l'),
~_Oc;::.E"I::f'...
'0'" I
u ..~ ..0 .B :.2 ..t
>.='+-> en
'~r ~.~ il-')i:;;;,;,,,;,'-;~;~'i-:.,,,,:. ...
S S~?;
~ en.~l(
'" :E .so
~ ....St
v 'l! .r
I:: .... V.
.~ !~
.... ~c-
~.~..!!/
'~'Ol~
.l:!"0
. 0 "']"
-~.c:..
11&'
;J~
.~(
"
.::c '0
:t,
e...-
'."""
. >;';:~;
,
~
'.-
:C(
i""""
.._.....J!iv....;
. -,\
:._ __J
a
1
ATTACHMENT B
DEVaOPloENT STANDARDS
TERRA NCN A I'l PZ A
OiULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT NO. 8336.10
RECEIV.ED
8Y
OCT 1 G 12Ej
.
~
I.
Purpose
PLANNING DEPARTMEIH
'HULA VIST1\, CAliFORNIA
."
The purpose of this chllpter Is to provIde stllndllrds for the
development of II c:onununlty shoppIng center locllted on 31 gross llcres
at the southellst corner of the IntersectIon of Interstate 805 and
East H Street. I tIs the I ntent of the cleveloper fflllt 1fle shopp I ng
center OJmpllment ffle surrounding res I dentl III erell. Therefore,
perking ereas will be Illndsceped to relIeve II bllrren eppeerllhce.
Signs lire prescrIbed In II specIfic sIgn progrem and wIll be desIgned
to be hllnnonlous wIth the spanish colonlel erchltecture of the
center, while stili provIdIng Identification of the IIIllJor llIId minor
tenants of the center.
II.
PennlTted IJses
Principal permItted
o . Supermarkets,
V llpparel stores.
uses lire liS follows:
drugstores, home
Improvement
stores,
IIIllJor
.
@
~tores, shops llnd offices supplying commodities or performing
servIces for residents of the cIty as II whole or the surrounding
COlMlulty such as department S+a-es. Specllllty shoes, blinks,
uslness offices llnd other flnancllll Institutions end personal
ce enterprises.
"'-
([)
Res~au~ents and similar enterprises.
"-- -
D. Cocktail lounges, nIghtclubs end theaters by Conditional Use
Permit only.
E. Bonaflde antique shops, but not IncludIng secondhllnd stores or
junk stores.
F. Off-street parking lots.
G. Orlv~thru restllurllnts,
outdoor plllnt nurseries;
H. .Ql" d cere centers, pre-schOOl use,
Condltlonel Use permiT only.
drlve-thru fInancIal
InstItutions,
end pI eygrounds by
I. Veterlnarllln clinIc (subject to provisIons of SectIon
19.58.050).
.
~"-~
.;lIA I fc
.
~
J. Automobile service sTaTions (subject 'to provisions of Section
19.58.280). 'tIre. bartery. accessory uses. provided fflat
services bays do no't fa~ public sTreets or reslden'tlel erees.
Car weshes (subject 'to Section 19.58.060). These ere euthorlzed
by Conditional Use Permit only.
.
K.
BusIness or 'technlc:el schools Including photography.
end dence. 81I0ng offlers. These ere euthorlzed by
Use Pennl't only.
~I~'I. <:1-'"1-...._ chiropractic oftlces. and ffle like. Including
clinics end emergency/surglc:el medlc:el centers.
ar't, IlUslc
Condl'tlonal
t
(3
~(9
Any offler re1"e1l business or service esTebllshmen't which ffle
OOClIIIlsslon fin 'to ent wlffl - fflese
IIn ards end which will no't Impelr ffle presen't or po'ten'tlel
use of edjecent properties.
N. Accessory .uses end building customerlly appur'tenan't 'to e
permlrted use.
III. Heloht ReQuletrons
No buIldIng shell exceed 'two stories or 35 fee't In.helght except for
erchltectural 'tower element on BuildIng 2 which shell not exceed 50
feet In height.
.
IV. Area. Lot Coveraoe end Yerd Requirements
The following minimum erea. lot coverege end yard requirements shell
be observed, except es provided In Section 19.16.060 end where
Increased for condItional uses (setbacks In feet):
LOT Area (sq. ft.):
5.000
"
Front Yard:
25 ft. (except nursery wall
at Building 1)
Side Yard:
None, except when aburtlng
an R district, fflen not less
'then 15 ft.
Rear Yard:
None
V. Enclosures recurred for elr uses - Fxceotlons:
All uses shell be conducted wholly wlfflln a completely enclosed
bu II ding, except for ouTdoor restaurants. serv Ice staT I ons, o1f-
street park I ng and I oedl ng fae" Itles. ouTdoor pi an't nurseries. end
ehlldrens' pleygrounds In connection wlffl a child cere ceder or pre-
school use and offler open uses speelf led under ():)ndl'tlonel Use
Pennl'ts as cIe'tennlned by ffle Planning Oormtlsslon. Pennenen't and
'temporery ouTside seles and dlspley shell be subject 'to 'the
provisions of Section 19.58.370.
.
~~
d)./ A - 7
/
...
J
VI. lendscaolng
.
The sIte shell be landscaped In conformance wl1t& 1fle landscapIng
IIlllnual of the cIty. 1fle approved sIte landscape plan. and approved by
1fle dIrector of plannIng.
VII. Off-street ~rklng and loedlnQ FacIlItIes:
Off-street perkIng and loadIng facilItIes are requIred for all uses.
lIS provIded on 1fle approved specIfic plan In accordance wIth the CIty
of Dlula VIsta adopted parkIng standards.
,
V III. Trash Stor ace Areas:
Trash storage arees shall be provIded per 1fle approved specIfIc plan.
subject to the condItIons of Sect I 0.. 19.58.340.
IX. Outdoor Storage:
Outdoor storage of merchandIse. IIlilterlal or equIpment shall be
permItted only when IncIdental to a permItted or accessory use
located on the pranlses. and provIded that:
A.
Storage area
fences. or
plan.
shall be completely enclosed and screened by walls.
buIldIngs. and shall be part of the approved sIte
B.
No outdoor storage of IIlilterlals or equIpment shall be permItted
to exceed to heIght greater than that of any enclosIng wall.
fence or buIldIng.
.
X. Wall Recul ranents:
Zoning walls shall be provIded subject to the condItIons In SectIon
19.58.360.
"
XI. Performance Standards:
All uses shall be subject to InItIal and contInued compl lance wIth
the Performance Standards set forth In Dlapter 19.66.
XII.~
A. InstallatIon - requlranents generally - sIgn penn.lt requIred
when:
No person except a publIc offIcer or employee In performance of
a publIc duty shall peste. post. pelnt. prInt, 1lllII, nck.
erect. piece or otflerwlse fasten any sIgn. pennant or notIce of
any kInd. or cause flle SllIlIe 'to be done. facIng or visIble frcxn a
publIc street In flIe cIty except as provIded hereIn and
elsewhere In thIs 'tl'tle. To Insure complIance wIth flIls
sectIon. a sIgn pennlt shill I be requIred for any sIgn except liS
provIded herelnaf'ter: Real estllte sIgns. end subdIvIsIon sIgns.
.
--ttt7'~
/)/ A -8'
<.
(
B. Application - contents required - determination authorIty -
appeal s:
",
All signs requiring a sign permit shell be submitted for
approvel by the project architect and the zoning. acbl Inl strater,
prier to Installation. The appllcetlon shall Indlcete the size,
location, design color, method of attachment, lighting and
IIIllterlals of all sIgns 'to be erected. The appllce'tlon shall
also contain suffIcIent Infa'llletlon on 'the archl'tecture, colors
and IIIllterlals of 'the buildIng on 'the sl'te, as Is necessary 'to
determIne compatlbll Ity of the sign 'to 'the approved sIgn
progrllll. In addl'tlon, 'the appllcent -shall submIt a color
rendering and/or paInt sample boards or chIps .and/or ectual
lIlaterlals 'to be used on 'the sIgn. The zoning acbllnlstra'tcr
shall determine whether approval shal I be gran'ted for any sIgn
based on Its confonnance wl'th 'the approved sIgn progrllll and cIty
InstallatIon and electrical regulatIons and standards.
C. Signs permitted by the approved sIgn progrllll shall be subject 'to
the regulations as set fcrth In SectIons 19.60.050, 19.60.060,
19.60.140, 19.60.160, 19.60.170, 19.60.180, 19.60.190,
19.60.200, .19.60.210, 19.60.220, 19.60.230, 19.60.290,
19.60.300, 19.60.330, 19.60.340, 19.60.350, 19.60.380, and
19.60.440.
.
XIII.Malor fntrance
DesIgn and construction of the majcr entrance opposl'te Hidden VIsta
DrIve shall be to the satisfactIon of the CIty Engineer and CIty
Traffic Engineer.
.
XIV. Street Imorovements
DesIgn and reconstructIon of necessary curb, gutter and sidewalk. on.
East H Street In proximity 'to Hidden VIsta DrIve to provIde for three
thru lanes'of traffIc In each dIrectIon, bIke lanes and double left
turn I lineS on each approach 'to HIdden VIsta DrIve and 'the IIIlljcr
shoppIng center entrance desIgn and constructIon shall be subject 'to
'the approval of the CIty Engineer and City TraffIc EngIneer.
XV. Traffic Control Easement
Traff Ic Control Easement at the major shoppIng center entrance
opposIte Hidden V Ista DrIve shall be dedlceted to 'the City.
.
~
~/A -1
The Public Facilities Financing and Implementing
Agreement with Major Retailer A (Home Depot) will be
delivered by hand on Friday, December 11, 1992 for
inclusion in your packet.
;)1 A .--Ie)
RESOLUTION NO. .&.f'I/J
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING AN IMPLEMENTING AGREEMENT WITH HOME DEPOT
U.S.A., INC. TO CARRY OUT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR
DEVELOPMENT OF A RETAIL STORE AT THE RANCHO DEL REY
COMMERCIAL CENTER
WHEREAS, on November 24, 1992, the City Council approved Resolution No. 16900
("Entitlements Resolution") and the first reading of Ordinance No. 2535 ("Entitlements
Ordinance"), collectively certifying the FSElR (as defined therein which defInition is
incorporated herein by reference), amending the General Plan, El Rancho del Rey SpecifIc Plan,
Rancho del Rey Sectional Planning Area (SPA) I, Planned Community District Regulations,
Rancho del Rey Employment Park Design Guidelines, and PFFP, and approving the Air Quality
Plan Water Conservation Plan, Tentative Maps, street name change and Development
Agreement, and making certain Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council held the second reading of the Entitlements Ordinance
(approving the Development Agreement) on November 30, 1992; and,
WHEREAS, A General Condition of Approval of the Commercial Center project
requires that an Implementing Agreement or other similar agreement be entered into between
each of Major Retailers A, B, and C and the City prior to each retailer commencing
development; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed Implementing Agreement with Home Depot (alternatively
herein referred to as the "Project" as when making reference to CEQA related matters)
implements the approved Development Agreement and provides assurances to the retailer and
the City as approved by Council; and,
WHEREAS, the Rancho del Rey Commercial Center FSElR has analyzed impacts
associated with the proposed Project and was certifIed by Council on November 24, 1992 and
carries out the Development Agreement as identifIed in the FSEIR; and,
rdrhd1.wp
December 15, 1992
Reso approving Home Depot Agmt
Page I
02//1---//
L)
NOW, TIlEREFORE, TIlE CITY COUNCIL DOES HEREBY FIND,
DETERMINE, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
I. FSEIR Contents.
The FSEIR consists of the following:
A. "Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report - Ranch del Rey Commercial
Center" (EIR 92-02) prepared by Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates (RBF) and dated
October 5, 1992 SCH # 92051032, which contains the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact
Report ("DSEIR") distributed date July 21, 1992, revised to reflect responses made to comments
on the DSEIR, and the comments and responses to the DSEIR; and
B. Appendices (A through D) to Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report.
C. Technical studies and information incorporated in the responses to comment.
II. FSEIR Reviewed and Considered.
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista has reviewed, analyzed and considered
FSEIR 92-02, the environmental impacts therein identified for this Project; the Candidate CEQA
Findings attached to the Entitlements Resolution as Attachment A, the proposed mitigation
measures contained therein, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached to the
Entitlements Resolution as Attachment B, and the Statement of Overriding Considerations which
is attached to the Entitlements Resolution as Attachment C prior to approving the Project.
III. Certification of Compliance with CEQA.
The City Council does hereby find that FSEIR 92-02, the Candidate CEQA Findings, the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and the Statement of Overriding Considerations
are prepared for this Project in accordance with requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act, the State EIR Guidelines, and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City
of Chula Vista.
IV. Independent Judgement of City Council
The City Council finds that the FSEIR reflects the independent judgement (,f the City of
Chula Vista City Council.
V. Approval of Implementing Agreement
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve the Implementing
Agreement with Home Depot, U.S.A., Inc. in the form presented, authorizes the City Manager
rdrhd 1. wp
December IS, 1992
Reso approving Home Depot Agmt
Page 2
;J,j,/j -) L
,
in conjunction with the approval of the City Attorney, to make minor, modifications thereto
prior to presentation to the Mayor for execution, and does hereby authorize the Mayor to execute
the Implementing Agreement substantially in the form presented together with such changes as
may be approved by the City Manager and City Attorney.
VI. Findings re Consistency with the General Plan.
The City Council hereby finds that the Project is and will be consistent with the general
plan for the reasons advanced in the Entitlements Resolution which reasons are incorporated
herein by reference.
VII. CEQA Findings, Mitigation Monitoring Program, and Statement of Overriding
Considerations.
A. Adoption of Findings.
The City Council does hereby approve, accept as its own, incorporate as if set
forth in full herein, and make each and every one of the findings contained in the
"Findings of Fact Re Proposed Rancho Del Rey Commercial Center" attached to
the Entitlements Resolution as Attachment A.
B. Certain Mitigation Measures Feasible and Adopted.
As more fully identified and set forth in the master EIR for the Rancho del Rey
SPA I (EIR-87-01) and the supplemental environmental document (EIR-92-D2)
and in the CEQA Findings for this project, which is attached to the Entitlements
Resolution as Attachment A, the Council hereby finds pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 that the
mitigation measures described in the above referenced documents are feasible and
will become binding upon the entity (such as the project proponent, the City, or
the school district) assigned thereby to implement same.
C. Infeasibility of Alternatives.
As is also noted in the above referenced environmental documents described in
the above subparagraph B, alternatives to the project which were identified as
potentially feasible in the EIR were found not to be feasible except the Site Plan
Alternative which is hereby rejected because the Project, as mitigated, already
reduces the impact on traffic to a level of less than significance.
D Adoption of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
rdrhdl. wp
December 15, 1992
Reso approving Home Depot Agmt
Page 3
d//JrJJ
\'
~
As required by the Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the City Council
hereby adopts Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ("Program") set
forth in Attachment B to the Entitlements Resolution incorporated herein by
reference as set forth in full. The Council hereby finds that 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 the Findings and the
Program.
E. Statement of Overriding Considerations.
Even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures and any feasible
alternatives, certain significant or potentially significant environmental effects
caused by the project or cumulatively will remain. Therefore, the City Council
of the City of Chula Vista hereby issues, pursuant to CEQA Guideline Section
15093, a Statement of Overriding Considerations in the form set forth in
Attachment C, attached to the Entitlements Resolution and incorporated herein as
if set forth in full, identifying the specific economic, social, and other
considerations that render the unavoidable significant adverse environmental
effects acceptable.
p Notice of Determination
The Environmental Review Coordinator of the City of Chula Vista is directed after City
Council approval of this Project to ensure that a Notice of Determination, together with a copy
of this resolution, its exhibits, and all resolutions passed by the City Council in connection with
this Project, is filed with the County Clerk of the County of San Diego.
Presented by:
Approved as to form by:
Chris Salomone
Community Development Director
Bruce M. BoogaardmCity Attorney
rdrhd1. wp
December 15, 1992
Reso approving Home Depot Agmt
Page 4
~~
;2J,/) ~) 7
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ltem~l.B
Meeting Date 12/15/92
ITEM TITLE: Resolution /1.,(14 I Approving and Authorizing Execution of an
Implementing Agreement with Major Retailer B (Kmart), Rancho del Rey
Commercial Center, and Related CEQA Findings
SUBMITTED BY: Community Development Director ( S .
REVIEWED BY: City Manage~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes No.xJ
BACKGROUND: On November 24, 1992, Council held a public hearing and subsequently
adopted Resolution 16900 and held the first reading of Ordinance 2535 relating to the conversion
of the western 55 acres of the Rancho del Rey Employment Park to a Commercial Center land
use designation and related regulatory actions including CEQA considerations. The second
reading of this ordinance was approved on November 30, 1992. Approval of the ordinance
included adoption of a Development Agreement with the applicant/developer of the Commercial
Center for all portions of the site excluding the easternmost parcel designated for Major Retailer
C. This Development Agreement covers the parcel to be purchased by Kmart, and requires an
Implementing Agreement be entered into between Kmart and the City prior to the issuance of
a building permit. The proposed Implementing Agreement (attached) implements the
Development Agreement and provides for benefits to Kmart as well as performance assurances
to the City.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute
the proposed Implementing Agreement with Kmart, and making certain CEQA findings.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The following boards and commissions
reviewed the actions taken by Council on November 24, as discussed in the November 24
agenda statement:
o Resource Conservation Commission - Endorsed project
o Design Review Committee - Endorsed amended Employment Park design guidelines
o Economic Development Commission - Endorsed project
o Planning Commission - Certified FSEIR and recommended approval of resolution and
ordinance, including Development Agreement
No group has reviewed the attached Implementing Agreement document. However, the key
terms of the agreement were outlined in the Planning Commission staff report.
DISCUSSION:
Kmart - General Information
K-mart is a 30 year old company and the second highest ranked retailer in the U.S., behind Wal-
Mart. (It recently acquired Pace Membership Warehouses.) Kmart has 2,200 stores nationally.
;Ji8 -I
Page 2, Item r::.21~
Meeting Date 12/15/92
Recently, Kmart began acquiring property in order to build and own its stores. "A related new
development is the earmarking of $3 billion to renovate its stores across the country to reflect
its new upgraded image. A $1.5 million upgrade of the Chula Vista Third Avenue store is
scheduled for early 1993.
!.
Kmart's existing Third Avenue store occupies 96,000 square feet and will be expanding by
20,000 square feet into the adjacent fotMahan 's Furniture store, for a total of 116,000 square
feet.
The new store on East H Street will provide a second Chula Vista location and will occupy
104,306 square feet, plus a 3500 square foot garden center for a total of 107,806 square feet.
(Additionally, Kmart will be building an adjacent 15,000-25,000 square foot shop for sale or
lease to a retail user.) Kmart representatives indicate that the new store's market area lies east
of 1-805 and south of their store located at Jamacha and Sweetwater, with an estimated 72,000
population base.
i"
I
~
~.
ij'
;;
;
4
!I'
_c,f
,
,.
,
~-
~
~
,
:j
~-
"1
,
ii_
,l,
Prooosed Agreement Terms
The key terms of the agreement remain as presented to the Planning Commission on November
18 and to Council on November 24 and are outlined below:
1.
2.
No direct financial assistance is being provided by the City to Kmart.
The City will permit Kmart to pay their Transportation Development Impact Fee over
a period of ten years.
Kmart will open the H Street store within 18 months of closing escrow.
Kmart will covenant to operate the existing store for ten years and to upgrade and expand
the store by 20,000 square feet.
Kmart will covenant to operate the new H Street store for ten years.
Should Kmart close either the existing or the new store during the ten year period, the
unpaid TDIF balance will be immediately due with interest.
KMart will provide a proactive approach to recruiting, training and/or hiring employees
from the local community, including a significant effort to work with local education and
training providers with a goal of hiring Chula Vista Residents on a priority basis.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Environmental Review
The Rancho del Rey Commercial Center Final SElR has analyzed impacts associated with the
proposed Implementing Agreement. This same FSEIR was certified by City Council on
November 24, 1992. The proposed Implementing Agreement carries out the Development
Agreement that was identified in the Final SEIR. Thus, no new environmental issues arise from
approval of this Implementing Agreement, and the Rancho del Rey Commercial Center Final
SEIR is the appropriate CEQA document. Likewise, the Candidate CEQA Findings (as modified
at the November 24 meeting), the Statement of Overriding Considerations, and the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program remain the appropriate documents to accompany the
proposed action.
~l~~}....
RESOLUTION
1/'9'//
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING AN IMPLEMENTING AGREEMENT WITH KMART
CORPORATION TO CARRY OUT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR
DEVELOPMENT OF A RETAIL STORE AT THE RANCHO DEL REY
COMMERCIAL CENTER
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, on November 24, 1992, the City Council approved Resolution 16900
and the first reading of Ordinance 2535, collectively certifying the FSEIR, amending the General
Plan, El Rancho del Rey Specific Plan, Rancho del Rey Sectional Planning Area (SPA) I,
Planned Community District Regulations, Rancho del Rey Employment Park Design Guidelines,
and PFFP, and approving the Air Quality Plan Water Conservation Plan, Tentative Maps, street
name change and Development Agreement, and making certain Findings and Statement of
Overriding Considerations; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council held the second reading of the Ordinance
(approving the Development Agreement) on November 30, 1992; and,
WHEREAS, A General Condition of Approval of the Commercial Center project
requires that an Implementing Agreement be entered into between each of Major Retailers A,
B, and C and the City prior to each retailer commencing development; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed Implementing Agreement with Kmart implements the
approved Development Agreement and provides assurances to the retailer and the City as
approved by Council; and,
WHEREAS, the Rancho del Rey Commercial Center FSEIR has analyzed impacts
associated with the proposed Implementing Agreement and was certified by Council on
November 24, 1992 and carries out the Development Agreement as identified in the FSEIR; and,
WHEREAS, no new environmental issues arise from approval of the
Implementing Agreement and the candidate CEQA findings (as modified at the November 24
meeting) the Statement of Overriding Considerations and the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program remain the appropriate documents to accompany the proposed action.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista does hereby approve and authorize the City execution of an Implementing
Agreement with Kmart Corporation for the development of a major retail store at the Rancho
del Rey Commercial Center.
Presented by:
Approved as to form by:
~ S:-~
.-/
Chris Salomone
Community Development Director
d,l [J--~
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
(Submitted without City Attorney review)
Page 3, Item ~ I ~
Meeting Date 12/15/92
FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed new store will generate an estimated 220 new jobs (of the
total 1224 projected for the entire commercial center). In terms of revenues, the proposed
Commercial Center will generate first year Net New Revenues of $1.21 million (after costs to
the City and potential market overlaps are deducted). Kmart alone is projected to generate
$271,000 in Year 1 Gross New Sales Tax Revenues and $229,000 in Year 1 Net New Sales Tax
Revenues. This latter figure (like the total $1.21 million) reflects the analysis by Williams
Kuebe1beck and Associates which nets out potential market overlap with existing stores and is
considered to be very conservative.
C:\WPSl \DYE\KMART.113
~) B ~3 /21 fJ.5
SENT BY:OICKINSON-WRIGHT
;12- 9-92 5:14PM
MESSENGER__OEPT~
6194765310:# 2
MAUREEN .... eURKII;
DICKINSON. ",It'OJolT. MOON, VAN DUSI!:N . ""CE",AN
C=OUNSEt-I-OR. AT t-AW
... NOATH WOODWAltD AVENUE
~.O. _ .0.
eI.OOM,.'I:I-O "'II-Ui. M'(;HIGAN _3-0S0.
,.1l~~..NONI: (3,131.... 1!1OD
.....oa1MU.E .taI....,...,.
HTIIOr'I'e ..101......
U1N...... ~lCHIGAN.
G....ND .....1_ ..ICMIOAN
WMHINCI,....iI. 0.0.
QHf~. u.....o..
Dec~r 9, 1992
VIA ....Uc:oPT
", " < . '",.' ",.~I....I<ol';..';
Cheryl Dt..''"~~-'-'--'""'~'''
cit:y of Chula Vista n, n
COIIIIII.unity DevelopmllDt Depart_nt
27. Fourth Avenue
Chuls viaea, Califo~Dia 91910
Ile I bart cOQorat..l,on - Rancho Del Ray, CA.
Store 17153'
i'.lo,";')~Jl"""_"",,,;~", "
"
Daar Cheryl:
This l.tt.~ will . confirm that tha Impl_ntatiol1
Aqr.e..nt between bart Corporation sad the City of chula Vista
faxed to _ by ICarc1. ICllll:y, Oil Novtllllber U, au, when r.viaed
in sccordaDCa with IllY letter to Kareis Scully dated Daaember 8,
1'92, 1s s.tiafactory for execution b:y Kmart. '
.1.... call _ if you ha.,e u1" que.tions.
Very tl:'ll.ly yours,
~~
ICal1rean H. Burica
HQ/tab
CCI .. I. ...1.r
8taV8D GUY
Itevin 1If. Tweed
;;))t3.J"
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RANCHO DEL REY COMMERCIAL CENTER
IMPLEMENTATION AGREEMENT
Kmart corporation
,9/tE,,(p
1
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2
3
RECITA!JS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4
AGREEMENT
5
1.
Purpose
Construction and operation of a new Kmart on the site
Existing store
6
2.
7
3.
. . . . .
. . . . . . . . .
8
Payment and Reimbursement of Development Impact Fees
Employment Outreach and Training.
4.
9
5.
6.
Default .
7.
Effective Date
8.
Failure to Approve Development Agreement
9.
Attorneys' Fees
10. Notices. . . .
11. Entire Agreement and Amendments
12. Choice of Law . . . . . . .
13. No Third Party Beneficiary
14. Time of Essence. . . . . .
26
27
28
S\A013411J.NAS
120992
-i-
;)IB'1
Paqe
1
4
4
4
5
6
6
6
8
8
8
9
9
10
10
11
1
ATTACHMENT
2
3 Attachment 1 - Legal Description of the Property
4 Attachment 2 - Legal Description of the site
5 Attachment 3 - Plot Plan
6 Attachment 4 - Form of Covenant
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
S\A013411J.NAS
120992
-ii-
[;). / B -8"
1
RANCHO DEL REY COMMERCIAL CENTER
2
IMPLEMENTATION AGREEMENT
3
4
This Implementation Agreement (the "Agreement") is made
5
, 199_, by
day of
and entered into as of this
6
and between the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a municipal corporation having
charter powers ("city") and KMART CORPORATION, a Michigan corpora-
tion ("Developer"), with reference to the recitals set forth below:
7
8
9
10
RECITALS
11
12
A. Developer understands that City, Rancho del Rey
partnership and Rancho del Rey Business Center Ltd. (collectively
"owner"), have heretofore entered or intend, subject to all legally
required notification and hearings, to hereafter enter into that
certain Development Agreement (the "Development Agreement") for the
Rancho del Rey Commercial Center with respect to the development of
certain real property (the "Property") owned by Owner and more
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
particularly described in the Legal Description of the Property
20
attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as
21
Attachment No.1.
22
23
B. Developer, pursuant to that certain purchase and sale
24
agreement (the "PUrchase Agreement") entered into as of
25
199____ between Developer and Owner intends to acquire a portion of
the Property (the "Site") more particularly described in the Legal
26
27
Description of the site attached hereto as Attachment No. 2 and
28
S\AOI3411J.NAS
120992
-1-
;)/ t2 ,4
12/10/92 15:21
U'1 714 851 0739
5J1R&11
141004
1 incorporated herein by this reference and shown on the plot Plan
2 attached hereto as Attach:lnent No. 3 and incorporated herein by this
3 reference.
4
5
c.
:In accordance with the terms of the Development
6 Agreement Developer Wlderstands thi:lt this Agreement is made and
7 entered into as a condition precedent to the effectiveness of the
8 Development Aqreement and constitutes a material part of the con-
9 sideration to the city for entering into the Develop1l1ent Ag-reement
,...._......:.:.~, "~~,..._._~~'.:,i\,,;f; --'--.;l......""""oo,;......_..."-"". .........,.,v:,;'>f' _.o.
10 and ,;.perfo~ncEO! 01:. the City,'s obligations pursuant to ,^,.~e
11 Development Agreement.
12
13
D.
Developer:,.:fUrt.her Wlderstands that upon acquisitio~
14 of the Site, Deve1.oper will be bound by the terms of the Development
15 Agreement and will receive direct and indirect benefits as a result
16 of the implementation of the Development Agreement.
17
19
E.
Developrar current1.y owns and operates as a Kmart
19 retail store an existinqapproximate1.y 96,000 square root facility
20 (the "Existing- Store") lqcated at, 1030 Third Avenue, Chula vista aJ).d
21 generally referred to as, the Third l\.venue Store. It is Developer~s
22 intent to continue to operate the existing- store for a minimum of
23 ten (10) years after the Effective Date of this Agreelllent.
24
25
F.
cit'll Review. The City has extensively reviewed the
26 terms and conditions of i:h"- Development Agreement and this Agreemen,t
27 and, in particular, ha!il. specifically considered and approved ttl~
28 impact and benefits of ,this Aqreement upon the general welfare of
SWI13&"J.IlAS
lZl09Z
-2-
.{;)/ B-dD
1 the city.
The terms and conditions of this Agreement have been
2 found by the City to be fair, just, and reasonable, and to provide
3 appropriate benefits to the city. This Agreement will serve the
4 best interests of the citizens of city; provide effective and effi-
5 cient development of public facilities, infrastructure and services
6 appropriate for the development of the Site; help maximize effective
7 utilization of resources within the city; increase city tax revenues
8 by the development of the Property; promote the creation of jobs for
9 city residents and provide other public benefits to the city and its
10 residents.
11
12
G.
It is the intent of the parties to encourage the
13 development of an additional Kmart retail store within the city of
14 Chula vista; to provide additional employment opportunities for the
15 citizens of Chula vista, to strengthen and diversify the local
16 economy; and, to provide for variety and choice for consumers within
17 the City.
18
19 The Parties acknowledge and agree that the development of
20 the site will result in public benefit and further acknowledge and
21 agree that this Agreement confers benefits on the Developer. The
22 Parties intend by this Agreement to provide the consideration
23 expressly set forth herein to the public which the Parties agree
24 shall balance the private benefits conferred on the Developer and
25 provide public assurance that this Agreement is fair, just, and
26 reasonable.
27
28
S\AOI3411J.NAS
120992
-3-
;J.) 6 - ) /
1
AGREEMENT
2
3
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the Recitals set forth
4 above, the consideration provided by the city pursuant to the
5 Development Agreement, and for other good and valuable considera-
6 tion, the receipt and sUfficiency of which are hereby acknowledged,
7 the parties, respectively, agree as follows:
8
9
1.
PurPose.
The purpose of this Agreement is to
10 implement the Development Agreement, to facilitate development of
11 the site in accordance with the Development Agreement and, to
12 provide for economic development of the city.
13
14
2.
Construction and ODeration of a new Kmart on the
15 site. Developer hereby agrees to construct and open for business
16 a minimum 107,000 square foot facility (the "New Facility") on the
17 site. The New Facility shall commence operation as a Kmart retail
18 store on or before 18 months after the date of close of the escrow
19 conveying the site from Owner to Developer.
Developer further
20 agrees that it will operate a minimum of 107,000 square feet of the
21 New Facility as a Kmart store in substantially the same manner as
22 it operates a majority of its other Kmart stores in the western
23 United states, for a minimum period of ten (10) years following the
24 opening of the New Facility.
25
26
The New Facility shall be constructed and operated in
27 accordance with the provisions of the Development Agreement, all
28 applicable land use regulations and all pertinent city codes and
S\A01341U.NAS
120992
-4-
dld,/;l
1 regulations. Developer's obligation under this Section 2 shall be
2 set forth in a recorded Covenant in substantially the form of the
3 "Form of Covenant" attached hereto as Attachment No. 4 (the
4 "Covenant") and incorporated herein by this reference.
5
6
3.
Existina Store.
Developer hereby agrees and
7 covenants to continue to operate one hundred percent (100%) of the
8 floor area of the Existing Store as a Kmart retail store in sub-
9 stantially the same manner as it operates a majority of its other
10 Kmart stores in the western United States, for a minimum of ten (10)
11 years after the Effective Date of this Agreement.
12
13 Developer further agrees to expand the Existing Store by
14 a minimum of 20,000 square feet of retail floor area (the "Required
15 Improvements"). All Required Improvements shall be completed on or
16 before the date thirty (30) months after the close of escrow con-
17 veying the site from Owner to Developer. All Required Improvements
18 shall be completed in accordance with all regulations, ordinances
19 and policies of the City of Chula vista. Upon completion of the
20 Required Improvements, Developer shall operate one hundred per-
21 cent (100%) of the floor area of the Existing store and the Required
22 Improvements, as a Kmart retail store in substantially the same
23 manner as it operates a majority of its other Kmart stores in the
24 western united states for a minimum of ten (10) years from the
25 Effective Date of this Agreement. Developer's obligation under this
26 section 3 shall be set forth in a recorded Covenant in the form of
27 "Form of Covenant" attached hereto as Attachment No. 4 and
28 incorporated herein by this reference.
S\A013411J.NAS
120992
-5-
d-/6~/3
1
4.
pavment and Reimbursement of Develooment Imoact Fees.
2 Developer shall pay transportation development impact fees (the
3 "DIF") as required by city in the amount of EIGHT HUNDRED FIFTY
4 THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED EIGHTY-SIX DOLLARS ($850,986.00). Said DIF
5 shall be paid to city in ten equal installments of EIGHTY-FIVE
6 THOUSAND NINETY-EIGHT DOLLARS and SIXTY CENTS ($85,098.60). The
7 first installment (the "Initial Payment") shall be paid to City
8 prior to the issuance of the building permit for the New Facility.
9 Each subsequent payment (the "subsequent Payment") shall be paid on
10 or before the date (the "Due Date") which is one year from the date
11 of the Initial Payment. In the event that a subsequent Payment is
12 not received on or before the Due Date, the Subsequent Payment will
13 accrue interest at eight percent (8%) per annum until paid.
14
15
5.
Emolovment Outreach and Traininq. Developer in the
16 operation of the New Facility shall provide a proactive approach to
17 recruiting, training and/or hiring employees from the local commu-
18 nity. This approach must include a significant effort to work with
19 local education and training providers, including but not limited
20 to Sweetwater Union High School Adult Program and Southwestern
21 College, with a goal of hiring Chula vista residents.
22
23
6.
Default. Developer's failure to pay the DIF, con-
24 struct and operate the New Facility, expand and operate the Existing
25 Store in accordance with and for the duration of time required by
26 this Agreement and the Covenant or to fulfill any other obligation
27 of Developer pursuant to this Agreement shall constitute a default
28
S\AOI3411J.NAS
120992
-6-
dIe --It.;
1 of this Agreement and shall entitle City to those remedies allowed
2 by law or equity.
3
4 After completion of the improvements required by this
5 Agreement, in the event that Developer ceases to operate either the
6 Existing store or the New Facility or both in violation of this
7 Agreement or the Covenant, the entire unpaid portion of the DIF plus
8 interest on the unpaid portion of the DIF calculated from the date
9 of the Initial Payment at eight percent (8%) shall be immediately
10 due and payable to City.
11
12 For purposes of this Agreement a sale, lease to a
13 third party, the closure for thirty (30) consecutive calendar days
14 of the either the Existing store or the New Facility shall be deemed
15 a cessation of operations and shall trigger the obligation to pay
16 the unpaid portion of the DIF provided that a temporary closure of
17 the Existing store or New Facility for a period not exceeding six
18 (6) months to repair or reconstruct such buildings after a casualty
19 shall not be deemed to be a cessation of operations hereunder, and
20 provided further that the sale and concurrent leaseback by Developer
21 of the site shall not constitute a cessation of operations. If the
22 unpaid portion of the DIF is not paid within thirty (30) calendar
23 days of the due d~te, City shall be entitled to any and all remedies
24 allowed by law and equity relative to Developer's Default of this
25 Agreement and the Covenant. If the unpaid portion of the DIF is
26 paid in timely fashion, this Agreement and the Covenant shall
27 terminate and Developer shall have no further obligation to city.
28
S\A013411J.NAS
120992
-7-
@,1r5~/~
1
In the event that the date for performance of any
2 obligation of Developer hereunder is delayed by labor dispute, fire,
3 adverse weather conditions which could not reasonably be antici-
4 pated, condemnation, riot, act of God, fire or other casualty or any
5 other cause beyond Developer's control, then the date for perfor-
6 mance shall be extended by the period of time taken by such delay.
7
8
7.
Effective Date.
This Agreement is not effective
9 unless and until the following shall have occurred: (i) the City
10 and Owner shall have entered into the Development Agreement; and
11 (ii) the conveyance of the site from Owner to Developer shall have
12 occurred at a time when the Development Agreement is in full force
13 and effect.
14
15
8.
Failure to Approve Development Aareement. Developer
16 hereby agrees and acknowledges that the approval or disapproval of
17 a development agreement is a discretionary act by the city subject
18 to certain legal requirements including but not limited to, public
19 notification and hearing and environmental review. Developer fur-
20 ther agrees and acknowledges that the determination by City to not
21 approve the Development Agreement shall not be a default of this
22 Agreement and in the event that the Development Agreement is disap-
23 proved, this Agreement shall terminate and the parties shall have
24 no further rights or remedies.
25
26
9.
Attornevs' Fees.
In the event of any conflict or
27 dispute concerning the enforcement or interpretation of any of the
28 terms or provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall
S\AOI3411J.NAS
120992
-8-
;)./e5-/b
1 be entitled to receive reasonable attorneys fees from the non-
2 prevailing party any and all reasonable costs and expenses incurred
3 therewith. Any actions which may be filed in the event of any such
4 conflict or dispute shall be filed in the Superior Court of the
5 State of california, County of San Diego or in the united States
6 District Court, Southern District of California.
7
8
10. Notices.
All notices or other communications
9 required or permitted hereunder shall be addressed as follows and
10 be in writing and shall be personally delivered, sent by overnight
11 mail (Federal Express, Express Mail or the like) or sent by regis-
12 tered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested.
13
14
If to City:
City of Chula vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, California 91910
Attention: City Manager
15
16
17
with a copy to:
City of Chula vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, California 91910
Attention: Bruce Boogaard, Esquire
City Attorney
18
19
20
with a copy to:
Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton
4695 MacArthur court, 7th Floor
Newport Beach, California 92660
Attention: Marcia Scully, Esquire
21
22
23
If to Kmart:
Kmart Corporation
3100 West Big Beaver Road
Troy, MiChigan 48084
Attention: Real Estate Department
24
25
26
27
11. Entire Aareement and Amendments.
This Agreement,
28 together with any Attachments referred to herein, constitutes the
S\AOI3411J.NAS
120992
-9-
;)P2>....;7
1 entire understanding between the parties hereto with respect to the
2 transaction contemplated herein; and, this Agreement supersedes any
3 and all prior arrangements or understandings between the parties
4 with respect thereto. Any amendment or modification of the provi-
5 sions of this Agreement shall only be effective upon execution and
6 delivery, by all parties hereto, of a writing incorporating all of
7 the terms of such amendment or modification. No oral amendment or
8 modification of this Agreement shall be binding on any party. Minor
9 technical changes, corrections, extensions of time not to exceed a
10 cumulative total of 180 days, and clarifications which do not sub-
11 stantively change the terms of this Agreement, may be made by a
12 writing executed by Developer and the city Manager, or his designee,
13 upon approval of the City Attorney.
14
15
12. Choice of Law.
This Agreement and each and every
16 related document is to be governed by, and construed in accordance
17 with, the laws of the state of california.
18
19
13. No Third Partv Beneficiarv. The terms and provisions
20 herein contained shall be only for the benefit of the parties and
21 their respective heirs, successors and assigns, and such terms and
22 provisions shall not inure to the benefit of any other party whomso-
23 ever, it being the intention of the parties hereto that no one shall
24 be deemed to be a third party beneficiary of this Agreement.
25
26
27
28
S\AOI3411J.NAS
120992
-10-
diG/It
1
14. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence with respect
2 to every provision hereof.
3
4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the city and Developer have executed
5 this Agreement as of the date first written above.
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
"DEVELOPER"
Kmart corporation, a Michigan
corporation
By
Its
Vice President
[Printed Name and Title]
"city"
CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
a municipal corporation
By
Mayor
S\A013411J.NAS
120992
;;Jd-~9- /_118 -Jl()
10
11
1
ATTEST:
2
3
4
CITY CLERK
5
6 APPROVED AS TO FORM
7
8
Bruce M. Boogaard, Esquire
9 City Attorney
Marcia Scully, Esquire
12 Special Counsel to City
13
14 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT
15
16
Chris Salomone
17 Executive Director
Community Development Department
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
S\A013411J.NAS
120992
-12-
~! 8,d. t:>
ATTACHMENT 1
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY
LICAL DESCaIPTIOK or A POiTION
or TRACT BO. '8-2 AND TRACT NO. 88-1
THAT PORTION OF CHULA VISTA TRACT NO. 88-2, RANCHO DEL REY BUSINESS CENTER, IN
TIlE CITY OF CHUlA VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO
MAP THEREOF NO. 12267, FILED AS FILE NO. 88-611737 IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, NOVEMBER 30, 1988, AND THAT PORTION OF CHUlA VISTA
TRACT NO. 88-1, RANCHO DEL REY PHASE 5, UNIT NO.2, IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 12502,
FILED AS FILE NO. 89-619507 IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO
COUNTY, NOVEMBER 15, 1989, KORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COKKENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 14 OF SAID MAP NO. 12267; THENCE
CONTINUING ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 14, NORTH 83043'15" EAST,
114.29 FEET; THENCE DEPARTING THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 14 SOUTH
88010'32" EAST, 239.49 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 75022'27" EAST, 86.74 FEET TO THE TRUE
POINT OF BEGINNING ~F THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PARCEL; THENCE SOUTH 80013'03" EAST,
128.14 FEET; THENCE NORTH 85019'38" EAST, 235.75 FEET; THENCE NORTH 82044'00"
EAST, 76.79 FEET; THENCE NORTH 87034 '00" EAST, 180.90 FEET; THENCE NORTH
82052'39" EAST, 163.38 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 86014'21" EAST, 96.83 FEET; THENCE
SOUTH 0000'00" EAST 268.59 FEET; THENCE NORTH 86033'35" EAST, 158.98 FEET TO A
POINT OF THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF PlAZA AHENA AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP NO.
12267; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID RICHT-OF-WAY LINE SOUTH 74056'00" WEST,
37.79 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 246 FOOT RADius CURVE CONCAVE
SOUTHEASTERLY; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
74040'00" A DISTANCE or 320.58 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE
OF TIERRA DEL REY AS SHOWN ON SAID HAP NO. 12267, SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON TIlE
EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF LOT 21 OF SAID MAP NO. 12267; TIlENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID
RICHT-OF-WAY LINE AND ALONG THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 21 SOUTH 0016'00"
WEST, 99.45 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 21; SAID CORNER ALSO BEING
TIlE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 22 OF SAID HAP NO. 12267; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG
SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE AND ALONG THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 22 SOUTH
S"'013411J.NAS
120992
ATTACHMENT 1 -- Page 1
"d/jj".2/
1
1
0.16' 00. VEST, 36.30 nIT TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 546 RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE
EASTERLY; THlNCI CONTINUING SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE AND ALONG THE
EASTERLY BOUlIDAIlY OF SAID 1,OT 22 THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 2.46'00. A DISTANCE
OF 26.36 FlIT; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE AND ALONG THE
EASTEllLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 22 AND TANGENT TO SAID 546 FOOT RADIUS CURVE SOUTH
2.30'00. EAST, 110.97 FEET; THENCE DEPARTING SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE AND ALONG THE
SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 22 SOUTH 42.31'32. WEST, 90.10 FEET TO THE
BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT 5907.5 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY, A RADIAL
TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 1.17' SO" EAST; THENCE CONTINUING WESTEllLY ALONG THE
SOUTHEllLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 22 AND SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
1.17'35. A DISTANCE OF 133.33 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE SOUTHERLY
80UNDARY OF SAID LOT 22 AND TANGENT TO SAID 5907.5 FOOT RADIUS CURVE SOUTH
89.59'45" WEST, 88.94 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF
SAID LOT 22 NORTH 85.15'16" WEST, 59.09 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT
22, SAID CORNEll ALSO BEING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 18 OF SAID MAP NO. 12267;
THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY or SAID LOT 18 SOUTH 86.20'49"
WEST, 76.89 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY or SAID LOT 18
SOUTH 89'59'45" WEST, 179.00 FEET; THENCE DEPARTING FROK THE SOUTHERLY 80UNDARY
OF SAID LOT 18 SOUTH 0.00'15" EAST, 30.00 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-Or-WAY LINE
OF EAST 'H' STREET AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP NO. 12267; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY
LINE SOUTH 89'59'45" WEST, 36.00 FEET; THENCE DEPARTING FROK SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY
LINE NORTH 0.00 '15" WEST, 30.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 18;
THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY 80UNDARY OF SAID LOT 18 SOUTH 89.59'45" WEST, 138.87
FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 18, SAID CORNEll ALSO BEING THE SOUTHEAST
CORNEll OF LOT 16 OF SAID MAP NO. 12267; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF
SAID LOT 16 SOUTH 89.59'45. WEST, 10.63 FEET; THENCE DEPARTING FROM THE SOUTHERLY
BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 16 NORTH 0.00'00 EAST, 462.54 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 90.00'00.
WEST, 38.48 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0.00'00" EAST, 354.93 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF
8EGINNING.
2
dl f3 ~~d
~ g
.. 0> (:, (:, (:, g ;... ;., :or 10 0<) ..
CD ~ 0 0 CD '" It) .... "'!
...J '" Ol c:i '" c:i a:i c:i N CD ....
.......
'- 0 " ,.... 0<) ,.., ,.., ,.., '" ,.., It)
~ .... ,..,
~
.;; g '0
-' 0
<{ Ct:: . ..
U
Vl
II
C, ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ W ,
-
w Q
ex: '0> 'on 'It) 'on 'on 'on 'on b b '0
'Vi (;> .... .... ~ .... ~ .... ~ 0 9 0 w
(:, 0, g 0, 8 8 (:, -'
z Ol Ol 0 0 <{
j: i2 N It) It) It) It) 0 0 u
<( 10 0, b '" b 0, '" b b b Vl
w CD (I) (I) (I) (I) 0'>
I- CD
Vl VI VI VI VI Z VI VI Z VI Z
<(
w
@ @@@@@)@@@@@ g
.
E R
@ 0'> Co '" (:, '" " 0 ;., .... ~
...J ,.... Ii> ... 0<) 0<) 0'> ~ ,.., "'!
~ ....... ,.... c:i Ol '" '" c:i c:i ,...; (I) 0>
Q: @ 0 0<) N 0'> ,.., N 0> ,.., (I) '"
0<) ~ ~
~ (3 ~
IlO 0 '"
(;> ~ '" io ,....
5~ I-~e C\I Ct:: ... .... 0
ZZ N It) 0'>
5~ <0 It)
..JQ" Cl.s@ It)
~ wCD .... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~u-0 II w ~
1-0 ~ Q '0 '0 b b b b . '", 'on \<:>
N
<.:> 0 0 9 0 0 0 !." ,.., ~
w z io (:, '" io it> (:, ~ ;... 0'> '"
a: i2 It) .... ~ .... 0<) 0<) - '" -
<( :". :". b b N N N . 0, in
~ -
~ w ,.... " .... (I) (I)
CD
VI VI VI VI VI VI Z
-'
~ @ @OO~~~~@@@
w
~ 0
w
w
V1 0'> Ol :.r ... It) 0, (:, (I) 0<) 0> 10
...J N ... " ~ " " Ol "1 III '" Ol
....... -i 0> '" (I) ui '" c:i 0<) '" CD a:i
0 0<) (I) N ,.., " (I) '" 0'> '" It)
N N N -
.,!. f- Ct::
cr
@ ;! <( w w w w w w w w w w w
:c Q 'on . t-. ~b:l 8 b 'm . b 'on
N
<.:> 0<) N 9 !." 9 ,.., N 0 0<)
u z ;., b N ,,, 0> ;,. ;Ji N :or b ;"
4@ @ z ~ .... - N - - .- It) 0 ,..,
w n 10 in b in N " N lD b 10
<( a:l (I) CD " CD (I) (I) CD III (I) 0 III
f- Z VI l/'l l/'l Z Z Z Z l/'l VI z
<l: @ Ge0G>@@8@>@~@
0
~/8"8' /~/8-~"
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
S\A013411J.NAS
120992
ATTACHMENT 2
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE
ATTACHMENT 2 -- Page 1
dlB '~lf
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
s\AOI3411J.NAS
120992
ATTACHMENT 3
PLOT PLAN
ATTACHMENT 3 -- Page 1
dl6 ~d 5"
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
S\A013411J.NAS
120992
ATTACHMENT 4
FORM OF COVENANT
ATTACHMENT 4 -- Page 1
d/B"'~!o
RESOLUTION NO. J ''!Ilfl
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING AN IMPLEMENTING AGREEMENT WITH KMART COR-
PORATION, INC. TO CARRY OUT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A RETAIL STORE AT THE RANCHO DEL REY
COMMERCIAL CENTER
WHEREAS, on November 24, 1992, the City Council approved Resolution No. 16900
("Entitlements Resolution") and the first reading of Ordinance No. 2535 ("Entitlements
Ordinance"), collectively certifying the FSElR (as defined therein which definition is
incorporated herein by reference), amending the General Plan, El Rancho del Rey Specific Plan,
Rancho del Rey Sectional Planning Area (SPA) I, Planned Community District Regulations,
Rancho del Rey Employment Park Design Guidelines, and PFFP, and approving the Air Quality
Plan Water Conservation Plan, Tentative Maps, street name change and Development
Agreement, and making certain Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council held the second reading of the Entitlements Ordinance
(approving the Development Agreement) on November 30, 1992; and,
WHEREAS, A General Condition of Approval of the Commercial Center project
requires that an Implementing Agreement or other similar agreement be entered into between
each of Major Retailers A, B, and C and the City prior to each retailer commencing
development; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed Implementing Agreement with Kmart Corporation
(alternatively herein referred to as the "Project" as when mak.:ng reference to CEQA related
matters) implements the approved Development Agreement and provides assurances to the
retailer and the City as approved by Council; and,
WHEREAS, the Rancho del Rey Commercial Center FSEIR has analyzed impacts
associated with the proposed Project and was certified by Council on November 24, 1992 and
carries out the Development Agreement as identified in the FSEIR; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL DOES HEREBY FIND,
DETERMINE, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
rdrkml. wp
December 15, 1992
Reso approving KMART Agmt
Page 1
c2/!3 ~d7
c,
"
I. FSEIR Contents.
The FSEIR consists of the following:
A. "Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report - Ranch del Rey Commercial
Center" (EIR 92-02) prepared by Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates (RBF) and dated
October 5, 1992 SCH # 92051032, which contains the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact
Report ("DSEIR") distributed date July 21, 1992, revised to reflect responses made to comments
on the DSEIR, and the comments and responses to the DSEIR; and
B. Appendices (A through D) to Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report.
C. Technical studies and information incorporated in the responses to comment.
II. FSEIR Reviewed and Considered.
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista has reviewed, analyzed and considered
FSEIR 92-02, the environmental impacts therein identified for this Project; the Candidate CEQA
Findings attached to the Entitlements Resolution as Attachment A, the proposed mitigation
measures contained therein, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached to the
Entitlements Resolution as Attachment B, and the Statement of Overriding Considerations which
is attached to the Entitlements Resolution as Attachment C prior to approving the Project.
ill. Certification of Compliance with CEQA.
The City Council does hereby find that FSEIR 92-02, the Candidate CEQA Findings, the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and the Statement of Overriding Considerations
are prepared for this Project in accordance with requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act, the State EIR Guidelines, and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City
of Chula Vista.
IV. Independent Judgement of City Council
The City Council finds that the FSEIR reflects the independent judgement of the City of
Chula Vista City Council.
V. Approval of Implementing A~reement
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista ,does hereby approve the Implementing
Agreement with Krnart Corporation, City Manager in conjunction with the approval of the City
Attorney, to make minor, modifications thereto prior to presentation to the Mayor for execution,
and does hereby authorize the Mayor to execute the Implementing Agreement substantially in
rdrkml. wp
December 15, 1992
Reso approving KMART Agmt
Page 2
d / IJ -c2(J'
the form presented together with such changes as may be approved by the City Manager and
City Attorney.
VI. Findings re Consistency with the General Plan.
The City Council hereby finds that the Project is and will be consistent with the general
plan for the reasons advanced in the Entitlements Resolution which reasons are incorporated
herein by reference.
VII. CEQA Findings, Mitigation Monitoring Program, and Statement of Overriding
Considerations.
A. Adoption of Findings.
The City Council does hereby approve, accept as its own, incorporate as if set
forth in full herein, and make each and every one of the findings contained in the
"Findings of Fact Re Proposed Rancho Del Rey Commercial Center" attached to
the Entitlements Resolution as Attachment A.
B. Certain Mitigation Measures Feasible and Adopted.
As more fully identified and set forth in the master EIR for the Rancho del Rey
SPA I (EIR-87-01) and the supplemental environmental document (ElR-92-02)
and in the CEQA Findings for this project, which is attached to the Entitlements
Resolution as Attachment A, the Council hereby finds pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 that the
mitigation measures described in the above referenced documents are feasible and
will become binding upon the entity (such as the project proponent, the City, or
the school district) assigned thereby to implement same.
C. Infeasibility of Alternatives.
As is also noted in the above referenced environmental documents described in
the above subparagraph B, alternatives to the project which were identified as
potentially feasible in the EIR were found not to be feasible except the Site Plan
Alternative which is hereby rejected because the Project, as mitigated, rJready
reduces the impact on traffic to a level of less than significance.
D Adoption of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
As required by the Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the City Council
hereby adopts Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ("Program") set
rdrkmI.wp
December 15, 1992
Reso approving KMART Agmt
Page 3
dl6 ~c21
forth in Attachment B to the Entitlements Resolution incorporated herein by
reference as set forth in full. The Council hereby finds that 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 the Findings and the
Program.
E. Statement of Overriding Considerations.
Even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures and any feasible
alternatives, certain significant or potentially significant environmental effects
caused by the project or cumulati',ely will remain. Therefore, the City Council
of the City of Chula Vista hereby issues, pursuant to CEQA Guideline Section
15093, a Statement of Overriding Considerations in the form set forth in
Attachment C, attached to the Entitlements Resolution and incorporated herein as
if set forth in full, identifying the specific economic, social, and other
considerations that render the unavoidable significant adverse environmental
effects acceptable.
vrn. Notice of Determination
The Environmental Review Coordinator of the City of Chula Vista is directed after City
Council approval of this Project to ensure that a Notice of Determination, together with a copy
of this resolution, its exhibits, and all resolutions passed by the City Council in connection with
this Project, is filed with the County Clerk of thr County of San Diego.
Presented by:
Approved as to form by:
Chris Salomone
Community Development Director
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
rdrkml.wp
December 15, 1992
Reso approving KMART Agmt
Page 4
02/0JtJ
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
SUBMITTED BY:
Item ~) c....
Meeting Date 12/15/92
Resolution) Ioq 42.. Approving and Authorizing Execution of a Public
Facilities Financing and Implementing Agreement with Major Retailer C
(The Price Company), Rancho del Rey Commercial Center, and Related
CEQA Findings
Community Development Director { -~ '
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY: City Manager 9 (4/5ths Vote: Yes No..xJ
BACKGROUND: On November 24, 1992, Council held a public hearing and subsequently
adopted Resolution 16900 and held the first reading of Ordinance 2535 relating to the conversion
of the western 55 acres of the Rancho del Rey Employment Park to a Commercial Center and
related regulatory actions including CEQA considerations. The second reading of this ordinance
was approved by Council on November 30, 1992. Approval of the ordinance included adoption
of a Development Agreement with the applicant/developer of the Commercial Center for all
portions of the site excluding the easternmost parcel designated for Major Retailer C (Price
Club). An approved General Condition of the Rancho del Rey Commercial Center project is
the requirement that Major Retailer C enter into a Development Agreement or PFFA and
Implementing Agreement with the City prior to the issuance of a building permit. The proposed
PFF A and Implementing Agreement satisfies this condition. It further provides for a three-way
agreement between The Price Company, the City and the developer which stipulates benefits to
Price Club and the developer as well as performance assurances to the City.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute
the proposed PFF A and Implementing Agreement with The Price Company, and making certain
CEQA findings.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The following boards and commissions
reviewed the actions taken by Council on November 24, as discussed in the November 24
agenda statement:
o Resource Conservation Commission - Endorsed project
o Design Review Committee - Endorsed amended Employment Park design guidelines
o Economic Development Commission - Endorsed project
o Planning Commission - Certified FSEIR and recommended approval of resolution and
ordinance, including Development Agreement
No group has reviewed the attached PFFA/Implementing Agreement document. However, the
key terms of the agreement were outlined in the November 18 Planning Commission staff report.
~(-I
Page 2, Item ~
Meeting Date 12/15/92
DISCUSSION:
Price Club - General Information
The Price Company, a leading national warehouse club discount store was founded by Sol Price
in 1976 and is the industry leader in both longevity and sales. Price Club now has over 50
stores and over $5 billion in sales. (Competitors include Sam's Club, Costco, and PACE).
Price Club sells quality brand name goods - groceries, office supplies, appliances, electronics,
housewares, hardware, auto supplies - at sharply discounted prices. Memberships include
individuals and businesses, typically small to medium-sized.
Average annual sales by these "big box" discounters are frequently three times those of more
established discounters. The industry average exceeds $400-$500 per square foot. Price Club
averages tend more towards $1000 per square foot.
The Price Club REIT currently owns the 34.62 acre Power Center on Broadway which includes
its own store and additional lease tenants and vacant land to the west. The existing Price Club
store occupies 112,000 square feet. Price Club is evaluating options to upgrade this facility
ranging from renovation to demolition and construction of a totally new facility. The new H
Street store will occupy 136,800, including a 6,800 square foot tire center.
Proposed Agreement Terms
The key terms of the agreement remain generally as presented to the Planning Commission on
November 18 and to Council on November 24, and are outlined as below:
1. Price Club will open the new store within 18 months of closing escrow.
2. Price Club will operate the new store for a minimum of ten years.
3. Price Club will upgrade the existing Broadway store and operate same for a minimum
of 8 years, provided that taxable sales do not fall below $60 million. (In the event the
store closes prematurely, Price Club will forgive the outstanding balance of their loan
to the City and reimburse the City the $835,000 paid to the developer, per items 4,6 and
7 below.)
4. Price Club will advance the City $1.892 million in funds for construction of public
improvements.
5. The developer will reduce the land sales price to Price Club by the amount of the Price
Club "loan", as well as contribute an additional minimum of $700,000 to Price Club
towards paying down the Assessment District liens.
6. The City will reimburse Price Club the amount advanced for public improvements over
a period of ten years, including interest based on the prime rate.
).Ie -~
Page 3, Item ,;)1 L
Meeting Date 12/15/92
7. The City will provide the developer an additional $835,000 in assistance for construction
of off-site public improvements. (McMillin will reimburse the City if Price Club doesn't
open in 18 months.)
8. Price Club will provide a proactive approach to recruiting, trammg and/or hiring
employees from the local community, exerting a significant effort to work with local
education and training providers including, but not limited to, Southwestern College and
Sweetwater Union High School District with a goal of hiring Chula Vista residents.
Environmental Review
The Rancho del Rey Commercial Center Final SEIR has analyzed impacts associated with the
proposed Implementing Agreement. This same FSEIR was certified by City Council on
November 24, 1992. The proposed Implementing Agreement carries out the Development
Agreement that was identified in the Final SEIR. Thus, no new environmental issues arise from
approval of this Implementing Agreement, and the Rancho del Rey Commercial Center Final
SEIR is the appropriate CEQA document. Likewise, the Candidate CEQA Findings (as modified
at the November 24 meeting), the Statement of Overriding Considerations, and the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program remain the appropriate documents to accompany the
proposed action.
Economic and Fiscal Impact
The proposed new store will employ 291 people (112 full time and 162 part time and 17 non-
union salaried managers). The hourly wage ranges from $6.00/hour (probational training wage)
to $13.27/hour with an average wage of $12.00/hour. Salaried managers earn $30,000-
$70,000/year. (The entire Commercial Center will generate 1224 jobs.)
In terms of revenues, the Commercial Center will generate first year Net New Revenues of
$1.21 million. The new Price Club alone is projected to generate Year 1 Gross Sales Tax
Revenues of $825,000. After accounting for potential overlapping sales with the existing store,
the new H Street Price Club is estimated to generate Year 1 Net New Sales Taxes of $401,000.
This is based on highly conservative market assumptions and is considered a "worst case"
analysis.
The $835,000 in assistance to the developer is a one time expense and will be paid from non-
General Fund revenues (e.g., TPF, (SB300) Fund, Transportation DIF Fund and Traffic Signal
fund). The $1.89 million rebate to Price Club will be paid off over ten years. Assuming an
interest rate of 6% (current prime rate), and an annual payment of $265,790, the projected Year
1 Net New Revenues to the City from the Commercial Center are adjusted to $933,210 ($1.513
million using the retailers' own rule of thumb estimates).
C:\WP.51\DYE\PRICECLB.I13
~)C-~
RESOLUTION NO. It.'t""
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A PUBUC FACILITIES
FINANCING AND IMPLEMENTING AGREEMENT WITH MAJOR
RETAILER C (THE PRICE COMPANY) RANCHO DEL REY COMMERCIAL
CENTER, AND RELATED CEQA FINDINGS
WHEREAS, on November 24, 1992, the City Council approved Resolution No. 16900
("Entitlements Resolution") and the first reading of Ordinance No. 2535 ("Entitlements
Ordinance"), collectively certifying the FSEIR (as defined therein which definition is
inc'Jrporated herein by reference), amending the General Plan, El Rancho del Rey Specific Plan,
Rancho del Rey Sectional Planning Area (SPA) I, Planned Community District Regulations,
Rancho del Rey Employment Park Design Guidelines, and PFFP, and approving the Air Quality
Plan Water Conservation Plan, Tentative Maps, street name change and Development
Agreement, and making certain Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council held the second reading of the Entitlements Ordinance
(approving the Development Agreement) on November 30, 1992; and,
WHEREAS, A General Condition of Approval of the Commercial Center project
requires that an Implementing Agreement or other similar agreement be entered into between
each of Major Retailers A, B, and C and the City prior to each retailer commencing
development; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL DOES HEREBY FIND,
DETERMINE, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
I. FSEIR Contents.
The FSEIR consists of the following:
A. "Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report - Ranch del Rey Commercial
Center" (EIR 92-02) prepared by Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates (RBF) and dated
October 5, 1992 SCH # 92051032, which contains the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact
Re)Ort ("DSEIR") distributed date July 21, 1992, revised to reflect responses made to comments
on the DSEIR, and the comments and responses to the DSEIR; and
B. Appendices (A through D) to Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report.
C. Technical studies and information incorporated in the responses to comment.
';'4'
rdrpcl. wp
December 15, 1992
Reso approving Price Club Aimt
pa,1
j
~I e,-If
\fJ
II. FSEIR Reviewed and Considered.
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista has reviewed, analyzed and considered
FSEIR 92-02, the environmental impacts therein identified for this Project; the Candidate CEQA
Findings attached to the Entitlements Resolution as Attachment A, the proposed mitigation
measures contained therein, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached to the
Entitlements Resolution as Attachment B, and the Statement of Overriding Considerations which
is attached to the Entitlements Resolution as Attachment C prior to approving the Project.
III. Certification of Compliance with CEQA.
The City Council does hereby fmd that FSEIR 92-02, the Candidate CEQA Findings, the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and the Statement of Overriding Considerations
are prepared for this Project in accordance with requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act, the State EIR Guidelines, and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City
of Chula Vista.
IV. Independent Judgement of City Council
The City Council finds that the FSEIR reflects the independent judgement of the City of
Chula Vista City Council.
V. Approval of Implementing Agreement
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve the Public Facilities
Finanacing and Implementing Agreement with Price Company in the form presented, authorizes
the City Manager in conjunction with the approval of the City Attorney, to make minor,
modifications thereto prior to presentation to the Mayor for execution, and does hereby authorize
the Mayor to execute the Implementing Agreement substantially in the form presented together
with such changes as may be approved by the City Manager and City Attorney.
VI. Findings re Consistency with the General Plan.
The City Council hereby finds that the Project is and will be consistent with the general
plan for the reasons advanced in the Entitlements Resolution which reasons are incorporated
herein by reference.
VII. . CEQA Findings, Mitigation Monitoring Program, and Statement of Overriding
Considerations.
A. Adoption of Findings.
rdrpcl.wp
December 15, 1992
Reso approving Price Club Agmt
Page 2
j"lt -:J
RESOLUTION
//,9,/,}..
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A PUBLIC FACILITIES
FINANCING AND IMPLEMENTING AGREEMENT WITH MAJOR
RETAILER C (THE PRICE COMPANY) RANCHO DEL REY COMMERCIAL
CENTER, AND RELATED CEQA FINDINGS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, on November 24, 1992, the City Council approved Resolution 16900
and the first reading of Ordinance 2535, collectively certifying the FSEIR, amending the General
Plan, El Rancho del Rey Specific Plan, Rancho del Rey Sectional Planning Area (SPA) I,
Planned Community District Regulations, Rancho del Rey Employment Park Design Guidelines,
and PFFP, and approving the Air Quality Plan Water Conservation Plan, Tentative Maps, street
name change and Development Agreement, and making certain Findings and Statement of
Overriding Considerations; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council held the second reading of the Ordinance
(approving the Development Agreement) on November 30, 1992; and,
WHEREAS, A General Condition of Approval of the Commercial Center project
requires that an Implementing Agreement be entered into between each of Major Retailers A,
B, and C and the City prior to each retailer commencing development; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed Implementing Agreement with The Price Company
implements the approved Development Agreement and provides assurances to the retailer and
the City as approved by Council; and,
WHEREAS, the Rancho del Rey Commercial Center FSEIR has analyzed impacts
associated with the proposed Implementing Agreement and was certified by Council on
November 24, 1992 and carries out the Development Agreement as identified in the FSEIR; and,
WHEREAS, no new environmental issues arise from approval of the
Implementing Agreement and the candidate CEQA findings (as modified at the November 24
meeting) the Statement of Overriding Considerations and the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program remain the appropriate documents to accompany the proposed action.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista does hereby approve and authorize the City execution of an Implementing
Agreement with The Price Company for the development of a major retail store at the Rancho
del Rey Commercial Center.
Presented by:
Approved as to form by:
Chris Salomone
Community Development Director
C:\WPS1\DYE\PRICECLB.RES
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
(Submitted without City Attorney review)
;J../C,5
The City Council does hereby approve, accept as its own, incorporate as if set
forth in full herein, and make each and every one of the findings contained in the
"Findings of Fact Re Proposed Rancho Del Rey Commercial Center" attached to
the Entitlements Resolution as Attachment A.
B. Certain Mitigation Measures Feasible and Adopted.
As more fully identified and set forth in the master EIR for the Rancho del Rey
SPA I (EIR-87-01) and the supplemental environmental document (EIR-92-02)
and in the CEQA Findings for this project, which is attached to the Entitlements
Resolution as Attachment A, the Council hereby finds pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 that the
mitigation measures described in the above referenced documents are feasible and
will become binding upon the entity (such as the project proponent, the City, or
the school district) assigned thereby to implement same.
C. Infeasibility of Alternatives.
As is also noted in the above referenced environmental documents described in
the above subparagraph B, alternatives to the project which were identified as
potentially feasible in the EIR were found not to be feasible except the Site Plan
Alternative which is hereby rejected because the Project, as mitigated, already
reduces the impact on traffic to a level of less than significance.
D Adoption of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
As required by the Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the City Council
hereby adopts Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ("Program") set
forth in Attachment B to the Entitlements Resolution incorporated herein by
reference as set forth in full. The Council hereby finds that 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 the Findings and the
Program.
E. Statement of Overriding Considerations.
Even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures and any feasible
alternatives, certain significant or potentially significant environmental effects
caused by the project or cumulatively will remain. Therefore, the City Council
of the City of Chula Vista hereby issues, pursuant to CEQA Guideline Section
15093, a Statement of Overriding Considerations in the form set forth in
rdrpc1.wp
December 15, 1992
Reso approving Price Club Agmt
Page 3
AI€. - '"
The Public Facilities Financing and Implementing
Agreement with Major Retailer C (The Price Company)
will be delivered by hand on Friday, December 11, 1992
for inclusion in your packet.
..
dl c -10
Attachment C, attached to the Entitlements Resolution and incorporated herein as
if set forth in full, identifying the specific economic, social, and other
considerations that render the unavoidable significant adverse environmental
effects acceptable.
p Notice of Determination
The Environmental Review Coordinator of the City of Chula Vista is directed after City
Council approval of this Project to ensure that a Notice of Determination, together with a copy
of this resolution, its exhibits, and all resolutions passed by the City Council in connection with
this Project, is filed with the County Clerk of the County of San Diego.
Presented by:
Approved as to form by:
Chris Salomone
Community Development Director
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
rdrpc1.wp
December 15, 1992
Reso approving Price Club Agmt
Page 4
dol a -1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
RANCHO DEL REY COMMERCIAL CENTER
9
PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING
AND IMPLEMENTATION AGREEMENT
10
PRICE CLUB
11
12
13
14
15
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
~C.,
c
,
1
2
3 RECITALS
4
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
5
6
7
8
9
AGREEMENT
10
TABLE OF CONTENTS
. .. .. .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .
Purpose of the Agreement . . .
The Property: Owner's Interest
Subdivision Map . . . . . . . .
Previous Land Use Entitlements
Request for Modification of Land Use Regulations
Environmental Review
Existing Price Club . . . . . .
ci ty Review . . . . . . . . . .
Public Benefit .......
Agreement Subject to Conditions to Effectiveness
.. . .. .. .. . .
.. . . .. .. . . .. .
ARTICLE 1.
DEFINITIONS
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
"CEQA"
"City"
"City Council"
"Day" or "Days"
"Design Guidelines"
"Commencement Date"
"Development" . . .
"Effective Date" .
"Exhibit" . . . . .
"Existing Facility"
"New Facility"
"Owner" . . . .
"Parties" . . .
"Prime Interest Rate"
"Project" . . . . . .
"Property" . . .
"Purchase Agreement"
"Retailer" . . . . .
ARTICLE 2.
EXHIBITS TO THIS AGREEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ARTICLE 3.
CONDITIONS TO EFFECTIVENESS
. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
ARTICLE 4.
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
-i- t2./C- 9
Paqe
1
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
6
7
7
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
9
9
9
9
10
10
10
10
10
10
11
11
11
11
12
15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ARTICLE 5.
OBLIGATIONS OF THE PARTIES . . . .
5.1 Obligations of Retailer
A. Construction and operation of a New Price
Club on the Property . . . . . . .
B. Loan by Retailer to City . . .
C. Repayment of Loan . . . . . . . . .
D. Termination of Loan Repayment Obligations
- Failure to Open Price Club . . . . . .
E. Termination of Loan Repayment Obligation
- Closing of New Facility . . . . . . . .
F. Termination of Loan Repayment Obligation
- Closing of Existing Facility . . .
G. Reimbursement for Costs of specified
Street Improvements .. ...
H. Definitions and Terms . . . . . .
I. DIF Fees . . . . . . . . . . . .
J. Employment Outreach and Training
K. Upgrade of Existing Facility
5.2 obligations of City . . . . . . .
A. Acquisition of certain Street and Public
Improvements . . . .
5.3 obligations of Owner ....
A. Construction of the Public Improvements
5.4 General Obligations . . . . . . . . . .
A. Anti-Discrimination During Construction
B. Compliance with Applicable Laws
C. Insurance....
D. Street Vacations . . . . . . .
ARTICLE 6.
DEFAULT
. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
6.1 Option to Set Matter for Hearing or Institute
Reference Proceedings
6. 2 Waiver. . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.3 Remedies Upon Default . . . . .
6.4 No Cross Defaults . . . . . . .
6.5 City's Right to Repayment of the Purchase
P~ice for the Specified Street Improvements
ARTICLE 7.
GENERAL PROVISIONS
7.1 Attorneys' Fees
7.2 Notices ... .
7.3 Joint and Several Liability
7.4 Reference . . . . .
7.5 Arbitration of Disputes
-ii- -2./ C- 10
15
15
15
16
16
17
17
18
20
20
22
22
22
22
23
25
25
25
25
25
26
26
26
27
27
27
27
28
28
28
29
30
30
33
1 7.6
7.7
2 7.8
7.9
3 7.10
7.11
4 7.12
7.13
5 7.14
7.15
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Applicable Law . . . . .
Amendment . . . . . . .
Relationship of Parties
Third Party Litigation .
No Third Party Beneficiary
Time of Essence ....
No Representations or Warranties
Integration
severability
captions . .
34
34
35
35
36
36
36
36
37
37
-iii-
.:/.1 t:. - II
1
2
3 EXHIBIT - 1
4 EXHIBIT - 2
5 EXHIBIT - 3
6 EXHIBIT - 4
7 EXHIBIT - 5
8 EXHIBIT - 6
9
EXHIBIT - 7
10
EXHIBIT - 8
11
EXHIBIT - 9
12
13 EXHIBIT - 10
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
LIST OF EXHIBITS
THE EXISTING PROPERTY MAP
THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY
CITY PROMISSORY NOTE
PROPOSED PROPERTY MAP
CITY'S ESTOPPEL CERTIFICATE
LIST OF REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS TO THE EXISTING
FACILITY
LIST OF SPECIFIED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
LIST OF SPECIFIED STREET IMPROVEMENTS
DISBURSEMENT SCHEDULE FOR THE PURCHASE PRICE FOR
THE SPECIFIED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
DISBURSEMENT SCHEDULE FOR PAYMENT OF THE PURCHASE
PRICE FOR THE SPECIFIED STREET IMPROVEMENTS
.N~r seAIII~t~
-iv-
.l./t;-12
1
RANCHO DEL REY COMMERCIAL CENTER
PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING
AND IMPLEMENTATION AGREEMENT
PRICE CLUB
2
3
4
This Public Facilities Financing and Implementation
Agreement (the "Agreement") is made and entered into as of this
5
6
day of
, 199__, by and among the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a
7
8
municipal corporation having charter powers ("City"), RANCHO DEL REY
PARTNERSHIP, a California general partnership (the "Partnership"),
9
RDR BUSINESS CENTER, LTD., a California limited partnership (the
10
"Business Center"), and THE PRICE COMPANY, a California corporation
11
12
("Retailer"), with reference to the recitals set forth below. For
purposes of this Agreement the Partnership and the Business Center
13
are jointly referred to herein as "Owner".
14
15
RECITALS
16
17
A. Puroose of the Aqreement. city, as a charter city,
18
19
is authorized pursuant to its self-rule powers to enter into
agreements pertaining to the furtherance of public purposes which
20
City, Owner and Retailer desire to enter
are municipal affairs.
21
into this Agreement to provide for the construction of specified
22
public improvements within City, to encourage private investment,
23
economic development including diversity of City's tax base, and
24
job formation within the City.
25
26
The Partnership
B.
The Prooertv:
Owner's Interest.
27
and the Business Center each hold fee title to portions of
28
S\A013412Z. HAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-1-
./je.-IE
1 approximately 15.5 gross acres of real property (the "Property")
2 within the City generally located approximately 1.5 miles east of
3 Interstate 805, 1 mile west of Otay Lakes Road, and bounded on the
4 north by Rice Canyon and on the south by East H Street. The
5 Property is a part of a larger property generally known, for pur-
6 poses of this Agreement, as the Rancho del Rey Commercial Center.
7 The Property is generally shown on the "Existing Property Map"
8 attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as Exhibit
9 No. 1 and legally described in the "Legal Description of the
10 property" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference
11 as Exhibit No.2. The Property is the subject of this Agreement.
12 All of the Property is currently owned by either the Partnership or
13 The Business Center. The current ownership of the existing parcels
14 which comprise the Property is illustrated on the Existing Property
15 Map (Exhibit No.1). The Partnership and The Business Center agree
16 for purposes of this Agreement to be jointly and severally bound by
17 this Agreement and to individually and jointly perform all obliga-
18 tions of the Owner pursuant to this Agreement. The Property is a
19 part of the Rancho del Rey Planned Community. Owner and Retailer
20 intend to enter into a purchase agreement (the "Purchase Agreement")
21 pursuant to which the Property will be conveyed from Owner to
22 Retailer.
23
24
C.
Subdivision Map.
Owner has submitted a proposed
25 Tentative Subdivision Map (Tentative Tract Map No. 93-01) to City.
26 If Tentative Tract Map No. 93-01 is approved by City, the Property
27 will be reparcelized into a single lot as shown on the "Proposed
28
S\A013412Z.NAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-2-
,2./&.../'1-
1 property Map" attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit
2 No.4.
3
4
D.
Previous Land Use Entitlements. The Property is part
5 of the 2, 450-acre El Rancho del Rey specific Plan (the "specific
6 Plan") which was adopted by the City on August 8, 1978 and amended
7 by General Plan Amendment (GPA-83-7) on November 12. 1985. The
8 Specific Plan serves as the city's General Development Plan for the
9 area.
10
11
The original Specific Plan contained ten (10) sectional
12 planning areas (SPAs).
The Property is located within a part of
13 SPA I, generally referred to as the Rancho del Rey Employment Park.
14 Development of the Property is governed by:
15
16
1.
The Specific Plan;
17
18
2.
The Rancho Del Rey SPA I sectional planning Area
19
(SPA) Plan adopted by the City on December 15, 1987 and amended
20
on August 7, 1990, November 19, 1991, and April 21, 1992.
21
22
3.
The Development Agreement entered into on
23
January 5, "L988 by and between Rancho Del Rey Partnership and
24
the City (the "SPA I Development Agreement") and recorded in
25 the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County on May 1,
26 1989 as Document 89-227812.
27
28
S\A013412Z. HAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-3-
c2/C - 15
1
4.
The Rancho Del Rey SPAs I, II and III Public
2
Facilities Financing Plan adopted on December 15, 1987 and
3
amended in July 1989 and January 15, 1991.
4
5
5.
The Rancho Del Rey SPA I Planned Community
6
District Regulations.
7
8
6.
The Rancho Del Rey Employment Park Design
9
Guidelines.
10
11
E.
Reauest for Modification of Land Use Reaulations.
12 subsequent to the approval of the Existing SPA I Development
13 Agreement, Owner has submitted to city for City's consideration a
14 request for the following approvals which, if approved, would modify
15 the land use regulations applicable to the Property:
16
17
1.
General Plan Amendment 93-01;
18
19
2.
Business Center Amendment to the Specific Plan;
20
21
3.
Business Center Amendment to the Rancho del Rey SPA I
22
sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan;
23
24
4. Commercial Center Amendment to the Rancho del Rey
25
SPAs I, II and III Public Facilities Financing Plan (which
amendment pertains only to SPA I, Phase I);
26
27
28
S\A013412Z.NAL
121592 - EGB-47835
~~-16
-4-
1
5.
Business Center Amendment to the Rancho del Rey SPA I
2
Community District Regulations;
3
4
6.
Adoption of the new Rancho del Rey Business Center
5
Design Guidelines;
6
7
7.
Tentative Subdivision Maps No. 92-05 and 93-01;
8
9
8.
The Rancho del Rey SPA I Commercial Center Air
10 Quality Improvement Plan; and
11
12
9.
The Rancho del Rey SPA I Commercial Center Water
13
Conservation Plan.
14
15
F.
Environmental Review. A Final Environmental Impact
16 Report ("EIR") was prepared for the Sectional Planning Area (SPA)
17 I Plan (EIR-87-1). It was certified by the City of Chula vista City
18 Council on December 15, 1987 by Resolution No. 13388. An Addendum
19 EIR to the original EIR-87-1 was prepared for the Revised Rancho del
20 Rey SPA I Plan and was certified on December 15, 1987. A Supplemen-
21 tal Environmental Impact Report (the "Supplemental EIR") has been
22 prepared for the Rancho del Rey Commercial Center (EIR-92-02). The
23 Supplemental EIR analyzes the effects of the amendment of the
24 various land use entitlements to redesignate the Property from
25 employment park to mixed-use commercial.
26
27
28
S\A013412Z.NAL
121592 - EGB-47835
.2/&-17
-5-
1
G.
Existinq Price Club.
Retailer currently owns and
2 operates as a Price Club membership warehouse club an existing
3 approximately 112,000 square foot facility (the "Existing Facility")
4 located at 1144 Broadway, Chula vista and generally referred to as
5 the Broadway store. It is Retailer's intent to continue to operate
6 the Existing Facility for a minimum of eight (8) years after the
7 Effective Date of this Agreement; provided, however, that Retailer
8 does not covenant, under this Agreement, to operate the Existing
9 Facility for any period of time.
10
11
H.
citv Review. The City has extensively reviewed the
12 terms and conditions of this Agreement and, in particular, has
13 specifically considered and approved the impact and benefits of this
14 Agreement upon the general welfare of the City.
The terms and
15 conditions of this Agreement have been found by the City to be fair,
16 just, and reasonable, and to provide appropriate benefits to the
17 City. This Agreement will serve the best interests of the citizens
18 of the City, and the publ ic health, safety, and wel fare.
This
19 Agreement will ensure a desirable and functional community environ-
20 ment; provide effective and efficient development of public facili-
21 ties, infrastructure and services appropriate for the development
22 of the property; help maximize effective utilization of resources
23 within the city; increase City tax revenues by the development of
24 the Property; promote the creation of jobs for City residents and
25 provide other public benefits to the city and its residents.
26
27
28
S\A013412Z.HAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-6-
.1./e-18
1
1.
Public Benefit. The Parties acknowledge and agree
2 that the development of the Property will result in public benefit
3 and further acknowledge and agree that this Agreement confers bene-
4 fits on the Owner and the Retailer.
The Parties intend by this
5 Agreement to provide the consideration expressly set forth herein
6 to the public which the Parties agree shall balance the private
7 benefits conferred on the Owner and the Retailer and satisfy certain
8 direct and indirect public needs resulting from or relating to the
9 development of the Property, and provide public assurance that this
10 Agreement is fair, just, and reasonable.
11
12
J.
Aareement Subiect to Conditions to Effectiveness.
13 The effectiveness of this Agreement is subject to the completion of
14 certain conditions precedent (the "Conditions to Effectiveness") set
15 forth in Article 3 below including but not limited to approval of
16 the proposed modifications to the land use entitlements listed in
17 Paragraph D herein above.
18
19 In the event that all of the Conditions to Effectiveness
20 are complied with, it is the intention of the parties to allocate
21 the costs of the construction and financing of certain public facil-
22 ities necessary to accommodate the proposed uses, and to provide for
23 private investment, economic development, additional employment
24 opportunities for City residents, an increased tax base for city and
25 other public benefits all as provided in this Agreement.
26
27
28
S\A013412Z.NAL
121592 - EGB-4783S
-7-
.JJ ~~ /9
10
11
1
AGREEMENT
2
3 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the Recitals set forth
4 above and for other good and valuable consideration provided for
5 herein,
the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby
6 acknowledged, the parties, respectively agree as follows:
7
8
ARTICLB 1.
9
DBFINITIONS
The following definitions apply only to their use within
12 this Agreement. The definitions are intended to have substantive
13 effect:
14
15
1.1 "CEQA" means the California Environmental Quality
16 Act, California Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et sea.
17
18
1.2 "City" means the City of Chula Vista, California.
19
20
1. 3 "ci ty Council" means the city Council of the City of
21 Chula vista.
22
23
1.4 "Oay" or "Days" means a calendar day unless expressly
24 stated to be a business day.
25
26
27
28
S\A013412Z. HAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-8-
J/e-- 2~
1
1. 5 "Design Guidelines" means the Rancho del Rey Business
2 Center Design Guidelines adopted by the City Council on
3
by Ordinance No.
4
5
1.6 "Commencement Date" means the July 1 which first
6 ocr ,rs after the New Facility opens for business.
7
8
1.7 "Development" means the improvement of the Property
9 for purposes of effecting the structures, improvements and facil-
10 ities comprising the project including, without limitation:
11 grading, the construction of infrastructure and public facilities
12 related to the Project whether located within or outside the
13 Property; the construction of structures and buildings; and the
14 installation of landscaping.
15
16
1.8 "Effective Date" means the date on which all of the
17 Conditions to Effectiveness set forth in Article 3 hereinbelow have
18 been fulfilled. City shall execute an Estoppel Certificate substan-
19 tially in the form of the "City's Estoppel certificate" attached
20 hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as Exhibit No. 5
21 as evidence of City's determination that all Conditions to
22 Effectiveness have been fulfilled.
23
24
1. 9 "Exhibit" means an exhibit to this Agreement as
25 listed in Article 2 below.
All Exhibits are incorporated as a
26 substantive part of this Agreement.
27
28
S\A013412Z.NAL
121592 - EGB-4783S
-9-
~C~J.I
1 1.10 "Existing Facility" means the existing Price Club
2 membership warehouse located at 1144 Broadway within the city.
3
4 1.11 "New Facility" means the Price Club membership ware-
5 house to be constructed by Retailer on the Property in accordance
6 with the provisions of this Agreement.
7
8
1.12 "Owner"
means
collectively
RANCHO
DEL
REY
9 PARTNERSHIP, a California general partnership, the general partners
10 of which are McMillin Communities, Inc., a California corporation
11 formerly known as McMillin Financial, Inc., and Home Capital
12 Corporation, a California corporation and RDR BUSINESS CENTER, LTD.,
13 a California limited partnership, the general partners of which are
14 McMillin Commercial Industrial Development, Inc., a California
15 corporation, McMillin Communities, Inc., a California corporation
16 and McMillin Development, Inc., a California corporation.
17
18
1.13 "Parties" means the city, Owner and Retailer and each
19 permi tted successor or assign of city, OWner or Retailer. A "Party"
20 shall refer to any of the Parties.
21
22 1.14 "Prime Interest Rate" means the Wells Fargo Bank
23 Prime Interest Rate as quoted from time to time in the Wall Street
24 Journal.
25
26
1.15 "Project" means the Development of the Property
27 pursuant to this Agreement including the construction of all private
28
S\A013412Z. HAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-10-
c2/C -<<.:L
1 improvements within the Property and all necessary public improve-
2 ments whether located on or off the Property.
3
4
1.16 "Property" means the real property described in
5 Exhibits No.1 and 2.
6
7
1.17 "Purchase Agreement" shall mean an agreement of
8 purchase and sale with respect to the Property between the Owner and
9 the Retailer.
10
11
1.18 "Retailer" means the Price Company, a California
12 corporation and its successors and assigns.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~
~
~
~
~
~
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ARTICLE 2.
EXHIBITS TO THIS AGREEMENT
The Exhibits to this Agreement are:
Exhibit 1:
The Existing Property Map.
The Legal Description of the Property.
City Promissory Note
Exhibit 2:
Exhibit 3:
Exhibit 4:
Proposed Property Map.
City'S Estoppel Certificate
Exhibit 5:
Exhibit 6:
List of Required Improvements
List of Specified Public Improvements
Exhibit 7:
Exhibit 8:
List of Specified street Improvements
Exhibit 9:
Disbursement Schedule for the Purchase
Price for the Specified Public Improvements
S\A013412Z,NAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-11-
~C-:l.g
1
Disbursement Schedule for Payment of the
Purchase Price for the Specified Street
Improvements
Exhibit 10:
2
3
4
ARTICLE 3.
5
CONDITIONS TO EFFECTIVENESS
6
7
The following are conditions precedent to the obligations
8
of the Parties hereunder:
9
10
3.1 Approval by City of the General Plan Amendment (GPA-
11
93-01) .
12
13
3.2 Approval by City of the Rancho del Rey Business
Center Amendment to the Specific Plan.
14
15
16
3.3 Approval by City of the Business Center Amendment to
17
the Rancho del Rey SPA I Plan Amendment.
18
19
3.4 Approval by city of the Commercial Center Amendment
20
to the Rancho Del Rey SPAs I, II & III Public Facilities Financing
Plan which Amendment pertains only to SPA I, Phase I.
21
22
23
3.5 Approval by City Council Ordinance of the Business
Center Amendment to the Rancho Del Rey SPA I Planned Community
District Regulations.
24
25
26
27
28
S\A013412Z.NAL
121592 . EGB-47835
,Jj C.. .:J. .,
-12-
1
3.6 Adoption by City of the proposed Rancho del Rey
2 Business Center Design Guidelines.
3
4
3.7 Approval by City of Tentative Tract Maps No. 92-05
5 and 93-01.
6
7
3.8 Approval by city of the Rancho del Rey SPA I
8 commercial Center Water Conservation Plan.
9
10
3.9 Approval by City of the Rancho del Rey SPA I
11 Commercial Center Air Quality Improvement Plan.
12
13
3.10 Approval of the vacation of
acres of public
14 rights of way within the property.
15
16
3.11 Validation.
The initiation by the City of
17 appropriate procedures under Code of civil Procedure Section 860,
18 et. sea., in order to validate this Agreement and the obligations
19 hereunder and the issuance and execution of a final non-appealable
20 court order of validation.
21
22
3.12 Environmental Review. All environmental review and
23 documentation r~quired by CEQA for completion of the Project and
24 approval of this Agreement including but not limited to certifica-
25 tion of the Supplemental EIR (EIR No. 92-02) and adoption of any
26 required findings is complete.
27
28
S\A013412Z.NAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-13-
.2./ C..-~5
1
3.13 Evidence of Financina.
Owner and Retailer shall
2 submit to City evidence reasonably acceptable to city that each has
3 adequate funds, authorized to be expended on the Project or has
4 obtained a commitment or commitments for construction financing
5 necessary for the construction of those public and/or private
6 improvements said party is required by this Agreement to build on
7 or to service the Property.
8
9
3.14 pavment of citv Costs. Owner shall have reimbursed
10 city for the cost of consultant fees expended or incurred by City
11 in the preparation and review of this Agreement.
12
13
3.15 Convevance of Property. Owner shall have conveyed
14 the property to Retailer and Retailer shall have accepted the
15 Property.
16
17 The parties acknowledge that certain of the Conditions to
18 Effectiveness set forth above involve discretionary approvals on the
19 part of the City. Nothing in this Agreement requires or otherwise
20 binds the City to take any particular actions relative to any of the
21 items set forth above.
In no event shall any exercise of city's
22 discretion to approve or disapprove any of the discretionary items
23 which are a Condition to the Effectiveness of this Agreement be
24 deemed to be a default or an act in bad faith by the city.
25
26
In the event that all of the Conditions to Effectiveness
27 are not satisfied within six (6) months after the date of this
28
S\A013412Z.NAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-14-
~G.-~6
1 Agreement or in the event that the city shall deny any of the
2 requested discretionary approvals this Agreement shall be of no
3 force and effect and no Party to this Agreement shall have any
4 rights or remedies relative to any other Party.
5
6
ARTI:CLB ...
7
DESCRI:PTI:ON OF PROPERTY
8
9
The Property subject to this Agreement consists of
10 approximately 15.5 gross acres of real property generally located
11 approximately 1-1/2 miles east of 1-805, approximately 1 mile west
12 of otay Lakes Road. The property is bounded on the north by Rice
13 Canyon and on the south by East H street.
The Property is more
14 particularly described in Exhibits No. 1 and 2.
15
16
ARTI:CLE 5.
17
OBLI:GATI:ONS OF THE PARTI:ES
18
19
5.1 Obliaations of Retailer. Retailer hereby agrees to
20 perform the following:
21
22 A. construction and Operation of a New Price Club
23 on the Propertv. Retailer hereby currently intends to construct and
24 open for business a minimum 110,000 square foot facility (the "New
25 Facility") on the Property. It is intended that the New Facility
26 will commence operation as a Price Club membership warehouse on or
27 before the date which is 18 months after close of the escrow
28
S\A013412Z. HAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-15-
J.,/ C ..<2. 7
1 conveying the Property from Owner to Retailer.
It is Retailer I s
2 current intent to operate one hundred percent (100%) of the floor
3 area of the New Facility as a Price Club membership warehouse in
4 substantially the same manner as it operates a majority of its other
5 Price Club membership warehouses in the western united states for
6 a minimum of ten (10) years; provided, however, that Retailer does
7 not covenant, under this Agreement, to operate the New Facility for
8 any period of time.
9
10
B.
Loan bv Retailer to city.
In order to assist
11 the city pay for the cost of the specified Public Improvements, the
12 Retailer shall loan the City the sum of ONE MILLION EIGHT HUNDRED
13 NINETY-TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($1,892,000) (the "Loan") through escrow
14 at the time escrow closes under the Purchase Agreement.
In the
15 event escrow does not close under the Purchase Agreement for any
16 reason whatsoever including, but not limited to the default of
17 either the Owner or the Retailer under the Purchase Agreement, then
18 the Retailer shall be under no obligation to make the Loan to the
19 City and this Agreement shall be deemed terminated.
20
21
C.
Repavment of Loan. The Loan shall be repaid by
22 the City to the Retailer in ten (10) consecutive annual principal
23 installments of ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY-NINE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS
24 ($189,200), together with interest accrued on the outstanding
25 principal balance at the Prime Interest Rate.
The Loan shall be
26 evidenced by the City's promissory note (the "Note") in the form
27 attached hereto as Exhibit No.3. The Prime Interest Rate shall be
28
S\A013412Z.NAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-16-
J./C,'c2 8
1 adjusted annually on each anniversary of the date of the Note and
2 the City shall have the right to prepay the Note in whole or in part
3 without penalty all as provided in the Note.
4
5
D.
Termination of Loan ReDavment Obliaations -
6 Failure to ODen Price Club. The City's obligation to repay the Note
7 is conditioned upon the New Facility being constructed on the
8 Property with a minimum gross floor area of 110,000 square feet and
9 open for business within eighteen (18) months after the Retailer
10 acquires fee title to the Property, which eighteen (18) month period
11 shall be extended for delays due to Force Majeure. In the event the
12. New Facility does not open for business until after the first
13 Anniversary of the date of the Note, the payment of the first annual
14 installment payment under the Note may be deferred by the City until
15 the date of such opening for business; provided, however, that
16 interest on such note shall continue to accrue during such deferral
17 period.
18
19
E.
Termination of Loan ReDavment Obliaation
20 Closina of New Facilitv. In the event the New Facility opens for
21 business and is thereafter "Permanently Closed" as defined in
22 section 5.1(G) (1) below prior to the tenth (lOth) anniversary of the
23 date of the Note then as of the "Note Termination Date" as defined
24 in section 5.1(G) (2), the unpaid principal balance of the Note shall
25 be deemed forgiven by the Retailer; provided, however, the city will
26 remain liable for the principal amount of the Note and accrued
27 interest pro-rated to the Note Termination Date. Thus the portion
28
S\A013412Z. HAL
121592 - EGB-4783S
-17-
.21'-~9
1 of the principal amount of the Note deemed forgiven shall be a
2 fraction of the numerator of which is the number of days from the
3 Note Termination Date to and including the tenth (loth) anniversary
4 of the date of the Note and the denominator of which is the number
5 of days from the date of the Note to and including the tenth (loth)
6 anniversary of the date of the Note.
7
8
F.
Termination of Loan Reoavment Obliaation
9 Closina of Existina Facilitv.
10
11
1.
In the event the Existing Facility is
12
"Permanently Closed," as defined in Section 5.1(G)(1) below,
13
during the eight (8) year period beginning on the Effective
14
Date of this Agreement, then as of the Note Termination Date
15
as defined in Section 5.1(G) (2) below the unpaid principal
16 balance of the Note shall be deemed forgiven by the Retailer;
17 provided, however, the city will remain liable for the prin-
18 cipal amount of the Note and accrued interest pro-rated to the
19
Note Termination Date.
Thus, the portion of the principal
20 amount of the Note deemed forgiven shall be a fraction of the
21 numerator of which is the number of days from the Note Termina-
22 tion Date to and inclUding the eighth (8th) anniversary of the
23 Effective Date of this Agreement and the denominator of which
24 is the number of days from the Effective Date of this Agreement
25 to and including the eighth (8th) anniversary of the Effective
26
Date of this Agreement.
Notwithstanding the aforementioned,
27
in the event that "Retail Sales" as defined in paragraph 3
28
S\A013412Z . MAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-18-
.2/t:.---.3 0
1 below in the Existing Facility for any fiscal year of twelve
2 (12) consecutive calendar months is less than SIXTY MILLION
3 DOLLARS ($60,000,000) and at any time thereafter the Existing
4 Facility is Permanently Closed, the Note shall not be deemed
5 forgiven and the City shall continue to repay the full amount
6
of the Note.
In computing the amount of Retail Sales there
7 shall be added to the amount of actual Retail Sales, an amount
8 equal to the average daily amount of actual Retail Sales for
9 each day the Price Club is opened during such twelve (12) con-
10 secutive month period multiplied by the number of days during
11 such twelve (12) month period the Existing Facility is closed
12 for business (excluding holidays and other days that a majority
13 of Price Clubs in California are not open for business).
14
15
2.
In the event that Retail Sales is less than
16 SIXTY MILLION DOLLARS ($60,000,000) for any twelve (12) con-
17 secutive month period as provided in Paragraph 1 above, the
18 Retailer shall give the City written notice of the actual
19
amount of Retail Sales (the "Retail Sales Notice") within
20 ninety (90) days after the end of such twelve (12) month
21 period. The city shall have the right to audit the books and
22 records of the Existing Facility at any time within six (6)
23 months after the City receives the Retail Sales Notice to
24 verify the amount of Retail Sales.
25
26
27
28
S\A013412Z.NAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-19-
J./ e.., 31 /
1
3.
The term Retail
Sales as used
in
2
paragraph 1 above shall mean sales for which california Sales
3
Tax are paid pursuant to the california Revenue and Tax Code.
4
5
G.
Reimbursement for Costs of scecified Street
6 Imcrovements. Retailer shall reimburse the City the sum of EIGHT
7 HUNDRED THIRTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($835,000) for Specified Street
8 Improvements only in the event that the Existing Facility is Perma-
9 nently Closed as defined in section 5.1(G) (1) within eight (8) years
10 after the Effective Date of this Agreement unless the Retail Sales
11 in the Existing Facility for any fiscal year of twelve (12) con-
12 secutive calendar months is less than SIXTY MILLION DOLLARS
13 ($60,000,000) prior to the date the Existing Facility is Permanently
14 Closed. The amount of Retail Sales shall be computed pursuant to
15 the provisions of Section 5.1(E) (3).
16
17
H.
Definitions and Terms.
18
19
1.
The New Facility (after it first opens for
20 business) or the Existing Facility, as the case may be, shall
21 be deemed "Permanently Closed" for purposes of this Section 5.1
22 if the Price Club on such facility is closed for business or
23 ceases to operate in SUbstantially the same manner as a major-
24 ity of other Price Clubs in the state of california for a
25 period (the "Closure calculation period) for three (3) consec-
26 utive months (excluding holidays or other days when a majority
27 of Price Clubs in California are closed) unless such closure
28
S\A013412Z,NAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-20-
~/" Jt2
1 or change in manner of operation is (i) of a temporary nature
2 due to repairs, alterations, construction or similar reason or
3 (ii) is temporary or permanent in nature due to Force Majeure.
4 A change in the Price Club name in and of itself shall not be
5 deemed to be a change in the manner of operation for purposes
6 of this paragraph 1.
7
8
2.
The "Note Termination Date" shall mean the
9 first day of the Closure calculation Period that the New
10 Facility or Existing Facility as the case may be is permanently
11 Closed.
12
13
3.
The time periods provided for in this
14
section 5.1 shall be deemed extended where delays are due to
15 war, insurrection, strikes, lockouts, riots, floods, earth-
16 quakes, fires, casualties, acts of God, acts of the public
17
enemy, epidemics, quarantine restrictions, freight embargoes,
18
litigation, unusually severe weather, inability to secure
19 necessary labor, materials or tools, delays of any contractor,
20 subcontractors or supplier, acts of the other party, acts or
21 the failure to act of the city of any other public or govern-
22 mental agency or entity or any other causes beyond the control
23 or without the fault of the Retailer (referred to herein as
24
"Force Majeure").
An extension of time for any such cause
25 shall be for the period of the enforced delay and shall com-
26 mence to run from the time of the commencement of the cause.
27
28
S\A013412Z. NAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-21-
JlC-33
1
1.
DIF Fees.
As a condition to obtaining a
2 building permit for the New Facility, the Retailer must pay the City
3 the transportation development impact fee (the "DIF") in the amount
4 of ONE HUNDRED NINETY-TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($192,000).
5
6
J.
EmDlovment Outreach and Trainina. For a period
7 of ten (10) years after the date of the Note, Retailer in the opera-
8 tion of the New Facility shall provide a proactive approach to
9 recruiting, training and/or hiring employees from the local com-
10 munity. In this regard, Retailer shall work with local education
11 and training providers inclUding but not limited to Sweetwater Union
12 District High School Adult Program and Southwestern college with a
13 goal of providing employment opportunities to Chula vista residents.
14. The parties hereby agree and acknowledge that in the event of a
15 default by Retailer of the obligations of this Paragraph 5.1(1),
16 ci ty' s sole remedy shall be specific performance to enforce the
17 provisions of this Paragraph J.
18
19
K.
UDarade of Existina Facilitv. Retailer intends
20 to upgrade the Existing Facility in the manner and within the time
21 set forth in the "List of Required Improvements" attached hereto and
22 incorporated herein by this reference as Exhibit No.6. The minimum
23 level of Required Improvements will be cosmetic improvements to the
24 exterior of the Existing Facility.
25
26
5.2 Obliaations of city. City hereby agrees to perform
27 the following:
28
5\A013412Z. HAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-22-
jJC-3t!
1
A.
Acauisition of certain street and Public
2 Imorovements. Provided city receives the ONE MILLION EIGHT HUNDRED
3 NINETY-TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($1,892,000) Loan from Retailer, City
4 shall acquire from Owner: (i) certain public improvements (the
5 "Specified Public Improvements") located on or servicing the
6 Property and more particularly described in the "List of Specified
7 Public Improvements" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
8 reference as Exhibit No.7, and (ii) certain street improvements
9 (the "Specified Street Improvements") as set forth in the "List of
10 Specified Street Improvements" attached hereto and incorporated
11 herein as Exhibit No.8.
12
13 The "Purchase Price for the specified Public Improvements"
14 shall be ONE MILLION EIGHT HUNDRED NINETY-TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS
15 ($1,892,000). The "Purchase Price for the Specified Street Improve-
16 ments" shall be EIGHT HUNDRED THIRTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS
17 ($835,000).
18
19 Owner and city shall mutually agree upon a method of
20 disbursement of the amounts described above, provided that such
21 disbursements shall be made to Owner or Owner's contractors as the
22 Specified Public Improvements and Specified Street Improvements are
23 constructed and generally in accordance with the Disbursement
24 Schedule for the Purchase Price for the Specified Public Improve-
25 ments attached hereto as Exhibit No. 9 and incorporated herein by
26 this reference and the Disbursement Schedule for payment of the
27
28
S\A013412Z.NAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-23-
.2/C- 4..5
1 Purchase Price for the Specified Street Improvements attached hereto
2 as Exhibit No. 10 and incorporated herein by this reference.
3
4 In the event that subsequent to the close of escrow under
5 the Purchase Agreement and receipt by City of the loan from Retailer
6 and prior to (i) payment of the full amount of the Purchase Price
7 for the Specified Public Improvements; (ii) payment of the full
8 amount of the Purchase Price for the Specified Street Improvements;
9 and (iii) the completion and commencement of operation of the New
10 Facility, Retailer defaults or otherwise determines to not construct
11 and/or open the New Facility, City shall:
12
13
(a) Continue to disburse to Owner or its Contractors
14 the Purchase Price for the Specified Public Improvements in
15 accordance with the Applicable Disbursement Schedule; and
16
17
(b) Cease to disburse any funds which have not been
18 previously disbursed as the Purchase Price for the Specified Street
19 Improvements.
20
21 In such event, Owner shall repay City within ninety (90)
22 days of the determination that the New Facility will not be com-
23 pleted or commence operation as required herein, any portion of the
24 Purchase Price for the specified Street Improvements which has been
25 previously disbursed to Owner or Owner's contractors.
26
27
28
S\A013412Z.NAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-24-
.l./ C --.3'
1
5.3 Obliaations of Owner. Owner hereby agrees to perform
2 the following:
3
4
A.
construction of the Public
Imorovements.
5 Provided that City receives the ONE MILLION EIGHT HUNDRED NINETY-
6 TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($1,892,000) loan from Retailer, Owner shall
7 construct the Specified Public Improvements, the specified Street
8 Improvements and any and all other public improvements required by
9 the Purchase Agreement or city as a condition to Development of the
10 Property.
11
12
5.4 General Obliaations.
13
14
A.
Anti-Discrimination Durina Construction. Owner
15 and Retailer for themselves, and their successors and assigns agree
16 that in the construction of the improvements on the Property and of
17 the related off-site public improvements provided for in this Agree-
18 ment, Owner and Retailer will not discriminate against any employee
19 or applicant for employment because of sex, marital status, race,
20 color, religion, creed, national origin or ancestry.
21
22
B.
Comoliance with Aoolicable Laws.
The Owner,
23 Retailer and their respective successors and assigns shall carry out
24 the construction of the improvements on the Property and of the
25 related off-site public improvements in conformity with all
26 applicable laws.
27
28
S\A013412Z. NAL
121592 - EGB-4783S
-25-
~/C-.J7
1
c.
Insurance.
Owner and Retailer and their
2 respective successors and assigns shall name city as additional
3 insured for all insurance policies obtained by Owner or Retailer for
4 this Project as pertains to their respective activities and opera-
5 tion of the Project. Provided, however, that Retailer as a self-
6 insured entity and any other party which may be self-insured, hereby
7 agrees to hold city harmless and to defend and indemnify city
8 against and for any liability arising from their respective
9 activities on the Property except if such liability arises from the
10 act or omission of the city or any agency of the City.
11
12
D.
street Vacations. All areas of streets which
13 are to be abandoned/vacated within the Property pursuant to
14 Section 66499.20~ of the Subdivision Map Act shall revert to the
15 entity owning the Property at the time of such vacation at no cost
16 to Owner.
17
18
ARTICLE 6.
19
DEFAULT
20
21
If any Party defaults under this Agreement, the Party
22 alleging such default will give the breaching Party and all other
23 parties not less than thirty (30) days' notice of default in
24 writing.
The notice of default will specify the nature of the
25 alleged default and, where appropriate, the manner and period of
26 time in which said default may be satisfactorily cured. During any
27 period of cure, the Party charged will not be considered in default
28
S\A013412Z.NAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-26-
.2.1 ~ -.38
1 for the purposes of institution of legal proceedings.
If the
2 default is cured, then no default will exist and the noticing Party
3 will take no further action.
4
5
6.1 option to Set Matter for Hearinq or Institute
6 Reference Proceedinqs. After proper notice and the expiration of
7 the cure period, the noticing Party to this Agreement may institute
8 reference proceedings pursuant to Section 7.4.
9
Except as otherwise expressly provided in
10
6.2 Waiver.
11 this Agreement, any failure or delay by a Party in asserting any of
12 its rights or remedies shall not deprive such Party of its right to
13. institute and maintain any actions or proceedings which it may deem
14 necessary to protect, assert or enforce any such rights or remedies.
15
16
6.3 Remedies Upon Default. Except as expressly provided
17 otherwise herein, in the event of a default by any Party to this
18 Agreement, the Parties shall have the remedies of damages or
19 specific performance, mandamus, injunction and other equitable
20 remedies.
21
22
6.4 No Cross Defaults. Except as expressly provided in
23 section 6.5 or elsewhere herein, the default of one party to this
24 Agreement shall not impair the rights or obligations of any other
25 party. Notwithstanding the provisions of this section 6.4, Retailer
26 shall comply with all legal conditions precedent to the issuance of
27 building permits and occupancy permits for the New Facility.
28
S\A013412Z. HAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-27-
~c,j9
1
6.5 city's Riaht to Reoavment of the Purchase Price for
2 the Soecified street Imorovements. City shall be entitled to mone-
3 tary damages from Owner to reimburse one hundred percent (100%) of
4 the Purchase Price for the Specified street Improvements if
5 (i) Owner defaults on the Owner's obligations pursuant to this
6 Agreement; (ii) Owner defaults on the Owner's obligations to
7 Retailer pursuant to the Purchase Agreement which default results
8 in the inability of the Retailer to comply with the Retailer obliga-
9 tions as set forth in this Agreement; and (iii) Retailer fails to
10 complete construction and commence operation of the New Facility
11 within eighteen (18) months of the conveyance of the Property to
12 Retailer.
Owner's monetary liability pursuant to this paragraph
13 shall be limited to repayment of 100% of the Purchase Price for the
14 Specified Street Improvements and the costs of litigation and attor-
15 neys' fees. Unless otherwise provided herein, Owner shall make full
16 payment to City of any sums required by this Section 6.5 within
17 ninety (90) days of the date on which the New Facility is obligated
18 to open.
Upon the timely commencement of operation of the New
19 Facility on the Property, City'S right pursuant to this paragraph
20 to reimbursement from Owner of the Purchase Price for the specified
21 Street Improvements shall terminate.
22
23
24
25
26
27 dispute
28
ARTICLE 7.
GENERAL PROVISIONS
7.1 Attornevs' Fees.
In the event of any conflict or
concerning the enforcement or interpretation of any of the
S\A013412Z.NAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-28-
.v~-'t()
1 terms or provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party or par-
2 ties shall be entitled to receive from the non-prevailing party or
3 parties any and all reasonable costs and expenses incurred there-
4 with, including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys' fees.
5 Any actions which may be filed in the event of any such conflict or
6 dispute shall be filed in the superior Court of the state of
7 california, county of San Diego or in the united states District
8 Court, Southern District of California.
9
10
7.2 Notices.
All notices or other communications
11 required or permitted hereunder shall be addressed as follows and
12 be in writing and shall be personally delivered, sent by overnight
13 mail (Federal Express, Express Mail or the like) or sent by regis-
14 tered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested.
15
16
If to City:
city of Chula vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, California 91910
Attention: city Manager
17
18
19
with a copy to:
city of Chula vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula vista, California 91910
Attention: Bruce Boogaard, Esquire
City Attorney
20
21
22
with a copy to:
Sheppard, MUllin, Richter & Hampton
4695 MacArthur Court, 7th Floor
Newport Beach, California 92660
Attention: Marcia Scully, Esquire
23
24
25
If to Retailer:
The Price Company
4241 Jutland
San Diego, California 92117
Attention: Mr. Don Howells
26
27
28
S\A013412Z.HAL
121592 - EGB-4783S
-29-
~/c-.fl
1
with a copy to:
Joseph R. Satz
vice President-Counsel
The Price company
4649 Morena Boulevard
P. o. Box 85466
San Diego, california 92138
2
3
4
5
If to Owner:
Rancho del Rey partnership
2727 Hoover Avenue
National City, California 92050
Attention: Mr. Ken Baumgartner
6
7
with a copy to:
Home Capital Corporation
707 Broadway, suite 1017
San Diego, California 92101
Attention: President
8
9
10
11 Such written notices may be sent in the same manner to
12 such other persons and addresses as either Party may from time to
13 time designate by mail.
14
15
7.3 Joint and Several Liabilitv. If any Party consists
16 of more than one legal person, their obligations are joint and
17 several.
18
19
7.4 Reference.
Each controversy, dispute or claim
20 between the Parties arising out of or relating to this Agreement,
21 which controversy, dispute or claim is not settled in writing within
22 thirty (30) days after the "Claim Date" (as hereinafter defined),
23 will. be settled by a reference proceeding in San Diego County,
24 California in accordance with the provisions of Section 638 et seq.
25 of the California Code of civil Procedure, or their successor
26 sections ("CCP"), which shall constitute the exclusive remedy for
27 the settlement of any controversy, dispute or claim concerning this
28
S\A013412Z. HAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-30-
.1.IC-Ifd-
1 Agreement, including whether such controversy, dispute or claim is
2 subject to the reference proceeding and the Parties waive their
3 rights to initiate any legal proceedings against each other in any
4 court or jurisdiction other than the Superior Court of San Diego
5 county (the "court"). The referee ("Referee") shall be a retired
6 Judge of the Court selected by mutual agreement of the parties, and
7 if they cannot so agree within forty-five (45) days after the Claim
8 Date, the Referee shall be promptly selected by the Presiding Judge
9 of the San Diego County Superior Court (or his representative). The
10 date on which the Referee is selected is herein called the
11 "Selection Date."
The Referee shall be appointed to sit as a
12 temporary judge, with all of the powers of a temporary judge, as
13 authorized by law, and upon selection should take and subscribe to
14 the oath of office as provided for in Rule 244 of the California
15 Rules of Court (or any subsequently enacted Rule).
The Referee
16 shall set the matter for hearing within sixty (60) days after the
17 Selection Date, and try any and all issues of law or fact and report
18 a statement of decision upon them, if possible, within ninety (90)
19 days of the Selection Date. Any decision rendered by the reference
20 will be final, binding and conclusive and judgment shall be entered
21 pursuant to CCP 644 in any court in the State of California having
22 jurisdiction. Any party may apply for a reference at any time after
23 thirty (30) days following the date (the "Claim Date") one Party
24 notifies the other Parties of a controversy, dispute or claim; by
25 filing a petition for a hearing and/or trial.
All discovery
26 permitted by this Agreement (as more particularly provided below),
27 shall be completed no later than fifteen (15) days before the first
28
S\A013412Z.NAL
121592 - EGB-4783S
-31-
.2Jc-Jfg
1 hearing date established by the Referee.
The Referee may extend
2 such period in the event of a Party's refusal to provide requested
3 discovery for any reason whatsoever, including, without limitation,
4 legal objections raised to such discovery or unavailability of a
5 witness due to absence or illness. No Party shall be entitled to
6 "priority" in conducting discovery. Depositions of a Party or its
7 affiliates may be taken by the other Party upon seven (7) days
8 written notice, and, requests for production or inspection of docu-
9 ments on a Party or its affiliates shall be responded to within ten
10 (10) days after service. All disputes relating to discovery which
11 cannot be resolved by the Parties shall be submitted to the Referee
12 whose decision shall be final and binding upon the Parties.
13
14
Except as expressly set forth in this Agreement, the
15 Referee shall determine the manner in which the reference pro-
16 ceeding is conducted including the time and place of all hearings,
17 the order or presentation of evidence, and all other questions that
18 arise with respect to the course of the reference proceeding. All
19 proceedings and hearings conducted before the Referee, except for
20 trial, shall be conducted without a court reporter, except that when
21 any Party so requests, a court reporter will be used at any hearing
22 conducted before the Referee. The Party making such a request shall
23 have the obligation to arrange for and pay for the court reporter.
24 The costs of the court reporter at the trial shall be borne equally
25 by the Parties.
26
27
28
S\A013412Z.NAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-32-
.2/ C-lJ'f
1 The Referee shall be required to determine all issues in
2 accordance with existing case law and the statutory laws of the
3 state of California.
The rules of evidence applicable to
4 proceedings at law in the state of California will be applicable to
5 the reference proceeding. The Referee shall be empowered to enter
6 equitable as well as legal relief, to provide all temporary and/or
7 provisional remedies and to enter equitable orders that will be
8 binding upon the parties. The Referee shall issue a single judgment
9 at the close of the reference proceeding which shall dispose of all
10 of the claims of the Parties that are the subject of the reference.
11 The Parties hereto expressly reserve the right to findings of fact,
12 conclusions of law, and a written statement of decision.
13
14
7. 5 Arbitration of DisDutes.
IN THE EVENT THAT THE
15 ENABLING LEGISLATION WHICH PROVIDES FOR APPOINTMENT OF A REFEREE IS
16 REPEALED (AND NO SUCCESSOR STATUTE IS ENACTED), ANY DISPUTE BETWEEN
17 THE PARTIES THAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE DETERMINED BY THE REFERENCED
18 PROCEDURE HEREIN DESCRIBED WILL BE RESOLVED AND DETERMINED BY ARBI-
19 TRATION. THE ARBITRATION WILL BE CONDUCTED BY A RETIRED JUDGE OF
20 THE COURT, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ARBITRATION ACT,
21 SECTIONS 1280 AND 1294.2 OF THE CCP AS AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME;
22 PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT NOTWITHSTANDING ANY PROVISION TO THE CON-
23 TRARY REGARDING DISCOVERY SET FORTH IN THE CALIFORNIA ARBITRATION
24 ACT, THE RIGHTS AND LIMITATIONS WITH RESPECT TO DISCOVERY AS SET
25 FORTH HEREINABOVE SHALL APPLY TO ANY SUCH ARBITRATION PROCEEDING.
26
27
28
S\A013412Z.NAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-33-
.lIC- '15
1
"NOTICE:
BY INITIALLING IN THE SPACE BELOW YOU ARE
2 AGREEING TO HAVE ANY DISPUTE ARISING OUT OF THE MATTERS
3 INCLUDED IN THE 'ARBITRATION OF DISPUTES' PROVISION
4 DECIDED BY NEUTRAL ARBITRATION AS PROVIDED BY CALIFORNIA
5 LAW AND YOU ARE GIVING UP ANY RIGHTS YOU MIGHT POSSESS TO
6 HAVE THE DISPUTE LITIGATED IN A COURT OR JURY TRIAL. BY
7 INITIALLING IN THE SPACE BELOW YOU ARE GIVING UP YOUR
8 JUDICIAL RIGHTS TO DISCOVERY AND APPEAL, UNLESS THOSE
9 RIGHTS ARE SPECIFICALLY INCLUDED IN THE 'ARBITRATION OF
10
DISPUTES' PROVISION.
IF YOU REFUSE TO SUBMIT TO ARBI-
11 TRATION AFTER AGREEING TO THIS PROVISION, YOU MAY BE COM-
12 PELLED TO ARBITRATE UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE CALIFORNIA
13 CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. YOUR AGREEMENT TO THIS ARBITRA-
14 TION PROVISION IS VOLUNTARY." "WE HAVE READ AND UNDER-
15 STAND THE FOREGOING AND AGREE TO SUBMIT DISPUTES ARISING
16 OUT OF THE MATTERS INCLUDED IN THE 'ARBITRATION OF
17 DISPUTES' PROVISION TO NEUTRAL ARBITRATION."
18
19
CITY
OWNER
RETAILER
20
21
7.6 Aoo1icable Law. This Agreement will be construed and
22 enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California.
23
24
7.7 Amendment.
No modification, waiver, amendment,
25 discharge, or change of this Agreement shall be valid unless the
26 same is in writing and signed by the party against which the
27 enforcement of such modification, waiver, amendment, discharge, or
28
S\A013412Z.NAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-34-
~/c.' 1/6
1 change is or may be sought. Notwithstanding the foregoing, modi fica-
2 tions, waivers, amendments, discharges, or changes of this Agreement
3 sought to be enforced against the City and which do not rise above
4 the level of minor technical changes, corrections, extensions of
5 time not to exceed a cumulative total of 180 days, or clarifications
6 which do not sUbstantively change the terms of this Agreement, may
7 be made by a writing executed by Owner, Retailer and the City
8 Manager, or his designee, upon approval of the city Attorney.
9
10
7.8 Relationship of Parties. It is understood that the
11 contractual relationship between city, Owner and Retailer is such
12 that each party is an independent entity and not an agent of any
13 other party.
14
15
7.9 Third Partv Litiaation. In the event that prior to
16 fulfillment of all Conditions to Effectiveness as required by
17 Article 3 herein above, any court action or proceeding is brought
18 by any person not a party to this Agreement to challenge this
19 Agreement, or any portion thereof, and without regard to whether or
20 not the Retailer or Owner are a party to said action or proceeding,
21 any party shall have the right to terminate this Agreement upon
22 thirty (30) days notice in writing to the other Parties given at any
23 time during the pendency of such action or proceeding prior to the
24 conveyance of the Property to Retailer.
25
26
If the Agreement is not terminated, Owner, Retailer and
27 city shall mutually defend, and equally share all expenses,
28
S\A013412Z.NAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-35-
.lIC~'17
1 Approved as to form:
2
3 Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
4
5
Marcia Scully
6 special Counsel to City
7 Approved as to content:
8
9 Chris Salomone
Executive Director
10 Community Development Department
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
S\A013412Z. HAL
121592 - EGB-47835
"RETAILER"
THE PRICE COMPANY, a California
corporation
By
Its:
By
Its:
-38-
02/ C - 1'?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
S\A0134122. HAL
121592 - EGB-47835
"OWNER"
RANCHO DEL REY PARTNERSHIP, a
California general partnership
By McMillin Financial, Inc., a
California corporation
General Partner
By
Its:
By
Its:
By Resolution Trust Corporation, as
Receiver/Conservator [strike one]
for:
Home Capital Corporation, a
California corporation,
General Partner
By
Its
By
Its
-39-
;; Ie -1(~
1 including attorneys' fees, to defend City from any claim, action or
2 proceeding against the City, its agents, officers, or employees to
3 attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Agreement or
4 the approval of any permit or entitlement granted concurrent with
5 or pursuant to this Agreement. The city shall promptly notify Owner
6 and Retailer of any such claim, action or proceeding. The parties
7 shall mutually agree upon selection of counsel to defend such claim,
8 action or proceeding.
9
10
7.10 No Third Partv Beneficiarv. The terms and provisions
11 herein contained shall be only for the benefit of the Parties and
12 their respective heirs, successors and assigns, and such terms and
13 provisions shall not inure to the benefit of any other party whoso-
14 ever, it being the intention of the Parties hereto that no one shall
15 be deemed to be a third party beneficiary of this Agreement.
16
17
7.11 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence with respect
18 to every provision hereof.
19
20
7.12 No Reoresentations or Warranties. No party hereto
21 makes any representations or warranties except as expressly set
22 forth in this Agreement.
23
24
7.13 Intearation.
This Agreement and the exhibits
25 atta.ched hereto shall constitute the entire Agreement between the
26 parties and supersede any and all prior written or oral agreements,
27 representations, and warranties between and among the parties and
28
S\A013412Z. NAL
121592 - EGB-47835
-36-
,;.IC' II!
1 their agents, all of which are merged into or revoked by this
2 Agreement, with respect to its subject matter.
3
4
7.14 severabilitv.
In the event any term, covenant,
5 condition, provision, or agreement contained herein is held to be
6 invalid, void, or otherwise unenforceable, by any court of competent
7 jurisdiction, such holding shall in no way affect the validity or
8 enforceability of any other term, covenant, condition, provision,
9 or agreement contained herein unless their enforcement under the
10 circumstances would be unreasonable, inequitable or otherwise
11 frustrate the purposes of this Agreement.
12
13
7.15 caDtions.
Article and section titles or captions
14 contained herein are inserted as a matter of convenience and for the
15 reference, and in no way define, limit, extend, or describe the
16 scope of this Agreement or any provision hereof. All reference to
17 section numbers herein shall mean the sections of this Agreement.
18
19
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this
20 Agreement on the date first above written.
21
22
"CITY"
23
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a municipal
corporation
24
25
By
26
27
28
S\A013412Z.NAL
121592 - EGB-47835
.lIC- tl9
-37-
RDR BUSINESS CENTER, LTD., a
California limited partnership
By McMillin Commercial Industrial
Development, Inc., a California
corporation, a General Partner
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
S\A013412Z . HAL
121592 - EGB-47835
By
Its
By
Its
By McMillin Communities, Inc., a
California corporation, a General
Partner
By
Its
By
Its
By McMillin Development, Inc., a
California corporation, a General
Partner
-40-
By
Its
By
Its
c2 Ie - L/j
10
11
1
EXHIBIT NO. 1
2
THE EXISTING PROPERTY MAP
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
S\A013412Z.NAL
121592 - EGB-41835
EXHIBIT NO. 1 -- Page 1
c1 ) C -5Z7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
S\A013412Z. HAL
121592 - EGB-4783S
EXHIBIT NO. 2
THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY
EXHIBIT NO. 2 -- Page 1
c1/C-S-/
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
S\A013412Z.NAL
121592 - EGB-47835
EXHIBIT NO. 3
CITY PROMISSORY NOTE
EXHIBIT NO. 3 -- Page 1
. ,/'
d/c-~~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
S\A013412Z.NAL
121592 - EGB-47835
EXHIBIT NO. 4
PROPOSED PROPERTY MAP
EXHIBIT NO. 4 -- Page 1
02/C -~)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
S\A013412Z. NAL
121592 - EGB-47835
EXHIBIT NO. 5
CITY'S ESTOPPEL CERTIFICATE
EXHIBIT NO. 5 -- Page 1
~/c-sY
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
S\A013412Z.NAL
121592 - EGB-47835
EXHIBIT NO. 6
LIST OF REOUIRED IMPROVEMENTS TO THE
EXISTING FACILITY
EXHIBIT NO. 6 -- Page 1
,2!C -.5.5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
S\A013412Z. HAL
121592 - EGB-47835
EXHIBIT NO. 7
LIST OF SPECIFIED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
EXHIBIT NO. 7 -- Page 1
d / C - 3~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
S\A013412Z. NAL
121592 - EGB-4783S
EXHIBIT NO. 8
LIST OF SPECIFIED STREET IMPROVEMENTS
EXHIBIT NO. 8 -- Page 1
dIe -5')
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1 EXHIBIT NO. 9
2 DISBURSEMENT SCHEDULE FOR PAYMENT OF
THE PURCHASE PRICE FOR THE SPECIFIED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
S\A013412Z.NAL
121592 - EGB-47835
.),/C~ -3SV'
EXHIBIT NO. 9 -- Page 1
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1 EXHIBIT NO. 10
2 DISBURSEMENT SCHEDULE FOR PAYMENT OF
THE PURCHASE PRICE FOR THE SPECIFIED STREET IMPROVEMENTS
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
S\A013412Z.NAL
121592 - EGB-47835
02/C-3/
EXHIBIT NO. 10 -- Page 1
Item No. 22b
Meeting Date 12/15/92
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
John D. Goss, City Manager ~
Report: Status of the Hiring of the Human Services Coordinator in
the Parks and Recreation Department
At the Council meeting of December 8, 1992, the Council requested information
regarding the status of the hiring process for the Human Services Coordinator
position. This position has been vacant since May of 1992. Since the position
became vacant staff has taken this opportunity to reevaluate the duties of the
position to ensure that they will provide the best possible level of service to
our community. Staff had some serious concerns over the work product and
priorities of the previous incumbent and purposely took their time in
reevaluating the position and working with Personnel to ensure that we would be
recru it i ng the type of person who wou I d be ab I e to meet the new pos i t ion
requirements.
As a prudent management step, staff has been evaluating all vacant positions
prior to filling them in order to confirm their continued need, the main concern
being that the most optimum staffing must be continued yet we must allow for the
possibility of downsizing without having to layoff any employees should next
year's revenue picture warrant it. In other words, we do not want to fi 11 a
position where there is a major likelihood that an employee will be laid off in
3-6 months because of reduced State revenues. Obv ious ly, we will adv i se the
Council of any recommended changes to the City's staffing patterns.
While we were evaluating this position we became aware of a former employee who
we thought was interested in volunteering for this position. Parks and
Recreation staff have talked to this person and it now appears that he/she is not
interested in this particular position.
The revised position duties include providing information and referral services
in the areas of housing, employment, legal and social services. The position
will also include acting as the City liaison to the Human Services Council and
advising the Parks and Recreation Department of social services legislation that
will impact the community.
As part of the budget funding for FY 92/93, Community Development Block Grant
funds were set aside in the amount of $15,000, to supplement the General Fund
monies for the position.
Regarding minor delays in filling some City positions, this is in part because
of a backlog of vacant positions to be filled after the hiring freeze was lifted.
01.;(16-1
I,
This placed a little extra workload on Personnel and the operating departments
in filling these jobs.
Current Status: The Department, in conjunction with the Personnel Department,
has recruited for the position and now has an eligibility list from which
finalist candidates for the position can be interviewed. The CDBG funds
($15,000) will cover the positions staffing expenses for 5 months of FY 92/93;
General Fund monies will not be utilized. It is staff's intent to proceed with
interviews and be able to hire a Human Services Coordinator by January or early
February, 1993.
Fiscal Impact: For FY 92/93, $15,000 is appropriated and available to fund the
position. For FY 93/94, staff will be re-evaluating obtainable alternatives to
the General Fund and will return to Council with recommendations for the funding
of this position for future years.
JDG:mab
01~ 6-2
/
7
.
~
~
Minutes
October 6, 1992
'hge 9
Mayor Nader Jtated that he planned on wting for the raoIution but did DOt feel dlat concIition was
~.
D1>CnI1mON 16834 0fllI!RllD BY <XXJNCILWOMAN HORTON, readiD& oldie Ial_ ...met.
Mr. Lee ukecI if die motion included the modified conclitions presented to Council.
Councilwoman Horton responded that the motion did include the moclifiecl conditions.
---
WI'E ON MOltON: _u...cl ~1 wiIh Malcolm .-...
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
. Jay I. Hilton, 10595 Jamacha Boulevard, Spring Valley, CA, President of the Olay Water District
Board, stated he had forwarded a tentative agreement to Council last month and requested clirection from
Council to his Board.
City Attorney Boogaard requested that the Council take up the matter of the pencIiDg litigation in closed
_ion as an off agencla item and make the necessary findings to do 10 in order to respond to the Olay
Water District Board tomorrow.
MSC (Nader/Mooft) to find that the mattK of the ~ ~t wiIh die 0Iay Wabr Distrid: was
. mattK ofurpnc:y; die ursmcy __ after the ,.-;..r of the agenda as r.ftOnvo1 was iDfonaecI cIuring their
meedDg that Mr. Hilton Deeded a I~ for his"'-"r be....u.., to be beard as a closed ~0Il item.
A4>ru,..d ~1 wiIh Malcolm a-'"
. Carolyn F. Butler, 97 Bishop Street, Chula Vista, CA, spoke in suppon of a DiaI.A.Ride program as
the did not feel the HandyTrans program was working.
Councilwoman Honon stated she had read the repon. from staff and talked to the Chair of the Senior and
Disabled Transponation Committee and suggested that Ms. Butler talk to the commission memben before
Council took any action.
Mayor Nader stated if it was not resolved Council may want to schedule a joint meeting with the committee.
Council had been receiving clifferent information as to what the respective services provided and what
Council's options were.
City Manager Goss felt the approach was correct and staff would I\IPply Council with an informatioaal
memorandum providing background information.
BOARD AND N1UUNCIIJN REalMMENDATIONS
17. REPORT IlItAPT PERMIT STRI!AMUNING WOIUCPLAN AND DlPU!Ml!NTATION
sc::H1!I)(U .In August 1991, the Economic Development Ovnmlnion (EDC) established a ~...Ittee
to cIewIop recommendations to stre.mll.... the City's cIeve10pment review ~ in order to create a user
friencl1yenvironment for busin_ cIewIopment. The mbcommitree met for _ months IIId identified 2S
specific recommenclations which were -w",~..d by the !DC and submitted to Council on 6/9/92. Council
provided cIirection on c:enain recommendations and instructed the !DC to work with staff to bring back an
implementation program. Staff recommends Council: (1) consider the EDC's "Draft Workplan and
Implementation Schedule' pertaining to their permit atteamlining recommendations; (2) provide feedback
to the !DC; and (3) direct staff and the !DC to return with a resolution approving a final (detailed)
workplan and schedule. (Director of Community Development)
....
e23b-)
Minutes
october 6, 1992
Pqe 10
Patty Davis, Chair of S1reamline the Permit Process, Subcommittee of the Economic Oeve1opment
Cmnmiuion, stated they were avai1able for questions.
Mayor Nader stated one of his coocerns was regarding the committees/commissions and felt Council had
apt tsled interest in leavinJ the project area committees in aiStmce with the possible uception of
South_ PAC because it cwerIappecI Montpmery. In other respecls, other than the Design Review
Committee, most of the complainlll receiwd were due to processing by staff. In !Kent monthJ he had
received complimenu repnlin& the more pro business attitude by staff. He had been looking for more
emphuiJ and spedficity on where Council could merge functions, require that the City Manager designate .__-
a lead department that could resolve differences between departments, etc:. He questioned where Council
would go regarding the clup1ication of effOrlll amongst staff depanmenlll.
Ms. Davis responded that the subcommittee had looked at duplicating efforlll on beha1f of the applicant.
They wanted to move forward with those effOrlll and bring them to fruition and then look at other areas.
Councilman Moore stated he would like to see a group formed to review all the PAC's with land use
authority, not including the Planning Commission, which would include one or two commission/committee
members, one or two EDC members, staff representative, and Deputy City Manager, meeting three times
muimum and coming forth with specific !Kommendations. Often the duties and responIibilities for the
commissions/committee were vague and should be reviewed to see why they were formed and what they
were supposed to do.
\
Penny Allen, Chair, Economic Development Commission, stated it was their concern that the PAC's had been
formed as per the State regulations but over time had become far broader in their powers but if disbanded
there would be a loss of public input. The PAC's may not be the appropriate mechanism for that input as
they were no longer filling their requirements. She felt the Subcommittee could review that and bring
fOIWard recommendations in a timely manner, i.e. four months.
.
Mayor Nader stated that if the intent was to clarify what the roles of the commissions/committees were he
agreed with that. He did not see that going so far as to abolish a committee.
Ms. Allen stated they would recommend that it be abolished as a PAC but reconstituted as a committee set
by Council.
Mayor Nader felt the biggest issue in the past was the duplication among departmenlll and questioned how
that would be addressed.
Ms. Allen responded that the EDC would welcome looking at that and would come back with
implementation time lines.
Councilman Moore stated that would evolve into another review and he did not feel they needed another
review. He felt there was sufficient input from the EDC and if representatives of the PAC's were brought
in that issue could be taken care of. Otherwise, the EDC was itaelf going into apansions they shouldn't be
going into.
Mayor Nader stated he liked the recommendation as far as it Went but felt the Commission might want to
look at what might be done in the future to insure that business people wouldn't face a structure that would
catc:h them between conflicting departments or require that one department needed to make a decision
before they could begin processing with another department. He questioned whether it was their intent
regarding the ORC as to uplicit criteria the ORC should be using and perhaps time lines to be I'IUInd..~.
Ms. Davis stated they were looking at the appeal of the ORC as a high priority. The proposed plan would
speed it up by two to three weeks with intentions of movinJ it up even further in the future.
.
~
d.J bp~
~
"""
.
,.
,.
Minutes
October 6, 1992
Page 11
MIIyor Nader stated a ORe committee member bad stated that their primary objective was aesthetics and
that they bad not viewed it as their job to consider economic feuibility although it could come into
consideration. In reviewing what the functions of that committee was would they look at outlining the
possibility that aesthetics, although important, were not to be considered with complete clisreprd for
whether a project could actually be done.
MI. Oavis agreed and stated they would be evaluating their processes and m..lri'1g recomm-ndations.
...--
Mayor Nader stated the topic of administrative CUP's bad been discussed previously and Council's direction
was that there needed to be more specific direction as to which CUP's could be bandied administratively.
He questioned whether there bad been any progress on <Wining what CUP applications would fall into what
category.
MI. Oavis referred to Items 1.3 and stated that staff would be working with the advisory group and bring
forth recommendations.
Councilman Rindone requested more detail focusing in on 24A as it was a major emphasis.
Mayor Nader agreed and added 248 to the list.
Councilman Moore stated that the EDC bad done all that he, as an individual member of the Council,'
wanted them to do. It was up to the Council to take the lead as to what would be done with the land use
commissions. He did not want another group to oy what their intents were in dealing with the PAC's. It
should be removed from the EDC and turned over to the Council.
Councilwoman Horton stated the commission could come back to Council with recommendations including
new job description, title, etc.
MS ~) Council accept the _~ility of M9iewing the duties, forming ordinano:es, ere. of
all the project area committees and the MaaIgomery PI.."";", Omnnitt-_ and form a mriewiug group
nprcIing their P$p"lloibilities and roles in the future.. The I...~wing group wwld CODtain -'-I of the
!DC, each of the PAC's, one or two -hon of the Counc:il,IIIlIIIagmIeIIt and cIepartmeor heacL
Councilwoman Horton felt the PAC's may not conform to what the state guidelines were but in order to
maintain the integrity of the older parts of the community those areas still needed community input.
Mayor Nader stated he would support the motion with the understanding that the goal of what the Council
was doing was not to necesnrily abolish or strip the committees but to review their functions and determine
whether any changes should be made to better implement the Council's intent.
VOl1! ON MO'I1ON: "'I"~ ~1 wiIh IofaLonllfl -""-t
MS (Riadone/NadeI-) to accept the n!pOrt and I"v,. the f'aoocIback as ...........mira_ by Counc:il to the EDC
and stalf in preparatiaD to Rbm1 to C"-' wiIh . final detailed -'Plan ando-'-l..I.. far r_~,
~v..d.
Mayor Nader questioned whether the maker of the motion would agree that Council would be accepting the
workplan minus the two previous motions; and priortize 248 from medium to high priority.
Councilman Rindone, as the maker of the motion, agreed.
VOl1! ON MO'I1ON: ap..,vrcd ~1 with Malcolm a""-t
..
e2Jb, J
Councilman Moore stated the motion included the Design Rmew C...;.....i..ion and the Resource
CoDJerVation enm...iuion.
Minutes
October 6, 1992
Page 12
Mayor Nader stated he had DOt intended to include the DRC or RCe. He did DOt have a problem in
reviewing any COIIIJDiIIion'. tub and l'l!IpOIIIibi1ities but he felt they were each in a separate c:atqoty from
each other and the PAC..
--
MS (MooftIHartao) to baw: the Mayur .r-l>I", a 0-......1 IlIIl .....~ to nview all
..........~l( ..1"_ _ iadudecI uadeI: the &rat 'NlCiou. .___-
Councllwoman Honon stated she would nominate Councilman Rindone.
Mayor Nader clarified that the motion stated he and Councilman Rindone would work with staff and
('ftmmiuioners to review the functions of the various City commissions acluc1ing the PAC. and MonfBolDery
Planning. He did not have any objection as long as it was not apected that all twenty.five or 10
commiaaions would be reviewed at the same time. One of the lint steps taken would be to communicate
to each of the coDlllliasionsa reminder that their responsibilities were defined by ordinance which could only
be amended by Council.
SUBS'IlTtT1'E MO'I1ON: ~ to appoint ("..........1...... Moore to _ with the Mayur OD the
Subc:-uni..-- Aw>"fIod ~1 with Malcolm abaenL
ACI10N ITEMS
18. RESOUn1ON lAA<lS AMENDlNGlHEI!NVIllONMENrALRlMEWPROCEDUlUlSOPlHEC1Y
OP 0iUlA VISTA TO PERMlTlHE C1Y axJNaL TO BSTABUSH lHE PUBUC RlMEWPERlOD AND TO
CONDUCT, AT 1HEI1l OP'llON, PUBUC HEARINGS ON DRAPT EIRS . At the Joint Meeting of the Council
and the Board of Superviaon on 9/24/92, the Board of Superviaon recognized the authority of the City of
Chula Vista to set the public review period for the Draft E1R on the Otay Ranch Project and deferred to
Council to set .aid period. Thereupon, Council directed staff to prepare changes to the City'. local
environmental review guidelines ("Local Guidelines") that would allow Council the right to set public review
periods and to place a resolution approving said changes on the Council's agenda. Staff recommends: (1)
approval of the resolution; (2) defer exercising either power until the Joint Meeting with the Planning
Commission is held on 10/12/92; and (3) continue to the meeting of 10/12/92 at 6:00 p.m. (City Attorney)
City Attorney Boogaard .tated staff was requesting that Council defer exercising any power under the
resolution, if adopted, and continue the meeting to the 10/12/92 meeting at 6:00 p.m.
Mayor Nader stated it was his understanding that at the joint meeting the Council would attempt to come
to IOme consensus with the Planning CoDlllliasion as to the review period on the Otay Ranch projecL
Presumably in future projects it would be a Council decision.
.
,
Councilman Moore hoped the item would be referred to the joint meeting. The Council did DOt give the
Planning CoDlllliasiol1 the authority to establish a review period and no where did he read it was within the
Planning Commission's authority. He questioned who S<I!t the date.
City Attorney Boogaard responded that the Environmental Rmew Coordinator iasued the draft E1R that
started the public review period and they did not S<I!t the closure hearing until at least 3O-4S days. It was
ended by the closing of the public hearing by the Planning (".nrnmlocjnn. The Environmental Review‹Coordinator could not te1lthe Planning CoDIIIIiasion to close the hearing. The P/_Imil1g en......i..ion at that
point had the power to delay the public review.
-
..,.
c23b -'I
----_.:.~..:_._:-.-:....,,""_._.
December 15, 1992
MEMO TO:
City Council
FROM:
.r:- IZ.~~
Tim Nader, Mayor
SUBJECT:
PROJECT AREA COMMITTEES
At the meeting of October 6, 1992, Council required by their motion, the formation of a
PAC/Montgomery Planning Committee review group for the purposes of determining how
consolidation of the PACs could be achieved in an effort to expedite permit processing.
This action was the result of recommendations by the Economic Development
Commission.
The reviewing group would contain members of the EDC, each of the PAC's, one or two
members of the Council, management, and department head (*see copy of 10/6/92
minutes).
At the same time, as the minutes disclose (copy attached), the Council created a
subcommittee consisting of myself and Councilman Moore to review the consolidation of
all other committees, commissions and boards along with evaluating their roles and
functions.
I believe it was the intent of the Council that Councilman Moore and myself also be on
the PAC/MPC reviewing group.
It is my recommendation that Council appoint myself and Councilman Moore to that
function. We will meet as a subcommittee with the rest of the reviewing group if
appointed, and will report back to the Council as time permits on the results of our
evaluation.
~ ~ ...ca?C-'M(-l. ~ ~ ~ 'fJ1Jdtd.
TN:BB:pw
Encls.
:23/:;--3
ITEM 24b.
Mtg. Date 12/15/92
December 14, 1992
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Councilman Bob Fox
John D. Goss, City Manager~'
Requested Fiscal Analysis of City Vehicle Alternatives
This memo is in response to your request for additional fiscal information on the
alternatives that were discussed at the December 8 Council meeting regarding the
use of City vehicles. At the December 8 meeting, the Council essentially
approved the staff recommendations with modifications regarding the following
five positions: City Manager, Assistant City Manager, City Attorney, Police
Chief) and Fire Chief. The Council also requested that the Mayor provide to the
Council in January any recommended policy related to the Mayor's vehicle.
In responding to your request, this memo will" therefor~ focus on fiscal
differences between the staff recommendation provided in the December 8 Agenda
Statement ("Staff Recommendation") and the Council action taken at the December
8 meeting ("Council Action") in terms of the five positions listed above.
Regarding the City Manager, Police Chief, and Fire Chief, all three of these
positions would probably continue to have City vehicles under either the Staff
Recommendat ion or the Counc i 1 Act ion~ although the Staff Recommendat ion did
include an option for the City Manager to relinquish his City vehicle and instead
receive a Senior Executive auto allowance of $400 - $550 per month. The
discussion below regarding the cost difference between a city vehicle and an auto
allowance, therefore} is also applicable to the City Manager option that was
included 1n the Staff Recommendation but not in the Council Action.
Assuming the City Manager) as well as the Police Chief and Fire Chief)would keep
their City vehicles under either the Staff Recommendation or the Council Action,
the only financial difference between these two alternatives would relate to the
Council Action restrictions on the personal use of the vehicles outside Chula
Vista. Although in theory this restriction could reduce the City's maintenance
and operations costs for the vehicles, based on recent experience it is unlikely
there would be much actual difference in cost between the Staff Recommendation
and Council Action as a result of the restriction.
Regarding the Assistant City Manager and City Attorney, the fiscal analysis is
more complex. In the Staff Recommendation, these two positions would have had
the option of either continuing to drive their Ford Explorers with unlimited
personal use or switching to a Senior Executive auto allowance of $400 - $550 per
month. The Council Action requires them to relinquish the vehicles and instead
receive a $320 per month auto allowance and a $230 per month salary increase.
If the Assistant City Manager and/or the City Attorney decided to switch to the
Senior Executive auto allowance under the Staff Recommendation, the City's cost
would be $400 to $550 per month compared to the $550 per month under the Council
Action. For each of the two positions, the Council Action thus might cost the
same or up to $150 per month more than the Staff Recommendation, depending on the
exact amount (within the $400 - $550 range) of Senior Executive auto allowance
that would be established by the City Council for the City Attorney and by the
City Manager for the Assistant City Manager. In both alternatives, the City
02Vb-1 (
would sell (or use as replacement vehicles elsewhere in the City's fleet) the
Ford Explorers, so there would be no fiscal difference in that regard.
If the Assistant City Manager and/or the City Attorney decided to continue using
their vehicles under the Staff Recommendation, the City's cost for owning,
operating, and maintaining those vehicles would be the point of fiscal comparison
with the Council Action.
The Explorer assigned to the City Attorney was purchased in April 1992 for
$24,924, and the one assigned to the Assistant City Manager was purchased in July
1991 for $22,595. Although staff has not completed evaluating the minimum price
it would expect to receive if these vehicles are sold, the City Attorney's and
Assistant City Manager's vehicles should sell for at least $18,000 and $16,000
respectively. Under the Council Action, the City Attorney would be reimbursed
$700 for the radio/CO sound system in his Explorer.
The City's cost of providing a specific vehicle varies from year to year
depending on mileage, repairs, and accidents as well as on replacement cycle and
replacement cost. The approximate monthly City cost of the Ford Explorers is
estimated to be in the following range:
Maintenance
Operations
Amortization/Replacement
Collision/Liability Equivalent
Monthly Total
$ 35 - $ 80
$ 35 - $ 65
$230 - $300
$ 65 - $.J!2
$365 - $530
This is a wide range because there are a number of unknowns and variables that
determine the actual cost. In the attached chart, staff has shown its best
estimate of these costs for the newer of the two Explorers. The chart shows a
five-year analysis period and uses the "present value" technique to estimate what
amount of allowance (in lieu of a vehicle) would cost the City the same as
continuing to provide the Ford Explorer. Instead of an amortization/replacement
charge, the chart shows estimated prices if the vehicle were sold now (in the
allowance alternative) or five years from now (in the car alternative).
As indicated in the chart, staff's best estimate is that a $450 per month
allowance would be most equivalent in cost to continuing to provide the Explorer.
It should be emphasized that this is only an estimate and that this analysis
focused on the cost to the City.
A similar analysis from the perspective of an affected employee would show a
higher than $450 per month value to the employee of having a City-provided
Explorer. The reasons the value to the employee would be greater than the cost
to the City involve the following costs that would be more expensive for the
employee than for the City to obtain: financing, insurance (or its equivalent),
and license/registration.
cc: Mayor and City Council
A:VEHMEM
c2tJb-~
.
DISSOLVEMBNT OF MONTGOMERY -AREA PLMlHING COMMITTEE
(MERGE REMAINING MEMBERS WI'l'H SOuTaw~ST PROJECT AREA COMMITTEEl
The Montgomery Area Planning Committee marks its seventh
anniversary January 1992. In those seven years, the PRIMARY and
INITIAL function in forming the Committee (Council action 7/2/85)
was completed, to develop a community element of the City's
General Plan resulting in the "MONTGOMERY SPECIFIC PLAN". In the
pursuit of that demanding element, the community's own local
resident worked well with the area property owners and were most
valuable during the initial transition period following annexation.
Like the City's General Plan major update, the process was
extensive, expensive, involved change in zoning in favor of and
adverse to many property owners. In addition to this major
project, many varied projects of somewhat routine also came before
the committee plus capital improvement projects, community block
grant annual allocations and prioritization. A list of City
efforts and accomplishments, infrastructure improvements,
administrative and organizational program,s community appearance
programs, commission and committee representations are set forth in
Appendix "A".
.
Although this recommendation will be a major change, the time has
come to become one city. There is no Montgomery community, as the
fire district was named. There are several proud communities with
long time history, namely Castle Park, Harborside, Otay, Woodlawn,
and West Fairfield -- all an integral part of Chula vista often
intertwined with original city boundaries.
Background information as to Council action formulation
measure and establishing the MPC and membership thereof
forth in Appendix "B".
Southwest Redevelopment Project Area includes approximately 45% of
the past fire District. The project area committee is under a
state mandate for another year to comply with requirements related
to potential "substantial" residential relocation and displacement
by project activities and other policies affecting residents of the
project area.
ballot
is set
The dissolvement of the Montgomery Planning Committee and transfer
of remaining members to the Southwest PAC will retain continuity in
the workings of the Montgomery Specific Plan and the extensive
planning and project experience to a project committee with limited
knowledge and experience at a time when extensive projects are
coming forward. This membership merger and associated experience
over shadow other gains (i. e. reduction in committee time, project
processing time, staff time and associated costs -- all to the
overall betterment of the City as a whole.
.
.2 tJb.. .3
.
Councilman Robert Fox
~ ..2t/-6
.
~ "/ Ot,.v... l "" fa
wcn((~1 Pfl.f2Vv; cfh .u,.~-<- !lie r
I&va IJt fC -
r::s;;-d f'-(~,,~ lJJ~1{ o/'W~? PA<- '4- Iffc..
(ao{.t.. W(c CDUlE:~h\.) #J1J1<rS. d,,~l(t~'itlJ(
v>>w1l 10 ~'(c-lJ1
1. u.J #i trrtc
.
.
dJ!bJ/
.
.
.
AGENDA
October 12th and 14th, 1992
Montgomery Community Planning Committee and
Project Area Committee Works,l16ps
Council Conference Roog.
10:00 am -11:00 am'
J
1. Introductions - Councilman Moore, PAC and Montgomery Community
Planning Committee representatives and assigned staff
2. Purpose of Meeting - Discussion of Objectives
Va.
Role and responsibilities (for example, MPC
purpose/intent/functions & duties)
Disband
Merger '?
Requirements desired . .
Today review general areas next meeting (10/14)
specific committee (i. e. 3 PACs, and/or merge with
Montgomery Community Planning Committee or
Planning Commission)
Y'b.
v'c.
vd.
C3
3. Review of Materials in Information Packet
a/ Forming Action
bV EDC recommendations
c,y/ Council action & individual comments
1]] Cost in staff time
e.,.....-- EDC recommendation if PAC's remain in some form.
Consider one PAC oversight commission as per
Growth Management Oversight Commission. .
) 'I trcA
'.
.
.
.
4.
Functions of Each PAC - Open Discussion
TItKt ((i'"""c f'\LVI ~
a. Role & Responsibilities (ordinances vs bylaws and
Commission Handbook)
b. Forming ordinance versus committee bylaws
p.f~ I'
5. Consensus Building; Identifying Similarities or Duplication
a. How to reduce staff time
b. How to reduce applicant's time/land use review time
c. How to reduce committee time
6. Working Plan for Future Meetings
a. Wednesday - October 14, 1992 - 10:00 a.m.
Montgomery Community Planning Committee and three Project
Area Committees - required, desired, merger, little changes,
meeting frequency, combined meeting with another's land use
review body etc. wording of role and responsibilities
b. Southwest Project Area Committee and Montgomery
Community Planning Committee - Merger and how
to combine -- another date?
LM:SS:das\pacmtg
dt/J:; -.3
.
.
.
Redevelopment was delayed as requested by the residents as a
condition of annexation, with the system in place, the potential
with a new/improved Broadway and Main street, for increased
commercial/industrial development will result in improved
infrastructure funded by other than limited block grant and/or city
funds. with new structures come sidewalks, curbs, qutters,
drainage systems and street widening thus fulfilling city efforts
but at a faster pace. All this within the purview of the Project
Area committee.
IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Council/Agency direct staff to provide
council/Agency appropriate administrative procedures to 1) Dissolve
the MPC and 2) merge t~e remaining 3 members into the Southwest
Project Area committee and 3) at the end of the third year, that
administrative action necessary to delete any presently required
State mandates.
SOUTHWEST PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE ROLE , FUNCTION
The Southwest Project Area Committee shall review all major plans
for new construction or major building expansions within the
project area including major public improvements (i. e. streets and
drainage). caution, not to duplicate Design Review Committee, City
landscape Architect, police and fire tasks. Relocation potential
and procedures of residents due to razing of the dwelling unit in
which they reside, is a major review and advisory responsibility of
this committee. Review each project as a community landlord,
rather than an architect, view safety, security of the customer-
pedestrian-employee, traffic circulation, parking, acceleration
lanes, walkways, lighting, noise, turning radius, signage, odor
control, drainage, hazardous waste, excessive competition, building
vacancies, overall area cleanliness, pollution, transportation
accessibility, saturation of like businesses, promotion potential,
bonding limitation of agency versus income, effect on adjoining
business and residential community, roof tops as viewed by higher
elevated residents.
The committee members shall be indoctrinated upon appointment and
annually thereafter, a staff presented workshop meeting, as to the
rationale of redevelopment, along with the role and functions of
the committee. Environmental impact reports, will be reviewed for
all projects within purview of committee, but only sufficient to
support role and functions without vote up or down. The committee
role is not to recommend project approval but auxiliary concerns
as set forth above and advisory report to Agency staff, Design
Review, and Resource Conservation Commissions.
IT IS RECOMMENDED the city council approve of the role and function
of the 3 project area committees as presented or amended with
direction to the City Clerk to include revised role and functions
in the Board & Commission Handbook within 90 days.
;2 L/ /J- 1-/-
.
.
.
ATTACHMENT "A"
Major capital improvements recently completed, under construction,
plus organization successes or plans beneficial to city Southwest
area:
1) A new $15-million library site prep started
2) Palomar Trolley Station, 18-acre project committed
3) opening of newest public housing on Dorothy Street
Fifth Avenue; "L" to Orange Avenue with new
sidewalks, drainage and street improvements
complete
5) Fourth Avenue Street widening moving forward "Lit to Moss
4)
curbs,
nearly
6) Missing sidewalks with highest priority within CIP
7) The Otay River Valley Green Belt effort is a reality,
with potential parklands
8)
Otay Valley Road $13-million improvements to commence
next year
9)
Agency supported low income housing, south of Lauderbach
Park
10) The majority of 1/2-cent sales tax fund devoted to
Broadway, south of "Lit Street to Main Street and Main
street, 1-5 to 1-805, hundreds of millions of dollars
over 15-years, devoted to southwest Chula vista.
11) 35 city Commission positions are filled by Southwest
Chula vistans
12) The successful revitalization program initiated by City
Manager with their local community committee outside this
City formal committee ?rganizations is well supported by
staff and City funding, past 3 years. It is becoming
self supporting and working well. it may be time to
shift to another area in the southwest and jump start
another revitalization area.
13) with more planning and knowledge in the Southwest PAC,
with an upturn in development of commercial and
industrial projects, it would be appropriate to plan for
a busy committee with in depth staff involvement.
c:< L/b- 5
.
.
.
BACKGROUND I:IQ'ORMATI:ON LEADI:NG TO MONTGOMERY ANNBDTI:ON TO CIIULA
VI:STA AND BSTABLI:SBXNG THE MONTGOMERY AREA PLANNI:NG COMMI:TTEE
1) Council meeting of 7/2/85
Discussion and direction to staff noting 6/15/85 meeting
directed staff to set a public hearing to consider
forming a Community Planning Committee for Montgomery
area if annexed. An ordinance nrovidina Council ontion
to commit to aDDointina tOD vote aetters in an advisory
election (Code calls for 7 members)
2) THE PRIMARY AND INITIAL FUNCTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMITTEE. to develop a community elElment of the General
Plan ((results: the Montgomery Specific Plan)
3) Verbiage, not action as to, how lona such a committee
miaht continue to function
Important for Council to contemplate expanding all City
boards and commissions to help facilitate the
assimilation of the community into the City and mitiaate
the lona term need for a sDecial Dlannina committee.
4)
The above action accomplished on 7/16/85, Ordinance No. 2119,
Committing the city Council to appoint top seven (7) vote
getters, would be elected to ori~inal 2-vear terms but
subseauent terms would be filled bv aDDointment bv the city
Council.
NOTE:
The above would indicate the MPC would phase out at an undetermined
time with assimilation of area residents into City commissions and
committees. with the Southwest PAC in place and the size the
project area, the phase out of this time with all things considered
is appropriate and merger of MPC members will provide excellent
talent.
c1L/6 '6
.
.
.
Role and Function of Project Area Committees
The City Council, through motion on 6 October. authorized me to
meet with representatives of the three PACs and the Montgomery
Planning Committee along with representing staff members. A
workshop with the aforementioned met on October 12th resulting in
a consensus that PACs were beneficial, duties uncertain, role and
responsibilities should be specific, duplication and delays in
project processing need to be reduced, prior to adjournment it was
agreed that the various representatives would speak with their
colleagues and make a report, the results of which I would
correlate, present to their specific committee for review, comment
nd endorsement; repackage and present to Council for action.
proiect Area Committees: it is recommended the Council approve the
following:
1. Retain all three PACs
a.
Ensure Towne Centre and Otay
formulating action be reviewed and if
attended to ensure any state mandates.
Valley
needed
b.
staff prepare Southwest Redevelopment PAC
formulating ordinance amendment so that upon
completion of year three all reference to
State mandates etc., will have been deleted.
2. Environmental Impact Reports:
Review by PAC's sUfficiently to. advise the Agency on
major projects as set forth in Role and Function
Statement with no, up/down, vote on the EIR itself,
therefore not duplicating the more knowledgeable RCC
role.
3. proiect Reviews:
The PACs shall review all major projects sufficient to
advise Agency as set forth in Role and Functions with the
rationale the PACs will not supplicate what the
Professionals on Design Review Board etc. are assigned to
accomplish but rather overall effect in Project Area,
Parking, Traffic, customer draw, excessive competition,
bonding limitations versus income, Agency subsidy, effect
on both business and adjoining residential community, and
that both are aware of forthcoming major changes
4.
Bvlaws Be Deleted From Use:
Bylaws will not be required with rewrite of Role and
unctions and full use of the Board and Commission
Handbook, which with approval of this Section of report
021/ h-7'
.
.
.
will require another update. Review of various committee
Bylaws noted, that unless the Bylaws went beyond Purpose,
the format and guidelines were in the handbook including
responsibilities, meeting place, etc. plus Roberts Rules
of Order sufficient for most occasions. This information
is also reinforced with the city Clerks Annual review of
above for all commissions and committee members.
NOTE:
Caution for those updating the Handbook to
ensure minor directions i.e., meeting time and
location etc. are not specific and any changes
that are routinely promulgated to the public
must be provided to the city Clerk for
coordination.
c2 Lj b -8
.
.
.
THE TOWN CENTRE I AND II PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE
ROLE AND FUNCTION
The Town Centre I and II Pro;ect Area Committee: shall review each
major area project. To reduce duplication of the Desian Review and
Resource conservation Committee and other reviewing professionals,
HR.~ cnmn~~ tJ Me ItMiRcc
the committee will review prior to them and ."1.... rage_a a i9RIil J
supported by rationale, copy to agency members. The committee is
charged to view projects as an overall owner, manager, safety
inspector and pedestrian, not as an architect or designer. The
committee shall be diligent as to the users plus overall
effectiveness of the area as it pertains to each and cumulative
projects; i.e., vacancies, pedestrian lighting, odor, noise, safety
and security, customer draw, over saturation of like merchants,
drainage, transportation and City services in general, bike riding
and racks, hazardous materials, parking, walkways, traffic
circulation and safety, signage, effect on adjoining business and
residents. A major concern is review of agency bonding capacity
and income sufficient to pay re: project area specific. A special
Annual Report on fiscal status of project area #1 and #2 to include
but not limited to bond debt, annual income and ability to pay
debt.
In the PACs role as parking place advisors, it shall, in addition
to portion of above, review all parking improvements, procurements,
regulations and fee structure, enforcement, maintainable revenue
and overall cost. Advise agency/council on annual basis.
Committee members are urged to conscientiously utilize the
~L/b-9
.
.
.
Commission Handbook as meeting guide, which includes the
established Role and Functions of all Boards, Commissions and
committee, meeting frequencies, excerpts of Roberts Rules of order,
term limits, annual reports etc. By laws as such will no longer be
needed or authorized. Changes to the Commission Handbook will be
accepted for review annually in June.
Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs) will be reviewed SUfficiently
to support PAC advice to Agency/Council in compliance with
established role, without up/down vote. The Resource conservation
Committee will advise the Planning Commission or Agency and/or
council regarding EIRS, the PAC has only an ancillary area of
concern and advise accordingly via recommendations to design review
and Resource conservation Committees upon being approved by PAC
motions.
02;Jb~/O
.
.
.
~~/~
-- .
~
~..e;:;::~~'
~~ -
ClN OF
CHULA VISTA
OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
November 25, 1992
Allen Jones, Vice Chair
Southwest Project Area Committee
% Fenton-Western Properties
7220 Trade Street
Suite 300
P.O. Box 64
San Diego, CA 92112
Dear Allen:
I have asked to be on your agenda to discuss both the Southwest Project Area and
Montgomery Planning Commission. The basis for discussion is the Economic
Development Commission's recommendation to City Council as to reducing land use
processing time and consideration to merge and/or be dissolved.
The attached information is presented for your review for philosophy, and as a
starting point and as background information. Nothirig is in concrete -- addition, deletion,
scrap the whole thing; concept wide open.
IJIJ<,... cl.teltu:... ~/.wr.. fl1JtNtit. an.J~/ ~ - ~ C(/~r;,. .l/lM"l. -
nw City Council has au~orized ~e as their representative to'work with the three AAJ "'~ WUJ
Project Area and Montgomery Planning Committees to reach a consensus to the Economic ~ ~
Development Commission's and Council's concerns. A lot of time and sincere effort has ~""'"
gone into the attached information and recommendations without bias.
May we come to a consensus next Wednesday.
hfI/Nrk (J.~
~
Yours in Community Service,
~~
J1fI Leonard M. Moore
Lfl' City Councilman
LMM/bb
Enclosure
~JJlb-)tJ
C:\WP5I\MooRE-I.LTRJ
276 FOURTH AVENUE/CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 91910/(619) 691-5044
.
.
.
THE OTAY VALLEY PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE ROLE . FUNCTION
The otay Valley Project Area Committee shall review all project
plans within the project areas. Review of environmental impact
reports (EIR'S) will be limited to sUfficiently support role and
functions without vote up/down. To reduce duplication of the
Design Review and Resource Conservation committee, provide those
specialized committees with recommendations and rationale to
support concern. Review all projects as area owners, landlord or
overseer of community, rather than an architect. Look at each plan
as to: Pedestrian safety, traffic movements, parking, vacancies,
walkways, lighting needs, acceleration lanes, turning radius,
noise, signage, odor control, drainage, hazardous materials. Note
effect on adjoining businesses and residential communities plus
timely awareness of major or any project forthcoming to same
communities within immediate area. Review the bonding limits
versus income of two project areas as to ability to repay debt and
submit annual report to the Redevelopment Agency.
All committee members shall be indoctrinated upon appointment and
on an annual basis by Community Development staff workshop meeting
as to rationale of redevelopment, role and function of the
committee and the areas of responsibility of those reviewing
project plans.
112392
~2//r II
-- ALLOWANCE ALTERNATIVE -- ------------- CAR ALTERNATIVE -------------
PRESENT PRESENT PRESENT
YR: MONTH SALE ALLOWANCE VALUE SALE OPERATIONS MAl NT INSUR VALUE VALUE
OF CAR IN LIEU OF TOTAL OF CAR (Gas/Wash) EQUIV OF TOTAL i 0.07
..-_.. ..----- -------- -------- --------
1 (19,000) 450 (18,550.00) 50 35 75 160.00 SI.000
2 450 447.39 50 35 75 159.07 SO.994
3 450 444 .80 50 35 75 158.15 SO. 988
4 450 442.22 50 35 75 157.23 SO.983
5 450 439.65 50 35 75 156.32 SO. 977
6 450 437.10 50 35 75 155.41 SO.971
7 450 434.57 50 35 75 154.51 SO.966
8 450 432.05 50 35 75 153.62 SO. 960
9 450 429.54 50 35 75 152.73 SO.955
10 450 427.05 50 35 75 151.84 SO.949
11 450 424.57 50 35 75 150.96 SO.943
12 450 422.11 50 35 75 150.08 SO. 938
2 13 450 419.66 50 40 75 153.88 SO.933
14 450 417.23 50 40 75 152.98 SO.927
15 450 414.81 50 40 75 152.10 SO.922
16 450 412.40 50 40 75 151.21 SO.916
17 450 410.01 50 40 75 150.34 SO.911
18 450 407.63 50 40 75 149.47 SO. 906
19 450 405.27 50 40 75 148.60 SO.901
20 450 402.92 50 40 75 147.74 SO.895
21 450 400.58 50 40 75 146.88 SO. 890
22 450 398.26 50 40 75 146.03 SO.885
23 450 395.95 50 40 75 145.18 SO.880
24 450 393.65 50 40 75 144.34 SO.875
3 25 450 391.37 55 45 75 152.20 SO.870
26 450 389.10 55 45 75 151.32 SO.865
27 450 386.84 55 45 75 150.44 SO.860
28 450 384 .60 55 45 75 149.57 SO.855
29 450 382.37 55 45 75 148.70 SO.850
30 450 380.15 55 45 75 147.84 SO.845
31 450 377.95 55 45 75 146.98 SO.840
32 450 375.76 55 45 75 146.13 SO.835
33 450 373.58 55 45 75 145.28 SO.830
34 450 371.41 55 45 75 144.44 SO.825
35 450 369.26 55 45 75 143.60 SO.821
36 450 367.11 55 45 75 142.77 SO.816
4 37 450 364.99 55 50 75 145.99 SO.811
38 450 362.87 55 50 75 145.15 SO .806
39 450 360.76 55 50 75 144.31 SO.802
40 450 358.67 55 50 75 143.47 SO. 797
41 450 356.59 55 50 75 142.64 SO.792
42 450 354.52 55 50 75 141.81 SO. 788
43 450 352.47 55 50 75 140.99 SO. 783
44 450 350.42 55 50 75 140.17 SO.779
45 450 348.39 55 50 75 139.36 SO. 774
46 450 346.37 55 50 75 138.55 SO. 770
47 450 344.36 55 50 75 137.74 SO. 765
48 450 342.37 55 50 75 136.95 SO.761
5 49 450 340.38 60 55 75 143.72 SO. 756
50 450 338.41 60 55 75 142.88 SO.752
51 450 336.44 60 55 75 142.05 SO. 748
52 450 334.49 60 55 75 141.23 SO. 743
53 450 332.55 60 55 75 140.41 SO.739
54 450 330.62 60 55 75 139.60 SO.735
55 450 328.71 60 55 75 138.79 SO.730
56 450 326.80 60 55 75 137.98 SO.726
57 450 324.90 60 55 75 137.18 SO. 722
58 450 323.02 60 55 75 136.39 SO.718
59 450 321.15 60 55 75 135.60 SO.714
60 450 319.28 <7,000) 60 55 75 (4,831.83) SO.710
S3,858.46 S3,819.02
c2ib~ /?
b
~4Cf~,.
~OJf)
)--
DRAFT MINUTES FROM 12/08/92 CITY COUNCIL MEETING
I
ACDON ITEMS
17. RESQLUnON 1695M APPROVINGCOUNOLPOUCYREGARDINGUSEOPaTYVEHlCLESAND
Al1TO ALLOWANCES - On 6/30/92, Council directed staff to prepare a recommended policy regarding
personal use of City vehicles and guidelines on the typeS of vehicles purchased for assignment to Executive
Managers. Staff recommends Council approve the resolution, implement the Policy, and direct the Fleet
Manager to prepare a report with recommended guidelines and recommendations. (Administration)
Continued from the meeting of 11124/92. .
Mayor Nader stated he was one of the employees that had personal use of a vehicle as part of his
compensation package. The policy had gone back to the late 70's or early 80's and the last time the Mayor's
pay had been on the ballot it had been acknowledged that part of the Mayor's compensation was personal
use of a vehicle. He felt it would be within the council'slrerogative, because those benefits were not set
in concrete in the Charter, to change the benefits. He ha absented himself in the past on the discussions
because he was one of the employees, in theory, that could potentially be affected and requested the City
Attorney's advice as to whether he could or should participate.
City Attorney Boogaard stated the proposal for his deliberation was approval of the Council policy which
only applied to employees and not to elected officials. As such, it would not be a conflict for the Mayor to
participate, remembering that he could abstain if he felt other than a [mancial conflict of interest.
Mayor Nader stated that as long as Council was discussing policy that affected non-elected employees he
should participate. If discussion arose regarding his compensation package he would abstain.
Councilman Rindone stated there were two City employees that had specific provisions in their contracts for
unlimited use and they were the City Manager and Assistant City Manager. The policy made excellent
progress in addressing the major concern, the unlimited personal use of public vehicles by employees but
the proposed implementation steps had not totally eliminated that concern. What complicated the situation
was that the two contracts were developed by previous Councils and unless there was concurrence with
those employees to agree to a change then those would have to be negotiated at a later date.
Mayor Nader stated the M~yor's position would have to be excluded from the proposed motion or he would
have to abstain.
Councilman Rindone stated he would exclude it from the discussion initially and come back with a separate
motion.
City Attorney Boogaard stated the philosophy of the Fair Political Practices Commission was that if there was
to be a bifurcation of an issue, the part that he would be precluded from discussing should be discussed first
so that his conversations and deliberations wouldn't subsequently impact the decision affecting him.
Mayor Nader suggested that he leave the dias if the Councilman Rindone wanted to offer a motion that
would affect the Mayor's compensation, that Council discuss and deal with that issue, then he could return
for the balance of the discussion. Mayor Nader then left the dias.
Councilman Rindone was designated Mayor Pro Tem to chair the meeting.
MS (Rindone/Moore) adc.pt a policy for the Citywbich would provide vehicles for Mayor, City Manager, and
Chief of Police. The three positions would be authorized to have cars purchased, as per current practice;
would have use for business pmposes and any 'commuting only" category within the City of ChulaYlSta;
and a cap of not to exceed 2,SOO miles for any non-business related activities (personal use) on an annual
basis outside the City.
Councilman Rindone stated he would also offer a second motion that would provide for City owned vehicles,
City Attorney and Assistant City Manager, in which there would be a car allowance and one time adjustment
in their salary to compensate them for a portion of their compensation package. It would be his intent to
implement the policy retroactively so that present employees would not be grandfathered in. The employees
would have a one time adjustment to thelt salary and a mileage allowance for those that already had It in
their contract as part of their compensation package. Unless there was concurrence by both parties
regarding the contract it would be a compensation issue.
c2LJb ---/7
Minutes
December 8, 1992
Page 6
bb
~r4~]-
~O.oy
Councilwoman Horton questioned whether the Fire Chief had been eliminated.
Councilman Rindone responded that it was not included in the motion and would be open to
recommendations from the Council.
Councilwoman Horton questioned whether actual salaries were taken into consideration when the benefit
comparisons were compiled.
Councilman Rindone stated the offer of a City vehicle was not in a written contract but was a verbal contract
from the subcommittee and therefore part of the compensation package. It was a valid issue but after
talking with the Assistant City Manager and City Attorney they had stated they were comfortable with the
proposal.
Councilwoman Horton questioned wheLler the City Manager, Mayor, and Police Chief had the option of a
car allowance rather than a City owned vehicle.
Councilman Rindone suggested that it not be restricted. He would not oppose the same compensation
package for the City Manager.
City Manager Goss stated he would personally like to go back and take a look at an auto allowance and
salary adjustment. He was uncertain as to what he would request because a City car was a benefit also to
the City. His first preference was an auto allowance, his second preference would be the current
arrangement, his third preference would be a leased car turned over for unrestricted use, and his fourth
preference would be the current proposal.
Councilman Rindone stated his recommendation would allow that to occur for the City Manager but the City
Attorney and Assistant City Manager would not have that option. He agreed that there was a reciprocal
benefit to the City if the City Manager had a City owned vehicle. The City Manager's usage had not been
questioned during his ten years of service.
Councilman Fox felt that when a commitment was made it should be honored unless it was illegal or
unethical. Because the proposal was accptable to the employees he could support the proposal.
Councilwoman Horton stated that the p. ~vious administration had negotiated the benefits and she felt the
changes should be made when a new City Manager was hired. She was comfortable with leaving the City
Manager status quo.
Councilman Fox felt there had been a commitment to the City Manger but there was also a commitment to
the public. He felt they should adhere to the current commitments and correct changes as the position or
employee changed. Council should establish a policy now for future positions.
Councilman Moore agreed with Councilman Fox but noted the other parties were in agreement of the
prol?osed changes. He felt there was a place for certain people to have unlinlited personal use of a City
vehicle with the City but had a problem with unlinlited use outside of the City. The employees should not
suffer a loss if their contract was broken.
Councilman Rindone stated the propos21 he had .submitted addressed only personal use of City vehicles. He
agreed that Council wanted to set a policy and not be unfair regarding compensation.
Councilman Fox stated he would have preferred to discuss the issue when raises were discussed. He
questioned whether the mileage was available on the Mayor's vehicle and expressed concern that the Mayor
was relying totally on the City vehicle for his transportation.
City Attorney Boogaard informed Council that Mayor Nader may address the Council from the podium as
a matter of personal interest, not as a member of Council. Therefore, he could provide information
requested.
Mayor Nader responded from the podium that the proposal would have a drastic affect. Although he did
not have the figures for personal use, he felt the City Manager's estimate was well under what his estimate
c2l--/b ;/F"
DftAFT COpy
Minutes
December 8, 1992
Page 7
was for his personal use. Because the compensation in the past had been unlimited personal use he did not
have a personal vehicle.
Councilman Rindone questioned whether the Mayor would have a preference of having no restriction or a
higher cap. The goal would be to address the needs while not disrupting the compensation packages for
those employees affected including the Mayor.
Mayor Nader stated it was a difficult subject to respond to objectively because he was personally affected
and had his views on what it should be for various City employees that would be affected. The policy in
the past was that personal use for the Mayor and certain City officials was unlimited.
AMENDMENT TO MOTION: (Rindon..;Moore) to wi1hdraw the MayoI's compensation from the motion.
Mayor Nader stated there was apparently a likelihood that his position would be brought back later after
the discussion tonight he would continue to abstain on the balance of the item.
Councilman Moore stated that if any of the employeE:s felt their compensation was adversely affected by
having a $320/month vehicle allowance and a pay differential of $230 then proof of that could be brought
forward to the City Manager.
Councilman Rindone stated the policy would take effect on or before 2/2/93. The policy would allow
unlimited use for business purposes.
Councilwoman Horton questioned whether the motion included the option for a car allowance.
Councilman Rindone stated the motion did not restrict the City Manager from coming back to Council
requesting a car allowance.
VOTE ON MOTION AS AMENDED: approved 4-().0-1 with Nader abstaining.
MS (RindoneIHorton) the policy would become effective on or before 2/2193, the City Attorney and the
Assistant City Manager would Surrender their h,,,pective vehicles, the City Attorney's and Assistant City
Manager's compensation packages would be amended .... follows: 1) in lieu of exercising the vehicle option
the City Attorney and Assistant City Manager shal1 be paid $320/month as a car allowance effective 212193;
2) the City Attorney's and Assistant City Manager's salary shal1 be increased effective 212193 by $23O/month;
3) the City shal1 reimbune the City Attorney $700 for the insta1lation of a special <D/sound system; and
4) the vehicles assigned to the Assistant City Manager and City Attorney shal1 not be retained in the City
fleet of vehicles but shal1, upon surrender, be sold in such a manner the City Manager determines will
produce as large of return to the City as possihle, the vehicles are not to be sold to any City official or
employee.
AMENDMENT TO MOTION: (MooreIRindone) the City Manager bas the option to se1l, or assign to staff
that had a need for a four.wheel drive vehicle; not as an additional fleet vehicle but as a replacement
vehicle.
Councilman Rindone stated the vehicles would be kept only if there was a need for a four.wheel drive
vehicle and if there was no need, the vehicles would be disposed of by the City Manager. .
City Attorney Boogaard responded to the Council not as the City Attorney but on a matter of personal
interest directly affecting him, and stated the terms were generally acceptable, however, if the vehicle was
surrendered before 2/2/92 he would expect the compensation package to begin at that time.
AMENDMENT TO MOTION: (Moore,lRindone) the vehicles are to be surrendered on or before 212193 at
which time the compensation package would begin; immediate 6omili.... of officials and employees would
be prohibited from purchasing the vehicles. .
AMENDMENT TO MOTION: (Moore,lRindone) if there was a breech of contract noted the affected parties
could bring it back to Council.
VOTE ON MOTION AS AMENDED: approved 4-().0-1 with Nader abstaining.
~tjb/J:l
Minutes
December 8, 1992
Page 8
bR4.'f Co
jOl'
Councilman Rindone then reviewed the proposed vehicle policy.
Jim Thomson, Deputy City Mana$er, informed Council that the Fire Chief had very little discretionary use
of his City vehicle. He was certam that the Fire Chief would not object to 'commuting only" use.
MSC (Rindonell'ox) to adopt the policy regarding City Use of personal Vehicles as proposed on page 16-17
of the staff report and the provision that personal use of vehicles for UDreStricted benefit could not be offered
to any employee as part of a benefit package without a majority vote of the members of the c:urrent City
Council. ^"I'1V~ed 4-().O-1 with Nader abstaining.
MSC (Rindonell'ox) to "I'y.vve the auto allowance policy, pages 16-18 and 16-19, items2B tbrough2G, not
adopting 2A. Approftd 4-().O-1 with Nader abstaining.
MOTION: (Moore) to form a subcommi,."'l! of the Mayor Nader and Councilman Rindone to bring back
recommendations on the MayoI's usage of City vehicles.
City Attorney Boogaard advised the Council that the Mayor could not serve on the subcommittee. As long
as it was discussed with the Mayor in a non-deliberanve aspect or as an arms length negotiation. He
questioned whether the intent was to have two Councilmembers produce a policy and offer it to the Mayor
at the meeting.
Councilman Moore withdrew the motion but felt the Mayor should present his own proposal.
City Attorney Boogaard stated the Mayor could present his own proposal from the podium at the meeting.
Councilman Rindone stated the item would be docketed for the first meeting in January and would be
presented by the Mayor.
MSUC (Rindone/Nader) to hear Item 18 and the RDA Agenda and continue the balance of the agenda to
the next regular meeting.
;2. j,-/ b - 02.0
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item cSl '-I- .D
1c5l-IS-Q.,;o
Meeting Date 1/S/93
ITEM TITLE:
. It 1 '13. ..
Resolut10n Amend1ng Counc11 POl1CY No. 104-
01 Relating to Items Pulled from the Consent
Calendar to ben~tjced after the Consent Calendar
City Attorney ((j'ti)
SUBMITTED BY:
4/sths Vote: Yes___No-X-
At its December 8, 1992 meeting, the City Council reached a
consensus that the order of the agenda should be changed so that
items taken from the Consent Calendar could be dealt with
immediately after the Consent Calendar is approved. Adoption of
the attached resolution changing Policy 104-01 will be sufficient
to cause said change to take place.
RECOMMENDATION: At the Council's discretion, adopt the attached
resolution.
DISCUSSION:
No further discussion deemed necessary.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS: N/A
FISCAL IMPACT: Negligible
F: \home\attomey\agendaorder
d,l/et,/
RESOLUTION NO.
/~9tJJ
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING COUNCIL POLICY NO. 104-01
RELATING TO ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT
CALENDAR TO BE PLACED AFTER THE CONSENT
CALENDAR
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city Council of
the city of Chula vista does hereby amend Council Policy No. 104-01
as follows:
"Except upon the consent of a majority of the council
that items may be taken out of the following order, items
shall be taken up in the following order at city Council
meetings:
1. Roll Call
2. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, Silent Prayer
3. Approval of Minutes
4. special Orders of the Day
5. Consent Calendar
6. Items Pulled from the Consent Calendar by the Public
7. Items Pulled from the Consent Calendar by the Council
8. Public Hearings and Related Resolutions and Ordinances
9. Oral Communications
10. Board and Commission Recommendations
11. Action Items
12. City Manager's Report(s)
13. Mayor's Report(s)
14 Council Comments
Adjour ment
~
rm by
Bruce M. Boogaar ,
1ty Attorney
F:\home\attomey\AGENDAOR.DER
ol'l~-d--