HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008/01/08 Agenda Packet
~v?-
:---~-::
~~~--...;;:
~-~.......
""':;0..- - "'--
CllY OF
CHULA VISTA
/lJ'eIt
Cheryl Cox, Mayor
Rudy Ramirez, Councilmember David R. Garcia, City Manager
John McCann, Councilmember Ann Moore, City Attorney
Jerry R. Rindone, Councilmember Susan Bigelow, City Clerk
Steve Castaneda, Councilmember
January 8, 2008
6:00 P.M.
Council Chambers
City Hall
276 Fourth Avenue
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL: Councilmembers Castaneda, McCann, Ramirez, Rindone, and Mayor Cox
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG AND MOMENT OF SILENCE
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
. OATHS OF OFFICE
Rodney Caudillo - Safety Commission
. INTRODUCTION BY RECREATION DIRECTOR MARTIN, OF EMPLOYEES OF
THE MONTH
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items I through 7)
The Council will enact the Consent Calendar staff recommendations by one motion.
without discussion, unless a Councilmember, a member of the public, or City staff
requests that an item be removed 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. Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be
discussed immediately following the Consent Calendar.
1. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
Letter of resignation from Christopher Redo, member of the Cultural Arts Commission.
Staff recommendation: Council accept the resignation and direct the City Clerk to post
the vacancy in accordance with Maddy Act requirements.
2. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ESTABLISHING THE SPEED
LIMIT ON BONITA ROAD BETWEEN BONITA GLEN DRIVE AND 1-805
SOUTHBOUND RAMPS AT 35 MPH (SECOND READING AND ADOPTION)
Based on provisions of the California Vehicle Code, pursuant to authority under the
Chula Vista Municipal Code, and at the direction of the City Engineer, Traffic
Engineering staff preformed an Engineering Speed Survey along Bonita Road between
Bonita Glen Drive and 1-805 Southbound Ramps, and determined the speed limit should
be set at 35 mph. This ordinance was first introduced on December 18, 2007.
(Engineering and General Services Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the ordinance.
3. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO
THE EASTLAKE II PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND
LAND USE DISTRICTS MAP (SECOND READING AND ADOPTION)
The applicant proposes to introduce commercial retail uses within the existing Eastlake
Design District in order to complement the existing furniture and home decorating
business presently in the District. The additional uses are intended to bring more foot
traffic to the District, improving its mercantile posture and potential for success. The
applicant also proposes modifications to the property development standards to
accommodate up to five story buildings, special parking ratios and medical office uses,
including medical clinics. This ordinance was first introduced on December 18, 2007.
(Planning and Building Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the ordinance.
4. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE ZONING MAP
ESTABLISHED BY 19.18.010 AND APPROVING A ZONE CHANGE REZONING
10-ACRES OF LAND FROM PLANNED COMMUNITY (PC) TO PUBLIC QUASI-
PUBLIC (PQ), LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE DISCOVERY
FALLS DRIVE EXTENSION AND HUNTE PARKWAY WITHIN OTAY RANCH
UNIVERSITY PLANNING AREA 10 (SECOND READING AND ADOPTION)
High Tech High Learning proposes a 550-student High School and a 700-student
Elementary/Middle School including an Environmental Learning Center on a 10-acre
portion of the University Park project site, located at the southeast comer of Hunte
Parkway and Discovery Falls Drive. The project requires a rezone of the 10-acre project
site from Planned Community (PC) to Public Quasi-Public (PQ) to allow the use in
advance of a Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan that is to be developed for the proposed
University Park site surrounding the project site. The ordinance was first introduced on
December 18, 2007. (Planning and Building Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the ordinance.
Page 2 - Council Agenda
h!t1l:/ /www.chuJavistaca.gov
January 8, 2008
5. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING THE APPOINTMENT OF INTERIM CITY CLERK AND
COMPENSATION FOR THE POSITION
On December II, 2007, the City Council appointed Donna Norris as Interim City Clerk,
subject to approval of compensation. On December 18, the City Council directed the
Human Resources Director to make an offer to Ms. Norris. She accepted the offer on
December 19, 2007. Adoption of the proposed resolution approves the compensation
package and thereby completes the appointment process for Interim City Clerk. (City
Attorney)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
6. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
WAIVING THE FORMAL CONSULTANT SELECTION PROCESS, APPROVING
AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND DOUGLAS R. NEWMAN IN THE
AMOUNT OF ONE HUNDRED FIFTY EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLARS ($158,000)
TO PROMOTE THE WORK OF THE NATIONAL ENERGY CENTER FOR
SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES AND THE CHULA VISTA RESEARCH PROJECT
AS PART OF THE SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM,
AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT
The San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E) Partnership Grant Program challenges the City
to provide energy efficiency services for city, commercial and residential facilities.
Through the program, SDG&E has agreed to fund a consultant to promote the results of
the work of the National Energy Center for Sustainable Communities and the Chula Vista
research Project. (City Manager)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
7.A. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE KIDS WALK & BIKE TO SCHOOL ~
PHASE II COMMUNITY-BASED TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GRANT,
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE GRANT, ESTABLISHING A NEW CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (TF362), TRANSFERRING EXISTING FUNDS, AND
APPROPRIATING GRANT FUNDS FOR ALL PUBLIC ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
WITHIN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA EXCEPT HILLTOP DRIVE,
LAUDERBACH, MONTGOMERY, HALECREST, SALT CREEK, ALLEN SCHOOL,
CHULA VISTA HILLS, AND VISTA SQUARE ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS (4/5THS
VOTE REQUIRED)
B. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE KIDS WALK & BIKE TO SCHOOL-
PHASE II COMMUNITY-BASED TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GRANT,
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE GRANT, ESTABLISHING A NEW CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (TF362), TRANSFERRING EXISTING FUNDS, AND
APPROPRIATING GRANT FUNDS FOR LAUDERBACH AND MONTGOMERY
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED)
Page 3 - Council Agenda
htto:! !www.chulavistaca.gov
January 8, 2008
C. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE KIDS WALK & BIKE TO SCHOOL -
PHASE II COMMUNITY-BASED TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GRANT,
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE GRANT, ESTABLISHING A NEW CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (TF362), TRANSFERRING EXISTING FUNDS, AND
APPROPRIATING GRANT FUNDS FOR SALT CREEK, ALLEN SCHOOL, AND
CHULA VISTA HILLS ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED)
D. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE KIDS WALK & BIKE TO SCHOOL -
PHASE II COMMUNITY-BASED TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GRANT,
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE GRANT, ESTABLISHING A NEW CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (TF362), TRANSFERRING EXISTING FUNDS, AND
APPROPRIATING GRANT FUNDS FOR VISTA SQUARE AND HILLTOP DRIVE
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED)
E. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE KIDS WALK & BIKE TO SCHOOL -
PHASE II COMMUNITY-BASED TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GRANT,
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE GRANT, ESTABLISHING A NEW CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (TF362), TRANSFERRING EXISTING FUNDS, AND
APPROPRIATING GRANT FUNDS FOR HALECREST ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
(4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED)
In 2006, City staff applied for a Community Based Transportation Planning Grant to fund
walking audits around elementary schools within the City. The purpose of the walking
audit was to identify needed pedestrian and bicycle improvements within a Y. mile radius
of each school. The State of California has approved the grant and now requires the City
Council to authorize acceptance of the grant so that the community based walking audit
effort can begin. (Engineering and General Services Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolutions.
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Persons speaking during Public Comments may address the Council on any subject
matter within the Council's jurisdiction that is not listed as an item on the agenda. State
law generally prohibits the Council from taking action on any issue not included on the
agenda, but, !f appropriate, the Council may schedule the topic for future discussion or
refer the matter to stqlf Comments are limited to three minutes.
Page 4 - Council Agenda
http://www.chulavistaca.gov
January 8, 2008
PUBLIC HEARINGS
The following item(s) have been advertised as public hearing(s) as required by law. If
you wish to speak on any item, please fill out a "Request to Speak" form (available in the
lobby) and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting.
8. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FROM CONCORDIA LUTHERAN CHURCH,
FOR A REZONE, PRECISE PLAN, AND TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP TO
DEVELOP 24 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS ON A 3.9 ACRE SITE PRESENTLY
OCCUPIED BY THE CONCORDIA LUTHERAN CHURCH AT 267 EAST OXFORD
STREET IN SOUTHWESTERN CHULA VISTA
Concordia Lutheran Church, is requesting a Rezone, Precise Plan and Tentative
Subdivision Map to develop 24 single-family lots on a 3.9-acre site presently occupied by
the church, at 267 East Oxford Street in southwestern Chula Vista. (Planning and
Building Director)
Staff recommendation: Council conduct the public hearing, adopt the following
resolutions, and place the ordinance on first reading:
A. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ADOPTING THE FINAL MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (MND)
(IS-07-031) FOR THE OXFORD STREET PROJECT; AND ADOPTING A
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP)
PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
B. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE ZONING
MAP ESTABLISHED BY SECTION 19.18.010 TO REZONE ONE 3.9 ACRE
PARCEL LOCATED AT 267 OXFORD STREET FROM R-I (RESIDENTIAL
SINGLE F AMIL Y) TO R- I -5-P (SINGLE-F AMIL Y RESIDENTIAL, PRECISE
PLAN), AND ADOPTING PRECISE PLAN STANDARDS (FIRST READING)
C. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
APPROVING A PRECISE PLAN AND A TENTATIVE MAP SUBJECT TO
THE CONDITIONS CONTAINED HEREIN FOR THE OXFORD STREET
PROJECT, TO DIVIDE 3.9 ACRES LOCATED AT 267 OXFORD STREET
INTO 24 SINGLE-F AMIL Y RESIDENTIAL LOTS
ACTION ITEMS
The Item(s) listed in this section of the agenda will be considered individually by the
Council, and is expected to elicit discussion and deliberation. If you wish to speak on
any item, please fill out a "Request to Speak" form (available in the lobby) and submit it
to the City Clerk prior to the meeting.
Page 5 - Council Agenda
httD:/ /www.chulavistaca.2:0V
January 8, 2008
9. CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENT TO CIVIC CENTER DESIGN BUILD
AGREEMENT WITH HIGHLAND PARTNERSHIP, INC
City Council approved a master plan for the renovation of the Civic Center in July of
2001. A Design Build Agreement was approved on February 18, 2003 with Highland
Partnership, Inc., and on August 3, 2004, the City Council approved the Guaranteed
Maximum Price of the project. (Engineering and General Services Director, Finance
Director)
Staffrecommendation: Council adopt the following resolution:
A. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO CIVIC CENTER DESIGN
BUILD AGREEMENT WITH HIGHLAND PARTNERSHIP, INC. FOR THE
CIVIC CENTER RENOVATION PROJECT TO INCREASE THE
GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE FOR PHASE 3 OF THE PROJECT BY
$1,699,515 AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE SECOND
AMENDMENT
OTHER BUSINESS
10. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS
1 I. MAYOR'S REPORTS
Ratification of the appointment of James Clark to the International Friendship
Commission.
12. COUNCIL COMMENTS
CLOSED SESSION
Announcements of actions taken in Closed Session shall be made available by noon on
Wednesday following the Council Meeting at the City Attorney's office in accordance
with the Ralph M Brown Act (Government Code 54957. 7).
13. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING SIGNIFICANT EXPOSURE
TO LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(b)
. One case
ADJOURNMENT to an Adjourned Regular Meeting, January 12, 2008 at 9:00 a.m. in the
parking lot in front of the Council Chambers, and thence to the Regular
Meeting of January 15,2008 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
Page 6 - Council Agenda
httD://www.chulavistaca,goy
January 8, 2008
In compliance with the
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
The City of Chula Vista requests individuals who require special accommodations to access,
attend, and/or participate in a City meeting, activity, or service request such accommodation at
least forty-eight hours in advance for meetings and five days for scheduled services and
activities. Please contact the City Clerk for specific information at (619) 691-5041 or
Telecommunications Devicesfor the Deaf(TDD) at (619) 585-5655. California Relay Service is
also available for the hearing impaired
Page 7 - Council Agenda
htto ://www.chulavistaca.l!OV
January 8, 2008
Susan Bigelow, MMC, City Clerk
City of Chula Vista
-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Redo [rnailto:redo@usa.net]
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 3:46 PM
To: Susan Bigelow
Cc: Jennifer Quijano
Subject: Resignation
Dear Susan,
I am writing to inform you that I must submit my resignation from the
Cultural
Arts Commission effective immediately because I am relocating out of the
city.
It has been a privilege and an honor to serve the citizens of Chula Vista as
a
member of the Commission.
I hope to serve again when my family and I return to Chula Vista in the years
to come.
Sincerely,
Christopher M. Redo
378 Corte Maria Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
1
I
D MlO\'i\ON
SECOND p.EM)\NG ~
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ESTABLISHING THE SPEED LIMIT ON BONITA ROAD
BETWEEN BONITA GLEN DRlVE AND I-80S
SOurHBOUND RAMPS AT 35 MPH
WHEREAS, based on the provisions of the California Vehicle Code and pursuant to
authority under the Chula Vista Municipal Code, the City Engineer has detennined that the speed
limit on Bonita Road between Bonita Glen Drive and I-80S Southbound ramps to be 35 mph;
and
WHEREAS, the prevailing speeds, accident history, roadway design characteristics and
land use justify a 35 mph posted speed limit; and
WHEREAS, the Engineering and Traffic Survey was prepared pursuant to all provisions
of the California Vehicle Code and the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices; and
WHEREAS, the Safety Commission concurs with staffs recommendation to establish
the speed limit on Bonita Road between Bonita Glen: Drive and I-80S Southbound ramps at
35 mph; and
WHEREAS, this recommendation and other information in the City Engineer's report has
been fully considered by the City Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista ordains as follows:
SEcnON I: That the speed limit on Bonita Road between Bonita Glen Drive and I-80S
Southbound ramps is established at 35 mph.
SECTION II: That Schedule X of a Register of Schedules maintained by the City Engineer as
provided in Section 10.48.020 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, "Established Speed Limits in
Certain Zones-Designated," is amended to include the following information:
Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 10.48.020 - Schedule X
Established SDeed Limits in Certain Zones
Name of Street Beginning At Ending At Speed Limit
Bonita Road Bonita Glen Drive I-80S Southbound 35 mph
Ramos
H;\AnorncyI,FinalR.c:soll\2007\121IQ7\l.l_OrdinlncejBorlilalt.oad)SpocdEst.doc
2-1
Ordinance No.
Page 2
SECTION III: 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
Jack Griffin
Director of Engineering and General Services
H:\ENGlN.EER'IlJrdincJc:a\0r'd2007\12_18-ONJ1'I1inan=_(Bonita~) S9=l Eat.doc
2-2
ORDINANCE NO.
NO /'.OO?1\ON
SeCONO Re/'.O\NG ~
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING
AMENDMENTS TO THE EASTLAKE IT PLANNED
COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND LAND USE
DISTRICT MAP
I. RECITALS
A. Project Site
WHEREAS, the areas of land which are the subject of this Ordinance are
diagrammatically represented in Exhibit "A" attached to and incorporated into this
Ordinance, and commonly known as EastLake Business Center II, and for the
purpose of general description herein consist of 44 acres divided into 3 separate
properties: (I) Area A consists of 16.7 acres located at the eastern portion of the
Business Center, at the northeast comer of Fenton Street and Showroom Place and
contains the existing (phase I) 234,000 EastLake Design District; (2) Area B consists
of 17.7 acres located at the northwest comer of Fenton Street and Showroom Place.
Area B is currently vacant; and, (3) Area C, located south of Fen ton Street, consists
of9.6 acres and is currently vacant ("Project Site"); and,
B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approval
WHEREAS, on September II, 2006, IRE Development ("Applicant") filed an
application requesting approval of amendments to the EastLake IT Planned
Community District Regulation and Land Use District Map; and,
C. Prior Discretionary Approvals
WHEREAS, development of the Project Site has been the subject matter of various
entitlements and agreements, including: (1) amended EastLake II General
Development Plan ("GDP") approved by City Council Resolution No. 2005-288 on
August 23, 2005; (2) Business Center II Supplemental SPA approved by City
Council Resolution No. 19666 on November 16,1999; and, (3) amended EastLake II
Planned Community District Regulations approved by City Council Ordinance
No. 3018 on Septemher 13,2005; and,
D. Planning Conunission Record on Applications
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a hearing on the
Project, and notice of the 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 ft. of the exterior boundary of the Proj ect, at least ten
(10) days prior to the hearing; and
J:\AllgmcylOrdinancc\PCM-07..04 CC ow 21 NOVEMBER :ZOO7finaU2-1 8-(l7,~
~ 1
Ordinance No.
Page 2
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the
Project on November 28, 2007, and voted 5-0-1-1 to forward a recommendation
to the City Council on the Project; and,
WHEREAS, the proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning
Commission at the public hearing on the Project held on November 28,2007, and the
minutes and resolution resulting therefrom, are hereby incoIJlOrated into the record of
this proceedings; and,
E. City Council Record on Applications
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for the hearing on the Project
application and notices of the hearing, together with its pUIJlOse, was given by its
publication in a newspaper of general circu1ation in the city, and its mailing to
property owners within 500 ft. of the exterior boundaries of the Project at least ten
(10) days prior to the hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the duly called and noticed public hearing on the Project was held
before the City Council of the City of Chula Vista on December 18, 2007, in the
Council Chambers in the City Hall, Chula Vista Civic Center, 276 Fourth Avenue, at
6:00 p.m. to receive the recommendations of the Planning Commission, and to hear
public testimony with regard to the same; and,
F. Discretionary Approvals Resolution and Ordinance
WHEREAS, at the same City Council meeting at which this Ordinance was
introduced for first reading on December 18, 2007, the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista approved Resolution No. , by which it approved amendments
to the General Plan, the EastLake II General Development Plan, the EastLake II
Supplemental Sectional Planning Area ("SPA'') Plan, the Design Guidelines, the
Supplemental Public Facilities Financing Plan, and the Air Quality and Water
Conservation Plans; and
G. Environmental Determination
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed
project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA")
and has conducted an Initial Study, 1S-07-015 in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act. Based upon the results of the Initial Study, the
Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the project could result in
significant effects on the environment. However, revisions to the project made by or
agreed to by the applicant would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point
J~;~\PCM-01.()04 CCORDZI IofOVEM8ER 2001fin.U2.18-07.doc
~-?
Ordinance No.
Page 3
where clearly no significant effects would occur; therefore, the Environmental
Review Coordinator has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-07-015.
Pursuant to the Resolution , the City Council adopted the Mitigated
Negative Declaration IS-07-015.
II NOW, THEREFORE, the City ofChula Vista finds, determines and ordains as follows:
A. CONSISTENCY WI1H GENERAL PLAN
The City Council fmds that the proposed Amendments to the EastLake II Planned
Community District Regulations and Land Use District Map are consistent with the
City of Chula Vista General Plan, as amended.
B. APPROVAL OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
The City Council approves the amendments to the EastLake II Planned Community
District Regulations and Land Use District Map as represented in Exhibit "B:'
Ill. EFFECTIVE DATE
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:
James D. Sandoval
Director of Planning and Building
'-If~ /1~~ 'f-t'-
Ann Moore
City Attorney
J:\AtIorney\OTd,i~-m-ll' cc ORD 21 NOVEMBEIt.1OO7fiMtI2-1i-07..doe
q q
'''''''~Q-~~W ry,~,',~u~~~$ ~\ Y\\~'
7e ~
B ~i~\ ~
<'" \ I-- ~~~ ~
~ ,o~\\ \~
~~ ~~
~ A )..'02,>-
~ '------- ~ /.
~ --< C '~~1 'ih.;2A \ \\; m;\
~ \ ,,~ ,.---' 1'\
) \ "II ~~~ r=- I=~ t:
\./::--~ , = r=i= ~i=
~ ar~y~~ fi 1= == f=!= f=
J ~ ~~)- _ r-/=ir=-
= n\ll~:\I11j[':;:''\' LAQ)",1. y '" .~ ~~'-'
'6 ~oo~ C1JflJJahoomQ!1.J;;;:Qi /Zit2ifZ:.: '$Y W .>.
B uuu 1J~ ~ I,
\\ Q~v~ t '
fu, <'C\j'''''''UIUI''. / ~
W ~2 ./! ~'C ~:i~W ~~#. ~0~ . \-
\ c,""'!' / /!; ~1 ~~ (1?;;~z:.<$:;-:r"}5,:S{f>:~'){,s:-' Ea~f;S~:~i~e~~C~/l1ter
\ C) ,..~~~r~~ A'~:~:~&l~~~~~~~.~,l~~!.~~:~~~~S ..~\ *;':~SJ~~~~rn~nqJ)<lEH1:t::S:lt~s "-
NORTH. '/,;:.: It,. .-.- ......,"' ". \Y.<'\\\ ><'V -..,,-i.r-.. . "-
. ,. .'.,
~
C:\dolftlolEa'll8ka_BC_SPA,..AmOlKCSlt...J 11.02.07
\
BOSWELLRO
-
r-
1-
ElOOWEU. AD
I~
'"A
'~
~ .
~
~
~
lC
-~
~
~
-------
I
./>0
~\~
~
~~(5
:( \\
,
oosweu. fU)
~
g
I~
~
~qp
=
...
-i,
llJ,
- -
\
'a
\<^~
-------
~1
BOIWELL AD
~
-~
~
J~" f I
\
----<
C:\dalnlolEo_._BC_S~_SItet.all1.02.07
'u~
I
~
'----
c
~
/~
'j
~\'
,\
J )
~
~
"
i
~
~
b:1
PrOC/i
or Valley Rd
RLM
(Residential Low
Medium)
Change land
Use from
Limited
Industrial (IL)
to Commercial
. :lif Retail (CR)
"!!~f.:;;il"
11-85 ~d
Q\a~ \..~
,
, 'I
. ,
RLI\f
(Residential Low
Medium)
LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
CHAPTER 5
TABLE 5-6
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DISTRIBUTION IN 2030 BY PLANNING AREA
(ACRES)
Total East
General Plan Land Use General Bay- North- South- East Uni ncorp. U ni ncorp.
Designation Plan front west west Chula 5weet- Otly
Area Vista water Ranch
Subareas 5 ubarea Sul:area
RESIDEN1IAL
Low 6,972 64 1,555 2,453' 2,900
Low Medium 8,200 1,354 1,401 4,927 307 211
Medium 1,201 187 2B8 622 32 72
Medium High 734 143 113 381 97
High 417 17 124 253 23
Urban Core 84 84
COMMERCIAL
~ E9i::t~.illll 121 115 202 ~qUl~ 32
Visitor 75 44 11 2 18
Professional & Admin. 160 21 61 7 59 12
MIXEDU!E
Mixed Use Residential 727 174 98 405 50
Mixed Use Commerci al 110 37 58 15
Mixed Use Transit Focus Area 122 83 39
INDUSTIlI AL
U!IrT'litB:ilnaustrlall ~..KTt 86 116 384 ~
Regional Technology Park · 200 200
General Industrial 218 218
PUBUC, QUAS PUBUC
AND OPEN SPACE
PublicIQuasi-Public 3,021 27 225 321 2,028 381 39
Parks and Recreation 931 60 73 106 573 88 31
Ooen 5pace 6,303 23 215 617 3,886 1,099 463
0""" 50ace Preserve 17,910 362 18 97 5,200 2,008 10,225
Open 5pace - 367 44 323
Active Recreation
Water 2,672 1,498 9 1,165
SPECIAL H..ANNING AREA
Eastern Urban CentEr 240 240
Resort 275 45 . 230
Town Center. 169 169
OTHER~ 4,553 98 866 829 2.291 408 61
TOTAL ACRES 58,422 2,620 3,994 4,815 24,620 6,829 15,544
1_ The unincorpcl'aled portiQ'l r:J the Norttwest Planning A rea (87 acres of Residential Low) is included in the Unincorporated
SweetwatB" Subarea column only.
,- Streets, freeways, UliIl1l' right-of-way'
.Please see Page lUT-285 for FInal Action DefelTolll Areas lnfonnadon
~(ft,..
-
odX~
Page LUf-59
~ITB-l
ORDINANCE NO.
NG "NO "OOPi\ON
SECONO REf>.O\
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING
THE ZONING MAP ESTABLISHED BY 19.18.010 AND
APPROVING A ZONE CHANGE RE-ZONING 10-ACRES OF
LAND FROM PLANNED COMMUNITY (PC) TO PUBLIC
QUASI PUBLIC (PQ), LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF THE DISCOVERY FALLS DRIVE EXTENSION
AND HUNTE P ARKW A Y WITHIN OTA Y RANCH UNIVERSITY
PLANNING AREA 10
WHEREAS, the subject matter of this Ordinance is the Zoning Map established by Chapter
19.18.010 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, and the area of the Zoning Map to be used as the
project area is identified as Exhibit "A," attached hereto; and,
WHEREAS, an application was made by High Tech High Learning ("Applicant") to amend
the Zoning Map was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning and Building Department on
October 17,2006; and,
WHEREAS, the applicant proposes to rezone the 10-acre project area that is located within
Otay Ranch University Planning Area 10 from Planned Community (PC) to Public Quasi-Public
(PQ) ("Project"); and,
WHEREAS, the 10-acre project site is owned by the City ofChula Vista, and on January 23,
2007, the City Council approved a lease with High Tech High Learning for a 50-year term, with two
25-year options at a rate of $1 per year; and,
WHEREAS, the structure of the lease will allow the City to retain long-term ownership and
control ofthe properly, while High Tech High Learning will be responsible for all costs associated
with the development and maintenance of their facilities; and,
WHEREAS, The Enviromnental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and has conducted an Initial Study (lS-
07-014) in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Based upon the results of the
Initial Study the Enviromnental Review Coordinator has determined that the project could result in
significant impacts on the environment. However, revisions to the project made by or agreed to by
the applicant would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant
effects would occur; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared a Mitigated
Negative Declaration (MND IS-07-014) and associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program ("MMRP"); and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the project at a public
hearing held at a time and place advertised, namely 5:00 pm on December 18,2007, in the Lee
Conference Room, 430 F Street; and,
J;\Au~irlllllCelPCZ-07-rocrON._11-18-07.doc
4-1
Ordinance No.
Page 2
WHEREAS, the City Council set the time and place for a hearing on said zone change
(PCZ-07-03) 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 Proj ect site at least ten days prior to the hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 6:00 p.rn.
December 18, 2007, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue and said hearing was thereafter
closed.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City ofChula Vista does hereby ordain as
follows:
I. ACTION
Hereby amends the Zoning Map, re-zoning the 1 O-acre project site for the High Tech High
Learning campus from Planned Community (PC) to Public Quasi-Public (PQ), finding that it
is consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan, the Otay Ranch General
Development Plan, and all other applicable Plans, and that the public necessity, convenience,
general welfare and good planning and zoning practice support their approval and
implementation.
II. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from and after its
adoption.
Presented by
Jim Sandoval
Planning and Building Director
1~\AtlDmey\Ordinance\PCZ..(l7 -OlCCOrd_12.1 &-07.doc
4-2
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
~!'f:.. CITY OF
~CHULA VISTA
JANUARY 8, 2008, Item2-
SUBMITTED BY:
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE APPOINTMENT OF
INTERIM CITY CLERK AND COMPENSATION FOR THE
POSITION
HUMAN RESOURC~~~~CTORIJ42-
CITY MANAGER ~"lJ
ASSISTANT CITY AGER~
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
4/STHS VOTE: YES D NO ~
BACKGROUND
On December 11, 2007, the Council appointed Donna Norris as Interim City Clerk, subject
to the approval of compensation. Adoption of the resolution approves the appointment and
compensation, and completes the appointment process for Interim City Clerk.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed activIty for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined
that the activity is not a "Project" in accordance with Section 15378 (b)(2) of the State
CEQA Guidelines because it is a personnel related action; therefore, pursuant to Section
l5060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no
environmental review is necessary.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that Council adopt the resolution.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Not Applicable.
DISCUSSION
On December 11, 2007, the Council appointed Donna Norris as Interim City Clerk,
subject to the approval of compensation. On December 18, the Council directed the
Human Resources Director to make an offer to Ms. Norris of an annual salary of
$120,000, effective January 4, 2008, which is approximately 5.5% above the current
salary for Assistant City Clerk. On December 19, 2007, Ms. Norris accepted the offer,
5-1
JANUARY 8, 2008, Item2-
Page 2 of2
and agreed to perform the full range of duties of the City Clerk until a permanent City
Clerk is recruited and selected. Ms. Norris's salary will revert to the Assistant City Clerk
level when her appointment as Interim City Clerk ends. Ms. Norris will continue to
receive her current level of benefits throughout the interim appointment period.
DECISION MAKER CONFLICT
Not Applicable.
Staff has reviewed the decision contemplated by this action and has determined that it is
not site specific and consequently the 500 foot rule found in California Code of
Regulations section l8704.2(a)(I) is not applicable to this decision.
FISCAL IMPACT
The cost of the additional Interim City Clerk compensation will depend on the length of
time that Ms. Norris serves in this capacity. The estimated cost for the additional salary
and benefits for the remainder ofthis fiscal year is approximately $4,800.
ATTACHMENTS
None
Prepared by: Marcia Raskin, Human Resources Director.
5-2
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE APPOINTMENT OF INTERIM
CITY CLERK AND THE COMPENSATION FOR THE POSITION
WHEREAS, on December 11, 2007, the Council appointed Donna Norris as Interim City
Clerk, subject to the approval of compensation; and
WHEREAS, On December 18, the Council directed the Human Resources Director to make
an offer to Ms. Norris of an annual salary of $120,000, effective January 4,2008, which is 5.5%
above the current salary for Assistant City Clerk; and
WHEREAS, On December 19,2007, Ms. Norris accepted the offer, and agreed to perform
the full range of duties of the City Clerk until a permanent City Clerk is recruited and selected; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Norris's salary will revert to the Assistant City Clerk level when her
appointment as Interim City Clerk ends.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
does hereby approve the appointment of Interim City Clerk and the compensation for the position.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Marcia Raskin
Human Resources Director
~<X\~~~\
Ann Moore
City Attorney
5-3
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
January 8, 2008 Item~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA WANING THE FORMAL CONSULTANT
SELECTION PROCESS, APPROVING AN AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY AND DOUGLAS R. NEWMAN IN THE
AMOUNT OF ONE HUNDRED FIFTY EIGHT THOUSAND
DOLLARS ($158,000) TO PROMOTE THE WORK OF THE
NATIONAL ENERGY CENTER FOR SUSTAINABLE
COMMUNITIES AND THE CHULA VISTA RESEARCH
PROJECT AS PART OF THE SAN DIEGO GAS AND
ELECTRIC PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM, AND AUTHORIZING
THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OFFICER if-S r
CITY MANAGER \~\\~
\ -. 4/5THS VOTE: YES D NO ~
BACKGROUND
Since March of 2006, staff has been working with the National Energy Center for
Sustainable Communities (NECSC) to advance responsible use of energy resources
through the planning efforts of three master-planned developments in eastern Chula Vista
(the Chula Vista Research Project) and the Los Vecinos and Creekside Vistas projects. The
resulting recommendations will establish a local precedent for a comprehensive approach
to energy conservation, efficiency demand management and alternative energy at the
individual building and community infrastructure level that will further environmental
goals and policies of the City of Chula Vista. It also provides a road map for Chula Vista
to integrate those advanced energy practices at the building and community design level in
a manner that makes the most of the economic and environmental opportunities for the
developer/contractor, the consumer/occupant and the ultimate service provider.
A goal of the Chula Vista Research Project (CVRP) was to disseminate the results of the
NECSC research both regionally and nationally so that other communities can benefit from
the research and individual projects. Funding provided by the California Energy
Commission and the U.S. Department of Energy will produce a set of reference guides on
sustainable community development practices based on extensive modeling of alternative
design options that maximize the use of renewable and advanced energy technologies and
6-1
January 8, 2008, Item~
Page 2 of6
systems. The guides are intended for public and private development professionals,
financial institutions and State and local government agencies.
In an effort to promote the work of the NECSC, the CVRP, and the broader environmental
initiatives of the City ofChuIa Vista, staff is recommending that we contract with Douglas
Newman to continue that work and the relationships established with the local state and
federal agencies that have lead to the funding and project successes to date. Mr. Newman
has developed a detailed outreach plan that will be implemented throughout the State of
California during the 2008 calendar year utilizing funding from the San Diego Gas &
Electric (SDG&E) Partnership Grant Program administered by the City's Conservation and
Environmental Services Department. The SDG&E Partnership Grant Program was adopted
by the City on September 19, 2006, and requires staff to provide public education and
specific energy services that reduce kilowatt and therm consumption at the local
government, commercial and residential level through December 31, 2008. The community
model and project demonstration projects implemented by Economic Development in
cooperation w;th the National Energy Center project and Conservation and Environmental
Services Department are a component of the portfolio of energy programs that are of vital
importance to the Energy Commission, SDG&E and other agencies that look to Chula
Vista's continued leadership in environmentally and economically sustainable energy
practices.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance
with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the
activity is not a "Project" as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines,
therefore, pursuant to Section l5060( c )(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the activity is not
subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is necessary.
RECOMMENDATION
The Chula Vista City Council adopt the resolution approving the agreement between the
City of Chula Vista and Douglas R. Newman in the amount of One Hundred Fifty Eight
Thousand Dollars ($158,000) to promote the work of the National Energy Center for
Sustainable Communities and the Chula Vista Research Project as part of the San Diego
Gas and Electric Partnership Program, waiving the City's Competitive Bidding Process
and authorizing the Mayor to execute the agreements.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Not applicable.
DISCUSSION
The SDG&E Partnership Program (Program) provides funding to develop energy
efficiency services for City, commercial and residential facilities. The City receives
approximately $731,000 annually from SDG&E for this program. Per the terms of the
agreement, this amount is intended to rise to approximately $2 million annually in future
program years.
A primary goal for the City and SDG&E is more energy efficient developments and
reduced energy costs for the residents and occupants of those developments, as well as
6-2
January 8, 2008, Item~
Page 3 of5
meeting the City's much broader goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. To date, the
Program has provided funding to allow for the NECSC to conduct research and analysis
for the Creekside Vistas condominiums and the Los Vecinos affordable apartment project.
The research analyzed energy, economic and environmental impacts of both planned and
alternative building design options for both sites. This approach entailed modeling building
envelope energy losses, internal loads, and space conditioning and ventilation for the
planned residential structures.
In first quarter of2008, NECSC will complete its research on the CVRP. The next step for
the NECSC is to disseminate the results of the research. Through the SDG&E Partnership
Program, Mr. Newman will prepare and execute a detailed outreach plan to disseminate the
CVRP reference guides to local and state government agencies and private development
companies across the State of California during the 2008 calendar year. This initiative will
be designed as a peer-to-peer program for energy efficiency to conform to the Program's
funding requirements.
Specifically, Mr. Newman will plan and facilitate a series of workshops both locally and
state-wide to present the results of the research. Further, Mr. Newman will prepare a
branded set of printed guides, compact disc versions of the guides, promotional ad-copy
suitable for placement in magazines and websites, and a promotional multi-media
presentation and script. These activities are in line with the City's and the NECSC's desired
objective of conducting applied research that examines technological, economic, social and
institutional barriers that prevent the use of existing energy-efficient technologies, materials
and management practices, and how to produce solutions to those barriers.
The promotion of the NECSC and the CVRP by Mr. Newman is closely aligned with the
City's Economic Development Strategy. The Office of Economic Development seeks to
attract clean technology businesses and businesses focused on sustainable development.
The SDG&E outreach funding will allow the showcasing the work of the NECSC
throughout the State of California. These promotional efforts will also allow staff to
continue promote to Chula Vista as a leader in sustainable development. Businesses in the
clean technology field will become aware of the markets that are being developed in Chula
Vista as a result of the NECSC research and corresponding promotional activities of Mr.
Newman.
Bidding Process Waiver
Chula Vista Municipal Code section 2.56.070 requires that the contracts for all supplies,
equipment and services when the estimated cost exceeds $100,000 shall be awarded by the
City Council to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder submitting the best bid in
accordance with a competitive bidding process. Exceptions to this requirement may be
granted where there is a commodity or service available from only one known source as
the result of unique performance capabilities, compatibility requirements or market
conditions. The competitive bidding requirements may be waived by the City Council
when they are impractical, impossible or the city interests would be materially better
served by a different procurement process.
Staff is recommending that the formal bidding process be waived for the promotion of the
work of the National Energy Center for Sustainable Communities and the Chula Vista
6-3
January 8, 2008, Item-L.:z-
Page 4 of 5
Research Project as part of the San Diego Gas and Electric Partnership Program. This
recommendation is based on the following capabilities that are uniquely being offered to
the City by Douglas Newman:
. Mr. Newman is the Director of the National Energy Center for Sustainable
Communities, a joint partnership established through a memorandum of
understanding approved by the City Council March 28, 2006, between the City of
Chula Vista, San Diego State University and the Gas Technology Institute, which is
advancing energy-efficient community development in California - the subject
matter of the CVRP reference guides.
. Mr. Newman has successfully designed and managed two previous projects on
related subjects for the City of Chula Vista - SDG&E Energy Efficiency
Partnership Program. The continuity and consistency that would be provided by the
retention of Mr. Newman builds on the relationships established with local, state
and federal agencies through these initial phases of the CVRP.
. Mr. Newman's previous participation with the NECSC and the City of Chula Vista
projects provides him unique knowledge that could not otherwise be obtained from
similar consultants.
. Mr. Newman has had an intimate involvement in creating, negotiating, and
managing the CVRP from start to finish, which will be utilized in his principal
authorship of its final technical reports and the reference guides that will be
disseminated through the proposed outreach initiative.
. Mr. Newman holds Masters Degrees in urban and regional planning and public
policy and administration and served as a senior program manager for the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, where he was responsible for national outreach programs similar in
nature to the proposed CVRP Outreach Initiative.
These service capabilities were found to be necessary in order to continue the work of the
NECSC and the CVRP, and to promote the environmental initiatives of the City ofChula
Vista throughout the State of California.
DECISION MAKER CONFLICT
Staff has reviewed the decision contemplated by this action and has determined that it is
not site specific and consequently the 500 foot rule found in California Code of
Regulations Section 18704.2(a)(I) is not applicable to this decision.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact to the General Fund as a result of adopting this recommendation.
Total funding in the amount of $158,000 will be appropriated for this agreement in the
City's Conservation Fund (Fund #28566) under the San Diego Gas & Electric Energy
Partnership Grant Program, as approved and adopted on December 12, 2006, for costs
associated with the scope of work contemplated in the subject agreement. Funds in the
amount of$106,327.00 are currently available to allow for the commencement of the scope
of work contemplated in Attachment No.1. The Conservation and Environmental Services
Department will bring a separate action before the City Council in the first quarter of 2008
which will allocate the balance of funding from the Partnership Program ($51,673.00) and
will allow for the completion of this project.
6-4
January 8, 2008, Item---'a.-
Page 5 of 5
ATTACHMENTS
1. Agreement between the City of Chula Vista and Douglas R. Newman for Professional
Services related to the Chula Vista Research Project Outreach Initiative
Prepared by:
Craig Ruiz, Principal Economic Development Specialist
6-5
THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT HAS BEEN REVIEWED
AND APPROVED AS TO FORM BY THE CITY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND WILL BE
FORMALLY SIGNED UPON APPROVAL BY
THE CITY COUNCIL
\~~u~
Ann Moore
City Attorney
Dated:
1;)-.//?/07
I (
Agreement between
City of Chula Vista and Douglas R. Newman
for Professional Services related to
the Chula Vista Research Project Outreach Initiative
6-6
Agreement between
City of Chula Vista
and
Douglas R. Newman
for Professional Services related to the Chula Vista Research Project Outreach Initiative
This agreement ("Agreement"), dated December 3,2007 for the purposes of reference only,
and effective as of the date last executed unless another date is otherwise specified in Exhibit A,
Paragraph I, is between the City-related entity as is indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 2, as such
("City"), whose business form is set forth on Exhibit A, Paragraph 3, and the entity indicated on
the attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 4, as Consultant, whose business form is set forth on
Exhibit A, Paragraph 5, and whose place of business and telephone numbers are set forth on
Exhibit A, Paragraph 6 ("Consultant"), and is made with reference to the following facts:
Recitals
Whereas, the National Energy Center for Sustainable Communities (NECSe) was founded
by the City of Chula Vista, San Diego State University (SDSU); and the Gas Technology
Institute (GII), and with the support of the U.S. Department of Energy; and
Whereas, the NECSC's mission is to promote healthier and more productive communities by
integrating cleaner energy systems and energy-smart planning and design into new development
and redevelopment projects; and
Whereas, the NECSC executes its mission through collaborative research, demonstration and
capacity-building (education and training) initiatives among government agencies, universities,
utilities, companies and nongovernmental organizations across the nation; and
Whereas, the NECSC is currently undertaking the Chula Vista Research Project (CVRP),
which will research technologies, plans, public policies and market-feasible business models for
energy- and resource-efficient community development in Chula Vista; and
Whereas, the NECSC is collaborating with government agencies, companies and utilities to
create a national demonstration site for energy-smart community development through the
ultimate creation of up to 20-30 showcase technology, land use and management practice
demonstration sites across the City ofChula Vista; and.
Whereas, the NECSC and its partners has received to date over one million dollars in
contract research funding from the U.S. Department of Energy, the California Energy
Commission and San Diego Gas and Electric Company to conduct research on the CVRP and
related projects; and
Whereas, the NECSC intends to publish the results of the research in the form of reference
guides based on the extensive modeling of alternative design options that maximize the use of
Page 1
6-7
renewable and advanced energy-efficient technologies and systems that will allow development
professionals and government agencies throughout California to utilize and incorporate the
research findings into other development projects; and
Whereas, on September 19, 2006, the City Council accepted the grant for the San Diego Gas
& Electric (SDG&E) Partnership Program; and
Whereas, Mr. Newman is the Director of the National Energy Center for Sustainable
Communities, a joint partnership between the City of Chula Vista, SDSU and GTI that is
advancing energy-efficient community development in California - the subject matter of the
CVRP reference guides; and
Whereas, Mr. Newman holds Masters Degrees in urban and regional planning and public
policy and administration and served as a senior program manager for the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, where he was
responsible for national outreach programs similar in nature to proposed CVRP Outreach
Initiative. Additionally, Mr. Newman has successfully designed and managed two previous
projects on related subjects for the City of Chula Vista - SDG&E Energy Efficiency Partnership
Program; and
Whereas, Mr. Newman has had an intimate involvement in creating, negotiating, and
managing the CVRP from start to finish, and his principal authorship of its final technical reports
and the reference guides that will be disseminated through the proposed outreach initiative; and
Whereas, Mr. Newman warrants and represents that he is experienced and staffed in a
manner such that he is and can prepare and deliver the services required of Consultant to City
within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the terms and conditions of this
Agreement; and
(End of Recitals. Next Page starts Obligatory Provisions.)
Page 2
6-8
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City and Consultant do hereby mutually
agree as follows:
1. Consultant's Duties
A. General Duties
Consultant shall perform all of the services described on the attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 7,
entitled "General Duties"; and,
B. Scope of Work and Schedule
In the process of performing and delivering said "General Duties", Consultant shall also
perform all of the services described in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, entitled "Scope of Work and
Schedule", not inconsistent with the General Duties, according to, and within the time frames set
forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, and deliver to City such Deliverables as are identified in Exhibit
A, Paragraph 8, within the time frames set forth therein, time being of the essence of this
agreement. The General Duties and the work and deliverables required in the Scope of Work and
Schedule shall be herein referred to as the "Defined Services". Failure to complete the Defined
Services by the times indicated does not, except at the option of the City, operate to terminate
this Agreement.
C. Reductions in Scope of Work
City may independently, or upon request from Consultant, from time to time reduce the
Defined Services to be performed by the Consultant under this Agreement. Upon doing so, City
and Consultant agree to meet in good faith and confer for the purpose of negotiating a
corresponding reduction in the compensation associated with said reduction.
D. Additional Services
In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set forth, City may require Consultant
to perform additional consulting services related to the Defmed Services ("Additional Services"),
and upon doing so in writing, if they are within the scope of services offered by Consultant,
Consultant shall perform same on a time and materials basis at the rates set forth in the "Rate
Schedule" in Exhibit A, Paragraph 10(e), unless a separate fixed fee is otherwise agreed upon.
All compensation for Additional Services shall be paid monthly as billed.
E. Standard of Care
Consultant, in performing any Services under this agreement, whether Defined Services or
Additional Services, shall perform in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill
ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions
and in similar locations.
Page 3
6-9
F. Insurance
Consultant must procure insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to
property that may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work under the
contract and the results of that work by the Consultant, his agents, representatives, employees or
subcontractors and provide documentation of same prior to commencement of work. The
insurance must be maintained for the duration of the contract.
Minimum Scope of Insurance
Coverage must be at least as broad as:
(I) Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence Form
CGOOOI).
(2) Insurance Services Office Form Number CA 0001 covering Automobile Liability,
Code I (any auto).
(3) Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and
Employer's Liability Insurance.
(4) Professional Liability or Errors & Omissions Liability insurance appropriate to the
Consultant's profession. Architects' and Engineers' coverage is to be endorsed to
include contractual liability .
Minimum Limits of Insurance
Contractor must maintain limits no less than:
I. General Liability:
(Including operations,
products and completed
operations, as applicable)
2. Automobile Liability:
3. Workers' Compensation
Employer's Liability:
4. Professional Liability or
Errors & Omissions
Liability:
$1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and
property damage. If Commercial General Liability insurance
with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general
aggregate limit must apply separately to this project/location or
the general aggregate limit must be twice the required occurrence
limit.
$1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
Statutory
$1,000,000 each accident
$1,000,000 disease-policy limit
$1,000,000 disease-each employee
$1,000,000 each occurrence
Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions
Page 4
6-10
Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At
the option of the City, either the insurer will reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured
retentions as they pertain to the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the
Consultant will provide a financial guarantee satisfactory to the City guaranteeing payment of
losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses.
Other Insurance Provisions
The general liability, automobile liability, and where appropriate, the worker's compensation
policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
(1) The City of Chula Vista, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers are
to be named as additional insureds with respect to liability arising out of automobiles
owned, leased, hired or borrowed by or on behalf of the Consultant, where applicable,
and, with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on
behalf of the Consultant, including providing materials, parts or equipment furnished
in connection with such work or operations. The general liability additional insured
coverage must be provided in the form of an endorsement to the contractor's
insurance using ISO CG 2010 (11/85) or its equivalent. Specifically, the endorsement
must not exclude Products/Completed Operations coverage.
(2) The Consultant's General Liability insurance coverage must be primary insurance as
it pertains to the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers. Any
insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees,
or volunteers is wholly separate from the insurance of the contractor and in no way
relieves the contractor from its responsibility to provide insurance.
(3) The insurance policy required by this clause must be endorsed to state that coverage
will not be canceled by either party, except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice
to the City by certified mail, return receipt requested.
(4) Coverage shall not extend to any indemnity coverage for the active negligence of the
additional insured in any case where an agreement to indemnify the additional insured
would be invalid under Subdivision (b) of Section 2782 of the Civil Code.
(5) Consultant's insurer will provide a Waiver of Subrogation in favor of the City for
each required policy providing coverage during the life of this contract.
If General Liability, Pollution and/or Asbestos Pollution Liability and/or Errors & Omissions
coverage are written on a claims-made form:
(1) The "Retro Date" must be shown, and must be before the date of the contract or the
beginning of the contract work.
(2) Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least
five (5) years after completion of the contract work.
Page 5
6-11
(3) If coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claims-made
policy form with a "Retro Date" prior to the contract effective date, the Consultant
must purchase "extended reporting" coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after
completion of contract work.
(4) A copy of the claims reporting requirements must be submitted to the City for review.
Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with licensed insurers admitted to transact business in the State of
California with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A V. If insurance is placed with a
surplus lines insurer, insurer must be listed on the State of California List of Eligible Surplus
Lines Insurers ("LESLI") with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A X. Exception may
be made for the State Compensation Fund when not specifically rated.
Verification of Coverage
Consultant shall furnish the City with original certificates and amendatory endorsements
effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements should be on insurance industry
forms, provided those endorsements or policies conform to the contract requirements. All
certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work
commences. The City reserves the right to require, at any time, complete, certified copies of all
required insurance policies, including endorsements evidencing the coverage required by these
specifications.
Subcontractors
Consultants must include all subconsultants as insureds under its policies or furnish separate
certificates and endorsements for each subconsultant. All coverage for subconsultants are subject
to all of the requirements included in these specifications.
G. Security for Performance
(I) Performance Bond
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 18, indicates the need for Consultant to provide
a Performance Bond (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately
preceding the subparagraph entitled "Performance Bond"), then Consultant shall provide to the
City a performance bond in the form prescribed by the City and by such sureties which are
authorized to transact such business in the State of California, listed as approved by the United
States Department of Treasury Circular 570, http://www.fms.treas.gov/c570, and whose
underwriting limitation is sufficient to issue bonds in the amount required by the agreement, and
which also satisfy the requirements stated in Section 995.660 of the Code of Civil Procedure,
except as provided otherwise by laws or regulations. All bonds signed by an agent must be
accompanied by a certified copy of such agent's authority to act. Surety companies must be duly
licensed or authorized in the jurisdiction in which the Project is located to issue bonds for the
Page 6
6-12
limits so required. Form must be satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney which
amount is indicated in the space adjacent to the term, "Performance Bond", in said Exhibit A,
Paragraph 18.
(2) Letter of Credit
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 18, indicates the need for Consultant to provide
a Letter of Credit (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding
the subparagraph entitled "Letter of Credit"), then Consultant shall provide to the City an
irrevocable letter of credit callable by the City at their unfettered discretion by submitting to the
bank a letter, signed by the City Manager, stating that the Consultant is in breach of the terms of
this Agreement. The letter of credit shall be issued by a bank, and be in a form and amount
satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney which amount is indicated in the space
adjacent to the term, "Letter of Credit", in said Exhibit A, Paragraph 18.
(3) Other Security
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 18, indicates the need for Consultant to provide
security other than a Performance Bond or a Letter of Credit (indicated by a check mark in the
parenthetical space immediately preceding the subparagraph entitled "Other Security"), then
Consultant shall provide to the City such other security therein listed in a form and amount
satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney.
H. Business License
Consultant agrees to obtain a business license from the City and to otherwise comply with
Title 5 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code.
2. Duties of the City
A. Consultation and Cooperation
City shall regularly consult the Consultant for the purpose of reviewing the progress of the
Defined Services and Schedule therein contained, and to provide direction and guidance to
achieve the objectives of this agreement. The City shall permit access to its office facilities, files
and records by Consultant throughout the term of the agreement. In addition thereto, City agrees
to provide the information, data, items and materials set forth on Exhibit A, Paragraph 9, and
with the further understanding that delay in the provision of these materials beyond thirty (30)
days after authorization to proceed, shall constitute a basis for the justifiable delay in the
Consultant's performance of this agreement.
B. Compensation
Upon receipt of a properly prepared billing from Consultant submitted to the City
periodically as indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 17, but in no event more frequently than
monthly, on the day of the period indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 17, City shall compensate
Consultant for all services rendered by Consultant according to the terms and conditions set forth
Page 7
6-13
in Exhibit A, Paragraph 10, adjacent to the governing compensation relationship indicated by a
"checkmark" next to the appropriate arrangement, subject to the requirements for retention set
forth in Paragraph 18 of Exhibit A, and shall compensate Consultant for out of pocket expenses
as provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 11.
All billings submitted by Consultant shall contain sufficient information as to the propriety of
the billing to permit the City to evaluate that the amount due and payable thereunder is proper,
and shall specifically contain the City's account number indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph l7(C)
to be charged upon making such payment.
3. Administration of Contract
Each party designates the individuals ("Contract Administrators") indicated on Exhibit A,
Paragraph 12, as said party's contract administrator who is authorized by said party to represent
them in the routine administration of this agreement.
4. Term
This Agreement shall terminate when the Parties have complied with all executory provisions
hereof.
5. Liquidated Damages
The provisions of this section apply if a Liquidated Damages Rate is provided in Exhibit A,
Paragraph 13.
It is acknowledged by both parties that time is of the essence in the completion of this
Agreement. It is difficult to estimate the amount of damages resulting from delay in
performance. The parties have used their judgment to arrive at a reasonable amount to
compensate for delay.
Failure to complete the Defined Services within the allotted time period specified in this
Agreement shall result in the following penalty: For each consecutive calendar day in excess of
the time specified for the completion of the respective work assigrunent or Deliverable, the
Consultant shall pay to the City, or have withheld from monies due, the sum of Liquidated
Damages Rate provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 13 ("Liquidated Damages Rate").
Time extensions for delays beyond the Consultant's control, other than delays caused by the
City, shall be requested in writing to the City's Contract Administrator, or designee, prior to the
expiration of the specified time. Extensions of time, when granted, will be based upon the effect
of delays to the work and will not be granted for delays to minor portions of work unless it can
be shown that such delays did or will delay the progress of the work.
6. Financial Interests of Consultant
A. Consultant is Designated as an FPPC Filer
Page 8
6-14
If Consultant is designated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 14, as an "FPPC filer", Consultant is
deemed to be a "Consultant" for the purposes of the Political Reform Act conflict of interest and
disclosure provisions, and shall report economic interests to the City Clerk on the required
Statement of Economic Interests in such reporting categories as are specified in Paragraph 14 of
Exhibit A, or if none are specified, then as determined by the City Attorney.
B. Decline to Participate
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant shall not make,
or participate in making or in any way attempt to use Consultant's position to influence a
govemmental decision in which Consultant knows or has reason to know Consultant has a
financial interest other than the compensation promised by this Agreement.
C. Search to Determine Economic Interests
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant warrants and
represents that Consultant has diligently conducted a search and inventory of Consultant's
economic interests, as the term is used in the regulations promulgated by the Fair Political
Practices Commission, and has determined that Consultant does not, to the best of Consultant's
knowledge, have an economic interest which would conflict with Consultant's duties under this
agreement.
D. Promise Not to Acquire Conflicting Interests
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant further warrants
and represents that Consultant will not acquire, obtain, or assume an economic interest during the
term of this Agreement which would constitute a conflict of interest as prohibited by the Fair
Political Practices Act.
E. Duty to Advise of Conflicting Interests
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant further warrants
and represents that Consultant will immediately advise the City Attorney of City if Consultant
learns of an economic interest of Consultant's that may result in a conflict of interest for the
purpose of the Fair Political Practices Act, and regulations promulgated thereunder.
F. Specific Warranties Against Economic Interests
Consultant warrants and represents that neither Consultant, nor Consultant's immediate
family members, nor Consultant's employees or agents ("Consultant Associates") presently have
any interest, directly or indirectly, whatsoever in any property which may be the subject matter
of the Defined Services, or in any property within 2 radial miles from the exterior boundaries of
any property which may be the subject matter of the Defined Services, ("Prohibited Interest"),
other than as listed in Exhibit A, Paragraph 14.
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
Page 9
6-15
Consultant Associates in connection with Consultant's performance of this Agreement.
Consultant promises to advise City of any such promise that may be made during the Term of
this Agreement, or for twelve months thereafter.
Consultant agrees that Consultant Associates shall not acquire any such Prohibited Interest
within the Term of this Agreement, or for twelve months after the expiration of this Agreement,
except with the written permission of City.
Consultant may not conduct or solicit any business for any party to this Agreement, or for
any third party that may be in conflict with Consultant's responsibilities under this Agreement,
except with the written permission of City.
7. Hold Harmless
Consultant shall defend, indemnifY, protect and hold harmless the City, its elected and
appointed officers and employees, from and against all claims for damages, liability, cost and
expense (including without limitation attorneys fees) arising out of or alleged by third parties to
be the result of the negligent acts, errors or omissions or the willful misconduct of the
Consultant, and Consultant's employees, subcontractors or other persons, agencies or firms for
whom Consultant is legally responsible in connection with the execution of the work covered by
this Agreement, except only for those claims, damages, liability, costs and expenses (including
without limitations, attorneys fees) arising from the sole negligence or sole willful misconduct of
the City, its officers, employees. Also covered is liability arising from, connected with, caused
by or claimed to be caused by the active or passive negligent acts or omissions of the City, its
agents, officers, or employees which may be in combination with the active or passive negligent
acts or omissions of the Consultant, its employees, agents or officers, or any third party.
With respect to losses arising from Consultant's professional errors or omissions, Consultant
shall defend, indemnifY, protect and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officers
and employees, from and against all claims for damages, liability, cost and expense (including
without limitation attorneys fees) except for those claims arising from the negligence or willful
misconduct of City, its officers or employees.
Consultant's indemnification shall include any and all costs, expenses, attorneys fees and
liability incurred by the City, its officers, agents or employees in defending against such claims,
whether the same proceed to judgment or not. Consultant's obligations under this Section shall
not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the Consultant. Consultant's obligations
under this Section shall survive the termination of this Agreement.
For those professionals who are required to be licensed by the state (e.g. architects, landscape
architects, surveyors and engineers), the following indemnification provisions should be utilized:
(1) Indemnification and Hold Harmless Agreement
With respect to any liability, including but not limited to claims asserted or costs, losses,
attorney fees, or payments for injury to any person or property caused or claimed to be caused by
the acts or omissions of the Consultant, or Consultant's employees, agents, and officers, arising
Page 10
6-16
out of any services performed involving this project, except liability for Professional Services
covered under Section 7.2, the Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, protect, and hold
harmless the City, its agents, officers, or employees from and against all liability. Also covered is
liability arising from, connected with, caused by, or claimed to be caused by the active or passive
negligent acts or omissions of the City, its agents, officers, or employees which may be in
combination with the active or passive negligent acts or omissions of the Consultant, its
employees, agents or officers, or any third party. The Consultant's duty to indemnify, protect and
hold harmless shall not include any claims or liabilities arising from the sole negligence or sole
willful misconduct of the City, its agents, officers or employees. This section in no way alters,
affects or modifies the Consultant's obligation and duties under Section Exhibit A to this
Agreement.
(2) Indemnification for Professional Services.
As to the Consultant's professional obligation, work or services involving this Project,
the Consultant agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its agents, officers and
employees from and against any and all liability, claims, costs, and damages, including but not
limited to, attorneys fees, that arise out of, or pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness
or willful misconduct of Consultant and its agents in the performance of services under this
agreement, but this indemnity does not apply liability for damages for death or bodily injury to
persons, injury to property, or other loss, arising from the sole negligence, willful misconduct or
defects in design by City or the agents, servants, or independent contractors who are directly
responsible to City, or arising from the active negligence of City.
8. Termination of Agreement for Cause
If, through any cause, Consultant shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper manner
Consultant's obligations under this Agreement, or if Consultant shall violate any of the
covenants, agreements or stipulations of this Agreement, City shall have the right to terminate
this Agreement by giving written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the
effective date thereof at least five (5) days before the effective date of such termination. In that
event, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, reports and
other materials prepared by Consultant shall, at the option of the City, become the property of the
City, and Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any work
satisfactorily completed on such documents and other materials up to the effective date of Notice
of Termination, not to exceed the amounts payable hereunder, and less any damages caused City
by Consultant's breach.
9. Errors and Omissions
In the event that the City Administrator determines that the Consultants' negligence, errors,
or omissions in the performance of work under this Agreement has resulted in expense to City
greater than would have resulted if there were no such negligence, errors, omissions, Consultant
shall reimburse City for any additional expenses incurred by the City. Nothing herein is intended
to limit City's rights under other provisions of this agreement.
Page 11
6-17
10. Termination of Agreement for Convenience of City
City may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any reason, by giving specific written
notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof, at least thirty
(30) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all finished and unfinished
documents and other materials described hereinabove shall, at the option of the City, become
City's sole and exclusive property. If the Agreement is terminated by City as provided in this
paragraph, Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any
satisfactory work completed on such documents and other materials to the effective date of such
termination. Consultant hereby expressly waives any and all claims for damages or
compensation arising under this Agreement except as set forth herein.
11. Assignability
The services of Consultant are personal to the City, and Consultant shall not assign any
interest in this Agreement, and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by assignment
or notation), without prior written consent of City.
City hereby consents to the assignment of the portions of the Defmed Services identified in
Exhibit A, Paragraph 16 to the subconsultants identified thereat as "Permitted Subconsultants".
12. Ownership, Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material
All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms, designs, plans, procedures, systems
and any other materials or properties produced under this Agreement shall be the sole and
exclusive property of City. No such materials or properties produced in whole or in part under
this Agreement shall be subject to private use, copyrights or patent rights by Consultant in the
United States or in any other country without the express written consent of City. City shall have
unrestricted authority to publish, disclose (except as may be limited by the provisions of the
Public Records Act), distribute, and otherwise use, copyright or patent, in whole or in part, any
such reports, studies, data, statistics, forms or other materials or properties produced under this
Agreement.
13. Independent Contractor
City is interested only in the results obtained and Consultant shall perform as an independent
contractor with sole control of the marmer and means of performing the services required under
this Agreement. City maintains the right only to reject or accept Consultant's work products.
Consultant and any of the Consultant's agents, employees or representatives are, for all purposes
under this Agreement, an independent contractor and shall not be deemed to be an employee of
City, and none of them shall be entitled to any benefits to which City employees are entitled
including but not limited to, overtime, retirement benefits, worker's compensation benefits,
injury leave or other leave benefits. Therefore, City will not withhold state or federal income tax,
social security tax or any other payroll tax, and Consultant shall be solely responsible for the
payment of same and shall hold the City harmless with regard thereto.
Page 12
6-18
14. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures
No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this agreement, against the City unless a
claim has first been presented in writing and filed with the City and acted upon by the City in
accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, as
same may from time to time be amended, the provisions of which are incorporated by this
reference as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and procedures used by the City in the
implementation of same.
Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in good faith with City for the
purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement.
15. Attorney's Fees
Should a dispute arising out of this Agreement result in litigation, it is agreed that the
prevailing party shall be entitled to a judgment against the other for an amount equal to
reasonable attorney's fees and court costs incurred. The "prevailing party" shall be deemed to be
the party who is awarded substantially the relief sought.
16. Statement of Costs
In the event that Consultant prepares a report or document, or participates in the preparation
of a report or document in performing the Defined Services, Consultant shall include, or cause
the inclusion of, in said report or document, a statement of the numbers and cost in dollar
amounts of all contracts and subcontracts relating to the preparation of the report or document.
17. Miscellaneous
A. Consultant not authorized to Represent City
Unless specifically authorized in writing by City, Consultant shall have no authority to act as
City's agent to bind City to any contractual agreements whatsoever.
B. Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman
If the box on Exhibit A, Paragraph 15 is marked, the Consultant and/or their principals is/are
licensed with the State of California or some other state as a licensed real estate broker or
salesperson. Otherwise, Consultant represents that neither Consultant, nor their principals are
licensed real estate brokers or salespersons.
C. Notices
All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to be given pursuant to this
Agreement must be in writing. All notices, demands and requests to be sent to any party shall be
deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served or deposited in the United
States mail, addressed to such party, postage prepaid, registered or certified, with return receipt
Page 13
6-19
requested, at the addresses identified herein as the places of business for each of the designated
parties.
D. Entire Agreement
This Agreement, together with any other written document referred to or contemplated
herein, embody the entire Agreement and understanding between the parties relating to the
subject matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any 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.
E. Capacity of Parties
Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and represents to the other party that it has
legal authority and capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this Agreement, and that
all resolutions or other actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter into this Agreement.
F. Governing LawN enue
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State
of California. Any action arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought only in the
federal or state courts located in San Diego County, State of California, and if applicable, the
City of Chula Vista, or as close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement, and performance
hereunder, shall be the City of Chula Vista.
(End of page. Next page is signature page.)
Page 14
6-20
Signature Page
to
Agreement between
City ofChula Vista
and
Douglas R. Newman
for Professional Services related to the Chula Vista Research Project Outreach Initiative
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this Agreement thereby
indicating that they have read and understood same, and indicate their full and complete consent
to its terms:
Dated:
City ofChula Vista
By:
Cheryl Cox, Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Approved as to form:
Ann Moore, City Attorney
Dated:
~c--
. C:-J
. , . Newman
Exhibit List to Agreement
( X ) Exhibit A
( X) Exhibit B - Agreement to Jointly Deliver the 2006-2008 City ofChula Vista Energy
Efficiency and Conservation Outreach Program between the City Of Chula Vista and San
Diego Gas & Electric Company, dated July 25, 2006
( X ) Exhibit C - Nondisclosure
Page 15
6-21
Exhibit A
to
Agreement between
City of Chula Vista
and
Douglas R. Newman
1. Effective Date of Agreement: December 3, 2007
2. City-Related Entity:
(X) City of Chula Vista, a municipal chartered corporation of the State of California
( ) Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista, a political subdivision of the State of
California
( ) Industrial Development Authority of the City of Chula Vista, a
( ) Other:
, a [insert business form]
("City")
3. Place of Business for City:
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
4. Consultant:
Douglas R. Newman
5. Business Form of Consultant:
( X ) Sole Proprietorship
( ) Partnership
( ) Corporation
6. Place of Business, Telephone and Fax Number of Consultant:
5415 N. Sheridan Road
Suite 1711
Chicago, IL 60640
Voice Phone: (773) 899-0801
Page 16
6-22
7. General Duties:
Consultant will prepare and execute a detailed outreach plan to disseminate the Chula Vista
Research Project (CVRP) Reference Guides to local and state government agencies and private
development companies across the State of California during the 2008 calendar year. Ibis
initiative will be designed as a peer-to-peer program for energy efficiency to conform to the
SDG&E's Partnership fund requirements.
Consultant shall abide by each and every term and condition of the Agreement to Jointly Deliver
the 2006-2008 City of Chula Vista Energy Efficiency and Conservation Outreach Program
between the City Of Chula Vista and San Diego Gas & Electric Company, dated July 25, 2006, a
copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B to this Agreement and the Disclosure Agreement,
attached hereto as Exhibit C to this Agreement.
8. Scope of Work and Schedule:
A. Detailed Scope of Work:
Task 1 - Consultant shall conduct a workshop in the San Diego Region to develop outreach plan
components and an implementation strategy that will engage professional associations and special
interest organizations across the State in the delivery of the resource guides to their constituents.
Consultant shall determine the participants who shall include senior representatives of California
investor-owned and municipal utilities, the design-development- building and finance industries, and
local municipal authorities.
Deliverables - An Outreach Planning Workshop, and an Outreach Plan & Implementation Strategy.
Task 2 - Consultant shall negotiate with professional and trade organizations to obtain their
commitment to assist in the distributing of the Resource Guides to their members. Distribution will
take place via transmission of electronic file versions of the guides to their members, special articles
about the guides in regular newsletters and or opportunities to present and distribute the guides at their
conferences.
Deliverables - A minimum of 5 Participant Commitments to assist with the distribution of Resource
Guides.
Task 3 - Consultant shall design and compose the outreach/marketing components for the reference
guides (conversion of the guides into appealing text and graphic layouts suitable for the targeted lay
audiences). The specific components will be determined by the workshop and co-designed with
SDG&E and City of Chula Vista staffs.
Deliverables -
- One branded set of hardcopy/printed guides;
- A CD version of the guides suitable for duplication;
- Promotional ad-copy suitable for placement in magazines & websites;
- A promotional multi-media presentation and script;
- A joint Chula Vista - California Energy Commission - SDG&E Press Release;
Page 17
6-23
- A joint media event to announce the guides in the San Diego Region & Sacramento;
- An opinion/editorial piece for media outlets;
Task 4 - Prepare and deliver promotional speeches at a minimum of 5 key conferences in the State of
California during 2008.
Deliverables - Presentation of Reference Guides at a minimum of 5 Conferences in California
2008 Schedule
December 2007 - Arrange planning workshop logistics & recruit participants
January 2008 - Conduct workshop & schedule fall speaking engagements
February & March - secure partner commitments & resources
April through July - design & compose outreach components
August & September - print & package guides & outreach materials
October - conduct media events & distribute guides & outreach materials
October through December - deliver presentations at conferences
B. Date for Commencement of Consultant Services:
( X ) Same as Effective Date of Agreement
( ) Other:
C. Dates or Time Limits for Delivery of Deliverables:
Deliverable No.1: No later than Januarv 3 L 2008
Deliverable No.2: No later than March 3 L 2008
Deliverable No.3: No later than Julv 3 L 2008
Deliverable No.4: No later than December 31. 2008
D. Date for completion of all Consultant services: No later than December 31,2008
9. Materials Required to be Supplied by City to Consultant:
N/A
10. Compensation:
A. (X) Single Fixed Fee Arrangement.
Page 18
6-24
For performance of all of the Defined Services by Consultant as herein required, City shall
pay a single fixed fee in the amounts and at the times or milestones or for the Deliverables set
forth below:
Single Fixed Fee Amount: One Hundred Fiftv Eight Thousand Dollars ($158.000.00).
payable as follows:
Milestone or Event or Deliverable
Amount or Percent of Fixed Fee
(X) 1. Interim Monthly Advances. The City shall make interim monthly advances
against the compensation due for each phase on a percentage of completion basis for
each given phase such that, at the end of each phase only the compensation for that
phase has been paid. Any payments made hereunder shall be considered as interest
free loans that must be returned to the City if the Phase is not satisfactorily
completed. If the Phase is satisfactorily completed, the City shall receive credit
against the compensation due for that phase. The retention amount or percentage set
forth in Paragraph 19 is to be applied to each interim payment such that, at the end of
the phase, the full retention has been held back from the compensation due for that
phase. Percentage of completion of a phase shall be assessed in the sole and
unfettered discretion by the Contracts Administrator designated herein by the City, or
such other person as the City Manager shall designate, but only upon such proof
demanded by the City that has been provided, but in no event shall such interim
advance payment be made unless the Contractor shall have represented in writing that
said percentage of completion of the phase has been performed by the Contractor.
The practice of making interim monthly advances shall not convert this agreement to
a time and materials basis of payment.
B. ( ) Phased Fixed Fee Arrangement.
For the performance of each phase or portion of the Defined Services by Consultant as are
separately identified below, City shall pay the fixed fee associated with each phase of Services,
in the amounts and at the times or milestones or Deliverables set forth. Consultant shall not
commence Services under any Phase, and shall not be entitled to the compensation for a Phase,
unless City shall have issued a notice to proceed to Consultant as to said Phase.
Phase
l.
2.
3.
Fee for Said Phase
$
$
$
( ) 1. Interim Monthly Advances. The City shall make interim monthly advances
against the compensation due for each phase on a percentage of completion basis for
each given phase such that, at the end of each phase only the compensation for that
phase has been paid. Any payments made hereunder shall be considered as interest
Page 19
6-25
free loans that must be returned to the City if the Phase is not satisfactorily
completed. If the Phase is satisfactorily completed, the City shall receive credit
against the compensation due for that phase. The retention amount or percentage set
forth in Paragraph 19 is to be applied to each interim payment such that, at the end of
the phase, the full retention has been held back from the compensation due for that
phase. Percentage of completion of a phase shall be assessed in the sole and
unfettered discretion by the Contracts Administrator designated herein by the City, or
such other person as the City Manager shall designate, but only upon such proof
demanded by the City that has been provided, but in no event shall such interim
advance payment be made unless the Contractor shall have represented in writing that
said percentage of completion of the phase has been performed by the Contractor.
The practice of making interim monthly advances shall not convert this agreement to
a time and materials basis of payment.
C. ( ) Hourly Rate Arrangement
For performance of the Defmed Services by Consultant as herein required, City shall pay
Consultant for the productive hours of time spent by Consultant in the performance of said
Services, at the rates or amounts set forth in the Rate Schedule herein below according to the
following terms and conditions:
(1) ( ) Not-to-Exceed Limitation on Time and Materials Arrangement
Notwithstanding the expenditure by Consultant oftime and materials in excess of said
Maximum Compensation amount, Consultant agrees that Consultant will perform all of
the Defined Services herein required of Consultant for $ including all
Materials, and other "reimbursables" ("Maximum Compensation").
(2) ( ) Limitation without Further Authorization on Time and Materials Arrangement
At such time as Consultant shall have incurred time and materials equal to
("Authorization Limit"), Consultant shall not be entitled
to any additional compensation without further authorization issued in writing and
approved by the City. Nothing herein shall preclude Consultant from providing additional
Services at Consultant's own cost and expense.
Category of Employee
Rate Schedule
Name of Consultant
Hourly Rate
$
$
$
$
$
Page 20
6-26
( ) Hourly rates may increase by 6% for services rendered after [month], 20_, if delay
in providing services is caused by City.
II. Materials Reimbursement Arrangement
For the cost of out of pocket expenses incurred by Consultant in the performance of services
herein required, City shall pay Consultant at the rates or amounts set forth below:
( X ) None, the compensation includes all costs.
Cost or Rate
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
() Reports, not to exceed $
() Copies, not to exceed $
() Travel, not to exceed $
() Printing, not to exceed $
() Postage, not to exceed $
() Delivery, not to exceed $
() Long Distance Telephone Charges, not to exceed $
() Other Actual Identifiable Direct Costs:
, not to exceed $
, not to exceed $
12. Contract Administrators:
City: Craig Ruiz, Principal Community Development Specialist
City of Chula Vista Community Development Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Consultant: Douglas Newman
5415 N. Sheridan Road
Suite 1711
Chicago, IL 60640
13. Liquidated Damages Rate:
( ) $
( ) Other:
per day.
14. Statement of Economic Interests, Consultant Reporting Categories, per Conflict ofInterest
Code:
( X ) Not Applicable. Not an FPPC Filer.
Page 21
6-27
( ) FPPC Filer
( ) Category No. 1. Investments and sources of income.
( ) Category No.2. Interests in real property.
( ) Category No.3. Investments, interest in real property and sources of income subject
to the regulatory, permit or licensing authority of the department.
( ) Category No.4. Investments in business entities and sources of income that engage in
land development, construction or the acquisition or sale of real property.
( ) Category No. 5. Investments in business entities and sources of income of the type
which, within the past two years, have contracted with the City of Chula Vista
(Redevelopment Agency) to provide services, supplies, materials, machinery or
equipment.
( ) Category No.6. Investments in business entities and sources of income of the type
which, within the past two years, have contracted with the designated employee's
department to provide services, supplies, materials, machinery or equipment.
( ) Category No.7. Business positions.
( ) List "Consultant Associates" interests in real property within 2 radial miles of Project
Property, if any: N/A
15. ( ) Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman
16. Permitted Subconsultants: N/A
17. Bill Processing:
A. Consultant's Billing to be submitted for the following period of time:
(X) Monthly
( ) Quarterly
( ) Other:
B. Day of the Period for submission of Consultant's Billing:
( ) First of the Month
( ) 15th Day of each Month
(X) End of the Month
( ) Other:
Page 22
6-28
C. City's Account Number:
18. Security for Performance
( ) Performance Bond, $
( ) Letter of Credit, $
( ) Other Security:
Type:
Amount: $
( ) Retention. If this space is checked, then notwithstanding other provisions to the contrary
requiring the payment of compensation to the Consultant sooner, the City shall be entitled
to retain, at their option, either the following "Retention Percentage" or "Retention
Amount" until the City determines that the Retention Release Event, listed below, has
occurred:
( ) Retention Percentage:
( ) Retention Amount: $
%
Retention Release Event:
( ) Completion of All Consultant Services
( ) Other:
H:Attorney/2ptyI5
Page 23
6-29
AGREEMENT TO JOINTLY DELIVER THE 2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION OUTREACH PROGRAM
BETWEEN
CITYOFCHULA VISTA
and
SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY
Dated: July 25, 2006
This program is funded by California utility customers under the auspices of the California
Public Utilities Commission.
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-30
THIS AGREEMENT TO JOINTLY DELIVER THE 2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA
VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION OUTREACH PROGRAM (the
"Agreement"), dated July 25, 2006, is effective as of January 1,2006 ("Effective Date") by and
among SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY ("SDG&E"), and THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA ("City"). SDG&E and City may be referred to herein individually as a "Party" and
collectively as the "Parties."
RECITALS
WHEREAS, on September 22, 2005 the California Public Utilities Commission (the
"Commission") in D.05-09-043 authorized certain energy efficiency programs to be delivered to
California utility customers for the years 2006 through 2008 and the continuation of programs
where local governmental entities partnered with utilities to deliver energy efficiency information
and education to utility customers;
WHEREAS, SDG&E submitted applications for the implementation of energy efficiency
programs which included the 2006-2008 City of Chula Vista Energy Efficiency and Conservation
Outreach Program (hereinafter referred to as the "Program"), involving the delivery of energy
efficiency funding, incentives, information, training and materials to City, its residents,
developers, and South Bay cities in SDG&E's service territory;
WHEREAS, the Parties desire to set forth the terms and conditions under which the
Program for the 2006 through 2008 program years shall be implemented;
NOW THEREFORE, for valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is
hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows:
1. DEFINITIONS
1.1. Agreement: This document and all exhibits attached hereto and incorporated
herein, and as amended from time to time.
1.2. ALJ: The Administrative Law Judge assigned to the Commission's Energy
Efficiency Rulemaking (R.01-08-028) or its successor proceeding.
1.3. Amendment: A future document executed by the authorized representatives of all
Parties which changes or modifies the terms of this Agreement.
1A. Authorized Budget: The Commission-approved total for performance of the
Authorized Work is $2,193,225.00 as set forth in the Concept Paper.
1.5. Business Day: The period from one midnight to the following midnight,
excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays.
2
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-31
1.6. Calendar Day: The period from one midnight to the following midnight,
including Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays. Unless otherwise specified, all days in this
Agreement are Calendar Days.
1.7. Concept Paper: The Parties' plans for implementing the Program in SDG&E's
service territory, approved by the Commission, and is attached hereto and incorporated
herein as Exhibit A.
1.8. Contractor: An entity contracting directly or indirectly with a Party, or any
subcontractor thereof subcontracting with such Contractor, to furnish services or
materials as part of or directly related to such Party's Authorized Work obligations.
City's Contractors shall be selected from SDG&E's approved list, where applicable, and
shall not include City's contract staff labor for the Program.
1.9. Eligible Customers or Customers: Customers eligible for Program services are
SDG&E customers.
1.10. Energy Efficiency Measure (or Measure): As such term is used in the
Commission's Energy Efficiency Policy Manual, Version 3, August 2005, a program or
measure approved by the Commission to reduce energy consumption (whether electrical
energy or gas energy).
1.11. EM& V: Evaluation, Measurement and Verification of the Program pursuant to
Commission requirements.
1.12. Gas Surcharge: The funds collected from gas utility ratepayers pursuant to
Section 890 et al. of the California Public Utilities Code for public purposes programs,
including energy efficiency programs approved by the Commission.
1.13. Program Expenditures: Actual (i.e., no mark-up for profit, administrative or other
indirect costs), reasonable expenditures that are directly identifiable to and required for
the Authorized Work, up to the amounts budgeted in the Concept Paper's budget
worksheets for such Authorized Work.
1.14. Public Goods Charge (PGC): The funds collected from electric utility ratepayers
pursuant to Section 381 of the California Public Utilities Code for public purposes
programs, including energy efficiency programs approved by the Commission.
In addition, all terms used in the singular will be deemed to include the plural, and vice versa.
The words "herein," "hereto," and "hereunder" and words of similar import refer to this
Agreement as a whole, including all exhibits or other attachments to this Agreement, as the same
may from time to time be amended or supplemented, and not to any particular subdivision
contained in this Agreement, except as the context clearly requires otherwise. "Includes" or
3
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-32
"including" when used herein is not intended to be exclusive, or to limit the generality of the
preceding words, and means "including without limitation." The word "or" is not exclusive.
2. PURPOSE
The Program is funded by California utility ratepayers and is administered by SDG&E under
the auspices of the Commission. The purpose of this Agreement is to set forth the terms and
conditions under which the Parties will jointly implement the Program. The Program and work
authorized pursuant to this Agreement is not carried on for profit.
This Agreement is not intended to and does not form any "partnership" within the meaning of
the California Uniform Partnership Act of 1994 or otherwise.
3. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Energy Efficiency and Conservation Outreach Program ("ECO Program") is being
offered by SDG&E and the City. The ECO Program aims to enable City, its residents,
developers, and South Bay cities to implement energy efficiency and conservation measures by
overcoming existing barriers. South Bay includes City, Coronado, Imperial Beach, National City
and unincorporated areas of the San Diego County. The ECO Program also aims to increase
public awareness about energy efficiency and conservation through non-traditional education and
outreach outlets and channels used by cities and San Diego County.
The ECO Program will enable target customers to implement energy efficiency and
conservation measures by overcoming barriers that they face. The target customers and barriers
for each customer include:
. City of Chula Vista: The City does not have adequate resources to assign dedicated
staff to pursue and implement energy efficiency projects on a consistent basis.
. Residents: Residents do not have a clear understanding of what programs are
available to them and which programs they qualifY for. Residents also need face-to-
face assistance to access and participate in energy efficiency programs.
. Condominium Conversion Developers: Developers do not have the appropriate
motivations to enhance the energy efficiency level of condominium conversion projects
beyond Title 24 compliance.
. South Bay Cities: South Bay cities lack policies, procedures and plans to
institutionalize energy efficiency and conservation measures into how they do business.
4. AUTHORIZED WORK
4
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-33
4.1. Scope. The work authorized by the Commission for the Program is set forth in
the Concept Paper for the service territory of SDG&E ("Authorized Work") and shall be
performed by the Parties pursuant to the terms of this Agreement.
4.2. Obiectives. Major objectives ("Objectives") for the Program are as follows:
4.2.1. City Energy Efficient Facilities Showcase Proiect. Reduce the City of
Chula Vista's energy use by 5% per year for a cumulative reduction of
15% by 2008 relative to 2005 energy use.
4.2.2. ECO Exhibit Proiect. Increase public awareness by assisting up to 160
people per day, with access to information through the implementation of
up to four (4) Eco Exhibits and/or active participation in energy efficiency
and conservation programs.
4.2.3. Energy Efficient Housing Proiect. Encourage condominium conversion
developers to upgrade the energy efficiency of converted units by
committing to complying with applicable Title 24 requirements and by
further incorporating measures that go beyond Title 24 requirements by at
least 10% or by reducing energy use for each unit by an average of 515
kW-hr and 15 therms per month. At least 500 condominiums per year will
be targeted for upgrades for a total of 1,500 energy efficient
condominiums by 2008, provided, however, the Parties may agree on a
replacement program that would be designed during the program cycle,
which design shall require the mutual agreement of both Parties and shall
comply with Commission procedures.
4.2.4. Municipal Energy BMPs Education Proiect. Sponsor and coordinate at
least four (4) energy efficiency and conservation workshops for cities
every year. The goal of the workshop series is to initially assist South Bay
cities develop energy action plans to manage energy. By the fourth
workshop, participating cities will have an Energy Action Plan to reduce
their energy use. Workshops will be targeted to East County cities in 2007
and North County cities in 2008.
The Program shall meet the objectives and goals set forth in the Concept Paper.
5. OBLIGATIONS OF THE PARTIES
5.1. Generallv. Each Party shall perform its Authorized Work obligations within the
Authorized Budget and in conformance with the deliverables, schedules (including the
Objectives) and the budgets associated with such Authorized Work as set forth in the
Concept Paper, and shall furnish the required labor, equipment and material with the
degree of skill and care that is required by current professional standards.
5
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-34
5.2. Additional Obligations ofCitv.
5.2.1. City shall obtain the approval of SDG&E when developing Program
marketing materials prior to any distribution, publication, circulation or
dissemination in any way to the public. In addition, all advertising,
marketing or otherwise printed or reproduced material used to implement,
refer to or is in any way related to the Program must contain the following
language: "This program is funded by California utility ratepayers and
administered by San Diego Gas & Electric Company, under the auspices
of the California Public Utilities Commission."
5.2.2. City will communicate regularly with the program representative of
SDG&E, and shall advise SDG&E of any problems or delay associated
with City's Authorized Work obligations.
5.3. Additional Obligations of SDG&E.
5.3.1. SDG&E will be actively involved in all aspects of Program delivery.
SDG&E will use its reasonable efforts to add value to the Program by
dedicating the human resources necessary to implement the Program
successfully and providing in-kind services support for the Program's
marketing and outreach activities.
5.3.2. SDG&E shall provide, at no cost to the Program, informational and
educational materials on SDG&E's statewide and local energy efficiency
programs to City to enable City to implement the Program.
5.3.3. SDG&E shall provide a program representative on a part-time basis, who
will be the point of contact between City and SDG&E for the Program.
5.4. EM&V. Once the Commission has approved and issued an evaluation,
measurement and verification ("EM&V") plan for the Program, such EM&V plan shall
be attached to this Agreement as Exhibit B and shall be incorporated herein by this
reference. Any subsequent changes or modifications to such EM&V plan by the
Commission shall be automatically incorporated into Exhibit B.
6. ADMINISTRATION OF PROGRAM
6.1. Decision-making and Approval.
6.1.1. Unless otherwise set forth in this Agreement, the following actions and
tasks require unanimous approval of the Parties (which approval may be
withheld by each such Party in its sole and absolute discretion):
6
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-35
a. Any action that materially deviates from the Concept Paper.
b. Any action that materially impacts the Concept Paper's schedule or
the Program.
c. Any action that materially impacts the Program's budget set forth
in the Concept Paper.
d. Selection of any Contractor not previously approved by SDG&E.
6.1.2. Unless otherwise specified in this Agreement, the Parties shall document
all material Program decisions, including, without limitation, all actions
specified in Section 6.1.1 above, in meeting minutes or, if taken outside a
meeting, through written communication, in all cases which shall be
maintained in hard copy form on file by the Parties for a period of no less
than ten (10) years after the expiration or termination of this Agreement.
6.2. Regular Meetings. During the Term of this Agreement, the Parties shall meet on a
regular basis, which shall occur no less than quarterly, at a location reasonably agreed
upon by the Parties, and shall engage in routine weekly communication to review the
status of the Program's deliverables, schedules and the budgets, and plan for upcoming
Program implementation activities. Any decision-making shall be reached and
documented in accordance with the requirements of Section 6.1.2 above.
6.3. Coordinating the Program Activities. Each Party shall be responsible for (i)
coordinating the implementation of its Authorized Work obligations with the other Party,
and (ii) monitoring the overall progress of the Authorized Work, to ensure that the
Program remains on target, (including achieving the Program's energy savings and
demand reduction goals), on schedule (including pursuant to the Objectives set forth in
Section 4.2), and meets all reporting and other filing requirements.
6.4. Regular Communication. The Parties agree to communicate regularly with the
other Parties and to advise the other Party of any problems associated with successful
implementation of the Program.
6.5. Coordinating with Other Energy Efficiency Programs. As applicable, SDG&E
shall coordinate with other existing or selected programs (including programs targeting
low-income customers) to enhance consistency in incentives and other Program details,
minimize duplicative administrative costs and enhance the possibility that programs can
be marketed together to avoid duplicative marketing expenditures. All Parties will
coordinate with other energy programs to maximize customer satisfaction and energy
savings.
6.6. Non-Responsibilitv for Other Parties. Notwithstanding anything contained in this
Agreement in the contrary, a Party shall not be responsible for the performance or non-
performance hereunder of any other Party, nor be obligated to remedy any other Party's
defaults or defective performance.
7
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-36
7. DOUBLE DIPPING PROHIBITED.
In performing its respective Authorized Work obligations, a Party shall implement the
following mechanism and shall take other practicable steps to minimize double-dipping:
7.1. Prior to providing incentives or services to an Eligible Customer, City shall obtain
a signed form from such Eligible Customer stating that:
7.1.1. Such Eligible Customer has not received incentives or services for the
same measure from any other SDG&E program or from another utility,
state, or local program; and
7.1.2. Such Eligible Customer agrees not to apply for or receive incentives or
services for the same measure from another utility, state, or local program.
City shall keep its Eligible Customer-signed forms for at least ten (10) years after the
expiration or termination of this Agreement.
7.2. City shall not knowingly provide an incentive to an Eligible Customer, or make
payment to a Contractor, who is receiving compensation for the same product or service
either through another ratepayer funded program, or through any other funding source.
7.3. City represents and warrants that it has not received, and will not apply for or
accept, incentives or services for any measure provided for herein or offered pursuant to
this Agreement or the Program from any other utility, state or local program.
7.4. The Parties shall take reasonable steps to minimize or avoid the provision of
incentives or services for the same measures provided under this Program from another
program or other funding source ("double-dipping").
8. REPORTING
8.1. Reporting Requirements. The Parties shall implement those reporting
requirements set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference, as approved by the Commission and as the same may be amended from time to
time, or until the Commission otherwise requires or issues different or updated reporting
requirements for the Program, in which case and at which time such Commission-
approved reporting requirements shall replace the requirements set forth in Exhibit C in
their entirety.
8.2. Commission Reporting Requirements Manual. All reports shall be submitted in
accordance with the requirements of the latest version of the Commission's Reporting
Requirements Manual (currently Version 3, August 2005) and any other reporting
8
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-37
protocol established by Commission staff. The Parties shall use their best efforts to
provide any additional information as requested by SDG&E or by Commission staff.
9. PAYMENTS
9.1. Authorized Budget. No Party shall be entitled to compensation in excess of the
total amounts approved by the Commission in the Authorized Budget for such Party's
Authorized Work obligations. However, if SDG&E executes any fund shift in
accordance with Section 9.4 below, then each Party shall be entitled to compensation up
to, but not exceeding, the Authorized Budget, as revised to reflect such fund shift, for
such Party's Authorized Work obligations.
9.2. Program Expenditures. Each Party shall be entitled to spend PGC or Gas
Surcharge Program Funds on Program Expenditures incurred by such Party.
9.3. Payment to City. In order for City to be entitled to PGC or Gas Surcharge funds
for Program Expenditures:
9.3.1. City shall invoice SDG&E quarterly, in advance and no later than the 15th
day of the first calendar month of each calendar quarter, for all reasonable
projected Program Expenditures for such quarter ("Quarterly Invoice"),
together with all such documentation reasonably required by SDG&E to
evidence the calculation of such projected Program Expenditures and all
such other documentation required to be attached thereto as described in
Section 9.3.2 below. With respect to the quarter in progress at the time of
execution of this Agreement, City shall submit, by the 15th day of the
month in which such execution occurred (or if such 15th day has passed,
then the 15th day of the following month), such Quarterly Invoice for such
quarter in progress (together with all such documentation).
9.3.2. At the end of each calendar quarter of the term of this Agreement, City
shall provide an accounting of all Program Expenditures that actually
incurred by City during the course of such quarter. City shall calculate the
difference between the actual Program Expenditures incurred by City
during the quarter just passed and the amount advanced by SDG&E under
Section 9.3.1 in respect of such quarter. If such actual Program
Expenditures incurred by City during such quarter is greater than such
amount advanced by SDG&E for such quarter, then City's Quarterly
Invoice for the following calendar quarter shall include a charge in the
amount of such difference. If the actual Program Expenditures incurred by
City during such quarter is less than such amount advanced by SDG&E for
such quarter, then City's Quarterly Invoice for the following calendar
quarter shall include a credit in the amount of the amount of such
difference. As a condition to payment by SDG&E in respect of a
9
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-38
Quarterly Invoice, City shall include with such Quarterly Invoice all such
documentation reasonably required by SDG&E evidencing the accounting
set forth in this Section 9.3.2 for the previous calendar quarter.
9.3.3. Upon the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement or the
Program, City shall provide a true-up of Program Expenditures during the
entire term of the Program and shall provide (or shall have provided) no
later than thirty (30) days after the effective date of such expiration or
earlier termination all such documentation reasonably requested by
SDG&E to evidence all Program Expenditures incurred by City during the
term of the Agreement and the Program. Ifthe total actual Program
Expenditures incurred by City during the term of the Program is greater
than the total amount of Program Expenditures paid by SDG&E during the
term of the Program, then City shall deliver an invoice SDG&E in the
amount of such difference at the same time City delivers the
documentation described above in this Section 9.3.3. If the total actual
Program Expenditures incurred by City during the term of the Program is
less than the total amount of Program Expenditures paid by SDG&E
during the term of the Program, then City shall refund the difference to
SDG&E within thirty (30) calendar days after the effective date of such
expiration or earlier termination.
9.3.4. SDG&E shall pay all invoices within thirty (30) calendar days after receipt
such invoice and all documentation and accountings required to be
delivered with such invoice as set forth in this Section 9.3, exclusive of
any disputed items.
9.3.5. City shall submit monthly and quarterly reports to SDG&E, in a format
reasonably acceptable to SDG&E and containing such information as may
be required for the reporting requirements set forth in Section 8 above
("Periodic City Reports"), by the tenth (lOth) Calendar Day of the calendar
month following performance, setting forth all Program Expenditures
incurred during the prior calendar month or quarter, as applicable.
9.3.6. Documentation necessary to substantiate the Program Expenditures shall
include, without limitation, the following:
a. Incentives: Subject to the provisions of Section 7, for each
incentive paid to Eligible Customers or Contractors (other than
point of purchase programs):
(i) Eligible Customer or Contractor name, address and
telephone number;
(ii) the type and quantity of each measure installed or received;
(iii) the amount of each incentive paid, and
10
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-39
(iv) the date each payment was provided or each measure was
installed or received.
b. Labor: For each of the Program's budget categories applicable to
City (e.g. Direct Implementation), a list of individuals and total
hours worked and labor rate(s) for each person during the month in
each budget category.
c. Equipment and Material: A list of equipment and material used
and/or installed in the performance of the Authorized Work during
the month, and supporting documentation for the cost incurred by
City therewith.
d. Overhead items other than travel/training/conferences: Supporting
documentation for overhead items such as rent, computer
equipment, facility charges, is required and shall be provided in
accordance with the provisions of Exhibit C. However, such
information must be provided upon request by either SDG&E or
the Commission.
e. Travel/Training/Conference: Supporting documentation for all
travel-related expenditures. While original receipts need not be
submitted, a detailed expense report for all travel expenses should
be provided, which includes airfare, mileage, meals, lodging,
parking, etc, in the format approved by SDG&E. A detailed travel
expense report should include the following information: name of
person incurring expense, reason for expense, date( s) incurred and
type of expense (e.g. airfare, airport parking, rental car, other
parking, mileage, meals, hotel, other costs, if any).
f. Contractor Costs: Copies of all Contractor invoices. If only a
portion of the Contractor costs applies to the Program, City shall
clearly indicate the line items or percentage of the invoice amount
that should be applied to the Program, as provided in Exhibit C.
g. Marketing: A copy of each distinct marketing material produced,
with quantity of a given marketing material produced and the
method of distribution.
9.3.7. City understands that only those costs listed in the Allowable Cost Table
set forth in Exhibit C can be submitted for payment. All invoices
submitted to SDG&E must report all Program Expenditures using the
allowable cost items included on the Allowable Cost Table set forth in
Exhibit C.
11
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-40
9.3.8. SDG&E reserves the right to reject any City invoiced amount for any of
the following reasons:
a. The invoiced amount, when aggregated with previous Program
Expenditures, exceeds the amount budgeted therefor in the
Authorized Budget for such Authorized Work.
b. There is a reasonable basis for concluding that such invoiced
amount is unreasonable or is not directly identifiable to or required
for the Authorized Work, the Concept Paper or the Program.
c. Such invoiced amount, in SDG&E's sole discretion, contains
charges for any item not authorized under this Agreement or by the
Commission, or is deemed untimely, unsubstantiated or lacking
proper documentation.
9.3.9. Should SDG&E reject any Program Expenditure of City, City invoice or
Periodic City Report, SDG&E may request such additional performance
required from City, modification required to City's invoice or such other
action as may be required of City, and any continuing dispute therefrom
shall be resolved in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 14.
9.3.10. City shall maintain for a period of not less than ten (10) years all
documentation reasonably necessary to substantiate the Program
Expenditures, including, without limitation, the documentation set forth in
Section 9.3.6(a) through (g) above. City shall promptly provide, upon the
reasonable request by SDG&E, any documentation, records or information
in connection with the Program or its Authorized Work.
9.4. Shifting Funds Across Budget Categories. SDG&E may shift Program funds
among budget categories (e.g. Administrative and Direct Implementation) as set forth in
the Concept Paper to the maximum extent permitted under, and in accordance with,
Commission decisions and rulings therefor to which this Program relates.
9.5. Reasonableness of Expenditures. Each Party shall bear the burden of ensuring
that its Program Expenditures are objectively reasonable. The Commission has the
authority to review all Program Expenditures for reasonableness. Should the
Commission, at any time, issue a finding of unreasonableness as to any Program
Expenditure, and require a refund or return of the PGC or Gas Surcharge funds paid in the
reimbursement of such Program Expenditure, the Party who incurred such Program
Expenditure and received reimbursement under this Agreement shall be solely and
severally liable for such refund or return.
12
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-41
9.6. Refund of PGC or Gas Surcharge Funds. With respect to any amount subject to
refund to the Commission pursuant to any subsequent Commission decision or ruling,
should the Commission determine that a refund is due and seeks to recover such refund,
the amount due shall be returned as directed by the Commission, within 30 days of
receipt of written notice that payment is owed, as follows: (1) if the refund is attributable
to an overpayment of Program funds to a Party, then that Party shall be solely liable for
such refund; (2) if the refund is attributable to an unreasonable expenditure, then the Party
who (i) incurred such Program Expenditure and received reimbursement therefor under
this Agreement, or (ii) was otherwise entitled to receive reimbursement under this
Agreement but did not actually receive reimbursement due to receipt of an equivalent
offset, shall be solely liable for such refund; (3) for any other refund, each Party shall be
solely liable for its pro-rata share, determined by calculating the percentage of the total
overall Program Expenditures represented by each Party's reimbursements of Program
Expenditures (both actual reimbursements and those to which the Party was otherwise
entitled but did not receive due to receipt of an equivalent offset). Nothing in this
provision is intended to limit a Party's right to pursue administrative or other remedies
available with respect to a Commission decision or ruling. A Party's approval of any
action which is the responsibility of another Party under this Agreement shall not shift the
corresponding responsibility with respect to any overpayment or unreasonable Program
Expenditure. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any overpayment of Program funds to a
Party (the "Receiving Party") shall be inunediately due and payable by the Receiving
Party, upon demand therefor, to the Party who made the overpayment, and the Party who
made the overpayment shall have the right to set the overpayment off from any other
Program funds payable to the Receiving Party, if possible, or otherwise pursue any
available remedies for the recovery of the overpayment.
10. END DATE FOR PROGRAM AND ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIVITIES.
Unless this Agreement is terminated pursuant to Section 24 below, and subject to the
Objectives, the Parties shall complete all Program Administrative activities (as defined by the
Concept Paper) and reporting requirements by no later than March 31, 2009, and all Direct
Implementation activities (as defined by the Concept Paper) by no later than December 31, 2008,
in each case unless otherwise agreed to by the Parties or so ordered by the Commission.
11. FINAL INVOICES
All Parties must submit final invoices no later than March 31, 2009.
12. INDEMNITY
12.1. Indemnitv bv City. City shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless SDG&E, and
its successors, assigns, affiliates, subsidiaries, current and future parent companies,
officers, directors, agents, and employees, from and against any and all expenses, claims,
losses, damages, liabilities or actions in respect thereof (including reasonable attorneys'
13
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-42
fees) to the extent arising from (a) City's negligence or willful misconduct in City's
activities under the Program or performance of its obligations hereunder, or (b) City's
breach of this Agreement or of any representation or warranty of City contained in this
Agreement.
12.2. Indemnity bv SDG&E. SDG&E shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless City
and its successors, assigns, affiliates, subsidiaries, current and future parent companies,
officers, directors, agents, and employees, from and against any and all expenses, claims,
losses, damages, liabilities or actions in respect thereof (including reasonable attorneys'
fees) to the extent arising from (a) SDG&E's negligence or willful misconduct in
SDG&E's activities under the Program or performance of its obligations hereunder or (b)
SDG&E's breach of this Agreement or any representation or warranty of SDG&E
contained in this Agreement.
12.3. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY. NO PARTY SHALL BE LIABLE TO ANY
OTHER PARTY FOR ANY INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL
DAMAGES WHATSOEVER WHETHER IN CONTRACT, TORT (INCLUDING
NEGLIGENCE) OR STRICT LIABILITY INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO,
LOSS OF USE OF OR UNDER-UTILIZATION OF LABOR OR FACILITIES, LOSS
OF REVENUE OR ANTICIPATED PROFITS, COST OF REPLACEMENT POWER
OR CLAIMS FROM CUSTOMERS, RESULTING FROM A PARTY'S
PERFORMANCE OR NONPERFORMANCE OF THE OBLIGATIONS HEREUNDER,
OR IN THE EVENT OF SUSPENSION OF THE AUTHORIZED WORK OR
TERMINATION OF THIS AGREEMENT.
13. OWNERSHIP OF DEVELOPMENTS
The Parties acknowledge and agree that SDG&E, on behalf of its ratepayers, shall own all
data, reports, information, manuals, computer programs, works of authorship, designs or
improvements of equipment, tools or processes (collectively "Developments") or other written,
recorded, photographic or visual materials, or other deliverables produced in the performance of
this Agreement; provided, however, that Developments do not include equipment or
infrastructure purchased for research, development, education or demonstration related to energy
efficiency. Although City shall retain no ownership, interest or title in the Developments except
as may otherwise be provided in the Concept Paper, it will have a permanent, royalty free, non-
exclusive license to use such Developments for the City's internal use and at the City's sole but
reasonable discretion for the residents and businesses within the City's current and future
municipal boundaries.
14. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
14.1. Dispute Resolution. Except as may otherwise be set forth expressly herein, all
disputes arising under this Agreement shall be resolved as set forth in this Section 14.
14
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-43
14.2. Negotiation and Mediation. The Parties shall attempt in good faith to resolve any
dispute arising out of or relating to this Agreement promptly by negotiations between the
Parties' authorized representatives. The disputing Party shall give the other Parties
written notice of any dispute. Within twenty (20) days after delivery of such notice, the
authorized representatives shall meet at a mutually acceptable time and place, and
thereafter as often as they reasonably deem necessary to exchange information and to
attempt to resolve the dispute. If the matter has not been resolved within thirty (30) days
of the fIrst meeting, any Party may initiate a mediation of the dispute. The mediation shall
be facilitated by a mediator that is acceptable to all Parties and shall conclude within sixty
(60) days of its commencement, unless the Parties agree to extend the mediation process
beyond such deadline. Upon agreeing on a mediator, the Parties shall enter into a written
agreement for the mediation services with each Party paying a pro rate share of the
mediator's fee, if any. The mediation shall be conducted in accordance with the
Commercial Mediation Rilles of the American Arbitration Association; provided,
however, that no consequential damages shall be awarded in any such proceeding and
each Party shall bear its own legal fees and expenses.
14.3. ConfIdentiality. All negotiations and any mediation conducted pursuant to
Section 14.2 shall be confIdential and shall be treated as compromise and settlement
negotiations, to which Section 1152 of the California Evidence Code shall apply, which
Section is incorporated in this Agreement by reference.
14.4. Iniunctive Relief. Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions, a Party may seek a
preliminary injunction or other provisional judicial remedy if in its judgment such action
is necessary to avoid irreparable damage or to preserve the status quo.
14.5. Continuing Obligation. Each Party shall continue to perform its obligations under
this Agreement pending fmal resolution of any dispute arising out of or relating to this
Agreement.
14.6. Failure of Mediation. If, after good faith efforts to mediate a dispute under the
terms of this Agreement as provided in Section 14.2 above, the Parties cannot agree to a
resolution of the dispute, any Party may pursue whatever legal remedies may be available
to it at law or in equity, before a court of competent jurisdiction and with venue as
provided in Section 34.
15. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES
City represents, warrants and covenants, as of the Effective Date and thereafter during the
Term of this Agreement that:
15.1. The Authorized Work performed by City and its Contractors shall comply with
the applicable requirements of all statutes, acts, ordinances, regulations, codes, and
standards of federal, state, local and foreign governments, and all agencies thereof.
15
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-44
15.2. The Authorized Work performed by City and its Contractors shall be free of any
claim of trade secret, trade mark, trade name, copyright, or patent infringement or other
violations of any proprietary rights of any person.
15.3. City shall conform to the applicable employment practices requirements of
(Presidential) Executive Order 11246 of September 24,1965, as amended, and applicable
regulations promulgated thereunder.
15.4. City shall contractually require each Contractor it hires to perform the Authorized
Work to indemnify SDG&E to the same extent City has indemnified SDG&E under the
terms and conditions ofthis Agreement.
15.5. City shall retain, and shall cause its Contractors to retain, all records and
documents pertaining to its Authorized Work obligations for a period of not less than five
(5) years beyond the termination or expiration of this Agreement.
IS .6. City shall contractually require all of its Contractors to provide SDG&E
reasonable access to relevant records and staff of Contractors concerning the Authorized
Work.
15.7. City will take all reasonable measures, and shall require its Contractors to take all
reasonable measures, to ensure that the Program funds in its possession are used solely
for Authorized Work, which measures shall include the highest degree of care that City
uses to control its own funds, but in no event less than a reasonable degree of care.
15.8. City will maintain, and shall require its Contractors to maintain, insurance
coverage or self insurance coverage in reasonable and customary coverage and amounts
at all times during the Term of this Agreement.
a.
16. PROOF OF INSURANCE
16.1. Evidence of Coverage. Upon request at any time during the Term of this
Agreement, City shall provide evidence that its insurance policies (and the insurance
policies of any Contractor, as provided in Section 15.8) are in full force and effect, and
provide the coverage and limits of insurance that City has represented and warranted
herein to maintain at all times during the Term of this Agreement.
16.2. Self-Insurance. If City is self-insured, City shall upon request forward
documentation to SDG&E that demonstrates to SDG&E's satisfaction that City self-
insures as a matter of normal business practice before commencing the Authorized Work.
SDG&E will accept reasonable proof of self-insurance comparable to the above
requirements.
16
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-45
17. CUSTOMER CONFIDENTIALITY REQUIREMENTS
17.1. Non-Disclosure. City, its employees, agents and Contractors shall not disclose
any Confidential Customer Information (defined below) to any third party during the
Term of this Agreement or after its completion, without City having obtained the prior
written consent of SDG&E, except as provided by law, lawful court order or subpoena
and provided City gives SDG&E advance written notice of such order or subpoena.
17.2. Confidential Customer Information. "Confidential Customer Information"
includes, but is not limited to, a SDG&E customer's name, address, telephone number,
account number and all billing and usage information, as well as any SDG&E customer's
information that is marked confidential. If City is uncertain whether any information
should be considered Confidential Customer Information, City shall contact SDG&E
prior to disclosing the customer information.
17.3. Non-Disclosure Agreement. Prior to any approved disclosure of Confidential
Customer Information, SDG&E may require City to enter into a nondisclosure agreement.
17.4. Commission Proceedings. This Section 17 does not prohibit City from disclosing
non-confidential information concerning the Authorized Work to the Commission in any
Commission proceeding, or any Commission-sanctioned meeting or proceeding or other
public forum.
17.5. Return of Confidential Information. Confidential Customer Information
(including all copies, backups and abstracts thereof) provided to City by SDG&E, and any
and all documents and materials containing such Confidential Customer Information or
produced by City based on such Confidential Customer Information (including all copies,
backups and abstracts thereof), during the performance of this Agreement shall be
returned upon written request by SDG&E.
17.6. Remedies. The Parties acknowledge that Confidential Customer Information is
valuable and unique, and that damages would be an inadequate remedy for breach of this
Section 17 and the obligations of City are specifically enforceable. Accordingly, the
Parties agree that in the event of a breach or threatened breach of this Section 17 by City,
SDG&E shall be entitled to seek and obtain an injunction preventing such breach, without
the necessity of proving damages or posting any bond. Any such relief shall be in
addition to, and not in lieu of, money damages or any other available legal or equitable
remedy.
17.7. Public Records Act. Notwithstanding the foregoing, SDG&E understands that all
information provided to the City may be subject to public review pursuant to the
California Public Records Act (California Government Code Section 6250 et seq.), which
17
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-46
provides that records in the custody of a public entity might be disclosed unless the
information being sought falls into one or more of the exemptions to disclosure set out in
Govermnent Code Sections 6254 through 6255. As a result, City may be obligated to
disclose any information provided to the City to any party that requests it to the extent
permitted under the California Public Records Act.
18. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE
The Parties hereby acknowledge that time is of the essence in performing their obligations
under the Agreement. Failure to comply with deadlines stated in this Agreement may result in
termination of this Agreement, payments being withheld or other Program modifications as
directed by the Commission.
19. CUSTOMER COMPLAINT RESOLUTION PROCESS
City shall develop and implement a process for the management and resolution of customer
complaints in an expedited manner including, but not limited to: (a) ensuring adequate levels of
professional customer service staff; (b) direct access of customer complaints to supervisory
and/or management personnel; (c) documenting each customer complaint upon receipt; and (d)
elevating any complaint that is not resolved within five (5) days of receipt by City.
20. RESTRICTIONS ON MARKETING
20.1. Use of Commission's Name. No Party may use the name of the Commission on
marketing materials for the Program without prior written approval from the Commission
staff. In order to obtain this written approval, SDG&E must send a copy of the planned
materials to the Commission requesting approval to use the Commission name and/or
logo. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Parties shall disclose their source of funding for
the Program by stating prominently on marketing materials that the Program is "funded
by California ratepayers under the auspices of the California Public Utilities
Commission."
20.2. Use of SDG&E's Names. City must receive prior review and written approval
from SDG&E for the use of SDG&E's name or logo on any marketing or other Program
materials (which approval may be withheld at SDG&E's sole and absolute discretion).
City shall allow twenty (20) days for SDG&E review and approval.
20.3. Use of City Name. SDG&E must receive prior written approval from City for use
of City's name or logo on any marketing or other Program materials (which approval may
be withheld at City's sole and absolute discretion). SDG&E shall allow twenty (20) days
for such City review and approval.
21. RIGHT TO AUDIT
18
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-47
City agrees that SDG&E and/or the Commission, or their respective designated
representatives, shall have the right to review and to copy any records or supporting
docwnentation pertaining to City's performance of this Agreement or the Authorized Work,
during normal business hours, and to allow reasonable access in order to interview any
employees of City who might reasonably have information related to such records. Further, City
agrees to include a similar right of SDG&E and/or the Commission to audit records and
interview staff in any subcontract related to performance of City's Authorized Work or this
Agreement.
22. STOP WORK PROCEDURES
SDG&E may suspend City's Authorized Work being for good cause, such as concerns related
to funding, implementation or management of the Program, safety concerns, fraud, or excessive
Customer complaints, by notifYing City in writing to suspend its Authorized Work being
performed in its service territory. City shall stop work immediately, and may reswne its
Authorized Work only upon receiving written notice from SDG&E that it may reswne its
Authorized Work.
23. MODIFICATIONS
Changes to this Agreement shall only be made by mutual agreement of all Parties through a
written amendment to this Agreement signed by all Parties.
24. TERM AND TERMINATION
24.1. Term. This Agreement shall be effective as of January 1,2006. Subject to Section
36 below and Section 10 above, this Agreement shall continue in effect until March 31,
2009 ("Term") unless otherwise earlier terminated in accordance with the provisions of
Section 24.2,24.3 or 29 below or any other provisions of this Agreement.
24.2. Termination for Breach. Any Party may terminate this Agreement in the event of
a material breach by the other Party of any of the material terms or conditions of this
Agreement, provided such breach is not remedied within sixty (60) days notice to the
breaching Party thereof from the non-breaching Party or otherwise cured pursuant to the
dispute resolution provisions set forth in Section 14 herein.
24.3. Termination for Convenience. SDG&E and the City of Chula Vista shall each
have the right to terminate this Agreement, at their sole convenience and without first
obtaining the other Party's prior consent, by providing at least thirty (30) days' prior
written notice to the other Party setting forth the effective date of such termination.
24.4. Effect of Termination.
19
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-48
24.4.1. In the event of termination of this Agreement, the Parties shall be entitled
to PGC and/or Gas Surcharge Funds for all Program Expenditures incurred
or accrued pursuant to contractual or other legal obligations for Authorized
Work up to the effective date of termination of this Agreement, provided
that any Periodic City Reports or other reports, invoices, documents or
information required under this Agreement or by the Commission are
submitted in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
The provisions of this Section 24.4.1 shall be a Party's sole compensation
resulting from any termination of this Agreement.
24.4.2. In the event of termination of this Agreement, City and SDG&E shall stop
any Authorized Work in progress and take action as directed by the other
Party to bring the Authorized Work to an orderly conclusion, and the
Parties shall work cooperatively to facilitate the termination of operations
and any applicable contracts for Authorized Work. SDG&E shall, within
30 days, make payment to the City for any Program Expenditures incurred
by City prior to the effective date of the termination, unless otherwise
prohibited by law or CPUC action.
25. WRITTEN NOTICES
Any written notice, demand or request required or authorized in connection with this
Agreement, shall be deemed properly given if delivered in person or sent by facsimile, nationally
recognized overnight courier, or fIrst class mail, postage prepaid, to the address specifIed below,
or to another address specifIed in writing by a Party as follows:
City:
The City of Chula Vista
Michael Meacham, Director Conservation &
Environmental Services Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
(619) 407-3545 telephone
(619) 409-5884 facsimile
mmeacham ci.chula-vista.ca.us
SDG&E:
San Diego Gas & Electric Company
Risa Baron, Energy Programs Supervisor
8306 Century Park Ct
San Diego, CA 92123-1530
(858) 654-1103 telephone
(858) 654-1175 facsimile
rbaron@semprautilities.com
Notices shall be deemed received (a) if personally or hand-delivered, upon the date of delivery to
the address of the person to receive such notice if delivered before 5:00 p.m., or otherwise on the
Business Day following personal delivery; (b) if mailed, three (3) Business Days after the date
the notice is postmarked; (c) if by facsimile, upon electronic confIrmation of transmission,
followed by telephone notifIcation of transmission by the noticing Party; or (d) if by overnight
courier, on the Business Day following delivery to the overnight courier within the time limits set
by that courier for next-day delivery.
20
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-49
26. CONTRACTS
Each Party shall, at all times, be responsible for its Authorized Work obligations, and acts
and omissions of Contractors and persons directly or indirectly employed by such Party for
services in connection with the Authorized Work.
27. RELATIONSHIP OF THE PARTIES
The Parties shall act in an independent capacity and not as officers or employees or agents of
each other. This Agreement is not intended to and does not form any "partnership" within the
meaning of the California Uniform Partnership Act of 1994 or otherwise.
28. NON-DISCRIMINATION CLAUSE
No Party shall unlawfully discriminate, harass, or allow harassment against any employee or
applicant for employment because of sex, race, color, ancestry, religious creed, national origin,
physical disability (including mv and AIDS), mental disability, medical condition (cancer), age
(over 40), marital status, and denial of family care leave. Each Party shall ensure that the
evaluation and treatment of its employees and applicants for employment are free from such
discrimination and harassment, and shall comply with the provisions of the Fair Employment and
Housing Act (Government Code Section 12990 (a)-(t) et seq.) and the applicable regulations
promulgated thereunder (California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Section 7285 et seq.). The
applicable regulations of the Fair Employment and Housing Commission implementing
Government Code Section 12990 (a)-(t), set forth in Chapter 5 of Division 4 of Title 2 of the
California Code of Regulations, are incorporated into this Agreement by reference and made a
part hereof as if set forth in full.
Each Party represents and warrants that it shall include the substance of the
nondiscrimination and compliance provisions of this clause in all subcontracts for its Authorized
Work obligations.
29. COMMISSION AUTHORITY TO MODIFY
This Agreement shall at all times be subject to the discretion of the Commission, including,
but not limited to, review and modifications, excusing a Party's performance hereunder, or
termination as the Commission may direct from time to time in the reasonable exercise of its
jurisdiction. In addition, in the event that any ruling, decision or other action by the Commission
adversely impacts the Program, as determined at their respective sole discretion, SDG&E and the
City shall each have the right to terminate this Agreement (subject, however, to the provisions of
Sections 24.4 and 36) by providing at least ten (10) days' prior written notice to City setting forth
the effective date of such termination. SDG&E shall, within 30 days, make payment to the City
for any Program Expenditures incurred by City prior to the effective date of the termination,
unless otherwise prohibited by law or CPUC action.
21
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-50
30. NON-WAIVER
None of the provisions of this Agreement shall be considered waived by any Party unless
such waiver is specifically stated in writing.
31. ASSIGNMENT
No Party shall assign this Agreement or any part or interest thereof, without the prior written
consent of the other Party, and any assignment without such consent shall be void and of no
effect. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if SDG&E is requested or required by the Commission to
assign its rights and/or delegate its duties hereunder, in whole or in part, such assignment or
delegation shall not require City's consent, and SDG&E shall be released from all obligations
hereunder arising after the effective date of such assignment, both as principal and as surety.
32. FORCE MAJEURE
Failure of a Party to perform its obligations under this Agreement by reason of any of the
following shall not constitute an event of default or breach of this Agreement: strikes, picket
lines, boycott efforts, earthquakes, fires, floods, war (whether or not declared), revolution, riots,
insurrections, acts of God, acts of government (including, without limitation, any agency or
department of the United States of America), acts of terrorism, acts of the public enemy, scarcity
or rationing of gasoline or other fuel or vital products, inability to obtain materials or labor, or
other causes which are reasonably beyond the control of such Party.
33. SEVERABILITY
In the event that any of the terms, covenants or conditions of this Agreement, or the
application of any such term, covenant or condition, shall be held invalid as to any person or
circumstance by any court, regulatory agency, or other regulatory body having jurisdiction, all
other terms, covenants, or conditions of this Agreement and their application shall not be affected
thereby, but shall remain in full force and effect, unless a court, regulatory agency, or other
regulatory body holds that the provisions are not separable from all other provisions of this
Agreement.
34. GOVERNING LAW; VENUE
This Agreement shall be interpreted, governed, and construed under the laws of the State of
California as if executed and to be performed wholly within the State of California. Any action
brought to enforce or interpret this Agreement shall be filed in San Diego County, California.
35. SECTION HEADINGS
Section headings appearing in this Agreement are for convenience only and shall not be
construed as interpretations of text.
22
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-51
36. SURVIVAL
Notwithstanding completion or of this Agreement, the Parties shall continue to be bound by
the provisions of this Agreement which by their nature or terms survive such completion or
termination. Such provisions shall include, but are not limited to, Sections 8, 9,12,13,14,17,
21,34,36 and 37 of this Agreement.
37. ATTORNEYS' FEES
Except as otherwise provided herein, in the event of any legal action or other proceeding
between the Parties arising out of this Agreement or the transactions contemplated herein, each
Party in such legal action or proceeding shall bear its own costs and expenses incurred therein,
including reasonable attorneys' fees.
38. COOPERATION
Each Party agrees to cooperate with the other Parties in whatever manner is reasonably
required to facilitate the successful completion of this Agreement.
39. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
This Agreement (including the Exhibits hereto) contains the entire agreement and
understanding between the Parties and merges and supersedes all prior agreements,
representations and discussions pertaining to the Authorized Work.
40. APPROVALS
Unless otherwise set forth in herein, approvals required of a Party shall not be unreasonably
withheld by such Party.
41. COUNTERPARTS.
This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed
to be an original, but all of which together shall be deemed to be one and the same instrument.
(Signature page follows)
23
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-52
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by
their duly authorized representatives.
CITY:
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ff~ Ah~
..-
Attest:
Susan Bigelow, City Clerk:
f
~/(Q--tt' k
Steph~n Padilla, Mayor
SDG&E:
LECTRIC COMPANY
,
Name: Anne Shen Smith
Title: Sr. Vice President. Customer Service
24
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-53
EXlllBIT A
2006-2008 CONCEPT PAPER
2006-2008 Energy Efficiency Concept Paper
City of Chula Vista & San Diego Gas & Electric Initiative
Conservation Outreach Program (ECO Program)
1
. Proiected Pro!!ram Bud!!et
2006 2007 2008
Administration
Administrative Overheads $ 36,554 $ 36,554 $ 36,554
Administrative Other $ 255,876 $ 255,876 $ 255,876
Marketina & Outreach $ - $ - $ -
Direct Imolementation
Incentives $ - $ - $ -
Activitv $ 438,645 $ 438,645 $ 438,645
Installation $ - $ - $ -
Hardware & Materials $ - $ - $ -
Rebate Processina & Insoection $ - $ - $ -
EM&V $ - $ - $ -
Total $ 731,075 $ 731,075 $ 731,075
2.
Net kWh
1,277,626
Savings identified in this paper are estimated based on the Energy Efficient Housing Project component. The
kW, kWh and therm savings along with incentives and rebates for City ofChula Vista retrofit projects for City
facilities are included in the SDG&E Energy Savings Bid Program (see City Energy Efficient Facilities
Showcase Project below). There are no projected kW, kWh and therm direct savings for the ECO Exhibit and
the Municipal Energy BMPs Education Projects.
3. Program Cost Effectiveness
Attached
4. Program Descriptors
The Energy Efficiency and Conservation Outreach Program (ECO Program) is being offered by San Diego
Gas & Electric Company, (SDG&E) and the City of Chula Vista (Chula Vista). The ECO Program aims to
enable Chula Vista, residents, developers, and Southbay cities to implement energy efficiency and
conservation measures by overcoming existing barriers. Southbay includes Chula Vista, Coronado, Imperial
Beach, National City and unincorporated areas of the San Diego County. The ECO Program also aims to
increase public awareness about energy efficiency and conservation through non-traditional education and
outreach outlets and channels used by cities and the County.
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-54
5. Program Statement
The ECO Program will enable target customers to implement energy efficiency and conservation measures by
overcoming barriers that they face. The target customers and barriers for each customer include:
. City of Chnla Vista: The City does not have adequate resources to assign dedicated staff to pursue and
implement energy efficiency projects on a consistent basis.
. Residents: Residents do not have a clear understanding of what programs are available to them and
which programs they qualifY for. Residents also need face-to-face assistance to access and participate in
energy efficiency programs.
. Condominium Conversion Developers: Developers do not have the appropriate motivations to
enhance the energy efficiency level of condominium conversion projects beyond Title 24 compliance.
. Southbay Cities: Southbay Cities lack policies, procedures and plans to institutionalize energy efficiency
and conservation measures into how they do business.
6. Program Rationale
. City Energy Efficient Facilities Showcase Project: Chula Vista has over 100 City owned buildings
and infrastructure that consume electricity and natural gas. The City has about 550 electricity and
natural gas meters and uses approximately 18 million kW -hrs of electricity and approximately 800,000
therms of natural gas annually. Due to addition of new City buildings and infrastructure, the City's
energy use is projected to increase by at least 5% in 2006. The City's annual energy budget is
approximately $3.4 million. The City's actual energy costs are also projected to increase due to new
City load and rising energy rates. Although the City has aggressively pursued energy efficiency
retrofits to reduce energy use, to reduce cost, to improve maintenance and to reduce its impact on the
environment, there are still many opportunities to improve how the City uses energy. An opportunity to
position City facilities to participate in SDG&E's demand response programs also exists. The ECO
Progriun seeks to enable the City to manage its energy use more effectively and consistently by
providing funding to the City for dedicated energy staff.
. ECO Exhibit Project: Chula Vista has co-sponsored Hard-to-Reach lighting events with SDG&E for
the past three years at various City venues. Year after year, an average of 600 households (.01 % of
Chula Vista's housing stock) participate in the one-day events to exchange their inefficient
incandescent light bulbs for more efficient compact fluorescent lights. Approximately 15% of the
participating households also sign up for SDG&E programs available to low income and senior
citizens. The City believes that the success of the events can be attributed to effective execution of a
marketing plan developed by SDG&E and City staff, face-to-face assistance from SDG&E and City
staff and customer convenience. The mobile ECO Exhibits aims to provide face-to-face assistance and
convenience on a more predictable basis by placing the staffed ECO Exhibits in high traffic community
locations. The City's believes that it can reach more than the .01 % of the households in the City by
providing a predictable location where residents can go to for assistance on energy issues.
. Energy Efficient Housing Project: There are currently about 800 apartment units at various stages of
the condominium conversion process by the City's Planning and Building Department. The Chula
Vista Planning and Building department estimates that at least 500 units per year will undergo
conversions from apartments to condominiums from 2006 to 2008 in. There is an untapped potential
for energy efficiency since condominium conversion developers are not often required to meet the most
current Title 24 requirements. Under this project, condominium conversion projects with three or more
units will be eligible for expedited plan review and permitting if they commit to incorporating energy
efficiency measures to exceed Title 24 requirements by at least 10% or if they incorporate measures to
reduce the average energy use for each unit by 515 kW-hr and 15 therms per month. Note: SDG&E,
along with the City of Chula Vista, City of San Diego, and the County of San Diego will continue to
review various options for implementing Title 24 guidelines. Where necessary, standard thresholds may
be applied Although it is preferred that program participants not receive utility incentives payments, in
exchange for expedited approval of their requested building permits or land use, ability to participate in
26
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-55
both the expedite and incentive programs may be considered. Both strategies will be reviewed during
the initial phases of the program.
. Municipal Energy BMPs Education Project: Staff from Southbay cities have continually expressed
their desire to participate in energy efficiency programs available from SDREO and SDG&E.
Unfortunately, due to competing priorities, staff from Southbay cities have not dedicated time or
resources to pursuing potential energy retrofit projects. Staff believes that the major barrier to
participating in energy efficiency programs is their City's lack of policies related to energy
management. The goal of the Municipal Energy BMPs Education project workshop series is to assist
cities develop energy action plans for Council adoption to manage energy more effectively. The City
ofChula Vista's C02 Reduction Plan will be used as a model for the workshops. By the end of the
fourth workshop, participating cities will have an Energy Action Plan to reduce their energy use.
7. Program Outcomes
The program is a savings, education and outreach program, which will deliver net energy savings, peak
demand savings and sustained efficiency at City facilities, for residents, multi-family housing units and at
other Cities.
The desired outcomes of the ECO Partnership are to:
o Enable the City to pursue energy efficiency projects and implement demand
response at City owned facilities,
o Enable residents to take action by educating residents about energy efficient
technology and energy conservation best management practices,
o Enable and motivate developers to invest in energy efficiency upgrades for
multi-dwelling units by expediting the City's plan review and permitting
process,
o Enable Southbay cities to institutionalize energy efficiency and conservation
into their practices by providing a step-by-step approach to developing and
implementing locally adopted policies.
8. Program Strategy
The City will assign an Energy Administrator to oversee general management of the ECO Program. The
Energy Administrator will be responsible for coordinating with SDG&E, SDREO and other third party
provider staff to ensure ECO Program projects work plans are developed and implemented to meet
established goals and objectives. The Energy Administrator will also coordinate efforts with internal and
external partners to develop effective outreach and marketing material to ensure program clarity. The
program strategies that will be used are:
. Residential New Construction
. Residential Target Marketing
8.1.1 Program Strategy Description
Residential New Construction:
The program strategy for this part of the program is to expedite plan review and permitting to incent builders
to include more energy efficient measures into condos converted from apartments. The City will reach
condominium conversions developers by modif'ying plan review and permit applications to inform developers
about the expedite process.
Residential Target Marketing
There are several parts to this strategy. The first is to provide face-to-face energy efficiency and conservation
outreach to low income, elderly and other hard-to-reach customers. This will be done thorough mobile energy
efficiency and conservation outreach exhibits (ECO Exhibits) staffed by trained personnel. The mobile ECO
27
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-56
Exhibits will be located at City facilities and at regional centers such as shopping centers and malls throughout
the Southbay. The second is to sbare lessons learned and best management practices (BMPs) with Southbay
cities through a series of four workshops. The last element is to provide the City with funding to hire
dedicated energy staff. Energy staff funded by the partnership will develop retrofit projects for both new and
existing City buildings and facilities, working with SDG&E's Saving's by Design and Sustainable
Communities Program to design and build City facilities that are at least 20% more energy efficient than state
standards.
8.1.2 Program Indicators
Encourage condominium conversion developers to upgrade the energy efficiency of converted units by
committing to complying with applicable Title 24 requirements and by further incorporate measures that go
beyond Title 24 requirements by at least 10% or by reducing energy use for each unit
Increase public awareness by assisting an average of 160 people per day (average of 40 people per day at each
ECO Exhibit) access and participate in energy efficiency and conservation programs.
Sponsor and coordinate at least four energy efficiency and conservation workshops for cities every year. The
goal of the workshop series is to initially assist South Bay cities develop energy action plans to manage
energy.
Major program objectives for the ECO Program projects are as follows:
City Energy Efficient Facilities Showcase Project: Reduce the City's energy use by 5% per year for a
cumulative reduction of 15% by 2008 relative to 2005 energy use.
ECO Exhibit Project: Increase public awareness by assisting an average of 160 people per day (average of
40 people per day at each ECO Exhibit) access and participate in energy efficiency and conservation
programs.
Energy Efficient Housing Project: Encourage condominium conversion developers to upgrade the energy
efficiency of converted units by committing to complying with applicable Title 24 requirements and by further
incorporate measures that go beyond Title 24 requirements by at least 10% or by reducing energy use for each
unit by an average of 515 kW-hr and 15 therms per month. Participating developers will receive expedited
plan review and permitting. At least 500 condominiums per year will be targeted for upgrades for a total of
1,500 energy efficient condominiums by 2008.
Municipal Energy BMPs Education Project: Sponsor and coordinate at least four energy efficiency and
conservation workshops for cities every year. The goal of the workshop series is to initially assist South Bay
cities develop energy action plans to manage energy. By the fourth workshop, participating cities will have an
Energy Action Plan to reduce their energy use. Workshops will be targeted to east county cities in year 2 and
north county cities in year 3.
9. Program Objectives
Major program objectives for the ECO Program projects are as follows:
City Energy Efficient Facilities Showcase Project: Reduce the City's energy use by 5% per year for a
cumulative reduction of 15% by 2008 relative to 2005 energy use.
ECO Exhibit Project: Increase public awareness by assisting an average of 160 people per day (average of
40 people per day at each ECO Exhibit) access and participate in energy efficiency and conservation
programs.
Energy Efficient Housing Project: Encourage condominium conversion developers to upgrade the energy
efficiency of converted units by committing to complying with applicable Title 24 requirements and by further
28
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-57
incorporate measures that go beyond Title 24 requirements by at least 10% or by reducing energy use for each
unit by an average of515 kW-hr and 15 therms per month. Participating developers will receive expedited
plan review and permitting. At least 500 condominiums per year will be targeted for upgrades for a total of
1,500 energy efficient condominiums by 2008.
Municipal Energy BMPs Education Project: Sponsor and coordinate at least four energy efficiency and
conservation workshops for cities every year. The goal of the workshop series is to initially assist South Bay
cities develop energy action plans to manage energy. By the fourth workshop, participating cities will have an
Energy Action Plan to reduce their energy use. Workshops will be targeted to east county cities in year 2 and
north county cities in year 3.
10. Program Implementation
The ECO Program consists of four projects to overcome barriers to implementing and participating in energy
efficiency and conservation programs. Each project aims to achieve energy efficiency and conservation
through a combination of energy efficiency retrofit projects at City facilities, public education and outreach at
high traffic community destinations, expedited plan review and permitting services for condominium
conversion projects and best management practices workshops for County cities. The projects and
implementation plans are described below:
a) City Energy Efficient Facilities Showcase Project
The goal of this element is to facilitate installation of energy efficiency measures
and development of efficiency and conservation outreach best management
practices (BMPs) for City facilities and employees by providing the City with
funding to hire dedicated energy staff. Energy staff funded by the partnership will
develop retrofit projects for City buildings and facilities. For existing facilities,
energy staff will work with the San Diego Regional Energy Office's (SDREO) to
participate in SDG&E's Energy Savings Bid Program. SDREO will assist the City
to assess opportunities through audits and identify incentives, development of an
implementation plan, access project incentives, develop a funding mechanism and
coordinate project execution to achieve energy savings. For new facilities, energy
staffwill work with SDG&E's Saving's by Design and Sustainable Communities
Program to design and build City facilities that are at least 20% more energy
efficient than state standards. Energy staff will also work to develop, implement
and train City personnel about energy BMPs to improve energy conservation
practices by employees. The City's goal is to reduce baseline energy use at City
facilities by at least 5% per year over the three-year period. The City's energy
goals are captured in SDG&E's Energy Savings Bid Program.
29
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-58
b) ECO Exhibit Project
The goal of this element is to provide face-to-face energy efficiency and
conservation outreach to low income, elderly and other hard-to-reach
customers. This project will reach the target audience through mobile energy
efficiency and conservation outreach exhibits (ECO Exhibits) staffed by
trained personnel. The mobile ECO Exhibits will be located at City facilities
and at regional centers such as shopping centers and malls throughout the
Southbay and potentially countywide. Specifically, the mobile ECO Exhibits
locations will include but are not limited to a local City hall, at libraries,
recreational centers, police stations, local shopping centers and regional
shopping malls. The ECO Exhibits will be used to engage the target audience
to learn about energy efficiency and energy conservation. Trained personnel
will demonstrate energy efficient technology available in the marketplace to
residents, educate residents about low or no-cost energy conservation
practices, assist residents access programs offered by energy conservation
program providers such as SDG&E and SDREO, allow residents to conduct
home energy audits via the internet and direct residents to EnergyStar
product retailers. The ECO Exhibits will also coordinate with SDG&E's
Hard-to-Reach Lighting Turn-in Program to market and provide a venue for
hard to reach customers to exchange inefficient lights for more efficient
lights. Lastly, the ECO Exhibits will serve as an outlet to recruit participants
for SDREO's Shade Tree Program.
c) Energy Efficient Housing Project:
The goal of this element is to improve the energy efficiency of existing multi-family
housing units that are proposed for conversion from apartments to condominiums by
providing expedited plan review and permitting services. The City will reach
condominium conversions developers by modifying plan review and permit
applications to inform developers about the expedite process.
d) Municipal Energy BMPs Education Project
The goal of this element is to share lessons learned and BMPs with Southbay cities
through a series of four workshops. In November 2000, the City adopted a C02
Reduction Plan to reduce the City's greenhouse gas emissions. The C02 Plan's goals
are to reduce the City's reliance on fossil fuel and to improve the energy efficiency of
City buildings and facilities. Since 1990, the City has retrofitted and constructed
buildings and facilities that are more energy efficient than the State's conservation
standards (Title 24). The City will use existing forums and outlets to reach Southbay
cities. The City will use the C02 Plan as a model to encourage and assist other cities
develop their own strategic plan to achieve energy efficiency at their facilities and to
incorporate low or no cost energy conservation BMPs into how they do business. The
project's goal is to enable Southbay cities to develop and adopt strategic policies to
improve their energy efficiency and reduce their environmental impact.
11. Customer Description
City facilities and staff, residents, condominium conversion developers, Southbay cities in San Diego County
are eligible to participate in ECO Partnership prognuns.
12. Customer Interface
. City Energy Efficient Facilities Showcase Project: The Energy Administrator will
coordinate internally with city staff to develop and implement retrofit projects for City
30
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-59
facilities. As described in the SDG&E's Energy Savings Bid Program, public agencies
including the City of Chula Vista will receive the following energy efficiency project
related services from the San Diego Regional Energy Office (SDREO) at no cost:
o Energy audits
o Technical assistance, and
o Incentive documentation/processing
. ECO Exhibit Project: The Energy Administrator will coordinate with SDREO,
SDG&E, cities and the County to develop and place the mobile ECO Exhibits in high
traffic locations. The ECO Exhibits staff will serve to engage customers to participate in
energy efficiency and conservation programs. ECO Exhibits customers will have an
opportunity to learn about energy efficient technology, receive information about low-or-
no cost energy conservation best management practices and receive direct assistance to
access offerings from other program providers.
. Energy Efficient Housing Project: The Energy Administrator will coordinate with
SDG&E and the City's Planning and Building staff to streamline the City's plan review
and permitting process application for condominium conversions projects. The Energy
Administrator will also act as a liaison between the City's Planning and Building staff
and developers to resolve any potential issues.
. Municipal Energy BMPs Education Project: The Energy Administrator will work
with SDREO and SDG&E to develop a series of four workshops per year to assists cities
develop individual strategic plans to manage their energy use and budget more
effectively. The Energy Administrator will base the workshops on the City of Chula
Vista's C02 Reduction Plan. The C02 Plan guides the City's effort to reduce reliance on
fossil fuel, improve energy efficiency for buildings and vehicles and to reduce the City's
overall impact on the environment. The workshops will be marketed to cities through
existing working group technical committees such as San Diego County's Pollution
Prevention Committee and SANDAG's Energy Working Group.
13. Energy Measnres and Program Activities
13.1. Prescriptive Measures
See SDG&E February I, 2006 Filing Workbook.
13.2. kWh Level Data -
See SDG&E February 1,2006 Filing Workbook.- Savings are included in the Energy Savings Bid
Program
13.3. Non-Energy Activities-
Audits, Education and Technical Assistance may be utilized
14. Subcontractor Activities
None
15. Quality Assurance and Evaluation Activities
Quality assurance for city facilities projects will consist of on-site inspections by SDREO through
SDG&E's Energy Savings Bid Program. Quality assurance for condominium conversion projects
will consist of on-site inspections by SDG&E's utility inspection department.
An evaluation plan will be developed in accordance with the soon to be developed EM& V
Protocols. The CPUC Energy Division will be holding meetings, workshops and possibly
31
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VlSTAENERGYEFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-60
hearings throughout the summer to develop these Protocols. SDG&E looks forward to
participating and commenting on those activities and plans to file EM& V plans for all programs on
October I, 2005 in conjunction with the ED, CEC, and the other IOUs
16. Marketing Activities
The City will work with, SDREO, SDG&E, City of San Diego and the County of San Diego to
develop and distribute marketing material to promote the ECO Partnership Programs to target
customers through new and existing distribution channels. These channels will include but are
limited to the four mobile ECO Exhibits, governing board meetings, public access cable stations,
partner websites, partner publications (Chula Vista Spotlight), employee newsletters and local
community newspapers.,
17. CPUC Objective
The Energy ECO Partnership between SDG&E and the City of Chula Vista is a community wide
effort that will enable the City, residents, developers and Southbay cities to implement sustainable
energy efficiency and conservation measures. The program supports the CPUC objectives of
minimizing lost opportunities and increasing the pursuit and implementation of cost-effective
energy efficiency.
32
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-61
EXlllBIT B
EM&V PLAN
[TO BE ATTACHED WHEN ISSUED BY THE COMMISSION]
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-62
EXIllBIT C
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
1. Reporting
1.1 City shall provide SDG&E with the requisite information, in accordance with Section 9.4 of the
Agreement, on the prior month's activities, accomplishments and expenditures related to its respective
Authorized Work obligations, for purposes of preparing the Monthly, Quarterly and Annual Reports.
1.2 SDG&E shall provide City in accordance with the provisions of Section 25 of the Agreement, or
otherwise make available to City on SDG&E's website, a copy of the filed Monthly Report within five
(5) Business Days after filing.
2. Monthly Report
2.1 Program Data - A spreadsheet table or tables listing which includes the following information:
Program Costs (cost reported cumulative-to-date (also referred to as inception-to-date))
a. Program identification nwnber as provided by the Program Administrator
b. Program name
C. Total cwnulative program authorized budget as adopted by the Commission
d. Total cwnulative program operating budget which includes any mid-course budget modifications
(e.g., fund shifts)
e. Total cwnulative program expenditures
f. Total program expenditures for the report month
g. Total cwnulative commitments (limited to incentive commitments)
Program Impacts (cost reported cumulative-to-date (also referred to as inception-to-date))
a. Total cwnulative net kW, kWh, and Therm savings projections
b. Total cwnulative achieved net kW, kWh and Therm savings
c. Total achieved net kW, kWh and Therm savings for the report month
d. Total committed (limited to incentive commitments) net kW, kWh and Therm savings
2.2 Program ChangeslNew Program Information
If applicable. the following information should be reported in the Monthly report:
a. Identification of program with operating budgets reduced during the report month
b. Identification of program with operating budgets increased during the report month
c. Identification of program terminated during the report month
3. Quarterly Report
3.1 Portfolio Benefit/Cost Metrics (Cumulative to Date)
a. Total cost to billpayers (TRC, administrative cost and incremental cost per the Standard Practice
Manual)
b. Total savings to billpayers (TRC)
c. Net benefits to billpayers (TRC)
d. TRC Ratio
e. PACRatio
f. Cost per kWh saved (centsIkWh) (PAC)
g. Cost per therm savings ($/therm) (PAC)
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-63
3.2 Measure List -A spreadsheet table for each program or program elementl containing each measure
installed, service rendered, or measure/service committed during the report month for which the
Program Implementer intends to claim savings. The Program Implementer should include any new
measures as part of the quarterly report. The list should display each measure as it is tracked and
recorded by the implementer and should include the following parameters at a minimum:
a. Name of Measure or Service Rendered
b. Measure or Service Description
c. DEER Measure ID (where applicable)
d. DEER Run ID (where applicable)
e. Unit Definition
f. Unit gross kWh savings
g. Unit gross Therms savings
h. Unit gross kW demand reduction
i. Incremental Measure Cost
j. Net to Gross Ratio
k. Effective Useful Life
I. Detailed end use classification (using classification scheme in section 6)
m. Quantity Installed during report period
n. Quantity Committed during report period
o. Rebate amount paid
p. Market Sector classification (using classification scheme in section 6)
q. Market Segment classification (using classification scheme in section 6)
3.3 Expenditures for the program per cost reporting format below (Appendix to Attachment contains list
of allowable costs) :
a. Commission Authorized Budget
b. Operating Budget
c. Total Expenditures
i. Administrative Cost
ii. Marketing/Advertising/Outreach Costs
iii. Direct Implementation
3.4 GBI Report - Progress towards achieving goals of the Green Building Initiative, if applicable
(Cumulative results)
a. Estimate of expenditures on program activities that contribute towards GBI goals (including both
public and non-public commercial participants)
b. Net cumulative achieved kW, kWh and Therm savings contributing towards GBI goals.
c. Net achieved kW, kWh and Therm savings contributing towards GBI goals for the quarter.
d. A description of non-resource program activities that support the Green Building Initiative,
including marketing and outreach activities.
e. Estimate of square footage affected by program activities supporting the Green Building Initiative
f. Items b, c and e above disaggregated by:
i. 2-digit NAICS code
ii. Aggregated end use classification (using classification scheme in section 5)
3.5 Program Narratives - For the program, a description of the program activities occurring during the
quarter.
a. Administrative activities
b. Marketing activities
1 Identification of distinct programs and program elements may be determined by CPUC staff at a
later time.
35
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-64
c. Direct Implementation activities
d. City's assessment of program performance and program status (is the program on target, exceeding
expectations, or falling short of expectations, etc.)
e. For non-resource programs and program elements (programs or program elements that are not
claiming direct energy impacts), a discussion of the status of program achievements.
f. Discussion of changes in program emphasis (new program elements, less or more emphasis on a
particular delivery strategy, program elements discontinued, measure discontinued, etc.)
g. Discussion of near term plans for program over the coming months (e.g., marketing and outreach
efforts that are expected to significantly increase program participation, etc.)
h. Changes to staffing and staff responsibilities, if any
i. Changes to contacts, if any
j. Changes to subcontractors and subcontractor responsibilities, if any
k. Number of customer complaints received
1. Program Theory and Logic Model ifnot already provided in the program's implementation plan,
or if revisions have been made.
3.6 Utility Quarterly Reports - SDG&E shall provide City a copy of the filed Quarterly Report within
two (2) Business Days after filing with the Commission in accordance with the provisions of the
Agreement.
4. Annual Reports
The format and content of the annual report is expected to be developed by the CPUC in fall 2006. The Program
Implementer will be required to fulfill these reporting obligations for their program.
5. Reporting Terminology Definitions
Adopted Program Budget - The program budget as it is adopted by the Commission. Inclusive of costs (+/-)
recovered from other sources.
Operating Program Budget - The program budget as it is defined by the program administrators for internal
program budgeting and management purposes. Inclusive of costs (+/-) recovered from other sources.
Direct Implementation Expenditures - Costs associated with activities that are a direct interface with the customer
or program participant or recipient (e.g., contractor receiving training). (Note: This is still an open issue, the items
included in this definition may be changed by the CPUC pending discussion on the application of the State's
Standard Practice Manual.)
Report Month - The month for which a particular monthly report is providing data and information. For example,
the report month for a report covering the month of July 2006, but prepared and delivered later than July 2006,
would be July 2006.
Program Strategy - The method deployed by a program in order to obtain program participation.
Program Element - A subsection of a program, or body of program activities within which a single program
strategy is employed. (Example: A body of program activities employing both an upstream rebate approach and a
direct install approach is not a single program element.)
6. Measure Classification
Measure End-Use Classification
Each energy efficiency measure reported should be classified into one of the following end-use categories
36
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-65
Residential End Uses
Detailed End Use
Clothes Dryer
Clothes Washer
Consumer Electronics
Cooking
Dishwasher
Other Appliance
Building Shell
Space Cooling
Space Heating
Interior Lighing
Exterior Lighting
Pool Pump
Freezers
Refrigeration
Water Heating
Other (User Entered Text String Description)
Nonresidential End Uses
Detailed End Use
Building Shell
Space Cooling
Space Heating
Ventilation
Daylighting
Interior Lighting
Exterior Lighting
Office Equipment
Compressed Air
Cooking
Food Processing
Motors
Process Cooling
Process Heat
Process Steam
Pumps
Refrigeration
Other (User Entered Text String Description)
Aggregated End Use
Appliances
Appliances
Consumer Electronics
Cooking Appliances
Appliances
Appliances
HVAC
HVAC
HVAC
Lighting
Lighting
Pool Pump
Refrigeration
Refrigeration
Water Heating
Other
Aggregated End Use
HVAC
HVAC
HVAC
HVAC
Lighting
Lighting
Lighting
Office
Process
Process
Process
Process
Process
Process
Process
Process
Refrigeration
Other
Measure Market SectorlMarket Segment Classification
Where reports require market sector or market segment classification, the following classification scheme should be
used.
Market Sector
Residential
Single Family
Multi Family
Mobile Homes
Market Segment
NA
NA
NA
NA
37
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-66
Nonresidential
Commercial
Industrial
Agricultural
Unknown
NAICS CODE (greater than 2 digit not required)
NAICS CODE (greater than 2 digit not required)
NAICS CODE (greater than 2 digit not required)
NAICS CODE (greater than 2 digit not required)
NA
7. Allowable Costs
Allowable Costs Table
The cost items listed on the Allowable Costs sheet are the only costs that can be claimed for ratepayer-funded energy
efficiency work. The costs reported should be only for costs actually expended. Any fmancial commitments are to be
categorized as commitments. If the reporting entity does not have a cost as listed on the cost reporting sheet, then no
cost is to be reported for that item. These Allowable Cost elements are to be used whenever costs are invoiced or
reported to the program administrator. If there is a desire to include additional Allowable Cost elements, the program
administrator should be contacted in order for the administrator to seek approval from the CPUC.
3/30/2006
Cost Cateaories Allowable Costs
Administrative Cost Category
Manaaerlal and Clerical Labor
IOU Labor - Clerical
IOU Labor - prOOram Desian
IOU Labor - Proaram Development
IOU Labor - Proaram Plannina
IOU Labor - Proaram/Proiect Manaaement
IOU Labor - Staff Manaaement
IOU Labor - Staff Supervision
Subcontractor Labor - Clerical
Subcontractor Labor - Proaram Desian
Subcontractor Labor - Program Development
Subcontractor Labor - Proaram Planning
Subcontractor Labor - Proaram/Proiect Manaoement
Subcontractor Labor - Staff Management
Subcontractor Labor - Staff Supervision
Human Resource SUDDOrt and DeveloDment
IOU Labor - Human Resources
IOU Labor - Staff Development and Trainino
IOU Benefits - Administrative Labor
IOU Benefits - Direct Implementation Labor
IOU Benefits - Marketino/Advertisino/Outreach Labor
IOU Pavroll Tax - Administrative Labor
IOU Pavroll Tax - Administrative Labor
IOU Pavroll Tax - Administrative Labor
IOU Pension - Administrative Labor
IOU Pension - Direct Implementation Labor
IOU Pension - Marketina/Advertising/Outreach Labor
Subcontractor Labor- Human Resources
Subcontractor Labor - Staff Development and Trainina
Subcontractor Benefits - Administrative Labor
Subcontractor Benefits - Direct Implementation Labor
Subcontractor Benefits - Marketing/Advertisino/Outreach Labor
Subcontractor Pavroll Tax - Administrative Labor
Subcontractor Pavroll Tax - Direct Implementation Labor
38
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-67
Allowable Costs Table
The cost items listed on the Allowable Costs sheet are the only costs that can be claimed for ratepayer-funded energy
efficiency work. The costs reported should be only for costs actually expended. Any financial commitments are to be
categorized as commitments. If the reporting entity does not have a cost as listed on the cost reporting sheet, then no
cost is to be reported for that item. These Allowable Cost elements are to be used whenever costs are invoiced or
reported to the program administrator. If there is a desire to include additional Allowable Cost elements, the program
administrator should be contacted in order for the administrator to seek aooroval from the CPUC.
3/30/2006
Cost Cateaories Allowable Costs
Subcontractor Payroll Tax - Marketino/Advertisina/Outreach Labor
Subcontractor Pension - Administrative Labor
Subcontractor Pension - Direct Implementation Labor
Subcontractor Pension - Marketina/Advertlsina/Outreach Labor
Travel and Conference Fees
IOU Conference Fees
IOU Labor - Conference Attendance
IOU Travel - Airfare
IOU Travel - LodQinQ
IOU Travel - Meals
IOU Travel - Mileage
IOU Travel - ParkinQ
IOU Travel - Per Diem for Misc. Exoenses
Subcontractor - Conference Fees
Subcontractor Labor - Conference Attendance
Subcontractor - Travel - Airfare
Subcontractor - Travel - Lodaina
Subcontractor - Travel - Meals
Subcontractor - Travel - MileaQe
Subcontractor - Travel - Parkina
Subcontractor - Travel - Per Diem for Misc. Exoenses
Overhead (General and Adminlstrativel- Labor and Materials
IOU Equipment Communications
IOU Equipment Computino
IOU Equipment Document Reoroduction
IOU Equipment General Office
IOU Equipment Transportation
IOU Food Service
IOU Office Supplies
IOU Postaoe
IOU Labor - Accountina Support
IOU Labor - Accounts Payable
IOU Labor - Accounts Receivable
IOU Labor - Administrative
IOU Labor - Facilities Maintenance
IOU Labor - Materials Manaaement
IOU Labor - Procurement
IOU Labor - Shop Services
IOU Labor - Transportation Services
IOU Labor - Automated Svstems
IOU Labor - Communications
IOU Labor - Information Technoloav
IOU Labor - Telecommunications
39
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-68
Allowable Costs Table
The cost items listed on the Allowable Costs sheet are the only costs that can be claimed for ratepayer-fimded energy
efficiency work. The costs reported should be only for costs actually expended. Any financial commitments are to be
categorized as commitments. If the reporting entity does not have a cost as listed on the cost reporting sheet, then no
cost is to be reported for that item. These Allowable Cost elements are to be used whenever costs are invoiced or
reported to the program administrator. If there is a desire to include additional Allowable Cost elements, the program
administrator should be contacted in order for the administrator to seek aooroval from the CPUC.
3/30/2006
Cost Cate!lories Allowable Costs
Subcontractor Equipment Communications
Subcontractor Equioment Comoutina
Subcontractor Equipment Document Reproduction
Subcontractor Eauipment General Office
Subcontractor Equipment Transportation
Subcontractor Food Service
Subcontractor Office Supplies
Subcontractor PostaQe
Subcontractor Labor - Accountina Support
Subcontractor Labor - Accounts Pavable
Subcontractor Labor - Accounts Receivable
Subcontractor Labor - Facilities Maintenance
Subcontractor Labor - Materials ManaQement
Subcontractor Labor - Procurement
Subcontractor Labor - Shop Services
Subcontractor Labor - Administrative
Subcontractor Labor - Transportation Services
Subcontractor Labor - Automated Svstems
Subcontractor Labor - Communications
Subcontractor Labor - Information TechnoloGv
Subcontractor Labor - Telecommunications
Marketina/Advertisina/Outreach Cost Category
IOU - Advertisements / Media Promotions
IOU - Bill Inserts
IOU - Brochures
IOU - Door Hanaers
IOU - Print Advertisements
IOU - Radio Spots
IOU - Television Soots
IOU - Website Development
IOU Labor - MarketinQ
IOU Labor - Media Production
IOU Labor - Business Outreach
IOU Labor - Customer Outreach
IOU Labor - Customer Relations
Subcontractor - Bill Inserts
Subcontractor - Brochures
Subcontractor - Door Hanaers
Subcontractor - Print Advertisements
Subcontractor - Radio Spots
Subcontractor - Television Spots
Subcontractor - Website Development
Subcontractor Labor - Marketino
40
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-69
Allowable Costs Table
The cost items listed on the Allowable Costs sheet ate the only costs that can be claimed for ratepayer-funded energy
efficiency work. The costs reported should be only for costs actually expended. Any financial commitments ate to be
categorized as commitments. If the reporting entity does not have a cost as listed on the cost reporting sheet, then no
cost is to be reported for that item. These Allowable Cost elements ate to be used whenever costs ate invoiced or
reported to the program administrator. If there is a desire to include additional Allowable Cost elements, the program
administrator should be contacted in order for the administrator to seek aOOloval from the CPUC.
3/30/2006
Cost Cateaorles Allowable Costs
Subcontractor Labor - Media Production
Subcontractor Labor - Business Outreach
Subcontractor Labor - Customer Outreach
Subcontractor Labor - Customer Relations
Direct ImDlementatlon Cost Cateaorv
Financial Incentives to Customers
Activltv - Direct Labor
IOU Labor - Curriculum Develooment
IOU Labor - Customer Education and Traininq
IOU Labor - Customer Equipment Testino and Diaonostics
IOU Labor - Facilities Audits
Subcontractor Labor - Facilities Audits
Subcontractor Labor - Curriculum Develooment
Subcontractor Labor - Customer Education and Traininn
Subcontractor Labor - Customer Equioment Testino and Diagnostics
Installation and Service - Labor
IOU Labor - Customer Eouipment Repair and Servicino
IOU Labor - Measure Installation
Subcontractor Labor - Customer Equipment Repair and Servicino
Subcontractor Labor - Customer Eouioment Repair and Servicing
Direct Implementation Hardware and Materials
IOU Audit Aoolications and Forms
IOU Direct Implementation Literature
IOU Education Materials
IOU Energy Measurement Tools
IOU Installation Hardware
Subcontractor - Direct Implementation Literature
Subcontractor - Education Materials
Subcontractor - Enerov Measurement Tools
Subcontractor - Installation Hardware
Subcontractor -Audit Applications and Forms
Rebate Processina and InsDection - Labor and Materials
IOU Labor - Field Verification
IOU Labor - Site Inspections
IOU Labor - Rebate Processino
IOU Rebate Applications
Subcontractor Labor - Field Verification
Subcontractor Labor - Rebate Processinn
Subcontractor - Rebate Applications
41
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-70
EXHIBIT D
NITLESTONESCHEDULE
City shall achieve, during each Program year, the following targets by December 31 of such
Program year:
Municipal Energy BMP Education Project
. Recruit & Hire interns/Temporary Expert Professionals
. IdentifY Interested Local Government Peer Sectors
. Contact & Survey Local Governments
. Develop Potential Workshop-Outreach Activity Schedule-Peer Input
. Conduct Targeted Workshop-Activities - that Foster Local Energy Plans
. Conduct Remaining Workshops-Activities
. Evaluate
. IdentifY Targets for Future Productive Outreach Activities
. Monitor Status, Record Quarterly Report and Evaluation Data
ECO Exhibit Project
. Recruit & Hire Interns/Temporary Expert Professionals
. Create Exhibit Plan & Seek Approval from all Parties
. Order Exhibit Displays and Graphics
. Establish Distribution Strategy & Schedule
. Distribute Exhibits and Implement Schedules-
. Ongoing Support & Maintenance of Exhibits
. Implement Resident Outreach Projects to Supplement Exhibits
. Monitor Status, Record Quarterly Report and Evaluation Data
Energy Efficient Housing Small Business and Mixed Use Project
. Recruit & Hire interns/Temporary Expert Professional
. Establish Program Incentives
. Apply Incentives to Existing City Programs
. Coordinate, Communicate with Development Staff for Future Eligible Project
. Implement Projects Adequate to Meet Kilowatt & Therm Reduction Objectives,
. Monitor Status, Record Quarterly Report and Evaluation Data
City Energy Efficient Facilities Showcase Project
. Recruit & Hire Staff
42
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-71
. IdentifY and Prioritize Facilitiesrrechnologies/Services and Policies with Greatest
Potential to Meet or Exceed Targeted Energy Reduction Goals
. Develop Contract/Service Agreements
. Implement Project Priorities
. Monitor Status, Record Quarterly Report and Evaluation Data
43
2006-2008 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM AGREEMENT
6-72
Exhibit B
NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENT
In Connection with that certain Agreement to Jointly Deliver the 2006-2008 City of
Chula Vista Energy Efficiency and Conservation Outreach Program ("Partnership Agreement")
between San Diego Gas & Electric Company ("SDG&E') and the City of Chula Vista ("Other
Party") relating to the implementation of the Program described therein ("Transaction"), SDG&E
anticipates disclosing to Other Party, and Other Party may learn of, Confidential Information (as
defmed below). Capitalized terms used herein but not defined herein shall have their meanings set
forth in the Partnership Agreement. As a condition to such disclosure by SDG&E to each of the
Other Party's directors, officers, employees, agents or advisors who have a direct need to access
such Confidential Information for the purpose of carrying out the Transaction (collectively
"Representatives"), the parties hereby agree as follows:
1. DEFINITION
"Confidential Information" shall mean proprietary information concerning the business,
operations and assets of SDG&E, its present and future direct or indirect subsidiaries or affiliates,
whether or not prepared in connection with the Transaction, which may include, without
limitation, Confidential Customer Information (as defined in the Partnership Agreement), any
business plans, documentation, source code, object code, diagrams, flow charts, research,
development, processes, marketing techniques and materials, development or marketing
timetables, strategies, development plans, customer, supplier or employee names or information,
pricing policies and financial and valuation information, and other information of a similar nature
whether or not reduced to writing or other tangible form, and any trade secrets, whether or not
defmed as "trade secrets" under the Uniform Trade Secrets Act of California, excluding
information (I) known to Other Party or its Representative prior to obtaining the same from
SDG&E; (2) in the public domain at the time of disclosure by Other Party; (3) obtained by Other
Party or its Representative from a third party who did not receive same, directly or indirectly,
from SDG&E subject to an binding and enforceable nondisclosure agreement; or (4) approved for
release by written authorization of an authorized officer of SDG&E.
2. LIMITED USE; NONDISCLOSURE
Other Party hereby agrees that it shall use, and shall cause its Representatives to use, the
Confidential Information solely for the purpose of carrying out the Transaction, and not in any
way detrimental to SDG&E, and that only its Representatives shall have access to the
Confidential Information. Other Party shall not, and shall cause its Representatives not to, (i) use
the Confidential Information for its or its Representatives' own benefit other than for the limited
purposes set forth herein, or (ii) make any copies, backups or abstracts of such Confidential
Information, however stored, without first obtaining the prior written consent of SDG&E unless
necessary for the implementation or completion of the Transaction. Other Party agrees to use the
same degree of care it uses with respect to its own proprietary or confidential information oi" a
reasonable standard of care to prevent unauthorized use or disclosure of the Confidential
Information. Except as otherwise provided herein, Other Party will keep confidential and not
disclose, and shall cause its Representatives to keep confidential and not disclose, the
Confidential Information to any third party. Other Party shall cause each of its Representatives to
become familiar with, and abide by, the terms of this Agreement.
1
6-73
3. COURT OR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 2 above, Other Party and its Representatives may
disclose any of the Confidential Information in the event, but only to the extent, that, based upon
advice of counsel, it is required to do so by the disclosure requirements of any law, rule, or
regulation or any order, decree, subpoena or ruling or other similar process of any court,
governmental agency or governmental or regulatory authority. Prior to making or permitting any
of its Representatives to make such disclosure, Other Party shall provide SDG&E with prompt
written notice of any such requirement so that SDG&E (with Other Party's assistance) may seek a
protective order or other appropriate remedy.
4. PUBLICITY
Without the prior written consent of SDG&E, Other Party shall not, and shall cause its
Representatives not to, disclose to any person (i) the fact that the Confidential Information has
been made available to Other Party or its Representatives, or (ii) any information regarding the
ongoing discussions between the parties, including the fact that such discussions are occurring; ,
however, that Other Party and its Representatives may disclose the information described in
clauses (i) and (ii) above if such disclosure is required under any of the circumstances described
in Article 3 above, in which case the procedures specified therein with respect to such disclosure
shall apply.
5. DOCUMENT RETENTION
At any time upon the request of SDG&E, Other Party shall promptly deliver (and return, if
applicable) to SDG&E or destroy (with such destruction to be certified to SDG&E) (i) all
Confidential Information existing in written form or recorded in any other tangible medium (and
all copies, abstracts and backups thereof, however stored) furnished to Other Party or any of its
Representatives, (ii) all portions of all documents, instruments, data, reports, plans, specifications,
abstracts and media (and all copies, abstracts and backups thereof, however stored) furnished to
or prepared by Other Party or any of its Representatives that contain Confidential Information,
and (iii) all other portions of all documents, installments, data, reports, plans, specifications,
abstracts and media (and all copies, abstracts and backups thereof, however stored) in Other
Party's or its Representatives' possession that contain or that are based on or derived from
Confidential Information. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Other Party may retain one copy of any
work product produced by Other Party in the course of carrying out the Transaction for its own
archival records (in which case the other confidentiality obligations contained in this Agreement
shall continue to apply) or to comply with any disclosure requirement of any regulatory authority
having jurisdiction over the Transaction.
6. SURVIVAL
Notwithstanding the return or destruction of all or any part of the Confidential Information, the
terms of this Agreement shall nevertheless remain in full force and effect with respect to specific
Confidential Information until the date that is five (5) years after the date of disclosure of such
Confidential Information, except that the terms of this Agreement shall remain in full force and
effect with respect to Confidential Customer Information in perpetuity.
2
6-74
7. ASSIGNMENT
Other Party may not assign (by operation of law or otherwise) any of its rights or obligations
hereunder without the prior written consent of SDG&E.
8. REMEDIES
The parties acknowledge that the Confidential Information is valuable and unique, and that
damages would be an inadequate remedy for breach of this Agreement and the obligations of
Other Party and its Representatives are specifically enforceable. Accordingly, the parties agree
that in the event of a breach or threatened breach of this Agreement by Other Party, SDG&E shall
be entitled to seek an injunction preventing such breach, without the necessity of proving
damages or posting any bond. Any such relief shall be in addition to, and not in lieu of, money
damages or any other legal or equitable remedy available to SDG&E.
9. NO IMPLIED LICENSES
Nothing in this Agreement will be construed as granting any rights to the Other Party, by license
or otherwise, to any Confidential Information, except as specifically stated in this Agreement.
10. NONWAIVER
It is understood and agreed that no failure or delay by SDG&E in exercising any right, power or
privilege available hereunder or under applicable law shall operate as a waiver thereof, nor shall
any single or partial exercise thereof preclude any other or further exercise thereof the exercise of
any other such right, power or privilege.
11. ENTIRE AGREEMENT; AMENDMENT
This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject
matter hereof, and may be amended only in writing signed by both parties. This Agreement
supersedes any previous confidentiality or nondisclosure agreement or contractual provisions
between the parties to the extent they relate to the subject matter hereof.
12. GOVERNING LAW
The formation, interpretation and performance of this Agreement shall be governed by the
internal laws of the State of California.
13. ATTORNEYS' FEES
If any action at law or in equity is brought to enforce or interpret the proVISIOns of this
Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the unsuccessful party all costs,
expenses (including expert testimony) and reasonable attorneys' fees, including allocated costs
and fees of in-house counsel, incurred therein by the prevailing party.
14. VENUE AND ,JURISDICTION
In the event of any litigation to enforce or interpret any terms of this Agreement, the parties agree
that such action will be brought in the Superior Court of the County of San Diego, California (or,
if the federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction over the subject matter of the dispute, in the U.S.
3
6-75
District Court for the Southern District of California), and the parties hereby submit to the
exclusive jurisdiction of such courts.
15. NOTICES
All notices to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing and either sent by (i) a nationally
recognized overnight courier service, in which case notice shall be deemed delivered as of the
date shown on the courier's delivery receipt; (ii) telecopy during business hours of the recipient,
with a copy of the notice also deposited in the United States mail (postage prepaid) the same
business day, in which case notice shall be deemed delivered on transmittal by telecopier
provided that a transmission report is generated reflecting the accurate transmission of the
notices; or (iii) United States mail, postage prepaid, in which case notice shall be deemed
delivered as of two business days after deposit in the mail, addressed as follows:
If to SDG&E:
With a copy to:
If Other Party:
San Diego Gas & Electric Company
8306 Century Park Court, CP42D
San Diego, CA 92123-1530
Facsimile: (858) 654-0311
Attn: Julie Ricks
Sempra Energy
101 Ash Street
San Diego, CA 92101
Facsimile: (619) 696-4670
Attn: General Counsel
City ofChula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Telephone: 619-409-5870
Facsimile: 619-476-5310
Attn: Michael Meacham
These addresses may be changed by written notice to the other Party provided that no notice of a
change of address shall be effective until actual receipt of the notice. Copies of notices are for
informational purposes only, and a failure to give or receive copies of any notice shall not be
deemed a failure to give notice.
16. SAVINGS CLAUSE; EFFECT OF UNIFORM TRADE SECRETS ACT
If any provision of this Agreement or the application thereof to any person, place, or
circumstance, shall be held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, unenforceable, or
void, the remainder of the Agreement and such provisions as applied to other persons, places, and
circumstances shall remain in full force and effect. In the event of any conflict between any
provision hereof and any provision of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act of California, the provision
affording the greater degree of protection to the disclosing party shall control.
17. NO REPRESENTATION OR WARRANTY
Other Party acknowledges and agrees that neither SDG&E nor any of SDG&E's representatives
or agents is making any representation or warranty, express or implied, as to the accuracy or
4
6-76
.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date last
written below.
CUYOf~CbiSm A~U ~ ,
By: ~J-
Aavid ;' Garcia
Name:
Approved as to legal form
~i_~ cA.- ~
Ann Moore f-r'--'
City Attorney
Title: City Manager
Date: \ ~l ~y. \)1
SAN DffiGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY
~ ~~'"
Name: t:Jtdflr emt1l~f ;:?~,eJ/-#,P Approved as to legal form
-- ,b 'd' /f1/I7V~i?lZ
Title: ~tr- 4. Sr"4SA1uJ see:.... ~ {(s/Or
...A /. - / (Attorney's initials)
Date: U/!-O/ tf r-
"t-77
COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA WAIVING THE FORMAL CONSULTANT
SELECTION PROCESS, APPROVING AN AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY AND DOUGLAS R. NEWMAN IN THE
AMOUNT OF ONE HUNDRED FIFTY EIGHT THOUSAND
DOLLARS ($158,000) TO PROMOTE THE WORK OF THE
NATIONAL ENERGY CENTER FOR SUSTAINABLE
COMMUNITIES AND THE CHULA VISTA RESEARCH
PROJECT AS PART OF THE SAN DIEGO GAS AND
ELECTRIC PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM, AND AUTHORIZING
THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, the National Energy Center for Sustainable Communities (NECSe) was
founded by the City ofChula Vista, San Diego State University (SDSU), and the Gas
Technology Institute (GTI), with the support of the U.S. Department of Energy; and
WHEREAS, the NECSC's mission is to promote healthier and more productive
communities by integrating cleaner energy systems and energy-smart planning and design into
new development and redevelopment projects; and
WHEREAS, the NECSC is currently undertaking the Chula Vista Research Project
(CVRP), which will research technologies, plans, public policies and market-feasible business
models for energy- and resource-efficient community development in Chula Vista; and
WHEREAS, the NECSC intends to publish the results ofthe research in the form of
reference guides; and
WHEREAS, staff wishes to promote these reference guides and have them disseminated
to local and state governmental agencies and private development companies throughout
California; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Newman is the Director of the NESCS and has been involved in
creating and managing the CVRP; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Newman has successfully designed and managed two prior projects on
related subjects for the City; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends the City waive the formal consultant selection process
outlined in Municipal Code section 2.56.110 because of Mr. Newman's knowledge of and
involvement in the NESCS and the CVRP, as well as his prior work with the City, making it
impractical to solicit proposals.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City ofChula Vista
as follows:
6-78
1. That it waives the formal consultant selection process outlined in Municipal Code
section 2.56.110.
2. That it approves an agreement between the City and Douglas R. Newman in the
amount of One Hundred Fifty Eight Thousand Dollars ($158,000) to promote the
work of the National Energy Center for Sustainable Communities and the Chula Vista
Research Project as part of the San Diego Gas and Electric Partnership Program.
3. That it authorizes the Mayor to execute the agreement.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
David R. Garcia
City Manager
~.tL ~fu~
Ann Moore C/
City Attorney
J:\Attomey\ELISA \RESOS\Douglas Newman Agreement.doc
6-79
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
..~\,,;
~~~ CITY OF
~ -<: ~~ CHULA VISTA
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
1/8/08, Item "*"
A. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF
THE KIDS WALK & BIKE TO SCHOOL - PHASE II COMMUNITY-BASED
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GRANT, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE
GRANT, ESTABLISHING A NEW CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
(TF362), TRANSFERRING EXISTING FUNDS, AND APPROPRIATING
GRANT FUNDS FOR ALL PUBLIC ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS WITHIN THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA EXCEPT HILLTOP DRIVE, LAUDERBACH,
MONTGOMERY, HALECREST, SALT CREEK, ALLEN SCHOOL, CHULA
VISTA HILLS, AND VISTA SQUARE ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
B. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF
THE KIDS WALK & BIKE TO SCHOOL - PHASE II COMMUNITY-BASED
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GRANT, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE
GRANT, ESTABLISHING A NEW CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
(TF362), TRANSFERRING EXISTING FUNDS, AND APPROPRIATING
GRANT FUNDS FOR LAUDERBACH AND MONTGOMERY ELEMENTARY
SCHOOLS
C. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF
THE KIDS WALK & BIKE TO SCHOOL - PHASE II COMMUNITY-BASED
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GRANT, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE
GRANT, ESTABLISHING A NEW CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
(TF362), TRANSFERRING EXISTING FUNDS, AND APPROPRIATING
GRANT FUNDS FOR SALT CREEK, ALLEN SCHOOL, AND CHULA VISTA
HILLS ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
D. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF
THE KIDS WALK & BIKE TO SCHOOL - PHASE II COMMUNITY-BASED
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GRANT, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE
GRANT, ESTABLISHING A NEW CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
(TF362), TRANSFERRING EXISTING FUNDS, AND APPROPRIATING
GRANT FUNDS FOR VISTA SQUARE AND HILLTOP DRIVE ELEMENTARY
SCHOOLS
E. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF
THE KIDS WALK & BIKE TO SCHOOL - PHASE II COMMUNITY-BASED
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GRANT, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE
GRANT, ESTABLISHING A NEW CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
(TF362), TRANSFERRING EXISTING FUNDS, AND APPROPRIATING
GRANT FUNDS FOR HALECREST ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
DIRECTOR OF ENG 7AND GENERAL SERVICES Cl)r--
CITY MANAGER
ASSISTANT CITY l\G R S-;-
4/5THS VOTE: YES ~ NO 0
7-1
:::z
1/8/00, Item~
Page 2 of 3
BACKGROUND
In 2006, City staff applied for a Community Based Transportation Planning Grant to fund
walking audits around elementary schools within the City. The purpose of the walking audit is
to identify needed pedestrian and bicycle improvements within a Y. mile radius of each school.
The State of California has approved the grant and now requires the City Council to authorize the
grant so that the community based walking audit effort can begin.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the activity is not a
"Project" as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines because the project is
acceptance of a grant to prepare audits of missing infrastructure and the creation of a CIP project
only; therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the activity is not
subject to CEQA. Although environmental review is not necessary at this time, once projects
have been defined, environmental review may be required and a CEQA determination completed
prior to commencing the construction of any improvements identified.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that Council adopt the resolutions.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Not applicable.
DISCUSSION
The City is in the process of identifying needed infrastructure primarily in the western portions
of the community. The intent of the Community Based Transportation Planning Grant is to
provide some community outreach so that stakeholders have input into the prioritization and
identification of needed infrastructure (see Attachment 1 for the grant application). The grant is
not for the construction of improvements.
The grant is collaboration between the City and Walk San Diego, a non-profit group that has
performed previous walking audits for the Safe Routes to School Program within the City of
Chula Vista. The four previously completed walking audits were performed at Otay, Harborside,
Rice and Lauderback Elementary schools (see Attachment 2). These walking audits have
yielded significant grant funding from the Safe Routes to School program for missing
infrastructure. The walking audits funded by this Community Based Transportation Planning
Grant will be used as future Safe Routes to School grant requests.
DECISION MAKER CONFLICT
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council and has found that the following
conflicts exist: Mayor Cox has property holdings within 500' of Halecrest Elementary School;
Councilmember Ramirez has property holdings within 500' of Lauderbach and Montgomery
Elementary Schools; Councilmember McCann has property holdings within 500' of Salt Creek,
7-2
1/8/00, Item r
Page 3 of 3
Allen School, and Chula Vista Hills Elementary Schools; and Counciimember Castaneda has
property holdings within 500' of Vista Square and Hilltop Drive Elementary Schools.
FISCAL IMPACT
At this time, staff is recommending establishing a new capital improvement project entitled
"Kids Walk and Bike to School - Phase II (TF362) for expenditure. The grant application
requires that the City match 20% of the grant total. The City's match is $60,400 and the grant is
for $241,600 providing a total program of $302,000. The City's match will contribute towards
the cost of City Staff administration of the grant. This cost was previously budgeted in an
existing project, "School Zone Traffic Calming Program (TF345)". Upon approval of this
resolution, $60,400 matching funds will be transferred from TF345 to the new CIP, TF362. The
bulk of the grant will fund the efforts of Walk San Diego.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1 - Community Based Transportation Planning Grant Application
Attachment 2 - Examples of previous walking audits performed by Walk San Diego.
Attachment 3 - Form of the agreement that Caltrans will require for the grant
Prepared by: Torn Adler, Senior Civil Engineer, Engineering and General Services Department
M:\Engineer\AGENDA\CAS2008\OI-08-08\tpg all3v3.doc
7-3
ATTACHMENT /
COMMUNITY-BASED TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
APPLICATION
An electronic version of this application package is available on the Department's Division of
Transportation Planning web site at: htto://www.dot.ca.f!ovlha/toD/fH"ants.htm
Application length -15 page maximum - excluding map of project area, digital photographs, and letters
of support that must be attached to the application upon submittal
Double-spaced, 12 pitch font
Required documents
Signed Application, Scope of Work, Project Timeline, map of project area, digital photographs
Submit five hard copies and an electronic copy on a CD of the entire Application in Microsoft Word and
all attachments.
Kids Walk & Bike to School - Phase II
City of Chula Vista, San Diego County, California
APPLICANT SUB-RECJPIENT(S)"
Organization City of Chula Vista South Bay Partnership
Contact Person Ms. Leah Browder
(include salutation Deputy Director of Engineering Mr. Dana Richardson, Director
and title)
Mailing Address 276 Fourth Avenue 2400 East Fourth Street
City Chula Vista, CA National City, CA
Zip Code 91910 91950
E-mail Address lbrowder@ci.chula-vista.ca.us richardl@pvh.ah.org
Telephone Area 619 Number 409-5976 Area (619) Number 472-4607
Number Code Code
Fax Number Area 619 Number 427-4246 Area (619) Number 470-4289
Code Code
FUNDING INFORMATION
Grant Funds Requested $ 241,600
Local Match (200/. of funds requested) $ 60,400
Other Funding $ 0
Total Project Cost $ 302,000
" Attach additional pages if necessary (this attachment will not be included in the 15 page maximum)
7-4
Project Summary - Identify the community, stakeholders, and what wiIl be accomplished (proposed tasks,
steps, and deliverables in chronological order). Describe how the project will be managed and an
appropriate product delivered.
Begin typing here:
Community: The City of Chula Vista is located 12 miles south of downtown San Diego and 5 miles
north of the international border with Mexico. The city's population of 223,500 is diverse at 50%
Hispanic, and youthful with a median age of 33 and almost 30% under the age of 18. Chula Vista is
also one of the fastest growing municipalities in the country with a 52 square mile public infrastructure
network that is expanding accordingly. The city's existing and planned transportation facilities vary
dramatically in condition and sufficiency from the newly developing areas of the city to the older
aging pre-smart growth neighborhoods. The rapid expansion, combined with a limited pool of
resources, now calls for a prioritization of city pedestrian, bicycle, and traffic circulation
improvements through smart, community-based master planning efforts.
Stakeholders: Initially, the project will focus on the Yo-mile "buffer zones" surrounding each of the
city's elementary schools (see Project Area map). Observations are that parents residing within these
zones are more apt to allow their children to walk to school. Therefore, the first stakeholders to gain
benefits from this project will be the city's schoolchildren, their families, and their neighbors.
Ultimately, the project will have positive impacts for all residents. A number of community-based
stakeholder organizations will take an active role in this planning project including Healthy Eating,
Active Communities (HEAC) and Walk San Diego who have partnered as the South Bay Partnership.
This partnership actively works at the community level to reduce childhood obesity by promoting
walkability and reducing reliance on cars. The South Bay Partnership will be the city's key planning
partner on this project. Other stakeholders will include the recently formed Southwest Chula Vista
Civic Association, the Environmental Health Coalition, the Northwest Civic Association, and a local
volunteer group known as "Crossroads" which monitors city planning efforts and provides regular
input. Local schools (where the community meetings will take place) and school districts, parent
faculty groups and homeowners associations will have critical involvement throughout the process.
2
7-5
Jurisdictional stakeholders such as city councilmembers, the city's redevelopment agency, and
impacted city departments such as Public Works and Police will benefit from well-targeted planning
outcomes and directives from this project.
Planned Accomplishments: To establish a long-term plan for prioritizing and funding the entire
integrated network of pedestrian and bicycle facilities improvements, the city has embarked on a
major comprehensive initiative to inventory, assess, and master plan the city's missing and inadequate
infrastructure. A unique aspect of this project is its community-directed focus. A city
interdepartmental project team (see Attachment I) will provide oversight, general project
management, technical advisement, analysis, and report preparation. But the success of this fully
collaborative effort, including design aspects, is predicated on the scope and depth of South Bay
Partnership's community outreach, hands-on coordination of day-to-day community-level planning
activities, and ensuring that planned tasks are accomplished by the community.
Tasks, Steps, and Deliverables (in chronological order): The planning project will be
accomplished in two phases. Phase I is described here for background purposes only and is not part of
this grant proposal. It is an already-funded effort that is currently in progress. Phase I provides a
baseline GIS-based assessment of the current state of the city's pedestrian transportation infrastructure
and preliminary cost estimates from the perspective of elementary school attendance boundaries. City
departments and the City Council will receive a full presentation of the infrastructure maps and
estimated cost estimates for missing sidewalks, curbs, gutters, ADA ped ramps, pavement and cross
gutters, and other deficiencies. In addition, Phase I will provide City Council with a fiscal analysis of
current policy challenges; current prioritization criteria and potential new considerations; current
funding availability and allocations; alternate applications of current revenue; and potential new
revenue sources. Comments, concerns, and other feedback from the initial presentations will be
incorporated into the analyses. Alignment of the proposed improvements with the principles of smart
growth and sustainability will be emphasized throughout all phases of the project.
3
7-6
South Bay Partnership and other community-based organizations listed above will be presented
with the baseline technical report of missing pedestrian and other facilities, and an inter-group/city
dialogue initiated. Over the next several months, the process will generate valuable input, to be
discussed and incorporated into the design and protocols for Phase II plannIng. These steps will be
accomplished by June 2007.
Phase II, which is the subject of this grant proposal, marks the begiuning of community
engagement in the transportation planning process. The now twice-improved infrastructure reports
will be presented at community meetings facilitated by the South Bay Partnership. Community
meetings will be held at each of the city's 36 neighborhood elementary schools. Residents will review
the full range of infrastructure needs and share thoughts regarding priorities in their neighborhoods
given the overwhelming needs and limited funding availability. The goal is to hear what missing
infrastructure feels like to the people who live in the area and whose children are trying to walk to
school. This will allow the City Council to consider how the community views and prioritizes missing
sidewalks and other deficiencies as the City Council works through the tough financial decisions
associated with infrastructure management choices. These meetings would also explore community
reaction to funding alternatives. Input from these meetings will help form the framework for creating
mutually agreed upon protocols for the next infrastructure assessment step. Using the protocols, the
South Bay Partnership will next work with the city and each of the 36 neighborhoods to complete a
series of detailed neighborhood walking audits. Data from the audits, together with the GIS inventory,
the community meetings, and lessons learned, will ultimately provide the basis for sound, responsive
citywide planning efforts. This community outreach component will be the most far-reaching step of
the project and is scheduled for completion by February 2008.
From February 2008 through May 2008, city staff works with the South Bay Partnership to
collect and analyze the considerable amount of data from the community outreach activities,
incorporates the new findings into an updated report and cost estimates, to be presented to city
4
7-7
departments and the City Council. The report will also incorporate updated recommendations
regarding potential policy revisions; prioritization criteria and potential new considerations; funding
availability and allocations; alternate application of current revenue and potential new revenue sources
based on community input. By June 2008, city project management staff will receive City Council
direction and feedback with regard to finalization of priority lists, refined project estimates, and
implementation of revenue strategies.
In the project's final step, the city would again work closely with the South Bay Partnership to
return to the community for fmal community-level meetings to review and comment on the pedestrian
infrastructure priority list and other key aspects of the project. The additional community feedback
will be incorporated before publication of the final report and presentation to City Council and the
public by December 2008.
This planning project develops information and methods that would be beneficial to other
California communities experiencing the same growth pressures as Chula Vista and also are
committed to community-directed prioritization playing a major role in transportation planning. This
study could serve as a case study for other regions and make efficient use of future plarming funds by
having made initial progress in these areas.
Justification for the Planning Project - Describe the transportation issue or need. Explain how the
proposal meets or relates to the Community-Based Transportation Planning Grant Program's Purpose and
Specific Objectives.
Begin typing here:
Transportation issue: New development and community revitalization issues in older sections of
Chula Vista include a broad array of highly interrelated transportation, infrastructure, and land use
factors. Today' s infrastructure - particularly in older pre-smart growth neighborhoods - will not
support the city's estimated growth, which is projected to reach approximately 280,000 by the year
2030. The City Council frequently receives competing requests from the public for local
infrastructure improvements. An overwhelming proportion of the citizen requests directly correlate
5
7-8
with the City COWlcil's desire to ensure safe routes to schools. Public infrastructure and land use
patterns in neighborhoods near schools strongly influence the health and safety of our school children.
They influence neighborhood walkability, pedestrian and bicyclist safety, traffic circulation patterns
and speeds, public transit systems, multimodal choices, and community character and pride.
Currently, missing sidewalks, curb and gutter are estimated at $132 million, far in excess of
available resources to provide them. However, the city believes that the answer to finding a
comprehensive and balanced approach to addressing local transportation planning needs and funding
priorities lies within its communities. The proposed approach considers the issues within the scope of
pedestrian routes to elementary schools. It engages the community by using local schools as the focal
point for a major multi-tiered work program to: (I) inventory and assess pedestrian infrastructure near
schools; (2) initiate a comprehensive community-based specific transportation planning effort; (3)
prioritize infrastructure needs and deficiencies near schools; (4) establish a citywide infrastructure
management program; and (5) develop and implement traffic-calming and other pedestrian-friendly
practi ces.
Community-based purpose and objectives: As proposed, this multi-disciplinary project would
directly achieve the purpose and objectives of the program, specifically:
. The project not only encourages community involvement and partnership, but is structured so
that community involvement helps form the basic fOWldation for meaningful, well-targeted
project outcomes
. More livable communities are inevitably achieved by providing the highest priority pedestrian
facilities near schools
. Promotion of strong and healthy communities by improving walkability and improved bike
routes for children
6
7-9
The project is a good example of efficient transportation planning that will provide more
pedestrian facilities near schools, reduce vehicle trips, and improve air quality
. The project promotes walkability and bike-friendly routes. near schools - a healthy, safe
context sensitive concept that fosters and encourages non-motorized transportation
Public Participation - Describe how the public and other potential stakeholders will be utilized or invited
to participate throughout the project.
Begin typing here:
Every developmental stage of Phase II incorporates a three-level outreach/feedback loop approach.
First presentation to City departments, then organized stakeholder groups such as the South Bay
Partnership and finally community-at-large with all input incorporated to ensure context sensitive
progress toward a fmal recommendation to the City Council for action. Residents will cooperate as
partners with the City of ChuJa Vista and with the South Bay Partnership during the planning of this
collaborative project to ensure its success and responsiveness to community needs.
Public participation will be a critical component of the planning process. A series of
community workshops will be held with the South Bay Partnership, Northwest Civic Association, the
Third Avenue Village Association (TAVA), the Southwest Chula Vista Civic Association, the
Environmental Health Coalition, Crossroads, local schools and school districts, and other interested
groups and residents invited to take part in the planning process. The optimal workshop participation
would involve 25-40 people, and will be facilitated by South Bay Partnership and a city project team
consisting of city transportation planning and engineering staff and community development staff.
Workshops will be designed to present preliminary fmdings to the community at critical decision
points in the planning. The goal of this level of community involvement is to ensure that adequate
community input is incorporated at each phase of the process from those who will actually be most
affected. Community involvement at critical decision points and throughout the process will greatly
advantage the project, ensuring responsive and high-quality outcomes. The workshops will also
ensure community ownership of project outcomes and the eventual implementation of the priorities.
7
7-10
Transportation Planning Grant Goals - Demonstrate how the proposal addresses one or more of the
Caltrans Transportation Planning Grant Goals listed on Page 2.
Begin typing here:
The main goals addressed through this project are (I) smart multimodal community-based
transportation planning that results in reduced vehicle trips and improved air quality by integrating
infrastructure priority-setting into active local communities; (2) healthy, safe context sensitive
transportation facilities planning that improves walkability and bike-friendly routes in the
communities surrounding schools; (3) increased resource efficiency through conservation by reducing
the need for automobile trips; which also relates to (4) safe and healthy communities and (5) improved
pedestrian and bicycle mobility and access; (6) public and stakeholder participation are key elements
of the project as described above; and (7) reducing air pollution and (8) energy conservation are
implied in that this project will focus on providing convenient and attractive alternatives to multiple
daily car trips.
Project Outcomes - Describe how the interim and fInal products will be carried forward to the next stage
of the project development process.
Begin typing here:
Interim and Final Products: Interim products include the community-based transportation
assessment protocols, walking audits, interim reports and fInal report. These are described in greater
detail in "Tasks, Steps, and Deliverables" above. Public meetings and meeting materials including
PowerPoint presentations also will be produced. The fInal report will be produced and available for
other jurisdictions interested in using this work as a basis for similar services. The next stage of the
development process will use the final report as a City Council-adopted master-planning tool to
implement the transportation improvements, school zone by school zone, according to community
priorities.
City staff has worked closely with the South Bay Partnership (Healthy Eating, Active
Communities; and Walk San Diego) on other projects over the years and will continue to work
cooperatively on this planning study. Regular working group meetings will be conducted to ensure
8
7-11
issues are dealt with in a timely manner and brought to Caltrans attention if necessary. Though this
regular interaction between city staff and the South Bay Partnership, the working group will determine
if major adjustments need to be made to the scope of work in order to complete each work task and the
overall objectives of the project and report those to Caltrans The city project team will prepare
quarterly progress reports to Caltrans for this project, as is the case with previous grant programs
administered by Caltrans.
9
7-12
To the best of my knowledge, aU information contained in this proposal is true and correct.
~~A-~C-U<
Signature of Authorized Official (Applicant)
Leah Browder
Print Name
Act
ngineering
October 12, 2006
Date
ecipient)
nirector. South R~y P~T~n~rship
Title
1~-13
City of Chula Vista - Kids Walk & Bike to School Phase II Planning Project
Scope of Work
Task 1 Working Group
Staff from the city and the South Bay Partnership will organize a project working group for this
project. Results from Phase I of the project will be reviewed and disseminated to participating
community groups and city departments. A consultant may be hired to conduct certain technical and
reporting tasks of the project.
Task 2 Public Outreach/Community Input Workshops
The South Bay Partnership team will facilitate a series of one or more community workshops at each
of the city's 36 elementary schools, inviting both residents and community groups. Workshops will
aim to familiarize the community with walkability and other transportation concepts and the available
resources for improvements. Residents will be asked to provide input with regard to (1) assessment
protocols for walk audits, (2) neighborhood transportation issues, and (3) infrastructure priorities.
Community-Based Assessment Protocols for
Walk Audits
Summ of Issues and Comments
Community-based Priority List
Agendas, materials and PowerPoint
resentations.
Included in interim re rt
Workshop announcements, materials,
attendance numbers and feedback.
Task 3 Walk Audits
Using mutually agreed upon protocols, the South Bay Partnership will facilitate the completion of
detailed neighborhood walk audits with each of the 36 school zones.
Task 4 Analysis of Findings
City staff will work with the South Bay Partnership to analyze and summarize data from the walk
audits, community meetings, the existing GIS inventory of infrastructure deficits, fiscal data, and
lessons learned, to create a comprehensive draft master planning report to be presented to city
departments and the City Council for direction and feedback.
Draft master planning report
Technical report summarizing community-proposed
priorities, potential policy revisions, funding
availabili and allocations, etc.
11
7-14
Task 5 Interim Report
City staff will work with City Council to incorporate Council direction, including fInalization of
priority lists, refInement of ro' ect estimates, and im lementation of revenue strate . es.
Council workshop
materials
Task 6 Final Community Meetings and Report
City staff will work with the South Bay Partnership to return to the community for a fInal series of
community-level meetings to receive comments on the interim report's pedestrian infrastructure
priority list and other key aspects of the project. The additional community input will be incorporated
before publication of the fInal report and presentation to City Council for adoption.
A endas, draft re orts, resentation materials
Technical report on strategies, resources, and priorities for
creating walkable neighborhoods. The fInal report will
include a phasing plan for implementation and will indicate
how facilities should be phased to coordinate with (I)
planned and potential land uses and (2) existing facilities.
Each phase will indicate what is required in terms of capital,
construction, service plan, and how the various components
will be built u to achieve full im lementation.
BUDGET/COSTS
Re~~t~ble' I ,.
Cate2'Ones Pa Grant 'Cost Matti Tota]
City project
I. Working Group manager, South $ 3,900 $ 3,900 $ 7,800
Bay Partnershin
2. Public South Bay
Outreach/Community Partnership, city 136,200 0 136,200
Innut W orkshons nroiect team
3. Walk Audits South Bay 36,700 0 36,700
Partnershin
4. Analysis of City project team 30,000 30,000 60,000
Findings
5. Interim renort City project team 0 II ,300 11,300
6. Final Community City project
team, South Bay 34,800 15,200 50,000
Meetings and Report Partnershin
TOTALS $ 241,600 $ 60,400 $ 302,000
12
7-15
California Department of Transportation
Transportation Planning Grants
Fiscal Year 2007-2008
PROJECT TlMELINE
redf,r"Enviriiiit 't,,, ~ ,. 'el'''Q't''x.j~'/''1ti''':Rla' "I"
, 0 ,rnnffJ Ii! ,..,US "....}l _,ns ll!;r,~ 1m n
Kids Walk & Bike to School - Phase II
ad' 'Coinm' hi
~n ,U
Grant $ Local $ In-kind $
Caltrans $
Caltrans/Ci Council
$
$
sseminate Phase I
lants
City project team/SSP.
-.J
10 t
m
SSP
SSPlWalk San Die 0
$
$
.,
'"
annin re art
Ci ro'ect team
s, estimates
Igs;
Ci ro'eel team & Council $
City/SSP $
13
altrans/ci contract
arkiog group meetings
ommunity-based assessment
faloeals for walk audits; summary of
ssues & comments; community-
ased fiorit list
ompleted walk audits for 36 school
ones
Draft master lannin ra art
Interim ra art
Final community meetings;
Inal fe art
dopted plan ready for
m lementation
..,~-
,-J~
\
\
Counly Landfill
I
I
//
~ MAIN ST
~
'"
~
~
1 i-n-..----------------..----.j
! I I
L_..J I
!
~
.'"
----
'-'J..;:~~,.-:~__::::,::~?,
"
7-18
Kids Walk & Bike to School- Phase II Planning Project
Attachment 1 - Project Team
Citv ofChula Vista Proiect Team
Project Manager: Deputy Director of Engineering
Engineering Department (transportation planning, mapping/schematics, fiscal data)
General Services Department (engineering design)
Public Works Operations Department (engineering inspection and ongoing maintenance)
Planning Department (specific planning, pedestrian focus and future policy considerations)
Community Development Department (economic development, community revitalization)
South Bav Partnership Team
Director, South Bay Partnership
Healthy Eating, Active Communities (HEAC) (community meetings facilitation)
Walk San Diego (walk audits)
Other Communitv Organizations
Southwest Chula Vista Civic Association
Northwest Civic Association
Environmental Health Coalition
Crossroads
Schools, school districts, parent-faculty associations
Homeowners associations
7-19
1\ \outh Bay
I'cirtnersh! p
2'+00 EAST FOURTH ST.
N.<>"TIO:-lAl. em"
CALIFORNI....
91950-2099
(619) 472-4607
A (vrnmunity (Olld~Ordli{\n aim~d dllmpflnin~
bealtn and well-~m~ in Sl)ut~ rfqion of San Diego
October 11, 2006
Mayor Stephen C. Padilla
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
RE: Support for "Kids Walk and Bike to School- Phase fr'
Dear Mayor Padilla,
The South Bay Partnership, a multi-level coalition focused on improving the health and quality oflife
of residents throughout the South Region of San Diego County since 1996, supports the City Chula
Vista's efforts in applying for a California Department of Transportation Community-Based Planning
grant. The grant will help promote a strong and healthy community in Chula Vista by supporting
innovative approaches to providing children and their families with easily accessible and highly
efficient transportation options.
The proposed planning project would be conducted in coordination with the South Bay Partnership's
Healthy Eating, Active Communities (HEAC) initiative and key partner organizations, like Walk San
Diego (WSD). The HEAC initiative and WSD offer an expertise in community-focused public health
related to the build environment and community design. Their innovative approach has a special
emphasis on designing physical activity environments that are also pedestrian and bicycle-friendly.
The intent of our unique collaboration related to this project is to learn about infrastructure needs
surrounding each of the city's elementary schools, through the lens of the stakeholders and resident
groups. Our successful collaboration will produce a series of comprehensive walking audits that could
then be used as the framework for well-targeted infrastructure planning.
In recent years, tbe City of Chula Vista has worked closely with other expert entities such as Caltrans
and the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), to align infrastructure development with
smart growth principles, which encourage and promote walkability and bike friendly routes near
schools. We applaud the City's efforts to work closely with HEAC and WSD in providing a
comprehensive system of walkabIe corridors, which in turn will promote healthy lifestyles and reduce
childhood obesity.
We feel that this project will not only serve as a model for localized, child-focused transportation
planning for other communities throughout the State, but will provide immeasurable benefits to the
families living in this community.
J"~~ (J I
a 4h~11~ 'rh-
Director
fr""(Ji::r' H\ ~1-IE C:UI;~;T) ur ~_..:"\ 11IEC,(1
HE.'\rT!-J _\~I:i H\.'.\I~!\ ~!::rn"](:F.S ,~\_~f:N(:Y-Al' OHO] .\\lD '.)fll'{', .'oEH\-lCl>
7-20
~nDlegO
((E. '9J ..."",.,_.....<---
,....... *,_<oil..~_
Iml)rovina Pedestrian Safety and Walkability in Southwest Chula Vist.~;
HARBORSIDE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL NEIGHBORHOOD
Priority Pedestrian Hotspots and Preliminary Recommendations
Wa/kSanDiego, working with the Healthy Eating, Active Communities (HEAC) coalition and the Harborside Elementary School, conducted a series of workshops that
involved a community process to identify pedestrian safety and access issues for residents and children living in the neighborhood around Harborside Elementary
School. Residents identified the following "hotspots" as the highest priority problems to address to make the neighborhood more walkable:
1. Harborside Park
2. Residential Zone: Colorado Avenue, Crested Butte Street, Jefferson Avenue, Oak/awn Avenue, Wood/awn Avenue
3, Broadway
4. Industrial Boulevard
5. Naples Street
6. Palomar Street
7. Oxford Street
....
I
....,
~
Wa/kSanDiego developed the following as initial recommendations for improving pedestrian safety in the following hotspots:
Issues Identified by Residents and Walk Audit
Harborside Park
1. No law enforcement presence
between 5-10pm after Health and
Human Services Agency security
leaves [9]
2. No public phone [7]
3. Homeless (e.g. sleeping in
playground area, pathway behind
park and Wal-Mart) [6]
4. Drug use (e.g. skateboard park,
small picnic area) [5]
5. Vandalism [2]
6. Need more active play area (e.g. volleyball court) [2]
7. Fence between Harborside School and Park is too short [1]
8. Insufficient lighting at night (e.g. basketball area) [1]
1, 3 - 5. Increase police patrols in and around Harborside Park during dusk and
early evening hours.
2. Install a public phone at the Park.
6. Park & Recreation: Install a volleyball court and/or promote other active
areas (e.g. basketball court) and recreation activities.
7. Increase the height of the fence between Harborside School and
Harborside Park to allow for greater security around school.
8. Install lighting that allows residents to use the park at night
:t>
-'.j
--
):,0.
o
.r
s::
In
";7
:-::j
I~
Priority Locations Issues Identified by Residents and Walk Audit
Residential Zone:
Colorado Avenue,
Crested Butte Street,
Jefferson Avenue,
Moss Street,
Oaklawn Avenue,
Woodlawn Avenue
-.J
I
""
""
Broadway
Woodlawn Avenue & Crested
Butte Street
1. Insufficient lighting at
night [71
Woodlawn Avenue
2. Speeding [5]
3. Menacing dogs [3]
Crested Butte Street
(and other streets)
4. Uneven sidewalks[3J
Moss Street
5. Crossing [3]
Alleyway between Oak/awn Avenue &
Woodlawn Avenue
6. Trash, drug use, overgrown bushes that
someone could hide behind [2J
Broadway between Naples Street & Palomar Street
1. Commercial area (e.g. Wal-Mart, Costco, Target) need
stop signs at exits [7]
Comer of Broadway &
Naples Street [61
2. Signal
pedestrian
phase too short
3. Cars don't yield
to pedestrians
(especially right
turn)
4. Need pedestrian
signage
e H..'''''......'''''''''O__.....
,.'. "-".,11..___
Recommendations
Woodlawn Avenue & Crested Butte Street
1. Install further street lighting to increase pedestrian safety at night.
Woodlawn Avenue
2. There are currently 2 stop signs located on this street, so installation of
speed "pillows~ is recommended.
3. Contact City Animal Control to capture loose dogs in the neighborhood.
Crested Butte Street etc.
4. Repair or install damaged or missing sidewalks, respectively on Crested
Butte, Jefferson Avenue, Moss Street, and other streets in this
neighborhood. Given the proximity to Harborside Elementary, these
locations should be high priority in the Sidewalk Installment Program.
Moss Street
5. There are currently no crosswalks or stop signs located on Moss Street
between Broadway and Industrial Blvd, which makes crossing unsafe for
pedestrians. Install a crosswalk on Moss Street at Oaklawn Avenue. As
noted previously, damaged sidewalks should be repaired as welL
Alleyway between Oak/awn Avenue & Woodlawn Avenue
6. Increase police patrols in this area. City should trim bushes/plants in this
alleyway and collect litter in this area and/or neighborhood residents to
organize a neighborhood trash clean-up.
Broadway between Naples Street & Palomar Street
1. City to work with commercial area (e.g. Wal-Mart, Costeo, Target) to install
stop signs at all exits.
Comer of Broadway & Naples Street
2. Increase crossing timing at this light to allow for safe pedestrian crossing.
3. Change right hand turn lane to not allow right hand turns on the red light at
all or at a minimum prohibited during school hours. Install signage to
inform drivers of the regulations and work with police to enforce this
change. Install bulbouts (curb extensions) on corners to slow right-hand
turns.
4. Install pedestrian sign age at this corner, especially given the proximity to
Harborside School and the number of children crossing this main
thoroughfare.
2
Priority Locations Issues Identified by Residents and Walk Audit
Corner of Broadway & Palomar Street [4]
5. Turning signals don't coordinate with pedestrian crossing
especially left turns
Broadway
(continued)
-.J
I
""
(.oJ
Corner of Broadway & Oxford Street [1] (see photo above)
6. Pedestrian phase too short
7. Cars don't yield to pedestrians and turn very fast,
especially turning right.
8. Unmarked crosswalks
Corner of Industrial Blvd. & Naples Street [6]
1. Crosswalk is not marked on all legs.
2. Not enough room for pedestrians waiting at southwest and
southeast corners.
3. Need pedestrian (e.g. children crossing) signage.
4. Drain with bad odor/chemical fumes and no cover.
5. Curb ramps are not aligned with the marked crosswalk
and lead out into the intersection.
Industrial Boulevard
e _""'._.....c__.
, ".' .......;;_...oII..~.h.I...._...
Recommendations
Corner of Broadway & Palomar Street
5. Modify street light timing and pedestrian crossing to create safer crossing.
Corner of Broadway & Oxford Street
6. Increase crossing phase at this signal to allow for safe pedestrian
crossing.
7. Change right hand turn lane to prohibit right turn on red at all times or
during school hours only. Install signage to remind drivers to yield to
pedestrians and work with police to enforce yielding. Install bulbouts (curb
extensions) on corners to slow right-hand turns.
8. Paint crosswalks (e.g. zebra crosswalk) on all sides of this busy
intersection to increase visibility of children and all users. Contact
commercial owners (e.g. Wal-Mart, Costco, Target) to contribute to these
improvements.
Corner of Industrial Blvd. & Naples Street
1. Paint crosswalks (e.g. zebra crosswalk) on all sides of this intersection to
provide safe crossing for children crossing to Harborside School and all
users.
2. Expand waiting area at southwest and southeast corners for pedestrians.
3. Install pedestrian (e.g. children crossing) signage.
4. Install drain cover and investigate cause of bad odor/chemical fumes to
mitigate environmental exposure.
5. Realign curb ramps so that they lead into the crossings and not into the
intersection.
3
Priority Locations Issues Identified by Residents and Walk Audit
......
I
I',)
./>0
Industrial Boulevard
(continued)
Naples Street
Industrial Blvd between
Palomar St & L SI 15J
6. No sidewalk on east
side
7. Poor lighting makes
it unsafe for trolley
riders that walk this
route
8. Spiders in the trees
on the east side
9. Trash (e.9. 9lass)
along street
Corner of Industrial Blvd &
Palomar Street [4J
10. Difficult to cross (especially
northern portion)
11. Uneven pavement around
tracks
12. Trolley gates coming down
pose a threat to pedestrians
crossing westbound.
13. Right turning vehicles
heading westbound to
northbound do not yield to
pedestrians.
Corner of Industrial Blvd &
Ada Street [2J
14. Homeless loiter in front of apartments (suspected
squatters in abandoned building)
Naples Street between Industrial Blvd &
Broadway
1. Poor lighting [5]
2. Cars drive too fast; need more school signage [4]
(Continued on next page)
E.EAJ~ H~I""....., .....0-_""'..
" ',__.Jl"~~
Recommendations
Industrial Blvd between Palomar St & L St
6-7. Install sidewalk with a parkway (e.g. planting strip) on the east side at
Industrial Blvd between Palomar St & L St, which is a major pedestrian
walkway connection to the Palomar Trolley stop. InstaUlighting on both
sides of Industrial to increase pedestrian safety at night.
8. Trim City trees and/or spray with pesticide in this area to reduce exposure
to insects.
9. Install trash cans. City to collect litter in this area and/or neighborhood
residents to organize a neighborhood trash clean-up.
Comer of Industrial Blvd & Palomar Street
10. Install curb extensions on all corners of this intersection as part of the
City's Palomar Gateway project that will make various improvements at
this intersection (e.g. widen the median along Palomar Street).
11. Repair and/or replace uneven pavement around trolley tracks.
12. Install a gate or other structure to protect pedestrians walking on the
sidewalk from the trolley gate.
13. Prohibit right turn on red (westbound to northbound). Install signage to
remind drivers to yield to pedestrians and work with police to enforce
yielding.
Comer of Industrial Blvd & Ada Street
14. Increase police patrol in this area and investigate squatting.
Naples Street between Industrial Blvd & Broadway
1. Install additional lighting to provide safe pedestrian activity at night.
2. Increase pedestrian signage for school zone and school mileage
regulation. Install a permanent median, as there is currently only a painted
median, along Naples Street. Change parking regulations to allow parking
on both sides, as there is currently only parking allowed on one side of the
street, and stripe parking area on both sides of Naples Street to narrow
the driving lanes and slow cars.
4
Priority Locations
Issues Identified by Residents and Walk Audit
3. Uneven sidewalks, difficult for strollers/wheelchairs [2]
4. Commercial exits (e.g. Wal-Mart, Carl's Jr., etc) need
stop sign [2]
5. Difficult to cross Naples
St at Jefferson Ave and
at Colorado Ave [2]
Naples Street
(continued)
Comer of Naples Street &
Oak/awn Avenue
6. Vehicles parking in 'no
parking zone' [1]
Naples Street between 4th Avenue
& &h Avenue
7. Lacks sidewalks and
lighting [1]
-.l
I
'"
01
Comer of Palomar Street & Trenton Avenue
1. Drug and gang activity [3]
2. Insufficient lighting, very dark [2]
3. Stolen cars being dismantled to seli parts [2]
Palomar Street
Corner of Palomar Street &
Industrial Blvd
4. Public alcohol
consumption [3]
5. Prostitute solicitation [2]
6. Empty lot with
overgrown bushes
creates place for
people to hide [1]
Oxford Street between Broadway & &A Avenue
1. No sidewalk [2]
2. Dangerous to enter La Bodeguita parking lot {1]
Oxford Street
(Continued on next page)
et H...""..............,.""',,""'"
~,g ..._..m.~_
Recommendations
3. Repair and/or replace sidewalks to allow for safe pedestrian activity,
especially strollers/wheelchairs.
4. As stated previously on Broadway, work with commercial area (e.g. Wal-
Mart, Costco, Carl's Jr.) to install stop signs at all exits.
5. Install a crosswalk and stop sign with a stop bar on Naples at the
intersection with Oaklawn Avenue to allow far safe crossing. This should
be done concurrent with the improvements stated previously such as a
permanent median and striping parking (see #2) to slow cars for safer
crossing.
Corner of Nap/es Street & Oak/awn A venue
6. This is actually a 'no parking vehicles aver 6 feet tall zone' on the apposite
side of Naples Street. Increase police enforcement of this parking zone.
Naples Street between 4th Avenue & Sh Avenue
7. Install sidewalks with parkway (e.g. planting strip) and curb ramps. Install
sufficient lighting far safe pedestrian transit at night.
Comer of Palomar Street & Trenton Avenue
1. Increase police patrol in this area to curb illegal activities (e.g. drugs, gang).
2. Install sufficient lighting to increase safety for pedestrians at night.
3. Police to investigate and prosecute stolen vehicle dismantling operation.
Corner of Palomar Street & Industrial Blvd
4-6. Increase police patrol in this area to curb illegal activities (e.g. public
alcohol consumption, prostitute solicitation)
6. City to continue to pursue redevelopment of this empty lot into high-
density, multi-family units. Trim overgrown bushes so there is no place for
people to hide.
Oxford Street between Broadway & Sh Avenue
1. Install sidewalk with parkway (e.g. planting strip) and curb ramps under
the Sidewalk Installment Program.
2. Contact La Bodeguita to revise the parking lot design and install a
pedestrian walkway.
(Continued on next page)
5
e ....""'...........~.,_...
.... ""-..,,.m..c_...-
Priority Locations Issues Identified by Residents and Walk Audit
Recommendations
Oxford Street
(continued)
Oxford Street between Broadway & Industrial Blvd; HHSA County Building
3. As stated for Broadway, work with commercial area (e.g. Wal-Mart,
Castco, Target) to install stop signs at all exits.
4. Install more lighting on Oxford Street and around the HHSA building to
increase safety.
4-5,7. As stated in reference to Harborside Park, increase police patrols
around HHSA during dusk and evening hours to reduce criminal activities
(e.g. drag racing, gangs, and drugs).
6. Work with shopping centers to install a mid-block crosswalk in front of this
commercial shopping area to create a safe mid-block crossing for
pedestrians.
7. Restrict parking to 2-hour limit zone with signs posting such.
8. Repair sidewalks on areas damaged.
.....
I
....,
en
Oxford Street between Broadway & Industrial B/vd; HHSA County
Building
3. Commercial exits dangerous for pedestrians crossing,
need stop signs [2]
4. Insufficient lighting [1J; Dark at night, invites gangs to
congregate [1]
5. Drag racing at night (between 11-12 pm) [1J
6. People crossing mid-block ("jaywalking") [1J
7. Homeless harass people and RV/trailers (especially
white pick-up with camper) parked along street [1J
8. Uneven sidewalks, difficult for stroller/wheelchair [1]
Note: The numbers in parenthesis refer to the number of residents that stated an issue or agreed with the issue previously noted by another resident.
Process/Methodology: The project included the following community outreach and data collection methods:
./ Analyzed pedestrian collision and injury data to identify high-risk locations in the neighborhood.
./ Established a Working Group including the WalkSanDiego Project Coordinator and staff, Healthy Eating, Active Community (HEAC) Project Coordinator, Chula Vista
Community Collaborative staff and community health leaders (promotoras), Health and Human Services Agency South Region staff, Harborside Elementary School
Principal, and school staff/volunteers to help organize and guide the project.
./ Collaborated with Chula Vista Traffic Engineering staff to review pedestrian collision data, identify high-risk locations, and conduct Walkability Workshops and Walk
Audits.
./ Conducted a Walkability Workshop with educational presentations on walkability/traffic calming, a Walk Audit of the neighborhood surrounding elementary school, and
a Walkability Forum with hotspot mapping sessions and voting prioritization of the major issues in this neighborhood. All activities and materials were provided in both
English and Spanish. More than 30 parents and residents participated in these community engagement activities. In addition, Congressman Filner's Aide participated in
the Walk Audit.
./ Conducted infonnal traffic observations, noting problem areas and driver behavior and identifying traffic calming and other solutions.
For more information olease contact:
Kristin Mueller
WalkSanDiego
Project Coordinator
(619) 544 - 9255
kristinmueller9{a)amail.com
6
.'l,TT A.CHMENT .3
Agreement ~
City~f~~-
.-
FUND TRANSFER AGREEMENT
THIS FUND TRANSFER AGREEMENT (FTAl, ENTERED INTO ON ~
between the State of California, acting by and through its Deparlmen~On,
referred to herein as DEPARTMENT, and the City of Chula Vista, hereinafter referred to as
AGENCY.
RECITALS
1. DEPARTMENT and AGENCY, pursuant to Streets and Highways Code section 114 (bl,
are authorized to enter in this FT A pertaining to State funding committed for
Transportation studies and planning under the jurisdiction of AGENCY.
1. AGENCY has agreed to implement Eastern University District Transit Plan, hereinafter
the Project, subject to the terms and conditions of this FT A. The Project Description
(Scope of Work and Cost Estimate) is attached hereto as Attachment III.
2. The resolution adopting the Project described above is attached hereto as Attachment II.
This resolution authorizes AGENCY to execute contracts and agreements.
3. All services performed by AGENCY pursuant to this FT A are intended to be performed in
accordance with all applicable Federal, State, and AGENCY laws, ordinances,
regulations, and DEPARTMENT encroachment permits, published manuals, policies, and
procedures.
4. Project funding is as follows:
~ ~ ...
5. This FT A is exempt from legal review and approval by the Department of General
Services, pursuant to PCC section 10295.
SECTION I
AGENCY AGREES:
To satisfactorily complete all Project Work described i~
SECTION II
DEPARTMENT AGREES:
DEPARTMENT agrees that when conducting an audit of the costs claimed by AGENCY under
the provisions of this FTA, DEPARTMENT will rely to the maximum extent possible on any prior
audit of AGENCY pursuant to the provisions of State and applicable Federal laws. In the absence
of such an audit, work of other auditors will be relied upon to the extent that such work is
acceptable to DEPARTMENT when planning and conducting additional audits.
7-27
Agreement-
Cityo~
Page 2 01 11
SECTION III
IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED:
In consideration of the foregoing and the mutual promises 01 the parties hereto, AGENCY and
DEPARTMENT agree as follows:
1. Notification of Parties
b. DEPARTMENT's Contract Manager is
a. AGENCY's Project Manager'
c. All notices herein provided to be given, or which may be given, by either party to
the other, shall be deemed to have been fully given when made in writing and
received by the parties at their respective addresses:
City of Chula Vista
Attention:
276 Fourth Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
California Department of Transportation
Plannln -District 11
2. Period of Performance
Work under this FTA shall begin 0
FTA by DEPARTMENT, and will terminate on
amendment.
en upon approval of this
nless extended by
3. Chanqes in Terms/Amendment
This FT A may only be amended or modified by mutual written agreement of the parties.
4. Termination
This FT A may be terminated by either party for any reason by giving written notice to the
other party at least thirty (30) days in advance of the effective date 01 such termination.
In the event of termination by said notice, funds reimbursed to AGENCY will include all
authonzed non-cancelable obligations and pnor costs incurred
5. Cost Limitation
a The total amount payable to AGENCY pursuant to this FTA by DEPARTMENT
shall not excee_
b. It is agreed and understood that this FT A fund limit is an estimate and that
DEP ARTMENT will only reimburse the cost of services actually rendered as
authorized by the DEPARTMENT Contract Manager at or below that fund
limitation established hereinabove.
7-28
6. Allowable Costs
a. The method of payment for this FT A will be based on actual allowable costs.
DEPARTMENT will reimburse AGENCY for expended actual allowable direct
'and indirect costs, including, but not limited to labor costs, employee benefrts,
and trav!,!1 (overhead is reimbursable only if the AGENCY has an approved
indirect cbst all09Btion plan) and contracted consultant services casts incurred
by AGENCY in performance of the Project work, not to exceed the cast
reimbursement limitation set forth in 5.a, above. Actual costs shall not exceed
the estimated wage rates, labor costs, travel and other estimated costs and fees
set forth in Attachment iii without prior written agreement between
DEPARTMENT and AGENCY.
b. Reimbursement of AGENCY expenditures will be authorized only for those
allowable costs actually incurred by AGENCY in the performance of the Project
work. AGENCY must not only have Incurred the expenditures on or after the
Effective Date of this FTA and before the Termination Date, but must have also
paid for those costs to claim any reimbursement.
c. Travei expenses and per diem rates are not to exceed the rate specified by the
State of California Department of Personnel Administration for similar employees
(Le. non-represented employees) unless written verification is supplied that
government hotel rates are not commercially available to AGENCY, or its
contractors, its subcontractors, and/or its subrecipients, at the time and location
required as specified in the California Department of Transportation's Travel
Guide Exception Process.
d. DEPARTMENT will reimburse AGENCY for all allowable Project costs no more
frequently than monthly in arrears as promptly as DEPARTMENT fiscal
procedures permit upon receipt of itemized signed invoices in triplicate. Invoices
shall reference this FTA Number and shall be signed and submitted to the
Contract Manager at the following address:
e. Invoices shall include the following information:
1. Names of the AGENCY Personnel performing work
2. Dates of Service
3. Locations of Service (AGENCY - address)
7. Reoorts
a. AGENCY shall submit written progress reports with each set of invoices to allow
the DEPARTMENT's Contract Manager to determine if AGENCY is performing
to expectations, is on schedule, is within funding cost limitations, to
communicate interim findings, and to afford.occasions for airing difficulties
respecting special problems encountered so that remedies can be deveioped.
b. Any document or written report prepared as a requirement of this FT A shall
contain, in a separate section preceding the main body of the document, the
7-29
~!lreementN_
CityofC~
Page4 of 11
number and dollar amounts of all contracts and subcontracts relating to the
preparation of those documents or reports.
c. AGENCY will provide five (5) copies and one (1) electronic version of the final
'written report to the DEPARTMENT's Contract Manager.
8. Local Match Funds
a. Except where expressly allowed in writing herein, reimbursement of credits for
local matching funds will be made or allowed only for work performed on and
after the start date and prior to the termination date of this FTA, unless
expressly permitted as local match expenditures made prior to the effective date
of this FTA pursuant to Government Code section 14529.17 or by prior executed
S6 2800 FT A for Local Match Fund Credn.
b. AGENCY agrees to contribute at least the statutorily or other required local
contribution of matching funds (other than state or federal funds), if any is
specified within this FT A or in any Attachment hereto, toward the actual cost of
the services described In Attachment III or the amount, if any described In an
executed SB 2800 (Streets.and Highways Code section 164.53) agreement far
local match fund credit, whichever is greater. AGENCY shall contribute not less
than as required match amount toward the services described herein on a
proportionai monthly or quarterly basis coinciding with as usual invoicing
frequency.
9. Cost Princicles
a. AGENCY agrees to comply with Office of Management and Budget Circular A-
87, Cost Principles for State and Local Government, and 49 CFR, Part 18,
Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to
State and Local Governments.
b. AGENCY agrees, and will assure .that its contractors and subcontractors will be
obligated to agree, that (a) Contract Cast Principles and Procedures, 48 CFR,
Federal Acquisition Regulations System, Chapter 1, Part 31, et seq., shall be
used to determine the allowability of individual Project cast items and (b) all
parties shall comply with Federal administrative procedures in accordance with
49 CFR, Part 18, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and
Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments. Every sub-recipient
receiving Project funds as a .contractor or sub-contractor under this FTA shall
compiy with Federal administrative procedures in accordance with 49 CFR, Part
18, Uniform Administrative Requirements far Grants and Cooperative
Agreements to State and Local Governments.
c. Any Project costs for which AGENCY has received payment or credit that are
determined by subsequent audit to be unallowable under Office of Management
and Budget Circular A-87, 48 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 31 or 49 CFR, Part 18, are
subject to repayment by AGENCY to DEPARTMENT. Should AGENCY fall to
reimburse moneys due DEPARTMENT within thirty (30) days of discovery or
demand, or within such other period as may be agreed in writing between the
Parties hereto, DEPARTMENT is authorized to intercept and withhold future
payments due AGENCY from DEPARTMENT or any third-party source,
including, but not limited to, the State Treasurer, the State Controner or any other
fund source.
7-30
.,greement No.-
City ofC~
Page50fl1
d. AGENCY agrees to include Project in the schedule of projects to be examined in
AGENCYs annual audit and in the schedule of projects to be examined under its
single audit prepared in accordance with Office of Management and Budget
Circular A-133.
e. Prior to AGENCY seeking reimbursement of indirect costs, AGENCY must
prepare and sUbmit annually to the DEPARTMENT an indirect cost rate proposal
and a central service costs allocation plan (if any) in accordance with Office of
Management and Budget Circular A-87 and Local Program Procedures Manual
(LLP 04-10).
10. Americans with Disabilities Act
By signing this FTA AGENCY assures DEPARTMENT that it complies with the
applicable provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, which
prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability, as well as all applicable regulations and
guidelines issued pursuant to the ADA. (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.)
11. Indemnification
a. Nothing in the provisions of the Agreement is intended to create duties or
obligations to or rights in third parties to this Agreement or affect the legal liability
of either party to the agreement by imposing any standard of care with respect to
the operation, maintenance and repair of St?te highways different from the
standard of care imposed by law.
b. Neither DEPARTI\IIENT nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any
damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by
AGENCY under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction
delegated to AGENCY under this FTA. It is understood. and agreed that,
pursuant to Government Code section 895.4, AGENCY shall fully defend,
indemnify and save harmless DEPARTMENT, its officers and empioyees from all
claims, suits or actions of every name, kind and description brought for or on
account of injury (as defined in Government Code section 810.8) occurring by
reason of anything done or omitted to be done by AGENCY under or in
connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to"AGENCY under
this FT A.
12. Non-Discrimination
a. During the performance of this FTA, AGENCY and all of its subcontractors, if
any, shall not unlawfully discriminate, harass or allow harassment, against any
employee or applicant for employment because of sex, race, color, ancestry,
religious creed, national origin, disability (including HIV and AIDS), mental
disability, medical condition (cancer), age (over 40), marital status, denial of
family and medical care leave, and denial of pregnancy disability leave.
AGENCY and its subcontractors shall ensure that the evaluation and treatment
of their employees and applicants for employment are free from such
discrimination and harassment. AGENCY and its sub-contractors shall comply
with the .provisions of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (Government Code
section 12900 et seq.) and the applicable regulations promulgated thereunder
(California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Section 7285.0 et seq.). The applicable
regulations of the Fair Employment and Housing Commission implementing
Government Code section 12990 (a-f), set forth in Chapter 5 of Division 4 otTilie
7-31
~>Jreement NO.'-
City of Chula Vista
Page 6 of 11
2 of the California Code of Regulations, are incorporated into this FT A by this
reference and are made a part hereof as if set forth in full. 'AGENCY and its
subcontractors shall give written notice of their obligations under this clause to
labor organizations with which they have a collective bargaining or ather
agreernent.
b. AGENCY shall include the nondiscrimination and compliance provisions 01 this
clause in all subcontracts to perform Work under this FT A.
13. Fundina ReQuirements
a. It is mutually understood between the parties that this FTA may have been
written for the mutual benefit of both parties in order to avoid program and fiscal
d"lays that would occur if the FT A was executed only alter ascertaining the
availability of a congressional or legisiative appropriation ollunds.
b. This FTA is valid and enforceabie only if sufficient funds are made available to
DEPARTMENT by the United States Government and/or the California State
Legislature lor the purpose of this Project. In addition, this FT A is subject to any
additional restrictions, limitations, conditions, or any statute enacted by the
Congress or the State Legislature thai may affect the provisions, terms or
funding of this FT A in any manner.
c. It is mutually agreed that if the Congress or Ihe State Legislature does not
appropriate sufficient funds far the program and Project, this FT A shall be
amended to refiect any reduction in funds.
d. DEPARTMENT has Ihe aptian to void this FT A under the thirty (30) day
termination clause or to amend this FT A to reflect any reduction of funds. In the
event 01 an unscheduled termination, the DEPARTMENT Contract Manager may
reimburse AGENCY is accordance with the provisions of Article 4 of this Section
III.
14. Records Retention
a. AGENCY, its contractors and subcontractors shall establish and maintain an
accounting system and records that properly accumulate and segregate incurred
Project costs and matching funds by line item for the Project. The accounting
system of AGENCY, its contractors and all subcontractors shall conform to
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), enable the determination of
incurred casts at interim points of completion, and provide support for
reimbursement payment vouchers or invoices. All accounting records and other
supporting papers of AGENCY, its contractors and subcontractors connected
with Project performance under this FTA shall be maintained for a minimum 01
three years from the date 01 final payment to AGENCY and shall be held open to
inspection, copying, and audit by representatives of DEPARTMENT, the
California State Auditor, and auditors representing the federal government.
Copies thereof will be furnished by AGENCY, its contractors, and its
subcontractors upon receipt of any request made by DEPARTMENT or its
agents. In conducting an audit of the costs and match credits claimed under this
FTA, DEPARTMENT will rely to the maximum extent possible on any prior audit
of AGENCY pursuant to the provisions of federal and State law. In the absence
of such an audit, any acceptable audit work performed by A(;)ENCY's external
and internal auditors may be relied upon and used by DEPARTMENT when
planning and conducting additional audits.
7-32
. .,;!reement N
City of C
Page 7 of 11
b. For the purpose of determining compliance with Title 21, California Code of
Reguiations, Section 2500 et seq., when applicable, and other matters connected
with the performance of AGENCY's contracts with third parties pursuant to
"Government Code section 8546.7, AGENCY, AGENCY's contractors and
subcontractors and DEPARTMENT shall each maintain and make available for
inspection all books, documents, papers, accounting records, and other evidence
pertaining to the performance of such contracts, inciuding, but not limited to, the
costs of administering those various contracts. All of the above referenced
parties shall make such materials available at their respective offices at all
reasonable times during the entire Project period and for three years from the
date affinal payment to AGENCY under this FTA. DEPARTMENT, the
California Slate Auditor, or any duly authorized representative of DEPARTMENT
or the United Slates Department of Transportation, shall each have access to
any books, records, and documents that are pertinent to a Project for audits,
examinations, excerpts, and transactions, and AGENCY shall furnish copies
thereof if requested.
c. AGENCY, its contractors and subcontractors will permit access to all records of
employment, employment advertisements, employment application forms, and
other pertinent data and records by the State Fair Employment Practices and
Housing Commission, or any other agency of the Slate of California designated
by DEPARTMENT, for the purpose of any investigation to ascertain compliance
with this FT A.
15. Disputes
a. Any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under this FTA that is not
disposed of by agreement shall be decided by the DEPARTMENT Contract Officer,
who may consider any written or verbal evidence submitted by AGENCY.
b. Neither the pendency of a dispute nor its consideration by the Contract Officer will
excuse AGENCY from full and timely performance in accordance with the terms of
the FTA. "
16. Subcontractors
AGENCY shall perform the work contemplated with resources available within Its own
organization and no portion of the work shall be subcontracted without written
authorization by DEPARTMENT's Contract Manager, unless expressly inciuded
(subcontractor identified) in Attachment I!\. Any subcontract in excess of $25,000 entered
into as a result of this FTA shall contain all the provisions stipulated in this FTA to be
applicable to AGENCY's subcontractors.
17. Third Partv Contractinq
a. AGENCY shall not award a construction contract over $10,000 or other
contracts over $25,000 [excluding professional service contracts of the type
which are required to be procured in accordance with Government Code
Sections 4525 (d); (e) and (I)] on the basis of a noncompetitive negotiation for
work to be performed under this FT A without the prior written approval of
DEPARTMENT. Contracts awarded by AGENCY, if Intended as local match
credit, must meet the requirements set forth in this FT A regarding local match
funds.
7-33
"greement N~
CityofC~
Page 8 of 11
b. Any subcontract entered into by AGENCY as a result of this FTA shall mandate
that travel and per diem reimbursements and third-party contract
reimbursements to subcontractors will be allowable as Project costs only after
. those costs are incurred and paid for by the subcontractors.
c. if local match is a requirement of these funds, AGENCY must ensure that local
match fuitds used for the Project meet the requirements outlined in this FTA in
the same manner as is required of all other Project expenditures.
d. In addition to the above, the preaward requirements of third perty
contractor/consultants with local agencies must be consistent with Local
Program Policy (LPP 00-05).
1 B. Labor Code Comoliance
AGENCY shall include in all subcontracts funded by this FT A which contemplates the
actual construction of a public works project paid for by funds allocated under this FT A, a
clause that requires each subcontractor to comply with California Labor Code
requirements that all workers employed on public works projects (as defined in California
Labor Code 1720-1815) will be paid not less than the general prevailing wage rates
predetermined by the Director of the State Department of Industrial Relations.
19. Disabled Veterans Business EnterDrise
a. Should Military and Veterans Code sections 999 et seq. be applicable to
AGENCY, AGENCY will meet, or make good faith efforts to mee~ the 3%
Disabled Veterans Business Enterprises goals (or AGENCY's applicable higher
goals) in the award of every contract for Project work to be performed under this
FTA.
b. AGENCY shall have the sole duty and authority under this FTA and each
amendment to determine whether these referenced code sections are applicable
to AGENCY and, if so, whether good faith efforts asserted by those contractors
of AGENCY were sufficient as outiined in MiIltary and Veterans Code sections
999 et seq.
20. Druo-Free Workolace Certification
By signin9 this FT A, AGENCY hereby certifies under penalty of perjury under the laws of the
State of California that AGENCY will comply with the requirements of the Drug-Free
Workplace Act of 1990 (Government Code section 8350 et seq.) and will provide a drug-free
workplace by doing all of the following:
a. Publish a statement notifying employees that unlawful manufacture, distribution,
dispensation, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited and
specifying actions to be taken against employees for violations, as required by
Government Code section 8355(a).
b. Establish a Drug-Free Awareness Program as required by Government Code
section 8355(b) to inform employees about all of the following:
1. the dangers of drug abuse in the workplace,
2. the person's or organization's policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace,
7-34
Agreement No.....
City ofCh~
Page 9 of 11
3. any available counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance
programs, and
4. penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abu.se violations.
c. Provide as required by Government Code section 8355(c), that every employee
who works on the proposed contract or grant
1. will receive a copy of the company's drug-free policy statemen~ and
2. will agree to abide by the terms of the company's statement as a condition
of employment on the contract or grant.
Failure to comply with these nequirements may result in suspension of payments under this
FTA or termination of this FTA or both, and AGENCY may be ineligible for the award of any
future state contracts if DEPARTMENT determines that any of the following has occurred:
(1) AGENCY has made a false certification or, (2) AGENCY violates the certification by
failing to carry out the requirements as noted above. .
21. Relationshio of Parties
It is expressly understood that this is an agreement is executed by and between two
independent governmental entities and that this is not intended to, and shall not be
construed to, create the relationship of agent, servant, employee, partnership, joint
venture or association, or any other relationship whatsoever other than that of an
independent party.
22. EQuioment Purchase (Bv AGENCY)
a. Prior authorization in writing by the DEPARTMENT Contract Manager shall be
required before AGENCY enters into any non-budgeted purchase order or
subagreement exceeding $500 for supplies, equipmen~ or consultant services.
AGENCY shall provide an evaluatiqn of the necessity or desirability of incurring
such costs.
b. For the purchase of any item, service or consulting work not covered in the attached
Project Description (Attachment III) and exceeding $500, three competitive
quotations must be submitted with the request or the absence of bidding must be
adequately justified, and prior authorization must be obtained from the
DEPARTMENT's Contract Manager.
c. Any equipment purchased as a result of this FT A is subject to the following:
AGENCY shall maintain an Inventory record for each piece of non-expendable
equipment purchased or built with funds provided under the terms of this FT A.
The inventory record of each piece of such equipment shall include the date
acquired, total cost, serial number, model identification (on sale, in accordance
with established DEPARTMENT procedures, purchased equipment), and any
other information or description necessary to identify said" equipment. Non-
expendable equipment so inventoried are those items of equipment that have a
normai life expectancy of one year or more and an approximate unit price of
$5,000 or more. In addition, theft-sensitive items of equipment costing less than
$5,000 shall be inventoried. A copy of the inventory record must be submitted to
DEPARTMENT upon request by DEPARTMENT.
7-35
~greement No.----
City of C~
Page 10 of 11
d. At the conclusion of the FTA, or if the FTA is terminated, AGENCY may either
keep the equipment and credit DEPARTMENT in an amount equal to its fair
market vaiue or sell such equipment at the best price obtainable at a public or
private sale in accordance with established DEPARTMENT procedures and
'credit DEPARTMENT in an amount equal to the sales price. If AGENCY elects
to keep the equipment, fair market value shall be determined, at AGENCY
expense; on theobasis of a competent, independent appraisal of such equipment.
Appraisals shall be obtained from an appraiser mutually agreeable to
DEPARTMENT and AGENCY. If it AGENCY is determined to sell the
equipment, the terms and conditions of such sale must be approved in advance
by DEPARTMENT.
e. CFR 49, Part 18 requires a credit to Federal funds when participating equipment
with a fair market value greater than $5,000 is credited to the Project.
f. Any subagreement entered into as a result of this FT A shall contain all of the
provisions of this Article.
23. Disabled Access Review
Disabled access review by the Department of General Services (Office of State Architect)
is required for the construction of all publicly funded buildings, structures, sidewalks,
curbs and related facilities. No construction contract will be awarded by AGENCY unless
AGENCY pians and specifications for such facilities conform to the provisions of sections
4450 and 4454 of the California Government Code, if applicable. Further requirements
and guidance are provided In TiUe 24 of the California Administrative Code and the
Americans with Disabilities Act (42 USC 12101, et. seq.).
24. Fire Marshal Review
The State Fire Marshal adopts buildln9 standards for fire safety and panic prevention.
Such regulations pertain to fire protection design and construction, means of egress and
adequacy of exits, installation of fire alarms, and fire extinguishment systems for any
DEPARTMENT owned or DEPARTMENT occupied buildings per Section 13108 of the
Health and Safety Code. When applicable, AGENCY must assura that any relevant
Project plans meet the standards of the State Fire Marshal to ensure cO!1sistency with
DEPARTMENT fire protection standards.
25. Environmental Clearance
Environmental ciearance of Project by AGENCY andlor DEPARTMENT is required prior
to requesting funds for right of way purchase or construction. No department or agency
shall request funds nor shall any department/agency board or commission authorize
expenditures of funds for any project, except feasibility or pianning studies, which may
have a'slgnificant effect on the environment unless such a request Is accompanied by an
environmental impact report per California Public Resources Code section 21102. The
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), in California Public Resources Code
section 21080{b)(10), does provide an exemption for rail projects which institute or
increase passenger or commuter services on rail or highway rights-of-way already in use.
26. Public Work
If this Project will result in the construction, alteration, modification or maintenance of a
"Public Work," as that term is defined in the labor Code, then AGENCY must conform to
the provisions of the labor Code applicable to Public Works as set forth in said sections
7-36
AgreementN~
CityolC~
Page 11 0111
1720 through 1815, all applicable regulations of the Department of Industrial Relations,
and determinations of coverage as issued by the Director of Industrial Relations.
27. Proiect Close Out
The FT A Expiration Date refers to the last date lor AGENCY to incur valid Project costs
or credits and is the date the FTA expires. AGENCY has sixty (60) days alter that
Expiration Date to make final allowable payments to Project contractors or vendors,
prepare the Project Closeout Report, and submit the final invoice to DEPARTMENT for
reimbursement for allowable Project costs. Any unexpended Project funds not invoiced
by that sixtieth (60th) day will be reverted and will no longer be accessible to reimburse
late Project invoices.
ATTACHMENTS:
The following attachments are incorporated into and are made a part of this FT A by this reference
and attachment.
I. Accounting & Audit Guidelines
II. AGENCY Resolution
III. Scope of Work, Schedule, and Costs
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto have executed this FTA on the day and year
lirst herein above written:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF ANSPORTATION
By:
Date:~
. APPROVED AS TO FORM
7-37
By:
Title:
Date:
Contract No'-
City of C~
Attachment I
Page 1 of 4
ATTACHMENT I
ACCOUNTING & AUDIT GUIDELINES FOR
AGREEMENTS WITH DEPARTMENT
INTROOUCTION
The purpose of this information is to outiine for you, a potential contractor w~h the Califomia State
Department of Transportation (DEPARTMENT), the basic elements of an adequate accounting
system, and the types and objectives of audits that will be pertormed in relation to your contract.
In order to successfully compete for a contract and meet the audit requirements, a contractor
(whether a prime or subcontractor) must have a system of record keeping and intemal control.
Although a specific cost accounting system is not required, a contractor needs a system that will
assure compliance with the terms of the agreement. A pre-award audit will be pertormed to
assure you meet these requirements prior to contract execution. If your system is deficient, the
contract will not be executed.
DEPARTMENT reimburses, through your overhead rate, the costs attributable to establishing and
maintaining a cost accounting system.
Staff time and other costs related to an audit pertormed of your contract are also normally
reimbursed through your overhead rate.
ACCOUNTING SYSTEM
Contractors (whether a prime or subcontractor) planning to contract with DEPARTMENT must
have an accounting system which meets the following objectives:
. The ability to record and report financial data in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles.
. A system of record keeping to ensure that costs billed to DEPARTMENT are:
a. Supported by adequate documentation.
b. In compliance with the terms of the contract and applicable Federal and State
regulations specified in the contract.
. A system of record keeping which ideally includes the following:
a. A General Ledger
b. Job cost ledger
c. Labor distributions
d. Time records
e. Subsidiary journais
f. Chart of accounts
g. Financial statements
. The ability to accumulate and segregate reasonable, allocable (incurred solely for a project)
and allowable (per terms of the contract) costs through the use of a cost accounting system.
The following are some of the attributes which would ideally be found in such a system:
7-38
:,'"
~{ .....
Contract No-
CityofC~
Attachment I
Page 2 of 4
a. A chart of accounts that includes indirect and direct general ledger accounts.
Indirect costs are not specifically identified to a project, for example, rent and/or
,utililies. Direct costs are specifically identified with a project, for example,
drafting hours and/or design hours.
b. Segregation of costs by contract, category of cost and milestones (if applicable).
c. Proper recording of direct and indirect costs. For example, recording of labor
costs should provide that non-project indirect hours are recorded on a timesheet
and in the accounting records to an administration, vacation, sick leave or other
Indirect cost account/code. Direct project hours should be recorded on a
timesheet and in the accounting records to a direct project cost accounllcode.
d. Consistent accounting treatment of costs in recording and reporting. For
example, if travel expense is charged directly to a project, all travel expense
incurred on any project should be considered a direct cost. As a result, project
related travel, whether reimbursable per the contract terms or not, should not be
included as an indirect cost.
e. Ability to trace from invoices submitted to DEPARTMENT to job cost records and
original, approved source documents, for example, timesheets, vendor invoices,
canceled checks.
f. Ability to reconcile job cost records to the accounting records.
. Compliance with cost principles described in the Code of Federal Regulations 48, Federal
Acquisition Regulations System (FAR), Chapter 1, Part 31. Information on how to obtain this
regulation is described under "Audit Criteria" in this brochure.
. Procedures to monitor and adjust projected overhead rates to actual rates.
. Controls to ensure that written approval is obtained prior to any changes to the contract.
. Procedures to retain accounting records and source documentation as required by the terms
of the contract.
. A system of intemal control that provides reasonable assurance that assets are protected;
financial data, records and statements are reliable; and errors and irregularities are promptly
discovered, reported, and corrected. The elements of a system of intemal control shouid
include, but not be limited to, the following:
a. Separation of duties for proper protection of assets. Incompatible duties are
those that place any person in a position to both perpetrate and conceal errors or
irregularities in the normal course of business. For example, the person who
writes checks should be different from the person who reconciles bank
statements and the person who purchases goods should be different from the
person who receives goods.
b. Limiling access to assets to only authorized personnel who require these assets
in the performance of their assigned duties. For example, blank check stock
should be locked in a safe when not in use.
c, Authorization and record keeping procedures that provide effective accounting
control over assets, liabilities, revenues, and expenditures.
7-39
Contract N""-"
CityofC~
Attachment I
Page 3 of 4
d. A system of practices to be followed in the performance of duties and functions.
. Such a system normally includes policies and procedures that establish the
purpose and requirements of the accounting system. For example, timekeeping
practices should ideally provide for the following:
Timesheets be prepared, signed, and dated by all employees.
Timesheets be completed in non-erasable ink.
Timesheet corrections be crossed-out and initialed by the employee.
Timesheets be signed by a supervisor as reviewed and retained on file
as required by the contract.
e. Personnel with skills and training commensurate with their responsibilities.
f. A system of intemal review. For example, bank reconciliations and travel
expense claims should be reviewed approved and signed by a supervisor.
AUDITS
Contractors, whether a prime or subcontractor, performing under a negotiated contract with
DEPARTMENT are subject to the following audits:
PREAWARD AUDITS
Prior to the award of a contract, the DEPARTMENT Audits and Investigations wili conduct a pre-
award audit to determine ilthe contractor's accounting system is adequate to accumulate and
segregate costs as detailed in the previous section and to determine if the proposed costs are
reasonable. The audit alerts both the contractor and DEPARTMENT management to problems
relative to the contractor's cost proposal and cost accounting system. Due to time constraints in
the award process, your cooperation in scheduling the pre-award audit with short notice wili
expedite the execution of your contract.
INTERIM AUDITS
Interim audits are performed on an as needed basis. During the pre-award audit, if it is
determined that the contractor's accounting system is new or minor deficiencies are noted, an
interim audit is scheduled to determine that the system is functioning adequately to ensure that
biiled costs are supported and that any deficiencies were corrected. An interim audit may be
requested by the contract administrator or by DEPARTMENT management to address concerns
during the course of the contract. Also, an audit manager may initiate an interim audit of a long
duration contract to ensure that costs reimbursed to date are allowable.
POST AUDITS
Post audits of contracts are performed routinely alter project completion. Post audits are
performed to determine whether the costs claimed are allowable, allocable, reasonable, and in
compliance with the Federal and State laws and regulations as well as the fiscal provisions
stipulated in the contract. The examination includes reviews of applicable iaws and regulations,
the contract requirements and the contractor's internal controls systems. Audit tests of the
contractor's accounting records and other auditing procedures considered necessary wiil also be
performed. Applications of all audit procedures would also be govemed by the individual contract
7-40
ContractN--
Cityof~
Attachment I
Page 4 of 4
under audit. Unsupported or unallowable costs are normally the result of weaknesses in the
accounting system and will be reimbursed to DEPARTMENT.
To provide contractors with a procedure for obtaining prompt and equitable resolution to a dispute
arising from a post-audit of a non-highway construction cost reimbursement contract,
DEPARTMENT has established an Audit Review Committee (ARC). Information explaining the
ARC should be found in your contract and/or as an attachment to the post-audit report.
AUDIT CRITERIA
For specific information regarding basic cost accounting systems and applicable State and
Federal reguiations, piease see the following:
Code of Federal ReQulations 48. Federal ACQuisition ReQulations Svstem. Chaoter 1. Part 31
This regulation contains cost principles and procedures for the pricing of contracts/subcontracts
and the determination, negotiation, or allowance of costs. Contact:
Superintendent of Documents
Government Printing Office
Washington, DC 20402
Washington D.C.
San Francisco
Los Angeles
(202) 783-3238
(415) 512-2770
(213) 239-9844
California State Administrative Manual
A reference source for statewide policies, procedures, regulations, and information. Contact:
Office of State Publishing
Department 01 General Services
(916) 445-2295
For review of the above references, contact your local library or the California State Library.
California State LibrarylLibrary and Courts Building
914 Capitol Mall
P. O. Box 942837
Sacramento, CA 94237-0001
Information: (916) 654-0261
For assistance in establishing an accounting system that will meet the objeCtives outlined in this
brochure, you should contact an accountant and/or bookkeeper whom is familiar with cost
accounting systems.
DEPARTMENT is an affirmative action employer. Equal opportunity is offered to all regardless of
race, color, creed, national origin, ancestry, sex, marital status, disability, religious or political
affiliation, age or sexual orientation. Contractors that contract with DEPARTMENT are
responsible for taking necessary and reasonable steps to achieve these same goals.
7-41
RESOLUTION NO. 2007-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE
KIDS WALK & BIKE TO SCHOOL - PHASE II COMMUNITY-
BASED TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GRANT,
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN
AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE
GRANT, ESTABLISHING A NEW CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT (TF362), TRANSFERRING EXISTING FUNDS, AND
APPROPRIATING GRANT FUNDS FOR ALL PUBLIC
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS WITHIN THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA EXCEPT HILLTOP DRIVE, LAUDERBACH,
MONTGOMERY, HALECREST, SALT CREEK, ALLEN
SCHOOL, CHULA VISTA HILLS, AND VISTA SQUARE
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS.
WHEREAS, City staff applied for a community based transportation planning grant in
the amount of $241,600 for the Kids Walk & Bike to School Phase II Planning Project (the
Project) with the State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) on October 12,
2006; and
WHEREAS, Caltrans awarded the grant in the amount of $241,600 to the City on
September 28, 2007; and
WHEREAS, Caltrans requires that the City adopt a resolution adopting the Project and
authorizing the City to execute contracts and agreements in furtherance of the Project; and
WHEREAS, Caltrans requires that the City match 20% of the grant amount which totals
$60,400; and
WHEREAS, the City will use the staffs administration of the grant funds as the required
match; and
WHEREAS, the City previously appropriated $60,400 within CIP TF345 and wishes to
transfer that amount to the new CIP TF362 for the purposes of tracking City staff time
administrating the Project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista, with regard to all public elementary schools within the City of Chula Vista except Hilltop
Drive, Lauderbach, Montgomery, Halecrest, Salt Creek, Allen School, Chula Vista Hills, and
Vista Square Elementary Schools, as follows:
1. That it authorizes the acceptance of the Kids Walk & Bike to School - Phase II
Community-based Transportation Planning Grant.
2. That it authorizes the Mayor to execute an agreement with the State of California
for the Grant.
3. That it establishes a new Capital Improvement Project (TF362).
4. That it transfers $60,400 in existing funds from TF345 to TF362.
7-42
5. That it and appropriates $241,600 to TF362 from the Kids Walk & Bike to
School-Phase II Community-based Transportation Planning Grant.
Presented by Approved as to form by
Jack Griffin
Director of Engineering and General Services
'-I~dL~~
Ann Moore
City Attorney
H:\ENGINEER\RESOS\Resos2008\Ol-08-08\Wulk and Bike to School Grant all except.. ..doc
7-43
RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE KIDS WALK
& BIKE TO SCHOOL - PHASE II COMMUNITY-BASED
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GRANT, AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA FOR THE GRANT, ESTABLISHING A NEW
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (TF362), TRANSFERRING
EXISTING FUNDS, AND APPROPRIATING GRANT FUNDS FOR
LAUDERBACH AND MONTGOMERY ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
WHEREAS, City staff applied for a community based transportation planning grant in the
amount of $241,600 for the Kids Walk & Bike to School Phase II Planning Project (the Project) with the
State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) on October 12, 2006; and
WHEREAS, Caltrans awarded the grant in the amount of $241 ,600 to the City on September 28,
2007; and
WHEREAS, Caltrans requires that the City adopt a resolution adopting the Project and
authorizing the City to execute contracts and agreements in furtherance of the Project; and
WHEREAS, Caltrans requires that the City match 20% of the grant amount which totals $60,400;
and
WHEREAS, the City will use the staffs administration of the grant funds as the required match;
and
WHEREAS, the City previously appropriated $60,400 within CIP TF345 and wishes to transfer
that amount to the new CIP TF362 for the purposes of tracking City staff time administrating the Project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, with
regard to Lauderbach and Montgomery Elementary Schools, as follows:
1. That it authorizes the acceptance of the Kids Walk & Bike to School - Phase II
Community-based Transportation Planning Grant.
2. That it authorizes the Mayor to execute an agreement with the State of California for the
Grant.
3. That it establishes a new Capital Improvement Project (TF362).
4. That it transfers $60,400 in existing funds from TF345 to TF362.
5. That it and appropriates $241,600 to TF362 from the Kids Walk & Bike to School-Phase II
Community-based Transportation Planning Grant.
Presented by Approved as to form by
Jack Griffin
Director of Engineering and General Services
J~ (JA~~
Ann Moore
City Attorney
H:\ENG1NEER\RESOS\Resos2008\OJ -08-08\Walk and Bike to School Grant Lauderbach, Montgomery.doc
7-44
RESOLUTION NO. 2007-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE
KIDS WALK & BIKE TO SCHOOL - PHASE II COMMUNITY-
BASED TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GRANT,
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN
AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE
GRANT, ESTABLISHING A NEW CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT (TF362), TRANSFERRING EXISTING FUNDS, AND
APPROPRIATING GRANT FUNDS FOR SALT CREEK,
ALLEN SCHOOL, AND CHULA VISTA HILLS
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
WHEREAS, City staff applied for a community based transportation planning grant in
the amount of $241,600 for the Kids Walk & Bike to School Phase II Planning Project (the
Project) with the State of Califomia Department of Transportation (Caltrans) on October 12,
2006; and
WHEREAS, Caltrans awarded the grant in the amount of $241,600 to the City on
September 28, 2007; and
WHEREAS, Caltrans requires that the City adopt a resolution adopting the Project and
authorizing the City to execute contracts and agreements in furtherance of the Project; and
WHEREAS, Caltrans requires that the City match 20% of the grant amount which totals
$60,400; and
WHEREAS, the City will use the staff's administration of the grant funds as the required
match; and
WHEREAS, the City previously appropriated $60,400 within CIP TF345 and wishes to
transfer that amount to the new CIP TF362 for the purposes of tracking City staff time
administrating the Project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista, with regard to Salt Creek, Allen School, and Chula Vista Hills Elementary Schools, as
follows:
1. That it authorizes the acceptance of the Kids Walk & Bike to School - Phase II
Community-based Transportation Planning Grant.
2. That it authorizes the Mayor to execute an agreement with the State of Califomia
for the Grant.
3. That it establishes a new Capital Improvement Project (TF362).
4. That it transfers $60,400 in existing funds from TF345 to TF362.
5. That it and appropriates $241,600 to TF362 from the Kids Walk & Bike to
School-Phase II Community-based Transportation Planning Grant.
7-45
Presented by
Jack Griffin
Director of Engineering and General Services
Approved as to form by
~~ !L ~1-~~
Ann Moore
City Attorney
H:\ENGINEER\RESOS\Resos2008\Ol-08-08\Walk and Bike to School Grant Salt Creek, Allen School, Chula Vista Hills.doc
7-46
RESOLUTION NO. 2007-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE
OF THE KIDS WALK & BIKE TO SCHOOL - PHASE II
COMMUNITY-BASED TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
GRANT, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE
AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE GRANT, ESTABLISHING A NEW CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (TF362), TRANSFERRING
EXISTING FUNDS, AND APPROPRIATING GRANT
FUNDS FOR VISTA SQUARE AND HILLTOP DRIVE
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
WHEREAS, City staff applied for a community based transportation planning grant in the
amount of $241,600 for the Kids Walk & Bike to School Phase II Planning Project (the Project) with the
State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) on October 12,2006; and
WHEREAS, Caltrans awarded the grant in the amount of $241 ,600 to the City on September 28,
2007; and
WHEREAS, Caltrans requires that the City adopt a resolution adopting the Project and
authorizing the City to execute contracts and agreements in furtherance of the Project; and
WHEREAS, Caltrans requires that the City match 20% of the grant amount which totals $60,400;
and
WHEREAS, the City will use the staffs administration of the grant funds as the required match;
and
WHEREAS, the City previously appropriated $60,400 within CIP TF345 and wishes to transfer
that amount to the new CIP TF362 for the purposes of tracking City stafftime administrating the Project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City ofChula Vista, with
regard to Vista Square and Hilltop Drive Elementary Schools, as follows:
1. That it authorizes the acceptance of the Kids Walk & Bike to School - Phase II
Community-based Transportation Planning Grant.
2. That it authorizes the Mayor to execute an agreement with the State of California for the
Grant.
3. That it establishes a new Capital Improvement Project (TF362).
4. That it transfers $60,400 in existing funds from TF345 to TF362.
5. That it and appropriates $241,600 to TF362 from the Kids Walk & Bike to School-Phase II
Community-based Transportation Planning Grant.
Presented by Approved as to form by
Jack Griffin
Director of Engineering and General Services
~L<,>~ (t~h-~t~
Ann Moore
City Attorney
H:\ENGINEER\RESOS\Resos2008\Ol-08-08\Walk and Bike to School Grant Vista Square, Hilltop Drive.doc
7-47
RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE KIDS WALK
& BIKE TO SCHOOL - PHASE II COMMUNITY-BASED
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GRANT, AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA FOR THE GRANT, ESTABLISHING A NEW
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (TF362), TRANSFERRING
EXISTING FUNDS, AND APPROPRIATING GRANT FUNDS FOR
HALECREST ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
WHEREAS, City staff applied for a community based transportation planning grant in the
amount of $241,600 for the Kids Walk & Bike to School Phase II Planning Project (the Project) with the
State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) on October 12, 2006; and
WHEREAS, Caltrans awarded the grant in the amount of $241,600 to the City on September 28,
2007; and
WHEREAS, Caltrans requires that the City adopt a resolution adopting the Project and
authonzing the City to execute contracts and agreements in furtherance of the Project; and
WHEREAS, Caltrans requires that the City match 20% of the grant amount which totals $60,400;
and
WHEREAS, the City will use the staffs administration of the grant funds as the required match;
and
WHEREAS, the City previously appropriated $60,400 within CIP TF345 and wishes to transfer
that amount to the new CIP TF362 for the purposes of tracking City staff time administrating the Project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, with
regard to Halecrest Elementary School, as follows:
1. That it authorizes the acceptance of the Kids Walk & Bike to School - Phase II
Community-based Transportation Planning Grant.
2. That it authorizes the Mayor to execute an agreement with the State of California for the
Grant.
3. That it establishes a new Capital Improvement Project (TF362).
4. That it transfers $60,400 in existing funds from TF345 to TF362.
5. That it and appropriates $241,600 to TF362 from the Kids Walk & Bike to School-Phase
II Community-based Transportation Planning Grant.
Presented by Approved as to form by
Jack Griffin
Director of Engineering and General Services
J 1~ (t~4-<o~-t> ~
Ann Moore
City Attorney
H:\ENGINEER\RESOS\Resos2008\Ol~08-08\Walk and Bike to School Grant Halecrest.doc
7-48
Addressed under Public Comments at the City Council Meeting of January 8, 2008
Chula Vista Open Competition and Anti-Discrimination Ordinance
PREAMBLE
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista desires free and open competition for construction
projects funded fully or partially with public dollars;
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista recognizes local jobs are best created when
construction projects offer an equal opportunity to all workers; and
WHEREAS, only projects that allow both union and non-union construction workers
and contractors to work should be eligible for public funding.
NOW THEREFORE, the City of Chula Vista adopts the following ordinance:
Prohibition of Anti-Competitive or Discriminatory Agreements or Requirements
(A) The city shall not fund or contract for the construction maintenance, repair, or
improvement of public works, where there is a requirement that an owner,
developer, contractor, subcontractor, or material supplier, execute or otherwise
become party to any agreement between organized labor on the one hand, and
the City, a developer and! or a contractor on the other hand, or even a City
imposed bid specification, any of which that requires owners, developers,
contractors, subcontractors or suppliers to become signatory to a collective
bargaining agreement or to require the employees of contractors, subcontractors,
or suppliers to join a union or pay dues to a union or union benefit funds.
(B) For purposes of this section, the term "public work" means: a building, road,
street, sewer, storm drain, water system, irrigation system, reclamation project,
redevelopment project, or other facility funded, owned or to be owned or be
contracted for by the City of Chula Vista or the Redevelopment Agency of the
City of Chula Vista.
(C) Any injured party resulting from violation of this ordinance shall be entitled to
injunctive relief in the Superior Court of the County of San Diego.
CC: On 1/9/08
Mayor/Councilmembers
Ann Moore, City Attorney
David Garcia, City Manager
Scott Tulloch, Assistant City Manager
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
..:$-~f:. CITY OF
- - --~ (HULA VISTA
Meeting Date: January 8, 2008, Item No.: 8
ITEM TITLE:
RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City ofChula Vista adopting
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program IS-07-031;
ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista amending
the zoning maps established by Section 19.18.010 of the Municipal Code,
by rezoning one 3.9 acre parcel located at 267 East Oxford Street from R-
1 (Single Family Residential) to R-I-5-P (Single Family Residential,
Precise Plan), and adopting Precise Plan Standards;
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
approving a Precise Plan and a Tentative Map subject to the Conditions
contained herein for the Oxford Street Project, to divide 3.90 acres
located at 267 East Oxford Street into 24 Single-family residential lots.
DIRECTOR OF PLJ~P AND BUILDIN~
CITY MANAGER v~ T
ASSISTANT CITY ANAGER 7;-
4/STHS VOTE: YES NOl
INTRODUCTION
This is a request for a Rezone, Precise Plan and Tentative Subdivision Map to develop 24 single-
family lots on a 3.9-acre site presently occupied by the Concordia Lutheran Church at 267 East
Oxford Street in southwestern Chula Vista (see Locator Map).
BACKGROUND
The applicant is acting on behalf of the property owner, Concordia Lutheran Church. The
church would sell the property and construct a new church facility in the Winding Walk
neighborhood of the Otay Ranch Planned Community.
8-1
Oxford Street Proj eet
Page 2
o 1/08/U8
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
On November 7, 2007, City staff and the applicant hosted a publicly noticed neighborhood
meeting at the Kellogg Elementary School, to accept comments and questions on the project.
Prior to this meeting, the applicant conducted two public meetings to obtain public input and
provide updates on the progress of the project. There were six attendees from the public at the
city-initiated meeting. The concerns related to the project that were expressed at the meeting
included:
. Increased traffic on Melrose Ave, which is in need of repair;
The City Engineer has reviewed the project and determined that the traffic will decrease as a
result of the change from church to residential uses, from 304 to 240 average daily trips. The
project will not create traffic impacts. As part of the City's Pavement Rehabilitation
Program, Melrose Street is on the Citizen Request list of streets to be evaluated for future
street repairs.
. Privacy concerns related to new two-story homes being placed adj acent to existing homes;
The City does not regulate privacy issues that could occur between adjacent properties.
. Potential affects of grading and construction of fences and retaining walls adjacent to the
existing homes;
During the construction phase of the project, the builder will design grading, walls and fences
that will not encroach onto the adjacent properties, and will be required to comply with the
grading ordinance, and detailed wall and fencing plans.
. Timing and Phasing of construction of the project;
The owner clarified that the property may be sold to a builder and anticipated that
construction would not commence until 2009.
. Proj ect drainage after development;
The applicant's Engineer described the proposed site drainage and improvements, including
construction of a storm drain system, a curb and gutter system, a cross-gutter, SwaleGard
curb inlet filters, and a grass-lined swale. Low flows from the site would be intercepted and
diverted by proposed cross-gutters to curb-inlet filters which will screen out larger materials
and discharge water directly into a proposed grass-lined swale located at the southwestern
corner of the project site. The grass-lined swale will convey flow in a westerly direction, and
will be graded at approximately 0.2% slope to permit water to percolate prior discharge to the
public curb/gutter system on East Oxford Street at the southwestern corner of the site.
Peak flows from the east side of the site will be conveyed along the proposed public street
and bypass the cross gutter, flowing directly to East Oxford Street. A portion of the peak
8-2
Oxford Street Project
Page 3
01/08/08
flows from the west side of the site will enter the curb inlets filters and be diverted to the
grass-lined swale before discharge to the public curb/gutter system on East Oxford Street at
the southwestern comer of the site while the remaining flow will bypass the inlets and flow
out to East Oxford Street.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act and has conducted an Initial Study, IS-07-031 in
accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Based upon the results of the Initial
Study, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the project could result in
significant effects on the environment. However, revisions to the project made by or agreed to
by the Applicant would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no
significant effects would occur; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared a
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, IS-07-031
(see Attachment 5, Final Mitigated Negative Declaration).
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council 1) adopt the Resolution approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program IS-07-031, and 2) adopt the Ordinance approving
zoning re-classification PCZ-07-08, and 3) adopt the Resolution approving Precise Plan PCM-08-
02 and Tentative Subdivision Map PCS-07-07, based on the findings and subject to the conditions
contained therein.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
On December 12, 2007, the Planning Commission considered the proposed project. Following
staffs presentation and public testimony, the Planning Commission voted 6-0-0-1 to recommend
that the City Council approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Rezone, Precise Plan, and
Tentative Map applications.
On November 19, 2007, the Resource Conservation Commission determined that Initial Study
IS-07-031 for the Project was adequate, and is recommending that the City Council adopt the
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, IS-07-031.
DISCUSSION
Project Site Characteristics:
The 3.9 -acre project site is located within the urbanized area of Western Chula Vista, (see
Locator Map). The site is approximately 100 feet east of the intersection of Melrose Avenue and
East Oxford Street. Primary access to the site is currently provided directly from East Oxford
Street. The existing site slopes gently uphill to the north from 260 feet to 270 feet. The site has
been partially disturbed with previous uses including a church, pre-school/daycare, and parking
lot on the south side of the lot and play fields on the north side of the lot (see Attachment 2,
8-3
Oxford Street Project
Page 4
01/08/08
Aerial Photo). The existing land uses on each side of the proj ect are single-family residential.
Project Description:
The project proposes demolition of the eXlstmg church, daycare/community building, and
accessory buildings, and redevelopment of the 3.9 ac. site with 24 single-family detached
residential dwelling units (see Attachment 3, Precise Plan Map). The project includes the
following applications:
1. PCZ-07-08, a rezone from the R-l Single Family Residential zone with minimum 7,000
square foot lots, to the R-I-5-P Single Family Residential zone, with minimum 5,000
square foot lots, including a "P" -Precise Plan Modifying District and Precise Plan
development standards;
2. PCM-08-02, a Precise Plan to establish a Precise Plan Map and Text, including
development standards, architectural, and landscape design guidelines;
3. PCS-07-07, a Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide 3.9 acres into 24 residential lots
and 2 HOA-maintained open space lots, served by a new public residential street. The
residential lots will range in size from 5,006 sq. fl. to 6,249 sq. fl. in size.
Compliance with Development Rel!ulations:
Site
General Plan
Low-Medium
Residential (3-6
dwelling units/acre)
North
Low-Medium
Residential (3-6
dwelling units/acre)
Low-Medium
Residential (3-6
dwelling units/acre)
Low-Medium
Residential (3-6
dwelling units/acre)
Low-Medium
Residential (3-6
dwelling units/acre)
South
East
West
ANALYSIS:
CV Municipal Code Zoning
R-l (Single-Family
Residential)
Existing Land Use
Concordia Lutheran Church and
Daycare
R-l (Single-Family
Residential)
Existing Single-Family Residential
R-l (Single-Family
Residential)
Existing Single-Family Residential
R-l (Single-Family
Residential)
Existing Single-Family Residential
R-l (Single-Family
Residential)
Existing Single-Family Residential
In recommending approval of the requested Rezone, Precise Plan, and Tentative Subdivision
Map, staff relies on the rationale discussed below:
8-4
Oxford Street Project
Page 5
o 1/08/u8
Rezone
The site and surrounding neighborhood consists primarily of single-family residential
development that has been zoned R-l (single-family residential) for more than 20 years. The
General Plan designation for the project site and surrounding area is Low-Medium Residential,
which permits single-family development at a range of 3-6 dwelling units per acre. The General
Plan includes policy LUT 4.2 that states that existing, stable single-family residential areas
should be protected through zoning or other regulations that discourage higher-density
residential uses or other incompatible activities. To maintain compliance with the General Plan,
the applicant has requested a rezone from the R-1-7 Single-Family Residential zone, to the R-l-
5-P (Single-Family Residential zone, 5,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size, with a Precise Plan
Modifying District). The project proposes 24 detached single-family homes on a 3.9-acre site,
which yields a gross density of 5.88 dwelling units per acre (including the site and adjacent land
area measured to centerline of East Oxford Street). Rezoning to a minimum 5,000 square foot lot
size is necessary to permit the proj ect to achieve the density permitted by the General Plan.
Compliance with the General Plan is not considered solely on the basis of development of
individual lots, but from an overall "neighborhood density" perspective. To establish that the
project is within the range of anticipated densities that would comply with General Plan, a 302-
acre neighborhood planning area bounded by Hilltop Drive on the west, 1-805 on the east, Naples
Street on the north, and Palomar Street on the south was analyzed. This area includes 1,179
existing dwelling units, non-residential and vacant lands, and 73.9 acres of land dedicated for
streets and public right-of way. The actual gross residential density of this area was determined
to be 3.9 dwelling units per acre. The maximum theoretical residential dwelling unit capacity, at
3-6 dwelling units per acre and 302 gross acres, is 1,809 dwelling units. When compared with
the existing 1,179 dwelling units, there is available residential capacity of 630 dwelling units at
the neighborhood level. Thus, approval of the 24 unit project will not cause the density of the
neighborhood area to exceed the maximum gross density of 6 du/acre established by the Low-
Medium Residential General Plan designation.
Rezoning to a 5,000 square foot minimum lot size will benefit the neighborhood because it will
result in construction of new, entry-level single-family housing product type that will range in
size from 1,982 to 2, 676 square feet, that will be similar in size and scale as the existing older
homes in the neighborhood. In contrast, development of the project with homes on lot sizes of
7,000 square foot minimum in today's market could result in an increase in home sizes from 500
to 900 square feet, which in staffs opinion would not be as compatible with the size or value of
existing homes in the surrounding neighborhood. Also, it would result in a reduction of lot yield
of 6 lots, which would reduce the fiscal revenues to the City generated by the project, which are
needed to provide maintenance and services to the neighborhood. Construction of new, entry-
level single-family housing will enhance the property values of existing homes in the
neighborhood.
Development of the site in compliance with the R-I-5-P zone will be consistent with the Low-
Medium Residential designation and objectives of the General Plan. However, to enable the
project to be designed to be compatible with the surrounding development on larger lots, staff
has required a P-Modifying District with the rezone, which requires approval of a Precise Plan.
8-5
Oxford Street Project
Page 6
01/08/08
Precise Plan
The Precise Plan includes a Precise Plan Map and Text, including the Precise Plan development
standards, architectural, and landscape design guidelines (see Precise Plan Resolution, Exhibit
B). The Precise Plan Text will serve as the land use plan for the project. The Precise Plan Map
shows residential building footprints and other site improvements. Minor amendments to the
Precise Plan Map can be approved by the Zoning Administrator, as long as those amendments
are consistent with the approved Precise Plan Development Standards.
Adoption of the Precise Plan will help ensure that the future design will be compatible with the
surrounding neighborhood. The proposed R-I-5-P zone requires a Precise Plan that enables the
modification of the development standards of the typical R-I-5 zone. The Precise Plan will
establish a 20 ft. rear yard building setbacks (see table below), which is more restrictive than the
15 ft. required by the R-I-5 zone, to encourage rear yards to be consistent with the R-I-7 zone
for the surrounding area, and to provide the residents with additional rear yard area for private
recreation. The Precise Plan will also establish architectural, landscaping and fencing guidelines.
The proposed precise plan guidelines will act as the modified R-I-5-P zoning standards for the
project area, and are listed in the following table:
PRECISE PLAN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Lot Size 5,000 sq. ft. minimum
Lot Width 50 ft. minimum, except 35 ft. for cul-de-sac lots
Building Coverage 40% maximum
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 50% Maximum
(including garage)
Front Yard Building Setback:
(all setbacks measured from property line except
where noted)
. To Building (living area) 15 ft.
. To Porch 10 ft.
Width of porch shall not exceed 1/3 width of
house
. To Garage 22 ft. from closest edge of sidewalk to face of
garage
Rear Yard Building Setback: 20 ft, with the following exceptions:
Up to 1/3 of the width of the first story of any
house may encroach 5 ft. into the required 20 ft.
rear yard setback, as long as the second
story meets the main 20 ft. setback. The
exception shall not apply to more than two
adjacent houses.
Interior Side Yard Building Setback 5 ft.
Exterior Side Yard Building Setback 10ft.
8-6
Oxford Street Project
Page 7
o 1/08/U8
Building Height: 28 ft. 12 stories
(Measured to mean height level between eave
and ridge - per CYMC 19.04.038)
Fencing: Decorative stucco, split-face block walls, or
wood fencing is required. Maximum height is 6
feet from adjacent grade level.
Garage Minimum 400 square foot, 2-car garage with
minimum dimension of 20 feet.
Notes:
a. Minor modifications to Precise Plan map are permitted pursuant to approval of a Site
Plan and Architectural Review by the Zoning Administrator, per CYMC 19.14.420.
Amendments to the Precise Plan Map shall comply with the Precise Plan Development
Standards. All other Precise Plan amendments shall comply with Precise Plan
Modification requirements per CYMC 19.14.577.
b. Uses and Development standards not addressed in this Precise Plan shall comply with
the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, CYMC Title 19.
c. Accessory Uses and Structures shall comply with requirements of CYMC 19.24.030,
with the following exceptions:
(1) The first 300 square feet of any attached or detached open structure, such as a
patio cover or gazebo, which are open on 2 or more sides, are exempt from the Floor
Area Ratio requirements.
(2) The first 100 square feet of detached enclosed buildings such as a pool, storage, or
garden building is exempt for the floor are ratio requirement.
(3) A 5-foot rear and side yard setback is required for any accessory structure in the
required rear or side yard area_
The proposed precise plan standards will have a pOSItive impact on the surrounding
neighborhood because the proposed standards allow the applicant to design a Proj ect that is
compatible with the existing single-family residential development. The Project will include 15-
foot front yard and 10 foot exterior side yard building setback standards, which are the same as
the R-I-7 Zone. A minimum rear yard setback of20 feet is required, which exceeds the R-I-5
requirement and matches the R-I-7 zone. Through the use of three different floor plans at
varying setbacks, the front and rear elevations of the homes will be staggered, which will vary
the alignment of homes to add visual interest. Front yards of some homes may include porches,
and rear yards of some homes may include a 5 ft. encroachment into the rear yard setback for a
one-story element, which will add interest and variety to the elevations. The applicant is
proposing single-story plans on 10 of the 24 lots, which will complement the surrounding area.
The surrounding neighborhood also contains a mixture of single-story and two-story
development. The Precise Plan will include architectural guidelines that will encourage variety in
architectural styles, colors, materials, rooflines, and window treatments. Such standards will
allow construction of a single-family development that is more compatible with the surrounding
R-I-7 zone type of development than the typical R-I-5 development.
8-7
Oxford Street Project
Page 8
o 1/08/U8
Tentative Map
Subdivision Design/Lot Size
The narrow, rectangular shape of the property lends itself to a typical subdivision design with
lots fronting on a single, centrally located street, connecting to East Oxford Street on the south.
All lots meet the minimum 5,000 square foot lot size, 50-foot minimum lot width, and 35-foot
cul-de-sac lot width required by the Precise Plan development standards and R-I zoning
standards. The project will include an HOA open space lot at the end of the cul-de-sac, and
another landscaped HOA lot to support the grass-lined drainage swale at the southwestern comer
of the lot. The lots will be designed to comply with the Subdivision Manual lot design criteria.
The proposed density of the project is 5.88 dwelling units per acre, which is consistent with the
density requirements of the RLM General Plan and R-I-P-5 zoning.
The project proposes waiver of the Subdivision Manual standard that lot lines be located at the
top of the slope, so that the south lot line of Lot One can be located at the bottom of the slope.
This is necessary to meet minimum lot width and area requirements for the lot, and to minimize
the amount of grading and use of retaining walls. A freestanding decorative wall will be placed
within the HOA lot at the top of the slope. The area between the wall and the street right-of way
will be placed in an easement and the landscaping and waU will be maintained by the
Homeowner's Association. The City Engineer recommends approval of this waiver on the
grounds that it would be a superior design and that the public safety will not be adversely
impacted.
Grading
The site slopes uphill gently to the north, and is part of a gently sloping ridgeline that slopes
uphill to the east. This area has been completely developed with single-family homes. The
conceptual grading plan proposes a total of 2,370 cubic yards of grading, with balanced cut and
fill. Manufactured slopes are limited to a few portions of the site, such as Lots I and 2, and along
the westerly edge of the site. Slope heights will be minor with the maximum height of 5 ft. and
grade of 2:1 between Lot 24 and the grass-lined swale. Because slope heights are minor, the
maximum retaining wall height will be 3 ft. Retaining walls will be limited to the rear of Lots 7-
12 and side lot lines of Lots 3, 4, 21, 22, 23 and 24. Conditions of approval have been included
requiring a wall and fencing plan and conceptual landscape plan to address any aesthetic
concerns that may arise regarding the design of walls and fencing and planting of the street trees
and slopes. Any visible retaining walls, such as those along the rear of Lots 7-12, will be
required by conditions of approval to be constructed of decorative materials.
Proj ect Access
Vehicular access to the site is provided by East Oxford Street, a public street with an existing
improved width of 40 feet with a 60 ft. right of way. The proposed on-site public street will be
improved to 36 feet with a right-of-way of 56 feet. The proposed public street will create a 4-way
intersection with East Oxford Street and Monterrey Street to the south. Conditions of approval
8-8
Oxford Street Project
Page 9
o 1/0S/0S
require that the proposed on-site public street will be improved to full residential street standards
with curb, gutter and sidewalk, and other public utilities in conjunction with Final Map approval.
Pedestrian access on-site will be provided by non-contiguous sidewalks along the street frontage,
connecting to existing sidewalks on East Oxford Street to the surrounding area. Transit service to
the site will be provided by Chula Vista Transit. There is an existing bus stop located 1 block
westerly of the site at the intersection of Melrose and East Oxford Street.
Public Utilities
In conjunction with the review of the Project, the applicant has prepared technical reports
analyzing the condition of public utilities such as sewer and water facilities, drainage, and water
quality/storm water runoff systems. Drainage and water quality is discussed in the Background
section above. The findings of these reports are surmnarized in the attached Mitigated Negative
Declaration (see Attachment 5).
The sewer technical report found that construction of additional public sewer improvements is
needed to serve the Project, and that the Project would not impact existing sewer facilities. The
existing sewer facility system includes S-inch sewer lines along East Oxford Street and one
sewer lateral to serve the existing church. There are currently no sewer mains serving the
northerly part of the site. Therefore a new 8-inch sewer lateral line within the proposed public
street, connecting the sewer main in East Oxford Street is proposed to service the lots. The
applicant will be required to submit a final sewer report and plan showing compliance with the
City's Sewer Design Criteria, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
The Sweetwater Authority Water District provides water service to the Project area. They will
provide service to the Project, contingent upon approval of internal improvement plans. The
proposed improvements will include a new water main extension within the proposed public
road that connects to the existing Authority water main in East Oxford Street, and terminates in
the proposed cul-de-sac. This would include new separate laterals and meters for each parcel.
Adequate storage facilities exist to serve the project.
Schools
The Project site is located in the attendance area of Palomar Elementary School at 300 East
Palomar Street, within the boundaries of the Chula Vista Elementary School District. The
Project is also within the attendance area of Castle Park Junior High School located at 160
Quintard Street, and Castle Park High School at 1395 Hilltop Drive, within the Sweetwater
Union High School District.
Staff contacted each school district, to determine if the additional dwelling units proposed by the
Project would cause these schools to be adversely impacted. Both School Districts provided
updated student generation rates for new development. Palomar Elementary is presently below
its capacity, and both Castle Park Junior High and Castle Park High Schools were both above
their capacity. Applying these rates resulted in generation of approximately S elementary school
students, 3 junior high school students, and 6 high school students, as described below:
8-9
Oxford Street Project
Page 10
01/08/08
School (Grade) Dwelling Generation Rate Students Generated
Units
Palomar Elementary School 24 X .35 - 8
(K-6) .
Castle Park Jr. High School 24 X .1216 = 3
(7-8)
Castle Park High School 24 X .2291 - 6
(9-12)
TOTAL 17
Both school districts responded that they would be able to accommodate the additional students
generated by the Project, and that the schools would not be adversely impacted by the approval
of the Project.
CONCLUSION:
For the reasons mentioned above, staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached
resolutions and ordinance approving attached Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program IS-07 -031, Rezone PCZ-07 -08, Precise Plan PCM -08-02,
and Tentative Map PCS-07-07, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained in
the attached Draft City Council Resolutions and Ordinance.
DECISION-MAKER CONFLICTS:
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council members and has found no property
holdings within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property, which is subject to this action.
FISCAL IMPACT
A "Fiscal Impact Analysis of the Oxford Street Project" report dated November 12, 2007 was
prepared by CIC Research for the applicant. The report estimates the fiscal impact of the project
on the operation and maintenance budget of the City's General Fund. The report concluded that
there would be a positive surplus of$11,530 to the City General Fund, and no fiscal impacts as a
result of the development of the Project. Also, the cost of processing the applications will be
covered by the deposit accounts paid for by the applicant.
8-10
Oxford Street Project
Page 10
01/08/08
School (Grade) Dwelling Generation Rate Students Generated
Units
Palomar Elementary School 24 X .35 = 8
(K-6)
Castle Park Jr. High School 24 X .1216 - 3
(7-8)
Castle Park High School 24 X .2291 - 6
(9-12)
TOTAL 17
Both school districts responded that they would be able to accommodate the additional students
generated by the Project, and that the schools would not be adversely impacted by the approval
of the Project.
CONCLUSION:
For the reasons mentioned above, staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached
resolutions and ordinance approving attached Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program IS-07 -031, Rezone PCZ-07-08, Precise Plan PCM-08-02,
and Tentative Map PCS-07-07, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained in
the attached Draft City Council Resolutions and Ordinance.
DECISION-MAKER CONFLICTS:
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council members and has found no property
holdings within 500 feet of the boundaries ofthe property, which is subject to this action.
FISCAL IMPACT
A "Fiscal Impact Analysis of the Oxford Street Project" report dated November 12, 2007 was
prepared by CIC Research for the applicant. The report estimates the fiscal impact of the project
on the operation and maintenance budget of the City's General Fund. The report concluded that
there would be a positive surplus of $11 ,530 to the City General Fund, and no fiscal impacts as a
result of the development of the Project. Also, the cost of processing the applications will be
covered by the deposit accounts paid for by the applicant.
Attachments
I Locator Map
2 Aerial Photo
3 Precise Plan Map
4 Tentative Map
5 Final Mitigated Negative Declaration
6 Ownership Disclosure Form
Prepared by: Richard Zumwalt, Associate Planner, Planning and Building Department
J: planning\casefiles\07 -08IPCZlpublichearinglPCZ 07 -08-CAS-12-l9-07
8-11
Kellcaa
:Ierne:lto-v
Sch:xll
~\J
R-l
Singe
falTily
Residential
~
C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJEc:T PROJEc:T DESCRIPTION:
C) APP\.JCANT: Brookfield Shea Otay, LLC. ZONE CHANGE
PROJECT 267 E. Oxford Street. Request 24 SFD development on a 3.9 acre lot Zone change
ADORESS: proposed from R-1 to R-1.5-P. Located at 267 E. Oxford St
SCALE: FILE NUlABER:
NORTH No Scale PCZ-07-088-1 Related cases: 1~7.oo1, PCS-<l7-ll7 & G?Ml74\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
,n.-tl fir U..{ \VI. r:. VJ T '2
i,itroi/lIction
>,-,_.,_._-.,.._--,,_..._.,.".~--_.---~.._----_._.__._--~"~-----'-,-'_.'-"--'-
'Figure 2 - Aerial Photograph
,-_.~"'-
Pag~p."'f'30
December I g, 2007
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
/
,;----
/
/
"" 40
,
,
/ , ,
, I
/ ,
, ,
,
,
NOCTURNE COURT ,
:
,
, , , ,
G}.f{}U:V/8TAa.4JWEjvS -- ~~~~j "
!J;.fT NO. 2 I
M NO. 6824 : , ,
APM620\4'0-t9rWwI28 , I
, ,
, " ,
' , : ,
' , , m
' , , " ,
" ' , " , ,
' ,
" , ,
' , , ,
.~ ,~ ,
"
"
"
'"
I - ~;.,.-
,
,
,
,
ill": jgIJ I /fJ7
, ,
6EAYjE'W ESfAUS (INIT NO. 3
I WlP No. 4JJI/J
APtt 889-392-01 pmU 10
, ,
, ,
.,
.,
'"
w,
~'I,..~
MELROSE A VENUE
PIlEPAREl)IJ't:
.~"'"
~~~
-..--
-..-.-
Project Description
N~c /.f.Af~AJT
peM 08.01
...
'"
g:
OJ
MONTEREY AVE
,
,
,
,
~,
d' .
"': ::.
, ~'"
J :;t~
I I.....
! E!~~
------'-1----'--im~lt
I ~\ ;i!
, ~ '
, ,
,
l I
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
~
PRECISE SITe PlAN
EORD
olCINI..,.....OOfomta
,
..............--":.-.----
2
I
~ I
.
.
2
.~~.
Figure 3 - Precise Plan
Page7ofJO
OctoberS,20D7
3
q-
~
I
<Xl
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
~~,,,--"
--
--,,----
"'-'/" 40
--------
,,--,,--
,
I
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
~~~ \
--,
,
I
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
"
~
, CD
= CID ,
= CD CD CD CD CD ICD -.
----~---------- Pozn.. ,"VII-O
-. -. -. ...."".. CD -. CD 1'>3<.1 I....m.,
,..,,1.1 ,.....1 ,
" ,
,..--- ,
- ,
- -- ----
------~----------
~ ' ; s l
~",i~ 88 (PUBUC STREET 'A'
:IS'''' ..-u ; " ,.
tl:~~~ ';.-- -
-i~~m-nnn ---
::;,: l::l 87 --
~ CiD @" CiD = = = =
, = = C!D _.. ...1M.' C!D - _.. @ ,.,1M.' ,..XZ,J -.
.....r.. -. -". "'111.1
,m. _..
---------------
"
~1I.o.
~
~l._..
NOCTURNE COURT
///:
, ,
CH1JLA IVJSTA GARDE,lS
4NfT No.2 I
1.14" NO. 6824 :
APNt 820}470-1O TlmU126
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
I ....-4!,.. l
, ,
, ,
'---
Project Description
Arr~A-{cJJ( Lf
PCS 07.{)7
...
~
~
OJ
MONTEREY AVE
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, "'
f ~! ~
, ~I..~
: ~'"
I I"'~
: ~:d~
I j:':1::r:~
--------i-------~~lt-
: ~:.t:
! ~ ~
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
Lt)
~
I
CO
,
,
,
{
I
,
:
,
,
,
,
"
\\\
,
,
,
,
\
TENTATIVE MAP
.~.
"
"-.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
4
OXFORD
"'
5
"
...~.
CltyolChd.Vl8lA.CaIfgmI.
-.......---
Figure 4 - Tentative Map
"
-=r-
---"";ji--:'- =-~=
-~
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
200 1
,
,
,
,
,
'"
_~ff.
- ~~
,
:
,
,
/1;1"1 198:
, ,
-., SEA vjt'w :~~~B4~T Nr;:.J.
APlt S89-3fJZ-Of tJmu 10
" ,
, ,
-,,-
,
,
,
,
,
,
, ~, .,
'" ~6 ,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
~,
MELROSE AVENUE
pl\EPAPBlB'f:
II~IF3
-..-...
Page8of30
OctoberS, 2007
A7rk I-fv11EI1JT 5
Mitigated Negative Declaration
PROJECT NAME: Oxford Street! Concordia Lutheran Church Residential
PROJECT LOCATION: 267 East Oxford Street
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO: APN #639-392-14-00
PROJECT APPLICANT: Brookfield Shea Otay, LLC
12865 Pointe Del Mar, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92014
(858) 481-8500
CASE NO.: 1S-07-031
DATE OF DRAFT DOCUMENT: October 19. 2007
DATE OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION MEETING: November 19. 2007
Richard Zumwalt. A.lC.P.. Associate Planner
PREP ARER:
DATE OF FINAL DOCUMENT:
November 20. 2007
Revisions made to this document subsequent to the issuance of the notice of availability of the
draft Mitigated Negative Declaration are denoted by underline.
A. Proiect Setting
The 3.9 -acre project site is located at 267 East Oxford Street, within the urbanized area of West em
Chula Vista, (Exhibit 1- Locator Map). The site is approximately 100 feet east of the intersection of
Melrose Avenue and East Oxford Street. Primary access to the site is currently provided directly off
of East Oxford Street. The entire project site has been partially disturbed with previous uses including
a church, pre-school/daycare, and parking lot on the south side of the lot and play fields on the north
side of the lot. The land uses immediately surrounding the project site are as follows:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Single-Family Residential
Single-Family Residential
Single-Family Residential
Single-Family Residential
B. Proiect Description
The project proposes demolition of the existing Concordia Lutheran Church, daycare/community
building, and accessory buildings, and redevelopment of the 3.9 ac. site with 24 single-family
detached residential dwelling units, (Exhibit 2 - Site Plan). The site is designated Residential Low-
Medium (3-6dwelling units per acre) on the City of Chula Vista General Plan and is zoned R-I-7
Single Family Residential. The project proposes a rezone from R-I-7 to R-I-5-P (Min. lot size of
5,000.sq. ft. with a Precise Plan Modifying District); a Precise Plan; and Tentative Subdivision Map
proposing 24 residential lots ranging from 5,006 sq. ft. to 6,249 sq. ft. in size, with 2 garage parking
spaces per home, a public street and HOA-maintained open space lots.
1
8-16
Proposed on-site improvements include drainage facilities, sewer system facilities, fire hydrants,
retaining walls, fencing, improved paved areas, open space and landscape treatments. The project is
identified as developable area within the City of ChuIa Vista Multiple Species Conservation Program
Subarea Plan, however, it is not located within the City's designated conservation area.
C. Compliance with Zoning and Plans
The proposed project site is within the General Plan RLM (Low-Medium Residential Density/3-6
dwelling units per acre) and RI (Single-Family Residential) Zone. The project proposes a rezone
from R-I to R-I-5-P (Min. lot size of 5,000 sq. ft. with a Precise Plan Modifying District). The
proposed project has been found to be consistent with the applicable site development regulations and
the General Plan.
D. Public Comments
On September 12, 2007, a Notice of Initial Study was circulated to property owners within a 500-foot
radius of the proposed project site. The public review period ended September 24, 2007. One e-mail
response was received during this period regarding how project grading will affect the adjacent
properties and how the design of the future homes would affect the neighbor's privacy. These issues
will be addressed in the Planning staff report regarding the project.
On October 19. 2007. the Notice of Availabilitv of the Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for
the proiect was posted in the County Clerk's Office and circulated to property owners within a 500-
foot radius of the proiect site. The 30-dav public comment period closed on November 19. 2007. No
written comments were received as a result of this notice.
E. Identification of Environmental Effects
An Initial Study conducted by the City of Chula Vista (including an attached Environmental
Checklist form) determined that the proposed project may have potential significant environmental
impacts however; mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project to reduce these impacts
to a less than significant level. This Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance
with Section 15070 of the State of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
Air Oualitv
Short-Tenn Demolition and Construction Activities
The project proposes demolition of the existing Concordia Lutheran Church, daycare/community
building and accessory buildings. The proposed proj ect will result in a short-term air quality impact
created from construction activities. The grading of the site for future single-family residential
development and worker and equipment vehicle trips will create temporary emissions of dust, fumes,
equipment exhaust, and other air pollutants associated with the construction and demolition activities.
Air quality impacts resulting from construction-related operations are considered short-term in
duration.
In order to analyze potential project impacts/emissions, the emission factors and threshold criteria
contained in the 1993 South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Handbook for Air
Quality Analysis were used.
A comparison of daily construction emissions to the SCAQMD's emission thresholds of significance
for each pollutant was analyzed. Emissions were calculated using the URBEMIS 2002 model. The
addition of emissions to .an air basin is considered under CEQA to be a significant impact.
Implementation of the Mitigation Measure I contained in Section F below would mitigate short-term
construction and rough grading and emissions related air quality impacts to below a level of
significance. These measures are included as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
2
8-17
Combined Short-Term and Long-Term Impacts
In order to assess whether the project's contribution to ambient air quality is cumulatively
considerable, the project's emissions were quantified with respect to regional air quality. The
proposed project, a small residential infill development, once completed will not result in significant
long-term air quality impacts. The project is consistent with the Chula Vista General Plan Update.
The minimal project generated traffic volume of 240 trips would not result in significant long-term
local or regional air quality impacts. Through project design, emission-controlled construction
vehicles and efficiency building products and vehicles as mitigated, no area source or long term
operational vehicle emission estimates will exceed the Air Quality significance thresholds.
Implementation of the Mitigation Measure I contained in Section F would mitigate construction and
grading related air quality impacts to below a level of significance. These measures are included as a
part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Biological Resources
A Biological Resource Analysis was prepared by Dudek, dated August 31, 2007, to assess the
potential biological resource impacts of the project. A biological reconnaissance survey of the project
site was conducted on March 30, 2007 to identify existing vegetation on the site. The biological
resource analysis is summarized below.
Habitat Loss Incidental Take (HUT) Permit
The project site is located within in the City of Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan boundary under the
City's MSCP Subarea Plan. The site is located in an area designated as a Development Area, but is
not located within a strategic preserve or conservation area. The project is subject to the requirements
of the Habitat Loss Incident Take (HUT) Ordinance. In accordance with the HLIT Ordinance, those
projects that are greater than one acre, contain sensitive biological resources, and are located outside
the "Covered Projects," must demonstrate compliance with the Ordinance and obtain Take authority
from the City of Chula Vista for impacts to Covered Species. The following is a summary of the
[mdings contained within the biological resource report as required by the City's HUT Ordinance,
Section 17.35.
Existing Conditions/ Plant Species
The 3.9-acre project site consists entirely of 1.8 acres of developed land on the south side of the site
with the existing church and accessory buildings, parking lot, and ornamental plantings, and 2.1 acres
of disturbed lands including the playfield and non-native grasses and vegetation on the north side of
the site. Developed land includes two mature Indian Laurel Figs and one Brazilian Pepper Tree, six,
I-ft. diameter eucalyptus trees, and turf-grass under-story. The non-native grasses and vegetation in
the disturbed lands result from establishment of a Bermuda-grass playfield which is mowed but
otherwise is no longer maintained and irrigated, resulting in a mixed growth of grasses and broad-
leaved weeds. Native vegetation cover is less than one percent of the vegetative cover onsite,
occurring on the perimeter of the site adjacent to fencing where the plants are not mowed. No
endemic or special status plants exist on the property.
Wildlife/Sensitive Species/Sensitive Habitats
The .biological report stated that wildlife species such as birds and butterflies occupied the site,
although no mammal, amphibian or reptile species were detected during the survey.
Ten bird species and two butterfly species were detected on site. Most bird species observed were
common, disturbance-adapted species. Cooper's hawk (Accipiter cooperi), which is a covered species
3
8-18
under the City of Chula Vista's MSCP Subarea Plan and a State species of special concern, was
observed during the site survey. Existing large Indian Laurel Fig and Brazilian Pepper trees occurring
on-site may provide suitable habitat for raptors, and a nest was observed in the Brazilian Pepper tree
on site. Due to the territorial !behavioral characteristics of the Coopers Hawk, it was assumed that
nest was used by them. No special status/wildlife species were reported within one mile of the
project site. No state or federally listed threatened or endangered wildlife species were observed in
the study area and are not expected to occur, due to the low quality of habitat onsite. Potential impacts
of the project on these resources and sensitive species, and mitigation measures are further discussed
in Project Impact section below.
Project Impact
The existing lot supports 2 large ornamental Indian Laurel Fig trees and I large Brazilian Pepper tree.
The proposed removal of these trees during development could impact potential habitat for the
Cooper's Hawk and other migratory bird species if the vegetation clearance occurs between January
15 thru August 15 during breeding season. If vegetation clearance occurs between August 16 and
January 14, development of the site would not result in significant impacts to biological resources. If
removal of habitat or construction activities must occur during the breeding season, pre-construction
surveys shall be conducted to determine the presence or absence of nesting raptors. The proposed
project may result in impacts to sensitive biological resources and nesting raptors, and therefore,
mitigation measures are required. The project will be required to implement the mitigation measures
specified in Section F, and therefore no impacts to Cooper's Hawk or other migratory birds are
anticipated. The project will not be required to obtain a HUT Permit pursuant to Section 17.35 of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code.
Further mitigation measures include implementation of construction BMPs, and clearing, grubbing or
grading permits. Implementation of the mitigation measures identified in Section F of this Mitigated
Negative Declaration would reduce potentially significant biological impacts to a level below
significance.
Geology and Soils
To assess the potential geologicallsoils impacts of the project, a Geotechnical Investigation evaluation
was prepared by Geocon, Inc. dated April 18, 2007. No groundwater was encountered on the site and
no groundwater related problems, either during or after construction, ar.e anticipated. No significant
geological or soil impacts would be created as a result of the proposed project as conditioned. The
potential for soil liquefaction is considered to be low. The project site is not located in an active
Earthquake Fault Zone. The nearest active fault is the Rose Canyon fault approximately 6 miles
away.
The site was graded previously with the development of the existing church. Proposed fill grading will
occur over the entirety of the 3.9-acre site. Grading is balanced, including 3,400 cubic yards per acre to be
excavated and filled, with a maximum cut and fill slope ratio of2:1. In the event ofa major earthquake, the
area could be subject to moderate to severe ground shaking. However, the site is considered comparable to
others in the general vicinity. The site is also underlain with artificial fill and San Diego Formation and is
not suitable for support of structures. The project will require issuance of a grading permit to require
excavation of undocumented fill, re-grading and re-compaction of the site, and review by the consultant of
project grading and foundation plans prior to submittal to regulatory agencies for approval, to minimize the
potential for damage to future structures as a result of unstable soils, ground-shaking, or subsidence.
4
8-19
According to the City's Engineering Division, the project will require a grading permit. The
preparation and submittal of a final soils report will be required prior to the issuance of the grading
permit as a standard engineering requirement. In order to prevent silt discharge during construction,
the developer will be required to comply with best management practices in accordance with RWQCB
NPDES Municipal Permit, Order No. R9-2007-0001. The appropriate erosion control measures
would be identified in conjunction with preparation of final grading plans and would be monitored
and implemented during construction by the Public Works Department. Therefore, the potential for
the discharge of silt into City storm drainage systems would be less than significant. Implementation
of the mitigation measures contained in Section F below would mitigate potential geological/soils
impacts to a less than significance level. These measures are included as a part of the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
In order to assess potential hazardslhazardous material impacts, dated April 2007, Dudek prepared the
"Phase I Environmental Site Assessment - Concordia Lutheran Church and School" Report for the
project. The project proposal includes the demolition of the existing church, accessory buildings and
parking lot. The report found that the potential exists for impacts to result from the demolition of
structures that may contain lead and asbestos. Therefore, prior to any demolition activities, a licensed
and registered asbestos and lead abatement contractor will perform asbestos and lead-based paint
abatement in accordance to all applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations, including San
Diego County Air Pollution Control District Rule 361.145 - Standard for Demolition and Renovation.
No evidence of additional hazards or hazardous materials or undocumented fill was observed on the
site. Implementation of the mitigation measures contained in Section F below would mitigate
potential hazards/hazardous materials impacts to a less than significant level. These measures are
included as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Hydrology and Water Quality
In order to assess potential hydrology and water quality impacts, a "Tentative Map Drainage Study
for Oxford Street", dated October 3, 2007, and amended October 17, 2007 and the "Tentative Map
Water Quality Technical Report for Oxford Street" dated October 3,2007, prepared by Hunsaker &
Associates, were submitted for the project and is summarized below:
Existing Conditions
The existing site is bordered on the north, west and east by existing single-family development.
Drainage from the existing development, including the buildings and playfield, flows southerly
toward East Oxford Street south of the site. The flows are then conveyed via existing curb, gutter and
sidewalk in a westerly direction towards the intersection of Melrose and East Oxford Street.
Proposed
The project proposes construction of a storm drain system, including a curb and gutter system, a
cross-gutter, SwaleGard curb inlet filters, and a grass-lined swale. Low flows form the site would be
intercepted and diverted by proposed cross-gutters to curb-inlet filters which will screen out larger
materials and discharge water directly into a proposed grass-lined swale located at the southwestern
corner of the project site. The grass-lined swale will convey flow in a westerly direction, and will be
graded at approximately 0.2% slope to permit water to percolate prior discharge to the public
curb/gutter system on East Oxford Street at the southwestern corner of the site.
Peak flows from the east side of the site will be conveyed along the proposed public street and bypass
the cross gutter, flowing directly to East Oxford Street. A portion of the peak flows from the west
side of the site will enter the curb inlets filters and be diverted to the grass-lined swale before
5
8-20
discharge to the public curb/gutter system on East Oxford Street at the southwestern comer of the site
while the remaining will bypass the inlets and flow out to East Oxford Street.
According to the Engineering Department, the proposed improvements appear adequate to handle the
project storm water runoff generated from the site. The existing flows to East Oxford Street were
analyzed under the 2, 10, 50 and lOa-year flood event. Additional Best Management Practices
(BMPs) included as part of the project design consist of a storm drain inlet protection system (curb
inlet filters), grass-lined swale, and permeable pavement in the driveways. No adverse impacts to the
City's drainage threshold standards will occur as a result ofthe proposed project.
As a standard condition, a final drainage study will be required in conjunction with the preparation of
the project grading plans. Properly designed drainage facilities will be installed at the time of the site
development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. In addition, compliance with required NPDES
regulations and construction BMPs such as de-silt basins and silt fences will reduce water quality
impacts to a less than significant level. Implementation of the mitigation measures contained in
Section F below would mitigate potential hydrology and water quality impacts to a level of less than
significance. These measures are included as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
Noise
In order to assess potential noise impacts of the proposed project, a noise study was prepared by
Dudek, entitled "Concordia Lutheran Church - Residential Project, City of Chula Vista Exterior
Noise Study", dated April 17, 2007, .and addendum dated August 31, 2007 for the project. The study
anticipated that on-site workers and adjacent residential population may be exposed to construction
noise associated with short-term construction activities. However, the project will be required to
comply with the City's Noise Ordinance. In addition, due to the minimal construction activities
associated with the project, impacts to surrounding residential properties related to construction noise
levels are not expected to be significant. The proposed residential project is not located within the
Health Risk Assessment Area (HRAA), within 500 feet of any adjacent freeway or highway. The
project is not anticipated to potentially violate the noise limits of the City's noise control ordinance.
Residences on lots 1 and 24 will be directly exposed to auto traffic on East Oxford Street, and are
likely to be affected by exterior CNEL noise levels of approx. of 61 decibels. Typical residential
construction may lower the interior noise level approx. 20 dB with windows closed. Installation of
mechanical ventilation and/or air conditioning in the homes on lots I and 24 in accordance with the
Ca. Building Code is necessary to ensure that windows can be closed to achieve compliance with the
45 dB interior standard. In addition, submittal of a subsequent noise study after installation of the
rooftop and HVAC equipment for review. Implementation of the mitigation measures contained in
Section F below would mitigate potential noise impacts to a level of less than significance. These
measures are included as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
F. Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Impacts
Air Oualitv
I. The following air quality mitigation requirements shall be shown on all applicable grading, and
building plans as details, notes, or as otherwise appropriate, and shall not be deviated from unless
approved in advance in writing by the City's Environmental Review Coordinator:
. Minimize simultaneous operation of multiple construction equipment units.
. Use low pollutant-emitting construction equipment.
. Use electrical construction equipment as practical.
. Use catalytic reduction for gasoline-powered equipment.
. Use injection-timing retard for diesel-powered equipment.
6
8-21
o Water the construction area twice daily to minimize fugitive dust.
o Stabilize graded areas as quickly as possible to minimize fugitive dust.
o Pave permanent roads as quickly as possible to minimize dust.
o Use electricity from power poles instead of temporary generators during building, if
available.
o Apply stabilizer or pave the last 100 feet of internal travel path within a construction site
prior to public road entry.
o Install wheel washers adjacent to a paved apron prior to vehicle entry on public roads.
o Remove any visible track-out into traveled public streets within 30 minutes of occurrence.
o Wet wash the construction access point at the end of each workday if any vehicle travel on
unpaved surfaces has occurred.
o Provide sufficient perimeter erosion control to prevent washout of silty material onto public
roads.
o Cover haul trucks or maintain at least 12 inches of freeboard to reduce blow-off during
hauling.
o Suspend all soil disturbance and travel on unpaved surfaces if winds exceed 25 miles per
hour.
o During rough grading, use of cooled exhaust gas re-circulation in conjunction with the
following:
a) Reduction of the number of pieces of equipment that operate simultaneously
b) Reduction of the number of hours that equipment operations daily. The reduction in
emissions would be directly proportional to the reduction in aggregate operating hours
and/or
c) Use equipment with lower horsepower ratings (emissions reduction would be directly
proportional to the reduction in aggregate horsepower)
o Requirement of one or a combination of the following measures for reduction of emissions:
a) Reduction of the number of pieces of equipment that operate simultaneously
b) Reduction of the number of hours that equipment operations daily. The reduction in
emissions would be directly proportional to the reduction in aggregate operating hours
and/or
c) Use equipment with lower horsepower ratings (emissions reduction would be directly
proportional to the reduction in aggregate horsepower)
Biological Resources
Migratory Birds I Cooper's Hawk
2. To ensure no direct and indirect impacts to raptors and/or any migratory birds occur during
construction (including clearing and grubbing), construction activities adjacent to nesting habit
should occur outside of the combined breeding season of January 15 to August 15 for these
species. If removal of habitat and/or construction activities adjacent to nest habitat must occur
during the breeding season, a pre-construction survey must be performed by a City-approved
biologist to determine the presence or absence of nesting birds on and within 300 feet of the
construction area and nesting raptors within 500 feet of the construction area. The pre-
construction survey must be concluded within 10 calendar days prior to the start of construction,
the results of which must be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to initiating any
construction activities. If nesting birds and/or raptors are detected by the City-approved biologist,
a bio-monitor must be present on-site during construction to minimize construction impacts and
ensure that no nests are removed or disturbed until all young have fledged.
7
8-22
Indirect Impacts
3. Prior to issuance of any land development pemrits, including clearing and grubbing or grading pemrits, the
project shall implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) identified in the Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan. BMPs shall be noted on grading and improvement plans and implemented during clearing
and site development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Environmental Review Coordinator in
order to avoid short-term indirect impacts to any biological resources in the project vicinity.
Geologv and Soils
4. Prior to the issuance of construction permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City Engineer and
City Building Official that all the recommendations in the GeoTechnical Investigation prepared by Geocon,
dated April 18, 2007, have been satisfied.
Hazards/Hazardous Materials
5. Prior to any demolition activities, a licensed and registered asbestos and lead abatement contractor shall
perform asbestos and lead-based paint abatement in accordance to all applicable local, state and federal
laws and regulations, including San Diego County Air Pollution Control District Rille 361.145 - Standard
for Demolition and Renovation.
Hvdrologv and Water Quality
6. Prior to the issuance of a grading pemrit, a fmal drainage study shall be required in conjunction with the
preparation of the fmal grading plans and must demonstrate that the post-development peak flow rate does
not exceed the pre-development flows as indicated in the "Tentative Map Drainage Study for Oxford
Street, prepared by Hunsaker & Associates, dated October 3, 2007", and amended October 17,2007, to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer. Additionally, the City Engineer shall verifY that the fmal grading plans
comply with the provisions of RWQCB NPDES Municipal Pemrit, Order No. R9-2007-0001 with respect
to construction-related water quality best management practices. If one or more of the approved post
construction BMPs is non-structural, then a post-construction BMP plan shall be prepared to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to the commencement of construction. Compliance with said plan
shall become a permanent requirement of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
7. Prior to the issuance of a grading pemrit, temporary desilting and erosion control devices shall be installed.
Protective devices shall be provided at every storm drain inlet to prevent sediment from entering the storm
drain system These measures shall be reflected in the grading and improvement plans to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer and Environmental Review Coordinator.
Noise
Interior - Vehicle Noise Mitigation
8. The windows of homes facing East Oxford Street (Lots I, 24) would need to remain closed to achieve a
45 CNEL interior noise level. The design of these homes must include a means of mechanical ventilation
and/or air-conditioning. The mechanical ventilation should be in accordance with the latest addition of the
California and Uniform Building Code and to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and
Environmental Review Coordinator.
9. Prior to approval of building pemrits, the applicant shall subrnit a subsequent noise study for the homes on
Lots I and 24 to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator demonstrating that the final
roof-mounted HV AC and/or Air Conditioning equipment complies with the City's noise control ordinance
at the property boundaries of 45 dBA Leq during uighttime hours and 55 dBA Leq during daytime hours or
ambient noise levels, whichever is greater.
Construction Noise and Vibration Mitigation
10. To minimize the potential noise and vibration impacts during construction upon adjacent residences, the
following shall be required:
8
8-23
3. Prior to issuance of any land development pennits, including clearing and grubbing or grading pennits, the
project shall implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) identified in the Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan. BMPs shall be noted on grading and improvement plans and implemented during clearing
and site development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Environmental Review Coordinator in
order to avoid short-term indirect impacts to any biological resources in the project vicinity.
Geologv and Soils
4. Prior to the issuance of construction pennits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City Engineer and
City Building Official that all the recommendations in the GeoTechnical Investigation prepared by Geocon,
dated April 18, 2007, have been satisfied.
Hazards/Hazardous Materials
5. Prior to any demolition activities, a licensed and registered asbestos and lead abatement contractor shall
perform asbestos and lead-based paint abatement in accordance to all applicable local, state and federal
laws and regulations, including San Diego County Air Pollution Control District Rule 361.145 - Standard
for Demolition and Renovation.
Hvdrologv and Water Oualitv
6. Prior to the issuance of a grading pennit, a fmal drainage study shall be required in conjunction with the
preparation of the fmal grading plans and must demonstrate that the post-development peak flow rate does
not exceed the pre-development flows as indicated in the "Tentative Map Drainage Study for Oxford
Street, prepared by Hunsaker & Associates, dated October 3, 2007", and amended October 17,2007, to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer. Additionally, the City Engineer shall verify that the final grading plans
comply with the provisions of RWQCB NPDES Municipal Pennit, Order No. R9-2007-0001 with respect
to construction-related water quality best management practices. If one or more of the approved post
construction BMPs is non-structural, then a post-construction BMP plan shall be. prepared to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to the commencement of construction. Compliance with said plan
shall become a permanent requirement of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
7. Prior to the issuance of a grading pennit, temporary desilting and erosion control devices shall be installed.
Protective devices shall be provided at every storm drain inlet to prevent sediment from entering the storm
drain system These measures shall be reflected in the grading and improvement plans to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer and Environmental Review Coordinator.
Noise
Interior - Vehicle Noise Mitigation
8. The windows of homes facing East Oxford Street (Lots I, 24) would need to remain closed to achieve a
45 CNEL interior noise level. The design of these homes must include a means of mechanical ventilation
and/or air-conditioning. The mechanical ventilation should be in accordance with the latest addition of the
California and Uniform Building Code and to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and
Environmental Review Coordinator.
9. Prior to approval of building pennits, the applicant shall subrnit a subsequent noise study for the homes on
Lots 1 and 24 to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator demonstrating that the fmal
roof-mounted HV AC and/or Air Conditioning equipment complies with the City's noise control ordinance
at the property boundaries of 45 dBA Leq during nighttime hours and 55 dBA Leq during daytime hours or
ambient noise levels, whichever is greater.
Construction Noise and Vibration Mitigation
10. To minimize the potential noise and vibration impacts during construction upon adjacent residences, the
following shall be required:
8
8-24
A. All construction equipment shall be equipped with improved noise muffling, and have the
manufacturers' recommended noise abatement measures, such as mufflers, engine covers,
and engine vibration isolators in good working condition.
E. If possible, hydraulic equipment instead of pneumatic impact tools and electric powered
equipment instead of diesel-powered equipment shall be used for all exterior construction
work.
e. All equipment shall be turned off if not in use.
D. Pursuant to Section 17.24.050(J) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, project-related
grading, demolition or construction activities shall be prohibited between the hours of
10:0 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Monday through Friday and between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
Monday through Friday and between 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. Saturdays and Sundays.
G. Agreement to Implement Mitigation Measures
By signing the line(s) provided below, the Applicant and Operator stipulate that they have each read,
understood and have their respective company's authority to and do agree to the mitigation measures
contained herein, and will implement same to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review
Coordinator. Failure to sign the line(s) provided below prior to posting of this Mitigated Negative
Declaration with the County Clerk shall indicate the Applicant's and Operator's desire that the
Project be held in abeyance without approval and that the Applicant and Operator shall apply for an
Environmental Impact Report.
..w;rt, \ACi:-- p~~
:;{ f,,(>.o~ StI'-...... or.N{ U-L.
p,pf\.JV\ 0, ftN $ - Pij: W)iJl....-"F-tiM\ o-rN:< /.U.--
Printed Name and Title of Applicant
orized rep tative)
(0 !\'f.r ';1..00"7--
Date
to il'i ( .z.uo9-
Date
Signature of Applicant
(or authorized representative)
N/A
Printed Name and Title of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
Date
N/A
Signature of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
Date
H. Consultation
I. Individuals and Organizations
City of Chula Vista:
Steve Power, Planning and Building Department
Luis Hernandez, Planning and Building Department
Maria Muett, Planning and Building Department
Ben Guerrero, Planning and Building Department
Josie Gabriel, Planning and Building Department
9
8-25
Glen Laube, Planning and Building Department
Lynnette Tessitore- Lopez, Planning and Building Department
Tom Adler, Engineering Department
Mario Ingrasci, Engineering Department
Silvester Evetovich, Engineering Department
Jim Newton, Engineering Department
Hasib Baha, Engineering Department
Richard Hopkins, Public Works Operations
Steven Gonzales, Public Works Operations
David McRoberts, Public Works Operations
Khosro Aminpour, Public Works Operations
Muna Cuthbert, Public Works Operations
Kelly Briers, Fire Department
Others:
Rafael Munoz, Chula Vista Elementary School District
Hector Martinez, Sweetwater Authority
Laurie Edwards, Sweetwater Authority
Sweetwater Union High School District
David Gottfredson, RECON
2. Documents
City ofChula Vista General Plan, 2005 (as amended).
Title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code.
City ofChula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, February 2003.
Biological Resource Analysis prepared by Dudek, dated August 31, 2007 and addendum.
Geotechnical Investigation for Oxford Street, Chula Vista, Ca.
dated April 18, 2007, and addendum dated October 8, 2007, by Geocon, Inc.
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment - Concordia Lutheran Church and School, 267 East
Oxford Street, Chula Vista, Ca. prepared by Dudek, April 2007, and addendum dated August 31,
2007.
Tentative Map Drainage Study for Oxford Street, dated October 3, 2007 and amended October
17, 2007 prepared by Hunsaker & Associates
Tentative Map Water Quality Technical Report for Oxford Street, dated October 2, 2007 and
amended October 2007 prepared by Hunsaker & Associates.
Air Quality URBEMIS Model, dated October 2007
Concordia Lutheran Church - Residential Project, City of Chula Vista Exterior Noise Study",
prepared by Dudek, dated April 17, 2007, and addendum dated August 31, 2007.
10
8-26
Archaeological Survey Report for Concordia Lutheran Church Project, 267 East Oxford Street,
Chula Vista, Ca., prepared by Brian F. Smith & Associates, dated April 3,2007, and addendum
September 2007.
Overview of Sewer Service for the Oxford Street Proiect. dated September 26. 2007 and amended
October 2007. prepared bv Dexter Wilson Engineering.
3. Initial Studv
This environmental determination is based on the attached mitial Study, and any comments
received in response to the Notice of Initial Study. The report reflects the independent judgment
of the City of Chula Vista. Further information regarding the environmental review of this
project is available from the Chula Vista Planning and Building Department, 276 Fourth Avenue,
Chula Y ta, CA 91910.
Date: II/Zllo7-
I
J :\Planning\RichardZ\Environmental\ IS-07 -031.finaIMND
II
8-27
ATTACHMENT "A"
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP)
OXFORD STREET/CONCORDIA LUTHERAN CHURCH RESIDENTIAL - IS-07-031
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared by the City of Chula Vista
in conjunction with the proposed Oxford Street/Concordia Lutheran Church Residential project.
The proposed project has been evaluated in an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and City/State
CEQA Guidelines (IS-06-007) The legislation requires public agencies to ensure that adequate
mitigation measures are implemented and monitored for Mitigated Negative Declarations.
AB 3180 requires monitoring of potentially significant and/or significant environmental impacts.
The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for this project ensures adequate
implementation of mitigation for the following potential impacts(s):
1. Air Quality
2. Biological Resources
3. Geology and Soils
4. HazardsIHazardous Materials
5. Hydrology and Water Quality
6. Noise
MONITORING PROGRAM
Due to the nature of the environmental issues identified, the Mitigation Compliance Coordinators
shall be the Environmental Review Coordinator and City Engineer of the City of Chula Vista.
The applicant shall be responsible to ensure that the conditions of the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program are met to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator and
City Engineer. The applicant shall provide evidence in written form confirming compliance with
the mitigation measures specified in Mitigated Negative Declaration 1S-07-031 to the
Environmental Review Coordinator and City Engineer. The Environmental Review Coordinator
and City Engineer will thus provide the ultimate verification that the mitigation measures have
been accomplished.
Table 1, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Checklist, lists the mitigation measures
contained in Section F, Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Effects, of Mitigated Negative
Declaration 1S-07-031, which will be implemented as part of the project. In order to determine if
the applicant has implemented the measure, the method and timing of verification are identified,
along with the City department or agency responsible for monitoring/verifying that the applicant
has completed each mitigation measure. Space for the signature of the verifying person and the
date of inspection is provided in the last column.
J :\Planning\MARIA \Initial Study\Oxford Map\IS-07 ..031 MMRPtext.doc
8-28
C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C) APPLICANT: Brookfield Shea Otay, LLC. INITIAL STUDY
PROJECT 267 E. Oxford Street. Request: 24 SFD development on a 3.9 acre Jot.
ADDRESS:
SCALE: FILE NUMBER:
NORTH No Scale IS-07-031 Related cases: PCS-07~7, PCZ~H8 & GPMl7-M
J:\Planning\Public Notices\IS\IS07031.cdr 04.26.07
8-29
~KHIBrr I
"
o
,:.
o
en
U
Q.
-------------------~~ ~
:: p- .... :-1' ~
'" ".... ~ - '!:"'" ~..
~;'i(!:: :l ~! ..~ 1\j...~ :M
-1"'-' -' ~ '1- -." - ..,
~ e~:r~. 5 i lc ~:lit S~ ~i i ~
;i~I~- "1"... ... ...~.. ....-:to'll)l......
..~~4~-----=___":._.z;.g :f '" ~
I~~~ ,g n ~ .!~ ~:! i~;; r 1::
n;il ~: !' ~ ~3 h~ !!bI .:dr i .::,
. . a: ~
<.
,
:;~ (;11111 J 'S:rO-~g 'NdV
g{!fJC 'ON <:IVW
-- -- i~ON-7pi.:$~.Tr1}.."'?f;-.vOs7Jl;r-- - - -- ----
'" !?' "'I I
.; I> ~...l a- ....t; :: Ii;
tl:~ ~ ~ ~_~ > ~~e il: :l: 2
~-~ S ~ 1;;: ~~~~i ; f . i . ~
-.. e~ ~ ~~ t~~~... ~, 3 a:
.!;-r:fn~~-l~r-- Tii------c-
~~ 1-;' B~ :~~a;.. -~ 5 ~~
I
,
I'
I
~"'.,.-...
,-
~
>-
..
I ,
~ . ~-,;.
H~l .
i.
r- '_:.;_.;;~::i:S:' ,"'..,
. .
.:.0-l
. .'
,
~
~
','.";,"'.;' "j"
..)
" ;~~~J~~
.'.j
~ _~_i2~ __ .. '-
-------~ .n to
------ .. / ,~!i., ~J
. /-J .._ ~
}' ~i ul
( -"~
f......"'... '.
; '. /~If~..t ;:
;",. ...~I,~~::i
I - '--,.,
,
.
,
.,
,
,
,
,.
.~ 1
. ,
"
ei'"
",-
. ~..
..-.....
'"
!S
"
"
8i
e~
8f-
..i
"'r,.:.
,
,
,'- "
,
'"
,
~
,
",
,
"
"
..;;.
i
:",\ ~
,
"
,
,.
.
\ e.;
\ 'loZ
,
,
,
,
,
,
i
Qi.'
\)-l,
i
t
,
...
ti:'"
..
. .
8i
:.t.
I
'''-
~,
~~
I
..
..
..
.
I "'; "";
I 10): ~::
.. I
SJ r,lfHl ,t~-{]L!/ta&:1 lU'II
: '/t/!l -aN ~YPt
I t '(iN.Lm
: !lONt'W ~B'1~93W
. ,
8-30
Ii). i
q~-
. r.:..~
:\~2
,:@~
,Ai
:'(Jl.
fcl. .~
~l..
I;\~
\:I.,
@~
@~
,-
fu:\ii
\':Jot,
x~'j '"l ~
. ~I. "'.
2h-;-i~j -
t''';; j
!. J.';,'~.-lP.'. .,"C-----7j
.1dh":5 la _ '.
: I~~;, ,- ~ :s
~. ,:'t '.'l l
~Jf~------__~____ . Eq
f ,~~ .;.,;:,
I '- ~Q' ~ .~. ~
: ~ - l)-" !3l' f'
, l,..; ~ ....
i_J~--~:~~-i .~.
t.,..:;' ~ ~fis2 !
~.:~t_-~-l!ti i!
,l,t:. ~">': ~ . ~}
,~. ; - ~ ~. !
rr': ._ I
..,. ! ,
~: . .;:
~-.~..-c~-------1..
:r;':,.. :, ~~...:.r~~~'
:t . i' 'j" .
~, .
'.:J..,-...."-.--;_...-..,,.--.;,.--~- .
-'+t . '. ...
i"'n'-' ~ ~i .
1"-!~ ".,
. ",-----';;~--r
~t I:
f
@i
J"
.
I
,
,
,
~;
1.">:
1'-' ..:
....,.....-""'U
i~~LO
o~
~ a:a
"Oil
~ ~
fi LL.!!
, ~:x ~
~oi
~
\::
!g
~
\\i
l'!. .
:ii' I
':.c ..
,,',;, ;111
~s. :h
51 =~,:._..1
i~"1lI
Ifill
!
Oxford StreeVConcordia Lutheran Church Residential (lS-07-031)
Mitiaation Monitorinq and Reportinq Proaram
Table 1
Mitigation Measure
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Comments
1.
The following air quality mitigation requirements shall be
shown on all applicable grading, and building plans as
details, notes, Of as otherwise appropriate:
. Minimize simultaneous operation of multiple
construction equipment units.
. Use low pollutant-emitting construction equipment.
. Use electrical construction equipment as practical.
. Use catalytic reduction for gasoline-powered
equipment.
. Use Injection-timing retard for diesel-powered
equipment.
. Water the construction area twice daily to minimize
fugitive dust.
. Stabilize graded areas as quickly as possible to
minimize fugitive dust.
. Pave permanent roads as quickly as possible to
minimize dust.
. Use electricity from power poles instead of temporary
generators during building, if available.
. Apply stabilizer or pave the last 100 feet of Internal
travel path within a construction site prior to public
road entry.
. Install wheel washers adjacent to a paved apron prior
to vehicle entry on public roads.
. Remove any visible track-Qut into traveled public
streets within 30 minutes of occurrence.
. Wet wash the construction access poInt at the end of
each workday If any vehIcle travel on unpaved
surfaces has occurred.
. Provide sufficient perimeter erosion control to prevent
washout of silty material onto publlc roads.
. Cover haul trucks or maintain at least 12 Inches of
freeboard to reduce blow~off during hauling.
Plan Check/Site
Inspection
x
x
ApplicanV City
Engineering
DepartmenVCity
Planning and Building
Department
x
Page-l
Miliaation Monitorina and Reoortina Proaram
Oxford Street/Concordia Lutheran Church Residential (IS-07-031)
Ix>
~
"
Table 1
. Suspend aU soil disturbance and travel on unpaved
surfaces \fwinds exceed 25 miles per hour.
. During rough grading, use of cooled exhaust gas
redrculation in conjunction with the following:
a) Reduction of the number of pieces of equipment
that operate simultaneously
b) Reduction of the number of hours that equipment
operations daily. The reduction in emissions would
be direcUy proportional to the reduction in
aggregate operating hours and/or
c) Use equipment with lower horsepower ratings
(emissions reductlon would be directly proportional
to the reduction In aggregate horsepower)
. Requirement of one or a combination of the following
measures for reduction of emissions:
a) Reduction of the number of pieces of
equipment that operate simultaneously.
b) Reduction of the number of hours that equipment
operations daily. The reduction in emissions
would be directly proportional to the reduction in
aggregate operating hours and/or
c) Use equipment with lower horsepower ratings
(emissions reduction would be directly
proportional to the reduction in aggregate
horsepower).
Page - 2
Oxford StreeVConcordia Lutheran Church Residential OS-07-0311
Table 1
2.
To ensure no direct and indirect Impacts to raptors and/or Plan Check/Site
any migratory birds occur during construction (including Inspection
clearing and grubbing), construction activitles adjacent to
nesting habitat should occur outside of the combined
breeding season of January 15 to August 15 for these
species. If removal of habitat and/or construction
activities adjacent to nest habitat must occur during the
breeding season, a pre-construction survey must be
performed by a City-approved biologist to determine the
presence or absence of nesting birds on and within 300
feet of the construction area and nesting raplors within
500 feet of the construction area. The pre-construction
survey must be concluded within 10 calendar days prior
to the start af construction, the results of which must be
submitted to the City for review and approval prior to
initiating any construction activities. If nesting birds
and/or raptors are detected by the City-approved
biologist, a blo-monitor must be present on-site during
construction to minimize construction Impacts and ensure
that na nests are removed or disturbed until all young
have fled ed.
Prior to the issuance of any land development permits Plan Check/Site
Including clearing and grubbing or grading permits, the Inspection
project shall implement Best Management Practices
(BMPs) identified in the Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan. BMPs shall be noted on grading and Improvement
plans and implemented during clearing and site
development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and
Environmental Review Coordinator In order to avoid
short-term indirect impacts ta any biological resources in
the ro ect vlclni
x
x
3.
x
x
x
Applicant/City
Engineering
DepartmenUPlanning
and Building
Department
x
ApplicanVCity
Engineering
DepartmenUPlanning
and Building
Department
Mitiqation Monitorinq and Reportinq Proqram
Prior to issuance of construction permits, the applicant
shall provide evidence to the City Engineer and City
Building Officlal that all the recommendations in the
Geotechnical Investigation, prepared by Geoeon, dated
A ril18, 2007, have been satisfied.
Page - 3
Applicant/City
Planning and Building
Department/City
Engineering
De artment
Oxford StreeUConcordia Lutheran Church Residential C1S-0Y.031\
Table 1
Mitiqation Monitorinq and Reoortinq Proqram
5.
Prior to any demolition activities, a licensed and
registered asbestos and lead abatement contractor shall
perform asbestos and lead-based paint abatement In
accordance with all applicable local, state and federal
laws and regulations, including San Diego County Air
PollutIon Control District Rule 361.145 - Standard for
Demolition and Renovation.
Plan ChecklSlte
Inspection
x
x
AppilcanUCity
Planning and Building
DepartmenVCity
Engineering
Department
6.
7.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a final drainage Plan Check/Site
study shall be required in conjunction with the preparation Inspection
of the final grading plans and must demonstrate that the
post~development peak flow rate does not exceed the
pre-development flows as indicated in the ~Tentatlve Map
Drainage Study for Oxford Street", prepared by Hunsaker
& Associates, dated October 3, 2007 and amended
October 17, 2007 to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Additionally, the City Engineer shail verify that the final
grading plans comply with the provisions of California
Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region
Order No. 2001-01 with respect to construction-related
water quality best management practices. If one or more
of the approved post construction BMPs is non-structural
then a post-construction BMP plan shall be prepared to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to the
commencement of construction. Compliance with said
plan shall become a permanent requirement of the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, temporary Plan Check/Site
desilUng and erosion control devices shall be Installed. Inspection
Protective devices shall be provided at every storm drain
Inlet to prevent sediment from entering the stann drain
system. These measures shall be reflected in the grading
and Improvement plans to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer and Environmental Review Coordinator.
x
x
x
x
x
ApplicanVCity
Planning and Building
DepartmenVClty
Engineering
Department
8.
The windows of homes facing East Oxford Street (Lots 1, Plan Check/Site
24) shall remain closed to achieve a 45 CNEL Interior Inspection
noise level. The design of these homes must Include a
means of mechanical ventilation and/or air-conditioning.
The mechanical ventilation should be in accordance with
the latest addition of the California and Unifonn Building
Code and to the satisfaction of the Building Official and
Environmental Review Coordinator.
Page - 4
x
x
x ApplicanVClty
Planning and Building
DepartmenVCity
Engineering
Department
x
x ApplicanVCity
Planning and Building
DepartmenVCity
Engineering
Department
x
Oxford StreeUConcordia Lutheran Church Residential IIS.07;031)
"
1
:n
Table 1
9.
Prior to approval of building permits, the applicant shall Plan Check/Site
submit a sub.sequent noise study for homes on Lots 1 and Inspection
24 to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review
Coordinator demonstrating that the final roof-mounted
HVAC and/or Air Conditioning equipment complies with
the City's noise control ordinance at the property
boundaries of 45 dBA Leq during nighttime hours and 55
dBA Leq during daytime hours or ambient noise levels,
whichever Is greater.
To minimize the potential noise and vibration impacts
during construction upon adjacent residences, the
following shaH be required:
10.
A. All construction equipment shall be equipped
with Improved noise muffling, and have the
manufacturers' recommended noise abatement
measures, such as mufflers, engine covers and
engine vibration isolates in good working
conditions.
B. If possible, hydraulic equipment instead of
pneumatic impacts tools and electric powered
equipment instead of diesel-powered
equipment shall be used for all exterior
construction work.
C. All equipment shall be turned off if not in use.
D. Pursuant to Section 17.24.050(J) of the Chula
Vista Municipal Code, project-related grading,
demolition or construction activities shall be
prohibited between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and
7:00 a,m. Monday through Friday and between
10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Monday through
Friday and between 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m.
Saturdays and Sundays.
J :\Planning\MARIA \Initial Study\Oxford Map\IS-07-031MMRPtb1.doc
Page. 5
x
x
x
ApplicanUCity
Planning and Building
DepartmenUCity
Engineering
Department
Mitiqation Monitorinq and Repoctinq Proqram
.,
1. Name of Proponent:
~!~
-T-
-
CnvOF
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM CHUlA VISfA
Concordia Lutheran Church c/o
Brookfield Shea Otay, LLC
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Chula Vista
Planning and Building Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
3. Address and Phone Number of Proponent:
Concordia Lutheran Church
c/o Brookfield Shea Otay, LLC
12865 Pointe Del Mar, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92014
(858) 481-8500
4. Name of Proposal:
Oxford Street! Concordia Lutheran
Church Residential
5. Date of Checklist:
October 17, 2007
6. Case No.:
IS-07 -031
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS QUESTIONS:
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Issues: Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
I. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 0 0 0 .
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, 0 0 0 .
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or 0 0 0 .
quality of the site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare,
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
o
o
o
.
1
8-36
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
in the area?
Comments:
a-b )The proposal includes the development of twenty-four single family residential units with site
improvements in accordance with the City of Chula Vista Municipal. The proposed landscape
improvements would enhance and improve the aesthetic quality of Oxford Street, the proposed
on-site public street and surrounding neighborhood. The proposed proj ect would not damage any
scenic resources, vegetation, or historic buildings within a state scenic highway. The site is
located on the side of a ridgeline developed with single-family homes, which slopes uphill to the
east. Development of the project site with homes could affect views from these adjacent
properties. However, the development layout is designed to include side-yard setbacks, which
allow views between proposed homes and above the roofline of single-story homes. The
approval of the project will not substantially degrade existing views across the property,
therefore, no significant aesthetic impacts are anticipated.
c) The proposal is an infill residential development project. The proposed project will not
substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the project site or its adjacent
residential surroundings. The project site is planned for single - family residential development
according to the General Plan Land Use regulations.
d) The project proposes one public streetlight on the cul-de-sac, and private lighting for each
residence, which should not affect adjacent residences. An existing streetlight will serve the
project entry at the intersection of East Oxford Street and the proposed street. The proposal will
be required to comply with the City's minimum standards for roadway lighting. The project will
be required to comply with the light and glare regulations (Section 19.66.100) of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code (CYMe). Compliance with these regulations will ensure that no significant
glare, or light would affect daytime or nighttime views in the surrounding residential
neighborhood area.
Mitil!ation:
No mitigation measures are required.
II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the
project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
o
o
o
.
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or
o
o
o
.
2
8-37
a Williamson Act contract?
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
0 0 0 .
Issues:
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment,
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
Comments:
a-c)The project site is developed with a church, pre-school/daycare, and parking lot on the south side
of the lot and play fields on the north side of the lot. The surrounding properties have been
developed with single-family homes. These properties are consistent with the Chula Vista
General Plan and zoning designation, and contain no agricultural resources or designated
farmland. The proposal would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of
Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use and no impacts to agricultural resources would be
created as a result of the proposed project.
Mitigation:
No mitigation measures are required.
m. AIR QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
o
o
o
.
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute 0 0 0 .
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase 0 . 0 0
of any criteria pollutant for which the project
region is non-attainment under an applicable
federal or state ambient. air quality standard
(including releasing emissions, which exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant 0 . 0 0
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
o
.
o
o
3
8-38
Issues:
number of people?
Comments:
(a-e) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Miti!!ation:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant air quality impacts to a level ofless than significance.
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the
proj ecl:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status
species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
4
8-39
o
o
o
.
.
o
o
o
o
o
o
.
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Issues: Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any 0 . 0 0
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances 0 0 0 .
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat 0 . 0 0
Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan7
Comments:
a-f) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mitieation:
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant biological resource impacts to a level of less than significance.
v. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in
State CEQA Guidelines S 15064.57
o
o
o
.
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to State CEQA Guidelines S 15064.57
o
o
o
.
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
o
o
o
.
5
8-40
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside offonnal cemeteries?
o
o
o
.
Comments:
a) In order to assess potential historic resources located on the project site or surrounding areas, an
archaeologicalJhistorical evaluation entitled "Archaeological Survey for the Concordia Lutheran
Church Project" was prepared by Brian F. Smith & Associates, dated September 19, 2007. The
following details summarize the results of the study. The existing structures were constructed
between 1962-1965 and were not associated with any important events or individuals in terms of
local, state or national history. The existing structures and the site do not qualify as a historic resource
under national, state or local register crjteria. The proposed project will not constitute a substantial,
adverse change to the significance of an historical resource as the structure has been determined by the
analysis not to be historically or architecturally significant within the project impact area. Therefore,
no substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5
is anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
b) The site has been disturbed by development of the church on the south 1/3 of the property and
previous playfield use of the northerly 2/3 of the property. Based on the level of previous site
disturbance, the potential for significant impacts or adverse changes to archaeological resource as
defined in Section 15064.5 is not anticipated.
c) Based on the level of previous disturbance to the site and the relatively limited amount of additional
grading for the proposed project, no impacts to unique paleontological resources or unique geologic
features are anticipated.
d) No human remains are anticipated to be present within the impact area of the project site as the project
site has been previously disturbed with the existing church and auxiliary structures.
Mitigation:
No mitigation measures are required.
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk of
loss, injury or death involving:
1.
Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
o
o
o
.
6
8-41
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Issues: Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault?
n. Strong seismic gronnd shaking? 0 . 0 0
iii.
Seismic-related
liquefaction?
including
o
o
.
ground
failure,
o
o
o
.
IV.
Landslides?
o
o
o
.
b)
Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
o
o
o
c)
Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in on-
or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
.
o
d)
Be located on expansive soil, creating substantial
risks to life or property?
o
o
o
.
e)
Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of wastewater?
o
o
.
Comments:
a-e) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mitigation:
o
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant geological impacts to a level ofless than significance.
7
8-42
Issues:
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
8
8-43
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
.
D
D
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
Impact
.
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
No
Impact
o
D
.
.
.
.
.
.
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorpora ted
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
Comments:
(a-b) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
c) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E. The proposed project site is located within one-quarter
mile of Palomar Elementary school located on East Palomar Street. The proposed project will not
emit acutely hazardous emissions or materials, therefore, will not create a significant impact to the
schools within the surrounding area.
d) The proposed project is not located on a site included on the County of San Diego Department of
Enviromnental Health Services Hazardous List pursuant to the Government Code Section 65962.5,
therefore, will not create a significant impact to the public or the enviromnent.
e) The project is not located within an airport land use plan nor within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport; therefore, the project would not expose people residing or working in the project
area to adverse safety hazards. .
f) The project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip; therefore, the project development
would not expose people working in the project area to adverse safety hazards.
g) The project is designed to meet the City's emergency response plan, route access and emergency
evacuation requirements. The proposed fire improvements include an emergency turning radius and
fire hydrant. No impairment or physical interference with the City's emergency response plan is
anticipated.
h) The project is designed to meet the City's Fire Prevention building and fIre service requirements. No
exposure of people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death due to wildfires is
anticipated.
Mitigation:
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant Hazards/Hazardous Materials impacts to a level of less than significance.
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.
Would the project:
a) Result in an increase in pollutant discharges to
receiving waters (including impaired water bodies
o
.
o
o
9
8-44
Issues:
pursuant to the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list),
result in significant alteration of receiving water
quality during or following construction, or violate
any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby
wells would drop to a level which would not support
existing land uses or planned uses for which permits
have been granted)? Result in a potentially
significant adverse impact on groundwater quality?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, in a manner, which
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, substantially increase the
rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on- or off-site, or place
structures within a 100-year flood hazard area which
would impede or redirect flood flows?
e) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure ofa levee or dam?
f) Create or contribute runoff water, which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
10
8-45
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
.
Less Than
Significant
Impact
.
o
.
o
o
No
Impact
o
.
o
.
o
Issues:
Comments:
(a-f) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mitil!ation:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant Hydrology/Water Quality impacts to a level ofless than significance.
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the
project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to the general
plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural community conservation plan?
11
8-46
D
D
D
D
D
.
D
D
D
.
.
D
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
a) The project site is surrounded with single-family residential land uses. The proposed residential infill
project would be consistent with the Chula Vista General Plan and cbaracter of the immediate
surrounding residential area. The project would not disrupt or divide an established community;
therefore, no significant land use impact would occur as a result of the project.
b) The project site is located within the RI (Single-Family Residential) Zones and RLM (Low-Medium
Density) General Plan land use designation. The project is required to rezone the existing parcel to R-
1-5-P and be in compliance with the respective zoning. The project has been found to be consistent
with the General Plan guidelines and regulations, therefore; no significant land use impacts are
anticipated.
c) Refer to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E. Potential short-term construction noise/raptor
nesting impacts are addressed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section, under Biological
Resources.
Miti!!ation:
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant Land U se!Planning impacts to a level of less than significance.
X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
o
o
o
.
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site delineated
on a local general plan, specific plan or other land
use plan?
o
o
o
.
12
8-47
Issues:
Comments:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
a) The project site has been previously disturbed with the existing church. The proposed project would
not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource of value to the region or the residents
of the State of California.
b) The State of California Department of Conservation has not designated the project site for mineral
resource protection. Therefore, no impacts to mineral resources are anticipated as a result of the
proposed project.
Mitil!ation:
No mitigation measures are required.
XI. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels
in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
13
8-48
o 0
.
o
o 0
o
.
o 0
o
.
o .
o
o
o 0
o
.
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
D
D
D
.
Comments:
a-d) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
e-f) The project is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport, nor is it
located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, the project development would not expose
people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.
Mitigation:
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant Noise impacts to a level ofless than significance.
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the
proj ect:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of road or other infrastructure)?
D
D
D
.
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
D
D
D
.
c) Displace substantial numbers
necessitating the construction of
housing elsewhere?
of people,
replacement
D
o
D
.
14
8-49
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
a-c) The project is surrounded by existing residential development and involves the removal of the
existing church and daycare buildings and related improvements. The proposed project does not
involve the extension of public facilities that would induce substantial growth. Future residential
development of the site for the proposed 24 single-family residential units is consistent with the
General Plan and would not exceed the regional or local population projections. The proposed
project would involve the rezoning of the site from R-I-7 to R-I-5-P Zone, which is consistent with
the RLM General Plan designation of the site, which would be similar to the existing adjacent single-
family residential properties to the north, south and east. The proposed project would not involve
displacement of existing housing or individuals.
Mitie:ation:
No mitigation measures are required.
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project
Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated
with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental impacts, in order
to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for any public services:
a. Fire protection? 0 0 . 0
b. Police protection? 0 0 0 .
c. Schools? 0 0 0 .
d. Parks? 0 0 . 0
e. Other public facilities? 0 0 0 .
15
8-50
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
a) According to the Fire Department, adequate fire protection services can continue to be provided to the
site. The applicant will be required to comply with the Fire Department policies for fITe hydrant
placement, fITe flow, fITe truck access and new building construction. The City's Fire performance
objectives and thresholds will continue to be met.
b) According to the Chula Vista Police Department, adequate police protection services can continue to be
provided upon completion of the proposed project. The proposed project would not have a significant
effect upon or result in a need for substantial new or altered police protection services. The City's
Police performance objectives and thresholds will continue to be met.
c) The proposed project would not induce substantial population growth; therefore, no significant adverse
impacts to public schools would result. According to the Chula Vista Elementary School District letter
dated May 22, 2007, the applicant would be required to pay the statutory building permit school fees
for the proposed residential construction or an alternative financing mechanism such as participation in
or annexation to a CFD is recommended.
d) The proposed project would not induce significant population growth, as it is a small residential infill
project. However, the applicant shall be required to pay Park Acquisition and Development Fees
(PAD) in accordance with Ordinance No. 2945 adopted by City Council on January 6, 2004.
e) The proposed project would not have a significant effect upon or result in a need for new or expanded
governmental services and would continue to be served by existing public infrastructure.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
XIV. RECREATION. Would the project:
a)
Increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other r=eational facilities such
that substantial physical deterioration of the facility
would occur or be accelerated?
D
D
.
D
b)
Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities, which have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
D
D
D
.
16
8-51
Issues:
Comments:
PotentiaUy
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
a) The proposed project would not induce significant population growth, as it is a small residential infill
project and would not impact existing or proposed recreational facilities. However, the applicant will
be required to pay Park Acquisition and Development Fees (pAD) in accordance with Ordinance No.
2945 adopted by City Council on January 6, 2004.
b) The project does not include the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. The project site is
not plarmed for any future parks and recreation facilities or programs. Therefore, the proposed project
would not have an adverse physical effect on the recreational environment.
Mitie:ation:
No mitigation measures are required.
XV. TRANSPORTATION I TRAFFIC. Would the
project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of
the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase
in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level
of service standard established by the county
congestion management agency for designated roads
or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
17
8-52
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
D D D .
D D D .
Issues:
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus
turnouts, bicycle racks)?
Comments:
(a,b,d,e) According to the Traffic Engineering Division, in their memorandum dated September 25,2007,
the proposed residential infill project is not anticipated to result in any significant traffic, circulation or
emergency access impacts. The existing church and daycare generates approximately 304 Average Daily
Trips (ADTs), as compared to the proposed project, which will generate approximately 240 ADTs. The
traffic generated by the project wiIl amount to a reduction of 64 ADT's. In addition, the project-
generated trips will not exceed the level of service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways. Therefore, due to the minimal traffic increase and
reduction of previous vehicular volume, the project will not create significant traffic operations impacts
along East Oxford Street and surrounding residential or collector streets.
c) The proposal would not have any significant effect upon any air traffic patterns, including either an
increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks.
f) The proposal includes garage spaces in accordance with the Chula Vista Zoning Code, and parking
on the proposed public street. The proposal meets ADA requirements for accessibility and parking.
g) There is an existing bus stop located 1 block westerly of the site at the intersection of Melrose and
East Oxford Street.
h) The proposal would not conflict with adopted transportation plans or alternative transportation
programs.
Mitil!ation:
No mitigation measures are required.
XVI. UTllHIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.
Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
D
D
D
.
18
8-53
Issues:
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or
are new or expanded entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider, which serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the provider's existing
commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste
disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
19
8-54
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
0 0 0 .
o
o
.
o
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
a) The project site is located within an urban area that is served by all necessary utilities and service systems.
According to the Engineering Department, wastewater requirements of the Regional Water Quality
Control Board not be exceeded as a result ofthe proposed project.
b) According to Sweetwater Authority correspondence dated April 24, 2007, an existing 8-inch water main is
located on the south side of East Oxford Street, with one existing water service to the site. The proposed
improvements will include a new water main extension within the proposed public road that connects to
the existing Authority water main in East Oxford Street, and tenninates in the proposed cul-de-sac. This
would include new separate laterals and meters for each parcel. As the water facility improvements are
designed in accordance with water authority standards, no significant impacts to existing facility systems
will occur as a result of the proposed project. Adequate storage facilities exist to serve the project.
c) The potential discharge of silt during construction activities could impact the storm drain system.
Appropriate erosion control measures will be identified in conjunction with the preparation of fmal
grading plans to be implemented during construction. The proposed project will result in the construction
of new storm water drainage facilities, including grassy swales and a detention basin located at the
southwest comer of the site. Installation of these improvements in conjunction with the proposed project
will result in a reduction of storm water flow. The proposed project is subject to the NPDES General
Construction Pennit requirements and shall obtain pennit coverage and develop a Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) prior to issuance of grading pennits. In addition, the project shall be
conditioned to implement construction and post-construction water quality Best Management Practices
(BMPs) for storm water pollution prevention in accordance with the Chula Vista Standard Urban Storm
Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP). No significant impacts to the City's storm drainage facilities are
anticipated as a result of the proposed project.
d) The project site is within the potable water service area of the Sweetwater District. Pursuant to
correspondence from the Sweetwater Authority, dated September 25, 2007, adequate storage facilities
exist, and the project may be serviced from the 8"-water main on East Oxford Street and the applicant will
need to install a service main to service this site. A fire flow of 1,500 gallons per minute fire flow at 20 psi
pressure for a two hour duration, as required by the Chula Vista Fire Department, is available to serve the
project. The proposed project will be required to construct expansions to existing water facilities as
described in Section b above.
e) An Overview of Sewer Service for the project was prepared on September 26, 2007 and amended October
2007, prepared by Dexter Wilson Engineering. The project site is within the boundaries of the City of
Chula Vista wastewater services area. The existing sewer facility system includes 8-inch sewer lines along
East Oxford Street and one sewer lateral to serve the existing church. There are currently no sewer mains
serving the northerly part of the site. Therefore a new 8-inch sewer lateral line within the proposed public
street, connecting the sewer main in East Oxford Street is proposed to service the lots. The applicant shall
be required to submit a final sewer report and plan showing compliance with the City's Sewer Design
Criteria, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. No adverse impacts to the City's sewer system or City's
sewer threshold standards will occur as a result of the proposed project.
t) The City of Chula Vista is served by regional landfills with adequate capacity to meet the solid waste needs
of the region in accordance with State law.
g) The proposal would be conditioned to comply with federal, state and local regnlations related to solid
waste.
Mitigation: The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
identified storm water/storm drainage and wastewater impacts to a level of less than significant.
20
8-55
Issues:
XVII. THRESHOLDS
Will the proposal adversely impact the City's
Threshold Standards?
A) Library
The City shall construct 60,000 gross square feet
(GSF) of additional library space, over the Jillle 30,
2000 GSF total, in the area east of Interstate 805 by
buildout. The construction of said facilities shall be
phased such that the City will not fall below the city-
wide ratio of 500 GSF per 1,000 population. Library
facilities are to be adequately equipped and staffed.
B) Police
a) Emergency Response: Properly equipped and staffed
police units shall respond to 81 percent of "Priority One"
emergency calls within seven (7) minutes and maintain
an average response time to all "Priority One"
emergency calls of 5.5 minutes or less.
b) Respond to 57 percent of "Priority Two" urgent calls
within seven (7) minutes and maintain an average
response time to all "Priority Two" calls of 7.5 minutes
orless.
C) Fire and Emergencv Medical
Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed fire
and medical units shall respond to calls throughout the City
within 7 minutes in 80% of the cases (measured annually).
D) Traffic
The Threshold Standards require 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. Signalized intersections west ofI-805 are not
to operate at a LOS below their 1991 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 Standard.
21
8-56
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
No
Impact
.
.
.
.
Issues:
E) Parks and Recreation Areas
The TIrreshold Standard for Parks and Recreation is 3
acres of neighborhood and community parkland with
appropriate facilities/I ,000 population east ofI-80S.
F) Drainage
The TIrreshold Standards require that storm water flows
and volumes not exceed City Engineering Standards.
Individual projects will provide necessary improvements
consistent with the Drainage Master Plane s) and City
Engineering Standards.
G) Sewer
The TIrreshold Standards require that sewage flows and
volumes not exceed City Engineering Standards.
Individual projects will provide necessary improvements
consistent with Sewer Master Planes) and City Engineering
Standards.
H) Water
The TIrreshold Standards require that adequate storage,
treatment, and transmission facilities are constructed
concurrently with planned growth and that water quality
standards are not jeopardized dLUing growth and
construction.
Applicants may also be required to participate in whatever
water conservation or fee offset program the City of Chula
Vista has in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
22
8-57
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
.
.
.
No
Impact
.
o
o
o
-
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Commeuts:
a) The project would not induce substantial population growth; therefore, no impacts to library facilities would
result. No adverse impact to the City's Library Threshold standards would occur as a result of the proposed
project.
b) According to the Police Department, adequate police protection services can continue to be provided upon
completion of the proposed project. The proposed project would not have a significant effect upon or result in a
need for substantial new or altered police protection services. No adverse impact to the City's Police Threshold
standards would occur as a result of the proposed project.
c) According to the Fire Department, adequate fire protection and emergency medical services can continue to be
provided to the project site. Although the Fire Department bas indicated they will provide service to the project,
the project will contribute to the incremental increase in fire service demand throughout the City. This increased
demand on fire services will not result in a significant cumulative impact. No adverse impact to the City's Fire
and Emergency Medical Threshold standards would occur as a result of the proposed project.
d) According to the Traffic Engineering Division, the surrounding street segments and intersections including East
Oxford Street and Melrose Avenue will continue to operate at the same Level of Service in compliance with the
City's traffic threshold standard with the proposed project traffic. No adverse impact to the City's traffic
threshold standards would occur as a result of the proposed project.
e) The proposed project would not induce significant population growth, as it is a small residential infil1 project and
would not impact existing or proposed recreational facilities. However, the applicant shall be required to pay
Park Acquisition and Development Fees (pAD) in accordance with Ordinance No. 2945 adopted by City Council
on January 6, 2004.
f) Based upon the review of the project, the Engineering Department has determined that there are no significant
issues regarding the proposed drainage improvements of the project site. The proposed drain system includes
improvements to existing drainage culverts to handle 2, 10, 50 and 100-year stonn events, a series of inlets,
private catch basins and culverts, underground detention systems, discharge controls, and filtering systems. No
adverse impacts to the City's drainage threshold standards will occur as a result of the proposed project.
g) An Overview of Sewer Service for the project was prepared on September 26, 2007 and amended October 2007
by Dexter Wilson Engineering. The project site is within the boundaries of the City of Chula Vista wastewater
services area The existing sewer facility system includes 8-inch sewer lines along East Oxford Street and one
lateral to serve the existing church. There are currently no sewer mains serving the northerly part of the site.
Therefore a new 8- inch sewer lateral line within the proposed public street, connecting the sewer main in East
Oxford Street is proposed to service the lots. The applicant shall be required to submit a final sewer report and
plan showing compliance with the City's Sewer Design Criteria, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. No
adverse impacts to the City's sewer system or City's sewer threshold standards will occur as a result of the
proposed project.
h) The project site is within the potable water service area of the Sweetwater District as noted in their
correspondence. Pursuant to correspondence from the Sweetwater Authority dated 4/24/07, the project may be
serviced from the 8"-water main on East Oxford Street and the applicant will need to install a service main to
service this site. No significant impacts to existing facility systems or the City's water threshold standards will
-occur as a result of the proposed project.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
23
8-58
~ I ~ ~
Issues:
XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current project, and the
effects of probable future projects.)
c) Does the project have environmental effects, which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
Comments:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
D
.
a) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E. Potential short-term construction raptor nesting impacts
are addressed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section F, under Biological Resources.
b) The project site has been previously disturbed with a church land use and site improvements. No
cumulative considerable impacts associated with the project when viewed in connection with the effects of
past projects, other current projects and probable future projects have been identified.
c) The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly, as the
proposed project has been mitigated to lessen any potential significant impacts to a level of less than
significance.
Mitigation: The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant impacts to a level ofIess than significance.
24
8-59
.. ' I C
XIX. PROJECT REVISIONS OR MITIGATION MEASURES:
Project mitigation measures are contained in Section F, Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant
Impacts, and Table I, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, of Mitigated Negative Declaration
1S-07-031.
xx. AGREEMENT TO IMPLEMENT MITIGATION MEASURES
By signing the line(s) provided below, the Applicant and/or Operator stipulate that they have each read,
understood and have their respective company's authority to and do agree to the mitigation measures
contained herein, and will implement same to the satisfaction ofthe Environmental Review Coordinator.
Failure to sign below prior to posting of this Mitigated Negative Declaration with the County Clerk shall
indicate the Applicant and/or Operator's desire that the Project be held in abeyance without approval
and that the Applicant and/or Operator shall apply for an Environmental Impact Report.
N.:6.\. V\d:-- ~~
ADAM Do p&VNI3( - ~~~~ ~L-
Printed Name and Title of Applicant
(or authorized representative)
tD / (1 ( ^OD "1-
Date
Signature of Applicant
(or authorized representative)
N/A
Printed Name and Title of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
N/A
Signature of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
Date
25
8-60
,. " } C
XXI. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at
least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated,"
as indicated by the checklist on the previous pages.
D Land Use and Planning
D Population and Housing
. Geophysical
D Agricultural Resources
. HydrologyfWater
. Air Quality
D Paleontological
Resources
DTransportation/Traffic
. Biological Resources
D Energy and Mineral
Resources
D Public Services
D Utilities and Service Systems
D Aesthetics
~azards and Hazardous
Materials
D Cultural Resources
. Noise
D Recreation
D Mandatory Findings of Significance
26
8-61
" .' _ r
XXII. DETERMINATION:
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 revisions in
the project have been made or agreed to by the project proponent. A Mitigated
Negative Declaration will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment,
and an Environmental Impact Report is required.
I find that the proposed project may have a "potentially significant impact" or
"potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one
effect: I) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable
legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier
analysis as described on attached sheets. An Environmental Impact Report is
required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed
adequately in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards
and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Negative
Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the
proposed project, nothing further is required.
II 121!t! T
Da~e I
J:\Planning\MARIA\Initial Study\Villas Del Mar\IS-04-022draftChecklist.doc
27
8-62
o
.
o
o
o
/h'r4c ilvU t:-:AIT 6
~\f?
::-~-
- -
Planning & Building Department
Planning Division I Development Processing
,
em OF
CHULA VISTA
APPLICATION APPENDIX B
Disclosure Statement
" Pursuant to Council Policy 101-01, prior to any action upon matters that will require discretionary action by
the Council, Planning Commission and all other official bodies of the City, a statement of disclosure of certain
ownership or financial interests, payments, or campaign contributions for a City of Chula Vista election must
be filed. The following information must be disclosed:
1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the property that is the subject of the
application or the contract, e.g., owner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier..
Brookfield Shea Otav LLC
Brookfield Otav LLC
Concordia Lutheran Church of Chula Vista, California
2. If any person' identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all
individuals with a $2000 investment in the business (corporation/partnership) entity.
N/A
3. If any person' identified pursuant to (1) above is a non-profit organization or trust, list the names of
any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of
the trust.
N/A
4. Please identify every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent
contractors you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter.
Hunsaker & Assoc. ( Lex Williman) Brookfield Otav LLC ( Adam Pevnev )
Hunsaker & Assoc. ( Marvbeth Murray) Nancv Keenan ( Dahlin Group)
Hunsaker & Assoc. (Terrv Barker)
5. Has any person' associated with this contract had any financial dealings with an official" of the City
of Chula Vista as it relates to this contraCt within the past 12 months. Yes D- No &-
If Yes, briefly describe the nature of the financial interest the official" may have in this contract.
6. Have you made a contribution of more than $250 within the past twelve (12) months to a current
member of the Chula Vista City Council? No t8J Yes 0 If yes, which Council Member?
276 Fourth Avenue I Chula Vista 8_~fornia I 91910 I (619) 691-5101
~\fy
-"t-
.
Planning & Building Department
Planning Division I Development Processing
em' OF
CHUlA VISfA
APPLICATION APPENDIX B
Disclosure Statement- Page 2
7. Have you provided more than $340 (or an item of equivalent value) to an official** of the City of Chura
Vista in the past twelve (12) months? (This includes being a source of income, money to retire a legal
debt, gift, loan, etc.) Yes D- No i:8J_
If Yes, which official** and what was the nature of item provided?
Date: 4/05/2007
Adam D. Pevnev - Assistant Vice President
Print or type name of Contractor I Applicant
*
Person is defined as: any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club,
fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, any other county, city,
municipality, district, or other political subdivision, -or any other group or combination acting as a
unit.
**
Official includes, but is not limited to: Mayor, Council member, Planning Commissioner, Member of
a board, commission, or committee of the City, employee, or staff members.
276 Fourth Avenue I Chula Vist~l~~lifornia I 91910 I (619) 691-5101
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ADOPTING THE FINAL MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION MND (IS-07-031) FOR THE
OXFORD STREET PROJECT; AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP)
PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT
WHEREAS, Concordia Lutheran Church submitted applications requesting approvals for a
Rezone from the R-I (Residential Single Family) Zone to the R-I-5-P (Residential Single Family,
Precise Plan) zone, establishing a Precise Plan Modifying District, and adopting Precise Plan
standards; a Precise Plan; and a Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide 3.90 acres located at 267
East Oxford Street into 24 single family residential lots, ("Project"); and
WHEREAS, on September 12, 2007, a Notice of Initial Study (NOl) was circulated to
property owners and residents within a 500-foot radius of the proposed project site; and
WHEREAS, Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and has conducted an Initial Study (IS-
07 -031) in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Based upon the results of the
Initial Study the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the project could result in
significant impacts on the environment. However, revisions to the project made by or agreed to by
the applicant would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant
effects would occur; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared a Mitigated
Negative Declaration (MND IS-07-031) and associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program (MMRP); and
WHEREAS, on October 19, 2007, a Notice of Availability (NOA) for Draft MND IS-07-
031 was posted at the County of San Diego Clerks Office and circulated for a 30-day public review
period to property owners and residents within a 500-foot radius of the proposed project site as well
as any individuals and/or groups that had requested to be noticed; and
WHEREAS, the Chula Vista Resource Conservation Committee held a duly noticed public
hearing for Draft MND IS-07-014 on November, 192007 and voted 5-0-0-1 to recommend that the
City Council certify MND 07-031 and adopt the MMRP; and
WHEREAS, the Chula Vista Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing for
Final MND IS-07-014 on December 12, 2007 and voted 6-0-0-1 recommending that the City
Council adopt Final MND 07-031 and adopt the MMRP in accordance with Resolution
and
WHEREAS, the Chula Vista City Council held a duly noticed public hearing for the Final
MND IS-07-031 and MMRP on January 8, 2008; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered Final MND IS-07-031 together with any
comments received during the public review process; and
J:\Atlomey\DavidM\Resos\IS-07-0JI MNDResoOxford.doc
8-65
WHEREAS, the Final MND IS-07-031 and other related materials are located in the
Planning and Building Department and maintained by the custodian of said documents who is the
Director of Planning and Building. This constitutes the record of proceedings upon which this
adoption of Final MND IS-07-031 is based.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of
Chula Vista does hereby find, determine, and order as follows:
1. PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD
The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at their public
hearing on Final MND 07-031 held on December 12, 2007, as well as the minutes and
resolutions resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding.
These documents, along with any documents submitted to the decision-makers, including
documents specified in Public Resources Code Section 21167.6, subdivision(s), shall
comprise the entire record of proceedings for any claims under the California Environmental
Quality Act ("CEQA") (Public Resources Code 921000 et seq.).
II. MND IS-07-031 CONTENTS
That the MND IS-07-031 consists of the following:
1. Initial Study Checklist IS-07-03I; and
2. Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-07-031 (including supporting technical reports)
3. Comments and Responses
4. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
(All hereafter collectively referred to as "MND IS-07-03I")
III. CERTIFICATION OF COMPIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
That the City Council does hereby find that MND IS-07-031 (Exhibit "A" to this Resolution,
a copy which is on file with the office of the City Clerk), and the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program are prepared in accordance with the requirements of CEQA (Pub.
Resources Code, 921000 et seq.), the CEQA Guidelines (California Code Regs. Title 14
915000 et seq.), and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City ofChula Vista.
Mitigation Measures Feasible and Adopted
As more fully identified and set forth in MND IS-07-031, the City Council hereby
finds pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(c)(2) and CEQA Guidelines
Section 15074.1 that the mitigation measures described in the above referenced
documents are feasible and will become binding upon the entity assigned thereby to
implement the same.
J:\Altomey\DavidM\Resos\IS-07-OJ 1 MNDResoOxford.doc
8-66
Adoption of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
As required by Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the City Council hereby
adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Program) set forth in
MND IS-07-031. The City Council further 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
mitigation measures identified MND IS-07-031 and associated Program.
IV. INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT OF CITY COUNCIL
The City Council has exercised their independent review and judgment and hereby finds on
the basis of the whole record before it that there is no substantial evidence that the project
will have a significant effect on the environment and concurs with the Planning Commission
and Environmental Review Coordinator's determination that Mitigated Negative
Declaration IS-07-031 in the form presented has been prepared in accordance with
requirements of the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the State CEQA
Guidelines and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City ofChula Vista and adopts
the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (IS-
07-031).
V. NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
That 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 is filed with the
County Clerk of the County of San Diego. These documents, along with any documents
submitted to the decision-makers, including documents specified in Public Resources Code
Section 21167.6, subdivision(s), shall comprise the entire record of proceedings for any
claims under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (Public Resources Code
921000 et seq.).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City Council of the City ofChula Vista finds that
the MND IS-07-031 and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program have been prepared in
accordance with the requirements of CEQA (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), CEQA
Guidelines (California Code Regs. Title 14 Section 15000 et seq.), and the Environmental Review
Procedures of the City of Chula Vista, and therefore is adopted.
Presented by
James D. Sandoval, AICP
Planning and Building Director
J:\Attomey\DavidMlResos\IS-07-03IMNDResoOxford.doc
8-67
i=- ,?/-1/ J311 A
Mitigated Negative Declaration
PROJECT NAME: Oxford Street! Concordia Lutheran Church Residential
PROJECT LOCATION: 267 East Oxford Street
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO: APN #639-392-14-00
PROJECT APPLICANT: Brookfield Shea Otay, LLC
12865 Pointe Del Mar, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92014
(858) 481-8500
CASE NO.: IS-07-031
DATE OF DRAFT DOCUMENT: October 19. 2007
DATE OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION MEETING: November 19. 2007
PREP ARER:
Richard Zumwalt. A.I.C.P.. Associate Planner
DATE OF FINAL DOCUMENT:
November 20. 2007
Revisions made to this document subsequent to the issuance of the notice of availability of the
draft Mitigated Negative Declaration are denoted by underline.
A. Proi ect Setting
The 3.9 -acre project site is located at 267 East Oxford Street, within the urbanized area of West em
Chula Vista, (Exhibit 1- Locator Map). The site is approximately 100 feet east of the intersection of
Melrose A venue and East Oxford Street. Primary access to the site is currently provided directly off
of East Oxford Street. The entire project site has been partially disturbed with previous uses including
a church, pre-school/daycare, and parking lot on the south side of the lot and play fields on the north
side of the lot. The land uses immediately surrounding the project site are as follows:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Single-Family Residential
Single-Family Residential
Single-Family Residential
Single-Family Residential
B. Proiect Description
The project proposes demolition of the existing Concordia Lutheran Church, daycare/community
building, and accessory buildings, and redevelopment of the 3.9 ac. site with 24 single-family
detached residential dwelling units, (Exhibit 2 - Site Plan). The site is designated Residential Low-
Medium (3-6 dwelling units per acre) on the City of Chula Vista General Plan and is zoned R-I-7
Single Family Residential. The project proposes a rezone from R-I-7 to R-I-5-P (Min. lot size of
5,000 sq. ft. with a Precise Plan ModifYing District); a Precise Plan; and Tentative Subdivision Map
proposing 24 residential lots ranging from 5,006 sq. ft. to 6,249 sq. ft. in size, with 2 garage parking
spaces per home, a public street and HOA-maintained open space lots.
8-~8
Proposed on-site improvements include drainage facilities, sewer system facilities, fire hydrants,
retaining walls, fencing, improved paved areas, open space and landscape treatments. The project is
identified as developable area within the City of Chula Vista Multiple Species Conservation Program
Subarea Plan, however, it is not located within the City's designated conservation area.
C. Compliance with Zoning and Plans
The proposed project site is within the General Plan RLM (Low-Medium Residential Density/3-6
dwelling units per acre) and RI (Single-Family Residential) Zone. The project proposes a rezone
from R-I to R-I-5-P (Min. lot size of 5,000 sq. ft. with a Precise Plan Modifying District). The
proposed project has been found to be consistent with the applicable site development regulations and
the General Plan.
D. Public Comments
On September 12,2007, a Notice of Initial Study was circulated to property owners within a 500-foot
radius of the proposed project site. The public review period ended September 24,2007. One e-mail
response was received during this period regarding how project grading will affect the adjacent
properties and how the design of the future homes would affect the neighbor's privacy. These issues
will be addressed in the Planning staff report regarding the project.
On October 19. 2007. the Notice of Availabilitv of the Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for
the proiect was posted in the County Clerk's Office and circulated to property owners within a 500-
foot radius of the proiect site. The 30-dav public comment period closed on November 19. 2007. No
written comments were received as a result of this notice.
E. Identification of Environmental Effects
An Initial Study conducted by the City of Chula Vista (including an attached Environmental
Checklist form) determined that the proposed project may have potential significant environmental
impacts however; mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project to reduce these impacts
to a less than significant level. This Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance
with Section 15070 of the State of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
Air Oualitv
Short-Term Demolition and Construction Activities
The project proposes demolition of the existing Concordia Lutheran Church, daycare/community
building and accessory buildings. The proposed project will result in a short-term air quality impact
created from construction activities. The grading of the site for future single-family residential
development and worker and equipment vehicle trips will create temporary emissions of dust, fumes,
equipment exhaust, and other air pollutants associated with the construction and demolition activities.
Air quality impacts resulting from construction-related operations are considered short-term in
duration.
In order to analyze potential project impacts/emissions, the emission factors and threshold criteria
contained in the 1993 South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Handbook for Air
Quality Analysis were used.
A comparison of daily construction emissions to the SCAQMD's emission thresholds of significance
for each pollutant was analyzed. Emissions were calculated using the URBEMIS 2002 model. The
addition of emissions to an air basin is considered under CEQA to be a significant impact.
Implementation of the Mitigation Measure I contained in Section F below would mitigate short-term
construction and rough grading and emissions related air quality impacts to below a level of
significance. These measures are included as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
a-S9
Combined Short-Term and Long-Term Impacts
In order to assess whether the project's contribution to ambient air quality is cumulatively
considerable, the project's emissions were quantified with respect to regional air quality. The
proposed project, a small residential infill development, once completed will not result in significant
long-term air quality impacts. The project is consistent with the Chula Vista General Plan Update.
The minimal project generated traffic volume of 240 trips would not result in significant long-term
local or regional air quality impacts. Through proj ect design, emission-controlled construction
vehicles and efficiency building products and vehicles as mitigated, no area source or long term
operational vehicle emission estimates will exceed the Air Quality significance thresholds.
Implementation of the Mitigation Measure I contained in Section F would mitigate construction and
grading related air quality impacts to below a level of significance. These measures are included as a
part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Biological Resources
A Biological Resource Analysis was prepared by Dudek, dated August 31, 2007, to assess the
potential biological resource impacts of the project. A biological reconnaissance survey of the project
site was conducted on March 30, 2007 to identify existing vegetation on the site. The biological
resource analysis is summarized below.
Habitat Loss Incidental Take (HUT) Permit
The project site is located within in the City of Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan boundary under the
City's MSCP Subarea Plan. The site is located in an area designated as a Development Area, but is
not located within a strategic preserve or conservation area. The project is subject to the requirements
of the Habitat Loss Incident Take (HUT) Ordinance. In accordance with the HUT Ordinance, those
projects that are greater than one acre, contain sensitive biological resources, and are located outside
the "Covered Projects," must demonstrate compliance with the Ordinance and obtain Take authority
from the City of Chula Vista for impacts to Covered Species. The following is a summary of the
findings contained within the biological resource report as required by the City's HUT Ordinance,
Section 17.35.
Existing Conditions/ Plant Species
The 3.9-acre project site consists entirely of 1.8 acres of developed land on the south side of the site
with the existing church and accessory buildings, parking lot, and ornamental plantings, and 2.1 acres
of disturbed lands including the playfield and non-native. grasses and vegetation on the north side of
the site. Developed land includes two mature Indian Laurel Figs and one Brazilian Pepper Tree, six,
I-ft. diameter eucalyptus trees, and turf-grass under-story. The non-native grasses and vegetation in
the disturbed lands result from establishment of a Bermuda-grass playfield which is mowed but
otherwise is no longer maintained and irrigated, resulting in a mixed growth of grasses and broad-
leaved weeds. Native vegetation cover is less than one percent of the vegetative cover onsite,
occurring on the perimeter of the site adjacent to fencing where the plants are not mowed. No
endemic or special status plants exist on the property.
Wildlife/Sensitive Species/Sensitive Habitats
The biological report stated that wildlife species such as birds and butterflies occupied the site,
although no mammal, amphibian or reptile species were detected during the survey.
Ten bird species and two butterfly species were detected on site. Most bird species observed were
common, disturbance-adapted species. Cooper's hawk (Accipiter cooperi), which is a covered species
8-10
under the City of Chula Vista's MSCP Subarea Plan and a State species of special concern, was
observed during the site survey. Existing large Indian Laurel Fig and Brazilian Pepper trees occuning
on-site may provide suitable habitat for raptors, and a nest was observed in the Brazilian Pepper tree
on site. Due to the territorial /behavioral characteristics of the Coopers Hawk, it was assumed that
nest was used by them. No special status/wildlife species were reported within one mile of the
project site. No state or federally listed threatened or endangered wildlife species were observed in
the study area and are not expected to occur, due to the low quality of habitat onsite. Potential impacts
of the project on these resources and sensitive species, and mitigation measures are further discussed
in Project Impact section below.
Project Impact
The existing lot supports 2 large ornamental Indian Laurel Fig trees and 1 large Brazilian Pepper tree.
The proposed removal of these trees during development could impact potential habitat for the
Cooper's Hawk and other migratory bird species if the vegetation clearance occurs between January
15 tbm August 15 during breeding season. If vegetation clearance occurs between August 16 and
January 14, development of the site would not result in significant impacts to biological resources. If
removal of habitat or construction activities must occur during the breeding season, pre-construction
surveys shall be conducted to determine the presence or absence of nesting raptors. The proposed
project may result in impacts to sensitive biological resources and nesting raptors, and therefore,
mitigation measures are required. The project will be required to implement the mitigation measures
specified in Section F, and therefore no impacts to Cooper's Hawk or other migratory birds are
anticipated. The project will not be required to obtain a HUT Permit pursuant to Section 17.35 of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code.
Further mitigation measures include implementation of construction BMPs, and clearing, grubbing or
grading permits. Implementation of the mitigation measures identified in Section F of this Mitigated
Negative Declaration would reduce potentially significant biological impacts to a level below
significance.
Geology and Soils
To assess the potential geologicallsoils impacts of the project, a Geotechnical Investigation evaluation
was prepared by Geocon, Inc. dated April 18, 2007. No groundwater was encountered on the site and
no groundwater related problems, either during or after construction, are anticipated. No significant
geological or soil impacts would be created as a result of the proposed project as conditioned. The
potential for soil liquefaction is considered to be low. The project site is not located in an active
Earthquake Fault Zone. The nearest active fault is the Rose Canyon fault approximately 6 miles
away.
The site was graded previously with the development of the existing church. Proposed fill grading will
occur over the entirety of the 3.9-acre site. Grading is balanced, including 3,400 cubic yards per acre to be
excavated and filled, with a maximum cut and fill slope ratio of 2: 1. In the event of a major earthquake, the
area could be subject to moderate to severe ground shaking. However, the site is considered comparable to
others in the general vicinity. The site is also underlain with artificial fill and San Diego Formation and is
not suitable for support of structures. The project will require issuance of a grading permit to require
excavation of undocumented fill, re-grading and re-compaction of the site, and review by the consultant of
project grading and foundation plans prior to submittal to regulatory agencies for approval, to minimize the
potential for damage to future structures as a result of unstable soils, ground-shaking, or subsidence.
8-1,
According to the City's Engineering Division, the project will require a grading permit. The
preparation and submittal of a final soils report will be required prior to the issuance of the grading
permit as a standard engineering requirement. In order to prevent silt discharge during construction,
the developer will be required to comply with best management practices in accordance with RWQCB
NPDES Municipal Permit, Order No. R9-2007-0001. The appropriate erosion control measures
would be identified in conjunction with preparation of final grading plans and would be monitored
and implemented during construction by the Public Works Department. Therefore, the potential for
the discharge of silt into City storm drainage systems would be less than significant. Implementation
of the mitigation measures contained in Section F below would mitigate potential geological/soils
impacts to a less than significance level. These measures are included as a part of the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
In order to assess potential hazardslhazardous material impacts, dated April 2007, Dudek prepared the
"Phase I Envirorunental Site Assessment - Concordia Lutheran Church and School" Report for the
project. The project proposal includes the demolition of the existing church, accessory buildings and
parking lot. The report found that the potential exists for impacts to result from the demolition of
structures that may contain lead and asbestos. Therefore, prior to any demolition activities, a licensed
and registered asbestos and lead abatement contractor will perform asbestos and lead-based paint
abatement in accordance to all applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations, including San
Diego County Air Pollution Control District Rule 361.145 - Standard for Demolition and Renovation.
No evidence of additional hazards or hazardous materials or undocumented fill was observed on the
site. Implementation of the mitigation measures contained in Section F below would mitigate
potential hazardslhazardous materials impacts to a less than significant level. These measures are
included as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Hydrology and Water Ouality
In order to assess potential hydrology and water quality impacts, a "Tentative Map Drainage Study
for Oxford Street", dated October 3, 2007, and amended October 17, 2007 and the "Tentative Map
Water Quality Technical Report for Oxford Street" dated October 3, 2007, prepared by Hunsaker &
Associates, were submitted for the project and is summarized below:
Existing Conditions
The existing site is bordered on the north, west and east by existing single-family development.
Drainage from the existing development, including the buildings and playfield, flows southerly
toward East Oxford Street south of the site. The flows are then conveyed via existing curb, gutter and
sidewalk in a westerly direction towards the intersection of Melrose and East Oxford Street.
Proposed
The project proposes construction of a storm drain system, including a curb and gutter system, a
cross-gutter, SwaleGard curb inlet filters, and a grass-lined swale. Low flows form the site would be
intercepted and diverted by proposed cross-gutters to curb-inlet filters which will screen out larger
materials and discharge water directly into a proposed grass-lined swale located at the southwestern
corner of the project site. The grass-lined swale will convey flow in a westerly direction, and will be
graded at approximately 0.2% slope to permit water to percolate prior discharge to the public
curb/gutter system on East Oxford Street at the southwestern corner of the site.
Peak flows from the east side of the site will be conveyed along the proposed public street and bypass
the cross gutter, flowing directly to East Oxford Street. A portion of the peak flows from the west
side of the site will enter the curb inlets filters and be diverted to the grass-lined swale before
s-h
discharge to the public curb/gutter system on East Oxford Street at the southwestern comer of the site
while the remaining will bypass the inlets and flow out to East Oxford Street.
According to the Engineering Department, the proposed improvements appear adequate to handle the
project storm water runoff generated from the site. The existing flows to East Oxford Street were
analyzed under the 2, 10, 50 and 100-year flood event. Additional Best Management Practices
(BMPs) included as part of the project design consist of a storm drain inlet protection system (curb
inlet filters), grass-lined swale, and permeable pavement in the driveways. No adverse impacts to the
City's drainage threshold standards will occur as a result of the proposed project.
As a standard condition, a final drainage study will be required in conjunction with the preparation of
the project grading plans. Properly designed drainage facilities will be installed at the time of the site
development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. In addition, compliance with required NPDES
regulations and construction BMPs such as de-silt basins and silt fences will reduce water quality
impacts to a less than significant level. Implementation of the mitigation measures contained in
Section F below would mitigate potential hydrology and water quality impacts to a level of less than
significance. These measures are included as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
Noise
In order to assess potential noise impacts of the proposed project, a noise study was prepared by
Dudek, entitled "Concordia Lutheran Church - Residential Project, City of Chula Vista Exterior
Noise Study", dated April 17, 2007, and addendum dated August 31, 2007 for the project. The study
anticipated that on-site workers and adjacent residential population may be exposed to construction
noise associated with short-term construction activities. However, the project will be required to
comply with the City's Noise Ordinance. In addition, due to the minimal construction activities
associated with the project, impacts to surrounding residential properties related to construction noise
levels are not expected to be significant. The proposed residential project is not located within the
Health Risk Assessment Area (HRAA), within 500 feet of any adjacent freeway or highway. The
project is not anticipated to potentially violate the noise limits of the City's noise control ordinance.
Residences on lots 1 and 24 will be directly exposed to auto traffic on East Oxford Street, and are
likely to be affected by exterior CNEL noise levels of approx. of 61 decibels. Typical residential
construction may lower the interior noise level approx. 20 dB with windows closed. Installation of
mechanical ventilation and/or air conditioning in the homes on lots 1 and 24 in accordance with the
Ca. Building Code is necessary to ensure that windows can be closed to achieve compliance with the
45 dB interior standard. In addition, submittal of a subsequent noise study after installation of the
rooftop and HV AC equipment for review. Implementation of the mitigation measures contained in
Section F below would mitigate potential noise impacts to a level of less than significance. These
measures are included as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
F. Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Impacts
Air Ouality
I. The following air quality mitigation requirements shall be shown on all applicable grading, and
building plans as details, notes, or as otherwise appropriate, and shall not be deviated from unless
approved in advance in writing by the City's Environmental Review Coordinator:
. Minimize simultaneous operation of multiple construction equipment units.
. Use low pollutant-emitting construction equipment.
. Use electrical construction equipment as practical.
. Use catalytic reduction for gasoline-powered equipment.
. Use injection-timing retard for diesel-powered equipment.
a-h
o Water the construction area twice daily to minimize fugitive dust.
o Stabilize graded areas as quickly as possible to minimize fugitive dust.
o Pave permanent roads as quickly as possible to minimize dust.
o Use electricity from power poles instead of temporary generators during building, if
available.
o Apply stabilizer or pave the last 100 feet of internal travel path within a construction site
prior to public road entry.
o Install wheel washers adjacent to a paved apron prior to vehicle entry on public roads.
o Remove any visible track-out into traveled public streets within 30 minutes of occurrence.
o Wet wash the construction access point at the end of each workday if any vehicle travel on
unpaved surfaces has occurred.
o Provide sufficient perimeter erosion control to prevent washout of silty material onto public
roads.
o Cover haul trucks or maintain at least 12 inches of freeboard to reduce blow-off during
hauling.
o Suspend all soil disturbance and travel on unpaved surfaces if winds exceed 25 miles per
hour.
o During rough grading, use of cooled exhaust gas re-circulation in conjunction with the
following:
a) Reduction of the number of pieces of equipment that operate simultaneously
b) Reduction of the number of hours that equipment operations daily. The reduction in
emissions would be directly proportional to the reduction in aggregate operating hours
and/or
c) Use equipment with lower horsepower ratings (emissions reduction would be directly
proportional to the reduction in aggregate horsepower)
o Requirement of one or a combination of the following measures for reduction of emissions:
a) Reduction of the number of pieces of equipment that operate simultaneously
b) Reduction of the number of hours that equipment operations daily. The reduction in
emissions would be directly proportional to the reduction in aggregate operating hours
and/or
c) Use equipment with lower horsepower ratings (emissions reduction would be directly
proportional to the reduction in aggregate horsepower)
Biological Resources
Migratory Birds / Cooper's Hawk
2. To ensure no direct and indirect impacts to raptors and/or any migratory birds occur during
construction (including clearing and grubbing), construction activities adjacent to nesting habit
should occur outside of the combined breeding season of January 15 to August 15 for these
species. If removal of habitat and/or construction activities adjacent to nest habitat must occur
during the breeding season, a pre-construction survey must be performed by a City-approved
biologist to determine the presence or absence of nesting birds on and within 300 feet of the
construction area and nesting raptors within 500 feet of the construction area. The pre-
construction survey must be concluded within 10 calendar days prior to the start of construction,
the results of which must be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to initiating any
construction activities. If nesting birds and/or raptors are detected by the City-approved biologist,
a bio-monitor must be present on-site during construction to minimize construction impacts and
ensure that no nests are removed or disturbed until all young have fledged.
8-74
Indirect Impacts
3. Prior to issuance of any land development permits, including clearing and grubbing or grading pennits, the
project shall implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) identified in the Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan. BMPs shall he noted on grading and improvement plans and implemented during clearing
and site development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Environmental Review Coordinator in
order to avoid short-term indirect impacts to any biological resources in the project vicinity.
Geologv and Soils
4. Prior to the issuance of construction permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City Engineer and
City Building Official that all the recommendations in the GeoTechnical Investigation prepared by Geocon,
dated April 18, 2007, have been satisfied.
HazardslHazardous Materials
5. Prior to any demolition activities, a licensed and registered asbestos and lead abatement contractor shall
perform asbestos and lead-based paint abatement in accordance to all applicable local, state and federal
laws and regulations, including San Diego County Air Pollution Control District Rule 361.145 - Standard
for Demolition and Renovation.
Hvdrologv and Water Oualitv
6. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a final drainage study shall be required in conjunction with the
preparation of the final grading plans and must demonstrate that the post-development peak flow rate does
not exceed the pre-development flows as indicated in the "Tentative Map Drainage Study for Oxford
Street, prepared by Hunsaker & Associates, dated October 3, 2007", and amended October 17, 2007, to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer. Additionally, the City Engineer shall verify that the fmal grading plans
comply with the provisions of RWQCB NPDES Municipal Permit, Order No. R9-2007-0001 with respect
to construction-related water quality best management practices. If one or more of the approved post
construction BMPs is non-structural, then a post-construction BMP plan shall be prepared to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to the commencement of construction. Compliance with said plan
shall become a permanent requirement of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
7. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, temporary desilting and erosion control devices shall be installed.
Protective devices shall be provided at every storm drain inlet to prevent sediment from entering the storm
drain system. These measures shall be reflected in the grading and improvement plans to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer and Environmental Review Coordinator.
Noise
Interior - Vehicle Noise Mitigation
8. The windows of homes facing East Oxford Street (Lots I, 24) would need to remain closed to achieve a
45 CNEL interior noise level. The design of these homes must include a means of mechanical ventilation
and/or air-conditioning. The mechanical ventilation should be in accordance with the latest addition of the
California and Uniform Building Code and to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and
Environmental Review Coordinator.
9. Prior to approval of building permits, the applicant shall submit a subsequent noise study for the homes on
Lots I and 24 to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator demonstrating that the final
roof-mounted HV AC and/or Air Conditioning equipment complies with the City's noise control ordinance
at the property boundaries of 45 dBA Leq during nighttime hours and 55 dBA Leq during daytime hours or
ambient noise levels, whichever is greater.
Construction Noise and Vibration Mitigation
10. To minimize the potential noise and vibration impacts during construction upon adjacent residences, the
following shall be required:
8-~5
3. Prior to issuance of any land development pennits, including clearing and grubbing or grading pennits, the
project shall implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) identified in the Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan. BrvIPs shall be noted on grading and improvement plans and implemented during clearing
and site development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Environmental Review Coordinator in
order to avoid short-term indirect impacts to any biological resources in the project vicinity.
Geologvand Soils
4. Prior to the issuance of construction permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City Engineer and
City Building Official that all the recommendations in the GeoTechnical Investigation prepared by Geocon,
dated April 18, 2007, have been satisfied.
HazardslHazardous Materials
5. Prior to any demolition activities, a licensed and registered asbestos and lead abatement contractor shall
perform asbestos and lead-based paint abatement in accordance to all applicable local, state and federal
laws and regulations, including San Diego County Air Pollution Control District Rule 361.145 - Standard
for Demolition and Renovation.
Hvdrologv and Water Oualitv
6. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a [mal drainage study shall be required in conjunction with the
preparation of the fmal grading plans and must demonstrate that the post-development peak flow rate does
not exceed the pre-development flows as indicated in the "Tentative Map Drainage Study for Oxford
Street, prepared by Hunsaker & Associates, dated October 3, 2001", and amended October 17,2007, to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer. Additionally, the City Engineer shall verify that the frnal grading plans
comply with the provisions of RWQCB NPDES Municipal Pennit, Order No. R9-2007-0001 with respect
to construction-related water quality best management practices. If one or more of the approved post
construction BMPs is non-structural, then a post-construction BMP plan shall be prepared to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to the commencement of construction. Compliance with said plan
shall become a permanent requirement of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
7. Prior to the issuance of a grading pennit, temporary desilting and erosion control devices shall be installed.
Protective devices shall be provided at every storm drain inlet to prevent sediment from entering the storm
drain system. These measures shall be reflected in the grading and improvement plans to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer and Environmental Review Coordinator.
Noise
Interior - Vehicle Noise Mitigation
8. The windows of homes facing East Oxford Street (Lots I, 24) would need to rennain closed to achieve a
45 CNEL interior noise level. The design of these homes must include a means of mechanical ventilation
and/or air-conditioning. The mechanical ventilation should be in accordance with the latest addition of the
California and Uniform Building Code and to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and
Environmental Review Coordinator.
9. Prior to approval of building pennits, the applicant shall submit a subsequent noise study for the homes on
Lots 1 and 24 to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator demonstrating that the final
roof-mounted BY AC and/or Air Conditioning equipment complies with the City's noise control ordinance
at the property boundaries of 45 dBA Leq during nighttime hours and 55 dBA Leq during daytime hours or
ambient noise levels, whichever is greater.
Construction Noise and Vibration Mitigation
10. To minimize the potential noise and vibration impacts during construction upon adjacent residences, the
following shall be required:
8-~6
A. All construction equipment shall be equipped with improved noise muffling, and have the
manufacturers' recommended noise abatement measures, such as mufflers, engine covers,
and engine vibration isolators in good working condition.
E. If possible, hydraulic equipment instead of pneumatic impact tools and electric powered
equipment instead of diesel-powered equipment shall be used for all exterior construction
work.
C. All equipment shall be turned off if not in use.
D. Pursuant to Section 17.24.050(1) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, project-related
grading, demolition or construction activities shall be prohibited between the hours of
10:0 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Monday through Friday and between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
Monday through Friday and between 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. Saturdays and Sundays.
G. Agreement to Imolement Mitigation Measures
By signing the line(s) provided below, the Applicant and Operator stipulate that they have each read,
understood and have their respective company's authority to and do agree to the mitigation measures
contained herein, and will implement same to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review
Coordinator. Failure to sign the line(s) provided below prior to posting of this Mitigated Negative
Declaration with the County Clerk shall indicate the Applicant's and Operator's desire that the
Project be held in abeyance without approval and that the Applicant and Operator shall apply for an
Environmental Impact Report.
#.ht, VIet.- LPJ:h..f!hf:Jr. , L.
1 r:;{ ~o~ ""","" (}r..., ~
HJA.fV\ 0, fBJ III-' - P7(: 6tJ;iJ';(ki:vt> (/'01:{ u-&
Printed Name and Title of Applicant
orized rep tative)
[0 Nt! ';U)O-:r-
Date
Iv It'( (2..009"
Date
Signature of Applicant
(or authorized representative)
N/A
Printed Name and Title of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
Date
N/A
Signature of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
Date
H. Consultation
I. Individuals and Organizations
City ofChula Vista:
Steve Power, Planning and Building Department
Luis Hernandez, Planning and Building Department
Maria Muett, Planning and Building Department
Ben Guerrero, Planning and Building Department
Josie Gabriel, Planning and Building Department
8 -9n
Glen Laube, Planning and Building Department
Lynnette Tessitore- Lopez, Planning and Building Department
Tom Adler, Engineering Department
Mario Ingrasci, Engineering Department
Silvester Evetovich, Engineering Department
Jim Newton, Engineering Department
Hasib Baha, Engineering Department
Richard Hopkins, Public Works Operations
Steven Gonzales, Public Works Operations
David McRoberts, Public Works Operations
Khosro Aminpour, Public Works Operations
Muna Cuthbert, Public Works Operations
Kelly Briers, Fire Department
Others:
Rafael Munoz, Chula Vista Elementary School District
Hector Martinez, Sweetwater Authority
Laurie Edwards, Sweetwater Authority
Sweetwater Union High School District
David Gottfredson, RECON
2. Documents
City ofChula Vista General Plan, 2005 (as amended).
Title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code.
City ofChula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, February 2003.
Biological Resource Analysis prepared by Dudek, dated August 31, 2007 and addendum.
Geotechnical Investigation for Oxford Street, Chula Vista, Ca.
dated April 18, 2007, and addendum dated October 8, 2007, by Geocon, Inc.
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment - Concordia Lutheran Church and School, 267 East
Oxford Street, Chula Vista, Ca. prepared by Dudek, April 2007, and addendum dated August 31,
2007.
Tentative Map Drainage Study for Oxford Street, dated October 3, 2007 and amended October
17, 2007 prepared by Hunsaker & Associates
Tentative Map Water Quality Technical Report for Oxford Street, dated October 2, 2007 and
amended October 2007 prepared by Hunsaker & Associates.
Air Quality URBEMIS Model, dated October 2007
Concordia Lutheran Church - Residential Project, City of Chula Vista Exterior Noise Study",
prepared by Dudek, dated April 17, 2007, and addendum dated August 31, 2007.
8....1118
Archaeological Survey Report for Concordia Lutheran Church Project, 267 East Oxford Street,
Chula Vista, Ca., prepared by Brian F. Smith & Associates, dated April 3, 2007, and addendum
September 2007.
Overview of Sewer Service for the Oxford Street Proi ect. dated September 26. 2007 and amended
October 2007, prepared by Dexter Wilson Engineering.
3. Initial Studv
This environmental determination is based on the attached Initial Study, and any comments
received in response to the Notice of Initial Study. The report reflects the independent judgment
of the City of Chula Vista. Further information regarding the environmental review of this
project is available from the Chula Vista Planning and Building Department, 276 Fourth Avenue,
Chula V' ta, CA 91910.
Date:
1I/'L/lo9-
I
J :\Planning\RichardZ\Environmental\ IS-07 ~031.finalMND
8-7~
C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C) APPLICANT: Brookfield Shea Otay, LLC. INITIAL STUDY
PROJECT 267 E. Oxford Street. Request: 24 SFD development on a 3.9 acre lot.
ADDRESS:
SCALE: FILE NUMBER:
NORTH No Scale IS-07-031 Related cases: PCS-07-07, PCZ-07-08 & GPA-07-04
J:\Planning\Public Notices\IS\IS07031.cdr 04.26.07
8-80
,eKHISIi I
"-
o
"-
o
"'
u
"'-
2 p...
.
;t filtH.! J -$M-ctg 'M!V
'l~Dr: '0,", .NW
----'~aN-~~~-v.L43~VO~anr---------
't ..~ ..- ..-r;.. : l f 1
" t '" · .,. "' . .
..~.. ~ !,:t . ~ G,~'" c: J eo ..
~-1 ~ ~ == ~~~~~ '= I .~' ~ ~
;."!?... 4'..2~"~: ,] a
.!-rnr}~~~;- Ir--!-f-tT----c-
B~ fa- a Eg B~~~~.. ~ ~ g ~~
: )
.L
I'
,
~'.:' ,-
".
1
.~
,Iil
~-'ij
'i ,~--~J
. nIl:!:'. ~;,. .
.: :":; ','i:' - l
hd'1
fr:~~--------"--- , ~
. ". '.
; _ 'Sri' :;; ~[ -:t
It,.. ~l~;
;", h~ ,.~'r
':,,.G;-,-----~~~~
~(",;. m ;~~~- I
f,-I-' ~ :oo;;~-~' ~
t~, 't;'lt.-~ I Ci) I
t, -::. Mi.~-l:]j Ci I'
':\; . ,,'ll: 1 ~
~;:~rt-.---~-.~-~.... . ~ t
~:. ~ So! ~ ">: ~ I
f~.. f 'J' .!
fl'" ._,',.," .
l?'i--"-----~---.-h. '. .
r~ ....,.
!-'",. ~ 'j.
ft. . t:I... I'
',. " 1',... .
;~. -~-~..----~~-~-r '
~'C- [if I,
, ;11'
, ,
~ -------";~-----l'
!
,
1r
"
Ipl:
f
~ ,
~ ,
,
,
,
.,
\
,
,
,
'[,/'> -
,': 'e~:
2........~)";,, __............:,
?- 8i">
,
, ' tS'ii.....
i \;JZ
,i
Sj'
Q~
I(jj~
. ,
'"
~ Q",i
::; .\~
o t
U ,.Afr---:~.~..-~..:ii
14 "~...H .~
.., ,~-~~ Qo ~t.
.c;." ~~ti....,
e-~~-C";,
.u ,-;l ,~. . ,?
~.~ ':,~;:~, ~ ',:.;~~'" :~_\
:-l_ _~,.".___: I~
) ~~
8j
;,:,
@'-
bi'"
,_It
< ,
ei
r,;..-
\7~
8i
i'
@i
'Ii
6~
@i
@i
,
" -~,
,
. .-" ""....'\.
"~x
,
'x
,,'
,,- "
,
€J'
''4':'."
r-l
fI;
\fl.
'"
,
,
"....'
,
"
\
,.
,
\ ~;
\ -.".;
,
\
\
,
,
,
~,
~~
.......,f~'.
I $-
, -
I
,
,
: It,:
I Mi
I
,
I
I
,
I
.>-i':rt...r"a,,'...
,
I,
I
I.
~; f" ,,;
1 l?] : i';l:-
, ,
91 fiI:JNJ. n-O~9t,tJCg WdY
I /'i'ttf -aN r.i!tJo'~;
J ~ '(jNJ.W
I ~(jf.J}'W {f3'1~SEW
, ,
,"
"
I
,
,
I
I'
8-81
/"".
'r-
""""'...... "" ~.
~ o;;t~LO
"'- OJ
'" a:~
::;; O~
UJ ..
>
~ u..~
'" Xg
z
w
>- 0&
<--L
\:::
!g
~
~
. 19i I
-:";'. I
~~~l;f
!~-ijl
if'-
!
ATTACHMENT "A"
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP)
OXFORD STREET/CONCORDIA LUTHERAN CHURCH RESIDENTIAL - IS-07-031
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Pro gram has been prepared by the City of Chula Vista
in conjunction with the proposed Oxford Street/Concordia Lutheran Church Residential project.
The proposed project has been evaluated in an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and City/State
CEQA Guidelines (IS-06-007) The legislation requires public agencies to ensure that adequate
mitigation measures are implemented and monitored for Mitigated Negative Declarations.
AB 3180 requires monitoring of potentially significant and/or significant environmental impacts.
The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for this project ensures adequate
implementation of mitigation for the following potential impacts(s):
1. Air Quality
2. Biological Resources
3. Geology and Soils
4. HazardslHazardous Materials
5. Hydrology and Water Quality
6. Noise
MONITORING PROGRAM
Due to the nature of the environmental issues identified, the Mitigation Compliance Coordinators
shall be the Environmental Review Coordinator and City Engineer of the City of Chula Vista.
The applicant shall be responsible to ensure that the conditions of the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program are met to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator and
City Engineer. The applicant shall provide evidence in written form confirming compliance with
the mitigation measures specified in Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-07-031 to the
Environmental Review Coordinator and City Engineer. The Environmental Review Coordinator
and City Engineer will thus provide the ultimate verification that the mitigation measures have
been accomplished.
Table 1, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Checklist, lists the mitigation measures
contained in Section F, Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Effects, of Mitigated Negative
Declaration IS-07-031, which will be implemented as part of the project. In order to determine if
the applicant has implemented the measure, the method and timing of verification are identified,
along with the City department or agency responsible for monitoring/verifying that the applicant
has completed each mitigation measure. Space for the signature of the verifying person and the
date of inspection is provided in the last column.
J:\Planning\MARIA \Initial Study\Oxford Map\IS-07 -031MMRPtext.doc
8-82
Oxford StreeUConcordia Lutheran Church Residential (IS-07-0311
Mitiqation Monitorinq and Reoortinq Proqram
Table 1
Mitigation Measure
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Comments
CD
I
CD
c..>
1.
The following air quality mitigation requirements shall be
shown on all applicable grading, and building plans as
details, notes, or as otherwise appropriate:
. Minimize simultaneous operation of multiple
construction equipment units.
. Use low pollutant-emitting construction equipment.
. Use electrical construction equipment as practical.
. Use catalytic reduction for gasoline-powered
equipment.
. Use injection-timing retard for diesel-powered
equipment.
. Water the construction area twice daily to minimize
fugitive dust.
. Stabilize graded areas as quickly as possible to
minimize fugitive dust.
. Pave permanent roads as quickly as possible to
minimize dust.
Use electricity from power poles instead of temporary
generators during building, if available.
Apply stabilizer or pave the last 100 feet of internal
travel path within a construction site prior to public
road entry.
. Install wheel washers adjacent to a paved apron prior
to vehicle entsy on public roads.
. Remove any visible track-out into traveled public
streets within 30 minutes of occurrence.
. Wet wash the construction access point at the end of
each workday if any vehicle travel on unpaved
surfaces has occurred.
. Provide sufficient perimeter erosion control to prevent
washout of silty material onto public roads.
Cover haul trucks or maintain at least 12 inches of
freeboard to reduce blow-off during hauling.
Plan Check/Site
Inspection
x
x
x
Applicant/ City
Engineering
Department/City
Planning and Building
Department .
Page - 1
Oxford Street/Concordia Lutheran Church Residential (IS-07-031)
Mitioation Monitorinq and ReDortinq Proqram
Table 1
. Suspend all soil disturbance and travel on unpaved
sulfaces if winds exceed 25 miles per hour.
. During rough grading, use of cooled exhaust gas
recirculation in conjunction with the foHowing:
a) Reduction of the number of pieces of equipment
that operate simultaneously
b) Reduction of the number of hours that equipment
operations daily. The reduction in emissions would
be directly proportional to the reduction in
aggregate operating hours anci/or
c) Use equipment with lower horsepower ratings
(emissions reduction would be direCUy proportional
to the reduction in aggregate horsepower)
. Requirement of one or a combination of the following
measures for reduction of emissions:
co
I
CO
.j>.
a) Reduction of the number of pieces of
equipment that operate simultaneously.
b) Reduction of the number of hours that equipment
operations daily. The reduction in emissions
would be directly proportional to the reduction in
aggregate operating hours and/or
c) Use equipment with lower horsepower ratings
(emissions reduction would be directly
proportional to the reduction In aggregate
horsepower).
Page - 2
Oxford Street/Concordia Lutheran Church Residential (IS-07-031\
Table 1
Mitiqation Monitorinq and Reportinq ProQram
2.
CD
I
CD
tn
3.
To ensure no direct and indirect impacts to raptors and/or Plan Check/Site
any migratory birds occur during construction (including Inspection
clearing and grubbing), construction activities adjacent to
nesting habitat should occur outside of the combined
breeding season of January 15 to August 15 for these
species. If removal of habitat and/or construction
activities adjacent to nest habitat must occur during the
breeding season, a pre.construction survey must be
performed by a City~approved biologist to determine the
presence or absence of nesting birds on and within 300
feet of the construction area and nesting raptors within
500 feet of the construction area. The pre-construction
survey must be concluded within 10 calendar days prior
to the start of construction, the results of which must be
submitted to the City for review and approval prior to
initiating any construction activities. If nesting birds
and/or raptors are detected by the City-approved
biologist, a bio-monitor must be present on-site during
construction to minimize construction impacts and ensure
that no nests are removed or disturbed until all young
have fled ed,
Prior to the issuance of any land development permits Plan Check/Site
including clearing and grubbing or grading permits, the Inspection
project shall implement Best Management Practices
(BMPs) identified in the Stonn Water Pollution Prevention
Plan. BMPs shall be noted on grading and improvement
plans and implemented during clearing and site
development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and
Environmental Review Coordinator in order to avoid
short-term Indirect impacts to any biological resources in
the ro'ect vlcinit .
x
x
x
ApplicanVCity
Engineering
DepartmenttPlanning
and Building
Department
x
ApplicanVCily
Engineering
DepartmenUPlanning
and Building
Department
x
x
Prior to issuance of construction permits, the applicant
shall provide evidence to the City Engineer and City
Building Official that all the recommendations in the
Geotechnical Investigation, prepared by Geoeon, dated
A ril18, 2007, have been satisfied,
Page - 3
ApplicanVCily
Planning and Building
DepartmenUCity
Engineering
De artment
Oxford StreeUConcordia Lutheran Church Residential OS-07-031)
Table 1
Mitioation Monitorina and Reoortino Proaram
5.
Prior to any demolition activities, a licensed and
registered asbestos and lead abatement contractor shall
perform asbestos and lead.based paint abatement In
accordance with all applicable local, state and federal
laws and regulations, including San Diego County Air
Pollution Control District Rule 361.145 - Standard for
Demolition and Renovation.
x
x
ApplicanVCity
Planning and Building
DepartmenVCity
Engineering
Department
00
I
00
en
Plan Check/Site
Inspection
x
6.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a final drainage
study shall be required in conjunction with the preparation
of the final grading plans and must demonstrate that the
post.development peak flow rate does not exceed the
pre-development flows as indicated in the ~Tentative Map
Drainage Study for Oxford Street", prepared by Hunsaker
& Associates, dated October 3, 2007 and amended
October 17, 2007 to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Additionally, the City Engineer shall verify that the final
grading plans comply with the provisions of California
Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region
Order No, 2001-01 with respect to construction-related
water quality best management practices. If one or more
of the approved post construction BMPs is non-structural
then a post-construction 8MP plan shall be prepared to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to the
commencement of construction. Compliance with said
plan shall become a permanent requirement of the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
7.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, temporary Plan Check/Site
desilting and erosion control devices shall be installed. Inspection
Protective devices shall be provided at every storm drain
inlet to prevent sediment from entering the storm drain
system. These measures shall be reflected in the grading
and improvement plans to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer and Environmental Review Coordinator.
x
x
x
ApplicanVCity
Planning and Building
DepartmenVCity
Engineering
Department
x
ApplicanVCity
Planning and Building
DepartmenUCity
Engineering
Department
8.
The windows of homes facing East Oxford Street (Lots 1,
24) shall remain closed to achieve a 45 CNEL interior
noise level. The design of these homes must include a
means of mechanical ventilation and/or air-conditioning,
The mechanical ventilation should be in accordance with
the latest addition of the California and Uniform Building
Code and to the satisfaction of the Building Official and
Environmental Review Coordinator.
Page - 4
ApplicanVCity
Planning and Building
Department/City
Engineering
Department
Oxford 8treeVConcordia Lutheran Church Residential 08-07-031)
00
I
00
-.j
9.
Prior to approval of building permits, the applicant shall Plan Checl<lSite
submit a sUbsequent noise study for homes on Lots 1 and Inspection
24 to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review
Coordinator demonstrating that the final roof-mounted
HVAC and/or Air Conditioning equipment complies with
the City's noise control ordinance at the property
boundaries of 45 dBA Leq during nighttime hours and 55
dBA Leq during daytime hours or ambient noise levels,
whichever is greater.
To minimize the potential noise and vibration impacts
during construction upon adjacent residences, the
following shall be required:
10.
A. All construction equipment shall be equipped
with improved noise muffling, and have the
manufacturers' recommended noise abatement
measures, such as mufflers, engine covers and
engine vibration isolates in good working
conditions.
8. If possible, hydraulic equipment instead of
pneumatic impacts tools and electric powered
equipment instead of diesel~powered
equipment shall be used for all exterior
construction work.
C. All equipment shall be turned off jf not in use.
D. Pursuant to Section 17.24.050(J) of the Chula
Vista Municipal Code, project-related grading,
demolition or construction activities shall be
prohibited between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and
7:00 a.m. Monday through Friday and between
10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Monday through
Friday and between 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m.
Saturdavs and Sundavs.
J:\Pianning\MARIA\lnitial Study\Oxford Map\lS-07-031MMRPtbl.doc
Table 1
Page - 5
x
x
x
ApplicanUCity
Planning and Building
DepartmenUCity
Engineering
Department
Mitiqation Monitorinq and Reoortinq Proqram
I
1. Name of Proponent:
~(ft..
---
CllYOF
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM CHUlA VI5fA
Concordia Lutheran Church c/o
Brookfield Shea Otay, LLC
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Chula Vista
Planning and Building Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
3. Address and Phone Number of Proponent:
Concordia Lutheran Church
c/o Brookfield Shea Otay, LLC
12865 Pointe Del Mar, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92014
(858) 481-8500
4. Name of Proposal:
Oxford Street/ Concordia Lutheran
Church Residential
5. Date of Checklist:
October 17, 2007
6. Case No.:
IS-07-031
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS QUESTIONS:
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
o
o
o
.
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including,
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
o
o
o
.
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings?
o
o
o
.
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare,
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
o
o
o
.
S-gS
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
in the area?
Comments:
a-b)The proposal includes the development of twenty-four single family residential units with site
improvements in accordance with the City of Chula Yista Municipal. The proposed landscape
improvements would enhance and improve the aesthetic quality of Oxford Street, the proposed
on-site public street and surrounding neighborhood. The proposed project would not damage any
scenic resources, vegetation, or historic buildings within a state scenic highway. The site is
located on the side of a ridgeline developed with single-family homes, which slopes uphiII to the
east. Development of the project site with homes could affect views from these adjacent
properties. However, the development layout is designed to include side-yard setbacks, which
allow views between proposed homes and above the roofline of single-story homes. The
approval of the proj ect will not substantially degrade existing views across the property,
therefore, no significant aesthetic impacts are anticipated.
c) The proposal is an infill residential development project. The proposed project wiII not
substantiaIly degrade the existing visual character or quality of the project site or its adjacent
residential surroundings. The project site is planned for single - family residential development
according to the General Plan Land Use regulations.
d) The project proposes one public streetlight on the cul-de-sac, and private lighting for each
residence, which should not affect adjacent residences. An existing streetlight wiII serve the
project entry at the intersection of East Oxford Street and the proposed street. The proposal wiIl
be required to comply with the City's minimum standards for roadway lighting. The project will
be required to comply with the light and glare regulations (Section 19.66.100) of the Chula Yista
Municipal Code (CYMC). Compliance with these regulations will ensure that no significant
glare, or light would affect daytime or nighttime views in the surrounding residential
neighborhood area.
Miti!!:ation:
No mitigation measures are required.
II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the
project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide hnportance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
o
o
o
.
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or
o
o
o
.
8-8'9
a Williamson Act contract?
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
D D D .
Issues:
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment,
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion ofFannland, to non-agricultural use?
Comments:
a-c)The project site is developed with a church, pre-schoolldaycare, and parking lot on the south side
of the lot and play fields on the north side of the lot. The surrounding properties have been
developed with single-family homes. These properties are consistent with the Chula Vista
General Plan and zoning designation, and contain no agricultural resources or designated
farmland. The proposal would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of
Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use and no impacts to agricultural resources would be
created as a result of the proposed project.
Mitil!ation:
No mitigation measures are required.
ill. AIR QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
o
o
o
.
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute 0 0 0 .
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase 0 . D 0
of any criteria pollutant for which the project
regIOn is non-attainment under an applicable
federal or state ambient air quality standard
(including releasing ermSSlOllS, which exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant 0 . 0 0
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
o
.
o
D
8-~O
Issues:
number of people?
Comments:
(a-e) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Miti!!ation:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
The mitigation measures contained in Section F ofthe Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant air quality impacts to a level ofIess than significance.
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the
project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status
species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, fiIIing, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
8-~1
D
D
D
.
.
D
D
D
D
D
D
.
Issues:
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or orclinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or orclinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
Comments:
a-f) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mitil!:ation:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
.
o
.
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
No
Impact
o
.
o
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant biological resource impacts to a level ofless than significance.
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in
State CEQA Guidelines ~ 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to State CEQA Guidelines ~ 15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
8-~2
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
.
.
.
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside offormal cemeteries?
D
D
D
.
Comments:
a) In order to assess potential historic resources located on the project site or surrounding areas, an
archaeological!historical evaluation entitled "Archaeological Survey for the Concordia Lutheran
Church Projecf' was prepared by Brian F. Smith & Associates, dated September 19, 2007. The
following details summarize the results of the study. The existing structures were constructed
between 1962-1965 and were not associated with any important events or individuals in terms of
local, state or national history. The existing structures and the site do not qualify as a historic resource
under national, state or local register criteria. The proposed project will not constitute a substantial,
adverse change to the significance of an historical resource as the structure has been determined by the
analysis not to be historically or architecturally significant within the project impact area. Therefore,
no substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5
is anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
b) The site has been disturbed by development of the church on the south 1/3 of the property and
previous playfield use of the northerly 2/3 of the properly. Based on the level of previous site
disturbance, the potential for significant impacts or adverse changes to archaeological resource as
defmed in Section 15064.5 is not anticipated.
c) Based on the level of previous disturbance to the site and the relatively limited amount of additional
grading for the proposed project, no impacts to unique paleontological resources or unique geologic
features are anticipated.
d) No human remains are anticipated to be present within the impact area of the project site as the project
site has been previously disturbed with the existing church and auxiliary structures.
Mitigation:
No mitigation measures are required.
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk of
loss, injury or death involving:
1.
Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
D
D
D
.
8-9'3
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Issues: Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault?
u. Strong seismic ground shaking? 0 . 0 0
111.
Seismic-related
liquefaction?
failure,
including
ground
iv. Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in on-
or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, creating substantial
risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of wastewater?
Comments:
a-e) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mitigation:
o
o
o
.
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant geological impacts to a level ofless than significance.
8-9~
Issues:
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
1) For a project within the VlCffilty of a private
airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
g) hnpair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
8-~5
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
.
o
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
.
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
No
Impact
o
o
.
.
.
.
.
.
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
Comments:
(a-b) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
c) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E. The proposed project site is located within one-quarter
mile of Palomar Elementary school located on East Palomar Street. The proposed project will not
emit acutely hazardous emissions or materials, therefore, will not create a significant impact to the
schools within the surrounding area.
d) The proposed project is not located on a site included on the County of San Diego Department of
Environmental Health Services Hazardous List pursuant to the Government Code Section 65962.5,
therefore, will not create a significant impact to the public or the environment.
e) The project is not located within an airport land use plan nor within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport; therefore, the project would not expose people residing or working in the project
area to adverse safety hazards.
f) The project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip; therefore, the project development
would not expose people working in the project area to adverse safety hazards.
g) The project is designed to meet the City's emergency response plan, route access and emergency
evacuation requirements. The proposed fITe improvements include an emergency turning radius and
fire hydrant. No impairment or physical interference with the City's emergency response plan is
anticipated.
h) The project is designed to meet the City's Fire Prevention building and fITe service requirements. No
exposure of people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death due to wildfires is
anticipated.
Mitigation:
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant Hazards/Hazardous Materials impacts to a level ofless than significance.
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.
Would the project:
a) Result in an increase in pollutant discharges to
receiving waters (including impaired water bodies
o
.
o
o
8-~6
Issues:
pursuant to the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list),
result in significant alteration of receiving water
quality during or following construction, or violate
any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby
wells would drop to a level which would not support
existing land uses or planned uses for which permits
have been granted)? Result in a potentially
significant adverse impact on groundwater quality?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, in a manner, which
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, substantially increase the
rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on- or off-site, or place
structures within a IOO-year flood hazard area which
would impede or redirect flood flows?
e) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
f) Create or contribute runoff water, which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
8-90,
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
D
D
D
D
.
Less Than
Significant
Impact
.
D
.
D
D
No
Impact
o
.
o
.
D
Issues:
Comments:
(a-f) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Miti2ation:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant Hydrology/W ater Quality impacts to a level of less than significance.
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the
project:
a) Physically divide an established conununity?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to the general
plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural conununity conservation plan?
8-98
o
o
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
.
o
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
a) The project site is surrounded with single-family residential land uses. The proposed residential infill
project would be consistent with the Chula Vista General Plan and character of the immediate
surrounding residential area. The project would not disrupt or divide an established community;
therefore, no significant land use impact would occur as a result of the project.
b) The project site is located within the RI (Single-Family Residential) Zones and RLM (Low-Medium
Density) General Plan land use designation. The project is required to rezone the existing parcel to R-
1-5-P and be in compliance with the respective zoning. The project bas been found to be consistent
with the General Plan guidelines and regulations, therefore; no significant land use impacts are
anticipated.
c) Refer to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E. Potential short-term construction noise/raptor
nesting impacts are addressed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section, under Biological
Resources.
Mitie:ation:
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant Land UselPlanning impacts to a level ofless than significance.
X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
o
o
o
.
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site delineated
on a local general plan, specific plan or other land .
use plan?
o
o
o
.
8-99
Issues:
Comments:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
a) The project site has been previously disturbed with the existing church. The proposed project would
not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource of value to the region or the residents
of the State of California.
b) The State of California Department of Conservation has not designated the projeCt site for mineral
resource protection. Therefore, no impacts to mineral resources are anticipated as a result of the
proposed project.
Mifu!:ation:
No mitigation measures are required.
XI. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels
in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
c) A substantial pennanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
8-11&0
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
o
o
o
.
Comments:
a-d) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
e-f) The project is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport, nor is it
located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, the project development would not expose
people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.
Mitigation:
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant Noise impacts to a level ofless than significance.
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the
proj ecl:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of road or other infrastructure)?
o
o
o
.
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
D
D
D
.
c) Displace substantial numbers
necessitating the construction of
housing elsewhere?
of people,
replacement
D
o
o
.
8-1\11
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
a-c) The project is surrounded by existing residential development and involves the removal of the
existing church and daycare buildings and related improvements. The proposed project does not
involve the extension of public facilities that would induce substantial growth. Future residential
development of the site for the proposed 24 single-family residential units is consistent with the
General Plan and would not exceed the regional or local population projections. The proposed
project would involve the rezoning of the site from R-I-7 to R-I-5-P Zone, which is consistent with
the RLM General Plan designation of the site, which would be similar to the existing adjacent single-
family residential properties to the north, south and east. The proposed project would not involve
displacement of existing housing or individuals.
Miti!!ation:
No mitigation measures are required.
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project:
Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated
with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental impacts, in order
to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for any public services:
a. Fire protection? 0 0 . 0
b. Police protection? 0 0 0 .
c. Schools? 0 0 0 .
d. Parks? 0 0 . 0
e. Other public facilities? 0 0 0 .
8-1b'i2
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
a) According to the Fire Depar1ment, adequate fire protection services can continue to be provided to the
site. The applicant will be required to comply with the Fire Department policies for fITe hydrant
placement, fITe flow, fITe truck access and new building construction. The City's Fire performance
objectives and thresholds will continue to be met.
b) According to the Chula Vista Police Department, adequate police protection services can continue to be
provided upon completion of the proposed project. The proposed project would not have a significant
effect upon or result in a need for substantial new or altered police protection services. The City's
Police performance objectives and thresholds will continue to be met.
c) The proposed project would not induce substantial population growth; therefore, no significant adverse
impacts to public schools would result. According to the Chula Vista Elementary School District letter
dated May 22, 2007, the applicant would be required to pay the statutory building permit school fees
for the proposed residential construction or an alternative financing mechanism such as participation in
or annexation to a CFD is recommended.
d) The proposed project would not induce significant population growth, as it is a small residential infiII
project. However, the applicant shall be required to pay Park Acquisition and Development Fees
(pAD) in accordance with Ordinance No. 2945 adopted by City Council on January 6, 2004.
e) The proposed project would not have a significant effect upon or result in a need for new or expanded
governmental services and would continue to be served by existing public infrastructure.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
XIV. RECREATION. Would the project
a)
Increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities such
that substantial physical deterioration of the facility
would occur or be accelerated?
D
D
.
D
b)
Does the proj ect include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities, which have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
D
D
o
.
a-ra3
Issues:
Comments:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
a) The proposed project would not induce significant population growth, as it is a small residential infill
project and would not impact existing or proposed recreational facilities. However, the applicant will
be required to pay Park Acquisition and Development Fees (pAD) in accordance with Ordinance No.
2945 adopted by City Council on January 6, 2004.
b) The project does not include the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. The project site is
not planned for any future parks and recreation facilities or programs. Therefore, the proposed project
would not have an adverse physical effect on the recreational environment.
Mitil!ation:
No mitigation measures are required.
XV. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC. Would the
proj ect:
a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of
the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase
in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level
of service standard established by the county
congestion managernent agency for designated roads
or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
8-1l:Y4
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
0 0 0 .
0 0 0 .
Issues:
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus
turnouts, bicycle racks)?
Comments:
(a,b,d,e) According to the Traffic Engineering Division, in their memorandum dated September 25,2007,
the proposed residential infill project is not anticipated to result in any significant traffic, circulation or
emergency access impacts. The existing church and daycare generates approximately 304 Average Daily
Trips (ADTs), as compared to the proposed project, which will generate approximately 240 ADTs. The
traffic generated by the project will amount to a reduction of 64 ADT's. In addition, the project-
generated trips will not exceed the level of service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways. Therefore, due to the minimal traffic increase and
reduction of previous vehicular volume, the project will not create significant traffic operations impacts
along East Oxford Street and surrounding residential or collector streets.
c) The proposal would not have any significant effect upon any air traffic patterns, including either an
increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks.
f) The proposal includes garage spaces in accordance with the Chula Vista Zoning Code, and parking
on the proposed public street. The proposal meets ADA requirements for accessibility and parking.
g) There is an existing bus stop located I block westerly of the site at the intersection of Melrose and
East Oxford Street.
h) The proposal would not conflict with adopted transportation plans or alternative transportation
programs.
Mitie:ation:
No mitigation measures are required.
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.
Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
o
o
o
.
8-1~5
Issues:
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or
are new or expanded entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider, which serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the provider's existing
commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste
disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
a-r86
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
D D D .
D
D
.
D
D
D
D
.
D
D
D
.
D
D
D
.
D
D
D
.
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
a) The project site is located within an urban area that is served by all necessary utilities and service systems.
According to the Engineering Department, wastewater requirements of the Regional Water Quality
Control Board not be exceeded as a result of the proposed project.
b) According to Sweetwater Authority correspondence dated April 24, 2007, an existing 8-inch water main is
located on the south side of East Oxford Street, with one existing water service to the site. The proposed
improvements wiIl include a new water main extension within the proposed public road that connects to
the existing Authority water main in East Oxford Street, and terminates in the proposed cul-de-sac. This
would include new separate laterals and meters for each parcel. As the water facility improvements are
designed in accordance with water authority standards, no significant impacts to existing facility systems
wiIl occur as a result ofthe proposed project. Adequate storage facilities exist to serve the project.
c) The potential discharge of silt during construction activities could impact tbe storm drain system.
Appropriate erosion control measures will be identified in conjunction with the preparation of final
grading plans to be implemented during construction. The proposed project will result in the construction
of new storm water drainage facilities, including grassy swales and a detention basin located at the
southwest comer of the site. Installation of these improvements in conjunction with the proposed project
will result in a reduction of storm water flow. The proposed project is subject to the NPDES General
Construction Permit requirements and shall obtain permit coverage and develop a Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) prior to issuance of grading permits. In addition, the project shall be
conditioned to implement construction and post-construction water quality Best Management Practices
(BMPs) for storm water pollution prevention in accordance with the Chula Vista Standard Urban Storm
Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP). No significant impacts to the City's storm drainage facilities are
anticipated as a result of the proposed project.
d) The project site is within the potable water service area of the Sweetwater District. Pursuant to
correspondence from the Sweetwater Authority, dated September 25, 2007, adequate storage facilities
exist, and the project may be serviced from the 8"-water main on East Oxford Street and the applicant wiIl
need to install a service main to service this site. A fire flow of 1,500 gallons per minute fire flow at 20 psi
pressure for a two hour duration, as required by the Chula Vista Fire Department, is available to serve the
project. The proposed project will be required to construct expansions to existing water facilities as
described in Section b above.
e) An Overview of Sewer Service for the project was prepared on September 26, 2007 and amended October
2007, prepared by Dexter Wilson Engineering. The project site is within the boundaries of the City of
Chula Vista wastewater services area. The existing sewer facility system includes 8-inch sewer lines along
East Oxford Street and one sewer lateral to serve the existing church. There are clUTently no sewer mains
serving the northerly part of the site. Therefore a new 8-inch sewer lateral line within the proposed public
street, connecting the sewer main in East Oxford Street is proposed to service the lots. The applicant shall
be required to submit a final sewer report and plan showing compliance with the City's Sewer Design
Criteria, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. No adverse impacts to the City's sewer system or City's
sewer threshold standards will occur as a result of the proposed project.
f) The City of Chula Vista is served by regional landfills with adequate capacity to meet the solid waste needs
of the region in accordance with State law.
g) The proposal would be conditioned to comply with federal, state and local regulations related to solid
waste.
Mitigation: The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
identified storm water/storm drainage and wastewater impacts to a level of less than significant.
8-f87
Issues:
XVII. THRESHOLDS
Will the proposal adversely impact the City's
Threshold Standards?
A) Library
The City shall construct 60,000 gross square feet
(GSF) of additional library space, over the June 30,
2000 GSF total, in the area east of Interstate 805 by
buildout. The construction of said facilities shall be
phased such that the City will not fall below the city-
wide ratio of 500 GSF per 1,000 population. Library
facilities are to be adequately equipped and staffed.
B) Police
a) Emergency Response: Properly equipped and staffed
police units shall respond to 81 percent of "Priority One"
emergency calls within seven (7) minutes and maintain
an average response time to all "Priority One"
emergency calls of 5.5 minutes or less.
b) Respond to 57 percent of "Priority Two" urgent calls
within seven (7) minutes and maintain an average
response time to all "Priority Two" calls of 7.5 minutes
or less.
C) Fire and Emergencv Medical
Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed fire
and medical units shall respond to calls throughout the City
within 7 minutes in 80% of the cases (measured annually).
D) Traffic
The Tbreshold Standards require 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. Signalized intersections west ofI-805 are not
to operate at a LOS below their 1991 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 Standard.
8-1158
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
No
Impact
.
.
.
.
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Issues: Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
E) Parks and Recreation Areas 0 0 0 .
The Threshold Standard for Parks and Recreation is 3
acres of neighborhood and community parkland with
appropriate facilitiesfl,OOO population east ofI-80S.
F) Drainage 0 0 . 0
The Threshold Standards require that storm water flows
and volwnes not exceed City Engineering Standards.
Individual projects will provide necessary improvements
consistent with the Drainage Master Plane s) and City
Engineering Standards.
G) Sewer
o
o
.
o
The Threshold Standards require that sewage flows and
volwnes not exceed City Engineering Standards.
Individual projects will provide necessary improvements
consistent with Sewer Master Planes) and City Engineering
Standards.
H) Water
o
o
.
o
The Threshold Standards require that adequate storage,
treatment, and transmission facilities are constructed
concurrently with planned growth and that water quality
standards are not jeopardized during growth and
construction.
Applicants may also be required to participate in whatever
water conservation or fee offset program the City of Chula
Vista has in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
8-1f}9
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
a) The project would not induce substantial population growth; therefore, no impacts to library facilities would
result. No adverse impact to the City's Library Threshold standards would occur as a result of the proposed
project.
b) According to the Police Department. adequate police protection services can continue to be provided upon
completion of the proposed project. The proposed project would not have a significant effect upon or result in a
need for substantial new or altered police protection services. No adverse impact to the City's Police Threshold
standards would occur as a result of the proposed project.
c) According to the Fire Department. adequate fire protection and emergency medical services can continue to be
provided to the project site. Although the Fire Department has indicated they will provide service to the project.
the project will contnbute to the incremental increase in fire service demand throughout the City. TIris increased
demand on fire services will not result in a significant cumulative impact. No adverse impact to the City's Fire
and Emergency Medical Threshold standards would occur as a result of the proposed project.
d) According to the Traffic Engineering Division, the surrounding street segments and intersections including East
Oxford Street and Melrose Avenue will continue to operate at the sarne Level of Service in compliance with the
City's traffic threshold standard with the proposed project traffic. No adverse impact to the City's traffic
threshold standards would occur as a result of the proposed project.
e) The proposed project would not induce significant population growth, as it is a small residential infil1 project and
would not impact existing or proposed recreational facilities. However, the applicant shall be required to pay
Park Acquisition and Development Fees (pAD) in accordance with Ordinance No. 2945 adopted by City Council
on January 6, 2004.
f) Based upon the review of the project. the Engineering Department has determined that there are no significant
issues regarding the proposed drainage improvements of the project site. The proposed drain system includes
improvements to existing drainage culverts to handle 2, 10, 50 and 100-year storm events, a series of inlets,
private catch basins and culverts, underground detention systems, discharge controls, and filtering systems. No
adverse impacts to the City's drainage threshold standards will occur as a result of the proposed project.
g) An Overview of Sewer Service for the project was prepared on September 26, 2007 and amended October 2007
by Dexter Wilson Engineering. The project site is within the boundaries of the City of Chula Vista wastewater
services area. The existing sewer facility system includes 8-inch sewer lines along East Oxford Street and one
lateral to serve the existing church. There are currently no sewer mains serving the northerly part of the site.
Therefore a new 8- inch sewer lateral line within the proposed public street. connecting the sewer main in East
Oxford Street is proposed to service the lots. The applicant shall be required to submit a final sewer report and
plan showing compliance with the City's Sewer Design Criteria, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. No
adverse impacts to the City's sewer system or City's sewer threshold standards will occur as a result of the
proposed project.
h) The project site is within the potable water service area of the Sweetwater District as noted in their
correspondence. Pursuant to correspondence from the Sweetwater Anthority dated 4/24/07, the project may be
serviced from the 8"-water main on East Oxford Street and the applicant will need to install a service main to
service this site. No significant impacts to existing facility systems or the City's water threshold standards will
occur as a result of the proposed project.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
8-11'0
, I 1 ;
Issues:
XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current project, and the
effects of probable future projects.)
c) Does the project have environmental effects, which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
Comments:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
.
D
D
D
.
D
D
D
.
a) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E. Potential short-term construction raptor nesting impacts
are addressed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section F, under Biological Resources.
b) The project site has been previously disturbed with a church land use and site improvements. No
cumulative considerable impacts associated with the project when viewed in connection with the effects of
past projects, other current projects and probable future projects have been identified.
c) The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly, as the
proposed project has been mitigated to lessen any potential significant impacts to a level of less than
significance.
Mitigation: The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant impacts to a level ofless than significance.
8-1'11
, ,
XIX. PROJECT REVISIONS OR MITIGATION MEASURES:
Project mitigation measures are contained in Section F, Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant
Impacts, and Table 1, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, of Mitigated Negative Declaration
IS-07-031.
XX. AGREEMENT TO IMPLEMENT MITIGATION MEASURES
By signing the line(s) provided below, the Applicant and/or Operator stipulate that they have each read,
understood and have their respective company's authority to and do agree to the mitigation measures
contained herein, and will implement same to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator.
Failure to sign below prior to posting of this Mitigated Negative Declaration with the County Clerk shall
indicate the Applicant and/or Operator's desire that the Project be held in abeyance without approval
and that the Applicant and/or Operator shall apply for an Environmental Impact Report.
AS&\'. V\d=--~~
ADAM D. f'f-VNe( - ~~~~ ~L.-
Printed Name and Title of Applicant
(or authorized representative)
1D 1(1 ( "OD "l-
Date
Signature of Applicant
(or authorized representative)
N/A
Printed Name and Title of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
N/A
Signature of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
Date
8-12/52
I' I ,1
XXI. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at
least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated,"
as indicated by the checklist on the previous pages.
o Land Use and Planning
D Population and Housing
. Geophysical
o Agricultural Resources
. Hydrology/Water
. Air Quality
D Paleontological
Resources
DTransportationlTraffic
. Biological Resources
D Energy and Mineral
Resources
o Public Services
D Utilities and Service Systems
D Aesthetics
~azards and Hazardous
Materials
D Cultural Resources
. Noise
D Recreation
D Mandatory Findings of Significance
8-12f3
,. ..
XXII. DETERMINATION:
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 revisions in
the project have been made or agreed to by the project proponent. A Mitigated
Negative Declaration will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment,
and an Environmental Impact Report is required.
I find that the proposed project may have a "potentially significant impact" or
"potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one
effect: I) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable
legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier
analysis as described on attached sheets. An Environmental Impact Report is
required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed
adequately in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards
and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Negative
Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the
proposed project, nothing further is required.
{J /21 /0 T
Date I
J:\Planning\MARIA\Initial Shidy\Villas Del Mar\IS-04~022draftCheck1ist.doc
8-1 ~1I
o
.
o
o
o
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING
THE ZONING MAP ESTABLISHED BY SECTION 19.18.010 TO
REZONE ONE 3.9 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT 267 EAST
OXFORD STREET FROM R-1 (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE
F AMIL Y) TO R-1-5-P (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL,
PRECISE PLAN), AND ADOPTING PRECISE PLAN
STANDARDS.
WHEREAS, the subject matter of this Ordinance is the Zoning Map established by Chapter
19.18.010 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, and the area of the Zoning Map to be used as the
project area is identified as Exhibit "A," attached hereto; and,
WHEREAS, an application made by Concordia Lutheran Church ("Applicant") to amend the
Zoning Map was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning and Building Department on April
10,2007; and,
WHEREAS, the applicant proposes to rezone the 3.9 acre Project site located at 267 East
Oxford Street from the R-I (Residential Single Family) Zone to the R-I-5-P (Residential Single
Family, Precise Plan) zone, establishing a Precise Plan Modifying District, and adopting Precise
Plan standards ("Project"); and,
WHEREAS, The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and has conducted an Initial Study (IS-
07-031) in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Based upon the results of the
Initial Study the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the project could result in
significant impacts on the environment. However, revisions to the project made by or agreed to by
the applicant would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant
effects would occur; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared a Mitigated
Negative Declaration (MND IS-07-03I) and associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program (MMRP); and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the project at a public
hearing held at a time and place advertised, namely 6:00 pm on December 12, 2007, in the Council
Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council set the time and place for a hearing on said zone change
(PCZ-07-08) 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 Project site at least ten days prior to the hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 6:00 p.m.
January 8, 2008, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue and said hearing was thereafter
closed.
J:lAuomey\DavidMIOrdinances\PCZ.07.08DraftOrd Oxford.doc
8-115
Ordinance No.
Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council ofthe City ofChula Vista does hereby ordain as follows:
1. FINDINGS FOR APROV AL OF REZONE AND PRECISE PLAN MODIFYING
DISTRICT, INCLUDING PRECISE PLAN STANDARDS.
Pursuant to Section 19.56.041 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista finds that the following circumstances are evident, which allows the application of the
"P" Precise Plan Modifying District to the project site.
I. That such use will not under the circumstances of the particular case be detrimental to the
health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity or injurious to
property or improvements in the vicinity.
The City Council finds that the proposed precise plan standards contained in attached
Exhibit C will not have a negative impact on the surrounding neighborhood because the
proposed standards allow the applicant to design a Project that is more compatible with the
existing residential development in the area. The surrounding area includes single-family
homes to the north, south, east and west. These homes were developed pursuant to the R-I-7
zone with predominantly 7,000 square foot lots. To provide a subdivision design that is more
compatible with the R-I-7 zone, the Project will include a minimum rear yard setback
requirement of20 feet, which exceeds the R-I-5 requirement, and matches that ofthe R-I-7
zone. Through the use of three different floor plans at varying setbacks, the front and rear
yards ofthe Project will be staggered, which will vary the alignment of homes to add visual
interest. The applicant is proposing single-story plans on 10 of the lots, which will
complement the surrounding area, which also contains a mixture of single-story and two-
story development. Such standards will allow construction ofa single-family development
that is more compatible with the surrounding R-I-7 zone type of development than the
typical R-I-5 development.
2. That such plan satisfies the following principles for amendment of the "P" modifYing district
as set forth in CYMC 19.56.041:
(a) The basic or underlying zone regulations do not allow the property owner
or the City the appropriate control or flexibility needed to achieve an efficient and
proper relationship among the uses allowed in the adjacent zone
The City Council finds that application of the "P" modifYing district is appropriate
because the underlying R-I-5 zone regulation does not allow development
standards needed to achieve a project design that is compatible with the adjacent
residential area, and therefore a precise plan modifYing district is needed to allow a
more compatible design. Development of the site under the standard R-I-5 zoning
would potentially result in massing issues created by rows of rear elevations of
J:\Altomey\OavidM\OrdinancesIPCZ-07-08DraftQrd Oxford.doc
8-116
Ordinance No.
Page 3
homes developed with a 15 ft. rear yard setbacks. The Precise Plan standards will
allow the Project to be designed with development standards which will make a
more appropriate transition between adjacent single family development on 7,000
square foot lots, and will also be designed to include walls, fencing and landscaped
open space lots that will help buffer the units adjacent from the adjacent uses, in a
manner that the development of the site will better coexist with adjacent uses.
3. That any exceptions granted which may deviate from the underlying zoning requirements
shall be warranted only when necessary to meet the purpose and application of the "P"
Precise Plan Modifying District.
(a) With the exception of the rear yard setback of20 feet and the front yard setback to the
porch of 10 feet, the development standards are the same as the R-I-5 zone.
(b) Development of the lot using the development standards of the R-I-5 zone would limit
the ability of the applicant to propose a design that meets the goal of achieving an
efficient and proper relationship among the uses allowed in the adjacent zone. The
Precise Plan will provide special development standards that will make the project more
compatible with adjacent single-family housing, which was developed under the R-I-7
development standards.
(c) The City Council finds that these requested deviations under the Precise Plan are
warranted in order to achieve the purpose of the Precise Plan Modifying District.
4. That the approval of this plan will conform to the General Plan and the adopted policies of
the City OfChula Vista.
(a) The Project has been designed and evaluated in accordance with the goals and objectives
of the General Plan. The Precise Plan, as described above, will allow the Project to be
consistent with the goals and objectives of the General Plan, and the Chula Vista
Municipal Code.
The Precise Standards as depicted in Exhibits B are adopted and are supported by the required
findings (CVMC Section 19.56.041, as outlined in Section II (E) above.
II. ACTION
Finding that it is consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan, and all other
applicable Plans, and that the public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good
planning and zoning practice support their approval and implementation, the City Council of
the City OfChula Vista hereby amends the Zoning Map, re-zoning the 3.9 acre Project site
located at 267 East Oxford Street from the R-l (Residential Single Family) Zone to the R-I-
5-P (Residential Single Family, Precise Plan) zone, establishing a Precise Plan Modifying
District, and adopting Precise Plan standards;.
J:\AllomeyIDavidMIOrdinances\PCZ-07-08DraftOrd Oxford.doc
8-117
Ordinance No.
Page 4
J :\Attorney\DllvidM\OrdinancesIPCZ-07 -08DrnflOrd Ox ford.dac
8-118
Ordinance No.
Page 5
III. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from and after its
adoption.
Presented by
James D, Sandoval
Planning and Building Director
J:\AllomeylDavidM\Ordinances\PCZ-07.08DraftOrd Oxford.doc
8-119
~\)
<C \,\0"
C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C) APPLICANr. Brookfield Shea Otay, LLC. ZONE CHANGE
PROJECT 267 E. Oxford Street. Request: 36 5FD development on a 3.9 acre lot. Zone change
ADDRESS: proposed from R1 to R2. Located at 267 E. Oxford 5t
SCALE: FILE NUMBER:
NORTH No Scale pel-07-08 Related cases: 15-07-031, PCS-ll7 -ll7 & GPA-ll7-04
J:\Planning\Public Notices\PCZ\PCZ0708.cdr 04.26.07
8-120
ORDINANCE #
12/12/07
f'l+1IE(iE
OXFORD STREET pROJECT
PCZ-07-08 / PCM 08-02
PRECISE PLAN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Lot Size 5,000 sq. ft. minimum
Lot Width 50 ft. minimum, except 35 ft. for cul-de-sac lots
Building Coverage 40% maximum
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 50% Maximum
(including garage)
Front Yard Building Setback:
(all setbacks measured from property line except
where noted)
. To Building (living area) IS ft.
. To Porch 10 ft.
Width of porch shall not exceed 1/3 width of
house
. To Garage 22 ft. from closest edge of sidewalk to face of
garage
Rear Yard Building Setback: j
20 ft, with the following exception:
Up to 1/3 of the width of the first story of any
house may encroach 5 ft. into the required 20 ft.
rear yard setback, as long as the second
story meets the main 20 ft. setback.
Interior Side Yard Building Setback 5 ft.
Exterior Side Yard Building Setback 10 ft.
Building Height: 28 ft. / 2 stories
(Measured to mean height level between eave
and ridge - per CYMe 19.04.038)
Fencing/Walls: Decorative stucco, split-face block walls, rail
(view) or wood privacy fencing are permitted.
Maximum height is 6 feet from adjacent grade level.
Garage Minimum 400 square foot, 2 car garage with
(Continued on Pg.2) minimum dimension of 20 feet.
8-121
ORDINANCE #
12/12/07
OXFORD STREET l'KOJECT
PCZ-07 -08 1 PCM 08-02
Notes:
a. Minor modifications to Precise Plan map are permitted pursuant to approval
of a Site Plan and Architectural Review by the Zoning Administrator, per
CVMC 19.14.420. Amendments to the Precise Plan Map shall comply with
the Precise Plan Development Standards. All other Precise Plan amendments
shall comply with Precise Plan Modification requirements per CYMC
19.14.577.
b. Uses and Development standards not addressed in this Precise Plan shall
comply with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, CYMC Title 19.
c. Accessory Uses and Structures shall comply with requirements ofCYMC
19.24.030, with the following exceptions:
(1) The first 300 square feet of any attached or detached open structure, such
as a patio cover or gazebo, which are open on 2 or more sides, are exempt
from the Floor Area Ratio requirements.
(2) The first 100 square feet of detached enclosed buildings such as a pool,
storage, or garden building is exempt for the floor are ratio requirement.
(3) A 5-foot rear and side yard setback is required for any accessory structure
in the required rear or side yard area.
8-122
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA, APPROVING A PRECISE PLAN AND A
TENTATIVE MAP SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS
CONTAINED HEREIN FOR THE OXFORD STREET
PROJECT, TO DIVIDE 3.90 ACRES LOCATED AT 267 EAST
OXFORD STREET INTO 24 SINGLE-F AMIL Y RESIDENTIAL
LOTS.
I. RECITALS
A. Project Site
WHEREAS, the parcel of land which is the subject matter of this Resolution is depicted
in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and for the purpose
of general description consists of 3.90 acres located at 267 East Oxford Street, consisting of
APN 639-392-14-00, ("Project Site"); and
B. Project Applicant
WHEREAS, on April 10, 2007, duly verified applications requesting approval of a
Precise Plan (PCM-08-02) and Tentative Subdivision Map (PCS-07-07, Chula Vista Tract
No. 07-07) were filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning and Building Department by
Concordia Lutheran Church ("Applicant" and "Owner"); and
C. Project Description; Environmental Determination
WHEREAS, said Applicant requests approval of a Precise Plan and Tentative Map to
subdivide 3.90 acres into 24 single family residential lots ("Project") on said Project Site;
and
WHEREAS, said Applicant requests a rezone of the property from the R-I-7 Single
Family Residential zone to the R-l-S-P Single Family Residential zone, with a Precise Plan
Modifying District on the Project Site; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed Project
for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and has conducted an Initial
Study, IS-07 -031 in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Based upon the results of the Initial Study, the Environmental Review Coordinator has
determined that the Project could result in significant effects on the environment. However,
revisions to the Project made by or agreed to by the Applicant would avoid the effects or
mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur; therefore, the
Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-07-
031.
J:\AtlomeyIDavidM\Resos\pcS"07-07-pcm-08-02 DRAFT CC RESO {12-19)Oxford,doc 8 -1 23
Resolution No. 2007-
Page 2
D. Planning Commission Record on Applications
WHEREAS, a hearing time and place was set by the Planning Commission for
consideration of the 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 and residents within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property, at least ten
(10) days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the Project
on December 12, 2007, wherein the Planning Commission, took public testimony, heard
staffs' presentation, and reviewed and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND
IS-07-031) and associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), along
with the applications for a Zone Change (PCZ-07-08), a Precise Plan (PCM-08-02) and
Tentative Map (PCS-07-07); and
WHEREAS, following staffs' presentation and hearing of public comments, the Planning
Commission considered all evidence and testimony presented and voted 6-0-0-1 to
recommend that the City of Chula Vista City Council adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration
(MND IS-07 -031) and associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
and approve the Zone Change (PCZ-07-08), Precise Plan (PCM-08-02) and Tentative Map
(PCS-07-07) in accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions herein; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has requested that the Planning Commission motion and vote
to approve the Project, along with any relevant comment be forward to the City Council for
their consideration at a public hearing to be held following the Planning Commission action;
and
E. City Council Record on Applications
WHEREAS, a hearing time and place was set by the City Council for consideration of the
Project and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a
newspaper of general circulation in the City, its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of
the exterior boundary of the Project, at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the duly called and noticed public hearing on the Project was held before the
City Council of the City of Chula Vista on January 8, 2008, in the Council Chambers, 276
Fourth Avenue, at 6:00 p.m. to receive the recommendations of the Planning Commission,
and to hear public testimony with regard to the same.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista reviewed and considered the
Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND IS-07-031) and associated Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program (MMRP), Zone Change (PCZ-07-08), Precise Plan (PCM-08-02), and
Tentative Map (PCS-07-07); and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista after considering all evidence
and testimony presented voted X-X-X-X to adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND IS-
07 -031) and associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) and to
J:\AltomeyIDavidM\ResoslpcS-07-07-pcm-08-02 DRAFT CC RESO (ll-19)Oxford.doc 8 -1 24
Resolution No. 2007-
Page 3
approve the Zone Change (PCZ-07-08), Precise Plan (PCM-08-02), and Tentative Map
(PCS-07-07) based on the findings and in accordance with the conditions listed below.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOL YED that the City Council does hereby find, detennine and
resolve as follows:
II. PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD
Record of the proceedings of the Planning Commission at their public hearing on
December 12, 2007, including their vote upon Planning Commission Resolution No.
PCZ-07-08/PCM-08-02!PCS-07-07 recommending approval, along with any relevant
comments, have been provided to the City Council and are hereby incorporated into the
record of this proceeding. These documents, along with any documents submitted to the
decision makers, shall comprise the entire record of the proceedings for any California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) claims.
III. PRECISE PLAN FINDINGS! APPROY AL
I. That such plan will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to
the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity or
injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity.
The City Council finds that the proposed precise plan and development standards
contained in attached Exhibit C will not have a negative impact on the surrounding
neighborhood because the proposed standards allow the applicant to design a Project that
is more compatible with the type and intensity of existing residential development in the
area. The surrounding area includes single-family homes to the north, south, east and
west. These homes were developed pursuant to the R-I-7 zone with predominantly 7,000
square foot lots. To provide a subdivision design that is more compatible with the R-I-7
zone, the Project will include a minimum rear yard setback requirement of20 feet, which
exceeds the R-I-5 requirement, and matches that of the R-I-7 zone. Through the use of
three different floor plans at varying setbacks, the front and rear yards of the Proj ect will
be staggered, which will vary the alignment of homes to add visual interest. The applicant
is proposing single-story plans on 10 of the lots, which will complement the surrounding
area, which also contains a mixture of single-story and two-story development. Such
standards will allow construction of a single-family development that is more
aesthetically attractive and compatible with the surrounding R-I-7 zone type of
development than the typical R-I-5 development. The project meets the density
requirements of the General Plan, and therefore the intensity of development is consistent
with that of the surrounding single-family area and will not adversely impact public
facilities such as parks and schools.
2. That such plan satisfies the following principles for amendment of the "P" modifying
district as set forth in CYMC 19.56.041:
(a) The basic or underlying zone regulations do not allow the property owner
or the City the appropriate control or flexibility needed to achieve an efficient and
proper relationship among the uses allowed in the adjacent zone
J:\AlIomey\DavidMIResos\pcs-07-01-pcm-08-02 DRAFT CC RESO {12-19)Oxford.doc 8 -1 25
Resolution No. 2007-
Page 4
The City Council finds that application of the "P" modifying district is
appropriate because the underlying R-I-5 zone regulation does not allow
development standards needed to achieve a project design that is compatible with
the adjacent residential area, and therefore a precise plan modifying district is
needed to allow a more compatible design. Development ofthe site under the
standard R-I-5 zoning would potentially result in massing issues created by rows
of rear elevations of homes developed with a 15 ft. rear yard setbacks. The
Precise Plan standards will allow the Project to be designed with development
standards which will make a more appropriate transition between adjacent single
family development on 7,000 square foot lots, and will also be designed to
include walls, fencing and landscaped open space lots that will help buffer the
units adjacent from the adjacent uses, in a manner that the development of the site
will better coexist with adjacent uses.
3. That any exceptions granted which may deviate from the underlying zoning requirements
shall be warranted only when necessary to meet the purpose and application of the "P"
Precise Plan Modifying District.
With the exception of the rear yard setback of 20 feet and the front yard setback to the
porch of I 0 feet, the development standards are the same as the R-1-5 zone. Minor
encroachment into the front and rear yard setbacks would add interest and articulation to
the street scene and rear elevations.
Development of the lot using the development standards of the R-1-5 zone would limit
the ability of the applicant to propose a design that meets the goal of achieving an
efficient and proper relationship among the uses allowed in the adjacent zone. The
Precise Plan will provide special development standards that will make the project more
compatible with adjacent single-family housing, which was developed under the R-1-7
development standards.
The City Council finds that these requested deviations under the Precise Plan are
warranted in order to achieve the purpose of the Precise Plan Modifying District.
4. That the approval of this plan will conform to the General Plan and the adopted policies
of the City OfChula Vista.
The Project has been designed and evaluated in accordance with the goals and objectives
of the General Plan. The Precise Plan, as described above, will allow the Project to be
consistent with the goals and objectives of the General Plan, and the Chula Vista
Municipal Code.
The Oxford Street Precise Plan Map and Text as depicted in Exhibit B is adopted and is
supported by the required findings (CYMC Section 19.56.041, as outlined in Section II (E)
above.
J:\Allomey\DavidM\Resos\pcs-07-07-pcm-08-02 DRAFT CC RESO (12-19)Ox.ford.doc 8 -1 26
Resolution No. 2007-
Page 5
IV. WAIVER OF PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN
Pursuant to CVMC 19.09.050, the City Council hereby finds that the requirement for a
Public Facilities Financing Plan is hereby waived because the project is infill
development located in a developed portion of the City where adequate public facilities
exist or will be provided concurrent with development of the project site, therefore there
are no public service, facility or phasing needs that warrant the preparation of a Public
Facilities Financing Plan.
V. TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FINDINGS
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66473.5 of the Subdivision Map Act, the City
Council finds that the Tentative Subdivision Map, as conditioned herein for 267 East
Oxford Street, is in conformance with the elements of the City's General Plan, based on
the following:
1. Land Use
The General Plan land use designation is Low Medium Residential (3-6 dwelling
units per acre). The proposed 24-lot subdivision will be developed at a density of 6
dwelling units per acre, which is within the allowable density and permitted number
of dwelling units.
2. Circulation
All off-site public streets required to serve the subdivision already exist or will be
constructed or paid for by the Applicant in accordance with the Conditions of
Approval. The on - site public street is designed in accordance with the City design
standards and/or requirements and provide for vehicular and pedestrian connections.
3. Public Facilities
The Project has been conditioned to ensure that all necessary public facilities and
services will be available to serve the Project concurrent with the demand for those
services. There are no public service, facility, or phasing needs created by the Project
that warrants the preparation of a Public Facilities Financing Plan, therefore this
requirement is waived.
4. Housing
The Project is consistent with the density prescribed within the Residential Low-
Medium General Plan designation, and provides additional opportunities for single-
family residential home ownership in the southwestern portion of the City.
5. Growth Management
The surrounding street segments and intersections including East Oxford Street and
Melrose Avenue will continue to operate at the same Level of Service in compliance
with the City's traffic threshold standard with the proposed project traffic. No
J:\Attomey\DavidM\Resos\pcs-07.07-pcm-08-02 DRAFT CC RESO (12-19)Oxford.doc 8 -1 27
Resolution No. 2007-
Page 6
adverse impact to the City's traffic threshold standards would occur as a result of the
proposed project.
The Project site is located in the attendance area of Palomar Elementary School,
within the boundaries of the Chula Vista Elementary School District. The Project is
also within the attendance area of Castle Park Junior High School and Castle Park
High School, within the Sweetwater Union High School District. Palomar Elementary
is presently below its capacity, and both Castle Park Junior High and Castle Park
High Schools were both above their capacity. Both school districts responded that
they would be able to accommodate the additional students generated by the Project,
and that the schools would not be adversely impacted by the approval of the Project.
The project site is within the potable water service area of the Sweetwater District.
The project may be serviced from the 8"-water main on East Oxford Street and the
applicant will need to install a service main to service this site. No significant
impacts to existing facility systems or the City's water threshold standards will occur
as a result of the proposed project.
The project site is within the boundaries of the City of Chula Vista wastewater
services area. The existing sewer facility system includes 8-inch sewer lines along
East Oxford Street and one lateral to serve the existing church. Therefore a new 8-
inch sewer lateral line within the proposed public street, connecting the sewer main in
East Oxford Street is proposed to service the lots. No adverse impacts to the City's
sewer system or City's sewer threshold standards will occur as a result of the
proposed project.
6. Open Space and Conservation
The project proposes individual single-family homes that meet the minimum open
space requirement per the Chula Vista Municipal Code. The Environmental Review
Coordinator has prepared a Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program, 1S-07-031, in compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act, and finds that the development of the site to be consistent with the goals
and policies of the Conservation Element.
7. Parks and Recreation
The proposed project would not induce significant population growth, as it is a small
residential infill project and would not impact existing or proposed recreational
facilities. The Project has been conditioned to pay park acquisition and development
fees prior to recordation of the Final Map.
8. Safety
The City Engineer, Fire and Police Departments have reviewed the proposed
subdivision for conformance with City safety policies and have determined that the
proposal meets those standards.
9. Noise
The Project has been reviewed for compliance with the Noise Element, a noise study
has been prepared by the applicant, which has determined that the project as
J:\A110meyID3vidM\Resoslpcs-07-07-pcm-QS-02 DRAFT CC RESO (12-19}Oxford.doc 8 _, 28
Resolution No. 2007-
Page 7
conditioned will comply with applicable noise measures at the time of issuance of the
building permit. The Project has been conditioned to require that all dwelling units be
designed to preclude interior noise levels over 45 dBA and exterior noise exposure
over 65 dBA for all outside private yard areas.
10. Scenic Highwav
This Project Site IS not located adjacent to or visible from a designated scemc
highway.
II. Seismic Safety
A Geotechnical report has been prepared for the Project, which has determined that
the site is not within or near a mapped earthquake fault zone, and there are no known
or suspected seismic hazards associated with the Project site. Conditions of approval
have been included which require that a detailed soils report and geo-technical study
be prepared prior to approval of grading plans, and that foundation plans be reviewed
in conjunction with building permits. Therefore, project compliance with applicable
Uniform Building Code standards would adequately address any building
safety/seismic concerns.
B. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66473.1 of the Subdivision Map Act, the
configuration, orientation, and topography of the site allows for the optimum siting of
lots for natural and passive heating and cooling opportunities and that the development of
the site will be subject to site plan and architectural review to insure the maximum
utilization of natural and passive heating and cooling opportunities.
C. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66412.3 of the Subdivision Map Act, the Council
certifies that it has considered the effect of this approval on the housing needs of the
region and has balanced those needs against the public service needs of the residents of
the City and the available fiscal and environmental resources.
D. The site is physically suited for residential development because it is graded, level, is
presently developed as a church, and is located adj acent to existing residential
development. The Project conforms to all standards established by the City for a
residential development.
E. The conditions herein imposed on the grant of permit or other entitlement herein
contained is approximately proportional both in nature and extend to the impact created
by the proposed development.
VI. GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66020 NOTICE
Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d)(1), NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the
90 day period to protest the imposition of any impact fee, dedication, reservation, or other
exaction described in this resolution begins on the effective date of this resolution and any
such protest must be in a manner that complies with Section 66020(a) and failure to follow
timely this procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, set aside, void or annual
1:\AllomeyIDavidMlResoslpcs-07.07-pcm-08-02 DRAFT CC RESO {IZ-19)Oxford.doc 8 -1 29
Resolution No. 2007-
Page 8
imposItIOn. The right to protest the fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions does
not apply to planning, zoning, grading, or other similar application processing fees or service
fees in connection with the project; and it does not apply to any fees, dedication, reservations,
or other exactions which have been given notice similar to this, nor does it revive challenges
to any fees for which the Statute of Limitations has previously expired.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby approve the Project subject to
the general and special conditions set forth below.
VII. TENT A TIVE MAP GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
A. Project Site is Improved with Project
The Applicant, or hislher successors in interest, shall improve the Project Site with the
Project as described in the Tentative Subdivision Map, Chula Vista Tract No. 07-07, located
at 267 East Oxford Street.
VIII. SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
A. The conditions herein imposed on the tentative map approval or other entitlement herein
contained is approximately proportional both to nature and extent of impact created by the
proposed development. Unless otherwise specified, all conditions and code requirements
listed below shall be fully completed by the Applicant, Owner or Successor-in-Interest to the
City's satisfaction prior to approval of the Final Map, unless otherwise specified:
GENERAL! PLANNING AND BUILDING
I. All of the terms, covenants and conditions contained herein shall be binding upon and
inure to the benefit of the heirs, successors, assigns and representatives of the Applicant
as to any or all of the property.
2. Applicant shall pay in full any unpaid balance for the Project, including Deposit Account
No. DQI439 and related Engineering Department accounts.
3. Applicant and hislher successors in interest shall, comply, remain in compliance and
implement, the terms, conditions and provisions, as are applicable to the property which
is the subject matter of this Tentative Subdivision Map and as recommended for approval
by the Planning Commission on November 28, 2007. The Applicant shall enter into an
agreement with the City, providing the City with such security (including recordation of
covenants running with the land) and implementation procedures as the City may require
compliance with the above regulatory documents. Said Agreement shall also ensure that,
after approval of the Final Map, the Applicant and hislher successors in interest will
continue to comply, remain in compliance, and implement such Plans.
4. Any and all agreements that the Applicant is required to enter into hereunder shall be in a
form approved by the City Attorney.
5. If any of the terms, covenants or conditions contained herein shall fail to occur, or if they
are, by their terms, to be implemented and maintained over time, if any of such
conditions fail to be so implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City
J:\AltomeyIDavidM\Resoslpcs-07-07-pcm-08-02 DRAFT CC RESO (12-19)Oxford.doc 8 -1 30
Resolution No. 2007-
Page 9
shall have the right to revoke or modify all approvals herein granted including issuance of
building permits, deny, or further condition the subsequent approvals that are derived
from the approvals herein granted, institute and prosecute litigation to compel their
compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. The Applicant shall
be notified in writing 10 days in advance prior to any of the above actions being taken by
the City and shall be given the opportunity to remedy any deficiencies identified by the
City.
6. The Applicant shall implement to the satisfaction of the City Environmental Review
Coordinator and the City Engineer the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated
Negative Declaration (IS-07-031) and associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program for the Project.
7. The Applicant shall comply with the "Recycling and Solid Waste Management Plan"
which has been approved by the City of Chula Vista Conservation Coordinator. The plan
demonstrates those steps the Applicant will take to comply with Municipal Code,
including, but not limited to Sections 8.24 and 8.25, and meet the State mandate to reduce
or divert at least 50 percent of the waste generated by all residential, commercial and
industrial developments. The Applicant shall contract with the City's franchise hauler
throughout the construction and occupancy phase of the project. The plan shall
incorporate trash enclosures which are designed to comply with the City's N.P.D.E.S.
permit if applicable, to provide compatibility with the architectural style of the
development, and to enhance trash enclosure doors where they are highly visible.
8. Applicant shall obtain a demolition permit from the Building Division and remove all
existing structures prior to issuance of the Grading Permit or Final Map, whichever
occurs first.
9. Applicant shall present written verification to the City Engineer from the Sweetwater
Authority that the subdivision will be provided adequate water service and long-term
water storage facilities.
10. Applicant shall obtain approval of a street name and street addresses to the satisfaction of
the Director of Planning and Building and City Engineer.
II. Applicant shall pay all applicable parkland acquisition and development (PAD) fees,
including in-lieu fees, to the City in accordance with Chapter 17.10 of the Municipal
Code.
12. Applicant shall submit detailed street tree and landscape erosion control plans for the
Project concurrent with grading plan submittal and approved prior to approval of the
Grading Permit by the Director of Building and Planning or designee. Plans shall be
prepared by a registered Landscape Architect pursuant to the City's Landscape Manual,
City Grading Ordinance and Subdivision Manual. Plans shall be consistent with the
Concept Landscape Plan approved in conjunction with the Precise Plan and Tentative
Map.
J:\AttomeyIDavidMIResoslpcs-07-07-pcm-08-02 DRAFTee RESQ(12-19)Ox:ford.doc 8 -1 31
Resolution No. 2007-
Page 10
13. Applicant shall install landscaping as depicted on the approved landscape plans and shall
provide root barriers and deep watering irrigation systems for trees, as approved by the
Director of Planning & Building.
14. Applicant shall enter into an assignable "Grant of Easements and Encroachment permit"
to ensure the perpetual maintenance of landscaping within the right-of-way by the Home
Owner's Association. Street parkways shall be designated as recycled water use areas, if
approved by the local water purveyor and the San Diego County Health Department.
15. Prior to the installation of any dry utilities, including but not limited to cable, telephone,
gas or electric lines, Applicant shall complete street improvement Landscape
Improvement Plan showing above ground utilities. Prior to any utility installation, wood
stakes shall be placed by the Applicant "on-site" according to the approved street
improvement Landscape Improvement Plan, and shall be painted a bright color and
labeled as "future street tree location". Applicant agrees to provide to the City adequate
documentation that all utility companies have been given notice that no dry utility line
shall be located within five feet of the wood stake in any direction. Applicant will
maintain street tree identification stakes in the locations as shown on the approved street
improvement Landscape Improvement Plan until all dry utilities are in place.
16. Applicant shall provide a minimum of 3 feet of flat ground access from the face of any
HOA maintained wall, fence, or landscaped area, to the beginning of the slope rounding
for maintenance, unless otherwise approved by the Director of Planning & Building.
17. Applicant shall install fire hydrants as determined by the City Fire Marshall. Said
hydrant locations shall be shown on the improvement plans.
18. Applicant shall submit plans and information to the satisfaction of the Chula Vista Fire
Department that the Project meets the Chula Vista Fire and California Fire Code
requirements, including but not limited to fire access, water supply, sprinkler systems,
and fire alarms.
GRADINGIDRAINAGEINPDES
19. The Applicant shall submit and obtain the City Engineer's approval of a detailed grading
plan in accordance with the Chula Vista Grading Ordinance.
20. The Applicant shall submit improvement plans prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer
and obtain a construction permit to perform any work in the City's right of way or future
right of way.
21. The Applicant shall provide a conceptual Dry Utility Plan, Geological Investigation,
Water and Sewer Availability Studies, Drainage Study, Water Quality Technical Reports
(WQTR) with the Improvement and Grading Plan submittals.
J:\Allomey\DavidM\Re.oslpcs-07-07-pcm-08-02 DRAFf CC RESO {12-19)Oxford.doc 8 -1 32
Resolution No. 2007-
Page 11
22. The Applicant shall obtain approval of water improvements by the Sweetwater Authority
in conjunction with Improvement plans.
23. The Applicant shall comply with all provisions of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) and the Clean Water Program during and after all phases
of the development process, including but not limited to: rough grading, construction of
street and landscaping improvements, and construction of dwelling units.
24. The Applicant shall incorporate site design BMP features and permanent BMP's
described in the final approved water quality and drainage report into the design and
construction of the project and shown on the grading plans.
25. The Applicant shall replace all existing sidewalks, curbs, and gutters on East Oxford
Street from property line to property line with curb, gutter and sidewalk to match existing
improvements to satisfaction of City Engineer.
26. The Applicant shall install curb, gutter and sidewalk paving on the proposed onsite public
street to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
27. The Applicant shall install ADA Pedestrian Ramps on both sides of proposed onsite
public street to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
28. The Applicant shall repair East Oxford Street along the property line to the centerline
with an asphalt treatment approved by the City Engineer.
29. The applicant is required to comply with the City's SUSMP as amended from time to
time.
30. Applicant shall establish a homeowners association to fund and oversee a contract for the
maintenance of the onsite storm water BMP's. The frequency of maintenance of the
storm water BMP's shall be contained in the provisions of the Codes, Covenants &
Restrictions (CC&Rs). The City Engineer and Director of Public Works shall approve
the provisions of the CC&Rs regarding the onsite storm water BMP's prior to approval of
the final map.
IMPROVEMENTS
31. All sewer laterals shall be privately maintained by the homeowner or HOA from each
building to the City maintained public sewer main.
32. Applicant shall design and construct all street improvements in accordance with Chula
Vista Design Standards, Chula Vista Street standards, and the Chula Vista Subdivision
Manual unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
J:\Altomey\DavidM\Resos\pcs-07-07-pcm-08-02 DRAFT CC RESO (12-19)Oxford.doc 8 -1 3 3
Resolution No. 2007-
Page 12
33. Applicant shall guarantee, subject to Municipal Code Section 18.44 relating to the
construction of public street improvements for the project.
34. Applicant shall provide evidence to the satisfaction of the City Engineer of ties to
established survey monuments to the proposed street centerlines prior to issuance of any
grading or construction permits or approval of the Final Map.
CC&R's
35. The Applicant shall submit a Declaration or Supplementary Declaration of Covenants,
Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) for approval by the City Engineer and Director of
Planning and Building prior to approval of the final map. The CC&Rs shall include the
following obligations of the Homeowners Association (HOA):
a. Listing of maintained private facilities.
b. The City's right but not the obligation to enforce CC&R's.
c. Provision that no private facilities shall be requested to become public unless all
homeowners and 100% of the first mortgage oblique have signed a written
petition.
d. Maintenance of all private walls, fences, lighting structures, paths, recreational
amenities and structures, drainage structures and landscaping.
e. Implement education and enforcement program to prevent the discharge of
pollutants from all on-site sources to the storm water conveyance system.
f. Before any revisions to provisions of the CC&R's that may particularly affect the
City can become effective, said revisions shall be subject to approval of the City.
The HOA shall not seek approval from the City of said revisions without the prior
consent of 100% of the holders of first mortgages or property owners within the
HOA.
g. The HOA shall not seek to be released by the City from the maintenance
obligations described herein without the prior consent of 100% of the holders of
first mortgages or property owners within the HOA.
36. The CC&Rs referenced in condition 35 shall be consistent with Chapter 18.44 of the
Subdivision Ordinance.
37. The Applicant shall submit homeowners associatIOn (HOA) budget for review and
approval prior to final map approval by the City Engineer for the maintenance of private
facilities, including but not limited to streets, storm drains and sewage systems. Said
budget shall include the BMP's and landscaping within the public street right-of-way.
EASEMENTS
38. All existing easements shall be shown and tied at lot lines on the final map. A title report
dated within 60 days of submittal of the final map shall be submitted together with
backing documents for all existing public utility easements and offers of dedication.
Developer shall submit evidence of noticing to all existing public utility easement holders
J:\Allomey\DavidM\Resoslpcs-07-07-pcm-08-02 DRAFT CC RESO (12-19}Oxford.doc 8 -1 3 4
Resolution No. 2007-
Page 13
within the project boundaries as required by the Section 66436 of the Subdivision Map
Act.
39. Applicant shall grant to the City a 5.5-foot wide street tree planting and maintenance
easement along all public streets within the subdivision as shown on the Tentative Map.
40. Applicant shall process a "Grant of Easements, License and Maintenance Agreement" to
allow the HOA to maintain the landscaping within the proposed public right of way.
AGREEMENTS
41. Applicant and his/her successors in interest agree to defend, indemnify and hold harmless
the City and its agents, officers, and employees, from any claim, action or proceeding
against the City, or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul any
approval by the City, including approval by its Planning Commission, City Councilor
any approval by its agents, officers, or employees wit regard to this subdivision pursuant
to Section 66499.37 of the State Map Act provided the City promptly notifies the
subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and on the further condition that the City
fully cooperates in the defense.
42. Applicant and his/her successors in interest agree to hold the City harmless from any
liability for erosion, siltation, increase flow of drainage, or spillage of sewage resulting
from this Project, now and in the future.
43. Applicant and his/her successors in interest agree to ensure that all franchised cable
television companies ("Cable Company") are permitted equal opportunity to place
conduit and provide cable television service to each lot within the subdivision.
44. Applicant and his/her successors in interest agree to comply with all applicable sections
of the Chula Vista Municipal Code and prepare the Final Map and all plans in accordance
with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, Subdivision Ordinance and the
Subdivision Manual of the City ofChula Vista.
45. Applicant shall enter into separate agreements with the Sweetwater Union High School
District and Chula Vista Elementary School District regarding annexation into
Community Facilities District No. 10, or pay school fees as required by State Law, to the
satisfaction of the above school districts prior to issuance of the first building permit for
the Project.
MISCELLANEOUS
46. On the Final Map, the Applicant shall tie the boundary ofthe subdivision to the
California Coordinate System (CeS83), Zone VI based on the North American Datum of
1983 (NAD 83).
47. Applicant shall pay following fees based on the final building permit issuance:
J:\AtlomeyIDavidM\Resos\pcs-07-07-pcm-{)8-02 DRAFT CC RESO (11_19)O"ford.doc 8 -1 35
Resolution No. 2007-
Page 14
a) Sewer Connection and Capacities fees
b) Development Impact Fees
c) Traffic Signal Fees
48. Improvement Plans shall show that driveways shall comply with the City of Chula Vista
driveway standards per CVCS I-B to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
49. The Applicant shall submit copies of the Final Map, grading plans, and improvement
plans in a digital format such as (DXF) graphic file prior to approval of the Final Map in
a form acceptable to the City Engineer.
50. Applicant shall submit a conformed copy of a recorded tax certificate covermg the
property prior to approval of the Final Map.
51. Applicant shall provide evidence to the satisfaction of the City Engineer of ties to
established survey monuments to the proposed street centerlines prior to issuance of any
grading or construction permits or approval ofthe Final Map.
B. The following Conditions of Approval shall be satisfied prior to issuance of the first building
permit for the Project, unless otherwise noted:
I Applicant shall design all dwelling units to preclude interior noise levels over 45dBA and
exterior noise exposure over 65 dBA for all outside private yard areas.
2 Plans for new construction shall comply with 2001 Ca. Building Code, Electrical code,
Plumbing Code, Mechanical Code, Fire Code, 2004 Energy Code, 1997 Uniform Code
for Abatement of Dangerous Buildings, Seismic Zone 4, Wind speed - 70 MPH, and
Exposure-c. Plans submitted on or after January 1,2008 shall comply with 2005 Energy
Code, and new 2007 Ca. Building Code, Electrical Code Plumbing Code, Fire Code and
Mechanical Code.
3 Applicant shall submit a detailed wall/fencing plan showing that all project walls and
fences comply with the Oxford Street Precise Plan dated 11/20/07 and applicable City of
Chula Vista Municipal Code requirements. Plan shall indicate color, materials, height and
location of freestanding walls, retaining walls, and fences to the Director of Planning and
Building for approval prior to issuance of the first building permit. The wall plan shall
also include details such as accurate dimensions, complete cross-sections showing
required walls, adjacent grading, landscaping, road/trail/sidewalk improvements, and the
location of typical residential structures. Materials and color used shall be compatible
and all walls located in corner side-yards or rear yards facing public or private streets or
pedestrian connections shall be constructed of a decorative masonry and/or wrought iron
material. Any combination free standing/retaining walls shall not exceed nine (9) feet in
height. The Applicant shall submit a detail and/or cross-section of the
maximum/minimum conditions for all "combination walls," which include retaining and
free standing walls, as part of said wall plan.
J:\AlIomeyIDavidM\Resos\pcs-07-07-pcm-08-02 DRAFT CC RESO {12-19)Oxford.doc
8-136
Resolution No. 2007-
Page 15
IX. EXECUTION AND RECORDATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL
The property owner and the Applicant shall execute this document by signing the lines
provided below, said execution indicating that the property owner and Applicant have each
read, understood, and agreed to the conditions contained herein. Upon execution, this
document shall be recorded with the County Recorder of the County of San Diego, at the sole
expense of the property owner and the Applicant, and a signed, stamped copy of this
recorded document within ten days of recordation to the City Clerk shall indicate the
property owner and Applicant's desire that the Project, and the corresponding application for
building permits and/or a business license, be held in abeyance without approval. Said
document will also be on file in the City Clerk's Office and known as Document No.
Signature of Applicant
Date
Signature of Property Owner
Date
X. CONSEQUENCE OF F AlLURE OF CONDITIONS
If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur, or if they are, by their terms, to be
implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so implemented
and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right to revoke or modify all
approvals herein granted, deny, or further condition issuance of all future building permits,
deny, revoke, or further condition all certificates of occupancy issued under the authority of
approvals herein granted, institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with
said conditions or seek damages for their violation. The Applicant shall be notified ten (10)
days in advance prior to any of the above actions being taken by the City and shall be given
the opportunity to remedy any deficiencies identified by the City within a reasonable and
diligent time frame.
XI. INVALIDITY ; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION
It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Resolution is dependent upon
the enforceability of each and every term, provision and condition herein stated; and that in
the event that anyone or more terms, provision, or conditions are determined by a Court of
competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, this resolution shall be deemed
to be automatically revoked and of no further force and effect ab initio.
J:\Attomcy\DavidM\Resos\pcs-07-07-pcm-08-02 DRAFf CC RESO (12_19)Qxford.doc 8 3
-1 7
Resolution No. 2007-
Page 16
Presented by:
James D. Sandoval
Director of Planning & Building
j:\AlIamey\DavidM\Resoslpcs-07-07-pcm-08-02 DRAFT CC RESO (12-19)Oll.ford.doc 8 -1 3 8
~\J
I::~OY
C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPllON:
C) APPLICANT: Brookfield Shea Olay, LLC. ZONE CHANGE
PROJECT 267 E. Oxford Street. Request: 36 5FD development on a 3.9 acre lot. Zone change
ADDRESS: proposed from R 1 to R2. Located at 267 E. Oxford 51
SCALE: FILE NUMBER:
NORTH No Scale pel-07-0B Related cases: 1s-{)7'{)31, PCS.{)7.{)7 & GPA.{)7-ll4
J:\Planning\Public Notices\PCZ\PCZ070B.cdr 04.26.07
8-139
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
Draft August 3, 2007
Revised October 5, 2007
Revised November 8, 2007
Revised December 18,2007
Project Proponent:
Brookfield Shea Otay, LLC
12865 Pointe Del Mar
Del Mar, California 92014
(858) 481-8500
Contact: Adam Pevney
Property Owner:
Concordia Lutheran Church ofChula Vista, California
267 East Oxford Street
Chula Vista, California 91911
Contact: Pastor Richard Schmidt
Planning:
Teresa Barker, ASLA
Planning & Landscape Architecture
1249 Myrtle Avenue
San Diego, California 92103
(619) 501-9157
Contact: Terry Barker
Planning & Engineering:
Hunsaker & Associates
9707 Waples Street
San Diego, California 92121
(858) 558-4500
Contact: MaryBeth Murray
Landscape Architecture:
Gillespie, Moody, Patterson, Inc.
9404 Genessee Avenue, Suite 140
La Jolla, California 92037-8977
(858) 558-987
Contact: Rob Streza
8-140
f- "I VI \ (S \ \ 1).
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
Table l!(Contents..
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1
A. Existing Site Description .......................................................................................... 1
B. Planning Process and Entitlements ........................................................................... 1
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................... 4
A. Site Plan ....................................................................................................................4
B Open Space Plan ....................................................................................................... 4
C. Grading and Drainage Plan ....................................................................................... 4
D. Site Access ................................................................................................................5
E. Utilities...................................................................................................................... 5
F. Walls and Fencing..................................................................................................... 6
G. Trash and Recycling.................................................................................................. 6
H. Maintenance... ... .... ................. .... .... ....... ... .... ........................ .................. .... ........... ..... 6
II. PRECISE PLAN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS............................................ 12
A. Site Plan .................................................................................................................... 12
B. Architecture............................................................................................................... 16
C. Landscape Architecture.............................................................................................26
LIST OF FIGURES & TABLES
Figure 1- Site Location Map............................................................................................... 2
Figure 2 - Aerial Photograph............................................................................................... 3
Figure 3 - Precise Plan......................................................................................................... 7
Figure 4 - Tentative Map ..................................................................................................... 8
Figure 5 - Grading Cross Sections....................................................................................... 9
Figure 6 - Street Cross Sections .......................................................................................... 10
Figure 7 - Utility and Drainage Detail................................................................................. II
Figure 8 - Trash and Recycling Container plan .................................................................. 12
Table 1- Oxford Street Precise Plan Development Standards ............................................ 13
Table 2 - Tentative Map Lot Summary .............................................................................. 15
Figure 9 - Oxford Plan I Elevations.................................................................................... 17
Figure 10 - Oxford Plan 1 - Floor Plan................................................................................ 18
Figure 11- Oxford Plan 2 Elevations.................................................................................. 19
Figure 12 - Oxford Plan 2 - Floor Plan................................................................................ 20
Figure 13 - Oxford Plan 3 Elevations.................................................................................. 22
Figure 14 - Oxford Plan 3 - Floor Plan................................................................................ 23
Figure 15 - Enhanced Side Elevations ................................................................................25
Figure 16 - Landscape Concept Plan................................................................................... 27
Figure 17 - Landscaped Street Elevation. . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . ..28
Figure 18 - Landscape Details..............................................................................................29
Figure 19 - Fence and Wall Plan ......................................................................................... 30
8-141
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
Table (lfContents',
RELATED DOCUMENTS
. TM Drainage Study, prepared by Hunsaker & Associates, October 3,2007
. TM Water Quality Technical Report, prepared by Hunsaker & Associates, October 3,
2007
. Overview of Sewer Service, prepared by Dexter Wilson Engineering, Inc., September 26,
2007
. Geotechnical Study, prepared by Geocon, April 18, 2007
. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, prepared by Dudek, April 2007
. Biological Resources and Impacts Analysis, prepared by Dudek, August 31, 2007
. Archaeological Survey, prepared by Brian F. Smith & Associates, September, 19,2007
. Trip Generation Comparison, prepared by Darnell & Associates, September 21, 2007
. Exterior Noise Study, prepared by Dudek, April 17, 2007
. Water Availability Letter, Sweetwater Authority, April 2007
. Fire Flow Availability, Sweetwater Authority, September 25, 2007
8-142
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
I",troduction .
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Existing Site Description
The Oxford Street Precise Plan site is a 3.9-acre property located at 267 East Oxford Street in
Southwestern Chula Vista, illustrated in Figure 1, Location Map and Figure 2, Aerial Photo.
Concordia Lutheran Church of Chula Vista, California owns the property and has provided a
church and community facilities on the site for over 40 years. The church facility includes a
worship center, offices, daycare, play areas and parking areas located in the southern area of
the property near East Oxford Street. Two mature ficus trees, a Brazilian pepper tree and
ornamental shrubs and lawns are planted around the buildings. The northern area of the
property is vacant and maintained as a mown field. The property occupies a portion of a
hilltop with the adjacent property to the west slightly higher in elevation and properties to the
north, east and south slightly lower in elevation. Single family residential neighborhoods
surround the project site.
Surveys and technical studies of the project site have determined that there are no significant
resources on the site that will be impacted by the development. Technical surveys and studies
prepared for the project include cultural resources, biology, geotechnical, noise, hazardous
materials, traffic, water quality, drainage, and water and sewer service.
B. Planning Process & Entitlements
The General Plan designation of the property is Low Medium Residential (RLM) and the
Zoning designation is R-I-7. The property is proposed to be developed with new residences
and rezoned to R-I-5 -P. The proposed new zoning will allow the minimum lot size to be
reduced from 7,000 square feet to 5,000 square feet. The purpose of a Precise Plan is to allow
diversification in the spatial relationship ofland uses, density, buildings, structures,
landscaping and open spaces, as well as design review of architecture and signs through the
adoption of Precise Plan development standards and guidelines. The location, height, size and
setbacks of buildings or structures, open spaces, signs and other development regulations
indicated in the Precise Plan take precedence over the otherwise applicable regulations of the
underlying zone.
The Oxford Street Precise Plan, Tentative Map, Architectural Plans and Landscape Plans
provided in this document are one solution the development of the project site. The City
Zoning Administrator may approve modifications to the Precise Plan Map to accommodate
alternative architectural plans or other revisions that may be proposed by a future developer.
pa!l81 ,f,f~
December 18, 2007
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
Introduction ..
.
N
"11"
<J>
~
<;?,
~
o
tP
~
MAIN ST.
VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
Figure 1 - Site Location Map
paff -2f4 if
December 18, 2007
OXFORlJ STREET PRECISE PLAN
Introduction ..
Figure 2 - Aerial Photograph
Pal8.J 1>~
December 18, 2007
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
Project lJescription .
ll. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project will create a 24-10t, single-family residential subdivision with a density
of6.15 dwelling units/acre, consistenLwith the General Plan. The purpose of this Precise
Plan is to allow the property owner and the city flexibility to achieve an efficient and site
appropriate development within the unique features of the property. The unique features of
this property include a long, narrow shape; the alignment of the project access street with the
existing Monterey Avenue; and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)
requirements for clean water treatment on site.
A. Site Plan
The proposed development will provide 24 residential lots of 5000 square feet or larger, as
allowed by the R-I-5-P Zone. The size and shape of the property results in a variety oflot
configurations. Three residential models are proposed to fit the varied lots while maintaining
the City standards for lot coverage and floor area ratio. These models provide for outdoor
living spaces that meet, and in most cases exceed, the City standards for private open space.
The different lot depths in the development provide an opportunity to vary building setbacks
to create a visually pleasing neighborhood. Garages and driveway locations will also be
varied for interest and to provide adequate areas for on-street parking and placement of trash
and recycling containers for pickup. The Precise Plan is illustrated in Figure 3, Precise Plan.
B. Open Space Plan
The provision of community open space is a required component of a Precise Plan. Common
open space in the proposed development includes a Home Owners Association (HOA) lot at
the end of the cul-de-sac access street, the street parkway and the water quality treatment area.
The open space at the end of the cuI-de-sac will be landscaped and defmed by a low wall.
This area provides an entry focal point and may serve as passive recreational space. The
street parkway will provide an attractive community amenity. The water quality treatment
area will be landscaped with trees and shrubs. This area will partially screen views into the
new development and provide an aesthetic element for the surrounding neighborhood.
Additional open space is provided in the form of larger private rear yard areas. Rear yard
setbacks meet or exceed minimum City standards. The project open space is illustrated in
Figure 16, Landscape Concept Plan and details of the HOA open spaces are illustrated in
Figure 18, Landscape Details.
C. Grading and Drainage Plan
The site will be graded to create a cul-de-sac access street aligned to the existing Monterey
Avenue to the south. The access street gradient is proposed to be approximately 4.0% (but
may vary from 2.0% - 5.0 %) in the southern area and approximately 1.0% in the northern
Par:-~"4 60
December 18, 2007
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
Project Oescription..
area (but may vary from 1.55 - 3.0%). Residential lots will be located on each side ofthe
access street. Residential lot pads will be terraced with pad elevations of approximately 260
feet at East Oxford Street rising to pad elevations of approximately 271 feet at the
northernmost area of the site. Retaining walls with a maximum height of three feet will be
located between several pads to accommodate the grade differential where necessary. The
graded site will maintain the approximate grade differentials with the existing surrounding
properties.
The site will be graded to direct run-off to a water quality basin in the southwest area of the
property next to East Oxford Street. The majority of the residential lots will surface drain to
the landscape easement along the access street that also serves as a water quality treatment
area. A portion of the site will drain to a five-foot wide drainage easement located along the
southeastern boundary of the property, ultimately discharging into Oxford Street.
Off-site grading is not proposed and the grading will strive for a balance of approximately
2,400 cubic yards per acre of cut and fill. The site grading is illustrated in Figure 4, Tentative
Map and Figure 5, Grading Cross Sections.
D. Site Access
The proposed site access is a new public street (Concordia Place) aligned to the existing
intersection of Monterey Avenue and East Oxford Street. Concordia Place will be
constructed to City standards with a 56-foot right-of-way and 67-foot general utility easement.
The street design will accommodate emergency vehicles and trash/recycling vehicles. The 36-
foot wide street pavement will accommodate two 12-foot wide travel ways with six-foot wide
parking areas on each side. There will be a 5.5-foot wide landscape easement on each side of
the street outside of the right-of-way. Within the right-of-way there will be a 4.5-foot wide
planting and water quality treatment area between the street curb and a 5-foot wide sidewalk.
Two street lights will be located on the access street. The north side of Oxford Street will be
improved with new curbs, gutters, sidewalks and landscaping. The proposed access is
illustrated in the Precise Plan and Figure 6, Street Cross Sections.
E. Utilities
Utilities currently serving the property will be upgraded as necessary to accommodate the
proposed residential development. A water service line located in the project access street
will connect to the existing eight-inch main located in East Oxford Street. Fire hydrants and
fire flows will be provided in accordance with the Chula Vista Fire Departments
requirements. A new eight-inch sewer service line located in the project access street will
connect to the existing eight-inch sewer main located in East Oxford Street. Dry utilities will
be brought into the site from East Oxford Street and located underground within the
development. Utility boxes will be located to be as unobtrusive as possible and surrounded
by shrubs and groundcovers to minimize their appearance. Figure 7, Utility and Drainage
pe;e 14fJ50
December 18, 2007
OXFORJJ STREET PRECISE PLAN
Project pescription .
Detail, illustrates the service provisions to residences and a portion of the southeastern
drainage easement.
F, Walls and Fencing
Wood fencing will be used at residential rear and side yards for privacy. Tubular metal
fencing may be used along the northern'property boundary of the property to promote a sense
of openness in the neighborhood. Split face block walls will be located along Oxford Street
for an attractive neighborhood appearance and to provide street noise attenuation. Walls and
fencing are illustrated in Figure 19, Fence and Wall Plan, of the landscape architecture
section of this document.
G. Trash and Recycling
The access street is designed to City standards and will accommodate trash and recycling
vehicles. Individual residences may store containers in garages, side or rear yards and place
them at the curb for pickup. There is adequate curb area along the street so driveways will not
be blocked by the containers. Figure 8, Trash and Recycling Container Plan,
H. Maintenance
A Homeowner's Association (HOA) will be established to ensure the maintenance of the
development. Codes, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&Rs) will be developed to establish
maintenance standards for buildings and landscaping. Each homeowner will be responsible
for maintaining his/her property in accordance with the CC&Rs. The HOA will be
responsible for maintaining the common areas including the Oxford Street and access street
parkways, the passive open space at the cul-de-sac, and the water quality treatment area.
PagS6..cf4'el
December 18, 2007
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
~,..,
/
--
/,//::
NOCTURNE COURT
,
,///'/"
, ,
CHLiJ..A WISTA GARDE(lS
I./NIT No.2'
~NO.5l1241
APN< B2q.47o-m TJlIWj24
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
I 40 l
..
--
---
--
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
"
"
'"
------~----------
i"~~ sa A
--~~im-------'
~ ~" I
~ '
<Xl
I
~
"""
CD
~'I..
~
.
~....
"
''''
~ ~fj.
,
,
,
,
1IJ8j 1f18 J $7
, :
BEA$W ESTATES (.NT 110. 8
I iJApJH}.43111
AP4 tJ8B-8B2-01 tJmJ 10
, ,
, ,
~
,
,
,
,
,
,
1f1tJ! 1116
,
,
:
,
,
,
I
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
--, \
"-../
,
I
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
20
"
$
~
MONTEREY AVE
Project Description
PCM 06-01
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, "'
I '~: fil
i ~~~
I ~ld;i;
: ~r:.~
--------i-------~~lt
i ~ ~
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
I
,I
PfIECISE SITe PLAN
OXFORD
CAylllCllLllaVkila,ClIlbda
-
2
M
__"'.........___c-1.__
2
Figure 3 - PrecllJe Plao
'"
'"
MELROSE A VENUE
Page7of30
"4
'"
I'fIEf'NI8liM
II~JP
December 18,2007
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
Project Description
- --- f---
,
= CID , , CD I~
C@). CD CD CD CD CD ICD j ,..,... I'
---------------- ,.,,/.1 ,.IID.( -. CD CD _.. I...JII.1 , I'
":III.~ -. -. -. , d
_.. _.. , ,
.. , I'
,
---- , I
---
------~----------
l'S ....~ as . ~
i~~ ...-. CONCORDIA PLACE .
~d~ ;.
-~~~---------- ---
\II tl a1 ----
~ = @ = @ @ QD QD
<ID = = "'..J _.. = -. CID -. ,.m.l -.
,,1/1I.,
...m.O ~. -. """,.' -.
----------------
..
NOCTURNE COURT
~.../....
--
~........................
...... 40
.
.
.
///~
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
.
,
.
.
,
, ,
GJJL/UIVJSTA~S
/.lNITHa 2 I
J./.4PNa 6824 I
APJoJ< 821470-19 THRUl26
I I
41 I I
: ..4!, l
, :
..
-
..
-
..
co
I
~
-.
-,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
- ~~
,
,
,
,
,
18jl 198! 197
SEA~ ESTATES ~ NO, S
I MAP'7Ili'42111 MiI-.
APlt 6a11-882-01 tHRU 10
I :
Cl'1
o
""
.....~~t
ROO
~""
~
MELROSE AVENUE
........". M
........"'............
-~-~~...
,
I
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
~......-... \
-.........l
,
I
I
,
,
,
,
,
,
$
-
PCS 07-07
...
~
~
OJ
MONTEREY AVE
,
,
:
-,
il '"
I ~~~
! ~ld~
I ~I"=~
--------i-------~~1f
l ~ t:
f ~ ~
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
: I
, ,
TENTATIVE MAP
OXFORD
CIlyrilClJ..u.........C8IllclfrU,
-
4
~
5
Figure 4 - Tentative Map
Page8of30
December 18,2007
"
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
\\,
\ ..iL
,
\
"
..
--.:1"
.,...--
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
I
,
,
,
,
,
--::r-
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
i91i ~
,
,
,
,
,
,
r
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
198 I
,
,
,
,
,
,
'"
..
plla'Nla)lIY;
III~~
_.._~-
---
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
300-
250-
200_
300-
250-
200-
00
I
~
en
~
300-
250-
200-
__ __~~~aM____. ~_=-~~~
-~--Ni2oij-,.o<-t: !'Nll"': _....~ ~......-. _ ~ '"""......
,
, ,
-.-------------~~"-~r---===----.---..iiiio'iRiT-iCiiiOAi~--.-- ------------
SLOPE PROFILE 'A-A'
R:<U; -. ,.....
lPIl ,.....
KSlElil:r
~_. --~n'j~,;~=mm-u==...m -~:-..F".==
I -~ a'
- ----
_S-rr_. _~rr~..!:__==-___.
SLOPE PROFILE 'B-B'
lI'<I.I>_,.....
lflI~ r_
-.........,
____________..lM:_______
_300
=--~-~ ,-,,,. -..,
.=~~~~..~--._'s-~~~------------.
_250
_200
SLOPE PROFilE 'c.c'
KlU:lOILr_
...~ ,"-oQ'
Page9of30
. HUN'^"'"
~~?S
----
-= :::::":--...
E. o.uoED STlIEET
SECTION MAP
~1"'1IrT
TENTATIVE MAP SHEET
OXFORD 3
0'
Clty of Chula VIlita, Call1omla 5
Project Description
Figure S - Grading CroSJ Sections
December lB, 2007
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
Project!Jescription'
R/W
LAJJDSCAPE: '" \
MAINTENANCE
E:ASEME:NT
~~+
'11,:1;
~.'
10'
"
.'
56' PUBllC R/W
28' 28'
12' 12'
R/W
.'
70'
5' 5'
r LANDSCAPE ct
MAINIDIANCE:
EASEAlENT
Ii" "
,
..a
,
t
.l.!..
~
,....._..._............_.__........_...m..
.....-......- ..--...-. .......-............- ....--.
4- pee
SlDE:WALK
rrPE: "0" CUR
'" GUTlER
AC. PAISIENT
MD BASE
CONCORDIA PLACE
PUBUC RESIDENTIAL STREET
""'7D~
PORTIONS OF CURB. GUTTER. ANO SIDEWALK TO BEt EXlS7JNG fMPROVEJ,lfNTS TO REMAIN
RafO\ED AND REPfJ,CCD AS SHOWN ON PLAN
34' LANDSCAPE EASEMENT (HOA UA/NTAJNfiJ)
R/W
60' PUBUC R/W
R/W
LOT 24
6' spur FACE.
BLOCK WALL
20'
20'
g'
5.8" .2':r
30'
30'
GRASSY 'WAILE:\
7..
~1~~E: ~ / /
5:'SL~
... PCC SIDEWAU<
LOCATED TO MATCH
DOS7JNG SIDEWALKS
ON IJ)JACE:NT SITES
3' I
3'
"
-ZlL
-a
.._.......'..___...m......__".-.._..............n'....
...'.-......,-...........-.................,.........
...............,.... .....
TYPE MGM CUR
'" OUTlER
A.C. PAl,6JENT
Nil} 8ASC
OXFORD STREET (EXISTING)
NCJTWSC4I.E
Figure 6 - Street Cross Sections
I&ge-JIg 2f30
December 18, 2007
'\. ~~, IV 1/ :J I L W O'l-L.
50' 51 .11<> ::>.pt=;:> =>i="/:;:::>
I I r'_
I ~ I ~ I
: /'. ~''': /--~ . ..." :,r'" ~." :
: I II f I :r ~'II
~ inOll.I,' ~ ~:II ~~V}'X/; ~:I ~:
~ _II ~ flj /~; /~~'~ :I,all) II' 5'l/IN. ,. ~ Or:
~ : P=268. 6 , I,;m :' I, 0< 0-." . I
,-: II 1:1 rzj; // i II ~ :0 i :
~J II IplRI ~,^ Iii ~Yj~ jij7/.1 i :I} ~ I
~ ~Pl' 5' l/IN L ~ T ~I ~ I': i ". II
~ I"": I"" . I
~ I: ~ . S I' ~: I <
'" II ~ ,kol--:" 1 tI 1::: ~f-~ I Ii ~ ~ II ~
-....;: 1I1::S: Sl ~ --~ - C\l
+- f~ ., S{' , 1-- --;;~iS"'~ -.-!'--!'2 50' -- -.1--
::'.. ". '0.. 'j .. . ..... " ...." "0 .... ....,. Q . .. .1...
I / '\ I 1\1 '\ /
I 1 L5.5' I.ANDSCAPE & I 'I D;) OS:
MAINTENANCE ESMT Cl ..I - "-
.. I ' ~I I - ,.:;;.
I t ~ ~ ----
~O~D1AlvPLA9E:,_v__ ~tv____J...m._vt<)~. v--
:0 FUTURE DEDICA nON J -.,
\1 1/ \J 1/ \I 1/0\1
'.' .j.'.1 .~. t;.:.. I.... .'T:' . , .:. .... '.1 . "' 'I' . '.1 " '. . 1 .
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
Project!Jescription .
'\.
.Y.. .
TYPICAL DRAINAGE, UTILITY AND SETBACK DETAIL
sc:..uD f".Bf
Figure 7 - Utility and Drainage Design
~~53'f30
December 18, 2007
;
E (
)
~
~
~
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
Project Description
/
/
I
I
I
\
\
,\
~-- =:::3.- _-'::A..- =- -:K- ,2C- -
00 I r".
I
~ I I
U1 I I
.;. I I
I I
I I
1150 I
F I
I
MELROSE A VENUE
-rrzt [2<J [2<J
WW
TRASH CART DETAIL
-,.,.,..
~....
/'fII!PARElJII'i:
.~!B
--
-..-..-
---
PCM 08-01
h
~
~
fJl
MONTE
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-----I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TRASH ENCLOSURE EXHIBIT
OXFORD
CltIllCl'lllll.......CilIlIDrl*I
Figure 8 - Trash aud Recycllng CODtainer Plan
Page 12 000
December 18, 2007
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
Project Description
III. PRECISE PLAN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
The proposed project will create 24 single-family residences accessed from East Oxford
Street. The site design is intended to create an intimate neighborhood that is compatible with
the surrounding residential community. The project design adheres to the City's Design
Manual with varied placement of building to create interest, building orientation for privacy,
and varied garage and parking setbacks.
A. Site Plan
The variety oflot sizes will be complemented by a variety of residential designs. Up to three
distinct residences will be utilized to provide a range of home styles and sizes. The residences
will be sited with varied setbacks from the street to create interest and maximize useable open
space surrounding the homes. The floor plans may be reversed, resulting in additional
residential types. The proposed development standards for the Oxford project are provided in
Table I below.
TABLE 1
Oxford Street Precise Plan Development Standards
Type Standard
Lot Size . 5,000 SQ ft. minimum
Lot Width 50 ft minimum, exceot 35 ft. for cul-de-sac
Building Coverage 40% maximum
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) (including garage) 50% Maximum
Front Yard Building Setback:
(all setbacks measured from property line
except where noted)
. To Building (living area) 15 ft.
. To Porch 10 ft.; Width of porch shall not exceed 1/3 width of house
. To Garage 22 ft. from closest edge of sidewalk to face of garage
Rear Yard Building Setback: 20 ft, with the following exception:
Up to 1/3 of the width of the first story of any house may
encroach 5 ft. into the required 20 ft. rear yard setback, as long
as the second story meets the main 20 ft. setback.
Interior Side Yard Building Setback 5 ft.
Exterior Side Yard Building Setback 10 ft.
Building Height: 28 ft. / 2 stories
(Measured to mean height level between eave and ridge - per
CVMC 19.04.038)
Fencing: Decorative stucco, split-face block walls, rail (view) or wood
privacy fencing is required.
Maximum height is 6 feet from adiacent grade level.
Garage Maximum 400 square foot, 2 car garage with minimum interior
dimension of 20 feet.
(Continued on Pg. 14)
P(I}!e Hi<8' 30
December 18, 2007
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
Project Description
Notes:
a. Minor modifications tu Precise Plan map are permitted pursuant to approval of
a Site Plan and Architectural Review by the Zoning Administrator, per CYMC
19.14.420. Amendments to the Precise Plan Map shall comply with the Precise
Plan Development Standards. All other Precise Plan amendments shall comply
with Precise Plan Modification requirements per CYMC 19.14.577.
b. Uses and Development standards not addressed in this Precise Plan shall
comply with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, CYMC Title 19.
c. Accessory Uses and Structures shall comply with requirements of CYMC
19.24.030, with the following exceptions:
(1) The first 300 square feet of any attached or detached open structure, such
as a patio cover or gazebo, which are open on 2 or more sides, are exempt from
the Floor Area Ratio requirements.
(2) The first 100 square feet of detached enclosed buildings such as a pool,
storage, or garden building is exempt for the floor are ratio requirement.
(3) A 5-foot rear and side yard setback is required for any accessory structure
in the required rear or side yard area.
PSg.e1l58f30
December 18,2007
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
Project Description
The Tentative Map provides a plan for grading, lot layout, access, utilities and water quality
treatment. The Precise Site Plan provides for preliminary plotting and setbacks as well as
establishing coverage's and floor area ratio requirements. Table 2 provides a summary of the
Precise Site Plan lot specific development standards to illustrate compliance with the Precise
Plan Development Standards.
TABLE 2
Oxford Street Precise Plan Development Lot Summary
LOT SUMMARY
RES LOT PLAN TOTAL FLOOR TOTAL
RES. LOT AREA TYPES FLOOR AREA FOOTPRINT LOT
NO. (SF) ON LOT AREA RATIO' AREA COVERAGE"
1 5,651 2 2,420 42.8% 1,452 25.7%
2 5,070 2 2,420 47.7% 1,452 28.6%
3 5,006 1 1,982 39.6% 1,982 39.6%
4 5,177 2 2,420 46.7% 1,452 28.0%
5 5,358 3 2,676 49.9% 1,580 29.5%
6 5,359 . 1 1,982 37.0% 1,982 37.0%
7 5,360 3 2,676 49.9% 1,580 29.5%
8 5,236 1 1,982 37.9% 1,982 37.9%
9 5,362 3 2,676 49.9% 1,580 29.5%
10 5,146 1 1,982 38.5% 1,982 38.5%
11 5,019 2 2,420 48.2% 1,452 28.9%
12 5,523 3 2,676 48.5% 1,580 28.6%
13 5,417 1 1,982 36.6% 1,982 36.6%
14 5,007 2 2,420 48.3% 1,452 29.0%
15 5,068 1 1,982 39.1% 1,982 39.1%
16 5,187 2 2,420 46.7% 1,452 28.0%
17 5,191 1 1,982 38.2% 1,982 38.2%
18 5,195 2 2,420 46.6% 1,452 27.9%
19 5,198 1 1,982 38.1% 1,982 38.1%
20 5,202 2 2,420 46.5% 1,452 27.9%
21 5,237 1 1,982 37.8% 1,982 37.8%
22 5,488 3 2,676 48.8% 1,580 28.8%
23 5,794 1 1,982 34.2% 1,982 34.2%
24 6,249 3 2,676 42.8% 1,580 25.3%
TOTAL 127,500
AVERAGE 5,313 43.4% 32.2%
MAX. 6,249 49.9% 39.6%
MIN. 5,006 34.2% 25.3%
. FI.OlJl NO RATIO III1LlES LI VIII: NO. GAlWOES. PATIOS, IHl Ntr MXrS'1R! SlR.CIIIlES PER CllI: 11.24.180.
.. LOT CllYEIlN;E IEFIIED ~ TIE PERCENT IF TIE TOTAL SITE NO 00IIEIlED ~ SlR.CIIIlES PER CllI: 11.04.0lIO.
PSge Hi qf 30
December 18, 2007
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
Project Description
B. Architecture
The project proposes architecture that is compatible in scale and design with the surrounding
neighborhood. A variety of styles, including both single and two story residences, will be
provided. All sides of the buildings will be articulated and special attention will be given to
building walls that are visible from East Oxford Street. Appropriate building materials will be
used for each architectural style and doors, windows and garage doors will be selected to
complement the style of the buildings.
The project will be integrated into the existing older neighborhood through the use of
traditional architectural styles:
. Spanish architecture will be expressed through the use of stucco walls in light and
neutral colors, tile roofs, and arch forms. Wood and iron trim and tile accents may be
used.
. Craftsman architecture will be expressed through the use of stucco walls, shingle roofs
and siding, exposed rafter tails, and wood details on gables and porches. Accent
materials may include tile, brick, stone, copper and wood. Earth tones and deep color
accents are appropriate for this style.
. California Eclectic architecture draws inspiration from traditional popular styles such as
Cape Cod and Spanish, but relies on strong building forms and minimal ornamentation to
create a contemporary style. Building materials include stucco walls, tile or shake roofs
and raised foam trim. Colors and accent materials should be similar or compatible with
the Spanish and Craftsman architecture to unify the three styles in the neighborhood.
Conceptual elevations and floor plans of the proposed residences are provided in the
following pages. These elevations and floor plans are examples ofthe proposed architectural
styles and the final, built elevations and floor plans may vary from these illustrations.
P8Je 1I!i'lf 3 0
December 18, 2007
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
Development Standards
Front Elevation - Plan 1A California Eclectic
00
I
~
(11
CO
Rear Elevation - Plan 1A California Eclectic
Front Elevation - Plan 18 Spanish
Rear Elevation - Plan 1 B Spanish
Elevations depicted reflect typical examples of architectural styles, however, final constructed elevations may vary slightly from what Is shown.
Figure 9
Odord Plan 1 - ElevatloBII
Page 17 ono
December 18.2007
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
Development Standards
t!QQ!S..
D
'1 r;pR I";ARftGE
BEDRM 2
00
I
~
'1 C..Il,R GAR.4.GE
BEDRM. J
~
~
a>
o
PORCH
BEDRM. 3
~
E.QRQi
Floor Plan - Plan 1A
California Eclectic
Floor Plan - Plan 18 Spanish
Floor Plans depicted reflect typical examples of architectural styles, however, final constructed floor plans may vary slightly from what Is shown.
Figure 10
Oxford Plan 1 - Floor Plan
Page lSoflO
December 18,2007
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
Development Standards
Front Elevation - Plan 2A California Eclectic
Front Elevation - Plan 28 Craftsman
00
I
~
~i"i:~i"'; 11""1"
-,.,,:.::': '-:A" -i\~i "'qu:-i';
,'- ','::'-;,,{.Yf :;\'1;~,;
,It." ..,. ,
: "" ".',',", ",",
-
m
~
ETI
D
~~ ~~
Rear Elevation - Plan 2A California Eclectic
Rear Elevation - Plan 28 Craftsman
Elevations depicted reflect typical examples of architectural styles, however, final constructed elevations may vary slightly from what Is shown.
Figure 11
Oxford Plan 2 - ElevatioD.
Page 19 uf]O
December 18, 2007
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
Development Standards
FAMILY
DININiS
f)'(i
\
\
\
\
: KITCHEN
\
\
\.
"
\.
o
:2~~AR 6AAMe
C'l
I'.)
I.lVcN6
i
.
,
",,==1 =======:l.I!raH6:==::;:====
,
,
,
,
.
.
,
J
::::1
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
",
"
"
"
.
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
,"oyeR
00
I
~
PO~H
,
,
,--------
[::::
First Floor Plan - Plan 2A
California Eclectic
First Floor Plan - Plan 28 Craftsman
Floor Plans depicted reflect typical examples of architectural styles, however, final constructed floor plans may vary slighUy from what Is shown.
Figure 12
Oxford Plan 2 - Floor Plan
Page 20 of30
Octcmbcr 11,2007
1
I
I
I
I I
- I I
I I I
~--------------1 I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
1___________1___1
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
r--------
BePROOOol ~
OolA~T~~
BIl!DfltOOM
OM&TIl.
~ATH
o
o
BeOROOM3
00
I
~
m
(.0)
Development Standards
--,
LAlI.
LO~T I
OI'T.e"~.4
"
"
::
"
"
"--
.
..........
~
"'.
T.
~'OOOOM' t;I z U' , 'LLf - - ~:::-_'O
~ ~llll
I III
I I IJI
L______________, I III
I I 1[1
~=d r-~-~-~
I I III
I I III
I I III
I III
~-----------J III
II III
II II'
c- --,g,.-r-.::--.:::--.=-.=-.=-=-:-;-.=--.=-=-=-.=-= ~_-:....:J
Second Floor Plan - Plan 2A California Eclectic
Second Floor Plan - Plan 28 Craftsman
Floor Plans depicted reflect typical examples of architectural styles, however, final constructed floor plans may vary slightly from what Is shown.
Figure 12
O~ford Plan 2 - Floor Plan
Page 21 0()0
December 18,2007
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
Development Standards
DDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDD
Front Elevation - Plan 3A Spanish
front Elevation - Plan 38 California Eclectic
~.'.'.." 11€1...."
DO
~"..~.,.'"
:h,~;..~",'.
"'r,':,.';',.
~".~"!l!'" ~.
',;.,~,'",.)'.!!,..."... ..r'Pi,.,.,....
'., ,
00
I
~
m''''''''..
, '".,.,.,'"....',"..'...,'" '.
,'.' ''':>~:: :};;,,'
;;.. ,:'
fl,',' .",' ~.,., g'\!i,","','
. ; ,l;:,;~ ''":';;:' .<-;Hi\'
.' . ',..
. ,
en
"'"
Rear Elevation - Plan 3A Spanish
R~ar Elevation - Plan 36 California Eclectic
Elevations depicted reflect typical examples of architectural styles, however, final constructed elevations may vary slightly from what Is shown.
Figure 13
Oxford Plan 3 - Elentlons
hge22onO
December 18, 2007
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
~~HItf,
______...J
L_______
2 CAR GARAGE
co
I
~
r-m--------------mm
I
!
,
I
I
'"
U1
------~
!
,
i
NOOK
"
"
"
"
D
KITCHEN
DINING
LIVING
II II
II PORCH II
II-II
~ ---11!1
First Floor Plan - Plan 3A
Spanish
Development Standards
L
I
2 CAR GARAGE
1111
'"
1111
'"
,...~__u_________________~_w~___ __~
, ,
! !
I I
! !
LIVING
"
"
"
II PORCH II
II II
0=============16
First Floor Plan - Plan 38 California Eclectic
Floor Plans depicted reflect typical examples of architectural styles, however, final constructed floor plans may vary slightly from what is shown.
Figure 14
Oxford Plan 3 - Floor Plan
Page 23 000
December 18,2007
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
Development Standards
~t!r~b~"
~E<O~~RUT
BEDROOM jJ
CD
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l___________________
~PEN
U~NG
j::.., P OSFT LlI U
BFDROOt..l ..
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I 9PEN
l___________________
L~NG
-" , "
, "
" "
L.,.!-------~ "
" "
" "
" "
" "
" "
" "
=[}c"""" ::::::==:[]
a>
a>
._~ I
l rL-------, :
fi ti
" II
I' II
I' II
1-, "
, .,
l_~_=__=__::_=__=__::-=-_=_JJ
Second Floor Plan - Plan 3A Spanish
Second Floor Plan - Plan 38 California Eclectic
Floor Plans depicted reflect typical examples of architectural styles, however, final constructed floor plans may vary slightly from what is shown. _
Figure 14
Odord Plan 3 - Floor Plan
Page 24 000
December 18.2007
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
(Xl
I
~
m
......
M
D
~ ~
~)q
~-~y,
;'.'
m m
Side Elevation - Plan 2A California Eclectic
Development Standards
~ ~m
~
Side Elevation - Plan 3A SpanIsh
Elevations depicted reflect typical examples of architectural styles, however, final constructed elevations may vary slightly from what Is shown.
FIgure IS
Oxford Plan 3 - Enhanced Side Elevations
Page 25 ofJO
DecernberlB.2007
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
Development Standards
C. Landscape Architecture
The proj ect landscape architecture is an important component in integrating the new
development into the existing neighborhood. The "traditional" landscape theme utilizes trees
that have been popular in southern California since the turn of the century. Stately theme
trees including magnolia and sycamore have been selected to create a sense of permanence
and integrate the new development into the surrounding neighborhood. The landscape plan
for the project is illustrated in Figure 16, Landscape Concept Plan.
The north side of Oxford Street will be planted with ground covers and California sycamore
street trees as illustrated in Figure 17, Landscape Street Elevations. The water quality
treatment area draws inspiration from California riparian areas so it will be landscaped with
boulders, grasses, shrubs, groundcovers and sycamore trees. A section view of the water
quality treatment area is provided in Figure 18, Landscape Details. .
The interior streets cape will include a sidewalk separated from the street by a parkway
planted with magnolia trees and sod. The sidewalk will be contiguous to the curb at the cul-
de-sac and the parkway landscape will be located between the sidewalk and residential
property line.
The open space lot at the end of the access street will be designed for passive recreation with
elements such as lawn, seating walls, accent lighting, and a table with seating. Magnolia trees
will frame the use area and create a focal point view from Oxford Street. Metal view fencing
is proposed along the northern boundary to create a sense of openness. A detail of this area is
shown in Figure 18, Landscape Details.
The front yard landscapes will be installed by the developer. The front yard landscapes will
include lawns, groundcover and shrub planting areas, and an accent tree. Wood fencing will
be used at residential rear and side yards for privacy. Six-foot high split face block walls will
be located along Oxford Street for an attractive neighborhood appearance and to provide
street noise attenuation. Walls and fencing are illustrated in Figure 19, Fence and Wall Plan.
The development's HOA will maintain the streetscapes, water quality treatment area and open
space lot at the cul-de-sac. The proposed project will be designed in conformance with the
City's Landscape Manual. The selection of landscape materials and irrigation will adhere to
the City's requirements for water conservation.
parg2~ 'If~o
December 18, 2007
.;
..
-il
"
.a
""
~
:i
e
~
";l
..
"
q
u'
"
I
"
':1
,"; ~
";1
'i i~
,\:11;
"-II'
"
,".
~(
~-
,r
C,_
:<:;
~
el
\j
~
....,
~
...
""
ril
~
~
0~ .
... i
b h h i i
. , .
.... ,'II: I
l>l I "!
l! II !n I
! I I 1 I I ! I
. .
! I I i I I!
I I I I !
I ! II! ~ I I ! I
l
I illl
>
! I! ~~~1l~1l~:i:i1l:i~
..1.. ..................."'..
.. .
Iii
;; ~ ~
I i I
II!
I I !
Idi
! I!!
,"
.}f
"'d
".:0"
". i-~~'
:I'i
.$.
.';
-; 1t
" i
-~
"
L\
z
w
oj)
I1J
..J
!z _""
.( . .
..J 9 ,,: 91
IL ~ .., 1
8-169
i ~ ~ ... I
.
.
I
Hil
~ cr:
~ ~ f
. cr: ~
~ 0 ,
au..
~ 5 0
, '!
! Ii
I I'
Ii
. II
i 1 /
Ill!l
!l!ij
'I'l
.! li!l.
i: i i~
Iqi!
111I!!l
! ~l : ! I
I I idl i i ii il
"quo....
11111 Illl
I i nll!!iI
.lll i L
IIUII!!llll
'" .
~ .
~a::
.~
....
~ 1j
=
.
u
.
:i'
"
.;;
.
.
..J
~
o
o
N
,,;
~
~
Il
~
o
~
N
.
~
~
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
Development Standards
DRG 05-01
L.OT5~F'l....AN6
L.OT 4 - PLAN 2:
L.OTa~PL.ANI
CONCORDIA PLACE ELEVATION
00
I
~
-.J
C)
CONCORDIA PLACE
OXFORD STREET ELEVATION
. ~ .
PREI'ARlSDIY:
STAEETELEYATlONS
...,
CIf\r"'Cl:LMVioIa,~
~ I
4 .
I
OXFORD STREET
Figure 17
Landscaped Street Elevation,
PIl.gc28of30
December 18, 2001
"'..
~-
. l!
. .
i'.'" ~
~ s ~ l1i
~ . ~
{l .
.a .
" --- . ~
,!! , . e
'" I OJ ~ ..,. I ... 8
1; ,... . <'!
~ () .
E ,
'"
:s. ()
- ~ ~ Iii
~ ;
~ D . "'
l:l ~ a:
1 ~ i
! c ~
I . a:
. l! .
I < 6
! ~ )(
c
lfI
L II
III
~
~
~
ti
~
'"'
~
'"'
'"
~
~
~
>- l
.. 1
~
>-
'"
"
----It
~ ~
0
~
I N
.
~
'I .
~
I,
.(
,
I .(
%
()
I i=
"
..
~
<(
8-171
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
. ,. '_..!~'.~_ J"\,'~',:-,
. .
_,i::::;.;,,....~-.>
. ,.
~ - ~
"12 ..L () (j]D .
"";"Q f.,1Jfo.~( ~",.
""M []7] AA[llJ
- ~'-1i-,- 2, idfJ
:--'~. ~.' ". .;;1 ~--'
~,':, '. Ii? "
!tiG. 0'
0,c':i)
~26g.1 p..268.6
M ""'M
~
;t ,~
...r- ~
W ~CD~
.!:3!',o 0 I ,.,,,... ~4 Y
M em ;;,tM M rm Iff ~ ~
, :f~+~ """ -:-, ~:>t g
~. ~
0',.
'A
~ --..---..
~f.'; . '-=::::.---
~,--/'
(~ :~, ~", ---1s;:--: ~-'!M:W 'I\~rwt ~'?C W
<T'P;J -'ff ~:.; ~!r-" ~ ~::J ~ ~~" 12
"'271.0.4 L.......,rm L-.....!5!!!!.I L-"r ~
_ L.,1HI ~ ~ L-- ~ L-..,[HJ
~
,
CONCORDIA PLACE ..
,," .,'.. ''''is..'O'-e. ,',_ _. .... '~,T""o....
I'
~T..=:;;:;:.=:;r.::=-:;:
;--:;;S';J;T ~:;T~;;~{'---;';; "-_-T7~T-*~;~~h ,T:~A~--~~ -~-=.~:~~-= -~:~~tL~:
T=:A~::::;'~
(X)
I
~
I
-'-_ '~,;,.,.,~;";::;,.,,.'::c;;:~ :1 1 .
.,
"".,t ~
; ;;':,,: :1 '-~ -';
-
.....~r__-...u<.........
__I
.1
...........'--",..........
Jo'lA1-1- 1-E<50END
-.J
'"
~_0I'\lf'J<;1!"""-" .u..~~.....
,._III'U..OQOaDO!<........ ----
"'_:lI'\.n'"'4""':_1H'tl. -
..--"'" -
.._..u.a_~""", _
...._w.u.w__ _
"""""""-"'"' -
1~'_..u.'_"""''''''''1II< .
.,..-........-................ .
~_.......,-lIlQcl<-- .
J!:
-~
Development Standards
DRe 05-01
I, tc,
,
. ~-
r : '-+1 :,.;k-J 'hi. ~..'
-- : --..:-. J .; I "
CD '2i I~IJ.O; I J
""., Pi M', : ^"'~:. Ji'l
cm-m- H-- [jO ~[ J ~ \\ 1:-, l I
. M i '..~ +.i '=l. t! ,-,'
-C I:, === I" ~.~J:'I
/~ - 11 .. _",,_ ~
".., 'i! '~B~l...j
- /;::-'L,,,: . ,=".:q-
..-.__"f.---.::c .".i ,ur
'I" "-\- '\1)"j'. ,
I __I' ,- ~~~n:
~) f/ (i::' ; I ,p:r ~" ".
'= l) ~!r1' rflmJ;:>. .,~:.,
00 .4 1'-262.3 I ~r.2 i' 'r~'
~... 'i~?~ I~~i..;
" 11U~-' ~
~~-lS:;':':T ;;-;~~T=- - - - ~~.
I" ;~ .;;;
. -~ .-...,
"
.-
'~:,,--_.
Ii"""""'"
!j I' -_.._
- --
-
~
2 I
~
4 .
,
.._...-.
FENCE AND WALL fIt..m
OXFORD STREET
~"'ChoiIio""""CdkImII.
Figure 19
Fence and Wall Plan
Page30of30
Deccmbel" 18, 2007
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
::$"!f:.. CIIT OF
~"'< ".... (HULA VISTA
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND
1/8/08, Item l
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO
THE CIVIC CENTER DESIGN BUILD AGREEMENT WITH
HIGHLAND PARTNERSHIP, INC. FOR THE CIVIC CENTER
RENOVATION PROJECT TO INCREASE THE GUARANTEED
MAXIMUM PRICE FOR PHASE 3 OF THE PROJECT BY
$1,699,515 AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE
SECOND AMENDMENT
DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING AND GENERAL SERVICES A~
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE /'~t I^- MoL \J .
CITY MANAGER ,t;.- <;; 'T
ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER SI
4/5THS VOTE: YES D NO [!]
In July of2001, the City Council approved a master plan for the renovation of the Civic Center.
On February 18, 2003, the City Council approved a Design Build Agreement ("Agreement")
with Highland Partnership, Inc. ("HPI") to design and construct the project. On August 3, 2004,
the City Council approved the Guaranteed Maximum Price ("GMP") of the project at
$38,346,000. The GMP reflects the amount to be paid to the design builder for design and
construction. The total project budget approved by City Council on August 3, 2004 was
$50,148,000.
On February 20, 2007, the City Council approved the funding of Phase 3 of the Civic Center
proj ect and appropriated funds therefore. Phase 3 of the proj ect includes the renovation of the
former police department building, the demolition of the Legislative Office Building and the
Community Development Building and the construction of the additional parking and
landscaped areas. The renovated former police department building will house the Human
Resources Department, Redevelopment Agency and Housing Authority, Recreation Department,
Information Technology Systems Department, Office of Conservation and Environmental
Services, a portion of the Building and Planning Department and the Chu1a Vista Employees
Credit Union. Phase 3 is funded by a combination of the Public Facility Development Impact
Fee Fund (93.68%) and the General Fund (6.32%). The approved budget for Phase 3 is
$15,015,000 and was funded using only cash on hand.
9-1
1/8/08, Item~
Page 2 of 12
Since construction commenced on Phase 3, a number of issues have arisen which have caused
the project budget to be adversely impacted. The major issues are the discovery of unexpected
and significant amounts of asbestos in the building, significant enhancement to the City's
computer server rooms and associated equipment upgrades, changes in floor plans on the first
floor and the expansion of use of the basement with the planned relocation of Planning and
Building staff out of their leased space in the Eastlake Business Center into the basement.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project has been approved under a Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-04-013.
RECOMMENDATION
That Council adopt the resolution.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
None.
DISCUSSION
Proiect Descrivtion
The Civic Center project has three construction phases. Phase I was the demolition and
reconstruction of City Hall. That phase was substantially completed in November of 2005.
Phase 2 was the renovation of the Public Services Building ("PSB"). That phase was
substantially completed in January of 2007. The final phase is the renovation of the former police
department building and the demolition of the Legislative Office Building and Community
Development Building. The total project budget for the project that the Council approved on
August 3, 2004 is $50,148,000. The GMP, the portion that is paid to the City's Design Builder,
HPI, for this project, is $38,346,000. The GMP covers all design and construction related costs
of the project. The remaining funds in the budget beyond the GMP are utilized for a variety of
purposes including furniture, fixtures and equipment, project insurance, staff time, consultant
services, etc.
As stated above, the first phase of the project was substantially completed in November 2005.
The phase included the demolition of the 18,300 square foot City Hall and construction of the
new facility. The actual cost of Phase I was $22,233,610 which translates into $542,390 below
the approved budget.
In an effort to make the multi-year, multi-phase project as fiscally efficient as possible, the
design costs for Phases 2 and 3 and the vast maj ority of the proj ect insurance costs were all
included in Phase 1. Additionally, some materials such as doors, flooring, ceiling tiles, etc. were
purchased for all three phases during Phase I.
Phase 2 included the renovation of the 29,700 square foot Public Services Building (PSB). The
Budget that was approved for Phase 2 was $12,357,000. In addition to that, $542,390 of the
Phase I savings was transferred into Phase 2, bringing the total Phase 2 budget up to
$12,899,390. Phase 2 has now been closed out with a total cost of $12,728,068. The net result
of the first two phases was a combined budget of $35,133,000 and a total expenditure of
9-2
1/8/08, Item--9-
Page 3 of 12
$34,961,678, leaving an available balance of $171,322. Table 1 below summarizes the total
budgets for Phases 1 and 2.
Table I. Phase 1 and Phase Two Budget Summary
Phase
Phase 1
Phase 2
* Approved budget for Phase 2 includes carryover of savings from Phase 1.
Phase 3 Chanf!es
Immediately after Phase 2 was completed, Phase 3 commenced. As stated above the approved
budget for Phase 3 is $15,015,000 and some expenses for Phase 3 were paid in earlier phases.
Attachment 1 is the staff report that was presented to City Council and approved on February 20,
2007 regarding these issues. Shortly after staff was relocated out of the former police
department building and work commenced, a significant asbestos issue was discovered. An
environmental review of all of the buildings in the complex had been done prior to any
construction commencing. The reports, which the City contracted for directly and provided to
HPI, noted that there would be some asbestos present, however, it turned out that the problem
was far more extensive than was anticipated. This discovery led to a suspension of work while
an asbestos mitigation plan was developed and submitted to the appropriate governmental
agencies for approval.
At the same time that the asbestos plans were being developed, the Administration Department
informed the General Services Department that it wished to close the satellite building
inspection/plan check office in the Eastlake Business Park and relocate that operation to the
Civic Center. This relocation would enable the City to terminate and/or allow the office space
lease agreement it has to expire. The only place in the Civic Center that these staff can be
housed is the un-programmed area of the basement of the former police department. Our design
build agreement and project budget did not contain any funds for the design and construction of
this space as it was intended that it to be roughed in and then utilized at some point in the future
when necessary.
Another significant change was the improvements to the ITS server room and purchase of
dedicated HV AC equipment for the computer room areas. Soon after work started on the
building, it became clear that the existing utilities and lines, including drainage lines, that ran
through the computer server area would need to be adjusted and/or removed. This prompted a
more comprehensive review of the computer rooms and the determination that a reworking of
that space would be of long-term benefit to the City. Also, in order to protect the equipment
which continued to be the City's central technology center, portable HV AC units needed to be
utilized. As we investigated the needs of the ITS department, it was determined that it would be
a much more secure and safer environment for the equipment if we provided dedicated,
exclusive HV AC systems. This proved to be a good decision as the City has experienced
minimal service disruptions and no loss of data during the course of construction.
9-3
1/8/08, Item~
Page 4 of 12
With respect to plan check changes, the changes discussed above required the submission of
revised plans. Also, during the course of the project, building and fire codes have evolved and
changed prompting some changes to the plans from the original construction documents.
There have also been a number of other changes that the Engineering and General Services
Department have been instructed to undertake that were not part of the City's original scope or
were changes to the original scope that resulted in cost increases. Table 2 below provides a
summary of the approved project budget for Phase 3. Table 3 below provides a summary of the
cost additive changes. As the table indicates, we have described those changes that we would
have normally expected to be paid out of the approved project contingency, those changes that
were not typical contingency items but were also not a result of City generated scope increases
and those changes that were the result of scope changes that the City directed.
Table 2. Approved Design and Construction Budget for Phase 3
Total Desi n Builders Costs
Pro' ect Insurance
Total Phase 3 Costs
9-4
$785,000
$10,000
$83,000
$166,000
$409,000
$142,000
$200,000
$739,000
$6,689,000
$1,419,000
$415,000
$11,057,000
$3,012,000
$946,000
$15,015,000
1/8/08, IteDl~
Page 5 of 12
Table 3. Cost Additive Changes
IteDl
Cost
NorDlal
Contingency
IteDl
City Generated
Scope Change
Site Utili Increases
ITS-Enhanced AC/Server RooDl Work
Plan Check Chan es
Sewer PUDl Location*
Lobb Ceilin Modifications**
First Floor Plan Changes
(Rearranging for Credit Union and several City
de ts.
Roof Drain/Slo e Issues
Eastlake Staff Relocation
Asbestos AbateDlent
Re lenishDlent of DB Contin enc ***
Pro. ect Insurance Increase
$33,980
$289,959
$171,123
$75,194
$2,398
$151,202
$100,884
$401,200
$876,642
$141,299
$18,400
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
* While this is shown as an added cost, it was known when the City's FY 2007-08 CIP
Budget was approved and sufficient sewer funds were appropriated at that time to cover this
item.
** The amount depicted is for design costs only. Construction costs will be able to be
covered within the replenishment of the DB Contingency.
*** It is hoped that not all of this replenishment will be needed, however, we will be
demolishing two older buildings that may have environmental issues we're not aware of at
present, therefore, we feel it is prudent to fully refund the contingency. Any funds not expended
will be returned to the City's funds.
Table 4 below breaks down the gross costs into the normal contingency items, those items that a
contingency would not typically cover but were not City generated scope changes and the City
scope changes.
9-5
1/8/08, Iteml
Page 6 of 12
Table 4. Summary of Cost Changes
As Table 4 indicates, the project would have come in within the 2004 approved budget but for
the asbestos and city generated scope changes. In fact, we believe that there is a chance that the
project may have been slightly under budget since we had an original project contingency of
$415,000 and would have tapped into it for only $137,262 as of today. As stated above, there is
still quite a bit of work to do and the demolition of the Community Development and Legislative
Office buildings could still create some cost issues.
To further analyze the fiscal status of Phase 3, if we were to assume the full expenditure of the
approved project budget and the asbestos remediation costs of $876,642, we would have been
6% over budget. With respect to the entire project, had all costs associated with all three phases
been spent, plus the asbestos costs, the project would be 1.75% over budget.
GMP Adiustment
The preceding discussion focused on the total project costs, which are ultimately what's most
important. The GMP only relates to those costs in the project that are payable to the design
builder. As such the amendment to the GMP is a somewhat different amount. As stated earlier,
the approved GMP for the entire project is $38,346,000. There have been no changes to the
GMP to date. The cost additive increases discussed within this report result in a net need to
increase the GMP by $1,699,515. Table 5 below summarizes how the GMP adjustment was
calculated and Attachment 2 is a copy of Prime Contract Change Order #05 that details how the
above amount has been determined.
Table 5. Summary of GMP Adjustment
Item
$8,428,488
$261,422
$8,689,910
Amended Phase 3 GMP
A roved Non Cost Additive Transfers
Current Phase 3 GMP
Committed Costs to Date
General Conditions
Total Costs to Date
Asbestos Abatement
Various Construction Cost Increases
$876,642
$1,225,940
9-6
1/8/08, 1tem~
Page 7 of 12
Previous I Committed Costs
Variance To Hard Costs From Bud
Civic Center Budf!et Status
As indicated in Tables 3 and 4, the total cost of changes to Phase 3 is $2,741,351. As prior staff
reports have indicated, there were some savings from the first two phases of the project. Those
savings have been brought forward from phase to phase. It is important to note that the
Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) and total project budget for the entire project was
established on August 3, 2004. That price was set when construction costs, particularly material
costs, were escalating significantly. The Design Build Contract did provide for automatic GMP
increases based on recognized construction cost indexes. None of those automatic GMP
increases have been sought by HPI nor are any anticipated. The Building Cost Index for the Los
Angeles area (San Diego is not tracked independently by the Engineering News Record) has
increased 16% since 2004. Had HPI requested the increases that the contract allows, the GMP
could potentially have already increased by $6,135,360 ($38,346,000*.16) for the base project
as compared to the $1,699,515 increase currently requested that includes non-DB generated
changes.
As the Civic Center project is a multi-phased project with several distinct funding sources, there
are funds that have not been expended in the cash accounts and the bond financed accounts for
Phases 1 and 2 that are available to be utilized to offset the Phase 3 increases. Table 6 below
provides a surmnary of funds available within the project that can be utilized to offset the Phase
3 cost increases.
Table 6. Funds Available in Civic Center Project (GG-139, GG-200 and GG-300)
Pro' ect Cost Increases
Phase 2 Bond Proceeds
Phase 3 Sewer Funds
Phase 3 Ci Furniture Allowance
EOC Pro'ect Transfer GG-189
$171,322
$75,194
$1,150,421
$6,714
Imvacts of These Intra-Proiect Transfers
Transferring the City's entire furniture and staff time reimbursement budget over to the hard
construction side of the project means that while the construction of the building can be
completed, it carmot be furnished, therefore, it carmot be occupied. It also means that the
General Fund will see a reduced amount of reimbursement of staff time charges, resulting in
budgetary shortfalls from revenues from a number of departments, but most prominently the
Engineering and General Services Department. The option of utilizing existing furniture
scattered throughout the Community Development, Ken Lee and Legislative Office Building is
9-7
1/8/08, Item~
Page 8 of 12
not workable since the design of the former police building, and, in particular, the electrical, data
and communication plans assume that wiring in workstations will run through the furniture itself
as it does in City Hall and the Public Services Building. The hodgepodge of furniture in those
buildings does not support that sort of design. Assuming that sufficient funds to purchase and
install the fumiture are appropriated to the project during the normal budget adoption process in
June of 2008, the City would then be in a position to order furniture on July I, 2008. Typically
there is a 90-day timeframe between placing the order and delivery plus an additional several
weeks for installation. Under a most positive scenario, the building will be completed in May of
2008 and the furniture installed and the building ready for occupancy sometime in October of
2008. This scenario would push back the completion of the site work into early 2009.
In the event that funds were not appropriated during the fiscal year 2008-09 budget process, we
would not be able to furnish the building and relocate the planned staff to the building. This will
leave the building essentially vacant for some undetermined amount of time and vulnerable to
vandalism. The City's computer center is in the basement of the building and contains millions
of dollars of equipment. The risk of damage to that facility is undoubtedly higher if the building
is vacant and the potential loss to the city in terms of equipment damage and loss of productivity
for staff due to that damage is significant. The issues discussed below with respect to site
conditions and ADA access will also be applicable to this scenario of not funding the furniture
portion of the project during the annual budget process.
Imoacts of Proiect Termination
Should this resolution not be adopted, the first significant impact to the project would be the
immediate suspension of the project by the City. The City's design build agreement allows it to
suspend the job for up to ninety days. Upon such an action, HPI could submit a request for a
change to either the GMP and/or the contract time. At the end of the ninety days, should the City
not reauthorize the restart of work, HPI could terminate the agreement upon ten days written
notice.
An alternative to suspension would be the immediate termination of the contract by the City.
The City may, upon giving a minimum of seven days notice, terminate the contract for
convenience. HPI will be entitled to just and equitable compensation for any satisfactory work
completed to the effective date of the termination. Upon termination, the City Manager may
direct HPI to take any action that may be necessary for the protection and preservation of
property related to the project which would include securing the building in a quasi-vacant and
semi-finished condition for an undetermined amount of time.
Aside from contractual issues, the most obvious impact, from the public's perspective, would be
the aesthetic issues surrounding having a boarded up building with security fencing around it on
the Civic Center campus.
While considering all of the discussion of the actual building costs, it is important to keep in
mind that, based on the November 2006 Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (PFDIF)
Update, the funding of the construction of the project was modified to have the PFDIF provide
88.7% of the total cost. Shutting down the project now will have no positive impact on the
general fund. In fact, besides the likely general fund costs that would be needed to make interim
improvements to the site and the existing buildings as discussed below, there would also be a
negative impact to the general fund in terms ofless staff time being reimbursed from the proj ect.
9-8
1/8/08, Item---B.-
Page 9 of 12
While the possibility exists that there would be a reduction in staff levels with the termination of
the project, that is not a given as there would need to be staff oversight of the remedial projects
that would need to move forward to make the complex safe and ADA compliant.
In assessing the impacts of shutting the final phase down at this point, it is crucial to also
consider the many other impacts besides what would seem the obvious financial ramifications to
the project as it's contracted today. As indicated above, the guaranteed maximum price for the
entire Civic Center project was established in August of 2004. A significant value engineering
effort was undertaken to establish that GMP for what was going to be a multi-phase four-year
construction project. That GMP was established just as material costs for construction projects
were starting to escalate sharply. By setting the GMP at that time, we essentially locked in our
costs in 2004 dollars and have managed to avoid the significant run-up in costs that virtually
every major construction project has experienced over the past three years. A termination of the
contract at this point essentially rips up the GMP as it exists today. Since we don't have any
sense of when the project would restart should it be stopped and how we would contract for the
completion of the project, it is very difficult to estimate how much our costs would rise upon
restart. We think a doubling of our remaining costs would be a conservative estimate if the
project is shut down for even just a few years.
Leaving aside construction cost run-ups, there are other direct project related considerations to
take into account. The City employs a project management consultant on this project, Kip
Howard of Allegis Development Services, Inc. Mr. Howard has direct experience on projects
that were shut down during construction. Mr. Howard was retained to restart the Four Season's
Aviara Hotel and Resort project in Carlsbad after it had been shutdown at approximately 25%
completion. Mr. Howard has indicated that significant expenses were incurred on that project
upon restart and that we would see the same.
One of the items that A viara experienced was that their HV AC system had to be removed and
replaced, including equipment and duct-work due to concerns over the fear of promoting
Legionnaires Disease. Rodents, birds and air-borne particulates had found their way into the
system despite best efforts to prevent that kind of infestation and infiltration. In that case, the
roof and exterior skin of the building was not watertight. We would obviously not want to make
that mistake. The building at present is not watertight and we would take the necessary steps to
make it so should work stop. Site drainage has not been completed and infiltration of sitting
rainwater is possible, especially over the long term. These problems could lead to placing our
technology center at risk as well as compromise our newly installed HV AC system. A
significant time period of inactivity makes both of those possibilities more likely. Mr. Howard
has also advised that we need to consider other issues that could have significant impacts on the
costs of completing the building at some time in the future. Among those issues are the
possibility of regulatory changes to life-safety, ADA and seismic codes that could cause re-
design and additional construction costs.
There are also significant issues to consider within the complex that would arise should the
building not be completed. This is a fairly long list and we have not attempted as yet to develop
cost estimates. It would be fair to assume that regardless of the costs, they would be a general
fund obligation. These are not in any order of importance and many will require significant
analysis to quantify the impacts:
9-9
1/8/08, Item2
Page 10 of12
> Inadequate ADA compliance (walkways and parking) for both the public and staff.
> Inadequate parking in the complex resulting in staff and the public continuing to park in
the surrounding neighborhoods.
> Unoccupied building would be an eyesore in the Civic Center complex and provide an
attraction for vagrants.
> Storm water and NPDES issues, as the site drainage system is incomplete.
> Restrooms, code compliant emergency access, ADA compliant access would need to be
completed in Building 300 for ITS staff who would still nelld to go there as the City's
technology hub will remain in the basement.
> Loss of energy incentives from SDG&E as part of the Savings By Design program.
> May require the continued and possible extension of lease for space in Eastlake for
Planning and Building staff.
> May require the continued lease of temporary office trailers for staff currently so housed
who are destined for Building 300. Power supplying the trailers in the Ken Lee parking
lot is temporary and would need to be upgraded.
> Would require the continued occupancy of the Community Development, Legislative and
Ken Lee Buildings. Virtually no maintenance has been done in these buildings for
several years. All of them have existing deficiencies related to ADA requirements,
deteriorating HV AC systems, poor exterior lighting, poor flooring, security and roof
problems.
> The Civic Center's Emergency Generator loop would not be completed.
> The Civic Center's internal building communications, security and HV AC control system
would not be completed.
> There would likely be significant morale and productivity issues as some staff continues
to occupy sub-standard space.
> Ongoing security of the vacant building would be problematic.
> Potential for conflict between ITS staff and unauthorized personnel in the vacant
building.
> ITS staff would continue to be scattered around the complex unless the interior spaces of
the existing buildings was reorganized.
There is a key point that needs to be emphasized. A project termination is not a no cost option.
The City would need to contract with HPI or some other contractor to make the building secure.
It is furthermore unlikely that those costs would be PFDIF eligible, which then renders them a
general fund obligation. During construction HPI has retained the services of a professional
security firm to patrol the site in the evenings and on weekends to protect their work and
materials. We have had multiple incidents of vandalism and theft in the building as it has been
renovated. Vacant buildings make attractive targets.
The bullet items above mention issues related to Americans With Disabilities Act issues. Since
the site is an active construction site, we are permitted to not be in compliance, provided, of
course, that the improvements when completed, will be fully compliant. Shutting down the
project eliminates that construction site exception and the City would need to then bring all
accessible areas up to ADA standards. This too would not likely be a PFDIF eligible cost.
Lastly, as stated above, the City's computer center will still be operating in the basement of the
building. Since there will be staff in the building, it must be compliant with ADA, including the
elevator. It also must have finished restroom facilities. A project termination would not absolve
the City of the need to finish the interior of the building to at least those minimum levels.
9-10
1/8/08, Item3-
Page 11 of12
With respect to the 'Eastlake Staff Relocation' item, these costs are related to the relocation of
the Planning & Building Department's Inspections and Plan Review staff from the Eastern
Permit Center to the Civic Center complex. The PFDIF program has always assumed the
eventual closing of the Eastern Permit Center. In the 1999 PFDIF Update, it was assumed that
the staff housed at this satellite office would be relocated to the new Corporation Yard upon the
project's completion. Since that time, staff has determined that sufficient space is not available
to house these employees at the Yard as previously planned. It is therefore the recommendation
of staff that suitable space be constructed to house these functions in the basement of the former
Police Facility. While this decision is anticipated to add $401,200 to the cost of Phase 3, this
amount will be offset by the elimination of annual lease payments for the satellite office. Upon
expiration of the lease agreement on December 3,2009, the closure of the Eastern Permit Center
will generate annual savings of $129,360. The payback on this decision is less than four years,
typically considered a very positive and advantageous pay back timeframe.
Total Pro/eet Budf!et Summary
Table 7 below provides a summary of the total budget history of the project, assuming that the
recommendations contained within this report are enacted. Since the project is multi-phased and
contains several funding components, Table 6 relates actual expenditures to the budgets
established in the August 2004 GMP. This gives a more apples to apples comparison of budget
to actual expenditures. The total delta reflects a 3% overage, an enviable result given the
complexity and duration of the project.
Table 7. Project Budget Summary
Phase
Actual/Projected
Ex enditures
Savings/(Shortfall)
Other Potential Issues
The only other sigoificant issue that potentially could affect the total project budget is the
incorporation of an Events Monitoring Center in the basement of the building. The basement
includes a large training room that has a moveable wall that allows flexibility in terms of the size
of the space. The City Manager has directed staff to enable this space to be utilized as an Events
Monitoring Center in the event of an emergency or some other event. The room will provide the
City with an area in the Civic Center that can be used as an interim Emergency Operations
Center. The room and, in fact, the entire building, do not meet minimum seismic standards for
an essential services building. It has been the long-term plan of the City that when Fire Station
No.1 is reconstructed it would include a formal Emergency Operations Center. Fire Station No.
I would be constructed to the necessary seismic standards to be classified as an essential services
building.
9-11
1/8/08, Item....3.-
Page 12 of 12
DECISION MAKER CONFLICTS
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council and has found a conflict exists, in
that Councilmember Jerry Rindone has holdings within 500 feet of the boundaries of the
property which is the subj ect of this action.
FISCAL IMPACT
The fiscal impact of this action is described in detail above. Phase 3 of the Civic Center project
is funded by the PFDIF and the General Fund. Most of the cost additive changes are direct
construction costs and, based on the March 2006 PFDIF Update, 100% of the those costs are
PFDIF eligible. With respect to project insurance, those costs are 93.68% PFDIF eligible. Upon
completion of Phase 3, the final split of the project's cost between the PFDIF and the General
fund will be calculated. No additional appropriations are requested at this time.
Due to the significant slow down in the housing market, we anticipate that an interfund loan or
bond restructuring may be necessary in order to avoid a deficit in the PFDIF fund at the end of
the current fiscal year. The Finance Department is currently working with bond counsel and the
City's financial advisor to review the various refunding options for both the General Fund and
PFDIF fund. A separate recommendation will be brought forward for Council consideration
regarding this matter.
The current PFDIF fee is sufficient to offset these construction and potential fmancing costs
without increasing the amount charged to developers.
Prepared by: Jack Griffin, Director of General Services
Maria Kachadoorian, Director of Finance
M:\General Services\GS Administration\Council Agenda\Civic Center\Phase III GG300\December 2007 GMP Adjustment 1 0808 draft version
3-strevisions2.doc
Attachment t; February 20, 2007 Staff Report
Attachment 2: Prime Contract Change Order #05
9-12
-- r
,
AM- a.c "-""lJ.1 \
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
~Vf::. CfTYOF
"~CHULA VISTA
2120/07, Item ~
SUBMITIED BY:
RESOLUTION APPROPRIATING FUNDS FROM THE
PUBLIC FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPAc:r FEE FUND FOR
THE CONSTRUc:rrON OF PHASE 3 OF THE CMC CENTER
RENOV A TrON PROJECT (00-300)
DIRECTOR OF GENERAL SERVICE&1:~
DIRECTOR OF FlNffCE rf f"I-- Mt.-\.j .
CITY MANAGER II
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
4/5THS VOTE: YES ~ NO 0
BACKGROUND
In July of2ool, the City Council approved a master plan for the renovation of the Civic Center.
On February 18, 2003, the City Council approved a Design Build Agreement ("Agreement")
with Highland Partnership, Inc. (''HPr') to design and construct the project. On August 3, 2004,
the City Council approved the Guaranteed Maximum Price ("GMP") of the project at
$38,346,000. The GMP reflects the amount to be paid to the design builder for design and
construction. The total project budget approved by City Council on August 3, 2004 was
$50,148,000. This action appropriates the funds to construct the third and final phase of the
project in accordance with those previous City Council actions.
Phase 3 of the Civic Center project is funded by a combination of the Public Facility
Development Impact Fee Fund (88.87%) and the General Fund (11.13%). The first two phases
of the project have been completed in accordance with the budget approved by the City Council.
The Public Facility Development hnpact Fee Fund ("PFDIF") was established to fund a number
of specific projects in the City, including the Civic Center Renovations. The PFDIF funds may
only be used for those projects specifically approved by the City Council in the ordinance
establishing the PFDIF and its subsequent amendments.
Phase 3 of the project includes the renovation of the former police department building, the
demolition of the Legislative Office Building and the Community Development Building and the
construction of the additional parking and landscaped areas. The renovated former police
department building will house the Human Resources Department, Community Development
Department, Recreation Department, Information Technology Systems Department, a portion of
the Building and PIanning Department and the Chula Vista Employees Credit Union.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project has been approved under a Mitigated Negative Declaration, rS-04-013.
)0-1
9:-13
1/20/07, ItemlO....-
Palle20f7
RECOMMENDATION
That Council adopt the resolution.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
None.
DISCUSSION
Proiect DescrirJtion
The Civic Center project has three construction phases. Phase I was the demolition and
reconstruction of City Hall. ThaI phase was substantially completed in November of 2005.
Phase 2 was the renovation of the Public Services Building C"PSB"). That phase was
substantially completed in January of2oo7. The final phase is the renovation of the former police
department building and the demolition of the Legislative Office Building and Community
Development Building. The total project budget for the project that the Council approved on
August 3, 2004 is $50,148,000. The OMP, the portion that is paid to the City's Design Builder,
HPI, for this project, is $38,346,000. The OMP covers all design and construction related costs
of the project. The remaining funds in the budget beyond the OMP are utilized for a variety of
purposes including furniture, fixtures and equipment, project insurance, staff time, consultant
services, etc.
As stated above, the first phase of the project was substantially completed in November 2005.
The phase included the demolition of the 18,300 square foot City Hall and construction of the
new facility. The actual cost of Phase 1 was $22,233,610 which translates into $542,390 below
the approved budget.
In an effort to make the multi-year, multi-phase project as fiscally efficient as possible, the
design costs for Phases 2 and 3 and the vast majority of the project insurance costs were all
included in Phase 1. Additionally, some materials such as doors, flooring, ceiling tiles, etc. were
purchased for all three phases during Phase I. The addition of these costs brought the total Phase
1 budget up to $25,283,854. Through January 17, 2007, the total amount expended for Phase 1
was $24,793,162. Staff is in the process of closing Phase 1 and does not expect any additional
expenditures.
Phase 2 included the renovation of the 29,700 square foot Public. Services Building (PSB). The
Budget that was approved for Phase 2 was $12,357,000. In addition to that, $537,823 of the
Phase 1 savings was transferred into Phase 2, bringing the total Phase 2 budget up to
$12,894,823. While there are still some outstanding bills to be paid, it appears that the final cost
of Phase 2 will be $12,807,465 which translates into $87,358 below the approved budget.
At the time thai Phase 2 was financed, Council also approved the addition of some Phase 3 costs.
The financing included all of the Phase 2 costs incurred during Phase 2 and reimbursement of
some of the costs in Phase I for Phases 2 and 3 that were not part of the Phase 1 financing.
Table 1 below provides a summary of bow the Phase 2 bond proceeds have been expended:
/~'r
9-14
2120/07, ltem~
Page 3 of7
Table 1.
Bond
Proceeds
"?I ,~i!I~F~!~~:~~n' 1;ltJ~:~:j~ F
Expenditure
Amount
Running
Balance
517,183,964 Startin Balance
NIC rovements
Pbase I Reimbursements for Phase 2 and 3
Phase 2 Costs less reimbursement
Phase 3 Costs less reimbursement
Bond Proceeds Available to Move Forward
50
51824,736
53,046,293
. $11,044,005
5263,665
$17,183,964
$15,359,228
$12,312,935
$1,268,930
$1,005,265
$1,005,265
With the substantial completion of Phase 2 in January of 2007, the City is ready to move on to
Phase 3. This phase includes the renovation of the fonner police department, the demolition of
the Community Development Building and the Legislative Office Building and the construction
of additional parking and landscaped areas. Housed on the first floor of the renovated building
will be the Human Resources Department, Community Development Department, Recreation
Department, a portion of the Building and Planning Department and the ChuJa Vista Employees
Credit Union. The basement will be home to the Information Technology Services Department
(ITS), a large conference/training room, additional conference rooms, storage areas, gym and
locker room and an un-programmed area that will be "roughed in". This un-programmed area
will be able to be easily finished if the City finds the need to use that space in the future.
From an architectural perspective, the building will be renovated on the exterior to complement
the architecture of the new City Hall and renovated PSB. The' elevation facing the PSB will
contain the same tower and archway elements that will complete the lIew public open space area
in the center of the complex. The existing exterior walls of the building will be modified to
provide windows similar to City Hall and PSB.
The interior of the building will also be significantly modified. The main feature of the interior
of the building will be a 36 foot by 36 foot "atrium" in the center of the building. Above the
atrium, there is an existing clearstory, thus natural light will be able to penetrate all the way into
the basement of the building. Public aCcess to the building will b'e switched from the side of the
building facing Fourth Avenue to the building elevation facing City Hall.
Pro/ect Schedule
The design build agreement between the City and HPI called for a start date of February 19,
2007 and substantial completion by May 7,2008 for Phase 3. Substantial completion means that
the building is operational and open for business. Final completion is called for by August 6,
2008. By the final completion date, the Community Development and Legislative Office
buildings win have been removed and the parking and landscape areas will be complete. It is
both staff and HPI's goal to deliver the project on schedule. It should be noted, however, that the
schedule for the completion of Phase 2 was about five weeks later than originally planned. This
was principally caused by two maj or factors, the presence of unsuitable soils beneath the area
where the former Council Chambers were located and the need to undertake a greater effort in
renovating the roof of the building. These slight delays trickle through the project into the third
phase. In an effort to recover as much time as possible, some work in the basement of the former
police department was started in January of2007. The pllIpose of this work was to provide some
areas for the ITS Department to relocate equipment. ./ tJ... ~
9-15
2120/07, Item...lO..-
Page 4 of7
Pro/eet FU1Idinf!
As briefly discussed above, the project has proceeded within the budgeted amounts approved by
Council on August 3, 2004. It is staff's belief that upon completion of Phase 3, the project will
have been delivered within the budget that was approved. Table 2 below provides a brief
summary of the budget status of all three phases. .
Table 2.
522,776,000
512,357,000
$15,015,000
~:,~~,_:I~~!f:1~~
:,.;;('5,{.,~~~~;""
,"" ,"',' "..; ,., .,',"" .. ...
:~i,~' .,'~~~t~?~~;~~;:.e~~;:,':~~:,:~~;\:;, .,,1,
City Hall
Public Services Building
Fonner Police Facility
522,233,610
512,807,465
515,015,000
$542,390
(5450,465)
50
:,';;}r\~';:';,:~~~~~i~1t'?~':'}I:;'I:"~~~~~:~:,j,~~i;::::,:~j:~~~~~;,~~;,t,4t! ;~;j;,;:rj,\~'J;~~B)';;i.~"~{;,;;;
With respect to Phase 2, we are confident tha1 we will receive credits on our insurance costs.
While the amount and timing of these credits are unknown as of this date, any credit will reduce
the overage depicted above, We also expect to receive rebates from San Diego Gas and Electric
for the 30kwH photovoltaic system installed on the roof of the PSB.
As described earlier, the City has already financed a portion of Phase 3 of the project with the
financing of Phase 2, Also, as discussed above, the City has already incurred some costs for Phase
3. Table 3 below provides a breakdown and the amounts and in which phase the early Phase 3
expenditures occurred,
Table 3.
'. ",";,~3::'i::;%~r'"., '''':.::..;ij",~;:';'~;I~,~}!{~;~~3;i1..-'i.~1&~t;,:"\
Design Builder Costs:
Design of Building
Design of Temp , Renov,
Development Staff Costs
DIB Fixed Fee (Design)
DIB Fixed Fee (Construction)
ConstrUCtion Allowances
Demolition and Construction 5155,201
DID Costs Sub-Total 51,199,201
City Budgeted Allowances: 576,.369
Project Insurance: 5898,726
::.;~':~"~~~/~~:,',~~.;':i~'.::~_i:',1~~~::f;:.:~:;~,~:\:;:,::;~."t:'~tfl~:i:~ ;'I::~t,::;'~;::~;~-;):" ~~;:~1~~!~::~ :,)
5785,000
510,000
583,000
$166,000
5785,000
510,000
$83,000
5166,000
541,175 $41,175
527,015 527,015
$47,011 5202,212
5115,201 51,314,402
591,485 5167,854
'i;r;;.?,::~~~:i:;:)'(:,:~\\~,~~,,;,,:;;;;, /~~ If
9:-16
2120/07, Item..lQ....
Page 5 of7
In terms of how Phase 3 will actually be paid for, the plan for that has changed since the beginning
of the project. Originally, the City planned to finance all three phases of the project. During the
course of 2006, the City entered into negotiations with the development commwrity with respect to
the updating of the PFDIF. The development community was very desirous of seeing the City nol
finance Phase 3. The eventual update of the PFDIF thai the City Council approved. in November of
2006 contemp1ated the City paying for Pbase 3 as il went, Le. not financing it. Based on the
November 2006 PFDIF update, Phase 3 of the Civic Center will be funded as follows;
PFDlF - 88.87"10 of construction and 79.27% of financing (portion financed with Phase 2)
General Fund - 11.13% of construction and 20.73% of financing.
Given that the total cost of Phase 3 has been approved at $15,015,000, that means that the PFDlF
share of the Phase is $13,343,830 and General Fund share is $1,671,170. As described above, some
Phase 3 costs have already occurred and a portion of the Phase 2 financing reimbursed the City for
those costs. Table 4 below summarizes the amount necessary to fully fund and complete the
project.
As Table 4 below indicates, the remaining funds needed to complete Phase 3 is $12,586,744. Of the
amount, $1,005,268 of Phase 2 bond proceeds are available for Phase 3. This then requires an
additionai appropriation of $11,581,476. Staff recommends appropriating the remaining PFDIF
share now. The general fund's share of this amount will be $1,337,031. Since the draw-down
schedule contemplates drawing the funds at a rate of 8.3% of the project monthly, the general fund
share will not be needed until the finall.S months of the project. With a final completion date of
August 6, 2008 as discussed above, the general fund component will not be required until late in
Fiscal Year 2008 or early in Fiscal Year 2009. It is anticipated that the General Fund's sbarewill be
derived from an internai loan from the PFDIF paid back over 20 years at an interest rate of 5%.
This type of repayment schedule would require an annual General Fund appropriation of
approximately $135,000 starting in FY 2009. This loan will be addressed during the Fiscal Year
2008 Budget process.
Table 4.
.' "\">>': '::f>~~::.~I'ti'--r '.. - :.;~";':1'~1\:~:'\i'.:::: ~.:{~~[~~~~:~)i'f~:-~li~~ ~t;~~!:~~22.:;;:;i:~~'~<~-~:~';.i.,~_r" :::':~'1-~~'::: '~t'~:}~h;;:::':~':<:~3' . ~~
;:,: " ~~p oD:":;;'. r, ,'-- ::'?<l~: ;~';~~~'J;,~~~~~~~j~ :j.,~j;:~:-~;~~~~~~,q~~~'-::~:,:',:~'~ ::"~,~! .~j'~', ..~~. ,""
"d 'd "i';'-"-';:".:.Di@get:"":'i:",;:,~el\."4~.IIl..'":: -'~et
: ~:~\.:~:..:i:i .':.;f~ ~ '."/:: ':': ,~',;~ i~~:~J~~:<i~/,\~:~?'~:;~18~,:;~
-,~ -. _ TO$Jilt' ..,.,-,
,~!;"~":" '<-.~..:~'~: _f"':~~j~~
"'il . ~ '~.u~\'.~1~\ ".-,,~
$11,057,000
$3,012,000
$946,000
$1,314,402
$167,854
$973,726
$9,742,598
$2,844,146
o
Design Builder Costs
City Budgeted Allowances
Project Insurance
:~, . -;,:~~::~~t'lt':~.!';J:;~~~;~::::-'i; ,'". '::. ;:'
.11)'.' ~5~J'"
,. ,',~~t~::1~i~1f';'}"?:'
Since the project was started, there have been some changes to the uses of buildings. The main
change was the decision to have lbe Community Development Department housed in the former
police department instead of in the PSB as originally planned. In 9rder to make lbat change work / /! _ .::.
from a space perspective, the originai plan to have a portion of the Engineering Department located (if .--,
9-17
2120/07, Item.J!L
Page 6 of7
in the fonner police department was changed and the entire Engineering Department is now located
in the PSB. This change occurred in early 2006 after a reorganization of the Engineering
Department. This change enabled the Community Development Department to have additional
space that it would need and also allow the Engineering Department to be kept together in the PSB.
This change has had a number of impacts on the project. First, some redesign of the interior space
plan was necessary in Phase 2 to eliminate Community Development and enlarge Engineering.
Similar redesign will occur in Phase 3. The more signifi.cant issue from a cost and logistic
perspective is that the General Services Department never anticipated having to find an alternate
location for Community Development. The plan in terms of interim moves of staff within the
complex was that the Human Resources Department would occupy the Community Development
Building and Legislative Office Building during Phase 3 construction. Those buildings would have
been vacated by the Community Development Department as they moved into the PSB. That was
the original plan.
With the change of plans, we needed to find a place to house both Community Development and
Human Resources during Phase 3. A number of options were explored including; leasing office
space off-site, utilizing the old public works center at F St. and Woodlawn Ave., scattering staff
throughout a nmnber of areas or leasing portable office space. Based on cost, II1mimizing public
inconvenience and mainWning departmental efficiencies, it was determined that the best way to go
was to lease portable office space and place those facilities in the rear of the Ken Lee parking lot. It
was further determined that it would be better to relocate Community Development to that space
even though it required an additional move. The reason for this is' that Human Resources handles
significantly more public traffic than Community Development and the Community Development
Building already had a counter/public waiting area as well as public parking mediately in front of
the building. We expect the cost of this effort to be approximately $205,000 ($45,000 for
construction and $160,000 for lease ($ I O,OOOImonth). It is our goal at this point in time to not
modify the proj ect budget for Phase 3, however, given how tight the budget on Phase 2 was, it
would not be terribly surprising if a minor budget adjustment may be necessary.
DECISION MAKER CONFLICTS
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council and has found a conflict exists, in
that Councilmember Jerry Rindone has holdings within 500 feet of the boundaries of the
property which is the subj ect of this action.
FISCAL IMPACT
The fiscal impact of the project is as described above in the discussion regarding the split in the
costs of the project between the PFDlF and General Fund. As discussed above the general fund
share of Phase 3 will not be needed until late in Fiscal Year 2008. Staff is recommending
appropriating the full share of the PFDlF obligation at this time. It is anticipated that the General
Fund's share will be derived from an internal loan from the PFDlF paid back over 20 years at an
interest rate of 5% (approximately $135,000 annually beginning in FY09) and will be addressed
during the FY 2008 budget process.
The projected Fiscal Year 2007 fund balance of the PFDlF is $15.8 million. This amount is
sufficient to pay the costs of Phase 3 of the Civic Center as well as meet the PFDlF's existing
debt service obligations. At the end of the project there will be a remaining fund balance of $5.1
million.
jO-(:;
9-18
I ~--
2120/07, Item.J.D....
Page 7 of7
From an operational standpoint, the building will include new mechanical equipment that will be
significantly more energy efficient than the existing equipment. Also, the City is participating in
the Savings By Design program with SDG&E and is attempting to comply with the City's
energy conservation policy of exceeding California Title 24 standards by 20%.
From a maintenance and custodial perspective, once the building is complete, and the
Community Development and Legislative Office Building arc removed, General Services will
attempt to analyze the demands the new building will create on those functions. It should be
noted that during the entire Civic Center project, custodial and building maintenance staff levels
have remained static since one building has been out of service the entire time. Obviously, this
will not be case at the conclusion of Phase 3. Given the shifting square footages and elimination
of the two smaller, less efficient buildings, its difficult to assess what the actual demands will be
until we are actually in the remodeled building and observe how the buildings operate as a
complex. One lesson that we have learned is that there is significantly higher demand for the use
of our buildings from outside the City given their usability, audio-visual capabilities, comfort
and attractiveness.
From the perspective of other departments in the complex there should not be any fiscal impact
as their staffing levels are not materially impacted. It is hoped, that given the new equipment,
shared counter spaces and more logical placing of departments that there will be increased
efficiencies among the departments in the complex. Whether those efficiencies will he able to be
quantified in terms of cost savings is something that those resident departments will have to
analyze once they've had sufficient time to become accustomed to the finished complex.
Prepared by; Jack GriffUJ, Director a/General Services
Maria KachadlJorlan. Diredor of Finance
M:\Ocr1enl Services\GS Administntion\COl./IIcil Apda.\Civic Center\Phaae In 00 JOO\Civic Center Phase 3 rmal.doc
/~-7
9-19
$ Highland
Prime Contract Change Order #05
A '\\" ,\"'-t z..
CDent cay OfCI'WI Via
271 Fourth Avenue
ChJa VlItI. CA 9191Q
Project: Civic Canter Compiax
AtWnUon: J.::k Grtnnn. ctredOr G.lwral Servtces
I<lp H_ .....b o...lopment_
DItIt: OctobIIr 26. 2001
GMP Per Prime Contract Amendmenl.August 3, 2004 (Componenl: A, B & C)
In eccardanCe with ClUa VIlla CivIc CenIer CaJI1lIex Design J Build
-
SedIon 15: Chlnge In GMP and Contract Tlme. Item No. 115.2.5 The CIty
1III'f.1n 1tl1OI. d\ICrMIOn, R)Ultthe GMP OI'Contl'IIctT1rne for any
un:llspull!ld amount or time allOClated with the ChInge Order or Addmor.!
$eNlcel.
""""""",A.CItyH.. GMP
CftyHall construction uvtngll ~ Trantferto Component B. PS8
CIty Hall FlIJlll coati
ComponsntB -PSB GMP
Tnnferfrom City Hall (tHlIIocate88,331 ofllw 480,138 to 08 ftxecI fees)
TlWlIfertD Design l!!IulIderflxed flea for added dulgn services
PSB l"8lIlsad Total
PSS cClnltnldkln savings. TranlfBrto Componetrl: C . Old PO
PSB Final COlts
c~nentC.ClldPD GMP
Tranafetfrom PSS (r&-IIIlocate 54,343 of the 110,354\0 DB f\Qd. tees)
Tl'8nsfv 10 CeI/gn BuId... ftxed feu for added design seNic&s
Old PO~1aecI Total (wIt/'lOUI r1Iimbl.lraeblesof$142.0(0)
fotalA,BIC
Total Change Order Number 05
Contract Summary
Origh'lli QMP per Firat Amendment to eMc c.ar Cellgn BuId Agrwement
GMP Cost Priorte tN. Change Order
Haw GMP k'lcIudlngthla ChlIr'G8 Order
~ T1lre wHl be cMnged by'" Change Color ("".n'ar day$)
Vartence from onglnal GMP to new QMI='
mIN" pereentaQe
David H. Cecil
Ser'lIOl Pfcject u..ger
I<lpHoward
Allegll OllNelopment SeNlces
__n
Dlrectct GeneI3l Servtces
9-.2.0
17,980,ooQ
~O,13e
17.499.884
9,451,000
391,805
84,331
0,031,136
.110,354
e,82O,182
10,915,000
55,011
64,343
11,025,364
38,3<48,000
38,3046.000
40,045.~15
o
1.BSO,515
4.4%
38,346,000
38,348,000
1.B99,S15
RESOLUTION NO. 2007-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE SECOND AMENDMENT
TO CIVIC CENTER DESIGN BUILD AGREEMENT WITH
HIGHLAND PARTNERSHIP, INe. FOR THE CIVIC CENTER
RENOVATION PROJECT TO INCREASE THE
GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE FOR PHASE 3 OF THE
PROJECT BY $1,699,515 AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR
TO SIGN THE SECOND AMENDMENT.
WHEREAS, in July 2001, the City Council approved a master plan for the renovation of
the Civil Center; and
WHEREAS, on February 18,2003, the City Council approved a Design Build Agreement
with Highland Partnership, Inc. for the Civic Center Renovation Project ("the Project"); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreement, the Project will be constructed in three
components; Components A (Phase I), Component B (Phase 2), and Component C (Phases 3)
and Phase I and 2 are substantially completed; and
WHEREAS, Phase 3 of the Project involves the renovation of the former police
department building, the demolition of the Legislative Office Building and Community
Development Building, and the construction of the additional parking and landscaped areas; and
WHEREAS, on August 3, 2004, the City Council approved the First Amendment to Civic
Center Design Build Agreement which, among other things, set the Guaranteed Maximum Price
("GMP") for Component A for an amount not to exceed $17,980,000; for Component B for an
amount not to exceed $9,451,000, and for Component C for an amount not to exceed
$10,915,000, for a total GMP of $38,346,000; and
WHEREAS, as construction of Phase 3 began, staff has encountered significant asbestos
issues and a number of other changes; and
WHEREAS, staff desires to further amend the Civic Center Design Build Agreement by
increasing the GMP for Component C (Phase 3) by $1,699,515 for a total GMP of $40,045,515
to reflect increased costs for Phase 3 of the Project; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City ofChula Vista
as follows:
1. That it approves the Second Amendment to Civic Center Design Build Agreement with
Highland Partnership, Inc. for the Civic Center Renovation Project increasing the
Guaranteed Maximum Price of Component C (Phase 3) of the Project by $1,669,515 for
a total GMP of $40,035,515.
9-21
Resolution No. 2007-
Page 2
2. That it authorizes the Mayor to sign the Second Amendment to Civic Center Design
Build Agreement.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Jack Griffin
Director of Engineering and
General Services
~..a ~C>-J i~ L!~ ~
Ann Moore
City Attorney
H:\ENGINEER\RESOS\Resos2008\OI-08-08\Civic Center-Second Amendment to DB-Increase aMP - ec.doc
9-22
THE ATTACHED AGREElYfENT HAS BEEN REVIEWED
AND APPROVED AS TO FORM BY THE CITY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND WILL BE
FORMALLY SIGNED UPON AFPROV AL BY
THE CITY COUNCIL
'4~t>-/d. -/~r
Ann Moore
City Attorney
Dated: itJ-../ 13/ i) 7
I I
Second Amendment to
Civic Center Design Build Agreement
between
City of Chula Vista
and
Highland Partnership, Inc.
9-23
SECOND AMENDMENT TO
crnc CENTER
DESIGN BUILD AGREEMENT
This Second Amendment to the Civic Center Design Build Agreement is entered into this
18th day of December 2007, by and between the City of Chula Vista, a municipal
corporation (City) and Highland Partnership, Inc. (Design Builder or DIB).
RECITALS
A. In July 2001, the City Council approved a master plan for the renovation of the
Chula Vista Civic Center.
B. The City Council approved a Design Build Agreement with Highland Partnership,
Inc. for the Civic Center Renovation Project (Project) on February 18,2003 (Agreement).
The Agreement contemplated that the construction of the renovations of the Civic Center
would be accomplished in three components (now referred to as Phases): Component A
(Phase I), Component B (Phase 2), and Component C (Phase 3).
C. Pursuant to section 6.4.1 of that Agreement, the Guaranteed Maximum Price
(GMP) was not to exceed $28,081,000.
D. The City Council approved the First Amendment to Civic Center Design Build
Agreement on August 3, 2004. A copy of the First Amendment to Civic Center Design
Build Agreement is attached to this Agreement as Exhibit A.
E. The First Amendment to Civic Center Design Build Agreement set the GMP for
Component A for an amount not to exceed $17,980,000; for Compom;nt B for an amount
not to exceed $9,451,000; and for Component C for an amount not to exceed
$10,915,000, except as adjusted pursuant to Section 6 of the First Amendment to Civic
Center Design Build Agreement, for a total GMP of $38,346,000.
F. As construction began on Phase 3, City staff encountered significant asbestos
abatement issues and determined that the plans should be modified due to a number of
City-generated changes in scope.
G. The City staff and DIB have reviewed and agreed to the increased costs and desire
to increase the GMP for Component C (Phase 3) by $1,699,515.
AGREEMENT
In consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained in this Second
Amendment to Civic Center Design Build Agreement, the Parties agree as follows:
1. Section 1: General Scope of Work to Be Performed by DIB. Subsection 1.3.1
is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:
9-24
"Perform all services, work and obligations as described herein for the
not to exceed Guaranteed Maximum Price ("GMP") determined
pursuant to Section 6.4 of this Agreement. The GMP shall not exceed
the amount of Forty Million Forty-Five Thousand Five Hundred and
Fourteen and no cents ($40,045,514) which shall include all Hard
Construction Costs necessary to provide a fully completed and
functional Project including, but not limited to, the cost for all labor,
equipment, material and the D/B Fixed Fee which includes fees and
expenses of any type, including all expenses under this agreement,
associated with completing the Project, whether on-site or off-site, and
the D/B Contingency Fund. Any costs incurred by D/B in excess of
said GMP shall be the responsibility of the D/B unless a Change Order
is approved by the City pursuant to Section 15 of this Agreement. All
funds remaining in the GMP at completion of the Project shall belong
to the City.
2. Section 6. Subsection 6.4.2. Delete the first paragraph of section 6.4.2 in its
entirety and replace with the following:
"The GMP for component B shall not exceed $9,451,000 and the GMP
for component C shall not exceed $12,614,514 except as adjusted as
follows:"
All other terms of the Civic Center Design Build Agreement, as modified by the First
Amendment to the Civic Center Design Build Agreement and this Second Amendment to
the Civic Center Design Build Agreement, shall remain in full force and effect.
[END OF AGREEMENT. NEXT PAGE IS SIGNATURE PAGE.]
9-i25
J:v.tromey\El.ISA\AGRESMENTS\Civil;: Center Design Build Agreement Second Amendment :0 increase GMP.doc
Signature Page to
the Second Amendment to the
Civic Center Design Build Agreement
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
HIGHLAND PARTNERSHIP, INC.
Cheryl Cox
Mayor
f-~~ a
"',..! I' .' __.
(j. David Gardner
ATTEST:
Ian Gill
City Clerk
Approved as to form by:
Ann Moore
City Attorney
9.2.26
l:\Attomey\EUSAIAGREEMENTS\Civic Center De$"ign Build Agrel:lTll:nt So:ond Amendment te inl;l"ellSe GMP,doc
EXHIBIT "A"
FIRST AMENDMENT TO
CMC CENTER
DESIGN BUILD AGREEl\.ffiNT
This First Amendment is made and entered into this 3rd day of August, 2004, by and
between the City of Chula Vista (herein "City"), amunicipal corporation, and Highland
Partnership, Inc. ("Design Builder or DIB"). City and DIB are sometimes hereinafter
referred to as Parties ("Parties'~.
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the Parties entered into an Agreement ("Original Agreement") on
February 18,2003 for the construction of necessary improvements at the City's Civic
Center; and
WHEREAS, since that Agreement was executed, the Parties have proceeded
forward on the design of these improvements; and
WHEREAS, during the development of these designs, the scope of portions of the
project have evolved in a maimer not originally contemplated by the Parties; and
WHEREAS, the City has determined that significant value and efficiency will be
gained by modifying the scope of the project.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained
herein the Parties agree that the following sections of the Original Agreement shal1 be
amended as follows:
1. Section 1.3.1 be amended to read as follows:
"Perform all services, work and obligations as described herein for the not to
exceed Guaranteed Maximum Price ("GMP'~ determined pursuant to Section 6.4 of this
Agreement. The GMP shall not exceed the amount of Thirty-eight Million Three
Hundred and Forty-Six Thousand and no cents ($38,346,000) which shall include all
Hard Construction Costs necessary to provide a fully completed and functional Project
including, but not limited to, the cost for all labor, equipment, material and the DIB Fixed
Fee which includes fees and expenses of any type, including all expenses under this
agreement, associated with completing the Project, whether on-site or off-site, and the
DIB Contingency Fund. Any costs incurred by DIB in excess of said GMP shall be the
responsibility of the D/B unless a Change Order is approved by the City pursuant to
9-27
Section 15 oftbis Agreement. All funds remaining in the GMP at completion of the
Project shall belong to the City.
2. Section 1.3.2.2 shall be amended to read as follows:
"Achieve "Substantial Completion" (as defined in Section 17.1) of Phase IV
component A 371 calendar days from the issuance of Notice to Proceed with said
component, and "Final Completion" (as defined in Section 17.3) no later than 462
calendar days from issuance of Notice to Proceed."
Section 1.3.2.2 (repeated) shall be renumbered as Section 1.3.2.3 and amended to read as
follows:
"Achieve "Substantial Completion" (as defined in Section 17.1) of Phase IV
component B 339 calendar days from the issuance of Notice to Proceed with said
component, and "Final Completion" (as defined in Section 17.3) no later than 430
calendar days from issuance of Notice to Proceed."
3. Section 1.3.2.3 shall be renumbered as Section 1.3.2.4 and amended to read as
follows:
"Achieve "Substantial Completion" (as defined in Section 17.1) of Phase IV
component C 444 calendar days from the issuance of Notice to Proceed with said
component, and "Final Completion" (as defined in Section 17.3) no later than 535
calendar days from issuance of Notice to Proceed."
4. Section 6.4 shall be amended to read as follows:
"Subsequent to the approval of the DDD, D/B shall, as directed by the City prior
to the issuance of a building permit, submit a GMP for approval by City. The GMP shall
include all Hard Construction Costs (including those portions ofFF &E for which D/B is
responsible pursuant to FF &E Matrix), D/B Contingency Fund, and D/B Fixed Fee for
the complete design and construction of the entire Project as specified in the approved
DDD, as amended; provided that;"
5. Section 6.4.1 shall be amended to read as follows:
. "The GMP for component A shall not exceed $17,980,000.
6. Section 6.4.2 shall be added to read as follows:
"6.4.2 The GMP for component B shall not exceed $9,451,000 and the
GMP'for component C shall not exceed $10,915,000 except as
adjusted as follows:
9-28
If, during the period of time from the City's approval of the
GMP until the component (s) B or C full building permit is
obtained ("Permit Time"), the Engineering News Record
20 City Building Construction Cost Index (BCl) average
over an annual basis or a portion thereof increases more
than 3 % on an annualized basis for the Permit Time, the
City shall take one or more of the following actions: I)
Increase the GMP through equivalent addition to DIB's
contingency equal to the difference between the 3%
annualized increase and the actual increase reflected in the
BCl at the time of issuance of a notice to proceed for each
phase, 2) Instruct the DIB to recommend to the City and
implement, after approval by the City, of compensatory
value engineering reductions, 3) the City may initiate the
termination provisions as prescribed in Section 26 of this
agreement, and 4) the City may make internal project
budget adjustments to manage the out of the ordinary cost
increases.
7. Section 6.4.2 of the Original Agreement shall be renumbered as 6.4.3
)
8.
Section 6.4.3 of the Original Agreement shall be renumbered as 6.4.4
9. Section 6.4.4 of the Original Agreement shall be renumbered as 6.4.5
10. Section 6.4.5 of the Original Agreement shall be renumbered as 6.4.6
II. Section 8.1.1.1 shall be amended to read as follows:
"Component A shall included minor tenant improvements necessary to make the
existing police building functional for its intended purpose, the temporary relocation of
all current City Hall occupants to the former Police building; demolition of the existing
City Hall; and construction of a new City Hall building, including a new Council
Chambers, consistent with the approved CD's, Master Plan (as amended), Basis of
Design, and FF &E Matrix; and relocation of appropriate departments into the new City
Hall."
12. Section 8.1.1.2 shall be amended to read as follows:
"Component B shall include the relocation of all occupants of the Public Services
Building ("PSB"), refurbishments of the PSB including all office space and site work
immediately surrounding the PSB consistent with the approved CD's, Master Plan (as
amended), Basis of Design and FF&E Matrix and relocation of appropriate departments
and staff into the refurbished PSB."
9-29
13. Section 14.1 shall be amended to read as follows:
"Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, as full and complete
compensation for performance of all services and obligations under this Agreement, D/B
shall be compensated ("D/B Fixed Fee") at a fixed sum equal to $7,617,000. That
portion of the D/B Fixed Fee earned with each Phase and component of the services is
listed in Exhibit 1 of this Addendum. Unless otherwise expressly provided in this
Agreement, DIB Fixed Fee shall include full compensation for all costs of any type
incurred by DIB in performing all services and obligations under this Agreement,
including but not limited to the following:"
14. Section 18.1 shall be amended to read as follows:
"The "Contract Time" shall be the number of calendar days stated in Section 1.3.2
for D/B to achieve Substantial Completion for each phase or component therein.
The total contract time shall not exceed 1,427 days from the issuance ofaNotice
to Proceed identified in Section 1.3.2.2."
15. The following Exhibits shall be replaced with the amended Exhibits attached
hereto:
Exhibit 2
Exhibit 3
Exhibit 6
Exhibit 8
Exhibit 9
14. Except as expressly provided herein all other provisions of the Original
Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
9-30
Jul-/T-<004 09:54
From-HIGHLAND PARTNERSHIP INC,
619498/970
T-44T P.00//002 F-404
SIGNATURE PAGE TO
THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE
CMC CENTER DESIGN BUll.D AGREEMENT
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
HI-GHLAND PARTNERSHIP, INC.
~~~
\j:David Gardner
Stephen Padilla, Mayor
Susan Bigelow, City Clerk
Ian Gill
ATTEST:
Approved as to form by
Ann Moore, City Attorney
9-31
~v?-
~
------ -
- --
Mayor and City Council
City Of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
ChulaVista, Ca 91910
619.691.6044 - 619.476.6379 Fax
f{,;<:::J\
V/\
~
DEe 1 7 200t:M.-
ellY OF
CHUlA VISfA
MEMO
December 17, 2007
FROM:
:-'f,':>.....".,.::.:"<';',. ~,v}":."..:':::-:.l;, ':"_".!
Eorriafrie Bennett, Deputy City Clerk
Jennifer Quijano, Constituent Services Manag~
International Friendship Commission
TO:
RE:
Mayor Cox would like to recommend James Clark for appointment to the International
Friendship Commission. James will replace Manny Ramirez.
Please place Mr. Clark on the January 8, 2008 Council agenda for ratification and
schedule the oath of office for the January 15, 2007 Council agenda. These dates will
enable Mr. Clark to participate in the January 16, 2008 International Friendship
Commission meeting.
Thank you.
cc: Mayor Cox
\;://\7/07
_ ~v. C\~tk'.. o.oes ('\'O(~ C::l.A(vel\~\,-\
o."'j C:~u.l.", \I\~b. \;>/C/c'.s~ ao(I,~ \'1
v'e.,i;, o\Eo"--t-.
~EIl"
0\ e,. v.
11-1