HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008/03/04 Agenda Packet
~~~
~~~~
.......~~........
~- ~"'-
CllY OF
HUlA VISTA
Cheryl Cox, Mayor
Rudy Ramirez, Councilmember David R. Garcia, City Manager
John McCann, Councilmember Ann Moore, City Attorney
Jerry R. Rindone, Councilmember Donna Norris, Interim City Clerk
Steve Castaneda, Councilmember
March 4, 2008
4:00 P.M.
Council Chambers
City Hall
276 Fourth Avenue
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL: Councilmembers Castaneda, McCarm, Ramirez, Rindone, and Mayor Cox
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG AND MOMENT OF SILENCE
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
. INTRODUCTION BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DAVE BYERS, OF EMPLOYEE
OF THE MONTH, MIKE LEAKE, TREE TRIMMER SUPERVISOR
. PRESENTATION BY IMPERIAL BEACH PORT ART COMMISSION
REPRESENTATIVE, GAIDI FINNIE, ON THE STATUS OF THE LIGHTING OF
THE CORONADO BAY BRIDGE PROJECT
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items I through 3)
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. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of February 7 and February 12,2008.
Staff recommendation: Council approve the minutes.
Page 1 - Council Agenda
http://www.chulavistaca. ~ov
March 4, 2008
2. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING THE FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION CHANGE REQUEST FORM,
INCLUDING THE CALIFORNIA ROAD SYSTEM (CRS) MAPS, AND
AUTHORIZING CITY STAFF TO SUBMIT THE FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION
CHANGE REQUEST FORM AND CRS MAPS TO CALTRANS
Caltrans requires that additions to the City's street inventory, such as in the eastern
territories, be classified and reported so that they can update the California Road System
Maps. Adoption of the resolution updates the City's inventory and provides the required
information to Caltrans. (Engineering and General Services)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
3. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING CHULA VISTA
MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 8.25 - "RECYCLING", TO IMPLEMENT A
CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION DEBRIS RECYCLING PROGRAM (FIRST
READING)
This proposed ordinance is one component of the City of Chula Vista's Assembly Bill
939 Integrated Waste Management Plan to divert material from the landfill- converting
waste to a resource. Adoption of the ordinance addresses the declining waste diversion
by creating a program to recycle construction and demolition materials. (Public Works
Director)
Staff recommendation: Council hold fust reading of the ordinance.
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 discussing or taking action on any issue not
included on the agenda, but, if appropriate, the Council may schedule the topic for future
discussion or refer the matter to staff. Comments are limited to three minutes.
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.
4. CONSIDERATION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA FISCAL YEAR 2008/2009
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM,
EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT PROGRAM (ESG), AND THE HOME
INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM
Page 2 - Council Agenda
htto:! !www.chulavistaca. gOY
Match 4, 2008
As a Housing and Urban Development entitlement community, the City receives grant
funds under the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Shelter
Grant Program (ESG) and the (HOME) programs. The funds are distributed among local
non-profits, housing developers and City departments in order to provide decent housing,
economic opportunities and a suitable living environment for low-moderate income
persons. Prior to distribution of the grant funds, the City must conduct a minimum of two
public hearings to solicit public input on the community development and housing needs.
(Redevelopment and Housing Director)
Staff recommendation: Council open the public hearing and continue it to March 11,
2008 at 6:00 p.m.
5. CONSIDERATION OF THE ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A
WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
City of Chula Vista staff have prepared a Western Transportation Development Impact
Fee Report to analyze potential traffic impacts of proposed new development on the west
side of the City's transportation system and to calculate development impact fees based
on that analysis. The City's Eastern Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDIF)
Program was established in 1988 and is responsible for the equitable funding of
transportation facilities east of I-80S. The proposed Western Transportation
Development Impact Fee (WTDIF) is a similar program proposed for Western Chula
Vista. (Engineering and General Services Director)
Staff recommendation: Council conduct the public hearing and hold first reading of the
following ordinances:
A. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING THE
WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE REPORT
(TF-358) PREPARED BY STAFF AND ESTABLISHING A WESTERN
TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAM TO
MITIGATE TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS WITHIN WESTERN CHULA
VISTA EXCLUDING PROJECTS - 1-5-17, STM-361, RAS-15, BP-5, 1-805-2,
RAS-17, BP-4, BP-2, AND OR-4 (FIRST READING)
B. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING THE
WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE REPORT
(TF-358) PREPARED BY STAFF AND ESTABLISHING A WESTERN
TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAM TO
MITIGATE TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS WITHIN WESTERN CHULA
VISTA INCLUDING PROJECTS - 1-5-17, STM-361, RAS-15, AND BP-5
(FIRST READING)
C. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING THE
WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE REPORT
(TF-358) PREPARED BY STAFF AND ESTABLISHING A WESTERN
TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAM TO
MITIGATE TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS WITHIN WESTERN CHULA
VISTA INCLUDING PROJECTS - 1-805-2, RAS-17, AND BP-4 (FIRST
READING)
Page 3 - Council Agenda
htto:llwww.chulavistaca.gov
March 4, 2008
D. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING THE
WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE REPORT
(TF-358) PREPARED BY STAFF AND ESTABLISHING A WESTERN
TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAM TO
MITIGATE TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS WITHIN WESTERN CHULA
VISTA INCLUDING PROJECT BP-2 (FIRST READING)
E. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING THE
WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE REPORT
(TF-358) PREPARED BY STAFF AND ESTABLISHING A WESTERN
TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAM TO
MITIGATE TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS WITHIN WESTERN CHULA
VISTA INCLUDING PROJECT ORA (FIRST READING)
OTHER BUSINESS
6. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS
7. MAYOR'S REPORTS
Ratification of the appointment of Albert Sides to the Board of Appeals and Advisors.
8. 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).
9. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8
Property: Assessor No. 644070100
Negotiating Parties: Curt Noland, Jim Sandoval, Ann Moore
Under Negotiation: Price and Terms
10. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8
Property: Assessor No. 6440801000
Negotiating Parties: Rob Cameron, Jim Sandoval, Ann Moore
Under Negotiation: Price and Terms
Page 4 - Council Agenda
btto:!!www.cbulavistaca. gov
Marcb 4, 2008
ADJOURNMENT to an Adjourned Regular Meeting on March 6, 2008 at 6:00 p.m. in the
Chula Vista Police Headquarters - Community Room, 315 Fourth Avenue,
and thence to the Regular Meeting of March 11, 2008 at 6:00 p.m., in the
Council Chambers.
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 5 - Council Agenda
htto:! Iwww.chulavistaca. Q"ov
March 4, 2008
DRAFT
MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
February 7, 2008
6:00 p.m.
An Adjourned Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista was called to
order at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located in City Hall, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula
Vista, California.
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: Councilmembers: McCann, Ramirez, Rindone and Mayor Cox
ABSENT: Councilmembers: Castaneda (excused)
ALSO PRESENT: Assistant City Manager Tulloch, City Attorney Moore, Interim City Clerk
Norris, and Deputy City Clerk Bennett
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG AND MOMENT OF SILENCE
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were none.
WORKSHOP
1. STATUS REPORT ON THE MISSING INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM EFFORT TO DATE
In February 2006, staff began development ofan Infrastructure Management Program for
a limited number of the City's public assets, including pavement; drainage; missing
sidewalks, curbs and gutters, and pedestrian ramps (missing infrastructure), deficient
cross gutters (included with missing infrastructure for the purposes of this report); and
utility wire undergrounding. Since that time, a comprehensive review of best-in-class
work in the area of public infrastructure asset management shows that in order to be most
effective, this effort should be broadened to include the full range of the City's public
infrastructure.
A Council workshop was held on April 5, 2007 to initiate the discussion of infrastructure
deficiencies. The focus of that meeting was on pavement and drainage. Based on that
discussion, a resolution was subsequently adopted by Council on May 1, 2007,
transferring funds from various projects and accounts into the City's Pavement
Rehabilitation Program. The City of Chula Vista has a pressing need to develop and
implement a broad infrastructure asset management program in order to create a
comprehensive asset management approach that ensures the best use of limited funding.
This is the next step toward creating what should become an Infrastructure Asset
Management Program. Continued work on this effort will take time and a significant
investment of resources. (Engineering & General Services Director)
Staff recommendation: Council accept the report, adopt the following resolution, and
provide direction regarding potential revenue sources for infrastructure needs:
I A-I
Assistant City Manager Tullo<;h introduced the Infrastructure Management Program effort to
date, focusing on missing and non-standard street infrastructure and the undergrounding utilities
program. He stated that funding alternatives would be addressed at a future Council workshop.
Engineering and General Services Director Griffin introduced Public Works Director Byers,
Land Surveyor Hopkins, Senior Civil Engineer Chopp, and Principal Civil Engineer Rivera.
Staff then presented the Total Infrastructure Need comprising Pavement, Drainage, Storm Drain,
Missing Infrastructure, and Utility Wire Undergrounding.
· Drainage Priorities (Engineering and General Services Director Griffm)
· Pavement Preservation (Public Works Director Byers)
· Workshop Goals (Public Works Director Byers)
· Missing Street Infrastructure (Engineering and General Services Director Griffin)
- Pedestrian Ramps (curb cuts)
- Curbs, Gutters and Sidewalks
- Non-Standard & Degraded Infrastructure - Pedestrian ramps, sidewalks, cross-
gutters (Land Surveyor Hopkins)
· Infrastructure Planning Efforts (Principal Planner Rivera)
· Utility Undergrounding, Undergrounding Status (Senior Civil Engineer Chopp)
· Current Undergrounding Funding (Senior Civil Engineer Chopp)
· Potential Undergrounding Funding (Senior Civil Engineer Chopp)
· Current Funding for Infrastructure (Engineering and General Services Director
Griffin)
· Funding Challenges (Engineering and General Services Director
Griffin)
· Potential Infrastructure Funding (Engineering and General Services Director
Griffin)
Deputy Mayor Rindone directed staff to ensure that middle schools qualify for the "Safe Routes
to Schools" grant. Deputy Mayor Rindone also suggested to staff for the next Council
workshop, to provide the Council with at least three priorities to focus on as funding options, and
that one of the three options provided by staff would not be a bond to go to the voters, since he
would not be supportive of this.
Mayor Cox informed the Council that she and Deputy Mayor Rindone were going through 10
projects with staff to bring forward to the Council by the end of February, to bring to
Congressman Filner and Senator Boxer in accordance with the priorities set by the Council.
Page 2 - Council Workshop Minutes
/ A-~
,
February 7, 2008
Councilmember Ramirez suggested that staff look at overlapping infrastructure projects where
possible. He also spoke of the need to refme and understand our procurement systems prior to
undertaking major CIP projects. With respect to the pavement management system, he
suggested staff look at a marketing strategy to provide the public with a clearer understanding of
programs. He suggested consideration for additional staff to pursue grant opportunities for City
projects.
ACTION:
Councilmember McCarm moved to accept the report and adopt the following
Resolution, heading read, text waived:
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-050, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE ADA CURB CUTS
PRIORITY LIST
Deputy Mayor Rindone seconded the motion and it carried 4-0, with
Councilmember Castaneda absent.
OTHER BUSINESS
2. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS
There were none.
3. MAYOR'S REPORTS
There were none.
4. COUNCIL COMMENTS
There were none.
ADJOURNMENT
At 7:58 p.m., Mayor Cox adjourned the meeting to the Regular Meeting of the City Council on
February 12, 2008 in the Council Chambers.
/---
~
Lorraine Bennett, CMC, Deputy City Clerk
~.
)A-3
<AFT
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
February 12, 2008
6:00 P.M.
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City ofChula Vista was called to order at 6:01 p.m.
in the Council Chambers, located in City Hall, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California.
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: Councilmembers: Castaneda, McCann, Ramirez, Rindone, and Mayor
Cox
ABSENT: Councilmembers: None
ALSO PRESENT: City Manager Garcia, City Attorney Moore, Interim City Clerk Norris,
and Deputy City Clerk Bennett
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG AND MOMENT OF SILENCE
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
. OATHS OF OFFICE
Susan O'Shaughnessy to the Cultural Arts Committee
Ricardo Balvaneda to the Design Review Committee
Enrique Martinez to the Design Review Committee
Interim City Clerk Norris administered the oaths of office to Commissioners O'Shaughnessy and
Martinez, and Deputy Mayor Rindone presented them with certificates of appointment. Mr.
Balvaneda was not present at the meeting.
. Presentation by Dr. Dorothy York, President of H.E.A.R.T. (Help and Education for
Animal Responsibility Team), of a check in the amount of $11,600 to the Chula Vista
Animal Care Facility
Dr. York introduced Debbie Martin, Treasurer for the non-profit organization, H.E.A.R.T., who
talked about the foundation, stating that the donation would be used specifically to expand and
improve the Chula Vista Animal Shelter's medical treatment room and provide proper
ventilation for a much needed isolation room for contagious animals. She also expressed
heartfelt thanks to Mr. and Mrs. Robert and Dorian Jones for their private donation towards the
project, and for a $5,000 grant award by the San Diego Foundation. She then presented a check
for $11,600 to Councilmember McCann who accepted it on behalf of the City.
. Presentation by Planning and Building Director Sandoval of Western Chula Vista
Revitalization, The Centennial Neighborhoods Partnership
Planning and Building Director Sandoval presented the Western Chula Vista Revitalization, The
Centennial Neighborhood Partnership.
1\2..)-\
Deputy Mayor Rindone directed staffto further enhance the proposed plan by developing a time
line with different timeframes, specific strategies, and to determine how to enhance housing
opportunities for single and multi-family residences. He further suggested scheduling a Council
workshop in order for the Council to assist with development of the timelines and strategies, and
enriching the City's housing stock.
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items 1 through 5)
Item 5 was removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion by a member of the public.
1. RESOLUTION NO. 2008-051, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING A DONATION FROM HEART IN THE
AMOUNT OF $11,600 TO THE ANIMAL CARE FACILITY AND APPROPRIATING
SAID DONATED FUNDS (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED)
The Help and Education for Animal Responsibility Team of the Chula Vista Animal Care
Facility, better known as H.E.A.R.T., has received donations totaling $11,600 from
various donors. The donors have specifically indicated the funds are to be used for
construction costs and related medical equipment needed to create a treatment room at
the Animal Care Facility. Adoption of the resolution accepts and appropriates the funds
for construction costs and related treatment room medical equipment. (Engineering and
General Services Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
2. A. RESOLUTION NO. 2008-052, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE EXECUTION OF THREE QUITCLAIM
DEEDS TO FACILITATE THE TRANSFER OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA'S
INTEREST IN THE ADJOINING PROPERTIES PURSUANT TO A LOT LINE
ADJUSTMENT PARCEL MAP FOR SYCAMORE ESTATES, PARCEL MAP 20356
B. RESOLUTION NO. 2008-053, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA ORDERING THE SUMMARY VACATION OF AN
EASEMENT FOR SEWER PURPOSES LOCATED WITHIN LOTS 5 AND 6 OF MAP
NO. 15566 OF SYCAMORE ESTATES AND PARCEL 4 OF PARCEL MAP 20356
THAT WAS GRANTED PER DOCUMENT RECORDED APRIL 22,1966 AS FILE
NO. 67889 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS
A Sycamore Estates lot line adjustment project was previously approved by Council to
realign the southerly portion of Sycamore Drive and relocate a cul-de-sac. Adoption of
the resolutions approves the execution of three quitclaim deeds releasing the City's
interest in excess property to the adjoining parcels as originally intended in the plan to
relocate the cul-de-sac. (Engineering and General Services Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolutions.
Page 2 - Council Minutes
/')
I\A"'~
j ,....
February 12, 2008
3. RESOLUTION NO. 2008-054, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE EXISTING CITY INVESTMENT
POLICY AND GUIDELINES
Per California Government Code Section 53646, the City Treasurer may annually present
the City's Investment Policy to the City Council to reaffIrm or make any changes to the
existing policy. The Investment Policy provides guidelines for the investment of idle
funds and affords the City various investment opportunities, as long as the investment is
deemed prudent and is allowable under current legislation of the State Government Code
Section 53600 et. seq. The current Policy was adopted by Council on July 10, 2007, and
received the Certificate of Excellence Award from the Association of Public Treasurers
United States and Canada in August 2007. Adoption of the resolution approves the
amendment to the existing City Investment Policy and Guidelines to include an
administrative reporting change and an addition to the list of authorized and suitable
investments. (Finance Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
4. RESOLUTION NO. 2008-055, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF JANITORIAL
SUPPLIES FROM CAMEO JANITORIAL SUPPLY, CORPORATE EXPRESS,
PADRE JANITORIAL SUPPLY, AND WAXIE JANITORIAL IN ACCORDANCE
WITH TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF CITY OF CHULA VISTA BID 1-07/08 FOR A
ONE (1) YEAR PERIOD BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2008 THROUGH DECEMBER
31, 2008, WITH FNE (5) ONE-YEAR OPTIONS TO EXTEND BY MUTUAL
CONSENT THROUGH DECEMBER 31,2013
City of Chula Vista Request for Bid 01-07/08 was mailed to five vendors, advertised in
the Star News and posted electronically on Planet Bids. Fifteen vendors responded.
Samples for a majority of the products were reviewed and approved by the Custodial and
Facility Manager. Adoption of the resolution awards the bid to four vendors and results
in an annual savings to the City of$18,800. (Finance Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
5. This item was removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion.
ACTION:
Deputy Mayor Rindone moved to approve staffs recommendations and offered
the balance of the Consent Calendar, headings read, texts waived.
Councilmember Castaneda seconded the motion and it carried 5-0.
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
5. RESOLUTION NO. 2008-056, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF OFFICE SUPPLIES
FROM CORPORATE EXPRESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH TERMS AND
CONDITIONS OF COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO CONTRACT #519042 FOR A ONE (1)
YEAR PERIOD EFFECTNE JULY 1, 2007 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2008, WITH FOUR
(4) ONE-YEAR OPTIONS TO EXTEND THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2012
Page 3 - Council Agenda
I ~.?)
February 12, 2008
The County of San Diego has awarded a contract to Corporate Express for office
supplies. The City of Chula Vista was named as a primary agency in the bid and
therefore qualifies for all rights and privileges afforded the County. Adoption of the
resolution authorizes the City to purchase office supplies from Corporate Express under
the same terms as the County of San Diego, which on average has resulted in a 61.5%
discount off list price for office supplies. (Finance Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
Bob Thomas, Chula Vista resident and local vendor, spoke with reference to the City's
participation in a cooperative bid with the County of San Diego for office supplies, toner
cartridges in particular, and he requested that he be allowed to continue to provide the City's
toner cartridge supplies, and services on printers. Senior Buyer Brooks responded that the City
would be issuing a competitive advertised bid, since the dollar amount on the existing contract
was anticipated to increase significantly, due to additional equipment and maintenance needs.
Mayor Cox requested clarification and staff confirmed, that acceptance of the proposed
resolution by Council, would not preclude anyone else from bidding on cartridges and service,
for which a separate Request For Proposal would be issued.
Councilmember Ramirez was hopeful that in the future, staff would look to local vendors as
much as possible for the supply of commodities and services.
Councilmember McCann directed staff for the future, to offer separate bids for commodities and
service, as well as to offer a bundle, and to allow local vendors to compete in the bidding
process.
ACTION:
Mayor Cox moved to approve staff's recommendation and offered Resolution No.
2008-056, heading read, text waived. Councilmember Castaneda seconded the
motion and it carried 5-0.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Luis Mendoza, Chula Vista resident, requested that the City investigate the practices of a local
medical clinic, Clinica Medica Para la Mujer de Hoy, one of a chain of such facilities, that he
stated was a magnet for predators and a hazard to the health and welfare of Chula Vista residents.
He referenced a recent Los Angeles Times article on the subject, stating that these clinics were a
haven for doctors cited for gross negligence, substance abuse, and sexual misconduct. Mayor
Cox referred the matter to the Police Department and City Attorney's Office.
Petra Barajas, Chula Vista resident, spoke in support of the position of City Attorney being
placed on the June 2008 ballot to become an elected position. She then referenced a recent Star
News article, stating that Steve Francis, candidate for San Diego Mayor had stated that Chula
Vista could afford the Chargers, and she asked the Council to inform Mr. Francis that he had
been misinformed, based upon the City's $15 million budget deficit. She also announced that
she was running for Chula Vista Council Seat 4 in the upcoming election, and would help the
citizens to achieve the best service as their representative.
Page 4 - Council Minutes
6~'f-
February 12, 2008
ACTION ITEMS
6. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR INSTALLATION OF AN ALL-WAY STOP
CONTROL AT THE INTERSECTION OF OLEANDER AVENUE AND TAMARACK
COURT AND STREET
A request was received to install an all-way stop control at the intersection of Oleander
Avenue and Tamarack Court. Staff performed an all-way stop control warrant study, per
Council Policy No. 478-03, and presented a report to the Safety Commission. Since the
intersection did not meet the requirements warranting all-way stop control, staffs
recommendation was to deny the request. However, staff did recommend the installation
of stop signs for eastbound and westbound traffic on Tamarack Court/Street; complete
with limit lines and "STOP" legends; red curb on Oleander A venue, south of Tamarack
Court/Street for a distance of 25 feet, and red curb on the east side of Oleander Avenue,
north of Tamarack Court for a distance of approximately 160 feet. The Safety
Commission agreed with the concerned residents present at the public hearing and voted
to recommend the requested all-way stop control at this intersection. In accordance with
Council Policy No. 478-03, this item is forwarded to the City Council for its
consideration. (Engineering and General Services)
Director of Engineering and General Services Griffin introduced the item and Senior Civil
Engineer Newton presented findings of the study regarding the intersection of Oleander Avenue
and Tamarack Court/Street.
Evelyn Sanchez, Chula Vista resident, representing the neighbors on all four comers of the
intersection, stated that her home was located at the southeastern comer, a blind comer that
offered drivers little time to take corrective action against potential accidents. She stated that the
comer between Oleander and Tamarack was the most dangerous, and had noted vehicles turning
the comer at accelerated speeds. She also expressed concern about the dangers of children
crossing these streets, and requested that the Council take action to protect the area residents.
Staffmember Newton stated that there was much debate on the matter by the Safety Commission,
and informed the Council that two of the Safety Commissioners were present to answer any
questions. Safety Commissioner Cochrane spoke in support of installing the all-way stop, stating
that he had observed speeding vehicles in the area and believed that it was a serious safety issue.
Safety Commissioner Moriarty also confirmed speeding vehicles and blind comers in the area,
and spoke in support of installation of a four-way-stop.
Councilmember Ramirez encouraged staff to go back and look at instituting additional traffic-
calming methods.
Councilmember Castaneda directed staff to look at the first wave of improvements and to come
back to the Council in six months with a report, and to look at the next level of traffic calming
measures if necessary.
ACTION:
Deputy Mayor Rindone moved to adopt the following Resolution No. 2008-057,
heading read, text waived:
Page 5 - Council Agenda
\ B-S
February 12, 2008
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-057, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA TO DENY THE RECOMMENDATION OF
THE SAFETY COMMISSION REGARDING THE INSTALLATION OF AN
ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL AT THE INTERSECTION OF OLEANDER
AVENUE AND TAMARACK COURT/STREET AND AFFIRM THE
DECISION OF THE CITY ENGINEER
Mayor Cox seconded the motion and it carried 4-1, with Councilmember McCann
voting no.
7. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST TO INSTALL AN ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL
AT THE INTERSECTION OF LAKESHORE DRIVE AND HARTFORD STREET
A request was received to install an all-way stop control at the intersection of Lakeshore
Drive and Hartford Street. Staff performed an all-way stop control warrant study, per
Council Policy No. 478-03, and presented a report to the Safety Commission. Since the
intersection did not meet the requirements warranting all-way stop control, staffs
recommendation was to deny the request. The Safety Commission agreed with the
concerned residents present at the public hearing and voted to recommend the requested
all-way stop control at this intersection. In accordance with Council Policy No. 478-03,
this item is forwarded to the City Council for its consideration. (Engineering and General
Services Director)
Engineering and General Services Director Griffin introduced the item and Senior Civil Engineer
Newton presented the findings of the study for the intersection of Lakeshore Drive and Hartford
Street.
ACTION:
Councilmernber Ramirez moved to adopt the following Resolution No. 2008-058,
heading read, text waived:
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-058, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA TO DENY THE RECOMMENDATION OF
THE SAFETY COMMISSION REGARDING THE INSTALLATION OF AN
ALL-WAY STOP CONTROL AT THE INTERSECTION OF LAKESHORE
DRIVE AND HARTFORD STREET AND AFFIRM THE DECISION OF THE
CITY ENGINEER
Mayor Cox seconded the motion and it carried 4-1, with Councilmember McCann
voting no.
Mayor Cox directed staff to come back with a report in a couple of months to address what could
be done regarding warning signage.
At 7:41 p.m. Mayor Cox announced a recess of the Council Meeting to adjourn the Joint Meeting
of the City Council and Redevelopment Agency. The Council Meeting reconvened at 7:45 p.m.,
with all Councilmembers present.
Page 6 - Council Minutes
\'~: . ..~
\ 0 ""...p
February 12, 2008
OTHER BUSINESS
8. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS
City Manager Garcia spoke regarding the Legislative Subcommittee's directives to prepare a
ballot measure as a companion piece with the height initiative, and to undertake a study to assess
the economic impacts of this. He stated that the item for the Council ordinance adjusting heights
along Third Avenue required review and approval by the Planning Commission, since it was an
amendment to the Urban Core Specific Plan, and the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation,
since it was within a redevelopment area. He explained that as a result of the short timeframe for
staff to submit the ballot measure and related documentation, and in order to preserve the
Council's rights to act on the measure, staff had to post the caption of the ordinance on February
7, 2008, and bring the proposed ordinances forward for Council review the last meeting of
February and again on the March 4, 2008 Council Meeting.
9. MAYOR'S REPORTS
Mayor Cox recognized Assistant Library Director Rod Reinhart and Dency Souval on the recent
Library fundraiser, and also recognized the Chula Vista Kiwanis, stating that both events raised
funds for needed City services.
10. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Ramirez stated that he held a recent community group meeting at the Lorna
Verde Pool regarding aquatics programs, stating that the group was excited about coming
forward to the Council to address the importance of establishing a local aquatics center. With
respect to the problems with the pool heater at Lorna Verde Pool, Councilmember Ramirez
directed the City Manager to address the issue as soon as possible.
Deputy Mayor Rindone reported on a well-attended meeting last week with respect to the plight
of the San Diego Junior Theatre, stating that they would have to shut down if alternative
solutions were not sought, which would be a great loss to the City. He expressed the need to
work together to retain the theatre and invited anyone interested in offering their support, to
contact his office.
The meeting adjourned to Closed Session at 7:53 p.m.
CLOSED SESSION
11. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8
Property: Cable franchise for the right to operate and provide a cable television system
within the City (pertaining to public rights-of-way throughout the City of Chula Vista,
thereby creating possessory interests in real property pursuant to California Government
Code ~53066 and California Revenue and Taxation Code ~ 1 07.7).
Page 7 - Council Agenda
\~-I)
February 12, 2008
CLOSED SESSION (Continued)
Agency negotiators: Scott Tulloch and Michael Meacham.
Negotiating parties: City of Chula Vista; Ultronics, Inc. (Barbara AltbalUll); Nexhorizon
Communications (Kevin D. Smiley).
Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment for franchise conveyance.
This item was not discussed and no action was taken.
12. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8
Property: Assessor No. 644070100
Negotiating Parties: Curt Noland, Jim Sandoval, Ann Moore
Under Negotiation: Price and Terms
No reportable action was taken on this item.
13. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8
Property: Assessor No. 6440801000
Negotiating Parties: Rob Cameron, Jim Sandoval, Ann Moore
No reportable action was taken on this item.
ADJOURNMENT
At 9:30 p.m., Mayor Cox adjourned the meeting to the Regular Meeting of February 19, 2008 at
6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
7~
~~C'D~tr:am
Page 8 - Council Minutes
\ <1:2_ y;
l r~ -
February 12, 2008
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
3/04/08, Item cL
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE FUNCTIONAL
CLASSIFICATION CHANGE REQUEST FORM, INCLUDING
THE CALIFORNIA ROAD SYSTEM (CRS) MAPS, AND
AUTHORIZING CITY STAFF TO SUBMIT THE FUNCTIONAL
CLASSIFICATION CHANGE REQUEST FORM AND CRS MAPS
TOCALTRANS .J
DIRECTOR OF ENGIN;El:IlJG AND GENERAL SERVICES ~ Jf
CITY MANAGER ~
ASSISTANT CITY rlANAGER "7-r
4/STHS VOTE: YES D NO [8J
SUMMARY
Recent additions to the City's street inventory, especially in the eastern territories, have not been
classified and reported to Caltrans. A Council Resolution is required by Caltrans to update the
California Road System (CRS) maps.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Envirorunental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with
the California Envirorunental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the activity qualifies
for a Class 6 categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15306 (Information Collection) of the
State CEQA Guidelines. Thus, no further envirorunental review is necessary.
RECOMMENDATION
Council adopt the resolution.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable
DISCUSSION
Under the 1991 Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), eligibility for
Federal aid is based on functional classification. Those routes that have a functional
classification other than Local Roads and Rural Minor Collectors are eligible for such funding.
The results of the functional classification must be mapped and submitted to the Federal
2-1
3/04/08, Item~
Page 2 of 3
Highway Administration (FHW A) for approval and when approved shall serve as the official
record for Federal aid highways and the basis for designation of the National Highway System.
The Intennodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991 restructured the Federal
aid system into two parts: the National Highway System (NHS) and the Interstate system, which
is a component of the NHS. A functional classification for highways has been an important part
of Federal aid highway programs for many decades.
Functional classification is the process by which streets and highways are grouped into classes,
or systems, according to the character of service they are intended to provide. There are three
highway functional classifications: arterial, collector, and local roads. All streets and highways
are grouped into one of these classes, depending on the character of the traffic and the degree of
land access that they allow. Federal, State and local governments use this tool to assign
jurisdictional responsibility, allocate funds, and establish appropriate design standards.
States are required by federal statute (23 USC 460.3b) to report public road mileage to the
FHW A. Funds for a number of federal highway programs are apportioned and allocated to the
states based on public road lane-miles in each state. Arterials and collectors identify streets and
roads that are eligible for Surface Transportation Program (STP) projects. All public roads
functionally classified above that of rural minor collector are eligible for Federal assistance
under new and/or continued programs provided by ISTEA. These are primarily funded under the
Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP), the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality
Program (CMAQ), and the Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program (HBRR).
The State cooperates with local officials in developing and updating the functional classification.
Roads that are classified higher than local urban or local rural roads must be reported
individually within their own classification.
The Functional Classification Change Request form (Attachment "A") shows a listing of streets
that need to be updated. This form will update the current listing to include all public arterials
and collectors within Chula Vista that have been open to traffic as of December 31,2007.
Functional Classification Change Requests, which include CRS maps, may be submitted by local
agencies to their Caltrans District Local Assistance Engineer (DLAE) year-round. The DLAE
reviews and forwards the information to Caltrans Headquarters. The FHW A reviews and
provides final approval for functional classification change requests by stamping and signing the
CRS maps.
Submitting Functional Change Requests and updates to the CRS maps at this time will enable the
City to submit correct information in the 2007 Maintained Mileage Report to the State, which is
due by March 14, 2008. This report includes an itemization of all public arterials and collectors
open to traffic as of December 31, 2007, as well as the total centerline mileage for local
(residential) streets. Council approval is also required to include new arterials and collectors in
this report. This information is used to calculate some of the City's transportation funding, such
as Transnet.
2-2
3/04/08, ItemL
Page 3 of3
DECISION MAKER CONFLICT
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council and has found a conflict exists, in
that Councilmember McCann has property holdings within 500 feet of the boundaries of the
property which is the subject of this action.
FISCAL IMPACT
This action will not have any direct fiscal impact at this time. However, increasing the City's
functionally classified roads is likely to increase the City's share of transportation revenue in the
future and increase the City's eligibility to obtain Federal grants.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Functional Classification Change Request form
B. CRS Map
Prepared by: Roberto Solorzano, Associate Engineer, Engineering and General Services Department
M:IENGINEER\AGENDAICAS2008103-04-08\A113 HWY FUN~T~O~AL CLASS-2007-REV2.DOC
ATTACHMENT "A"
Functional Classification Change Request Form
Submitted by
Date:
Roberto Solorzano
Feblll31)' 13,2008
N
I
"""
~
.
~ c
'" . .~
.. .. ~
. . c ~ Change! (To) Number or
:>:ll i c ~
'" . i:5 c Nowl (From) Now L;:;:h Through Current
c = -"
. ~.E c ... ,~ = Delete Road From T. Class Class Lanes AADT
U U ~
15Y45 D4 II SO Chuh\Vista Irhanl!e 1ST AVE H ST EST 16 17 0.720 2 3340
ISY45 B1 II SO ChillaVista hanl!:e ]0 TH ST L ST EDGEMERE AVE 16 17 0.160 4 oJ,
15Y45 K3 11 SO ChulaVista Irhange EAST H ST UENAVISTA WAY DrAY LAKES RD 16 14 0.430 6 43800
15Y45 E4 II SO ChuJa. Vista Irhanl!c EAST H ST I-80S DEL REY BL YO 16 14 1.150 6 68700
16Y41 A3 11 SO ChulaVista Irhalll!e EAST H ST brAY LAKES RD MOUNT MIGUEL RD 16 14 2.070 4 31400
15Y45 K6 II SO ChuBi' Vista IrhanlJe EAST PALOMAR ST IuERlT AGE RD MONARCHE DR 17 16 0.750 6 10600
16Y41 A6 II SO ChulaVista baul!e EAST PALOMAR ST MONARCHE OR 800 FT WfLA MEDIA RD 17 16 0.900 4 J0600
16Y41 B5 II SD ChiiJa.Vista Irhanpe EAST PALOMAR ST SANTA DELPHINA AVE SANTA CORA AVE 17 16 0,260 4 8800
16Y41 D2 11 SO ChlilaVista ~hanl!.e EASTLAKE PKWY MILLER OR END tm SAN DIEGO N1UEDUC 16 17 1.560 4 1800
16Y41 D2 11 SO ChulaVista Irhanl!e EASTLAKE PKWY TDGEWATER DR MILLER DR 16 17 0.310 4 8400
16Y41 A4 11 SO ChulaVisla Chan<>e GOTIIAM ST IrlTAY LAKES RD TULANE AVE 17 19 0.400 2 3300
15Y45 K4 U SO ChulaVista Irhanl!:e GUNPOWDER PT DR IrHV NATURE CTR BAY BLVD 17 19 0.600 2 oJ,
15Y45 A5 II SO ChulaVista Irhan<>e HST BAY BLVD 1-5 19 17 0.050 4 28800
15Y45 E9 11 SD ChiilaVista Irhanl!:e HILL TOP DR MAIN ST PALOMAR ST 16 17 1.090 4 12000
15Y45 E1 11 SO ChiiJaVista Ir.hanl!e HILL TOP DR ALOMAR ST HST 16 17 ').020 2 12000
16Y41 K4 11 SO ChulilVista Irhange HUNTE PKWY lrLUBHOUSE DR OT A Y LAKES RD 17 16 0.513 4 1600
16Y41 F5 11 SO CtlulaVisla Ichanl!e HUNTE PKWY OLYMPIC PKWY CLUBHOUSE DR 17 16 0.650 4 3200
16Y41 F3 11 SO ChulaVista Irhan 'e HUNTE PKWY ioTA Y LAKES RD PROCTOR V ALLEY RD 17 16 1.060 4 5500
15Y45 A6 11 SO Chli\aVista hanl!e J ST BROADWAY HILL TOP DR 16 17 I.SIO 2 13500
I5Y45 A6 11 SO ChulaVista han"e 1ST 1-5 BROADWAY 16 17 0.510 4 11200
15Y45 A7 11 SD ChiilaVisla hanl!:c LST BAY BLVD HILL TOP DR 16 17 2.020 4 20400
15Y45 E6 II SO Chula Vista han"c LST HILL TOP DR TELEGRAPH CANYON RD 16 17 0.830 4 21200
16Y41 B5 II SO Chu\aVista hanl!:e LA 1-1EDlA RD ~AST PALOMAR ST OLYMPIC PKWY 6 14 0.520 6 13400
15Y45 19 11 SD ChiilaVista hanrre MAIN ST MAXWELL RD HERlT AGE RD 16 14 0.855 6 14900
\5Y45 H7 11 SO ChiJlaVisla hanl!.e OLYMPIC PKWY BRANDYWINE AVE PASEO RANCHERO 16 14 1.670 6 30200
16Y41 B5 111 SD ChulaVisla hanI!'e OLYMPIC PKWY A MEDIA RD EAST PALOMAR ST 6 14 0.500 6 36000
16Y4-1 OJ 111 SD ChiJhiVista han"e OT A Y LAKES RD EASTLAKE PKWY URl (j1I SALT CREEKIRTE9 16 14 1.200 6 11200
16Y4I A4 11 SO Chu\aVista hanl!:e OT A Y LAKES RD I-rELEGRAPH CANYON RD EASTLAKE PKWY 16 14 1.650 6 50700
16Y41 F3 11 SD ChulaVistii hanl!'e OT A Y LAKES RD URl fill SALT CREEKJRTE 9 CL (ji) WOESTE RD 6 14 0.910 6 8900
Page 1 of 2
)>.
-I
:;;
()
::r::
~
m
z
-I
I~
ATTACHMENT "A"
Functional Classification Change Request Form
Submitled by
Date:
Roberto Solorzano
February 13,2008
t-.)
I
01
1i
~ ..
~ .. "
~ . .~ ~
. .. .. ~ .. ChangeJ (To) Number of
::E.~ ~ 15 ;; ~
~ E . .. Newl (From) N.w Lenl:th Through Currenl
Pii . .. ,. .. Delete Road From To Clan Class (mil Lanes AADT
U U ~
15Y45 A8 11 SO ChulaYista hanoe PALOMAR 5T iRAYBLVD 1-' 16 17 0.140 4 ]4300
16Y41 F1 11 SO Chula Vista hanee PROCTOR VALLEYRD "'AOUNT MIGUEL RD HUNTE PKWY 16 17 0.960 6 12300
15Y45 H4 11 SO ChtilaVista hanlJe TELEGRAPH CANYON RD PASED DEL REV DrAY LAKES RD 16 14 3.000 6 47700
16Y41 CS n so ChulaVista ow EAST PALOMAR 5T InL YMPIC PKWY MAGDALENA AVE 16 0.473 4 01.
16Y41 F, n SO CbulaVista .w OLYMPIC PKWY HUNTE PKWY WUESTE RD I' 0.625 . 01.
16Y41 86 11 SO ChulaVista .'.w LA MEDIA RD SANTA VENETIA 5T BIRCH RD I. 0.284 6 7798
16Y31 AIO U SO Chi.da Vista ".w SAN MIGUEL RANCH RD ROCTOR VALLEY RD SR-125 17 1.136 . 01.
16Y31 ClD ill so ChulaVista N.w MOUNT MIGUEL RD SR-125 PROCTOR VALLEY RD 17 1.326 . 7874
16Y41 D6 11 so Chub. Vista >I.w BIRCH RD SR.125 EASTLAKE PKWY 14 0.511 6 4259
16Y41 C6 II so ChulaVista >I.w BIRCH RD AMEDIARD SR~125 16 0.720 6 4259
Functional Classification Codes
Rural FUD(:tiooal Class Codes: Urban Functional Class Codes:
01= Principal Arterial Interstate 11 =-Principal Arteriallnterstale
02=Other Principal Arterial 12=Principal Arterial ~Other Fwys or Expwys
06=MinorArterial 14=Other Principal Arterial
07=MajorCollector 16=Minor Arterial
08=Minor Collector 17=Collector
09=Local 19=Local
Page2of2
)'..
---l
---l
,l>
o
I
s:
m
z
-l
~
\
N
ATTACHMENT 8-1
-
I
~
,
2-6
ATTACHMENT, B - 2-
I
,
~
~
~
)! ~
. ~
~ .
3i~~
,
~
,
i
8
~ ~
" , .
/ .
, ~
.,
,
~ "' Illl, 2
j Idll"' I
~ ~ ~ ~..: . i:l:
o'I,.Hl"! "
,".;H
. "ili l
I. ,
"j I
i"
....;'" ,
. ~
i'o
w
"
<
"
0",
~~
~~
~~ OJ
O.d
~ I ~ ; S
~ <f?illI;.>tl}
;;; 1--
~ 1111,
Ill!
.....i
qlj
(,"
:lW
II
I .
o
, ! II!. II
! I IiI
, lloi!! 0
! II.,!
I ~ l'a Iii!
! 'Hi
"1
., . Ii
<
j'lh
3~~.~
;Z~1 ~
i~l 1<
I
2-7
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE FUNCTIONAL
CLASSIFICATION CHANGE REQUEST FORM, INCLUDING
THE CALIFORNIA ROAD SYSTEM (CRS) MAPS, AND
AUTHORIZING CITY STAFF TO SUBMIT THE
FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION CHANGE REQUEST
FORM AND CRS MAPS TO CALTRANS
WHEREAS, under the 1991 Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA),
eligibility for Federal funds is based on functional classification of roads and streets; and
WHEREAS, those roads and streets that have a functional classification other than Local
Roads and Rural Minor Collectors are eligible for Federal funding; and
WHEREAS, if the City wants to classify or reclassify a City street or road, the City is
required have a City Council resolution authorizing staff to submit a Functional Classification
Change Request Form, including California Road System (CRS) maps, to Caltrans; and
WHEREAS, Caltrans will then forward the Functional Classification Change Request
Form and CRS maps to the Federal Highway Administration for approval; and
WHEREAS, recent additions to the City's street inventory, especially in the eastern part
of the City, have not been classified and reported to Caltrans; and
WHEREAS, City staff wishes to submit the Functional Classification Change Request
Form, including the CRS maps, to Caltrans so that the Form and maps will be forwarded to the
Federal Highway Administration for approval and, if approved, those streets and roads will be
eligible for Federal funds.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City ofChula Vista
that it approves the Functional Classification Change Request Form, including the California
Road System (CRS) maps, and authorizes City staff to subrnit the Functional Classification
Change Request Form and CRS maps to Caltrans.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Jack Griffin
Director of Engineering and
General Services
~tL~ rfr--
Ann Moore
City Attorney
H:\ENGINEER\RESOS\Resos2008\03-04-08\Reso Approving Hwy Updates revised by ec.doc
2-8
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
.:S-'lff::. CllY OF
--=" ,,~ CHULA VISTA
03/04/2008
Item 3
SUBMITTED BY:
ORDINANCE AMENDING CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE
CHAPTER 8.25 "RECYCLING", TO IMPLEMENT A
CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITI N DEBRIS RECYCLING
PROGRAM.
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
CITYMANAGER I~
ASSISTANT CITY ~NAGER '0 r
ITEM TITLE:
REVIEWED BY:
4/5THS VOTE: YES
NO ~
BACKGROUND
This proposed Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance is one component of the
City of Chula Vista's AB 939 Integrated Waste Management Plan to divert material from the
landfill - converting waste to a resource. AB 939 requires cities and counties to divert 50% of the
waste going to landfills or potentially face fines of up to $10,000 per day. The City ofChula Vista
did not meet the landfill diversion goal for 2005. The California Integrated Waste Management
Board (CIWMB) strongly recommended that Chula Vista implement this ordinance in an attempt to
address the declining waste diversion rate particularly in light of the potential amount of new
construction and redevelopment planned for the future.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that there is no possibility
that the activity may have a significant effect on the environment because it involves
implementation of a program to recycle construction and demolition materials that would
otherwise be disposed of in the landfill; therefore, pursuant to Section 15061 (b )(3) of the State
CEQA Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is
necessary.
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council adopt the ordinance amending Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 8.25.
3-1
03/04/2008, Iteml
Page 2 of6
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Board of Appeals and Advisory - January 14, 2008. Voted approval to send to Council for
adoption.
Resource Conservation Commission - February 4,2008. Voted that the ordinance was adequate
and recommended that Council adopt.
DISCUSSION
The CIWMB estimates that Construction and Demolition Debris (C&D) make up 22% of the waste
stream statewide. The City of San Diego conducted a waste stream characterization study and
found that C&D materials make up between 35-45% of the Miramar Landfill waste stream. We
believe that approximately 40% of ChuIa Vista's waste stream is comprised of C&D materials.
Additionally, 25% of ChuIa Vista's waste stream is delivered to the Otay Landfill by the waste
generators directly, self-hauled.
Given this information, the CIWMB
strongly recommended that ChuIa Vista
adopt a Construction and Demolition
Debris Recycling Ordinance. The Waste
Board staff provided City staff with
valuable information on other
jurisdictions' C&D programs and a
model ordinance. City staff also worked
with the Local Solid Waste Taskforce -
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
during a two-year process to develop a
model ordinance for San Diego County
jurisdictions to adapt and adopt in an
effort to keep reporting requirements
similar from jurisdiction to jurisdiction
within San Diego County.
rI.IO _
=...-
"'CIo"CS'-=
~ .. ~ "'CI
.... ~ - =
-...... <lJ ~
- l7.I l>-
-< =..... ~
>...c
,,~...
2003
136,961
~
~ =
= Q,) '-=
".c~
4= ; =
...... "
.. -
1J1
..= 3=
~ "'Ot::
_ l7.I Q,) "C
.. = ;.. c
- Q Q,) =
=..... ;>-
..... .... Q,)
Q ~.c
f-< ~...
~
..
";
,,~
.cc
...
-
..
1J1
2004
139,687
45,187
182,148
25%
2005
158,742
63,816
203,503
31%
2006
156,746
58,717
217,459
27%
48,197
204,943
24%
Stakeholder InDut
During this process, the T AC held several meetings with local govemment representatives and
industry stakeholders.
City staff solicited input from the affected departments and local builders (Kevin O'Neal), as well as
industry representatives from the Building Industry Association (BIA - Matt Adams), Associated
General Contractors of America, Inc (AGC - Brad Barnum) and the Building Owners and Managers
Association (BOMA - Craig Benedetto). Most of the comments and suggestions were incorporated
into the proposed ordinance.
Ordinance Summary
The proposed Chula Vista ordinance is a culmination of stakeholder input and an adaptation of
the TAC model. The ordinance establishes a C&D performance deposit program to provide an
incentive for applicants to reuse and recycle debris rather than landfilling it. This is similar to
existing C&D diversion programs in the State such as, San Jose, Oakland, San Mateo, San Diego
and San Francisco. A summary of the proposed Chula Vista program is as follows.
3-2
03/04/2008, Item---3-
Page 3 of6
Covered Projects
All applicants for covered projects must comply with the ordinance. No construction permit
or demolition permit for these projects will be issued until the initial C&D Waste
Management Report (WMR) form has been received and approved by the Waste
Management Report Compliance Official (Environmental Services Division) and an
appropriate performance deposit has been received by the City. Covered projects include:
. Any project requiring a permit for demolition or construction, which has a
project valuation of $20,000 or more.
. Housing subdivision construction or demolitions and I or any other sequenced
developments will be considered a "project" in its entirety and not a series of
individual projects.
All City construction and demolition projects shall be considered a covered project and will
need to comply with the Waste Management Report requirement.
Non-Covered Projects
A performance deposit and WMR will not be required for the following projects, but such
projects will be encouraged to divert at least 50% of all project-related construction and
demolition waste materials.
. Work for which a building or demolition permit is not required.
. Roofing projects that do not include tear-off of existing roof.
. Work for which only a plumbing, only an electrical or only a mechanical permit
is required.
. Seismic tie-down projects.
. Projects less than 10,000 square feet, where no structural building modifications
are required.
. Emergency demolition required to protect public health and safety.
. Individual single-family home renovations that are not part of a larger project,
such as a housing or commercial development.
Waste Management Report
All applicants for covered projects must submit a Waste Management Report on a Waste
Management Report Form (Attachment #2) prior to issuance of a construction or demolition
permit, illustrating how they plan to divert 90% of the inert debris (rock, dirt, concrete,
asphalt, tile) and 50% of the remaining debris.
. The WMR will be reviewed and must be approved prior to issuance of a
construction or demolition permit. The Waste Management Compliance
Official will have ten (10) business days to respond with an approval, a denial or
a request for clarification. If the WMR Official does not respond within 10
business days, the applicant should notifY the Official. The WMR Official will
then have three (3) days to respond or the deposit requirement will be waived.
. The WMR will indicate the following:
i. The type of project.
ii. The total square footage of the project.
111. The estimated volume or weight of C&D debris that will be recycled or
diverted from landfilling.
IV. The maximum volume or weight of C&D debris that will be disposed of in
a landfill; and
3-3
03/04/2008, Iteml
Page 4 of6
v. The vendors or facilities that the applicant proposes to use to collect,
process, and/or receive the C&D debris.
Performance Deposit
A Performance Deposit will be paid when all permit fees and deposits are paid. The deposit
will be 3% of the project valuation or a maximum of $30,000. If the deposit amount is $50
or less it will be waived. Valuation will be established using the Chula Vista Planning and
Building Department standard project valuation tables. Upon completion of the project, the
deposit will be refunded based upon the recycling goals being met. If only a portion of the
goal has been met, the deposit refund will be prorated accordingly.
Performance Deposit Refund
Within 30 days after demolition is completed (if a demolition permit only) or 30 days after
the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or at the time of issuing the last certificate of
occupancy for units within a phased project of any covered project, the applicant should
submit documentation that it has met the diversion requirements for the project. The
diversion requirement will be 90% diversion of inert materials, rock, dirt, concert, asphalt,
tile, brick, etc., and 50% of the rest of the C&D debris generated, via reuse and recycling.
The documentation should include all of the following.
1. Receipts from the vendor or facility that received each material, showing the actual
volume or weight of that material.
2. A copy of the WMR form in its entirety.
3. Photographs and narrative documentation of the applicant's reuse activities: such as,
grinding up old concrete to use for pipe bed.
Within 30 days after submitting the performance documentation to the WMR Compliance
Official, a confirmation will be made of the waste diverted and deposit funds released. A
sliding scale for compliance provides a proportional forfeiture of the deposit, depending on
what percentage of materials are or are not reused, recycled/diverted. This table is included in
the WMR form. Interest earned on the deposits and un-refunded deposits are the property of
the City and will be used for waste reduction and recycling activities.
Within 30 days of completion of the demolition project or issuance of the certificate of
occupancy, if an applicant fails to submit the WMR with the required documentation, then
the entire performance deposit will be forfeited and will remain the property of the City to be
used for waste reduction and recycling activities.
There are no administrative fees charged to process the Waste Management Report and
performance deposit as these expenses will be covered under the AB 939 fee charged on all
solid waste service invoices.
Diversion Exemptions
There is a provision for granting an exemption if due to unique circumstances, it is infeasible
to meet the diversion requirements (example: asbestos piping, or asbestos ceiling tiles). The
WMR Compliance Official will work with the applicant to establish a modified diversion
requirement.
3-4
03/04/2008, Iteml
Page 5 of6
Appeal Process
The applicant may appeal the determination made by the WMR Compliance Official.
Appeals shall be made to the City Manager or Designee. The appeal shall be in writing and
filed with the City Clerk within 10 business days of receipt of the WMR Compliance
Official's decision. The appeal shall be limited to the following issues: 1). The granting or
denial of an exemption; and 2). The amount of security to be released. The decision of the
City Manager or Designee shall be final.
Implementation
The Waste Management Report and performance deposit will not be a requirement until July
1,2008. The purpose in delaying the implementation date is two-fold. First, staff will use the
time between adoption and the implementation date to conduct workshops and other forms of
outreach to the construction industry and the community. Staff will introduce the Waste
Management Report form, explain the reporting process, and that an approved WMR must be
received as part of the application package for demolition and construction permits.
Second, there are several vendors throughout the County who will accept clean, separated
loads of construction materials for recycling and reuse (San Diego County Construction and
Demolition Recycling Guide Attachment #3). However, there is only one mixed C&D debris
processing/recycling location currently, EDCO in Lemon Grove. Allied Waste Services, is
in the permitting process to build a C&D processing/recycling facility at the Otay Landfill.
Allied projects to have it completed and operational by late next summer/early fall. This will
provide two, certified C&D processing/recycling facility options for mixed C&D debris with
one conveniently located adjacent to the City of Chula Vista, at the Otay Landfill.
Staffing
The Environmental Services Division of the Public Works Department will administer the
Waste Management Report process. The Waste Management Report is to be submitted and
approved by Environmental Services Staff or by City Manager's designee prior to permit
issuance. Setting this process up in advance of the application process minimizes any
impacts to the permitting process. Development Services counter staff will look for an
"Approved WMR" to accompany the respective permit application and will process the
performance deposit.
Given the large volume of C&D materials that are in the waste stream, implementing a C&D
debris recycling/diversion program will have a significant impact on Chula Vista's diversion
numbers. Additionally, these materials are fairly easy to recycle. The purpose of the C&D
performance deposit program will be to provide an incentive for applicants to reuse and
recycle these materials turning them into a resource and assisting the City of Chula Vista in
meeting the State mandate landfill diversion goal.
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)(l) is not applicable to this decision.
3-5
03/04/2008, Item3-
Page 6 of6
FISCAL IMP ACT
This ordinance will not impact the General Fund. C&D program administration activities will be
paid for through the AB 939 Fee that covers all activities related to the City of Chula Vista's
recycling and solid waste management activities.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft Ordinance
2. Draft Waste Management Report Form
3. County Construction and Demolition Recycling Facility Brochure
Prepared by: Lynn France, Environmental Services Program Manager, Department of Public Works.
3-6
DRAFT
STRIKEOUT VERSION -
Underline means new language, strikeout means removed language
Chapter 8.25
RECYCLING
Sections:
8.25.010 Purpose and intent.
8.25.020 Definitions.
8.25.030 Mandatory fees for recycling.
8.25.035 Reserved.
8.25.040 Separation ofrecyclable materials, storage, and containers.
8.25.050 Mandatory recycling.
8.25.060 Recycling programs.
8.25.070 Reports.
8.25.080 Scavenging.
8.25.090 Compo sting.
8.25.095 Construction and Demolition Debris Recvcling.
8.25.100 Enforcement.
8.25.110 Severability.
8.25.010 Purpose and intent.
The purpose of this eChapter is to provide standards for integrated solid waste
management, to include source reduction, recycling and composting of solid
wastes, in order to provide for the long-term health, safety and welfare of Chula
Vista residents through extending current landfill capacity, preserving resources,
and providing for the general protection of the environment. The eChapter
provides for regulation of the storage, collection, transportation and recovery of
marketable and recyclable materials. (Grd. 2992 ~ 1,2005; Grd. 2740 ~ 3, 1998;
Grd. 2492 ~ 1,1992).
8.25.020 Definitions.
For purposes of this e~hapter, and other municipal code provisions referring
hereto, the following words shall have the meanings ascribed thereto, unless the
context in which they are used clearly indicates another meaning:
AI. "Aluminum" means recoverable materials made from aluminum, such as
used aluminum food or beverage containers, aluminum foil, siding, screening, and
other items manufactured from aluminum.
A2. "Applicant" means anv individual, firm. limited liabilitv companv.
association. partnership. political subdivision. government agencv. municipality.
industrv. public or private corporation. or anv other entitv whatsoever who applies
to the Citv for the applicable permits to undertake anv Construction. Demolition.
or Renovation Proiect within the Citv of Chu1a Vista.
B. "Bin" shall mean those plastic or metal containers of one cubic yard (202
gallons) to eight cubic yards that have plastic lids on the top (unless metal lids are
designated by the eCity mManager). Bins are used for weekly or more frequent
collection of waste, yard waste or designated recyclables by the e~ity or its
franchise agent.
~A~~}m~jiltffi:.Q.",ll!_S,!;JI-i!).s~\.lO:ID.J2Q[lllY..bl1""'llS':.t.I.iJ~"iQ"'.Kia\C~'Mc.J!.,~,:uJ'_:m~t~-,i.:;iQl\Ji-9.a5.:Q.!!.J;!.\ls!:ti~~J!;!N'..:;~i~J.,__.Lc.L~~t'!'.ll.!!ifI_(M!'AH(~.!!
w~_!OO:!i!~49g:,~C"~,K..t2{.lL~!~;;tLl_.d:.e.~:'~ ::'\J&..!I...H:' 'lI~Rl!~\Jlt..UrgpJ;'Rl\J')<;;(l:'r',]IC 8.2: (U JSHt ! "s":ns) Ii!:~ glLlis!
Last revised: 92 2> 98@ 12:181'.m.2/27/08 7:39 am
3-7
Page 2
STRIKEOUT VERSION -
Underline means new language, strikeout means removed language
C. "Bulky waste" means discarded items whose large size or shape precludes or
complicates their handling by standard residential or commercial solid waste,
recycling and green waste collection methods. Bulky items include white goods,
furniture, large auto parts, trees, stumps, carpet and other potentially oversize
wastes. Bulky waste does not include hazardous or infectious waste unless
specifically exempt, such as freon-containing refrigerators.
D. "Buy-back center" means a facility licensed and permitted by the
Department of Conservation and/or local jurisdiction which pays a fee for the
delivery and transfer of ownership to the facility of source-separated materials for
the purpose of recycling or composting.
E. "Cardboard" means post-consumer waste paper grade corrugated cardboard
(grade No. 11), kraft (brown) paper bags, or solid fiber boxes which have served
their packaging purposes and are discarded and can later be reclaimed for
collection and recovery for recycling.
F. "Carts" shall mean those plastic containers with a capacity of less than 202
gallons (one cubic yard). Carts shall have a fixed lid and are designed for
automated and/or semi-automated collection of solid waste, yard waste and/or
designated recyclables by the "City or its franchise agent.
G. "City" shall mean the "City of Chula Vista, a municipal corporation of the
state of California, in its present incorporated form or in any later reorganized,
consolidated, enlarged or reincorporated form.
H. "Collection" means the act of removing and conveying nonhazardous and
noninfectious solid waste, commingled or source-separated materials, from
residential, commercial, industrial, or institutional (governmental) generators to a
facility for processing, compo sting, transfer, disposal or transformation.
I. "Commercial" means a site and/or business zoned or permitted for any use
other than residential including, but not limited to, commercial, light industrial,
industrial and agricultural. Commercial generators that generate three or more
cubic yards of waste per week are serviced by a bin or compactor collection
vehicle.
1. "Commercial recyclables" means designated recyclable materials from the
two commercial subcategories of "office" and "hospitality." Materials include,
but are not limited to: office paper, cardboard, newspaper, and aluminum from
offices; and cardboard, glass bottles and jars, plastic bottles, aluminum, tin and bi-
metal cans, and white goods from hospitality establishments.
K. "Compactor containers" means those fully enclosed metal containers of two
to 40 cubic yards provided by the "City's hauler or customer. Compactors
typically serve very large quantity generators.
1. "Compost" means the product resulting from the controlled biological
decomposition of organic wastes that are source-separated from the municipal
solid waste stream.
M. "Compo sting" shall mean the controlled and monitored process of
converting organic wastes into compost.
Nl. "Construction" means the building of any facility or structure or any
portion thereof including any tenant improvements to an existing facility or
sturcture.
cm,)C\lmS'l;S and ~Mrinl'~\nvdhN ~ClIi Seltinlls\Te,nolllurv lnieme! Filed">1 K Sg\C\?IC 8. ~~ I l'_JDSM revisions O~_25_08 df.!.o;;f~~~_ifl:gL~_n .f ~ h,R~t!ffl.lllll~.s:.~ ~,;;!'L]il~,
dli: !!jMJil.ill:!.~':\1I;l:;' _C~.:'JC_.1L.~.J;:r.}~I.1..:l! :a!ilf!.U~_;f._.!1.~.AllJJ:' . ttL _/ JU:.b?r9P~Rl.'Y'J'O;E~'(" 11(' ~_::.~ (U mEt t e '56115) 122 ::.~ 9a.aea
Last revised: 02-25-08 @ 12:18 p.m.
3-8
Page 3
STRlKEOUT VERSION -
Underline means new language, strikeout means removed language
N.f. "Construction and Demolition waste" means used or discarded materials
removed from the premises duringthe demolition, dredging, grubbing, and
building, ana rubble resulting from Construction. remodeling, repair, and/or
Demolition activities on housing, commercial, governmental buildings, and other
structures and pavement.
01- "Contract or franchise agent(s)" means any person or private or public
entity designated by the eCity eCouncil, pursuant to Article XII of the eCity
Charter and Chapter 8.23 CVMC, as being responsible for administering the
collection, processing and/or disposal of solid waste or designated recyclables.
02. "Conversion Rate" means the rate set forth in the standardized Conversion
Rate Table approved bv the City pursuant to this Chapter for use in estimating the
volume or weight of materials identified in a Waste Management Report.
03. "Covered Proiect" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 8.25.095 of
this Chapter.
04. "Demolition" means the decimating. deconstructing. razing, ruining.
tearing down or wrecking of anv facility. structure, pavement or building. whether
in whole or in part, whether interior or exterior.
05. "Divert" means to use material for anv purpose other than disposal in a
landfill or transformation facilitv.
06. "Diversion Requirement" means the diversion of ninety percent of Inert
Waste and not less than fifty percent of the remaining waste generated via Reuse
or recycling, unless a partial or full diversion exemption has been granted
pursuant to Section 8.25.095 of this Chapter, in which case the Diversion
Requirement shall be the maximum feasible diversion rate established by the
Waste Management Report Compliance Official for the proiect.
P. "Recycling box" shall mean those containers with a capacity of 18 gallons to
32 gallons which are supplied by the eCity or its franchise agent for manual
collection of designated recyclables at special events.
Q. "Curbside collection" means the service of removing and conveying
nonhazardous and noninfectious solid waste, source-separated recyclables and/or
green waste from the public thoroughfare at the curb or alley. (The e~ity shall
make the final determination regarding eligibility for curbside collection, which
shall generally apply to small quantity generators.)
R71. "Designated containers" ("containers") shall mean those containers
designated by the eCity ffiManager for temporary storage and collection of waste
or designated recyclables including but not limited to curbside bins, carts, bins,
roll-off boxes, and/or compactor containers.
R2. "Designated recyclables" means those materials designated by the eCity
mManager for recovery or reuse. Any material having an economic value on the
secondary materials market or that is otherwise salvageable shall be included
and/or other materials that have been separated from other small quantity or large
quantity generators for the purposes of being recycled for resale and/or reuse, and
placed at a designated recycling or waste collection or storage location or in a
designated recycling or waste container for the purpose of collection and
processing, or any such designated recyclable materials collected under a mixed
C\DocumeniS and Settin"'s\nvdiaf\l oca.1 Setljn~s\Tenmnrarv Inlerne'l F'ie1'.OI K58\C\'MC 8,:;51F_J1):'11\_1 re"~,,iOlH; O~.25-08 q~~~~:,t:nJeL,,:t1,~,~ltt1:l.~:"_C~_~!!1_!.~fll.D,
md..~.t.filil:!1(~.i;2.It!?':'C:-.~.I.C~,,;f..kL1!?~~H.I e ili.i~';'.~.;:L9.~._~~_~J:' . rtsffie) 'nMJrQRPRJ ~TcrS'(' 'J' IS 8.:).: (:r,J' JP!:H re i!' ~ s) IJ~ :~ ')U.2 e
Last revised: 02-25-08@ 12:18 p.m.
3-9
Page 4
STRIKEOUT VERSION -
Underline means new language, strikeout means removed language
waste processing program. The list includes, but is not limited to: newspaper
(ONP), mixed paper (MP), corrugated cardboard (OCC), steel, tin and bi-metal
cans, metal coat hangers, aluminum containers, white goods, glass food and
beverage containers, No.1 and No.2 plastic containers, all California redemption
containers, used oil, used oil filters, yard waste, clean lumber, concrete and
asphalt.
S. "Designated solid waste and recycling collection or storage location" means
a place designated by the e~ity mManager for storage and/or collection of waste,
green waste and/or recyclables pursuant to CVMC 8.24.100. Designated locations
include, but are not limited to, the curb, alley, waste/recycling enclosure, a
loading dock, or basement of a commercial enterprise or multifamily complex
where waste and recyclables are placed for collection or temporary storage prior
to collection by the eCity' s franchise agent.
T. "Franchised recyclables" means any residential, commercial or industrial
recyclables, as defined herein, to be collected by the eCity's contract agent or
franchisee, placed in designated recycling containers or at designated recycling
collection or storage location(s).
U. "Garbage" means all nonhazardous, noninfectious organic waste including:
kitchen and table waste, and animal or vegetable waste that attends or results from
the storage, preparation, cooking, or handling of food stuffs, except organic
wastes separated therefrom and used in composting in accordance with CVMC
8.25.090.
V. "Generator" means every owner, tenant, occupant or person owning or
having the care and control of any premises in the e~ity including the temporary
use of parks, open space or a public thoroughfare.
w. "Glass bottles and jars" means food and beverage containers made from
silica or sand, soda ash, and limestone, the product being transparent or
translucent and being used for packaging or bottling, including container glass
designated redeemable under the California Beverage Container Recycling and
Litter Reduction Law, Division 12.1 (commencing with Section 14500) of the
California Public Resources Code, as well as glass jars and bottles without
redeemable value ("scrap"), but excluding household, kitchen, and other sources
of noncontainer glass such as drinking glasses, ceramics, light bulbs, window
pane glass, and similar glass products that are not bottles or jars.
x. "Grantee" shall mean the eCity's franchise agent(s).
Y. "Green wastes" means the leaves, grass, weeds, shrubs, tree branches, tree
trunk and other wood materials from trees. Green waste may also include
preconsumer food waste, incidental amounts of waxed or plastic-coated cardboard
and mixed paper, and unpainted and untreated lumber. Green waste does not
include tree stumps in excess of 35 pounds, more than incidental dirt or rock,
plastic, glass, metal, painted or treated lumber, plywood, particle board, or other
manufactured products that contain glue, formaldehyde, nonorganic or
nonbiodegradable materials.
z. "Green waste processing" means the accumulation and storage of green
waste in a manner that leads to the intentional or unintentional thermophilic
decomposition of green waste. The acceptance of payment for green waste and
C.\DoclJmenls and Selrin!!S\nvdiaN.oca.' Seltjm!~'.T"'mnorarvll1te1"J1e:f'les\()1 KS8\CVMC 8,::SU'_lD~Mre\'i~ion5 O~-25-0SdQ.;~~~~jm:~~_'J:_,-!l~!.I1i!a:lI.!:l
,~.!t4.f!J.jj",gJ.~U._..:';;2.'i)r r.~'::~JSJ.,.:'.~ u._%'.e;MJ.L i;:rj,"_ll">l..9.~_.;.L!l.bt~ :1: . HEm~:. 'JR.I:J r9RPR' ~lCE~ ~. '1 I~ 1l_:~ (Lr m~r {r~ sielU) t?:;! :~ 'J'il.ile.
Last revised: 02-25-08 @ 12:18 p.m.
3-10
Page 5
STRIKEOUT VERSION -
Underline means new language, strikeout means removed language
the accumulation of more than 15 yards or three tons per year of unprocessed,
shredded, ground or composted material shall constitute green waste processing
and is subject to the eCity, eCounty and state requirements regulating compost
and/or solid waste facilities. Residential, commercial and agricultural sites that
generate, stockpile or process green waste material generated on-site and used on-
site without sale of fInished or unfmished material, that are otherwise compliant
with all conditions of the municipal code for nuisance, may apply for an annual
exemption.
AA. "Hazardous or toxic waste" means any waste material or mixture of wastes
which is toxic, corrosive, flammable, explosive, an irritant, a strong sensitizer,
and which generates pressure through decomposition, heat or other means, if such
a waste or mixture of wastes may cause substantial personal injury, serious illness
or harm to humans, domestic animals, or wildlife, during, or as an approximate
result of, any disposal of such wastes or mixtures of wastes as defIned in Section
25117 of the California Health and Safety Code, which is not legally disposable at
a Class III landfIll.
BB. "Hospitality" means any establishment that offers dining services, food or
beverage sales. This includes taverns, bars, cafeterias, and restaurants, as well as
motels and hotels (temporary housing of less than one month duration), hospitals,
schools, colleges, and other such establishments that have dining services, or a
restaurant or bar, on their premises.
CC. "Industrial recyclables" means recyclables from industrial, construction,
and demolition operations, including, but not limited to, asphalt, concrete, dirt,
land-clearing brush, sand and rock.
DD. "Industrial solid waste" means solid waste originating from mechanized
manufacturing facilities, factories, refIneries, construction and demolition
projects, and/or publicly operated treatment works, excluding recyclables and
compostables, if properly handled and treated, and excluding hazardous or toxic
waste.
EE. "Inert waste" means materials such as concrete, soil, asphalt, ceramics,
brick. masonrY. tile. earthen cooking ware, automotive safety glass, and mirrors.
FF. "Improper disposal" means the discarding of any item or items upon public
or private premises that were not generated on the premises as a part of its
authorized use, unless written consent of the property owner is fIrst obtained.
GG. "Improper disposal site" means any premises that have intentionally or
unintentionally accumulated solid waste or recyclables and/or charged a fee for
accepting material without a solid waste or compo sting permit from the county
local enforcement agency. This does not include businesses licensed and
permitted in the e~ity to purchase source-separated recyclables.
HR. "Incidental waste" means less than one pound of waste deposited in a
public litter bin or designated waste container to prevent litter, such as waste from
a fast food meal deposited in a designated waste container or public litter bin by a
pedestrian or vehicle operator.
II. "Industrial generator" means any property or generator that is engaged in the
manufacture of products including but not limited to construction and demolition.
Industrial generators are typically serviced by roll-off box containers of lO-yard
(' \D'-lclJUleni, and Setrinl!",nvdiaf',Locai S"'!1in,,~\T~mnmftr>, Internet Fj\l'~\OI .KS8\CVMC 8,"~ I F_1DSM re\'i~ion8 ()~_~~_()S .1Q.~~~me&~:i:f.lgjj.J.)."._i.~.L_:Q_~_~_,!I,_~'lill':L[L;!.m_:f ;n
wlJl.e...,,,.,,l;l;~,\~.R~2:.:i:'_~":'.I:.~_~,,::;'..'[;'J':J!1'.5U.I_Li~llnL:i.~m.;fS.!!:;:!il'-i:1:' . ll~ :, 'Ro.D r gP.PRJ \lfar'r"l Ir 8.2: ~bf }pEl t a 'B' 8 IsUl2 2S gg,E1s8
Last revised: 02-25-08 @ 12:18 p.m.
3-11
Page 6
STRIKEOUT VERSION -
Underline means new language, strikeout means removed language
to 40-yard capacities and typically generate inert materials such as asphalt,
concrete, building debris and some wood and dry green waste.
JJ. "Industrial" means any form of mechanized manufacturing facilities,
factories, refineries, and construction and demolition operations, excluding
hazardous waste operations.
KK. "Institutional" shall mean any premises owned and/or occupied by local,
state and federal agencies, typically office or education facilities with a common
waste stream.
LL. "Integrated solid waste management" means a planned program for
effectively controlling the storage, collection, transportation, processing and
reuse, conversion, or disposal of solid waste, recyclables and/or compostables in a
safe, sanitary, aesthetically acceptable, environmentally sound and economical
manner. It includes all administrative, financial, environmental, legal and
planning functions as well as the operational aspects of solid waste handling,
disposal, litter control and resource recovery systems necessary to achieve
established objectives.
MM. "Landfill" means a disposal system by which solid waste is deposited in a
specially prepared area which provides for environmental monitoring and
treatment pursuant to the California Code of Regulations, California Public
Resources Code and the Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
NN. "Large quantity generator" means those residential, commercial, industrial
and institutional entities that generate more than 300 gallons of waste per week
excluding source-separated recyclables diverted from disposal or transformation.
00. "Mixed waste processing" means a system of recovering recyclables from
the mixed waste stream through separation at a processing facility, transfer
station, landfill, or other such facility, instead of separation at the primary waste
generation source.
PP. "Multifamily" means a structure or structures containing a total of four or
more dwelling units in any vertical or horizontal arrangement on a single lot or
building site.
QQ. "Newspaper" means newsprint-grade paper including any inserts that
come in the paper, and excluding soiled paper, all magazines and other
periodicals, telephone books, as well as all other paper products of any nature.
RRl. "Non-Covered Proiect" shall have the meaning set forth in Section
8.25.095 of this Chapter.
RRl. "Nuisance" means anything which is injurious to human health, or is
indecent or offensive to the senses, and interferes with the comfortable enjoyment
of life or property, and affects at the same time an entire community or
neighborhood, or any number of persons, although the extent of annoyance or
damage inflicted upon the individual may be unequal, and which occurs as a
result of the storage, removal, transport, processing, or disposal of solid waste,
compost, and/or designated recyclables.
SS. "Office" or "offices" for purposes of this eChapter shall mean any office,
combination of offices, or connected building or office space regardless of office
affiliation, ownership, or occupancy. This includes, but is not limited to,
businesses used for retail, wholesale, professional services, legal services,
C ';l)..,~],me!lt~ and ~etri<lin;,n\idiaf;!_ocal Selt;nll~\T emnmar'" Internet F'I-<,-()l K s&'.rVMC S.'~ I F_lDSM re\'i~ions O'_15.J)~ ,1Q...~i:~~_1;l1l1.~1\!~_.!Il'_l!J:,~.mi!lj;\Ii.'_t ~_ JH.L"~~fl\:'J;-,"-Mffil..\ll:i.M
!rn.!t.~_~_l:ilil'l,Il:J5?.'?.9..:.~2.~J.C.L:;'LH 'R-&tL\..~~.~~_ ~_;.;...:;.L.2L!!._t1_~':\ 'as s. J:lb.b.rrgWRI ~JGE!:~"] I~ U: '(l:f JSEr t e '~iaE!U'2 ::r lIS.slB!
Last revised: 02-25-08 @ 12: 18 p.m.
3-12
Page 7
STRIKEOUT VERSION -
Underline means new language, strikeout means removed language
financial services (to include banks), medical services, shipping and receiving
areas, churches, schools, colleges, and libraries.
IT. "Office paper" means waste paper grades of white and colored ledgers and
computer paper. Examples include forms, copy paper, stationery, and other papers
that are generally associated with desk and employee work area activity, and any
additional materials to be added by ordinance.
UUI. "Performance Deposit" means cash, money order or check submitted to
the City.
UUl. "Plastic bottle" means a plastic container with narrow neck or mouth
opening smaller than the diameter of the container body, used for containing milk,
juice, soft drinks, water, detergent, shampoo or other such substances intended for
household or hospitality use; to be distinguished from nonbottle containers (e.g.,
deli or margarine tub containers) and from nonhousehold plastic bottles such as
those for containing motor oil, solvents, and other nonhousehold substances.
VV. "Pollution" means the condition caused by the presence in or on a body of
water, soil, or air of any solid waste or substance derived therefrom in such
quantity, or such nature and duration, or under such condition, that the quality,
appearance, or usefulness of the water, soil, land, or air is significantly degraded
or adversely altered.
WWl. "Processing" means the reduction, separation, recovery, conversion, or
recycling of any component( s) of solid waste.
WW2. "Project" means anv activity, which requires an aplJlication for a
Construction or Demolition pennit or anv similar permit from the Citv of Chula
Vista.
-xx. "Putrescible wastes" means the waste in organic material with the
potential decomposition capacity to emit noticeable quantities of odor and gas by-
products. Material in this category includes, but is not limited to, kitchen waste,
dead animals, food from containers, etc., except organic wastes separated
therefrom and used in compo sting.
YY. "Recyclables" means any materials that are recyclable, reclaimable, and/or
reusable within the following generating categories: small quantity generator and
large quantity generator. Any material having an economic yalue on the
secondary materials market or that is otherwise salvageable shall be included
and/or other materials that have been separated from other small or large quantity
generators for the purposes of being recycled for resale and/or reuse, and placed at
a designated recycling or waste collection or storage location or in a designated
recycling or waste container for the purpose of collection and processing, or any
such designated recyclable materials collected under a mixed waste processing
program.
ZZ. "Recycling" shall mean any process by which materials which would
otherwise be discarded, deposited in a landfill or transformation facility and
become solid waste are collected (source-separated, commingled, or as "mixed
waste"), separated and/or processed, and returned to the economic mainstream in
the form of raw materials or products or materials which are otherwise salvaged
or recoyered for reuse.
AAA. "Refuse" means garbage and rubbish.
(" "Dncltm~nl~ and $ettinm;\nvdiaf',Loca, Sellin.,~\Tem"nr~rvlnlerlle: F;lp~\OI K58\CV'MC 8 ~~ I F.JD"]I,1 revj~i(lns O~-2~""S{h1!~:;~~~~.~;:,:.s;~.~1 ",L;[
o%!_l;fL!i~_ll:lillit~.9.2~"C:'.~JC_t.;.:_.u:_.:.li?,SJ.tR j;ri~lIL-;;t.';:,L_'.J:!L.!i~~J:' . R8 ~,Ja"J,ll'gp~]}l \lKE(;'(' '1 K g ,:::5 (H .lS~r I e iBlaRe) 92 2! QU,ee
Last revised: 02-25-08 @ 12:18 p.m.
3-13
Page 8
STRIKEOUT VERSION -
Underline means new language, strikeout means removed language
BBB. "Removal" means the act of taking solid wastes or designated recyclables
from the place of generation either by the contract or franchise agent(s), or by a
person in control of the premises.
CCC1. "Removal frequency" means frequency of removal of solid wastes or
recyclables from the place of generation.
CCC2. "Renovation" means anv change. addition. or modification in an
existing structure.
DDD. "Residential," for purposes of this eChapter, means any building or
portion thereof designed or used exclusively as the residence or sleeping place of
one or more persons, including single- and multiple-family dwellings, apartment-
hotels, boarding and lodging houses. "Residential" does not include short-term
residential uses, such as motels, tourist cabins, or hostels which are regulated as
hospitality establishments.
EEE1. "Residential recyclables" means those specific recyclable materials from
residential solid waste (single-family and multifamily) including, but not limited
to, aluminum, glass bottles and jars, newspaper, plastic bottles, tin and bi-metal
cans, white goods, and yard waste.
EEE2. "Reuse" means further or repeated use.
-FFF. "Roll-off service" means service provided for the collection, removal and
disposal of industrial waste such as construction, demolition and other primarily
inert nonputrescible wastes and green wastes. Roll-off service is usually provided
using metal containers of 10 to 40 cubic yards that are open on the top with doors
on one end.
GGG. "Rubbish" means nonputrescible solid wastes such as ashes, paper, glass,
bedding, crockery, plastics, rubber by-products or litter. Such materials that are
designated as recyclable or compost may be exempt from categorizing as rubbish;
provided, such materials are handled, processed and maintained in a properly
regulated manner.
HHH. "Salvaging or salvageable" means the controlled and/or authorized
storage and removal of solid waste, designated recyclables or recoverable
materials for the purpose of recycling. reuse. or storage for later recvcling or
reuse.
III. "Scavenging" means the uncontrolled and/or unauthorized removal of solid
waste, designated recyclables or recoverable materials. Such activity is unlawful
and is a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail and $1,000 in civil
penalties under CVMC 8.24.200 and 8.25.080 and Chapter 9, Section 41950 of
the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989.
lJJ. "To segregate waste material" means any of the following: the placement
of designated recyclables in separate containers; the binding or bagging of
designated recyclab1es separately from other waste material and placing in a
separate container from refuse, or the same container as refuse; and the physical
separation of designated recyclables from other waste material (either at the
generating source, solid waste transfer station, or processing facility).
KKK. "Small quantity generator" means those residential, commercial,
industrial and institutional entities that generate less than 300 gallons of waste per
C \[)()CJ,m"',I< an'" S""rin(!~\t1vdi3f..l()"Il: S"'ltin,,~\l ~nmnrafV Interne: l.n..,,\()l K58.\CVMC 8.~5 ll'-JDSM 'ev~~ions (\~-2~~i)gJ_(l_I<.~~~.!ftI!~_Mjj:~:i~kR"ELL:.~\~:!l:tL("'-n.1!8J8ti~_r_
!!;l_A.~.~.li:l"8 (;:s...\'~.Q'UJ;;J:"_;l~ hr. JJ;1S"'1.ffi~~lL';'_:;.~,L1.'~AA~1: '!La 1~, J1UH''2r.DR1\l'1<;I;g'C''':rK 8.3= (bf Jl,nrt f! 's's 6) QJ 3~ '08.6ee
Last revised: 02-25-08 @ 12:18 p.m.
3-14
Page 9
STRlKEOUT VERSION -
Underline means new language, strikeout means removed language
week excluding source-separated recyclables diverted from disposal or
transformation.
LL1. "Solid waste" means all putrescible and nonputrescible solid, semisolid
and liquid wastes, such as refuse, garbage, rubbish, ashes, industrial wastes,
demolition and construction wastes, abandoned vehicles and parts thereof,
discarded home and industrial appliances, manure, vegetable or animal solid and
semisolid wastes, and includes liquid wastes disposed of in conjunction with solid
wastes at solid waste transfer/processing stations or disposal sites, which are
generated by residential, commercial or industrial sites within the eCity. Solid
waste shall not include: hazardous and infectious waste, sewage collected and
treated in a municipal or regional sewage system or materials or substances
having commercial value or other importance which can be salvaged for reuse,
recycling, compo sting or resale.
MMM. "State" shall mean the state of California.
NNN. "Storage" means the interim containment of solid wastes, yard wastes, or
recyclables in an approved manner after generation and prior to disposal,
collection or processing. ("Interim" means for one week or less; roll-off
containers may store nonputrescible waste for up to 30 days.)
000. "Streets and byways" shall mean the public streets, ways, alleys and
places as the same now or may hereafter exist within said city, including state
highways now or hereafter established within said city.
PPPl- "Tin and bi-metal cans" means any steel food and beverage containers
with a tin or aluminum plating.
PPP2. "Total Proiect Costs" means the total value of a Proiect as calculated
using Chula Vista's standard valuation multipliers.
QQQ. "Transfer or processing station" means those facilities utilized to receive
solid wastes and to temporarily store, separate, convert, or otherwise process the
solid waste and/or recyclables.
RRRl. "Unit" means an individual residence contained in a residential
multifamily complex.
RRR2. "Waste Management Report !WMR)" means a WMR form. approved
bv the City Manager or designee. for the purpose of compliance with this Chapter.
RRR3. "Waste Management Report Compliance Official" means the
designated staff person! s) authorized bv the Citv Manager and responsible for
implementing the Construction and Demolition Debris Recvcling Program.
SSS. "White goods" means kitchen or other large enameled appliances which
include, but are not limited to, refrigerators, washers, and dryers.
TTT. "Wood waste" means lumber and wood products but excludes tree
stumps in excess of 35 pounds, more than incidental dirt or rock, plastic, glass,
metal, painted or treated wood, plywood, particle board or other manufactured
products that contain glue, formaldehyde, nonorganic or nonbiodegradable
materials.
UUU. "Vector" means any nuisance such as odor, unsightliness, sound, or a
carrier, usually insects or rodents, that is capable of transmitting a disease.
VVV. "Yard waste" means the leaves, grass, weeds, and wood materials from
trees and shrubs from the single-family and multifamily residential sources of the
C \.oOClJmellls and Settim$"nvdiaf',LoC8! Settin1!~\'[ellll'lm"'" In'emel F;le~'DI K5&\CVMC 8,~~ 11;_JD"Mr"v;~ioM O~"::;:5.0g,d~f_~~~~fIj!;~.ltliUJ;;J;>:L!;J:f'\I.!!jL81'[
!l!1!!..~_~,lli~J:ili~.I~.tl.~.::"C~~J~J;,f..~a~.H.L~_i~~;_fl..:;_2;_;LQgA._i11:T:' '<i~ltJ 'Y:.hIP9p.PR1\tr~Eg\('''H~ g.:: (kT W~f[ ! 's'snsU'2 2~ Q8.dae
Last revised: 02-25-08 @ 12:18 p.m.
3-15
Page 10
STRIKEOUT VERSION -
Underline means new language, strikeout means removed language
e~ity's green waste (to include landscape haulings from residential sources).
Acceptable materials for collection include all yard waste as herein defined,
excluding treated or processed wood or lumber, bulky waste or any other
materials as shall be determined by the eCity as to not be salvageable. All
acceptable yard waste shall be void of nails, wire, rocks, dirt or any other material
that is not considered yard waste. (Ord. 2992 ~ I, 2005; Ord. 27<10 ~ 3, 1998; Ord.
2<192 ~ I, 1992).
8.25.030 Mandatory fees for recycling.
A. The eCity eCouncil finds and determines that the regular collection of
recyclables by the contract or franchise agent(s) of the eCity from all places in the
eCity is a service to the premises from which it is collected. All owners or
occupants of premises generating recyclables shall pay the monthly collection fee
charged by the e~ity' s contract or franchise agent, not to exceed the eCity-
approved maximum rates. A schedule of maximum rates shall be kept on file with
the eCity eClerk and is available for public review. Maximum rates may be
subject to increase pursuant to the terms of the eCity's contract or franchise with
the contract or franchise agent(s). Subject to the terms of the then-in-effect
contract or franchise, the e~ouncil may from time to time establish such rates by
resolution, including the establishment of rates for different classifications of
quantity generators (small quantity generators, large quantity generators,
residential, commercial, or industrial, or subclassifications thereof) or types of
materials generated or other classifications which are deemed to be in the public
interest.
B. Pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 41900, et seq., the
eCity may, by resolution of the eCity e~ouncil, impose fees on eCity generators
to pay the actual costs incurred by the eCity in preparing, adopting or
implementing an integrated waste management plan in accordance with state
mandates.
C. The contract or franchise agent shall provide billing service and be totally
responsible for the collection of such fees, at the same time and in the same
manner as the collection of charges for refuse collection pursuant to CVMC
8.24.180. No person shall willfully fail, neglect or refuse, after demand by the
contract or franchise agent(s), to pay the fees provided for herein. (Ord. 2992 ~ I,
2005; Ord. 27<10 ~ 3, 1998; Ord. 2<192 ~ I, 1992).
8.25.035 Reserved.
(Ord. 2992 S 1,2005; Ord. 2740 S 3, 1998; Ord. 2492 S I, 1992; Ord. 2428 S I,
1990).
8.25.040 Separation of recyclable materials, storage, and containers.
A. The owner, operator, and/or occupant of any prernises, business
establishment, industry, or other property, vacant or occupied, shall be rebuttably
presumed to be the generators of, and be responsible for the safe and sanitary
storage of, all solid waste, designated recyclables, and compost accumulated on
the property. The designated recyclables and compost shall be stored separately
C'J).oclJm"'!lI~ ~nd SeltinQ"!;\nv(]iaH (leal Sellin~,",Tem!lnr8n; llllern~ Fjl",~\OI K58\CVMC 8.25 11'.]I)SM r"v;~ion~ 1)~.25-0S_d~~.\IJ!I.MllLJl..~.t:&~!.limlJt..~~~~_~.r,L_at, !.f~J'!
m4~~,Illi:1ilmll:';:.9.92.:J;:.~:'L~C: :.:;_J;,L'~Jd~.~flLl1;;:..;'L 'J_~_rNs1:' . lIe l!/,JR"Y r9PJ;'RI ~1f;E!,': ~"Ht:: g.~~ 1M" ~~H re 'sle 1U)~ 21 'ii.BE e
Last revised: 02-25-0S @ 12:1S p.m.
3-16
Page 11
STRlKEOUT VERSION -
Underline means new language, strikeout means removed language
from refuse. The property owner, operator, or occupant shall store such solid
waste, designated recyclables, and compost on the premises or property in such a
manner so as not to constitute a fire, health, or safety hazard, and shall require it
to be handled in such a manner so as not to promote the propagation, harborage,
or attraction of vectors, or the creation oflitter or other nuisances.
B. A container or containers for designated recyclables shall be provided by the
contract or franchise agent(s) for any premises generating residential or
commercial recyclables, for the exterior collection of designated recyclables.
Containers for industrial recyclables shall be provided by the generator of the
designated recyclables, unless otherwise arranged through the eCity mManager.
The containers shall effectively segregate the designated recyclables from refuse.
C. All such containers to be used in the e!;;ity's recycling programs shall be
approved by the e!;;ity mManager, in conjunction with the contract or franchise
agent(s) (or, in the case of industrial recyclables, the generators of the industrial
recyclables ).
D. Designated recyclables shall be sorted according to type and/or as
established by program guidelines and placed in separate containers, containers
with segregated compartments, or commingled (in one recycling container), as
agreed upon by the eCity mManager and the contract or franchise agent(s).
Containers, if more than one, shall be grouped together and placed for collection
at the same time as when regular refuse collection occurs or at designated
recycling collection times (if different from refuse collection) and at designated
recycling collection locations.
E. All containers used for recycling purposes, storage or collection, including
commercial and industrial recycling containers used in eCity recycling programs
as well as all other containers used for recycling purposes whether owned or
operated by a commercial entity, nonprofit organization, or any other persons or
entity, shall be identified with the name and current telephone number of the
owner or the responsible agency or person. Commercial recycling containers shall
remain locked at all times in order to discourage scavenging and prevent dumping
of refuse in the container, unless exempted by the eCity mManager in conjunction
with the contract or franchise agent(s).
F. Containers which do not comply with the requirements of this s.section shall
be presumed to be refuse and taken by the contract or franchise agent( s) for
disposal or potential use as salvaging or recycling containers.
G. It shall be unlawful for any person to dispose, dump, or otherwise place
material other than designated recyclables in a designated recycling container or
at a designated recycling collection or storage location.
H. Exemption. Designated recyclables which are source-sorted by their
generator for the purpose of recycling by selling them to a. buy-back center or
donating them to a eCity-licensed nonprofit or community group conducting
recycling programs for the purpose of raising funds do not have to be placed in
the designated recycling container required by this s.section, nor placed in a
designated recycling collection location in accordance with this s.section. When
designated recyclables are received by a eCity-licensed nonprofit or community
group conducting recycling programs for the purpose of raising funds, they shall
C \[){)clJmen's and SP.lli,\l!1;\nvdi~N ocal Sellinw;\T~m')N~rv lntl"nlel Files'.OI. K58'CVMf' Ii ~5 JJ'.JDSM r"vi~i()ns O~.25-08 dQ.<&::~ffl.!:fl.!f!:J"\l!!=~t!i!!gf.k.::MI~~,~.;.:.r;; :_.j._- (Q..-- I
L(R.1Llif;1it'.o_.l~4Q.\i2_C:J lL~_~'::'~.lL!~:ii:.IJ_.:L~:,~.!1UI:"'_:;L9i:i1,QgJ: . R.'!Fll.:) 'Jlhb1 rgp.,gR' Y'lCES'r'? IS g.::!r (H IDEt! " . s'.'!:Ii) j'J. ::!f 'JHae
Last revised: 02-25-08 @ 12:18 p.m.
3-17
Page 12
STRIKEOUT VERSION -
Underline means new language, strikeout means removed language
be stored and sorted in accordance with this s~ection and transported to a buy-
back center for the purpose of recycling. (Ord. 2992 ~ 1, 2005; Ord. 2710 ~ 3,
1998; Ord. 2192 ~ 1, 1992).
8.25.050 Mandatory recycling.
It shall be mandatory for all generators of residential, commercial, and
industrial recyclables in the eCity to separate from refuse, for recycling purposes,
all designated recyclables and otherwise participate in recycling as described by
thiseChapter. (Ord. 2992 ~ I, 2005; Ord. 2740 ~ 3, 1998; Ord. 2492 ~ 1, 1992).
8.25.060 Recycling programs.
A. The e~ity mManager shall establish and promulgate reasonable regulations,
guidelines and other program-related specifics as to the implementation of
recycling programs for residential, commercial, and industrial recycling,
including the method for collection of designated recyclables.
B. Commercial and industrial establishments shall develop their respective "in-
house" recycling plans that provide. for the collection of designated recyclables in
conjunction with the eCity's established recycling programs. The eCity and the
contract or franchise agent(s) shall assist in program development and provide
technical expertise and training materials.
C. Collection of recyclables from single-family residential units shall minimally
occur once weekly. For commercial and industrial entities, collection shall be
provided as needed to meet demand.
D. The eCity encourages use of buy-back centers, donation centers (for used
furniture and other reusable bulky items, and nonprofit agents), scrap dealers,
home and commercial compo sting, source reduction, and other creative, lawful
and environmentally sound efforts to reduce waste in accordance with this
eChapter that do not conflict with any established or planned eCity-sponsored
recycling, compo sting or source-reduction programs. (Ord. 2992 ~ 1, 2005; Ord.
2710 ~ 3, 1998; Ord. 2492 ~ I, 1992).
8.25.070 Reports.
A.c.All commercial and industrial establishments shall submit recycling tonnage
documentation on an annual basis to the eCity's conservation coordinator, due on
or before January 31st, for the previous year. Annual reporting shall be on the
form promulgated by the eCity mManager, and commence on the first anniversary
of the date set forth in the mandatory recycling implementation schedule as
established in this eChapter as July I, 1993. Voluntary reporting prior to the
required mandatory recycling is encouraged. (Ord. 2992 ~ 1, 2005; Ord. 2710 ~ 3,
1998; Ord. 2192 ~ 1, 1992).
B. Effective July 1. 2008. all Applicants for a Construction or Demolition
permit for a Covered Proiect must submit a Waste Management Report (WMR) to
the Waste Management Report Compliance Official for approvaL prior to pelmit
issuance. per Section 8.25.095.
8.25.080 Scavenging.
C.'--Documents and Setrin\$\n\idiaf',!"ocal S"'ttin,,~\Temnnrar" In'ernel Fi!e~\OI K53\C\'MC 8.25 LF-TI)S)vl re,';siMS O~.25.0S_dQf(,~,!lft.lbS.~i~h'!mf\~M\fflj~_i?rJ)J'\lilIL\':f.M
1m~.~.U,~.lftig,.I..~.Qll!;::,~"~J;_~_"::; );.:__~)2CJ.f.L&;.i"~~~';:.":;:L ,]_8~_HJ:' "IlU EJ J:lbb.H'SP.BR' ~lg;:(\r' 'He 8.:::- (Y Jl;'g1! Fe isi ~) 22 :::i ~'U.2 2
Last revised: 02-25-08@ 12:18 p.m.
3-18
Page 13
STRIKEOUT VERSION.
Underline means new language, strikeout means removed language
A. It shall be unlawful for any person other than authorized eCity personnel or
contract or franchise agent(s) to remove any separated designated recyclable(s)or
salvageable commodity from any designated recycling collection or storage
location, or designated recycling container. However, the original generator of the
designated recyclables may, for any reason, remove the designated recyclables
placed by said generator from the designated recycling container or designated
recycling collection or storage location in which said generator had originally
placed them.
B. It shall be unlawful for any person to disturb, modify, harm, or otherwise
tamper with any container or designated recycling collection or storage location
containing designated recyclables, or the contents thereof, or to remove any such
container from the location where the same was placed by the generator thereof,
or to remove the contents of any such container, unless authorized by the
generator of such designated recyclablesor duly authorized eCity personnel or
contract or franchise agent(s). (Ord. 2992 ~ 1, 2005; Ord. 2710 ~ 3, 1998; Ord.
2192 ~ 1, 1992).
8.25.090 Composting.
A. Every establisher of a compo sting pile, bin, holding area or other such
composting system shall first obtain a permit from the eCity, if the total volume
used within the boundaries of the premises for composting is 15 cubic yards or
greater.
B. Every composting pile, bin, holding area or other such compo sting system
shall be maintained so as to not create a public or private nuisance through visual,
odor, safety and/or other means, or as prescribed in Chapter 19.66 CVMC.
Without constituting a limitation on the foregoing, no such compo sting pile, bin,
holding area or other such compo sting system shall be maintained within six feet
from an exterior window, exterior door or other exterior entrance to an inhabited
residential structure other than one owned by the owner of such compo sting
system.
C. The owner, operator, or occupier of property containing a compo sting pile,
bin, holding area or other such compo sting system that is greater than five feet
high, five feet wide and five feet in length shall weekly monitor temperature,
through utilization of a thermometer designed for such purposes.
D. No single compost pile, bin, holding area or other such composting system
on a residential single-family (as defined in Ordinance No. 2443) premises shall
be more than five feet in height and/or greater than six feet in width or length.
COrd. 2992 ~ 1, 2005; Ord. 2710 ~ 3, 1998; Ord. 2589 ~ 1, 1991; Ord. 2192 ~ 1,
-l--mt.
8.25.095 Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling
A. Proiects.
L Covered Projects. The following proiect categories are Covered Proiects
and must comply with this Section 8.25.095:
C."Dt1<::llment~ and Setrill!!O\nvdiaH..oca, Set1in,,~'.Temnmani]nlemel F;\"s\{)Y:\,~,!l.\QYb1C:t;:;_~__];'J;::,TP.)iM_~i~J.QDS {'-~_,_~~-_\l~.!;1Q.o;~~~~,~;.C"~Jlll!runj_~.!!
_Ul:d..9...~,I~nL~_J.~4_Q..Il:.1.:::',!S;J ,::L1LLeJ;~iJLiM~"I:.L~.;._.:f__\lU_~_.J:\ 'Ita t, Jlbh1 rGRPI1'T \l'JC-H'("] I( ~.:! (b.F m~ll e 'B' a sUJ3:aS \IS,dee
Laslrevised: 02.25-08@ 12:18 p.m.
3-19
Page 14
STRIKEOUT VERSION -
Underline means new language, strikeout means removed language
a. Anv Proiect requiring a permit for Demolition or Construction. with a
Proiect valuation of $20.000 or more. unless defined as a Non-Covered Proiect in
Section 8.25.095.A.3.. below.
b. Anv sequenced developments. such as housing subdivision
Construction or subdivision Demolition must be considered as a "proiect" in its
entirety for purposes of this Section. and not as a series of individual proiects.
2. City-Sponsored Proiects. All City Construction and Demolition proiects
shall be considered "Covered Proiects" and shall submit a Waste Management
Report to the City Manager or designee prior to issuance of any Construction or
Demolition permits.
3. Non-Covered Proiects. A Perfonnance Deposit and Waste Management
Report shall not be required for the following:
a. Work for which a Construction or Demolition permit is not required.
b. Roofing proiects that do not include tear-off of existing roof.
c. Work for which onlv a plumbing. onlv an electrical. or only a
mechanical pemlit is required.
d. Seismic tie-down proiects
e. Proiects less than 10.000 square feet. where no structural building
modifications are required.
f. Emergencv required to protect public health and safetv.
g. Individual single-family home Renovations that are not part of a larger
project.
While not required. it shall be encouraged. that at least 50% of all proiect-
related Construction. Renovation and Demolition waste from Non-Covered
Proiects be Diverted.
B. Submission of Waste Management Report.
1. Construction and Demolition Waste Management Report Forms.
Applicants for any Covered Proiect shall complete and submit a Construction and
Demolition Waste Management Report on a Waste Management Report form
(WMR) approved bv the City for this purpose. The WMR shall be submitted for
review and approval. prior to issuance of a Construction or Demolition permit.
The completed WMR shall indicate all of the following:
a. The type ofproiect
b. The total square footage of the proiect:
c. The estimated volume or weight of Construction and Demolition debris.
bv material type. to be generated:
d. The maximum volume or weight of Construction and Demolition debris
that will be recycled or Diverted from the landfill:
e. The maximum volume or weight of Construction and Demolition debris
that will be disposed of in a landfilL and
f. The vendors or facilities that the Applicant proposes to use to collect
process or receive the Construction and Demolition debris.
In estimating the volume or weight of materials identified in the WMR. the
Applicant shall use the standardized conversion rates established and approved bv
the City for this purpose.
.c.:.\Q.Q.U!.!M!ltUl!lli.~i1J~!;I.i.;LN..O.~.llL.S_.;ni!JyfuI~IIIJl_Q[~'Y_lnljlm.~.f.i.1.~,s.l.Q.1K~.~"-Cy~.cJL';;.~JJ.~1R.S.M.I~im_Q!!L(L~~~::.mL>!Q.~-E-N~~.~_ffi:.!!:!!~_~~~_:~_lJL~_~.lli_r:<!m;!m.~li.M.
t!!_~__~_m\l.L~Wllt';:~.2.':':J:.''::JC..t':'~.Ji.f.,,:E!.!;;rJ._:!__~!i:~__ffi..';1: ';;1_9S"_It,1.~ '; . Rem;' j.:g,.I,Jf'QI'.ERJ -VJl;:E('{'''HC 8.2~ (l,f JSSH a 's' a~nJ_Q2 2~ gg.da:
Last revised: 02-25-08 @ 12;18 p.m.
3-20
Page 15
STRIKEOUT VERSION -
Underline means new language, strikeout means removed language
Initial Application. Not withstanding any other provision of this Code. no
Construction or Demolition permit maybe issued until the initial Construction and
Demolition Waste Management Report has been approyed bv the WMR
Compliance Official. The WMR Compliance Official will respond to the
applicant's WMR submittal within 10 business days with an approvaL denial or
request for clarification. If the WMR Compliance Official does not respond
within 10 business days. the applicant should notify the Official. After
notification by the Applicant. the Official will then have three business days to
complete the review. If the review is not completed within three business davs
after the notification. the deposit requirement will be waived.
3. Amount ofSecurilY. The Applicant for any Covered Proiect shall submit a
Perfonnance Deposit. The amount of the Performance Deposit shall be calculated
as the lesser of three percent of the Total Project Cost or $30.000. Acceptable
forms ofpavrnent jnclude Cash. Money Orders. and Checks.
The WMR Compliance Official shall waive the Performance Deposit if the
total deposit required pursuant to this Section would be fiftv dollars or less.
Performance Security funds will be placed in a secured account. subject to
interest. and returned to the Applicant upon acceptance of proof of compliance in
full. or if partial compliance. on a prorated basis dependent on the degree of
compliance. All interest earned will be the property of the Citv and used for waste
reduction and recvcling activities.
4. Documentation. Within 30 days after Demolition is completed (if a
Demolition permit only) or 30 davs after the issuance of a certificate of
occupancy or at the time of issuing the last certificate of occupancy for units
within a phased Project of any Covered Project. the Applicants shall submit to the
WMR Compliance Official. documentation that it has met the Diversion
Requirement for the Proiect. unless Applicant has been granted an Exemption
pursuant to Section 8.25.095.C of this Chapter. The documentation shall include
all of the following:
a. Receipts from the vendor or facility that received each material.
showing the actual weight or volume of that material:
b. A COpy of the completed Waste Management Report form. in its
entirelY: and
c. Photographs and narrative documentation of the Applicant's Reuse
activities.
5. Weighing of Wastes. Applicants shall make reasonable efforts to ensure
that all Construction. Renovation and Demolition waste Diverted for Reuse or
disposed of is measured and recorded using the most accurate method of
measurement available. To the extent practical. all Construction. Renovation and
Demolition waste shall be weighed by measurement on scales. Such scales shall
be in compliance with all regulatory requirements for accuracy and maintenance.
For Construction. Renovation and Demolition waste for which weighing is not
practical due to small size or other considerations. a volumetric measurement
shall be used. For conversion of volumetric measurements to weight. the
Applicant shall use the standardized rates established bv the Conversion Rates
QillQ.c..!.l!l1~~A!l.~i!]):~jp,f-.'19.9J!LS_..ruv.g.tT!:.IJl..R_Qr..~n:.!.ntllJl1etJ'jl~_~).QJ"J;:j,!!.l.c.'.l-.~KJL;.~_,U:m.S.M,J:~~'i~onil....JI~::;l,~:Q,~,.gQ,~~I!L~llJ,.J!J~..f:.~jtl'..:lL~~J)Jj:.L.R!..'!l!.~ll,'ft~~.JZ_Im_IltQ!..lll::.~.~,
lI!.tJa.I;;\J,..:._'11~.;H:'~~ E::'-u.( ~~~J4- '''_EUJ:r:j:li~.L2~._.;;L2..'L~Mt: 'll~J It, JJl.b.H'9P09IJl Y-10EI; f"'1'tC 8.2~ (hY JS~t1 r! 'BiaRs) In :::r gg_~8a
Last revised: 02-25-08 @ 12: 18 p.m.
3-21
Page 16
STRIKEOUT VERSION -
Underline means new language, strikeout means removed language
Table approved bv the Citv for this PUTPose. Conversion Rate Tables will be
included with the Waste Management Report form.
6. Determination of Compliance and Release of Performance Deposit. The
WMR Compliance Official shall review the information submitted under this
Section and determine whether the Applicant has complied with the Diversion
Requirement. as follows:
a. Compliance. If the WMR Compliance Official determines that the
Applicant has fullv complied with the Diversion Requirement applicable to the
Proiect. he or she shall cause the release of the Performance Deposit to the
Applicant within 30 davs of the Applicant's submission of the documentation
required under this Section. If the Applicant has complied in part. a portion of the
performance deposit will be withheld. The amount withheld will be proportional
to the percentage of materials that are not Recvcled/Diverted.
b. Noncompliance. If the WMR Compliance Official determines that the
Applicant failed to submit the documentation within the required time period.
then the Performance Deposit shall be forfeited to the City. All forfeited and/or
unrecovered funds shall be used for waste reduction and recvcling activities.
C. Exemption.
1. Application. If an Applicant for a Covered Proi ect experiences unique
circumstances that the Applicant believes make it infeasible to complv with the
Diversion Requirement. the Applicant mav applv for an Exemption at the time
that he or she submits the WMR. The Applicant shall indicate on the WMR the
maximum rate of diversion he or she believes is feasible for each material and the
specific circumstances that he or she believes makes it infeasible to complv with
the Diversion Requirement.
2. Meeting with WMR Compliance Official. The WMR Compliance Official
shall review the information supplied bv the Applicant and mav meet with the
Applicant to discuss possible wavs of meeting the Diversion Requirement.
3. Granting of Exemption. If the WMR Compliance Official determines that
it is infeasible for the Applicant to meet the Diversion Requirement due to unique
circumstances. he or she shall detemline the maximum feasible diversion rate for
each material and shall indicate this rate on the WMR submitted bv the Applicant.
The WMR Compliance Official shall return a copv of the WMR to the Applicant
marked "Approved with Exemption." The Applicant shall then be responsible for
Diverting the revised rate noted bv the WMR Compliance Official on the
Approved WMR. in compliance with the provisions of this Section.
4. Denial of Exemption. If the WMR Compliance Official determines that it
is possible for the Applicant to meet the Diversion Requirement. he or she shall so
inform the Applicant in writing. The Applicant shall resubmit a WMR form in full
compliance with Section 8.25.095. If the Applicant fails to resubmit the WMR. or
if the resubmitted WMR does not comply with this Section. the WMR
Compliance Official shall denv the WMR,'
D. Appeal.
Appeals. Appeals of a determination made bv the WMR Compliance Official
under this Section 8.25.095 shall be made to the Citv Manager or designee. The
appeal shall be in writing and filed with the City Clerk within ten (10) business
C.'J)ocument~ an!t~w!m:>I.iJlliL,~,ll!._S.rnin&~\I~mj)9J:W):.JJ1.1~fJl.~LfjJ.~_~:,-QLK~a\k\:!'!1.c._~_.;;:,~.1F.:.!D.S.M.I!,;y.il\i.lm.U).k_:;_5.:I!.1l.QQ~~_~_-&rt\i.!'I8~J~.__Jf~ I ~_\!!l!llli,~'_r.L._m: _~JLQn
a.l!i_J;l._~lil.i!l.tL':_222\_CIK..l,;;..lf._~L;~ ~::_';f ~S".!1fl_;':\ 'R:m~. 'HlhH9Pd;'Rl\l'rGH\("'?fS 8,:::: (f.f msrl ! 's'S'lli) l:J 2; '2Hae
Last revised: 02-25-08@ 12:18 p.m.
3-22
Page 17
STRIKEOUT VERSION -
Underline means new language, strikeout means removed language
davs of issuance of the WMR Compliance Official's decision. The appeal shall be
limited to the following issues: (1) the granting or denial of an exemption; and (2)
the amount of securitv to be released. The decision of the Citv Manager or
designee shall be final.
8.25.100 Enforcement.
A. The eCity mManager or designee is responsible for enforcing the provisions
of this eChapter.
B. Types of materials included in designated recyclables may be
administratively deleted by the eCity mManager under emergency conditions (to
include market failures), subject to formal ordinance amendment approved by the
e~ity e~ouncil, if such conditions persist.
C. Nothing in this e~hapter or its implementing regulations shall prevent the
e~ity or its contract or franchise agent(s) from efforts to obtain voluntary
compliance by way of warning, notice of violation, educational or other means.
(Ord. 2992 S 1, 2005; Ord. 2740 ~ 3, 1998; Ord. 2192 S 1, 1992).
8.25.110 Severability.
If any provision, clause, sentence or paragraph of this e~hapter or the
application thereof to any person or circumstances shall be held invalid, such
invalidity shall not affect the other provisions or application of the provisions of
this e~hapter which can be given effect without the invalid provision or
application, and to this end the provisions of this e~hapter are hereby declared to
be severable. (Ord. 2992 ~ 1, 2005; Ord. 2740 S 3, 1998; Ord. 2492 ~ 1, 1992).
.!::...J)..Qf.IillI.snTh and Set.1ing~,n~'dj~f~l&QlLSJmings:,.n:D'..R.QJ.llrLlJ1!..~tFi!.!';s.J.Ql...K~~.\..c.\'M.Ca~..LE.,.1J2.s.N_~'i.si9J)Ji..Q_;;'~~:Qa.I!Q.~~H:tlt~~llilfiLJJJ.lf::LP.!.!~\i!~t~m~C:!L'larn.~.~.~,
~,~_J;?_~..:ml:Uke_l}:_.;_r.9r'\C,~J~JL~: k-I_JQSHf.ffi:;Nm..s.;'_;;f...'il_U~l:' . U~ I ". HI bH9PJ;'RI "J1CH (" '] I'; n.:: fI r JD~H r 'j'! IS) {)1 :U lJ~ .ail!
Last revised: 02-25-08 @ 12:18 p.m.
3-23
",- ('
'!'o" \j,/i/
~\'/./#
--.-
( .~'" ~ ""t>l'
~~'.>r""""'~_" ..,. -"'1oe
~~~:;:::.;;;.
,
/--\
DRAFT
Construction and Demolition Debris
Waste Management Report
(WMR)
The City of Chula Vista has a Mandatory Recycling Ordinance CVMC 8.25. Prior to submitting your application for a demolition or
buiiding permit, you must have compieted a Waste Management Report, approved by the Environmental Services Division, stating
how you will recycle at least 90% of inert waste and at a minimum, 50% of the remaining construction and demolition waste
generated. To assist in this effort, information is avaiiable on where to recycle construction debris from Allied Waste Services (619
421-9400), the County of San Diego (htto:l/www.ilacsd.orqlrecvclel brochures), the City of San Diego
(htto:llwww.sandieqo.qovlenvironmental-services/recvclinq/cdrecvclinq.shtml) and the California Integrated Waste Management
Board (hito ://www.ciwmb.ca . qov ICon DemolT ools. him).
Please be informed that all construction and demolition projects are required to complete the Waste Management Report form and
submit a Performance DeDosit unless specifically exempted as described in Chula Vista Municipal Code 8.25.095.
SteD 1: Before the Proiect Beains
. This is a three-part process. Complete Part 1 of the WMR form. Identify debris that you expect to generate on the project
work site.
. Submit your form to the Environmentai Services Division for approval: Environmental Services Division, Public Works
Facility, 1800 Maxwell Road, Chula Vista, CA 91911 (This process may take up to ten (10) business days.) When vour
WMR is aooroved it will be returned to vou for filina with vour oennit aoolication.
. The Performance Deposit is calculated at three (3) percent of the total project cost OR a maximum of $30,000. if your
calculated deposit is $50 or less the. deposit will be waived. Your oerfonnance deDosit will be oaid when vou oav vour
Dermit fees.
SteD 2: While the Proiect Proaresses
. Save all receipts and/or documents from reuse facilities, recycling centers, processing facilities and landfills where
materials were taken. Your Performance Deposit will be refunded based upon your documentation of the amount of debris
you diverted from disposal - 90% of inert waste and/or 50% of the remaining waste generated by the project equals 100%
refund of your deposit. It you recycle/divert less than the threshold amounts, the amount of your refund will be adjusted
proportionally. Any interest and un-refunded deposits are the property of the City and will be used for waste reduction and
recycling activities.
SteD 3: Within 30 Davs of Proiect ComDletion
. Complete Part 2a and 2b of this form and submit receipts (original or photocopies) to the Environmental Services Division
verifying that materials have been reused or diverted for beneficial reuse to a certified recycling center, processing facility,
or disposal. Use the attached conversion chart for materials that are recycled by the truckload quantities to establish a
weight value to calculate your recycling percentage.
City of Chula Vista Waste Management Report
Applicant Name:
Mailing Address:
Phone:
Contacted City's Franchise Waste Hauler for this Project (Allied Waste Services (619) 421-9400):
Yes _No
Expected project start date:
Project Location (Address and Cross Street):
Building IProject Type: demolition, renovation, tenant improvement, etc.:
Expected project completion date:
Square footage:
Project Cost: $ Performance Security Dollar Amount:
(3% of project cost or $30,000. If calculated deposit is $50 or less it will be waived.)
FOR CllY USE ONLY: WMP Status
_ Approved
_ Approved with exception
Denied
Reviewed by:
Date:
Approved by:
Date'
3-24
City of Chula Vista Demolition Debris Waste Management Plan -
Part 1 And Part 2A
Permit Number:
Applicant Name:
Maiiing Address:
Phone:
Project Address (include cross streets)
Part 1 - Initial Application. Complete the information requested in each of the columns identified as "Part 1" and submit for
approval to City of Chula Vista, Environmental Services Division - WMP Review, Public Works Facility, 1800 Maxwell Road,
Chuta Vista, CA 91911. You will need a copy of your approved plan attached to your construction or demolition permit application.
Part 2A and 28 - Upon completion of the project - Part 2A: Complete Columns A, B, C, and D and identify the actual vendors
and facHlties for each material type. Part 2B: Complete the diversion equation and questions. Sign and date the document and mail
or deliver the completed fomn and copies of corresponding weight tickets and I or diversion documentation to the address above.
Material HandlinQ Methods -Indicate Quantities in tons for each material listed
(# of pounds divided by 2,000 = tons)
PART 1 PART 1 PART 1 PART 1 (A) 18) {C}
Estimate of Estimate of Es"'iiriiaieof Estimllteof ActualTotaJ Actual Actual
Total Quantity Amount to be Amount 10 be Amount to Quantity Amount Amount
Material Type lobe $alvagedor Recycled be Discarded Salvaged Recycled
( 2,000 lb. per ton) Discarded Reused Disposed In or Reused
Landfills
PartZA PartZA PartZA
(DI
Actual
Amount
Disposed
In
Landfills
Actual Destlnatlon(s)
Vendors and Facilities
PartZA
PARTZA
Asphalt & Concrete
Divert 90%
BrlcklMasonrymle
Divert 90%
Cabinets, doors,
fixtures, windows (circle
all that apply)
Ce_
(Carpet) Paddlng/Foam
Only
Cardboard
Ceiling TIle (acoustic)
Drywall (Used)
Drywall (New, unpainted
sheets or scrap)
Landscape Debris
(brosh, trees, stumps,
etc.)
Rooflng Materials
Scrap Metal
Stucco
Unpainted wood &
pallets
Recycled Mixed Debris
Other
Other
GalbagefTrash
Column Totals
City of Chula Vista Demolition Debris Waste Management Report - Part 28
Permit Number:
Applicant Name:
Mailing Address:
Phone:
Project Address (include cross streets)
To calculate your recycling/diversion percentage, enter your totals from Part 2A, columns A, Band C into the formula below
Column Totals B + C_ = Divided by A = x 100 = %
Is your answer equal to 90% for inert waste and 50% or greater for remaining waste generated by your project? YES If NO,
explain why. Use additional paper if necessary and attach to this document.
Specify the method used to convert material volumes to weight, if necessary. (Conversion Tables are attached to assist you.)
If some materials were not recycled or reused, explain why:
CERTIFICATION - I hereby certify that I have reviewed the document and that the information reported in this Waste Management
Report is true and correct.
Applicant Signature and Date:
Date:
Print Name and Title
Signature
FOR CITY USE ONLY
ProiectStatus:
_Approved _%PerfQfl11ance Security to be returned 10 applicant
Denied _Add~ional Documentation Requested (see attached)
Performance SecwrFty Returned:
Performance Security Forfeitted:
(Dale)
(Date)
_ Approved with Exception
Reviewed by:
Approved by:
Date:
Date
lnerts - D3po5it Rimel Praatioo Remiring WIsle - D3po5it Rimel Praatioo
~ <I>
~
S
~ 0:
<I> ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w
~ = = = = = = = = = >- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
< " i i . " " " " " ~ = = = = =
0: . ~ . ~ . . ~ . " " . "
W 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: ffia: .. ~ . ~ .
>- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0: ~ ~ 0: ~ ~ 0:
:i-g .~ . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . .
" 0 " 0 " 0 " 0 " 0 ~ 0 " 0 " 0 c- .. " .. " .. " .. " ..
ZU
= ~ = ~ = 1; = ~ = ~ = = ~ = ~ = -~ 8. 1; 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0
>-0 . U . U .!i . U . U . U .!i U . U . <~ = U = U = U =
o:~ c . C . . c . c . c . . c . c . &! . . . . .!i . .
~~ 0: 0: 0: " ~ 0: 0: 0: 0: "0: ~ ~ 0: C ~ 0: C
" " " " " " " ~ " . " " " " . ~" " " " " " "
III 100 8:J 8:J 10 8:J 8:J '" '" '" '" '" 30 '" '" '" 10 '" '" 100 '" '" 30 00 '" '" 10 '"
OJ .. 19 7B 00 '" '" .. 49 18 3l 18 '" 18 ,. 18 . 18 49 .. 3l 7B '" '" ,. 3Il . 18
88 .. 7B 7B '" '" '" 3Il '" 16 3Il 16 2ll 16 18 16 B 16 '" .. 3Il 76 2ll '" 18 36 B 16
B7 94 T7 7' B7 54 5/ 34 .7 ,. "' ,. V ,. 17 ,. 7 ,. 47 94 "' 7. V 54 17 34 7 ,.
88 92 76 72 ffi 52 '" 32 46 12 36 12 2ll 12 16 12 6 12 46 92 36 72 2ll 52 16 32 6 12
88 III 75 10 ffi '" 55 30 45 10 " 10 25 10 15 10 5 10 45 III " 10 25 '" 15 30 5 10
54 '" 7. '" 54 '" 54 2ll 44 B 34 B 24 B " 8 . B 44 '" 34 '" 24 '" ,. 2ll . B
III '" 73 ., III '" III 2ll <l 6 33 6 Z3 6 13 6 3 6 <l ., 33 ., Z3 '" 13 " 3 6
B2 84 72 64 52 44 52 24 42 . 32 . 22 . 12 . 2 . 42 84 32 64 22 44 12 24 2 .
81 B2 71 62 61 42 51 22 ., 2 31 2 21... 2. 11 2 1 2 ., B2 31 B2 21 42 11 22 1 2
"
Sample Construction and Demolition Conversion Calculations
Roofin Materials
Asphalt Composition Shingle (Sq. ft. of roof x 3 lbs.) 12000 = tons
Wood Shingle/Shake (Sq. ft. of roof x 2Ibs.) 12000 = tons
Concrete/Clay Tile (Sq. ft. of roof x 10 lbs.) 12000 = tons
Roof Decking (Sq. ft. of roof x 1.5 Ibs.) 12000 = tons
Appliances/Equipment
Asphalt
Concrete
Dirt
Brick
Inert Material Loose -
(Cu. ft. x 45 Ibs.) 12000 = tons
(Cu. ft. x 100 Ibs.) 12000 = tons
(Cu. ft. x 75 lbs.) 12000 = tons
(Cu. ft. x 120 lbs.) 12000 = tons
Cook Top
Dishwasher
Refrigerator
Oven (Single)
Trash Compactor
Water Heater 30gal.
Water Heater 40-50gal.
Bathtub, Cast Iron
Bathtub, Steel
Sink, Cast Iron
Sink, Porcelain
Sink, Steel
Toilet
301bs.
1001bs.
1501bs.
751bs.
401bs.
501bs.
751bs.
300 Ibs.
751bs.
501bs.
201bs.
101bs.
401bs.
Demolition
Com lete Demolition
Complete Demolition with tile roof
Green Waste (trees, shrubs, turf, etc.)
Mixed Debris (such as interior remodel)
S . ft. of structure x 40 Ibs I 2000 = tons
(Sq. ft. of structure x 47 ibs) 12000 = tons
(Cu. yds. X 108 lbs) 12000 = tons
Cu. Yds. X (300-600 Ibs)/2000 = tons
Conversion Rates Table
Material Pounds/cubic yard Tons/cubic yard
Cubic yards/ton
Wood (Tell us Institute) 329.5 Ibs.lc.yd. 0.16 tons/c.yd. 6.06 c.yds/ton
Cardboard fiattened, 100Ibs.lc.yd. 0.05 tons/c.yd. 20 c. yds/ton
uncompacted (US EPA)
Cardboard loose 50 Ibs.lc.yd 0.02 ton sic yd 40 c. yds/ton
(Tellus)
Drywall (Tellus) 393.5Ibs.lc.yd. 0.19 tons/c.yd. 5.08 c.yds/ton
Concrete (Tellus) 1,855Ibs.lc.yd. 0.92 tons/c.yd. 1.07 c.yds/ton
Asphalt (Tellus) 1,380 Ibs/c. yd 0.69 ton sic yd 1.44 c. yds/ton
Mixed Waste 300-600Ibs.lc.yd. 0.15-0.30 tons/c.yd. 6.66-3.33 c.yds/ton
(MSWANA)
Sources: Tellus Institute and Municipal Solid Waste Association of North America,
Obtained from the California Integrated Waste Management Board web site.
Http://www.ciwmb.ca.Qov/IQlibrarv/DSG/lcandD.htm
3-27
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING
CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 8.25 -
"RECYCLING," ADDING A CONSTRUCTION AND
DEMOLITION DEBRIS RECYCLING PROGRAM
WHEREAS, under California law as embodied in the California Waste Management Act
of 1989 (California Public Resources Code Sections 40000, et seq.), the City of Chula Vista is
required to prepare, adopt and implement source reduction and recycling plans to reach landfill
diversion goals, and is required to make substantial reductions in the volume of waste materials
going to the landfills, or face fmes up to $10,000 per day; and
WHEREAS, in order to meet these goals it is necessary that the City promote the
reduction of solid waste, and reduce the stream of solid waste going to the landfills; and
WHEREAS, waste from construction, demolition, and renovation of buildings represents
a significant portion of the volume of waste presently coming from the City of Chula Vista and
much of this waste is particularly suitable for recycling and reuse; and
WHEREAS, the City's commitment to the reduction of waste requires the establishment
of programs for recycling and salvaging of construction and demolition (C & D) waste; and
WHEREAS, certain types of projects are exempt from these requirements.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, does ordain as
follows:
SECTION I: That Section 8.25.095 is added to the Chula Vista Municipal Code and Chapter
8.25 is modified to read as follows:
Chapter 8.25
RECYCLING
Sections:
8.25.010 Purpose and intent.
8.25.020 Definitions.
8.25.030 Mandatory fees for recycling.
8.25.035 Reserved.
8.25.040 Separation of recyclable materials, storage, and containers.
8.25.050 Mandatory recycling.
8.25.060 Recycling programs.
8.25.070 Reports.
8.25.080 Scavenging.
H:lAttorney\Final Resos\2008\03 04 08\CVMC 8.25 (LF-JDSM revisioll$--CLEAN ccL02-25-08.doc
Last revised: 02-25-08 @ 12: 18 p.m.
3-28
Ordinance No.
Page 2
8.25.090 Composting.
8.25.095 Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling.
8.25.100 Enforcement.
8.25.110 Severability.
8.25.010 Purpose and intent.
The purpose of this Chapter is to provide standards for integrated solid waste
management, to include source reduction, recycling and composting of solid
wastes, in order to provide for the long-term health, safety and welfare of Chula
Vista residents through extending current landfill capacity, preserving resources,
and providing for the general protection of the environment. The Chapter provides
for regulation of the storage, collection, transportation and recovery of marketable
and recyclable materials.
8.25.020 Definitions.
For purposes of this Chapter, and other municipal code provisions referring
hereto, the following words shall have the meanings ascribed thereto, unless the
context in which they are used clearly indicates another meaning:
AI. "Aluminum" means recoverable materials made from aluminum, such as
used aluminum food or beverage containers, aluminum foil, siding, screening, and
other items manufactured from aluminum.
A2. "Applicant" means any individual, firm, limited liability company,
association, partnership, political subdivision, goverrunent agency, municipality,
industry, public or private corporation, or any other entity whatsoever who applies
to the City for the applicable permits to undertake any Construction, Demolition,
or Renovation Project within the City ofChula Vista.
B. "Bin" shall mean those plastic or metal containers of one cubic yard (202
gallons) to eight cubic yards that have plastic lids on the top (unless metal lids are
designated by the City Manager). Bins are used for weekly or more frequent
collection of waste, yard waste or designated recyclables by the City or its
franchise agent.
C. "Bulky waste" means discarded items whose large size or shape precludes or
complicates their handling by standard residential or commercial solid waste,
recycling and green waste collection methods. Bulky items include white goods,
furniture, large auto parts, trees, stumps, carpet and other potentially oversize
wastes. Bulky waste does not include hazardous or infectious waste unless
specifically exempt, such as freon-containing refrigerators.
D. "Buy-back center" means a facility licensed and permitted by the
Department of Conservation and/or local jurisdiction which pays a fee for the
delivery and transfer of ownership to the facility of source-separated materials for
the purpose of recycling or composting.
E. "Cardboard" means post-consumer waste paper grade corrugated cardboard
(grade No. II), kraft (brown) paper bags, or solid fiber boxes which have served
their packaging purposes and are discarded and can later be reclaimed for
collection and recovery for recycling.
l:\AttomeyVILLM\QRDrNANCES\CVMC 8.25 (LF-JDSM revisions-CLEAN ccL02.25-OS.doc
Last revised: 02-25-08 @ 12: 18 p.m.
3-29
Ordinance No.
Page 3
F. "Carts" shall mean those plastic containers with a capacity of less than 202
gallons (one cubic yard). Carts shall have a fixed lid and are designed for
automated and/or semi-automated collection of solid waste, yard waste and/or
designated recyclables by the City or its franchise agent.
G. "City" shall mean the City of Chula Yista, a municipal corporation of the
state of California, in its present incorporated form or in any later reorganized,
consolidated, enlarged or reincorporated form.
H. "Collection" means the act of removing and conveying nonhazardous and
noninfectious solid waste, commingled or source-separated materials, from
residential, commercial, industrial, or institutional (governmental) generators to a
facility for processing, composting, transfer, disposal or transformation.
1. "Commercial" means a site and/or business zoned or permitted for any use
other than residential including, but not limited to, commercial, light industrial,
industrial and agricultural. Commercial generators that generate three or more
cubic yards of waste per week are serviced by a bin or compactor collection
vehicle.
J. "Commercial recyclables" means designated recyclable materials from the
two commercial subcategories of "office" and "hospitality." Materials include,
but are not limited to: office paper, cardboard, newspaper, and aluminum from
offices; and cardboard, glass bottles and jars, plastic bottles, aluminum, tin and bi-
metal cans, and white goods from hospitality establishments.
K. "Compactor containers" means those fully enclosed metal containers of two
to 40 cubic yards provided by the City's hauler or customer. Compactors typically
serve very large quantity generators.
1. "Compost" means the product resulting from the controlled biological
decomposition of organic wastes that are source-separated from the municipal
solid waste stream.
M. "Composting" shall mean the controlled and monitored process of
converting organic wastes into compost.
N1. "Construction" means the building of any facility or structure or any
portion thereof including any tenant improvements to an existing facility or
sturcture.
N2. "Construction and Demolition waste" means used or discarded materials
removed from the premises during demolition, dredging, grubbing, and building,
resulting from Construction, remodeling, repair, and/or Demolition activities on
housing, commercial, govemmental buildings, and other structures and pavement.
01. "Contract or franchise agent(s)" means any person or private or public
entity designated by the City Council, pursuant to Article XII of the City Charter
and Chapter 8.23 CYMC, as being responsible for administering the collection,
processing and/or disposal of solid waste or designated recyclables.
02. "Conversion Rate" means the rate set forth in the standardized Conversion
Rate Table approved by the City pursuant to this Chapter for use in estimating the
volume or weight of materials identified in a Waste Management Report.
03. "Covered Project" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 8.25.095 of
this Chapter.
J:\AttorneyV1LLM\ORDINANCES\CYMC 8.25 (LF-JDSM revisions-CLEAN ccL02-2S.08.doc
Last revised: 02-25-08 @ 12:18 p.m.
3-30
Ordinance No.
Page 4
04. "Demolition" means the decimating, deconstructing, razing, rummg,
tearing down or wrecking of any facility, structure, pavement or building, whether
in whole or in part, whether interior or exterior.
05. "Divert" means to use material for any purpose other than disposal in a
landfill or transformation facility.
06. "Diversion Requirement" means the diversion of ninety percent of Inert
Waste and not less than fifty percent of the remaining waste generated via Reuse
or recycling, unless a partial or full diversion exemption has been granted
pursuant to Section 8.25.095 of this Chapter, in which case the Diversion
Requirement shall be the maximum feasible diversion rate established by the
Waste Management Report Compliance Official for the project
P. "Recycling box" shall mean those containers with a capacity of 18 gallons to
32 gallons which are supplied by the City or its franchise agent for manual
collection of designated recyclables at special events.
Q. "Curbside collection" means the service of removing and conveying
nonhazardous and noninfectious solid waste, source-separated recyclables and/or
green waste from the public thoroughfare at the curb or alley. (The City shall
make the final determination regarding eligibility for curbside collection, which
shall generally apply to small quantity generators.)
Rl. "Designated containers" ("containers") shall mean those containers
designated by the City Manager for temporary storage and collection of waste or
designated recyclables including but not limited to curbside bins, carts, bins, roll-
off boxes, and/or compactor containers.
R2. "Designated recyclables" means those materials designated by the City
Manager for recovery or reuse. Any material having an economic value on the
secondary materials market or that is otherwise salvageable shall be included
and/or other materials that have been separated from other small quantity or large
quantity generators for the purposes of being recycled for resale and/or reuse, and
placed at a designated recycling or waste collection or storage location or in a
designated recycling or waste container for the purpose of collection and
processing, or any such designated recyclable materials collected under a mixed
waste processing program. The list includes, but is not limited to: newspaper
(ONP), mixed paper (MP), corrugated cardboard (OCC), steel, tin and bi-metal
cans, metal coat hangers, aluminum containers, white goods, glass food and
beverage containers, No. I and No.2 plastic containers, all California redemption
containers, used oil, used oil filters, yard waste, clean lumber, concrete and
asphalt
S. "Designated solid waste and recycling collection or storage location" means
a place designated by the City Manager for storage and/or collection of waste,
green waste and/or recyclables pursuant to CYMC 8.24.100. Designated locations
include, but are not limited to, the curb, alley, waste/recycling enclosure, a
loading dock, or basement of a commercial enterprise or multifamily complex
where waste and recyclables are placed for collection or temporary storage prior
to collection by the City's franchise agent
J:\AllomeyIJILLM\ORDINANCES\CVMC 8.25 (LF-JDSM revlsions--CLEAN ccL02-25-08.doc
Last revised: 02-25-08 @ 12:18 p.m.
3-31
Ordinance No.
Page 5
T. "Franchised recyclables" means any residential, commercial or industrial
recyclables, as defined herein, to be collected by the City's contract agent or
franchisee, placed in designated recycling containers or at designated recycling
collection or storage location( s).
U. "Garbage" means all nonhazardous, noninfectious organic waste including:
kitchen and table waste, and animal or vegetable waste that attends or results from
the storage, preparation, cooking, or handling of food stuffs, except organic
wastes separated therefrom and used in composting in accordance with CVMC
8.25.090.
V. "Generator" means every owner, tenant, occupant or person owning or
having the care and control of any premises in the City including the temporary
use of parks, open space or a public thoroughfare.
W. "Glass bottles and jars" means food and beverage containers made from
silica or sand, soda ash, and limestone, the product being transparent or
translucent and being used for packaging or bottling, including container glass
designated redeemable under the California Beverage Container Recycling and
Litter Reduction Law, Division 12.1 (commencing with Section 14500) of the
California Public Resources Code, as well as glass jars and bottles without
redeemable value ("scrap"), but excluding household, kitchen, and other sources
of noncontainer glass such as drinking glasses, ceramics, light bulbs, window
pane glass, and similar glass products that are not bottles or jars.
X. "Grantee" shall mean the City's franchise agent(s).
Y. "Green wastes" means the leaves, grass, weeds, shrubs, tree branches, tree
trunk and other wood materials from trees. Green waste may also include
preconsumer food waste, incidental amounts of waxed or plastic-coated cardboard
and mixed paper, and unpainted and untreated lumber. Green waste does not
include tree stumps in excess of 35 pounds, more than incidental dirt or rock,
plastic, glass, metal, painted or treated lumber, plywood, particle board, or other
manufactured products that contain glue, formaldehyde, nonorganic or
nonbiodegradable materials.
Z. "Green waste processing" means the accumulation and storage of green
waste in a manner that leads to the intentional or unintentional thermophilic
decomposition of green waste. The acceptance of payment for green waste and
the accumulation of more than 15 yards or three tons per year of unprocessed,
shredded, ground or composted material shall constitute green waste processing
and is subject to the City, County and state requirements regulating compost
and/or solid waste facilities. Residential, commercial and agricultural sites that
generate, stockpile or process green waste material generated on-site and used on-
site without sale of finished or unfinished material, that are otherwise compliant
with all conditions of the municipal code for nuisance, may apply for an annual
exemption.
AA. "Hazardous or toxic waste" means any waste material or mixture of wastes
which is toxic, corrosive, flammable, explosive, an irritant, a strong sensitizer,
and which generates pressure through decomposition, heat or other means, if such
a waste or mixture of wastes may cause substantial personal injury, serious illness
or harm to humans, domestic animals, or wildlife, during, or as an approximate
J:\Attomey\JILLM\QRDJNANCES\CVMC 8.25 (LF-JDSM revisions--CLEAN ccL02-25-08.doc
Last revised: 02-25-08 @ 12:18 p.m.
3-32
Ordinance No.
Page 6
result of, any disposal of such wastes or mixtures of wastes as defined in Section
25117 of the California Health and Safety Code, which is not legally disposable at
a Class III landfill.
BB. "Hospitality" means any establishment that offers dining services, food or
beverage sales. This includes taverns, bars, cafeterias, and restaurants, as well as
motels and hotels (temporary housing of less than one month duration), hospitals,
schools, colleges, and other such establishments that have dining services, or a
restaurant or bar, on their premises.
CC. "Industrial recyclables" means recyclables from industrial, construction,
and demolition operations, including, but not limited to, asphalt, concrete, dirt,
land-clearing brush, sand and rock.
DD. "Industrial solid waste" means solid waste originating from mechanized
manufacturing facilities, factories, refineries, construction and demolition
projects, and/or publicly operated treatment works, excluding recyclables and
compostables, if properly handled and treated, and excluding hazardous or toxic
waste.
EE. "Inert waste" means materials such as concrete, soil, asphalt, ceramics,
brick, masonry, tile, earthen cooking ware, automotive safety glass, and mirrors.
FF. "Improper disposal" means the discarding of any item or items upon public
or private premises that were not generated on the premises as a part of its
authorized use, unless written consent of the property owner is first obtained.
GG. "Improper disposal site" means any premises that have intentionally or
unintentionally accumulated solid waste or recyclables and/or charged a fee for
accepting material without a solid waste or composting permit from the county
local enforcement agency. This does not include businesses licensed and
permitted in the City to purchase source-separated recyclables.
HH. "Incidental waste" means less than one pound of waste deposited in a
public litter bin or designated waste container to prevent litter, such as waste from
a fast food meal deposited in a designated waste container or public litter bin by a
pedestrian or vehicle operator.
II. "Industrial generator" means any property or generator that is engaged in the
manufacture of products including but not limited to construction and demolition.
Industrial generators are typically serviced by roll-off box containers of IO-yard
to 40-yard capacities and typically generate inert materials such as asphalt,
concrete, building debris and some wood and dry green waste.
n. "Industrial" means any form of mechanized manufacturing facilities,
factories, refineries, and construction and demolition operations, excluding
hazardous waste operations.
KK. "Institutional" shall mean any premises owned and/or occupied by local,
state and federal agencies, typically office or education facilities with a common
waste stream.
LL. "Integrated solid waste management" means a planned program for
effectively controlling the storage, collection, transportation, processing and
reuse, conversion, or disposal of solid waste, recyclables and/or compostables in a
safe, sanitary, aesthetically acceptable, environmentally sound and economical
manner. It includes all administrative, financial, environmental, legal and
J:\Attomey\J1LLM\QRDlNANCES\CYMC 8.25 (LF-JDSM revisions--CLEAN ccL02-25-08.doc
Last revised: 02-25-08@ 12:18 p.m.
3-33
Ordinance No.
Page 7
planning functions as well as the operational aspects of solid waste handling,
disposal, litter control and resource recovery systems necessary to achieve
established objectives.
MM. "Landfill" means a disposal system by which solid waste is deposited in a
specially prepared area which provides for environmental monitoring and
treatment pursuant to the California Code of Regulations, California Public
Resources Code and the Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
NN. "Large quantity generator" means those residential, commercial, industrial
and institutional entities that generate more than 300 gallons of waste per week
excluding source-separated recyclables diverted from disposal or transformation.
00. "Mixed waste processing" means a system of recovering recyclables from
the mixed waste stream through separation at a processing facility, transfer
station, landfill, or other such facility, instead of separation at the primary waste
generation source.
PP. "Multifamily" means a structure or structures containing a total of four or
more dwelling units in any vertical or horizontal arrangement on a single lot or
building site.
QQ. "Newspaper" means newsprint-grade paper including any inserts that
come in the paper, and excluding soiled paper, all magazines and other
periodicals, telephone books, as well as all other paper products of any nature.
RRI. "Non-Covered Project" shall have the meaning set forth in Section
8.25.095 ofthis Chapter.
RR2. "Nuisance" means anything which is injurious to human health, or is
indecent or offensive to the senses, and interferes with the comfortable enjoyment
of life or property, and affects at the same time an entire community or
neighborhood, or any number of persons, although the extent of annoyance or
damage inflicted upon the individual may be unequal, and which occurs as a
result of the storage, removal, transport, processing, or disposal of solid waste,
compost, and/or designated recyclables.
SS. "Office" or "offices" for purposes of this Chapter shall mean any office,
combination of offices, or connected building or office space regardless of office
affiliation, ownership, or occupancy. This includes, but is not limited to,
businesses used for retail, wholesale, professional services, legal services,
financial services (to include banks), medical services, shipping and receiving.
areas, churches, schools, colleges, and libraries.
TT. "Office paper" means waste paper grades of white and colored ledgers and
computer paper. Examples include forms, copy paper, stationery, and other papers
that are generally associated with desk and employee work area activity, and any
additional materials to be added by ordinance.
UUl. "Performance Deposit" means cash, money order or check submitted to
the City.
J:\A.ttomey\lILLM\ORDINANCES\CVMC 8.25 (LF-JDSM revisions-CLEAN ccL02-2S-08.doc
Last revised: 02-25-08 @ 12:18 p.m.
3-34
Ordinance No.
Page 8
UU2. "Plastic bottle" means a plastic container with narrow neck or mouth
opening smaller than the diameter of the container body, used for containing milk,
juice, soft drinks, water, detergent, shampoo or other such substances intended for
household or hospitality use; to be distinguished from nonbottle containers (e.g.,
deli or margarine tub containers) and from nonhousehold plastic bottles such as
those for containing motor oil, solvents, and other nonhousehold substances.
VV. "Pollution" means the condition caused by the presence in or on a body of
water, soil, or air of any solid waste or substance derived therefrom in such
quantity, or such nature and duration, or under such condition, that the quality,
appearance, or usefulness of the water, soil, land, or air is significantly degraded
or adversely altered.
WWI. "Processing" means the reduction, separation, recovery, conversion, or
recycling of any component( s) of solid waste.
WW2. "Project" means any activity, which requires an application for a
Construction or Demolition permit, or any similar permit from the City of Chula
Vista.
XX. "Putrescible wastes" means the waste in organic material with the
potential decomposition capacity to emit noticeable quantities of odor and gas by-
products. Material in this category includes, but is not limited to, kitchen waste,
dead animals, food from containers, etc., except organic wastes separated
therefrom and used in compo sting.
YY. "Recyclables" means any materials that are recyclable, reclaimable, and/or
reusable within the following generating categories: small quantity generator and
large quantity generator. Any material having an economic value on the
secondary materials market or that is otherwise salvageable shall be included
and/or other materials that have been separated from other small or large quantity
generators for the purposes of being recycled for resale and/or reuse, and placed at
a designated recycling or waste collection or storage location or in a designated
recycling or waste container for the purpose of collection and processing, or any
such designated recyclable materials collected under a mixed waste processing
program.
ZZ. "Recycling" shall mean any process by which materials which would
otherwise be discarded, deposited in a landfill or transformation facility and
become solid waste are collected (source-separated, commingled, or as "mixed
waste"), separated and/or processed, and returned to the economic mainstream in
the form of raw materials or products or materials which are otherwise salvaged
or recovered for reuse.
AAA. "Refuse" means garbage and rubbish.
BBB. "Removal" means the act of taking solid wastes or designated recyclables
from the place of generation either by the contract or franchise agent(s), or by a
person in control of the premises.
CCCI. "Removal frequency" means frequency of removal of solid wastes or
recyclables from the place of generation.
CCC2. "Renovation" means any change, addition, or modification in an
existing structure.
J:V\ltomey\JILLM\ORDlNANCES\CVMC 8.25 (LF-JDSM revisions.-CLEAN ccL02-25-08,doc
Last revised: 02-25-08 @ 12:18 p.m.
3-35
Ordinance No.
Page 9
DDD. "Residential," for purposes of this Chapter, means any building or
portion thereof designed or used exclusively as the residence or sleeping place of
one or more persons, including single- and multiple-family dwellings, apartment-
hotels, boarding and lodging houses. "Residential" does not include short-term
residential uses, such as motels, tourist cabins, or hostels which are regulated as
hospitality establishments.
EEE 1. "Residential recyclables" means those specific recyclable materials from
residential solid waste (single-family and multifamily) including, but not limited
to, aluminum, glass bottles and jars, newspaper, plastic bottles, tin and bi-metal
cans, white goods, and yard waste.
EEE2. "Reuse" means further or repeated use.
FFF. "Roll-off service" means service provided for the collection, removal and
disposal of industrial waste such as construction, demolition and other primarily
inert nonputrescible wastes and green wastes. Roll-off service is usually provided
using metal containers of 10 to 40 cubic yards that are open on the top with doors
on one end.
GGG. "Rubbish" means nonputrescible solid wastes such as ashes, paper, glass,
bedding, crockery, plastics, rubber by-products or litter. Such materials that are
designated as recyclable or compost may be exempt from categorizing as rubbish;
provided, such materials are handled, processed and maintained ina properly
regulated manner.
HHH. "Salvaging or salvageable" means the controlled and/or authorized
storage and removal of solid waste, designated recyclables or recoverable
materials for the purpose of recycling, reuse, or storage for later recycling or
reuse.
III. "Scavenging" means the uncontrolled and/or unauthorized removal of solid
waste, designated recyclables or recoverable materials. Such activity is unlawful
and is a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail and $1,000 in civil
penalties under CVMC 8.24.200 and 8.25.080 and Chapter 9, Section 41950 of
the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989.
JJJ. "To segregate waste material" means any of the following: the placement
of designated recyclables in separate containers; the binding or bagging of
designated recyclables separately from other waste material and placing in a
separate container from refuse, or the same container as refuse; and the physical
separation of designated recyclables from other waste material (either at the
generating source, solid waste transfer station, or processing facility).
KKK. "Small quantity generator" means those residential, commercial,
industrial and institutional entities that generate less than 300 gallons of waste per
week excluding source-separated recyclables diverted from disposal or
transformation.
LLL. "Solid waste" means all putrescible and nonputrescib1e solid, semisolid
and liquid wastes, such as refuse, garbage, rubbish, ashes, industrial wastes,
demolition and construction wastes, abandoned vehicles and parts thereof,
discarded home and industrial appliances, manure, vegetable or animal solid and
semisolid wastes, and includes liquid wastes disposed of in conjunction with solid
wastes at solid waste transfer/processing stations or disposal sites, which are
J:\AttorneyIJILLM\ORDINANCES\CVMC 8.25 (LF-JDSM revisions--CLEAN ccL02-25-08.doc
Last revised: 02-25-08 @ 12:18 p.m.
3-36
Ordinance No.
Page 10
generated by residential, commercial or industrial sites within the City. Solid
waste shall not include: hazardous and infectious waste, sewage collected and
treated in a municipal or regional sewage system or materials or substances
having commercial value or other importance which can be salvaged for reuse,
recycling, composting or resale.
MMM. "State" shall mean the state of California.
NNN. "Storage" means the interim containment of solid wastes, yard wastes, or
recyclables in an approved manner after generation and prior to disposal,
collection or processing. ("Interim" means for one week or less; roll-off
containers may store nonputrescible waste for up to 30 days.)
000. "Streets and byways" shall mean the public streets, ways, alleys and
places as the same now or may hereafter exist within said city, including state
highways now or hereafter established within said city.
PPPl. "Tin and bi-metal cans" means any steel food and beverage containers
with a tin or aluminum plating.
PPP2. "Total Project Costs" means the total value of a Project as calculated
using Chula Vista's standard valuation multipliers.
QQQ. "Transfer or processing station" means those facilities utilized to receive
solid wastes and to temporarily store, separate, convert, or otherwise process the
solid waste and/or recyclables.
RRRl. "Unit" means an individual residence contained in a residential
multifamily complex.
RRR2. "Waste Management Report (WMR)" means a WMR form, approved
by the City Manager or designee, for the purpose of compliance with this Chapter.
RRR3. "Waste Management Report Compliance Official" means the
designated staff person(s) authorized by the City Manager and responsible for
implementing the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Program.
SSS. "White goods" means kitchen or other large enameled appliances which
include, but are not limited to, refrigerators, washers, and dryers.
TTT. "Wood waste" means lumber and wood products but excludes tree
stumps in excess of 35 pounds, more than incidental dirt or rock, plastic, glass,
metal, painted or treated wood, plywood, particle board or other manufactured
products that contain glue, formaldehyde, nonorganic or nonbiodegradable
materials.
UUU. "Vector" means any nuisance such as odor, unsightliness, sound, or a
carrier, usually insects or rodents, that is capable of transmitting a disease.
VVV. "Yard waste" means the leaves, grass, weeds, and wood materials from
trees and shrubs from the single-family and multifamily residential sources of the
City's green waste (to include landscape haulings from residential sources).
Acceptable materials for collection include all yard waste as herein defined,
excluding treated or processed wood or lumber, bulky waste or any other
materials as shall be determined by the City as to not be salvageable. All
acceptable yard waste shall be void of nails, wire, rocks, dirt or any other material
that is not considered yard waste.
J:lAltomeyVILLM\ORDINANCES\CVMC 8.25 (LF-105M revisions-CLEAN cc)_02-2S-08.doc
Last revised: 02-25-08@ 12:18 p.m.
3-37
Ordinance No.
Page II
8.25.030 Mandatory fees for recycling.
A. The City Council finds and determines that the regular collection of
recyclables by the contract or franchise agent(s) of the City from all places in the
City is a service to the premises from which it is collected. All owners or
occupants of premises generating recyclables shall pay the monthly collection fee
charged by the City's contract or franchise agent, not to exceed the City-approved
maximum rates. A schedule of maximum rates shall be kept on file with the City
Clerk and is available for public review. Maximum rates may be subject to
increase pursuant to the terms of the City's contract or franchise with the contract
or franchise agent(s). Subject to the terms of the then-in-effect contract or
franchise, the Council may from time to time establish such rates by resolution,
including the establishment of rates for different classifications of quantity
generators (small quantity generators, large quantity generators, residential,
commercial, or industrial, or subclassifications thereof) or types of materials
generated or other classifications which are deemed to be in the public interest.
B. Pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 41900, et seq., the
City may, by resolution of the City Council, impose fees on City generators to pay
the actual costs incurred by the City in preparing, adopting or implementing an
integrated waste management plan in accordance with state mandates.
C. The contract or franchise agent shall provide billing service and be totally
responsible for the collection of such fees, at the same time and in the same
manner as the collection of charges for refuse collection pursuant to CVMC
8.24.180. No person shall willfully fail, neglect or refuse, after demand by the
contract or franchise agent(s), to pay the fees provided for herein.
8.25.035 Reserved.
(Ord. 2992 S 1,2005; Ord. 2740 S 3,1998; Ord. 2492 S I, 1992; Ord. 2428 S I,
1990).
8.25.040 Separation of recyclable materials, storage, and containers.
A. The owner, operator, and/or occupant of any premises, business
establishment, industry, or other property, vacant or occupied, shall be rebuttably
presumed to be the generators of, and be responsible for the safe and sanitary
storage of, all solid waste, designated recyclables, and compost accumulated on
the property. The designated recyclables and compost shall be stored separately
from refuse. The property owner, operator, or occupant shall store such solid
waste, designated recyclables, and compost on the premises or property in such a
manner so as not to constitute a fire, health, or safety hazard, and shall require it
to be handled in such a manner so as not to promote the propagation, harborage,
or attraction of vectors, or the creation of litter or other nuisances.
B. A container or containers for designated recyclables shall be provided by the
contract or franchise agent( s) for any premises generating residential or
commercial recyclables, for the exterior collection of designated recyclables.
Containers for industrial recyclables shall be provided by the generator of the
J:\AllomcyIJILLM\ORDINANCES\CVMC B.25 (LF.JDSM revisions-CLEAN ccL02-25-08.doc
Last revised: 02-25-08 @ 12:18 p.m.
3-38
Ordinance No.
Page 12
designated recyclables, unless otherwise arranged through the City Manager. The
containers shall effectively segregate the designated recyclables from refuse.
C. All such containers to be used in the City's recycling programs shall be
approved by the City Manager, in conjunction with the contract or franchise
agent(s) (or, in the case of industrial recyclables, the generators of the industrial
recyclables ).
D. Designated recyclables shall be sorted according to type and/or as
established by program guidelines and placed in separate containers, containers
with segregated compartments, or commingled (in one recycling container), as
agreed upon by the City Manager and the contract or franchise agent(s).
Containers, if more than one, shall be grouped together and placed for collection
at the same time as when regular refuse collection occurs or at designated
recycling collection times (if different from refuse collection) and at designated
recycling collection locations.
E. All containers used for recycling purposes, storage or collection, including
commercial and industrial recycling containers used in City recycling programs as
well as all other containers used for recycling purposes whether owned or
operated by a commercial entity, nonprofit organization, or any other persons or
entity, shall be identified with the name and current telephone number of the
owner or the responsible agency or person. Commercial recycling containers shall
remain locked at all times in order to discourage scavenging and prevent dumping
of refuse in the container, unless exempted by the City Manager in conjunction
with the contract or franchise agent( s).
F. Containers which do not comply with the requirements of this Section shall
be presumed to be refuse and taken by the contract or franchise agent(s) for
disposal or potential use as salvaging or recycling containers.
G. It shall be unlawful for any person to dispose, dump, or otherwise place
material other than designated recyclables in a designated recycling container or
at a designated recycling collection or storage location.
H. Exemption. Designated recyclables which are source-sorted by their
generator for the purpose of recycling by selling them to a buy-back center or
donating them to a City-licensed nonprofit or community group conducting
recycling programs for the purpose of raising funds do not have to be placed in
the designated recycling container required by this Section, nor placed in a
designated recycling collection location in accordance with this Section. When
designated recyclables are received by a City-licensed nonprofit or community
group conducting recycling programs for the purpose of raising funds, they shall
be stored and sorted in accordance with this Section and transported to a buy-back
center for the purpose of recycling.
8.25.050 Mandatory recycling.
It shall be mandatory for all generators of residential, commercial, and
industrial recyclables in the City to separate from refuse, for recycling purposes,
all designated recyclables and otherwise participate in recycling as described by
this Chapter.
l:\AUomeyIJILLM\ORDINANCES\CVMC 8.25 (LF.JDSM revisions--CLEAN Cl:L02-25-08.doc
Last revised: 02-25-08 @ 12:18 p.m.
3-39
Ordinance No.
Page 13
8.25.060 Recycling programs.
A. The City Manager shall establish and promulgate reasonable regulations,
guidelines and other program-related specifics as to the implementation of
recycling programs for residential, commercial, and industrial recycling,
including the method for collection of designated recyclables.
B. Commercial and industrial establishments shall develop their respective "in-
house" recycling plans that provide for the collection of designated recyclables in
conjunction with the City's established recycling programs. The City and the
contract or franchise agent( s) shall assist in program development and provide
technical expertise and training materials.
C. Collection ofrecyclables from single-family residential units shall minimally
occur once weekly. For commercial and industrial entities, collection shall be
provided as needed to meet demand.
D. The City encourages use of buy-back centers, donation centers (for used
furniture and other reusable bulky items, and nonprofit agents), scrap dealers,
home and commercial composting, source reduction, and other creative, lawful
and environmentally sound efforts to reduce waste in accordance with this
Chapter that do not conflict with any established or planned City-sponsored
recycling, composting or source-reduction programs.
8.25.070 Reports.
A. All commercial and industrial establishments shall submit recycling tonnage
documentation on an annual basis to the City's conservation coordinator, due on
or before January 31st, for the previous year. Annual reporting shall be on the
form promulgated by the City Manager, and commence on the first anniversary of
the date set forth in the mandatory recycling implementation schedule as
established in this Chapter as July 1, 1993. Voluntary reporting prior to the
required mandatory recycling is encouraged.
B. Effective July 1, 2008, all Applicants for a Construction or Demolition
permit for a Covered Project must submit a Waste Management Report (WMR) to
the Waste Management Report Compliance Official for approval, prior to permit
issuance, per Section 8.25.095.
8.25.080 Scavenging.
A. It shall be unlawful for any person other than authorized City personnel or
contract or franchise agent( s) to remove any separated designated recyclable( s) or
salvageable commodity from any designated recycling collection or storage
location, or designated recycling container. However, the original generator of the
designated recyclables may, for any reason, remove the designated recyclables
placed by said generator from the designated recycling container or designated
recycling collection or storage location in which said generator had originally
placed them.
B. It shall be unlawful for any person to disturb, modify, harm, or otherwise
tamper with any container or designated recycling collection or storage location
containing designated recyclables, or the contents thereof, or to remove any such
container from the location where the same was placed by the generator thereof,
J:\AttomeyV1LLM\QRDlNANCES\CVMC 8.25 (LF.JDSM revisions--CLEAN ccl_02-25-OS.doc
Last revised: 02-25-08 @ 12:18 p.m.
3-40
Ordinance No.
Page 14
or to remove the contents of any such container, unless authorized by the
generator of such designated recyclables or duly authorized City personnel or
contract or franchise agent(s).
8.25.090 Composting.
A. Every establisher of a composting pile, bin, holding area or other such
composting system shall first obtain a permit from the City, if the total volume
used within the boundaries of the premises for composting is 15 cubic yards or
greater.
B. Every composting pile, bin, holding area or other such composting system
shall be maintained so as to not create a public or private nuisance through visual,
odor, safety and/or other means, or as prescribed in Chapter 19.66 CYMC.
Without constituting a limitation on the foregoing, no such composting pile, bin,
holding area or other such composting system shall be maintained within six feet
from an exterior window, exterior door or other exterior entrance to an inhabited
residential structure other than one owned by the owner of such composting
system.
C. The owner, operator, or occupier of property containing a composting pile,
bin, holding area or other such composting system that is greater than five feet
high, five feet wide and five feet in length shall weekly monitor temperature,
through utilization of a thermometer designed for such purposes.
D. No single compost pile, bin, holding area or other such composting system
on a residential single-family (as defined in Ordinance No. 2443) premises shall
be more than five feet in height and/or greater than six feet in width or length.
8.25.095 Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling
A. Projects.
1. Covered Projects. The following project categories are Covered Projects
and must comply with this Section 8.25.095:
a. Any Project requiring a permit for Demolition or Construction, with a
Project valuation of $20,000 or more, unless defined as a Non-Covered Project in
Section 8.25.095.A.3., below.
b. Any sequenced developments, such as housing subdivision
Construction or subdivision Demolition must be considered as a "project" in its
entirety for purposes of this Section, and not as a series of individual projects.
2. City-Sponsored Projects. All City Construction and Demolition projects
shall be considered "Covered Projects" and shall submit a Waste Management
Report to the City Manager or designee prior to issuance of any Construction or
Demolition permits.
3. Non-Covered Projects. A Performance Deposit and Waste Management
Report shall not be required for the following:
a. Work for which a Construction or Demolition permit is not required.
b. Roofing projects that do not include tear-off of existing roof.
c. Work for which only a plumbing, only an electrical, or only a
mechanical permit is required.
d. Seismic tie-down projects
J:\Altomey\JILLM\ORDINANCES\CYMC 8.25 (LF-JDSM revisions--CtEAN ccL02-25-08.doc
Last revised: 02-25-08@ 12:18 p.m.
3-41
Ordinance No.
Page 15
e. Projects less than 10,000 square feet, where no structural building
modifications are required.
f. Emergency required to protect public health and safety.
g. Individual single-family home Renovations that are not part of a larger
project.
While not required, it shall be encouraged, that at least 50% of all project-
related Construction, Renovation and Demolition waste from Non-Covered
Projects be Diverted.
B. Submission of Waste Management Report.
1. Construction and Demolition Waste Management Report Forms.
Applicants for any Covered Project shall complete and submit a Construction and
Demolition Waste Management Report on a Waste Management Report form
(WMR) approved by the City for this purpose. The WMR shall be submitted for
review and approval, prior to issuance of a Construction or Demolition permit.
The completed WMR shall indicate all of the following:
a. The type of project;
b. The total square footage of the project;
c. The estimated volume or weight of Construction and Demolition debris,
by material type, to be generated;
d. The maximum volume or weight of Construction and Demolition debris
that will be recycled or Diverted from the landfill;
e. The maximum volume or weight of Construction and Demolition debris
that will be disposed of in a landfill; and
f. The vendors or facilities that the Applicant proposes to use to collect
process or receive the Construction and Demolition debris.
In estimating the volume or weight of materials identified in the WMR, the
Applicant shall use the standardized conversion rates established and approved by
the City for this purpose.
2. Initial Application. Not withstanding any other provision of this Code, no
Construction or Demolition permit maybe issued until the initial Construction and
Demolition Waste Management Report has been approved by the WMR
Compliance Official. The WMR Compliance Official will respond to the
applicant's WMR submittal within 10 business days with an approval, denial or
request for clarification. If the WMR Compliance Official does not respond
within 10 business days, the applicant should notify the Official. After
notification by the Applicant, the Official will then have three business days to
complete the review. If the review is not completed within three business days
after the notification, the deposit requirement will be waived.
3. Amount of Security. The Applicant for any Covered Project shall submit a
Performance Deposit. The amount of the Performance Deposit shall be calculated
as the lesser of three percent of the Total Project Cost or $30,000. Acceptable
forms of payment include Cash, Money Orders, and Checks.
The WMR Compliance Official shall waive the Performance Deposit if the
total deposit required pursuant to this Section would be fifty dollars or less.
Performance Security funds will be placed in a secured account, subj ect to
interest, and returned to the Applicant upon acceptance of proof of compliance in
J:\AttomeyVILLM\ORDlNANCES\CYMC 8.25 (LF-JDSM revisions-CLEAN ccL02-25-08.doc
Last revised: 02-25-08@ 12:18 p.m.
3-42
Ordinance No.
Page 16
full, or if partial compliance, on a prorated basis dependent on the degree of
compliance. All interest earned will be the property of the City and used for waste
reduction and recycling activities.
4. Documentation. Within 30 days after Demolition is completed (if a
Demolition permit only) or 30 days after the issuance of a certificate of
occupancy or at the time of issuing the last certificate of occupancy for units
within a phased Project of any Covered Project, the Applicants shall submit to the
WMR Compliance Official, documentation that it has met the Diversion
Requirement for the Project, unless Applicant has been granted an Exemption
pursuant to Section 8.25.095.C of this Chapter. The documentation shall include
all of the following:
a. Receipts from the vendor or facility that received each material,
showing the actual weight or volume of that material;
b. A copy of the completed Waste Management Report form, in its
entirety; and
c. Photographs and narrative documentation of the Applicant's Reuse
activities.
5. Weighing of Wastes. Applicants shall make reasonable efforts to ensure
that all Construction, Renovation and Demolition waste Diverted for Reuse or
disposed of is measured and recorded using the most accurate method of
measurement available. To the extent practical, all Construction, Renovation and
Demolition waste shall be weighed by measurement on scales. Such scales shall
be in compliance with all regulatory requirements for accuracy and maintenance.
For Construction, Renovation and Demolition waste for which weighing is not
practical due to small size or other considerations, a volumetric measurement
shall be used. For conversion of volumetric measurements to weight, the
Applicant shall use the standardized rates established by the Conversion Rates
Table approved by the City for this purpose. Conversion Rate Tables will be
included with the Waste Management Report form.
6. Determination of Compliance and Release of Performance Deposit. The
WMR Compliance Official shall review the information submitted under this
Section and determine whether the Applicant has complied with the Diversion
Requirement, as follows:
a. Compliance. If the WMR Compliance Official determines that the
Applicant has fully complied with the Diversion Requirement applicable to the
Project, he or she shall cause the release of the Performance Deposit to the
Applicant within 30 days of the Applicant's submission of the documentation
required under this Section. If the Applicant has complied in part, a portion of the
performance deposit will be withheld. The amount withheld will be proportional
to the percentage of materials that are not RecycledlDiverted.
b. Noncompliance. If the WMR Compliance Official determines that the
Applicant failed to submit the documentation within the required time period,
then the Performance Deposit shall be forfeited to the City. All forfeited and/or
unrecovered funds shall be used for waste reduction and recycling activities.
J:\AlIorney\JILLM\ORDINANCES\CVMC 8.25 (LF-JDSM revisions-CLEAN ccL02-25-08.doc
Last revised: 02-25-08 @ 12: 18 p.m.
3-43
Ordinance No.
Page 17
C. Exemption.
1. Application. If an Applicant for a Covered Project experiences unique
circumstances that the Applicant believes make it infeasible to comply with the
Diversion Requirement, the Applicant may apply for an Exemption at the time.
that he or she submits the WMR. The Applicant shall indicate on the WMR the
maximum rate of diversion he or she believes is feasible for each material and the
specific circumstances that he or she believes makes it infeasible to comply with
the Diversion Requirement.
2. Meeting with WMR Compliance Official. The WMR Compliance Official
shall review the information supplied by the Applicant and may meet with the
Applicant to discuss possible ways of meeting the Diversion Requirement.
3. Granting of Exemption. If the WMR Compliance Official determines that
it is infeasible for the Applicant to meet the Diversion Requirement due to unique
circumstances, he or she shall determine the maximum feasible diversion rate for
each material and shall indicate this rate on the WMR submitted by the Applicant.
The WMR Compliance Official shall return a copy of the WMR to the Applicant
marked "Approved with Exemption." The Applicant shall then be responsible for
Diverting the revised rate noted by the WMR Compliance Official on the
Approved WMR, in compliance with the provisions of this Section.
4. Denial of Exemption. If the WMR Compliance Official determines that it
is possible for the Applicant to meet the Diversion Requirement, he or she shall so
inform the Applicant in writing. The Applicant shall resubmit a WMR form in full
compliance with Section 8.25.095. If the Applicant fails to resubmit the WMR, or
if the resubmitted WMR does not comply with this Section, the WMR
Compliance Official shall deny the WMR.
D. Appeal.
Appeals. Appeals of a determination made by the WMR Compliance Official
under this Section 8.25.095 shall be made to the City Manager or designee. The
appeal shall be in writing and filed with the City Clerk within ten (10) business
days of issuance of the WMR Compliance Official's decision. The appeal shall be
limited to the following issues: (1) the granting or denial of an exemption; and (2)
the amount of security to be released. The decision of the City Manager or
designee shall be final.
8.25.100 Enforcement.
A. The City Manager or designee is responsible for enforcing the provisions of
this Chapter.
B. Types of materials included in designated recyclables may be
administratively deleted by the City Manager under emergency conditions (to
include market failures), subject to formal ordinance amendment approved by the
City Council, if such conditions persist.
C. Nothing in this Chapter or its implementing regulations shall prevent the
City or its contract or franchise agent(s) from efforts to obtain voluntary
compliance by way of warning, notice of violation, educational or other means.
J;\AttomeyIJILLM\ORDlNANCES\cVMC 8.25 (LF.JDSM revisions--CLEAN ccL02-25-08.drn:
Last revised: 02-25-08 @ 12:18 p.m.
3-44
Ordinance No.
Page 18
8.25.110 Severability.
If any provision, clause, sentence or paragraph of this Chapter or the
application thereof to any person or circumstances shall be held invalid, such
invalidity shall not affect the other provisions or application of the provisions of
this Chapter which can be given effect without the invalid provision or
application, and to this end the provisions of this Chapter are hereby declared to
be severable.
. SECTION II: Effective Date.
This ordinance shall take effect thirty days after final passage.
Presented by:
Approved as to form by:
Dave Byers
Director of Public Works
J:\AttomeyIJILLM\ORD1NANCES\CVMC 8.25 (LF-JDSM revisioos--CLEAN ccL02-25-08.doc
Last revised: 02-25-08@ 12:18 p.m.
3-45
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
~!'f:. CITYOF
.~CHUIA VISTA
MARCH 4, 2008, Item 4-
PUBLIC HEARING TO REVIEW THE CITY'S HOUSING
AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT FEDERAL GRANT
PROGRAMS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008/2009 (COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT, HOME INVESTMENT
PARTNERSHIP ACT AND EMERGENCY SHELTER
GRANT)
ASSISTANT DIRECTOW:R OF REDEVELOPMENT AND@)
HOUSING
CITY MANAGER ~
4/5THS VOTE: YES D NO ~
It is recommended that the public hearing be continued to the meeting of March 11, 2008
at 6:00 p.m.
4-1
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
.-
3/4/08, Item '::;;
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE ADOPTION OF ORDINANCES
ESTABLISHING A WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT
FEE.
A. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ACCEPTING THE WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT
FEE REPORT (TF-358) PREPARED BY STAFF AND ESTABLISHING A
WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAM TO
MITIGATE TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS WITHIN WESTERN CHULA VISTA
EXCLUDING PROJECTS - 1-5-17, STM-361, RAS-15, BP-5, 1-805-2, RAS-I7, BP-
4, BP-2, AND OR-4
B. ORDINANCE OF THE I ,CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ACCEPTING THE WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT
FEE REPORT (TF-358) PREPARED BY STAFF AND ESTABLISHING A
WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAM TO
MITIGATE TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS WITHIN WESTERN CHULA VISTA
INCLUDING PROJECTS - 1-5-17, STM-361, RAS-15, BP-5
C. ORDINANCE OF THE ,CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ACCEPTING THE WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT
FEE REPORT (TF-358) PREPARED BY STAFF AND ESTABLISHING A
WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAM TO
MITIGATE TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS WITHIN WESTERN CHULA VISTA
INCLUDING PROJECTS - 1-805-2, RAS-I7, BP-4
D. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ACCEPTING THE WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT
FEE REPORT (TF-358) PREPARED BY STAFF AND ESTABLISHING A
WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAM TO
MITIGATE TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS WITHIN WESTERN CHULA VISTA
INCLUDING PROJECT BP-2
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
E. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ACCEPTING THE WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT
FEE REPORT (TF-358) PREPARED BY STAFF AND ESTABLISHING A
WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAM TO
MITIGATE TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS WITHIN WESTERN CHULA VISTA
INCLUDING PROJECT OR-4
DIRECTOR OF ENG~ERIN AND GENERAL SERVICES ~
CITY MANAGER ~"Sv
ASSISTANT CITY AGER '7"'--
4/STHS VOTE: YES 0 NO IZI
5-1
Page 2, Item .5
Meeting Date 3/04/08
SUMMARY
City of Chula Vista staff have prepared a Western Transportation Development Impact Fee
Report (Report) to analyze potential traffic impacts of proposed new development on the
westside of the City's transportation system and to calculate development impact fees based on
that analysis. The City's Eastern Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDIF) Program was
established on January 12, 1988 by Ordinance 2251. That program is responsible for the
equitable funding of transportation facilities east ofI-805. The proposed Western Transportation
Development Impact Fee (WTDIF) is a similar program proposed for Western Chula Vista.
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 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA review.
Although environmental review is not necessary at this time, environmental review will be
required prior to the approval of final design plans and the awarding of construction contracts for
facilities funded through Western Transportation Development Impact Fees.
RECOMMENDATION
I. Council conduct the public hearing.
2. Council approve the ordinances establishing the WTDIF Program (first reading).
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION
Not applicable.
DISCUSSION
New development places demands on the existing transportation infrastructure which can be
mitigated by upgrading existing and/or constructing new transportation facilities. The proposed
WTDIF program will provide for future transportation facilities needs due to westside
development through the Year 2030. The proposed future development will result in the need for
transportation infrastructure improvements to accommodate growth-related traffic, including but
not limited to traffic signals, curb, gutter and sidewalk, public transportation infrastructure and
pedestrian and bicycle facilities. A well planned fee program can generate sufficient funds to
allow the city to adequately mitigate impacts created by new development. The ancillary reason
for adopting a Western TDIF is because in November 2004 county-wide voters passed the
Transnet Ordinance prepared for the San Diego Association of Govemments (SANDAG). This
Ordinance states in part, "Any local agency that does not provide its filll monetary contribution
required by Section 9(A) in a given fiscal year will not be eligible to receive funding for local
streets and roads under section 4(D)(1) of the TransNet Ordinance for the immediately following
fiscal year ". The Ordinance is further described below.
The impact fees are calculated for an Area of Benefit that encompasses the entire westside of the
city, see Attachment I, "Western Transportation Development Impact Fee Report" (Report). The
WTDIF program will distribute the cost of infrastructure equitably among new development in
Western Chula Vista. The fee will be used to construct new transportation improvements or
5-2
Page 3, Item .5
Meeting Date 3/04/08
expand existing facilities and shall not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the new
transportation improvements in accordance with California Government Code Section 66000 et
seq.
California Government Code Section 66001 requires that an agency establishing, increasing or
imposing impact fees meet the following requirements:
1. Identify the purpose of the fee;
2. Identify the use of the fee and;
3. Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a. The use of the fee and the development type on which the fee is imposed;
b. The need for the public facility and the type of development project on which the
fee is imposed and;
c. The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development project
on which the fee is imposed.
Each of these requirements were followed in the development of the fee program.
Methodologv for Fee Determination
Government Code section 66000 et seq. requires, among other things, that the City establish a
reasonable relationship between the projects to be funded and the amount of the fee. As more
thoroughly discussed below, the WTDIF program uses Average Daily Traffic (ADT), which is
converted to Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU's), as the tool to equate impact fees among the
different land uses. ADT generation rates published by SANDAG are used to determine the trip
generating characteristics of the different landuse categories on the transportation system.
The process for determining WTDIF fees included two phases. The fIrst phase involved
performing a defIciency analysis to determine what future growth-related traffic impacts were
placed on the existing regional and local transportation network. To accomplish this, a variety of
recently approved documents were analyzed. The process included gathering a voluminous
amount of land use data detailing the amount of new development proposed for the west side of
Chula Vista as depicted in the City's General Plan and Urban Core SpecifIc Plan (UCSP).
Existing, approved traffic studies performed for the General Plan and the UCSP were used to
defIne and locate traffic impacts and their mitigations. Other approved reports were also used in
determining impacts; these include the UCSP report entitled, "Chula Vista Urban Core SpecifIc
Plan Facilities Implementation Analysis", the city's Infrastructure DefIciency Plan, the "Final
City of Chula Vista, Midbayfront LCP Resubmittal No. 8 Amendment, Environmental Impact
Report, February, 1991" and project listings from the City's Capital Improvement Program.
Attachment 1 lists the infrastructure improvements from all sources. The project list includes
local as well as Regional Arterial System (RAS) segments, intersection improvements including
traffic signals, interchange improvements, bicycle and pedestrian projects and Light Rail
facilities.
The locations where traffic impacts occurred, as shown in Attachment 1, were gathered and
assembled together in one list. The fInal list designates the transportation facilities on the west
5-3
Page 4, Item ..5
Meeting Date 3/04/08
side of Chula Vista that will require transportation improvements due to projected westside
growth.
The next phase in the process involved calculating an impact fee to address the traffic impacts
identified in the deficiency analysis above. The program looked at associated costs for all eligible
projects in Year 2007 dollars, the current number of Average Daily Trips (ADT) and the existing,
corresponding Level of Service (LOS) for each affected street segment and intersection proposed
for improvement. Anticipated traffic volumes for year 2030 were retrieved from the Traffic
Impact Reports listed above and their impacts on existing infrastructure were analyzed to
determine the impacts attributable solely to future development. This information establishes the
nexus between future development and the need for future improvements. Street segments and
intersections that are currently operating at unacceptable levels of service were removed from the
list of projects to be funded by future development as these conditions are not attributable to
future development and therefore are not eligible for inclusion in the funding program.
The WTDIF fee is based on estimated trips for residential, commercial and industrial
development. The City of Chula Vista, like other cities in San Diego County, uses the SANDAG
Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region as the resource for specific land
use trip generation. Trips were then converted to EDU's which are units of measure that
standardize all land use types (housing, retail, office, industrial, etc.) to the level of demand
created by one single-family dwelling unit (SFDU). For example, in the case of traffic volume,
one EDU is equivalent to the amount of trips per day, in both directions, for a SFDU. According
to SANDAG, this SFDU generates 10 trips per day. A small business that generates 30 trips per
day would therefore be equivalent to three EDU's in terms of traffic demand. The City
historically has refined the SANDAG approach and has identified three residential land use
categories used in this report. The report aggregates residential land uses to utilize four categories
and recommends the following: 10 ADTs generated from a residential project with densities
ranging on average from I to 6 dwelling units per gross acre; 8 ADTs from a residential project
with densities between 6 and 20 dwelling units per gross acre; 6 ADTs from a residential project
with densities greater than 20 dwelling units per gross acre; and 4 ADTs from a mobile home
residential project. These city aggregated categories comport with the SANDAG Vehicular
Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region.
Applicable costs for all eligible projects as described above were summed up and divided by the
number of remaining EDU's on the west side of the city. From this process, the report estimated
the portion of total project costs that can be directly attributed to new development on the
westside of Chula Vista. The baseline costs per EDU were determined to be $3,148.11. To this
sub-total, the following administrative costs were added: a 2% WTDIF Administration cost,
$62.96/EDU, and an additional 1% SANDAG Administrative cost, $31.48/EDU. The [mal fee
was calculated at $3,243 per EDU. This $3,243 per EDU fee will be collected and monitored
separately for Regional facilities and local roadways. Regional arterials will comprise 78.92 % or
$2,559 of the total fee, while 21.08 % or $684 of the total fee will remain for local roadways.
Of note is how the Report calculated the trip generation rate for Commercial land uses.
Commercial land use trip generation rates have been reduced by 62.6%. This reduced rate is
based on the final edition of the study entitled, "RTCIP Impact Fee Nexus Study - Final Report"
5-4
Page 5, Item >=)
Meeting Date 3/04/08
dated November 26, 2007 prepared for SANDAG by MuniFinancial and attached with
Attachment 1. This study was prepared "to provide a single nexus analysis that all local
agencies in San Diego County could use to adopt an impact fee and fulfill their contribution to
the Regional Transportation Congestion Improvement Plan (RTCIP). The report documents the
required statutory findings under California's Mitigation Fee Act." The report identifies
commercial trip origins, distributions, and generation rates. The R TCIP study found that
approximately 62.6 percent of regional commercial trips are generated from within San Diego
County and more specifically from residential units within the county, which leads to the
observation that 37.4 percent of commercial trips are generated from outside of the region. The
RTCIP study concluded that residential development directly causes 62.6 percent of commercial
development. Consequently, the travel demand associated with that share of commercial
development is covered by residential development. These conclusions are in alignment with the
previously approved Eastern TDIF analysis. Consequently, the commercial trip rates were
adjusted accordingly by reducing them by 62.6 percent. The reduced trip generation rates for
commercial land uses are then similar to those rates used in the Eastern TDIF program for
citywide consistency.
Development Proiects Exempt from the Fee
Development projects by public agencies shall be exempt from the provisions of the fee if those
projects are designed to provide the public service for which the agency is charged ("public
purpose").
Exempt development uses with the following characteristics or activities as a principal use of
land, generally described as "community purpose facility":
"Community purpose facility" means a facility which serves one of the following purposes:
1. Social service activities, including such services as Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts, Boys and
Girls Club, Alcoholics Anonymous and services for the homeless;
2. Public schools;
3. Private schools;
4. Day care;
5. Senior care and recreation;
6. Worship, spiritual growth and development.
5-5
Page 6, Item !5
Meeting Date 3/04/08
Table I below presents the WTDIF rates for the different land uses.
PROPOSED WESTERN TDIF FEE PER LAND USE CLASSIFICA TION
Proposed Western TDIF Fee per EDU:
$3,243
SIDENTIAL
esidential (LOW)
1-6 dwelling units per
acre
7 to 20 dwelling units per
acre
Over 20 dwelling units
per acre
esidential (MED)
esidential (HIGH)
Mobile Home
COMMERCIAL
egional Commercial
Community Commercial
eighborhood Commercial
eighborhood Commercial
Street Front Commercial
etail Commercial
Wholesale Trade
OFFICE
igh Rise Office
More than 100,000 S.F.
and 6+ Stories
< 6 Stories
< 6 Stories
ow Rise Office (in Acreage)
ow Rise Office ( in Square
ootage)
edical Office
Medical and Dental
Facilities
ODGING
ow Rise Hotel/Motel (in Acreage)< 4 Stories
ow Rise Hotel or Motel (in < 4 Stories
umber of rooms)
igh Rise Hotel >4 Stories
NDUSTRY
Heavy Industry
Warehouse IStorage
dustrial Park
ight Industrial
SF - Thousands of Square Feet
5-6
Iper EDU $3,243per DU
.8per EDU per DU
$2,594
.6per EDU per DU
$1,946
.5per EDU $1,622per DU
19EDU/Acre $61,617/Acre
26EDU/Acre $84,318 1 Acre
45EDU/Acre $145,935/Acre
5EDU/KSF $16,215/KSF
15EDU/Acre $48,645 1 Acre
15EDU/KSF $48,645 1 Acre
22EDU/Acre $71,346IAcre
60EDU/Acre $194,580
IAcre
30EDU/Acre $97,290/Acre
2EDU/KSF $6,486/KSF
50EDU/ACRE $1 62,1 50Acre
20EDU/Acre $64,860/Acre
I.OEDU/Room $3,2431 RM
30/EDU/Acre $97,2901 Acre
12EDU/Acre $38,9161 Acre
6EDU/Acre $19,458/Acre
9EDU/Acre $29,1871 Acre
20EDU/Acre $64,860/Acre
Page 7, Item 5
Meeting Date 3/04/08
Area of Benefit
The area of benefit for the proposed fee is that area within the City of Chula Vista west of I -805.
The absence of contiguity to the proposed street improvement is not essential to conferring a
benefit to properties. The circulation system on the westside of the city must be viewed as a
whole. Each of the proposed street improvements listed in Attachment 1 will mitigate the
adverse traffic impacts generated by new development in total. Individual projects are not
reviewed because every development will create systemic traffic, and ultimately utilize the entire
system of streets to access work, commerce, schools, residences and the many other land uses
throughout the City. A failure in any part of the system will have a negative impact on other
parts and traffic from the development closest to an impacted segment of street will be just as
affected as traffic from a more distant development. The analogy of a water system is sometimes
used where constrictions or breaks in any part of the system will have significant impacts on the
whole system. In addition, the street improvements are required by the City's Growth
Management Ordinance as a condition to all development within the area of benefit in order to
maintain acceptable levels of service on the major roadways. The proposed area of benefit
contains a total of 19,914 future EDU's.
Western Transportation Development Impact Fee Credits
The WTDIF program allows for the construction of eligible transportation projects by developers
in lieu of paying the WTDIF at building permit issuance similar to the existing Eastern TDIF
program. Any projects constructed by a developer would be audited and credits issued
incrementally as the facility is constructed.
Program Monitoring
Monitoring the change in land use inventory will be important to maintain the integrity of the fee
program. In practice, the fee shall only apply to a proposed project that generates more trips than
what is presently being generated today. In other words, the fee is based solely on the change in
trip generating potential of proposed projects. For example, if the city receives a new project
application and this proposed project's trip generating potential is equal to that of the present land
use that it is replacing, then the developer need not pay any WTDIF fee. However, through a
simple calculation, if the proposed development generates an increased amount of trips, for
example, one hundred more trips, then this project shall pay the WTDIF fee in an amount equal
only to the increase or change in trip generating potential, or in this case, 10 EDUs.
TRANSNET Ordinance and the Regional Trans1>ortation Congestion Improvement Program
In November 2004, San Diego County voters approved local Proposition A extending the
Transnet Yz cent sales tax for transportation programs through 2048. Included in Proposition A
and the Transnet Extension Ordinance was the Regional Transportation Congestion Improvement
Program (RTCIP). The purpose of the RTCIP is to ensure that new development directly invests
in the region's transportation system to offset the negative impacts of growth on congestion and
mobility. The ordinance states, "Revenue collected through the Funding Programs shall be used
to construct transportation improvements on the Regional Arterial System such as new arterial
5-7
Page 8, Item 5
Meeting Date 3/04/08
roadway lanes, turning lanes, reconfigured freeway-arterial interchanges, railroad grade
separations and new regional express bus services, or similar types of improvements,
preliminary and final engineering, right of way acquisition, and construction that will be needed
to accommodate future travel demand generated by new development throughout the San Diego
region. A reasonable portion of the program revenue, up to a maximum of three percent, may be
usedfor fund administration."
As discussed above, city staff followed the procedures and intent of two documents in preparing
the WTDIF Program. The Transnet Ordinance prepared for SANDAG and approved by the
voters in November 2004 and the subsequent report, entitled "RTCIP Impact Fee Nexus Study-
Final Report" dated November 26, 2007 prepared for SANDAG by MuniFinancial. The RTCIP
is identified as Section 9 of the Transnet ordinance and states in part; "Any local agency that
does not provide its full monetary contribution required by Section 9(A) in a given fiscal year
will not be eligible to receive funding for local streets and roads under section 4(D)(1) of the
Transnet Ordinance for the immediately following fiscal year ".
City staff envisions a subsequent report to be done shortly after approval of this program that
reviews the feasibility of combining the city's two TDIF programs, this proposed program on the
westside and the existing program on the eastside, into one comprehensive TDIF program. The
main inducement for developing a single program is to track improvements citywide on Regional
Arterial System (RAS) facilities, as shown in the updated Regional Transportation Plan. This is
important because the RTCIP states, "Starting on July 1, 2008, each local agency in the San
Diego region shall contribute $2,000 in exactions from the private sector, for each newly
constructed residential housing unit in that jurisdiction to the RTCIP. These exactions shall
ensure future development contributes its proportional share of the funding needed to pay for the
Regional Arterial System and related regional transportation facility improvements, as defined
in San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG's) most recent, adopted Regional
Transportation Plan. "
RAS roadways are listed in SANDAG's Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), Mobility 2030
(November 2007) and are generally described as those roads that act as a critical link in
providing direct connections between communities ensuring system continuity and congestion
relief in high volume corridors.
The Regional Transportation Congestion Improvement Program portion of the Transnet
ordinance states that "Each jurisdiction's Funding Program shall be submitted for review by the
Independent Taxpayers Oversight Committee (!TOC) referred to in Section I1 of the Transnet
Ordinance prior to April 1, 2008, approved by Regional Transportation Commission by June 1,
2008 and shall become operative on July 1, 2008. Failure to submit a Funding Program for
review by ITOC by April 1 of any year beginning April 1, 2008 shall result in that jurisdiction
losing eligibility toC receive funding for local streets and roads under Section 4(D) (I) of the
Ordinance until July 1 of the following year. "
Each jurisdiction shall have up to but no more than seven fiscal years to expend Funding
Program revenues on the Regional Arterial Systems projects. The seven year term shall
commence on the first day of July following the jurisdiction's receipt of the revenue. At the time
5-8
Page 9, Item 5
Meeting Date 3/04/08
of the review and audit by the Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee, each jurisdiction
collecting a development impact fee to meet the requirements of its Funding Program shall
provide the Committee with written [mdings for any expended, unexpended and uncommitted
fees in their Program Fund and demonstrate a reasonable relationship between the fee and the
purpose for which it was charged, consistent with the requirements of Government Code Section
66000.
Failure to adopt the WTDIF ordinance puts the City at risk of losing approximately five million
dollars annually in each of the next five years in TransNet revenues. These TransNet revenues
are used nearly entirely on pavement rehabilitation throughout the City.
Staff has worked with and met numerous times with the Building Industry Association of San
Diego County (BIASD). Attachment 2 contains a letter from the BlASD with their concerns,
questions and suggestions to the City Manager dated February 12, 2008 as well as the City
Manager's response letter.
Fee Adiustments and Program Administration
The Transnet Ordinance provides for an annual inflation adjustment to the fee on July 1 of each
year beginning in 2009. The annual inflation adjustment will be 2 per cent or based on the
Caltrans highway construction cost index, whichever is higher. The program collects an
additional 2% of the total improvement cost estimate for staff administration and an additional
1 % for SANDAG administrative costs.
As discussed above, the RTCIP and Transnet ordinance provided guidance for the creation of the
WTDIF program including the following:
1. Provides for the collection of a fee for each new dwelling unit. As of July l, 2008, the
City will need to collect an average fee of $2,000 per dwelling unit constructed, to be
used on regional projects, and arterial street projects within the City of Chula Vista.
2. The program includes an annual escalator to the fee.
3. Fee revenues collected and any accrued interest shall be held in a separate account by the
city.
4. The City must submit their Funding Program for review to the Independent Taxpayers
Oversight Committee (ITOC) by Aprill, 2008 and subsequently every year after.
5. The RTCIP allows up to 3 percent of program revenues to be used for program
administration. SANDAG anticipates adding a 1 percent administrative charge to the
RTCIP fee to fund costs related to the ITOC. Local agencies may add up to 2 percent for
their program administration costs.
5-9
Page 10, Item 5
Meeting Date 3/04/08
Findings
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the WTDIF Program Ordinance based on the
following findings:
A. The purpose of the Fees hereby enacted prevents new development from reducing the
quality and availability of public transportation infrastructure facilities provided to
residents of the city by requiring new development to contribute to the cost of additional
capital transportation infrastructure improvements needed to meet the growth generated
by such development; and
B. The revenue from the Fees hereby enacted will be used to construct public facilities and
infrastructure and pay for other capital expenditures needed to serve new development as
identified in the Impact Fee Report dated February 2008; and
C. Based on analysis presented in the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee
Report, Attachment I, there is a reasonable relationship between
1. The use of the fees and the types of development projects on which they are imposed
and
2. The need for facilities and the types of development projects on which the fees are
imposed.
3. The amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility or portion of the public
facility attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.
Proposed Ordinance
By adopting the proposed ordinance, Council will establish a new WTDIF rate of $3,243 per
EDU. This ordinance will become effective 60 days after the second reading.
DECISION-MAKER CONFLICTS
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council Members and has found that
conflicts exist in that Council Members Rindone, McCann, Castaneda and Ramirez have
property holdings within 500 feet of the boundaries of the projects which are the subject of this
action. These Council Members will only vote on the implementing ordinances that exclude
conflicting projects.
FISCAL IMPACT
The Western Transportation Development Impact Fee, as do all of the City's Development
Impact Fees, will require the creation of a separate fund from the general fund. There will be no
negative impact to the General Fund. Tonight's action aids the General Fund by minimizing city
infrastructure costs due to future development. The program accounts for staff costs in the
amount of 2% of the program estimate for administration and monitoring.
5-10
Page 11, Item 5
Meeting Date 3/04/08
As previously discussed, failure to adopt this ordinance puts the City at risk of losing
approximately five million dollars annually in each of the next five years in TransNet revenues.
These TransNet revenues are used nearly entirely on pavement rehabilitation throughout the City.
ATTACHMENTS
I) Engineer's Report for the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee
2) Comment letter from BIASD and Response Letter from City Manager
Prepared by: Dave Kaplan, Transportation Engineer. Engineering and General Services Department
M:lEngineerIAGENDA\CAS2008\OJ-04-08\ WTDIF\FINALIFINAL2- WTDlF CAS 10-17-07 dek-DCADraft5 DEK 2-18-08.doc
02/27/2008 9:40: 18 AM
5-11
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING
THE WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT
FEE REPORT (TF-358) PREPARED BY STAFF AND
ESTABLISHING A WESTERN TRANSPORTATION
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAM TO MITIGATE
TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS WITHIN WESTERN CHULA
VISTA EXCLUDING PROJECTS - 1-5-17, STM-361, RAS-15, BP-5,
1-805-2, RAS-17, BP-4, BP-2, AND OR-4
WHEREAS, the adoption of the City's General plan indicated that future growth was going to
occur in the City west of! -805; and
WHEREAS, the traffic studies for the City's General Plan and the Urban Core Specific Plan
show the City's transportation network will be impacted by new development within the western
portion of the City unless new transportation facilities are added to accommodate the new
development; and
WHEREAS, since January 1987, the City has had a program in place for the collection of a
transportation development impact fee for the fmancing of street improvements in the area east of
Interstate 805.
WHEREAS, the Engineer's Report establishes that the transportation facilities necessitated by
development within the western portion of the City comprise an integrated network; and
WHEREAS, the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee is solely based upon that
portion of the project costs which are attributable to new development; and
WHEREAS, on March 4, 2008, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista held a duly noticed
public hearing at which oral or written presentations regarding the Western Transportation
Development Impact Fee could be made; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Municipal Code and California Government Code Sections 66000,
et. seq., the City Council has accepted a report entitled "Engineer's Report for the Western
Transportation Development Impact Fee" ("Engineer's Report") dated February, 2008 that analyzed
the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee necessary to fund transportation facilities needed
to serve future development within the western portion of the City; and
WHEREAS, the City's 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 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista is placing this ordinance on its first
reading which will establish a development impact fee per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) to finance
transportation facilities within the western portion of the City of Chula Vista; and
ORD#1
5-12
WHEREAS, pursuant to Govemment Code Section 660 I 7(a), the fees proposed by this
ordinance will not become effective until sixty (60) days after its first reading; and
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED, that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
does hereby adopt Chapter 3.55 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code relating to transportation
development impact fees to pay for various transportation facilities located on the westside of the City
as follows:
SECTION 1: Findings
The City Council finds, after consideration of the evidence presented to it including the "Engineer's
Report for the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee" dated February, 2008, that the
creation of a transportation development impact fee is necessary in order to assure that there are
sufficient funds available to finance the transportation facilities necessary to serve development west
ofI-805; and
The City Council finds that new development within the western portion of the City of Chula Vista
should be required to mitigate the burden created by development through the construction of
transportation facilities; and
The City Council finds, based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, and consistent with the
City's General Plan, and the various reports and information received by the City Council in the
ordinary course of its business, that the imposition of traffic impact fees on all development within the
western portion of the City of Chula Vista for which building permits have not been issued is
necessary in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare by providing for the public
transportation facilities to assure effective implementation of the City's General Plan; and
The City Council finds that the amount of the proposed fees levied by this ordinance does not exceed
the estimated cost of providing the transportation facilities.
SECTION 2: Chapter 3.55 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is hereby adopted and shall read as
follows:
3.55.010 General intent.
The City's General Plan Land Use and Transportation Element requires that adequate public facilities
be available to accommodate increased population created by new development within the City of
Chula Vista.
The City Council has determined that new development will create adverse impacts on the City's
existing public transportation facilities which must be mitigated by the financing and construction of
certain public transportation facilities which are the subject of this chapter. New development
contributes to the cumulative burden on these public transportation facilities in direct relationship to
the amount of vehicular traffic and population generated by the development or the gross acreage of
the commercial or industrial land in the development.
The City Council has determined that a reasonable means of financing the public transportation
facilities is to charge a fee on all developments within the western portion of the City. imposition of
the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee on all new development for which building
5-13
ORD#1
permits have not yet been issued is necessary in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare,
thereby ensuring effective implementation of the City's General Plan.
3.55.020 Definitions.
For the purposes of this chapter, the following words or phrases shall be construed as defined herein,
unless from the context it appears that a different meaning is intended.
A. "Building permit" means a permit required by and issued pursuant to the
Uniform Building Code.
B. "City Engineer" means the City Engineer, the City Engineer's designee or the
City Manager's designee.
C. "Density" means dwelling units per gross acre identified for each planning
area shown on the approved tentative map or approved tentative parcel map or
as determined by the City Manager's designee.
D. "Developer" means the owner or developer of a development.
E. "Development permit" means any discretionary permit, entitlement or
approval for a development project issued under any zoning or subdivision
ordinance of the City.
F. "Development project" or "development" means any activity described as the
following:
1. Any new residential dwelling unit developed on vacant land;
2. Any new commercial/office or industrial development constructed on vacant land;
3. Any expansions to established developments or new developments on nonvacant land in
those land use categories listed in subsections (F)(l) and (2) of this section, if the result
is a net increase in dwelling units. The fee shall be based solely on this net dwelling unit
increase;
4. Any new or expanding special land use project;
5. Any special purpose project developed on vacant land or nonvacant land, or expanded
within a pre-existing site, if the result is a net increase in dwelling units. The fee shall
be based solely on this net dwelling unit increase;
6. Any other development project not listed above but described in Section 65927 and
65928 of the State Government Code.
"Community purpose facility" means a facility which serves one of the following purposes:
1. Social service activities, including such services as Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts, Boys
and Girls Club, Alcoholics Anonymous and services for the homeless;
2. Public schools;
3. Private schools;
4. Day care;
5. Senior care and recreation;
6. Worship, spiritual growth and development.
H. "Western portion of the City ofChula Vista" generally means that area of the
City located between the City boundary on the west, Interstate 805 on the east,
the City boundary on the north and the City's boundary on the south, as shown
on the map entitled "Figure I" of the Engineering study.
1. "Engineering study" and "Engineer's Report" means the Engineer's Report for
the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee dated February, 2008
and prepared by City staff on file in the Office of the City Clerk.
J. "Regional Arterial System" (RAS) RAS roadways are generally described as
those facilities that act as a critical link in providing direct connections
between communities ensuring system continuity and congestion relief in high
ORD# 1
5-14
volume corridors. They are roadways that are listed in the most recent edition
of SANDAG's Regional Transportation Plan
K. "Special land use" means any nonresidential, non-commercial/office or
nonindustrial development project (e.g., Olympic Training Center, hospitals,
utilities), or non-special purpose project.
1. "Special purpose project" means any for-profit community purpose facility
(e.g., day care).
3.55.030 Public transportation facilities to be fmanced bv the fee.
A. The public transportation facilities ("facilities") which are the subject matter of the fee, are
listed below as detailed in subsection C of this section and in the Engineer's Report on file in
the Office of the City Clerk.
B. The City Council may modify or amend the list of projects in order to maintain compliance
with the circulation element of the City's General Plan.
C. The facilities are as follows:
I. (1-5-1) 1-5/E Street NB off-ramp restriping add lane
2. (1-5-2) 1-5/E Street/Bay Blvd SB off-ramp restriping add lane
3. (1-5-3) 1-5/NB ramp widening at E, H, J, Ind., Palomar & Main Sts
4. (1-5-4) E Street bridge widening over 1-5
5. (1-5-5) F Street bridge widening over 1-5
6. (1-5-6) 1-51B Street NB off-ramp restriping add lane
7. (1-5-7) 1-5/H Street SB off-ramp restriping add lane
8. (1-5-8) H Street bridge widening over 1-5
9. . (1-5-9) 1-5/J Street NB off-ramp restriping add lane
10. (1-5-10) 1-5/J Street undercrossing widening add EB-NB
I I. (1-5-1 I) L Street bridge widening over 1-5 (S/W for peds)
12. (1-5-12) 1-5/Bay Blvd (south ofL St.) SB on/off ramps traffic signal
13. (1-5-13) 1-5/Industrial Blvd NB on/off ramps traffic signal
14. (1-5-14) 1-5/Palomar Street bridge widening
15. (1-5-15) 1-5/Main Street NB on/off ramps traffic signal
16. (1-5-16) 1-5/Main Street bridge widening
5-15
ORD#1
Interstate-80S Improvements
17. (1-805-1) NB on-ramp widening & metering at Bonita, East H St (EB-NB), Telegraph
Canyon Road (Project 1-805-1 is 100% funded in 2006 RTIP with State funds.)
State Route 54 Improvements
18. (SR-54-1) SR-54 WB off-ramp restripe at Broadway
19. (SR-54-2) SR-54 EB off-ramp atN. Fourth Avenue - add ramp lane
Regional Arterial System (RAS) Projects
20. (RAS-1) Bonita Road from First Avenue to 1-805
21. (RAS-2) Broadway from C Street to south of Main Street (City Limits)
22. (RAS-3) E Street improvements - First Ave to Bonita Road/E. Flower St
23. (RAS-4) E Street improvements, 1-5 to 300' east ofNB ramp
24. (RAS-5) E Street LRT grade separation (underpass LRT option)
25. (RAS-6) H Street LRT grade separation (underpass LRT option)
26. (RAS-7) H Street at Broadway EB queue jumper lane & traffic signal modifications
27. (RAS-8) H Street 14' -wide median & street light improvements
28. (RAS-9) H Street widening to 6-lanes from Interstate-5 to Broadway
29. (RAS-10) H Street improvements from Second Ave to Hilltop Drive
(RAS-11) East H St. north side improvements from Hilltop Dr. to 1-805
(RAS-12) L StreetlBay Blvd traffic signal & add turn lanes
(RAS-13) L Street improvements south side west ofIndustrial Blvd
(RAS-14) Telegraph Canyon Road at 1-805 south side sidewalk
(RAS-16) Palomar Street improvements from 1-5 to 1-805
(RAS-18) H St/4th Ave add WB-NB & EB-SB right turn lanes
(RAS-19) H St/4th Ave add WB-NB & EB-SB right turn lanes
ORD#1
5-16
General Plan Impacts and Mitigations
(GP-l) E. St. from Marina Parkway to 1-5
(GP-2) Marina Parkway from E St. to J St.
(GP-3) L St. from Hilltop Drive to 1-805
Parkway (GP-4) Main St. from 1-5 to Broadway
(GP-5) Main St. from Broadway to Hilltop Dr.
(GP-6) Third Avenue from L St. to Palomar St.
(GP-7) H St. from Marina Parkway to 1-5
(GP-8) J St. from Marina Parkway to 1-5
Bicycle & Pedestrilm Facilities Improvements (21 % WTDlF share per GPU)
(BP-I) Bayshore Bikeway (bike path) between E Street & F Streets
(BP-3) Industrial Blvd improvements & bike lanes from L St. to Main Street
(BP-6) Develop bicycle paths & pedestrian access to Third Avenue
Midbayfront Local Coastal Program Roadways
(Mid-I) E Street restripe to add EB-NB dual left turn to NB 1-5 on-ramp.
(Mid-2) I-SIE St. SB off-ramp widening to add fourth lane
(Mid-3) Bay Blvd IS' widening along Westerly Curb Line at E St. approach for ISB/3NB
(Mid-4) I-SIE St. NB widen off-ramp to add 3rd lane for Right Turn only lane
(Mid-5) E St revisions to median and North Curb Line east ofI-5 to add 3rd WB lane.
(Mid-6) Marina Parkway 4-lane fromE St. to J St.
(Mid-7) E St./W oodlawn Ave EB-SB RT lane plus a Traffic Signal
(Mid-8) E St. at Broadway add WB & EB LT lane + WB & EB RT only lane
plus a Traffic Signal & No R1W costs.
(Mid-9) F StlBroadway restriping to provide EB-SB & WB-NB RT lane
(Mid-I 0) H Street widening at Broadway for WB Thru & EB Thru & RT only.
5-17
ORD#1
Other Roadways
(OR-I) N. 4th Avenue/Brisbane Ave traffic signal modifications
(OR-2) Second AvenuelD Street all-way stop installation
3.55.040 Territorv to which fee applicable.
The area of the City of Chula Vista to which the fee herein established shall be applicable is the
territorial limits of the western portion of the City ofChula Vista ("territory") as defined above, as they
may from time to time be amended.
3.55.050 Establishment of a fee.
A development impact fee ("fee") is hereby established to pay for the facilities within the territory. The
fee shall be paid upon the issuance of building permits for each development project within the western
portion of the City of Chuta Vista. The WTDIF fee in the amounts set forth in CVMC 3.55.030 is
hereby established to pay for transportation improvements and facilities within the western portion of
the City of Chula Vista.
3.55.060 Determination of fees bv land use catee:orv.
A. For purposes of this fee, single-family dwelling units shall include single-
family detached homes and detached condominiums; multifamily dwelling
units shall include attached condominiums, townhouses, duplexes, triplexes,
and apartments. The density of the development type shall be based on the
number of dwelling units per gross acre for single-family or multifamily
residential and shall be based upon the densities identified on the approved
tentative map or approved tentative parcel map entitling the development
unless otherwise approved in writing by the City Manager's designee.
B. Commercial/office and industrial development projects shall be charged on a
per acre or per square footage basis. For purposes of this fee, gross acreage
and lor square footage as it applies to the commercial, industrial and office
development types, means all land area that the City Manager's designee
deems necessary within. the boundary of the parcel or parcels of the
development project for which building permits are being requested.
C. The fee multiplied by the total number of dwelling units, square footage or
acres within a given development project represents a developer's fair share
("fair share") for that development proj ect.
3.55.070 Time to determine amount due.
The fee for each development shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance and shall be
the amount as indicated at that time, and not when the tentative map or final map were granted or
applied for, or when the building permit plan check was conducted, or when application was made for
the building permit. No building permit shall be issued unless the development impact fee is paid. The
fees shall be deposited into a WTDIF fund, which is hereby created, and shall be expended only for the
purposes set forth in this chapter. The Director of Finance is authorized to establish various accounts
within the fund for the various improvements and facilities identified in this chapter and to periodically
make expenditures from the fund for the purposes set forth herein in accordance with the facilities
phasing plan or capital improvement plan adopted by the City Council. The City Council finds that
collection of the fees established by this chapter at the time of the building permit is necessary to
5-18
ORD#1
ensure that funds will be available for the construction of facilities concurrent with the need for those
facilities and to ensure certainty in the capital facilities budgeting for the western part of the City.
3.55.080 Purpose and use of fee.
The fees collected shall be used by the City for the following purposes as detennined by the City
Council:
I. To pay for the construction of facilities by the City, or to reimburse
the City for facilities installed by the City with funds from other
sources.
2. To reimburse developers who have been required by
CVMC3.55.l50 A to install improvements that are major streets
and are listed in CVMC 3.55.030.
3. To reimburse developers who have been pennitted to install
improvements pursuant to CVMC 3.55.150 B.
3.55.090 Amount of fee.
A. The fee shall be the amounts as set forth below in Table I. The fee shall be adjusted on July I
of each year beginning in 2009. The annual inflation adjustment will be 2 % or based on
Caltrans highway construction cost index, whichever is higher. The program collects 2% ofthe
total improvement cost estimate for staff administration and an additional 1 % for SANDAG
Administrative costs.
B. Adjustments of the fee based upon the annual inflation adjustment or the Caltrans Highway
Construction Cost Index shall be automatic and shall not require further action by the City
Council. The WTmp may also be reviewed and amended by the City Council as necessary
based on changes in the type, size, location or cost of the facilities to be financed by the fee;
changes in land use designation in the City's General Plan; and upon other sound engineering,
fmancing and planning infonnation.
5-19
ORD# 1
Pro Dosed TDIF Fee Der EDU: I $3,243.00
LaDd Use Classification EO Us TO IF Rate
RESIDENTIAL
Residential (LOW) 0-6 dwellino units per acre I ner EDU $3,243 I DU
Residential (MED) 6.1 To 20 dwelling units per acre .8 per EDU $2,594 I DU
Residential (HIGH) Over 20 dwelling units per acre .6 per EDU $1,9461 DU
Mobile Home .5 per EDU $1,6221 DU
COMMERCIAL
Contain 1-5 major dept. stores & usually have
Imore than 50 tenants. Typically larger than 40
Regional Commercial acres. 20EDU/Acre $64,860 I Acre
Smaller in that size than regional. Contain junior
Ioept. Store or variety Store,( i.e. Target Center
Iwith other commercial stores)as a major tenant
and have 15 to 50 other tenants. Smaller in size,
Community Commercial 8-20 acres. . 28EDU/Acre $90,804 I Acre
lNeighborhood Commercial Less than 10 acres. Includes supermarket and
drug store. Mav include office SDaces. 48EDUlAcre $155,664/Acre
N'eicl1borhood Commercial Same as above but in Square Footage 4.8 EDU/KSF $15,664/KSF
Conunercial activities found along major streets,
bot in a planned center with limited on-site
Street Front Commercial IDarking. 16EDU/Acre $51,888IAcre
etail Commercial SDecialty RetaiVStrip Commercial 16EDU/Acre $51,888/KSF
liTsually located near transportation facilities.
Structures are usually large and cover majority of
~e parcel. Examples are clothing and supply,
Wholesale Trade also includes swap meet areas. 24 EDUI Acre $77,832/Acre
OFFICE
High Rise Office More than 100,000 S.F. and 6+ Stories 60EDU/Acre $194,580 I Acre
Low Rise Office < 6 Stories 30EDU/Acre $97,290 I Acre
LOW Rise Office (in thousands < 6 Stories
of square feet) 2 EDU/KSF $6,486 I KSF
Medical Office Medical and Dental Facilities 50EDU/Acre $162,150/ Acre
LODGING
LOW Rise HoteVMotel < 4 Stories 20EDUlAcre $64,860 I Acre
Low Rise Hotel or Motel < 4 Stories I EDU/Room $3,243 I Room
Hicl1 Rise Hotel >=4 Stories 30/EDUI Acre $97,290IAcre
INDUSTRY
Shipbuilding, airframe, and aircraft
manufacturing. Usually located next to
Heavv Industry transportation facilities and commercial areas.
Parcels are tvDicallv 20-50 Acre. 12EDU/Acre $38,916/Acre
Usually large buildings located near freeways,
Warehouse IStorage industrial or strio commercial areas. 6EDU/Acre $19,458 I Acre
Office/iDdustrial uses clustered into a center. The
primary uses are industrial by may include high
percentages of other uses in service or retail
Industrial Park activities. 9EDU/Acre $29,187 I Acre
Licl1t Industrial <>.11 other industrial uses and manufacturing not
lincluded in cateoories above. 20EDU/Acre $64,860 I Acre
Table 1
PROPOSED WTDIF FEE PER LAND USE CLASSIFICATION
5-20
ORD# 1
3.55.100 Development proiects exempt from the fee.
A. Development projects by public agencies shall be exempt from the provisions of the fee if those
projects are designed to provide the public service for which the agency is charged ("public
purpose").
B. Community purpose facilities which are not operated for profit ("nonprofit community purpose
facilities") are also exempt inasmuch as these institutions provide benefit to the community as a
whole, including all land use categories which are the subject matter of the fee. The City
Council hereby determines that it is appropriate to spread any impact such nonprofit
community purpose facilities might have to the other land use categories subject to the fee. In
the event that a court determines that the exemption herein extended to community purpose
facilities shall for any reason be invalid, the City Council hereby allocates the nonprofit
community purpose facilities' fair share to the City of Chula Vista and not to any of the land
use categories which are the subject matter of the development impact land use categories.
C. Development projects which are additions or expansions to existing dwelling units or
businesses, except special land use projects, shall be exempt if the addition or expansion does
not result in a net increase in dwelling units or commerciaVindustrial acreage.
3.55.110 Authority for accountinl!: and expenditures.
A. The fees collected shall be deposited into a Western Transportation Development Impact Fee
financing fund ("WTDIF fee fund," or "fund"), which is hereby created and shall be expended
only for the purposes set forth in this chapter.
B. The director of finance is authorized to establish a single fund for the various facilities
identified in this chapter and to periodically make expenditures from the fund for the purposes
set forth herein.
3.55.120 Findinl!:s.
The City Council fmds that:
A. Collection of the fee established by this chapter at the time of the building permit issuance is
necessary to provide funds for the transportation facilities identified in CVMC 3.55.030 and to
ensure certainty in the capital facilities budgeting for growth impacted public transportation
facilities; and
B. The purpose of the Fees hereby enacted prevents new development from reducing the quality
and availability of public transportation infrastructure facilities provided to residents of the City
by requiring new development to contribute to the cost of additional capital transportation
infrastructure improvements needed to meet the growth generated by such development; and
C. The revenue from the fees hereby enacted will be used to construct public facilities and
infrastructure and pay for other capital expenditures needed to serve new development as
identified in the Engineer's Report dated February, 2008; and
D. Based on analysis presented in the Engineer's Report there is a reasonable relationship between
I. The use of the fees and the types of development projects on which they are imposed and
2. The need for facilities and the types of development projects on which the fees are imposed.
3. The amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility or portion of the public facility
attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.
5-21
ORD# 1
3.55.130 Fee additional to other fees and char!!es.
This fee is in addition to the requirements imposed by other City laws, policies or regulations relating
to the construction or the financing of the construction of public improvements within subdivisions or
developments
3.55.150 Developer construction of transportation facilities.
A. Whenever a developer of a development project would be required by application of City law
or policy, as a condition of approval of a development permit to construct or finance the
construction of a portion of a transportation facility identified in Section 3.55.030 the City
Council may impose an additional requirement that the developer install the improvements
with supplemental size, length or capacity in order to ensure efficient and timely construction
of the transportation facilities network. If such a requirement is imposed, the City Council
shall, in its discretion, enter into a reimbursement agreement with the developer, or give a
credit against the fee otherwise levied by this chapter on the development project, or some
combination thereof.
B. Whenever a developer requests reimbursement, or a credit against fees, for work to be done or
paid for by the developer under subsection (A) of this section, the request shall be submitted in
writing to the City Manager's designee.
1. The request shall contain a description of the project with a detailed cost estimate
which itemizes those costs of the construction attributable to the transportation facility
project and excludes any work attributable to a specific subdivision project. The
estimate is preliminary and the amount of reimbursement or credit against fees is
subject to final determination by the City Manager's designee. Additional information
shall be provided to the City by the developer upon request of the City.
2. Such reimbursement or credit against fees shall be subject to the following conditions:
a. Requirements of Developer.
i. Preparation of plans and specifications for approval by the City;
ii. Secure and dedicate any right-of-way required for the transportation facility
project;
iii. Secure all required permits and environmental clearances necessary for the
transportation facility project;
iv. Provision of performance bonds (where the developer intends to utilize provisions
for immediate credit, the performance bond shall be for 100 percent of the value of the
transportation facility project);
v. Payment of all City fees and costs.
b. The City will not be responsible for any of the costs of constructing the
transportation facility project. The developer shall advance all necessary funds to construct the
transportation facility project.
c. The developer shall secure at least three qualified bids for work to be done and shall
award the construction contract to the lowest qualified bidder. The developer may combine the
construction of the transportation facility project with other development-related work and
award one construction contract for the combined work based on a clearly identified process
for determining the low bidder, all as approved by the City Manager's designee. Should the
construction contract be awarded to a qualified bidder who did not submit the lowest bid for
the transportation facility project portion of the contract, the developer will only receive
transportation development impact fee credit based on the lowest bid for the transportation
facility portion of the contract. Any claims for additional payment for extra work or charges
shall be justified, shall be documented to the satisfaction of the City Manager's designee and
5-22
ORD#1
shall only be reimbursed at the prices for similar work included in the lowest bid for the
transportation facility portion of the contract.
d. Upon complying with the conditions set forth in subsections (B)(1) and (B)(2)(a) of
this section as determined by the City and upon approval of the estimated cost by the City
Manager's designee, the developer shall be entitled to immediate credit for 50 percent of the
estimated cost of the construction attributable to the transportation facility project. Once the
developer has received valid bids for the project which comply with subsection (B)(2)( c) of
this section, entered into binding contracts for the construction of the proj ect, and met the
conditions set forth in subsections (B)(1) and (B)(2)(a) of this section as determined by the
City, all of which have been approved by the City Manager's designee, the amount of the
immediate credit shall be increased to 75 percent of the bid amount attributable to the
transportation facility project. The immediate credits shall be applied to the developer's
obligation to pay transportation development impact fees for building permits issued after the
establishment of the credit. The developer shall specify these building permits to which the
credit is to be applied at the time the developer submits the building permit applications.
e. If the developer uses all of the immediate credit before final completion of the
transportation facility project, then the developer may defer payment of development impact
fees for other building permits by providing to the City liquid security such as cash or an
irrevocable letter of credit, but not bonds or set -aside letters, in an amount equal to the
remaining amount of the estimated cost of the transportation facility project.
f. When all work has been completed to the satisfaction of the City, the developer shall
submit verification of payments made for the construction of the transportation facility proj ect
to the City. The City Manager's designee shan make the final determination on expenditures
which are eligible for credit or cash reimbursement.
g. After final determination of eligible expenditures has been made by the City
Manager's designee and the developer has complied with the conditions set forth in subsection
(B) of this section, the final amount of transportation development impact fee credits shall be
determined by the City Manager's designee. The developer shall receive credit against the
deferred fee obligation in an amount equal to the difference between the fmal expenditure
determination and the amount of the 75 percent immediate credit used, if any. The City shall
notify the developer of the final deferred fee obligation, and of the amount of the applicable
credit. If the amount of the applicable credit is less than the deferred fee obligation, then the
developer shall have 30 days to pay the deferred fee. If the deferred fees are not paid within the
3D-day period, the City may make a demand against the liquid security and apply the proceeds
to the fee obligation.
h. At the time building permits are issued for the developer's project, the City win
incrementally apply credit which the developer has accrued in lieu of collecting the required
transportation development impact fees. The amount of the credit to be applied to each
building permit shan be based upon the fee schedule in effect at the time of the building permit
issuance. The City Manager's designee shall convert such credit to an EDU basis for
residential development and/or a gross acre basis for commercial or industrial development for
purposes of determining the amount of credit to be applied to each building permit.
i. If the total eligible construction cost for the transportation facility project is more than
the total transportation development impact fees which will be required for the developer's
project, then the amount in excess of development impact fees will be paid in cash when funds
are available as determined by the City Manager; a reimbursement agreement will be executed;
or the developer may waive reimbursement and use the excess as credit against future
transportation development impact fee obligations. The City may, in its discretion, enter into
an agreement with the developer to convert excess credit into EDU and/or gross acre credits for
5-23
ORD#1
use against future development impact fee obligations at the fee rate in effect on the date of the
agreement.
j. The requirements of this subsection (B) of this section may, in the City's discretion,
be modified through an agreement between the developer and the City and approved by City
Council.
C. Whenever a transportation development impact fee credit is generated by
constructing a transportation facility using assessment district or community
facilities district financing, the credit shall only be applied to the
transportation development impact fee obligations within that district.
3.55.160 Procedure for fee waiver or reduction.
A. Any developer who, because of the nature or type of uses proposed for a
development project, contends that application of the fee imposed by this
chapter is unconstitutional, or unrelated to mitigation of the traffic needs or
burdens of the development, may apply to the City Council for a waiver,
reduction, or deferral of the fee. A development which is designed and
intended as a temporary use (10 years or less) and which is conducted in
facilities which are, by their nature, short-term interim facilities such as a
portable or modular building (including mobile homes, trailers, etc.) may
qualify for a waiver, reduction, or deferral. In addition, a deferral may be
granted on the basis of demonstrated economic hardship on the condition that:
(1) the use offers a significant public benefit; (2) the amount deferred bears
interest at a fair market rate so as to constitute an approximate value
equivalent to a cash payment; and (3) the amount deferred is adequately
secured by agreement with the applicant. Unless the requirement for timely
filing is waived by the City, the application shall be made in writing and filed
with the City Clerk not later than 10 days after notice of the public hearing on
the development permit application or the project is given, or if no
development permit is required, at the time of the filing of the building permit
application. The application shall state in detail the factual basis for the claim
of waiver or reduction.
B. The City Council shall consider the application at a public hearing on same,
notice of which need not be published other than by description on the agenda
of the meeting at which the public hearing is held. Said public hearing should
be held within 60 days after its filing. The decision of the City Council shall
be final. If a deferral, reduction or waiver is granted, it should be granted
pursuant to an agreement with the applicant, and the property owner, if
different from the applicant, providing that any change in use within the
project shall subject the development to payment of the full fee. The procedure
provided by this section is additional to any other procedure authorized by law
for protesting or challenging the fee imposed by this chapter.
3.55.170 ExemDtions.
Development projects by public agencies shall be exempt from the provisions of this fee. Exempt
development uses with the following characteristics or activities as a principal use of land, generally
described as "community purpose facility" as defined above in CVMC Section 3.55.020.
ORD#1
5-24
3.55.180 Assessment districts.
If any assessment or special taxing district is established for any or all of the facilities listed in Section
3.55.030 the owner or developer of a project may apply to the City Council for a credit against the fee
in an amount equal to the development's attributable portion of the cost of the authorized
improvements as determined by the City Manager's designee, plus incidental costs normally occurring
with a construction proj ect, but excluding costs associated with assessment district proceedings or
fmancing.
3.55.190 Economic incentive credit.
The City Council may authorize the City to participate in the financing of transportation facility
projects or portions of transportation facility projects as defmed in Section 3.55.030 at the time of the
appropriation of funds by City Council for the construction of an eligible transportation facility, the
City shall be eligible to receive a credit known hereafter as an economic incentive credit. Such
economic incentive credit may be applied to development impact fee obligations for those projects
which the City Council determines, in its sole discretion, to be beneficial to the City. The use of the
economic incentive credit may be subject to conditions which shall be set forth in a written agreement
between the developer of the project and the City and approved by City Council.
The City may receive economic incentive credit only for those eligible projects identified in Section
3.55.030 for amounts of funding not identified in the fmancial. and engineering study "Western
Transportation Development Impact Fee" report dated February 2008.
3.55.195 Fund loans.
A.
B.
Loans by the City. The City may loan funds to the fund to pay for
facilities should the fund have insufficient funds to cover the cost of
said facility. Said loans, if granted, shall be approved upon the adoption
of the annual City budget or upon resolution of the City Council and
shall carry interest rates as set by the City Council for each fiscal year.
A schedule for repayment of said loans shall be established at the time
they are made and approved by the Council, with a maximum term not
to exceed the life of the fund.
Developer Loans. A developer may loan funds to the City as outlined
in CVMC 3.55.150. The City may repay said developer loans with
interest, under the terms listed in subsection (A) of this section.
3.55.200 Effective date.
This chapter shall become effective
SECTION 3: Effective Date
This Ordinance shall become effective 60 days after its second reading and adoption.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Jack Griffm
Engineering and General Services Director
Ann Moore
City Attorney
5-25
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING
THE WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT
FEE REPORT (TF-358) PREPARED BY STAFF AND
ESTABLISHING A WESTERN TRANSPORTATION
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAM TO MITIGATE
TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS WITHIN WESTERN CHULA
VISTA INCLUDING PROJECTS - 1-5-17, STM-36l, RAS-15 AND
BP-5
WHEREAS, the adoption of the City's General plan indicated that future growth was going to
occur in the City west ofl-805; and
WHEREAS, the traffic studies for the City's General Plan and the Urban Core Specific Plan
show the City's transportation network will be impacted by new development within the western
portion of the City unless new transportation facilities are added to accommodate the new
development; and
WHEREAS, since January 1987, the City has had a program in place for the collection of a
transportation development impact fee for the financing of street improvements in the area east of
Interstate 805.
WHEREAS, the Engineer's Report establishes that the transportation facilities necessitated by
development within the western portion of the City comprise an integrated network; and
WHEREAS, the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee is solely based upon that
portion of the project costs which are attributable to new development; and
WHEREAS, on March 4, 2008, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista held a duly noticed
public hearing at which oral or written presentations regarding the Western Transportation
Development Impact Fee could be made; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Municipal Code and California Government Code Sections 66000,
et. seq., the City Council has accepted a report entitled "Engineer's Report for the Western
Transportation Development Impact Fee" ("Engineer's Report") dated February, 2008 that analyzed
the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee necessary to fund transportation facilities needed
to serve future development within the western portion of the City; and
WHEREAS, the City's 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 defmed 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; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista is placing this ordinance on its first
reading which will establish a development impact fee per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) to finance
transportation facilities within the western portion of the City of Chula Vista; and
ORD#2
5-26
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 66017(a), the fees proposed by this
ordinance will not become effective until sixty (60) days after its first reading; and
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED, that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
does hereby adopt Chapter 3.55 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code relating to transportation
development impact fees to pay for various transportation facilities located on the westside of the City
as follows:
SECTION 1: Findings
The City Council finds, after consideration of the evidence presented to it including the "Engineer's
Report for the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee" dated February, 2008, that the
creation of a transportation development impact fee is necessary in order to assure that there are
sufficient fimds available to finance the transportation facilities necessary to serve development west
ofI-805; and
The City Council fmds that new development within the western portion of the City of Chula Vista
should be required to mitigate the burden created by development through the construction of
transportation facilities; and
The City Council finds, based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, and consistent with the
City's General Plan, and the various reports and information received by the City Council in the
ordinary course of its business, that the imposition of traffic impact fees on all development within the
western portion of the City of Chula Vista for which building permits have not been issued is
necessary in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare by providing for the public
transportation facilities to assure effective implementation of the City's General Plan; and
The City Council finds that the amount of the proposed fees levied by this ordinance does not exceed
the estimated cost of providing the transportation facilities.
SECTION 2: Chapter 3.55 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is hereby adopted and shall read as
follows:
3.55.010 General intent.
The City's General Plan Land Use and Transportation Element requires that adequate public facilities
be available to accommodate increased population created by new development within the City of
Chula Vista.
The City Council has determined that new development will create adverse impacts on the City's
existing public transportation facilities which must be mitigated by the financing and construction of
certain public transportation facilities which are the subject of this chapter. New development
contributes to the cumulative burden on these public transportation facilities in direct relationship to
the. amount of vehicular traffic and population generated by the development or the gross acreage of
the commercial or industrial land in the development.
The City Council has determined that a reasonable means of financing the public transportation
facilities is to charge a fee on all developments within the western portion of the City. imposition of
the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee on all new development for which building
5-27
ORa # 2
permits have not yet been issued is necessary in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare,
thereby ensuring effective implementation of the City's General Plan.
3.55.020 Definitions.
For the purposes of this chapter, the following words or phrases shall be construed as defined herein,
unless from the context it appears that a different meaning is intended.
A. "Building permit" means a permit required by and issued pursuant to the
Uniform Building Code.
B. "City Engineer" means the City Engineer, the City Engineer's designee or the
City Manager's designee.
C. "Density" means dwelling units per gross acre identified for each planning
area shown on the approved tentative map or approved tentative parcel map or
as determined by the City Manager's designee.
D. "Developer" means the owner or developer of a development.
E. "Development permit" means any discretionary permit, entitlement or
approval for a development project issued under any zoning or subdivision
ordinance of the City.
F. "Development project" or "development" means any activity described as the
following:
1. Any new residential dwelling unit developed on vacant land;
2. Any new commercial/office or industrial development constructed on vacant land;
3. Any expansions to established developments or new developments on nonvacant land in
those land use categories listed in subsections (F)(l) and (2) of this section, if the result
is a net increase in dwelling units. The fee shall be based solely on this net dwelling unit
mcrease;
4. Any new or expanding special land use project;
5. Any special purpose project developed on vacant land or nonvacant land, or expanded
within a pre-existing site, if the result is a net increase in dwelling units. The fee shall
be based solely on this net dwelling unit increase;
6. Any other development project not listed above but described in Section 65927 and
65928 of the State Government Code.
"Community purpose facility" means a facility which serves one of the following purposes:
1. Social service activities, including such services as Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts, Boys
and Girls Club, Alcoholics Anonymous and services for the homeless;
2. Public schools;
3. Private schools;
4. Day care;
5. Senior care and recreation;
6. Worship, spiritual growth and development.
H. "Western portion of the City of Chula Vista" generally means that area of the
City located between the City boundary on the west, Interstate 805 on the east,
the City boundary on the north and the City's boundary on the south, as shown
on the map entitled "Figure 1" of the Engineering study.
1. "Engineering study" and "Engineer's Report" means the Engineer's Report for
the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee dated February, 2008
and prepared by City staff on file in the Office of the City Clerk.
J. "Regional Arterial System" (RAS) RAS roadways are generally described as
those facilities that act as a critical link in providing direct connections
between communities ensuring system continuity and congestion relief in high
ORD#2
5-28
volume corridors. They are roadways that are listed in the most recent edition
of SANDAG's Regional Transportation Plan
K. "Special land use" means any nonresidential, non-commercial/office or
nonindustrial development project (e.g., Olympic Training Center, hospitals,
utilities), or non-special purpose project.
1. "Special purpose project" means any for-profit community purpose facility
(e.g., day care).
3.55.030 Public transDortation facilities to be financed bv the fee.
A. The public transportation facilities ("facilities") which are the subject matter of the fee, are
listed below as detailed in subsection C of this section and in the Engineer's Report on file in
the Office of the City Clerk.
B. The City Council may modify or amend the list of projects in order to maintain compliance
with the circulation element of the City's General Plan.
C. The facilities are as follows:
I. (1-5-1) 1-5/E Street NB off-ramp restriping add lane
2. (1-5-2) 1-5/E Street/Bay Blvd SB off-ramp restriping add lane
3. (1-5-3) I-5INB ramp widening at E, H, J, Ind., Palomar & Main S18 (21 %)
4. (1-5-4) E Street bridge widening over 1-5 (250' X 20' X $350/sf)
5. (1-5-5) F Street bridge widening over 1-5 (250' X 20' X $350/sf
6. (1-5-6) I-5/H Street NB off-ramp restriping add lane
7. (1-5-7) I-5/H Street SB off-ramp restriping add lane
8. (1-5-8) H Street bridge widening over 1-5 (200'X40'X$350/sf)
9. (1-5-9) I-5/J Street NB off-ramp restriping add lane
10. (1-5-10) I-5/J Street undercrossing widening add EB-NB (175x20X$350)
II. (1-5-11) L Street bridge widening over 1-5 (S/W for peds 300' X 12')(21 %)
12. (1-5-12) 1-5/Bay Blvd (south ofL St.) SB on/off ramps traffic signal
13. (1-5-13) 1-5/Industrial Blvd NB on/offramps traffic signal
14. (1-5-14) 1-5/Palomar Street bridge widening (2751fX 501fX $350/sf)
15. (1-5-15) I-5/Main Street NB on/off ramps traffic signal (CV share $120k)
16. (1-5-16) 1-5/Main Street bridge widening (2751fX 20lfX $350/sf)
17. (1-5-17) 1-5 HOV & Managed Lanesfrom SR905 to SR54 (63.4% in CJ1
18. STM 361
5-29
ORD # 2
a. 1-5 Multi-Modal Corridor Study (80% Fed. DEMO funds)
b. (SANDAG cost estimate is $4.3M & CV share TBD.)
Interstate-805 Improvements
19. (1-805-1) NB on-ramp widening & metering at Bonita, East H St (EB-NB),
Telegraph Canyon Road (project 1-805-1 is 100% funded in 2006 RTIP with State
funds.)
State Route 54 Improvements
20. (SR-54-1) SR-54 WB off-ramp restripe at Broadway
21. (SR-54-2) SR-54 EB off-ramp at N. Fourth Avenue - add ramp lane
Regional Arterial System (RAS) Projects
22. (RAS-I) Bonita Road from First Avenue to 1-805
23. (RAS-2) Broadway from C Street to south of Main Street (City Limits)
24. (RAS-3) E Street improvements - First Ave to Bonita RoadIE. Flower St
25. (RAS-4) E Street improvements, 1-5 to 300' east ofNB ramp
26. (RAS-5) E Street LRT grade separation (underpass LRT option)
27. (RAS-6) H Street LRT grade separation (underpass LRT option)
28. (RAS- 7) H Street at Broadway EB queue jumper lane & traffic signal modifications
29. (RAS-8) H Street 14'-wide median & street light improvements (same as RAS-9)
30. (RAS-9) H Street widening to 6-lanes from Interstate-5 to Broadway
31. (RAS-10) H Street improvements from Second Ave to Hilltop Drive
32. (RAS-11) East H St. north side improvements from Hilltop Dr. to 1-805
33. (RAS-12) L StreetlBay Blvd traffic signal & add turn lanes
34. (RAS-13) L Street improvements south side west of Industrial Blvd
35. (RAS-14) Telegraph Canyon Road at 1-805 south side sidewalk
36. (RAS-15) Orange Avenuefrom Palomar Street to Hilltop Drive
37. (RAS-16) Palomar Street improvements from 1-5 to 1-805
38. (RAS-18) H St/4th Ave add WB-NB & EB-SB right turn lanes
ORD # 2
5-30
39. (RAS-19) H St/4th Ave add WB-NB & EB-SB right turn lanes
General Plan Impacts and Mitigations
40. (GP-l) E. St. from Marina to 1-5
41. (GP-2) Marina Parkway from E-J St.
42. (GP-3) L St. from Hilltop to 1-805
43. (GP-4) Main St. from 1-5 to Broadway
44. (GP-5) Main St. from Broadway to Hilltop Dr.
45. (GP-6) Third Avenue from L St. to Palomar St.
46. (GP-7) H St. from Marina to 1-5
47. (GP-8) J St. from Marina to 1-5
Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities Improvements (21 % WTDIF share per GPU)
48. (BP-l) Bayshore Bikeway (bike path) between E Street & F Streets
49. (BP-3) Industrial Blvd improvements & bike lanes from L St. to Main Street
50. (BP-5) Orange Ave. bike lanes from Palomar St. to Hilltop Drive
51. (BP-6) Develop bicycle paths & pedestrian access to Third Avenue
Midbayfront Local Coastal Program Roadways
52. (Mid-I) E Street restripe to add EB-NB dual left turn to NB 1-5 on-ramp.
53. (Mid-2) I-5/E St. SB off-ramp widening to add fourth lane
54. (Mid-3) Bay Blvd 15' widening along Westerly Curb Line at E St. approach for
lSB/3NB
55. (Mid-4) I-5/E St. NB widen off-ramp to add 3rd lane for Right Turn only lane
56. (Mid-5) E St revisions to median and North Curb Line east of 1-5 to add 3rd WB
lane.
57. (Mid-6) Marina Parkway 4-lane from ESt. to J St.
58. (Mid-7) E St./Woodlawn Ave EB-SB RTlane plus a Traffic Signal)
59. (Mid-8) E St. at Broadway add WB & EB LT lane + WB & EB RT only lane. plus
a Traffic Signal & No R/W costs.
60. (Mid-9) F StlBroadway restriping to provide EB-SB & WB-NB RT lane
ORD#2
5-31
61. (Mid-lO) H Street widening at Broadway for WB Thru & EB Thru & RT only.
Other Roadways
62. (OR-I) N. 4th AvenueIBrisbane Ave traffic signal modifications
63. (OR-2) Second Avenue/D Street all-way stop installation
3.55.040 Territorv to which fee applicable.
The area of the City of Chula Vista to which the fee herein established shall be applicable is the
territorial limits of the western portion of the City of Chula Vista ("territory") as defined above, as they
may from time to time be amended.
3.55.050 Establishment of a fee.
A development impact fee ("fee") is hereby established to pay for the facilities within the territory. The
fee shall be paid upon the issuance of building permits for each development project within the western
portion of the City of Chula Vista. The WTDIF fee in the amounts set forth in CVMe 3.55.030 is
hereby established to pay for transportation improvements and facilities within the western portion of
the City of Chula Vista.
3.55.060 Determination offees bv land use cateeorv.
A. For purposes of this fee, single-family dwelling units shall include single-
family detached homes and detached condominiums; multifamily dwelling
units shall include attached condominiums, townhouses, duplexes, triplexes,
and apartments. The density of the development type shall be based on the
number of dwelling units per gross acre for single-family or multifamily
residential and shall be based upon the densities identified on the approved
tentative map or approved tentative parcel map entitling the development
unless otherwise approved in writing by the City Manager's designee.
B. Commercial/office and industrial development projects shall be charged on a
per acre or per square footage basis. For purposes of this fee, gross acreage
and lor square footage as it applies to the commercial, industrial and office
development types, means all land area that the City Manager's designee
deems necessary within the boundary of the parcel or parcels of the
development project for which building permits are being requested.
C. The fee multiplied by the total number of dwelling units, square footage or
acres within a given development project represents a developer's fair share
("fair share") for that development proj ect.
3.55.070 Time to determine amount due.
The fee for each development shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance and shall be
the amount as indicated at that time, and not when the tentative map or final map were granted or
applied for, or when the building permit plan check was conducted, or when application was made for
the building permit. No building permit shall be issued unless the development impact fee is paid. The
fees shall be deposited into a WTDIF fund, which is hereby created, and shall be expended only for the
purposes set forth in this chapter. The Director of Finance is authorized to establish various accounts
within the fund for the various improvements and facilities identified in this chapter and to periodically
make expenditures from the fund for the purposes set forth herein in accordance with the facilities
phasing plan or capital improvement plan adopted by the City Council. The City Council fmds that
ORD#2
5-32
collection of the fees established by this chapter at the time of the building permit is necessary to
ensure that funds will be available for the construction of facilities concurrent with the need for those
facilities and to ensure certainty in the capital facilities budgeting for the western part of the City.
5-33
QRD#2
3.55.080 PurJlose and use offee.
The fees collected shall be used by the City for the following purposes as determined by the City
Council:
1. To pay for the construction of facilities by the City, or to reimburse
the City for facilities installed by the City with funds from other
sources.
2. To reimburse developers who have been required by
CVMC3.55.150 A to install improvements that are major streets
and are listed in CVMC 3.55.030.
3. To reimburse developers who have been permitted to install
improvements pursuant to CVMC 3.55.150 B.
3.55.090 Amount of fee.
A. The fee shall be the amounts as set forth below in Table 1. The fee shall be adjusted on July I
of each year beginning in 2009. The annual inflation adjustment will be 2 % or based on
Caltrans highway construction cost index, whichever is higher. The program collects 2% of the
total improvement cost estimate for staff administration and an additional 1 % for SANDAG
Administrative costs.
B. Adjustments of the fee based upon the annual inflation adjustment or the Caltrans Highway
Construction Cost Index shall be automatic and shall not require further action by the City
Council. The WTDIF may also be reviewed and amended by the City Council as necessary
based on changes in the type, size, location or cost of the facilities to be fmanced by the fee;
changes in land use designation in the City's General Plan; and upon other sound engineering,
fmancing and planning information.
ORD#2
5-34
ProDosed TDIF Fee Der EDU: I $3,243.00
",:..,_" ..,..,...::.._.,".'..:.,...>.,:.'.:.;....:...".;:,:..:..:"",_,:"_'C T , , ED Us TDIF Rate
Land Use Classifi.atiiin' , " "
RESIDENTIAL ,
esidential (LOW) 0-6 dwellin~ units oer acre 1 oer EDU $3,2431 DU
Residential (MEm 6.1 To 20 dwellin~ units Der acre .8 per EDU $2,5941 DU
Residential !HIGH) Over 20 dwellin~ units oer acre .6perEDU $1,946/DU
Mobile Home .5 per EDU $1,6221 DU
COMMERCIAL
Contain 1-5 major dept. stores & usually have
!more than 50 tenants. Typically larger than 40
Re~ional Commercial acres. 20EDU/Acre $64,860 1 Acre
Smaller in that size than regional. Contain junior
lDep!. Store or variety Store,( I.e. Target Center
with other commercial stores)as a maj or tenant
Community Commercial and have 15 to 50 other tenants. Smaller in size,
8-20 acres. 28EDU/Acre $90,804 1 Acre
Neiwborhood Commercial Less than 10 acres. Includes supermarket and
dru~ store. Mav include office soaces. 48EDU/Acre $155,6641 Acre
~eiwborhood Commercial Same as above but in Souare Foota.e 4.8EDU/KSF $15,664/KSF
Commercial activities found along major streets,
bot in a planned center with limited on-site
Street Front Commercial oarking. 16EDU/Acre $51,8881 Acre
Retail Commercial Soecialty RetaiIJStrio Commercial 16EDU/Acre $51,888/KSF
Usually located near transportation facilities.
Structures are usually large and cover majority of
Ithe parcel. Examples are clothing and supply,
Wholesale Trade also includes swao meet areas. 24EDU/Acre $77.832/Acre
OFFICE
Hiw Rise Office More than 100,000 S.F. and 6+ Stories 60EDU/Acre $194,5801 Acre
Low Rise Office < 6 Stories 30EDU/Acre $97,290/Acre
LOW Rise Office (in thousands < 6 Stories
of souare feen 2 EDU/KSF $6,4861 KSF
Medical Office Medical and Dental Facilities 50EDU/Acre $162,1501 Acre
LODGING ,
Low Rise HotelJMotel < 4 Stories , 20EDU/Acre $64,8601 Acre
Low Rise Hotel or Motel < 4 Stories ' 1 EDU/Room $3,243 1 Room
lHigh Rise Hotel 1>=4 Stories 30/EDU/Acre $97,2901 Acre
INDUSTRY
Shipbuilding, airframe, and aircraft
manufacturing. Usually located next to
Heavv Industry tTansportation facilities and commercial areas.
Darcels are tvoicallv 20-50 Acre. 12EDU/Acre $38,916/Acre
Usually large buildings located near freeways,
Warehouse IStora~e industrial or strin commercial areas. 6EDU/Acre $19,4581 Acre
Office/industrial uses clustered into a center. The
primary uses are industrial by may include high
percentages of other uses in service or retail
Industrial Park activities. 9EDU/Acre $29,1871 Acre
111.11 other industrial uses and manufacturing not
Liwt Industrial included in cate~ories above. 20EDU/Acre $64,8601 Acre
Table 1
PROPOSED WTDIF FEE PER LAND USE CLASSIFICATION
ORD#2
5-35
3.55.100 Development proiects exempt from the fee.
A. Development projects by public agencies shall be exempt from the provisions of the fee if those
projects are designed to provide the public service for which the agency is charged ("public
purpose").
B. Community purpose facilities which are not operated for profit ("nonprofit community purpose
facilities") are also exempt inasmuch as these institutions provide benefit to the community as a
whole, including all land use categories which are the subject matter of the fee. The City
Council hereby determines that it is appropriate to spread any impact such nonprofit
community purpose facilities might have to the other land use categories subject to the fee. In
the event that a court determines that the exemption herein extended to community purpose
facilities shall for any reason be invalid, the City Council hereby allocates the nonprofit
community purpose facilities' fair share to the City of Chula Vista and not to any of the land
use categories which are the subject matter of the development impact land use categories.
C. Development projects which are additions or expansions to existing dwelling units or
businesses, except special land use projects, shall be exempt if the addition or expansion does
not result in a net increase in dwelling units or commercial/industrial acreage.
3.55.110 Authority for accountine and expenditures.
A. The fees collected shall be deposited into a Western Transportation Development Impact Fee
financing fund ("WTDIF fee fund," or "fund"), which is hereby created and shall be expended
only for the purposes set forth in this chapter.
B. The director of finance is authorized to establish a single fund for the various facilities
identified in this chapter and to periodically make expenditures from the fund for the purposes
set forth herein.
3.55.120 Findines.
The City Council finds that:
A. Collection of the fee established by this chapter at the time of the building permit issuance is
necessary to provide funds for the transportation facilities identified in CVMC 3.55.030 and to
ensure certainty in the capital facilities budgeting for growth impacted public transportation
facilities; and
B. The purpose of the Fees hereby enacted prevents new development from reducing the quality
and availability of public transportation infrastructure facilities provided to residents of the City
by requiring new development to contribute to the cost of additional capital transportation
infrastructure improvements needed to meet the growth generated by such development; and
C. The revenue from the fees hereby enacted will be used to construct public facilities and
infrastructure and pay for other capital expenditures needed to serve new development as
identified in the Engineer's Report dated February, 2008; and
D. Based on analysis presented in the Engineer's Report there is a reasonable relationship between
I. The use of the fees and the types of development projects on which they are imposed and
2. The need for facilities and the types of development projects on which the fees are imposed.
3. The amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility or portion of the public facility
attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.
ORD#2
5-36
3.55.130 Fee additional to other fees and chare:es.
This fee is in addition to the requirements imposed by other City laws, policies or regulations relating
to the construction or the fmancing of the construction of public improvements within subdivisions or
developments
3.55.150 Developer construction of transportation facilities.
A. Whenever a developer of a development project would be required by application of City law
or policy, as a condition of approval of a development permit to construct or finance the
construction of a portion of a transportation facility identified in Section 3.55.030 the City
Council may impose an additional requirement that the developer install the improvements
with supplemental size, length or capacity in order to ensure efficient and timely construction
of the transportation facilities network. If such a requirement is imposed, the City Council
shall, in its discretion, enter into a reimbursement agreement with the developer, or give a
credit against the fee otherwise levied by this chapter on the development project, or some
combination thereof.
B. Whenever a developer requests reimbursement, or a credit against fees, for work to be done or
paid for by the developer under subsection (A) of this section, the request shall be submitted in
writing to the City Manager's designee.
I. The request shall contain a description of the project with a detailed cost estimate
which itemizes those costs of the construction attributable to the transportation facility
project and excludes any work attributable to a specific subdivision project. The
estimate is preliminary and the amount of reimbursement or credit against fees is
subject to fmal determination by the City Manager's designee. Additional information
shall be provided to the City by the developer upon request of the City.
2. Such reimbursement or credit against fees shall be subject to the following conditions:
a. Requirements of Developer.
i. Preparation of plans and specifications for approval by the City;
ii. Secure and dedicate any right-of-way required for the transportation facility
proj ect;
iii. Secure all required permits and environmental clearances necessary for the
transportation facility project;
iv. Provision of performance bonds (where the developer intends to utilize provisions
for immediate credit, the performance bond shall be for 100 percent of the value of the
transportation facility project);
v. Payment of all City fees and costs.
b. The City will not be responsible for any of the costs of constructing the
transportation facility project. The developer shall advance all necessary funds to construct the
transportation facility project.
c. The developer shall secure at least three qualified bids for work to be done and shall
award the construction contract to the lowest qualified bidder. The developer may combine the
construction of the transportation facility project with other development-related work and
award one construction contract for the combined work based on a clearly identified process
for determining the low bidder, all as approved by the City Manager's designee. Should the
construction contract be awarded to a qualified bidder who did not submit the lowest bid for
the transportation facility project portion of the contract, the developer will only receive
transportation development impact fee credit based on the lowest bid for the transportation
facility portion of the contract. Any claims for additional payment for extra work or charges
shall be justified, shall be documented to the satisfaction of the City Manager's designee and
ORD # 2
5-37
shall only be reimbursed at the prices for similar work included in the lowest bid for the
transportation facility portion of the contract.
d. Upon complying with the conditions set forth in subsections (B)(1) and (B)(2)(a) of
this section as determined by the City and upon approval of the estimated cost by the City
Manager's designee, the developer shall be entitled to immediate credit for 50 percent of the
estimated cost of the construction attributable to the transportation facility project. Once the
developer has received valid bids for the project which comply with subsection (B)(2)(c) of
this section, entered into binding contracts for the construction of the project, and met the
conditions set forth in subsections (B)(l) and (B)(2)(a) of this section as determined by the
City, all of which have been approved by the City Manager's designee, the amount of the
immediate credit shall be increased to 75 percent of the bid amount attributable to the
transportation facility project. The immediate credits shall be applied to the developer's
obligation to pay transportation development impact fees for building permits issued after the
establishment of the credit. The developer shall specify these building permits to which the
credit is to be applied at the time the developer submits the building permit applications.
e. If the developer uses all of the immediate credit before [mal completion of the
transportation facility project, then the developer may defer payment of development impact
fees for other building permits by providing to the City liquid security such as cash or an
irrevocable letter of credit, but not bonds or set-aside letters, in an amount equal to the
remaining amount of the estimated cost of the transporUtion facility project.
f. When all work has been completed to the satisfaction of the City, the developer shall
submit verification of payments made for the construction of the transportation facility project
to the City. The City Manager's designee shall make the final determination on expenditures
which are eligible for credit or cash reimbursement.
g. After final determination of eligible expenditures has been made by the City
Manager's designee and the developer has complied with the conditions set forth in subsection
(B) of this section, the final amount of transportation development impact fee credits shall be
determined by the City Manager's designee. The developer shall receive credit against the
deferred fee obligation in an amount equal to the difference between the [mal expenditure
determination and the amount of the 75 percent immediate credit used, if any. The City shall
notify the developer of the final deferred fee obligation, and of the amount of the applicable
credit. If the amount of the applicable credit is less than the deferred fee obligation, then the
developer shall have 30 days to pay the deferred fee. If the deferred fees are not paid within the
30-day period, the City may make a demand against the liquid security and apply the proceeds
to the fee obligation.
h. At the time building permits are issued for the developer's project, the City will
incrementally apply credit which the developer has accrued in lieu of collecting the required
transportation development impact fees. The amount of the credit to be applied to each
building permit shall be based upon the fee schedule in effect at the time of the building permit
issuance. The City Manager's designee shall convert such credit to an EDU basis for
residential development and/or a gross acre basis for commercial or industrial development for
purposes of determining the amount of credit to be applied to each building permit.
i. If the total eligible construction cost for the transportation facility project is more than
the total transportation development impact fees which will be required for the developer's
project, then the amount in excess of development impact fees will be paid in cash when funds
are available as determined by the City Manager; a reimbursement agreement will be executed;
or the developer may waive reimbursement and use the excess as credit against future
transportation development impact fee obligations. The City may, in its discretion, enter into
an agreement with the developer to convert excess credit into EDU and/or gross acre credits for
ORD#2
5-38
use against future development impact fee obligations at the fee rate in effect on the date of the
agreement.
j. The requirements of this subsection (B) of this section may, in the City's discretion,
be modified through an agreement between the developer and the City and approved by City
Council.
C. Whenever a transportation development impact fee credit is generated by
constructing a transportation facility using assessment district or community
facilities district financing, the credit shall only be applied to the
transportation development impact fee obligations within that district.
3.55.160 Procedure for fee waiver or reduction.
A. . Any developer who, because of the nature or type of uses proposed for a
development project, contends that application of the fee imposed by this
chapter is unconstitutional, or unrelated to mitigation of the traffic needs or
burdens of the development, may apply to the City Council for a waiver,
reduction, or deferral of the fee. A development which is designed and.
intended as a temporary use (10 years or less) and which is conducted in
facilities which are, by their nature, short-term interim facilities such as a
portable or modular building (including mobile homes, trailers, etc.) may
qualify for a waiver, reduction, or deferral. In addition, a deferral may be
granted on the basis of demonstrated economic hardship on the condition that:
(1) the use offers a significant public benefit; (2) the amount deferred bears
interest at a fair market rate so as to constitute an approximate value
equivalent to a cash payment; and (3) the amount deferred is . adequately
secured by agreement with the applicant. Unless the requirement for timely
filing is waived by the City, the application shall be made in writing and filed
with the City Clerk not later than 10 days after notice of the public hearing on
the development permit application or the project is given, or if no
development permit is required, at the time of the filing of the building permit
application. The application shall state in detail the factual basis for the claim
of waiver or reduction.
B. The City Council shall consider the application at a public hearing on same,
notice of which need not be published other than by description on the agenda
of the meeting at which the public hearing is held. Said public hearing should
be held within 60 days after its filing. The decision of the City Council shall
be final. If a deferral, reduction or waiver is granted, it should be granted
pursuant to an agreement with the applicant, and the property owner, if
different from the applicant, providing that any change in use within the
project shall subject the development to payment of the full fee. The procedure
provided by this section is additional to any other procedure authorized by law
for protesting or challenging the fee imposed by this chapter.
3.55.170 Exemptions.
Development projects by public agencies shall be exempt from the provisions of this fee. Exempt
development uses with the following characteristics or activities as a principal use of land, generally
described as "community purpose facility" as defined above in CVMC Section 3.55.020.
ORO#2
5-39
3.55.180 Assessment districts.
If any assessment or special taxing district is established for any or all of the facilities listed in Section
3.55.030 the owner or developer of a project may apply to the City Council for a credit against the fee
in an amount equal to the development's attributable portion of the cost of the authorized
improvements as determined by the City Manager's designee, plus incidental costs normally occurring
with a construction project, but excluding costs associated with assessment district proceedings or
fmancing.
3.55.190 Economic incentive credit.
The City Council may authorize the City to participate in the financing of transportation facility
projects or portions of transportation facility projects as defined in Section 3.55.030 at the time of the
appropriation of funds by City Council for the construction of an eligible transportation facility, the
City shall be eligible to receive a credit known hereafter as an economic incentive credit. Such
economic incentive credit may be applied to development impact fee obligations for those projects
which the City Council determines, in its sole discretion, to be beneficial to the City. The use of the
economic incentive credit may be subject to conditions which shall be set forth in a written agreement
between the developer of the project and the City and approved by City Council.
The City may receive economic incentive credit only for those eligible projects identified in Section
3.55.030 for amounts of funding not identified in the financial and engineering study "Western
Transportation Development Impact Fee" report dated February 2008.
3.55.195 Fund loans.
A.
B.
Loans by the City. The City may loan funds to the fund to pay for
facilities should the fund have insufficient funds to cover the cost of
said facility. Said loans, if granted, shall be approved upon the adoption
of the annual City budget or upon resolution of the City Council and
shall carry interest rates as set by the City Council for each fiscal year.
A schedule for repayment of said loans shall be established at the time
they are made and approved by the Council, with a maximum term not
to exceed the life of the fund.
Developer Loans. A developer may loan funds to the City as outlined
in CVMC 3.55.150. The City may repay said developer loans with
interest, under the terms listed in subsection (A) of this section.
3.55.200 Effective date.
This chapter shall become effective
SECTION 3: Effective Date
This Ordinance shall become effective 60 days after its second reading and adoption.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Jack Griffin
Engineering and General Services Director
Ann Moore
City Attorney
5-40
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING
THE WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT
FEE REPORT (TF-358) PREPARED BY STAFF AND
ESTABLISHING A WESTERN TRANSPORTATION
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAM TO MITIGATE
TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS WITHIN WESTERN CHULA
VISTA INCLUDING PROJECTS - 1-805-2, RAS-17 AND BP-4
WHEREAS, the adoption of the City's General plan indicated that future growth was going to
occur in the City west ofI-805; and
WHEREAS, the traffic studies for the City's General Plan and the Urban Core Specific Plan
show the City's transportation network will be impacted by new development within the western
portion of the City unless new transportation facilities are added to accommodate the new
development; and
WHEREAS, since January 1987, the City has had a program in place for the collection of a
transportation development impact fee for the fmancing of street improvements in the area east of
Interstate 805:
WHEREAS, the Engineer's Report establishes that the transportation facilities necessitated by
development within the western portion of the City comprise an integrated network; and
WHEREAS, the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee is solely based upon that
portion of the project costs which are attributable to new development; and
WHEREAS, on March 4, 2008, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista held a duly noticed
public hearing at which oral or written. presentations regarding the Western Transportation
Development Impact Fee could be made; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Municipal Code and California Government Code Sections 66000,
et. seq., the City Council has accepted a report entitled "Engineer's Report for the Western
Transportation Development Impact Fee" ("Engineer's Report") dated February, 2008 that analyzed
the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee necessary to fund transportation facilities needed
to serve future development within the western portion of the City; and
WHEREAS, the City's 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 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista is placing this ordinance on its fust
reading which will establish a development impact fee per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) to finance
transportation facilities within the western portion of the City of Chula Vista; and
ORD # 3
5-41
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 66017(a), the fees proposed by this
ordinance will not become effective until sixty (60) days after its frrst reading; and
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED, that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
does hereby adopt Chapter 3.55 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code relating to .transportation
development impact fees to pay for various transportation facilities located on the westside of the City
as follows:
SECTION 1: Findings
The City Council frnds, after consideration of the evidence presented to it including the "Engineer's
Report for the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee" dated February, 2008, that the
creation of a transportation development impact fee is necessary in order to assure that there are
sufficient fimds available to frnance the transportation facilities necessary to serve development west
ofI-805;and
The City Council frnds that new development within the western portion of the City of Chula Vista
should be required to mitigate the burden created by development through the construction of
transportation facilities; and
The City Council fmds, based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, and consistent with the
City's General Plan, and the various reports and information received by the City Council in the
ordinary course of its business, that the imposition of traffic impact fees on all development within the
western portion of the City of Chula Vista for which building permits have not been issued is
necessary in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare by providing for the public
transportation facilities to assure effective implementation of the City's General Plan; and
The City Council frnds that the amount of the proposed fees levied by this ordinance does not exceed
the estimated cost of providing the transportation facilities.
SECTION 2: Chapter 3.55 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is hereby adopted and shall read as
follows:
3.55.010 General intent.
The City's General Plan Land Use and Transportation Element requires that adequate public facilities
be available to accommodate increased population created by new development within the City of
Chula Vista.
The City Council has determined that new development will create adverse impacts on the City's
existing public transportation facilities which must be mitigated by the frnancing and construction of
certain public transportation facilities which are the subject of this chapter. New development
contributes to the cumulative burden on these public transportation facilities in direct relationship to
the amount of vehicular traffic and population generated by the development or the gross acreage of
the commercial or industrial land in the development.
The City Council has detennined that a reasonable means of frnancing the public transportation
facilities is to charge a fee on all developments within the western portion of the City. imposition of
the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee on all new development for which building
ORD#3
5-42
permits have not yet been issued is necessary in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare,
thereby ensuring effective implementation of the City's General Plan.
3.55.020 Defmitions.
For the purposes of this chapter, the following words or phrases shall be construed as defined herein,
unless from the context it appears that a different meaning is intended.
A. "Building permit" means a permit required by and issued pursuant to the
Uniform Building Code.
B. "City Engineer" means the City Engineer, the City Engineer's designee or the
City Manager's designee.
C. "Density" means dwelling units per gross acre identified for each planning
area shown on the approved tentative map or approved tentative parcel map or
as determined by the City Manager's designee.
D. "Developer" means the owner or developer of a development.
E. "Development permit" means any discretionary permit, entitlement or
approval for a development project issued under any zoning or subdivision
ordinance of the City.
F. "Development project" or "development" means any activity described as the
following:
1. Any new residential dwelling unit developed on vacant land;
2. Any new commercial/office or industrial development constructed on vacant land;
3. Any expansions to established developments or new developments on nonvacant land in
those land use categories listed in subsections (F)(1) and (2) of this section, if the result
is a net increase in dwelling units. The fee shall be based solely on this net dwelling unit
increase;
4. Any new or expanding special land use project;
5. Any special purpose project developed on vacant land or nonvacant land, or expanded
within a pre-existing site, if the result is a net increase in dwelling units. The fee shall
be based solely on this net dwelling unit increase;
6. Any other development project not listed above but described in Section 65927 and
65928 of the State Government Code.
"Community purpose facility" means a facility which serves one of the following purposes:
1. Social service activities, including such services as Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts, Boys
and Girls Club, Alcoholics Anonymous and services for the homeless;
2. Public schools;
3. Private schools;
4. Day care;
5. Senior care and recreation;
6. Worship, spiritual growth and development.
H. "Western portion of the City of Chula Vista" generally means that area of the
City located between the City boundary on the west, Interstate 805 on the east,
the City boundary on the north and the City's boundary on the south, as shown
on the map entitled "Figure 1" of the Engineering study.
1. "Engineering 'Study" and "Engineer's Report" means the Engineer's Report for
the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee dated February, 2008
and prepared by City staff on file in the Office of the City Clerk.
J. "Regional Arterial System" (RAS) RAS roadways are generally described as
those facilities that act as a critical link in providing direct connections
between communities ensuring system continuity and congestion relief in high
ORD#3
5-43
volume corridors. They are roadways that are listed in the most recent edition
of SANDAG's Regional Transportation Plan
K. "Special land use" means any nonresidential, non-commercial/office or
nonindustrial development project (e.g., Olympic Training Center, hospitals,
utilities), or non-special purpose project.
L. "Special purpose project" means any for-profit community purpose facility
(e.g., day care).
3.55.030 Public transDortation facilities to be fmanced bv the fee.
A. The public transportation facilities ("facilities") which are the subject matter of the fee, are
listed below as detailed in subsection C of this section and in the Engineer's Report on file in
the Office of the City Clerk.
B. The City Council may modify or amend the list of projects in order to maintain compliance
with the circulation element of the City's General Plan.
C. The facilities are as follows:
I. (I-5-1) 1-51E Street NB off-ramp restriping add lane
2. (1-5-2) 1-51E Street/Bay Blvd SB off-ramp restriping add lane
3. (I-5-3) 1-5/NB ramp widening at E, H, J, Ind., Palomar & Main Sts (21%)
4. (1-5-4) E Street bridge widening over 1-5 (250' X 20' X $350/sf)
5. (1-5-5) F Street bridge widening over 1-5 (250' X 20' X $3501sf
6. (1-5-6) 1-5/H Street NB off-ramp restriping add lane
7. (1-5-7) 1-5/H Street SB off-ramp restriping add lane
8. (I-5-8) H Street bridge widening over 1-5 (200'X40'X$350/sf)
9. (1-5-9) 1-5/J Street NB off-ramp restriping add lane
10. (1-5"10) 1-5/J Street undercrossing widening add EB-NB (175x20X$350)
11. (I-5-1I) L Street bridge widening overI-5 (SIW for peds 300' X 12')(21 %)
12. (I-5-12) 1-5/Bay Blvd (south ofL St.) SB on/off ramps traffic signal
13. (1-5-13) 1-5/Industrial Blvd NB onJofframps traffic signal
14. (1-5-14) 1-5/Palomar Street bridge widening (2751fX 50lfX $350/sf)
15. (I-5-15) 1-5/Main Street NB on/off ramps traffic signal (CV share $120k)
16. (1-5-16) 1-5/Main Street bridge widening (2751fX 20lfX $350/sf)
17. (I-5-17) 1-5 HOV & Managed Lanesfrom SR905 to SR54 (63.4% in CJ1
18. STM 361
5-44
ORD#3
a. 1-5 Multi-Modal Corridor Study (80% Fed. DEMO funds)
b. (SANDAG cost estimate is $4.3M & CV share TBD.)
Interstate-805 Improvements
19. (1-805-1) NB on-ramp widening & metering at Bonita, East H St (EB-NB),
Telegraph Canyon Road (Project 1-805-1 is 100% funded in 2006 RTIP with State
funds.)
20. (/-805-2) Main St. undercrossing widening for EB-NB left turn lane
State Route 54 Improvements
21. (SR-54-1) SR-54 WB off-ramp restripe at Broadway
22. (SR-54-2) SR-54EB off-ramp at N. Fourth Avenue - add ramp lane
Regional Arterial System (RAS) Projects
23. (RAS-1) Bonita Road from First Avenue to 1-805
24. (RAS-2) Broadway from C Street to south of Main Street (City Limits)
25. (RAS-3) E Street improvements - First Ave to Bonita RoadiE. Flower St
26. (RAS-4) E Street improvements, 1-5 to 300' east ofNB ramp
27. (RAS-5) E Street LRT grade separation (underpass LRT option)
28. (RAS-6) H Street LRT grade separation (underpass LRT option)
29. (RAS-7) H Street at Broadway EB queue jumper lane & traffic signal modifications
30. (RAS-8) H Street l4'-wide median & street light improvements (same as RAS-9)
31. (RAS-9) H Street widening to 6-lanes from Interstate-5 to Broadway
32. (RAS-10) H Street improvements from Second Ave to Hilltop Drive
33. (RAS-11) East H St. north side improvements from Hilltop Dr. to 1-805
34. (RAS-12) L Street/Bay Blvd traffic signal & add turn lanes
35. (RAS-B) L Street improvements south side west ofIndustrial Blvd
36. (RAS-l4) Telegraph Canyon Road at 1-805 south side sidewalk
37. (RAS-I5) Orange A venue from Palomar Street to Hilltop Drive
38. (RAS-16) Palomar Street improvements from 1-5 to 1-805
ORD#3
5-45
39. (RAS-17) Main St. improvements from I-5 to I-805 (See GPU Table 5.10-6)
40. (RAS-18) H St/4th Ave add WB-NB & EB-SB right turn lanes
41. (RAS-19) H St/4th Ave add WB-NB & EB-SB right turn lanes
General Plan Impacts and Mitigations
42. (GP-I) E. S1. from Marina to 1-5
43. (GP-2) Marina Parkway from E-J S1.
44. (GP-3) L S1. from Hilltop to 1-805
45. (GP-4) Main S1. from 1-5 to Broadway
46. (GP-5) Main S1. from Broadway to Hilltop Dr.
47. (GP-6) Third Avenue from L St. to Palomar S1.
48. (GP-7) H S1. from Marina to 1-5
49. (GP-8) J St. from Marina to 1-5
Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities Improvements (21 % WTDIF share per GPU)
50. (BP-l) Bayshore Bikeway (bike path) between E Street & F Streets
51. (BP-3) Industrial Blvd improvements & bike lanes from L S1. to Main Street
52. (BP-4) Main Street bike lanes from Industrial Blvd & I-805
53. (BP-5) Orange A ve. bike lanes from Palomar St to Hilltop Drive
54. (BP-6) Develop bicycle paths & pedestrian access to Third Avenue
Midbayfront Local Coastal Program Roadways
55. (Mid-I) E Street restripe to add EB-NB dual left turn to NB 1-5 on-ramp.
56. (Mid-2) 1-5/E St. SB off-ramp widening to add fourth lane
57. (Mid-3) Bay Blvd 15' widening along Westerly Curb Line at E S1. approach for
I SB/3NB
58. (Mid-4) I-5/E S1. NB widen off-ramp to add 3rd lane for Right Turn only lane
59. (Mid-5) E St revisions to median and North Curb Line east of 1-5 to add 3rd WB
lane.
60. (Mid-6) Marina Parkway 4-lane from E S1. to J S1.
5-46
ORD # 3
61. (Mid-7) E St./Woodlawn Ave EB-SB RT lane plus a Traffic Signal)
62. (Mid-g) E St. at Broadway add WB & EB LT lane + WB & EB RT only lane. plus
a Traffic Signal & No RJW costs.
63. (Mid-9) F StJBroadway restriping to provide EB-SB & WB-NB RT lane
64. (Mid-IO) H Street widening at Broadway for WB Thru & EB Thru & RT only.
Other Roadways
65. (OR-I) N. 4th Avenue/Brisbane Ave traffic signal modifications
66. (OR-2) Second A venue/D Street all-way stop installation
3.55.040 Territorv to which fee applicable.
The area of the City of Chula Vista to which the fee herein established shall be applicable is the
territorial limits of the western portion of the City of Chula Vista ("territory") as defined above, as they
may from time to time be amended.
3.55.050 Establishment of a fee.
A development impact fee ("fee") is hereby established to pay for the facilities within the territory. The
fee shall be paid upon the issuance of building permits for each development project within the western
portion of the City of Chula Vista. The WTDlF fee in the amounts set forth in CVMC 3.55.030 is
hereby established to pay for transportation improvements and facilities within the western portion of
the City ofChula Vista.
3.55.060 Determination of fees bv land use cateeorv.
A. For purposes of this fee, single-family dwelling units shall include single-
family detached homes and detached condominiums; multifamily dwelling
units shall include attached condominiums, townhouses, duplexes, triplexes,
and apartments. The density of the development type shall be based on the
number of dwelling units per gross acre for single-family or multifamily
residential and shall be based upon the densities identified on the approved
tentative map or approved tentative parcel map entitling the development
unless otherwise approved in writing by the City Manager's designee.
B. Commercial/office and industrial development projects shall be charged on a
per acre or per square footage basis. For purposes of this fee, gross acreage
and lor square footage as it applies to the commercial, industrial and office
development types, means all land area that the City Manager's designee
deems necessary within the boundary of the parcel or parcels of the
development project for which building permits are being requested.
C. The fee multiplied by the total number of dwelling units, square footage or
acres within a given development project represents a developer's fair share
("fair share") for that development project.
3.55.070 Time to determine amount due.
The fee for each development shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance and shall be
the amount as indicated at that time, and not when the tentative map or final map were granted or
applied for, or when the building permit plan check was conducted, or when application was made for
ORD#3
5-47
the building permit. No building permit shall be issued unless the development impact fee is paid. The
fees shall be deposited into a WTDIF fund, which is hereby created, and shall be expended only for the
purposes set forth in this chapter. The Director of Finance is authorized to establish various accounts
within the fund for the various improvements and facilities identified in this chapter and to periodically
make expenditures from the fund for the purposes set forth herein in accordance with the facilities
phasing plan or capital improvement plan adopted by the City Council. The City Council finds that
collection of the fees established by this chapter at the time of the building permit is necessary to
ensure that funds will be available for the construction of facilities concurrent with the need for those
facilities and to ensure certainty in the capital facilities budgeting for the western part of the City.
3.55.080 Purpose and use of fee.
The fees collected shall be used by the City for the following purposes as determined by the City
Council:
1. To pay for the construction of facilities by the City, or to reimburse
the City for facilities installed by the City with funds from other
sources.
2. To reimburse developers who have been required by
CVMC3.55.150 A to install improvements that are major streets
and are listed in CVMC 3.55.030.
3. To reimburse developers who have been permitted to install
improvements pursuant to CVMC 3.55.150 B.
3.55.090 Amount of fee.
A. The fee shall be the amounts as set forth below in Table I. The fee shall be adjusted on July I
of each year beginning in 2009. The annual inflation adjustment will be 2 % or based on
Caltrans highway construction cost index, whichever is higher. The program collects 2% of the
total improvement cost estimate for staff administration and an additional I % for SANDAG
Administrative costs.
B. Adjustments of the fee based upon the annual inflation adjustment or the Caltrans Highway
Construction Cost Index shall be automatic and shall not require further action by the City
Council. The WTDIF may also be reviewed and amended by the City Council as necessary
based on changes in the type, size, location or cost of the facilities to be financed by the fee;
changes in land use designation in the City's General Plan; and upon other sound engineering,
fmancing and planning information.
5-48
ORD#3
Table 1
PROPOSED WTDIF FEE PER LAND USE CLASSIFICATION
Proposed TDIF Fee per EDU: I $3,243.00
ILl""'!' ",3",.","", """",,'" ,'.'" >t"e,',,'" , . , ':;,",' ", . I,'" ' EDUs TDIF Rate
, and Use Classification' ",; .' .,
RESIDENTIAL
lResidential (LOW) 0-6 dwelling units oer acre 1 oer EDU $3,243/DU
Residential (MED) 6,1 To 20 dwelling units oer acre ,S per EDU $2,594 I DU
Residential (HIGH) Over 20 dwelling units oer acre ,6perEDU $1,946 I DU
Mobile Home ,5 per EDU $1,622 I DU
COMMERCIAL
Contain 1-5 major dept, stores & usually have
more than 50 tenants, Typically larger than 40
Regional Commercial acres. 20EDU/Acre $64,860 I Acre
Smaller in that size than regional, Contain junior
Dept Store or variety Store,( I.e, Target Centet
with other commercial stores)as a major tenant
Community Commercial and have 15 to 50 other tenants. Smaller in size,
S-20 acres, 2SEDU/Acre $90,804 I Acre
iNeighborhood Commercial Less than 10 acres. Includes supermarket and
drug store. Mav include office soaces, 4SEDU/Acre $155,664 I Acre
IN.,ighborhood Commercial Same as above but in Souare Footage 4,SEDU/KSF $15,664/KSF
Commercial activities found along major streets,
Inot in a planned center with limited on-site
Street Front Commercial arking, l6EDU/Acre $51,888 I Acre
Ketall Commercial Soecialtv Retail/Strio Commercial l6EDU/Acre $51,888/KSF
Usually located near transportation facilities.
Structures are usually large and cover majority of
the parcel. Examples are clothing and supply,
Wholesale Trade also includes swao meet areas. 24EDU/Acre $77,832 I Acre
OFFICE
High Rise Office More than 100,000 S,F, and 6+ Stories 60EDU/Acre $194,580/Acre
ILOW Rise Office < 6 Stories 30EDU/Acre $97,290 I Acre
Low Rise Office (in thousands < 6 Stories
of sauare feet) 2 EDU/KSF $6,486 I KSF
!Medical Office lMedical and Dental Facilities 50 EDUI Acre $162,1501 Acre
LODGING
iLow Rise HotellMotel < 4 Stories 20 EDUI Acre $64,860 I Acre
iLaw Rise Hotel or Motel < 4 Stories 1 EDU/Room $3,243 I Room
High Rise Hotel b=4 Stories 30/EDU/Acre $97,290 I Acre
INDUSTRY
Shipbuilding, airframe, and aircraft
manufucturing.Usuallyloc&ednextto
Heavv Industrv lTansportation facilities and commercial areas.
Parcels are typicallv 20-50Acre. l2EDU/Acre $38,916/Acre
Usually large buildings located near freeways,
W arehouse IStora~e industrial or strio commercial areas, 6EDU/Acre $19,458 I Acre
Office/industrial uses clustered into a center, The
IPrimary uses are industrial by may include high
[percentages of other uses in service or retail
tIndustrial Park activities. 9EDU/Acre $29,187 I Acre
lLight Industrial IAll other industrial uses and manufacturing Dot
included in categories above. 20 EDU/ Acre $64,860 I Acre
ORD # 3
5-49
3.55.100 Development projects exempt from the fee.
A. Development projects by public agencies shall be exempt from the provisions of the fee if those
projects are designed to provide the public service for which the agency is charged ("public
purpose").
B. Community purpose facilities which are not operated for profit ("nonprofit community purpose
facilities") are also exempt inasmuch as these institutions provide benefit to the community as a
whole, including all land use categories which are the subject matter of the fee. The City
Council hereby determines that it is appropriate to spread any impact such nonprofit
community purpose facilities might have to the other land use categories subject to the fee. In
the event that a court determines that the exemption herein extended to community purpose
facilities shall for any reason be invalid, the City Council hereby allocates the nonprofit
community purpose facilities' fair share to the City of Chula Vista and not to any of the land
use categories which are the subject matter of the development impact land use categories.
C. Development projects which are additions or expansions to existing dwelling units or
businesses, except special land use projects, shall be exempt if the addition or expansion does
not result in a net increase in dwelling units or commercial/industrial acreage.
3.55.110 Authority for accounting: and expenditures.
A. The fees collected shall be deposited into a Western Transportation Development Impact Fee
financing fund ("WTDIF fee fund," or "fund"), which is hereby created and shall be expended
only for the purposes set forth in this chapter.
B. The director of finance is authorized to establish a single fund for the various facilities
identified in this chapter and to periodically make expenditures from the fund for the purposes
set forth herein.
3.55.120 Finding:s.
The City Council finds that:
A. Collection of the fee established by this chapter at the time of the building permit issuance is
necessary to provide funds for the transportation facilities identified in CVMC 3.55.030 and to
ensure certainty in the capital facilities budgeting for growth impacted public transportation
facilities; and
B. The purpose of the Fees hereby enacted prevents new development from reducing the quality
and availability of public transportation infrastructure facilities provided to residents of the City
by requiring new development to contribute to the cost of additional capital transportation
infrastructure improvements needed to meet the growth generated by such development; and
C. The revenue from the fees hereby enacted will be used to construct public facilities and
infrastructure and pay for other capital expenditures needed to serve new development as
identified in the Engineer's Report dated February, 2008; and
D. Based on analysis presented in the Engineer's Report there is a reasonable relationship between
I. The use of the fees and the types of development projects on which they are imposed and
2. The need for facilities and the types of development projects on which the fees are imposed.
3. The amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility or portion of the public facility
attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.
ORD#3
5-50
3.55.130 Fee additional to other fees and chare:es.
This fee is in addition to the requirements imposed by other City laws, policies or regulations relating
to the construction or the financing of the construction of public improvements within subdivisions or
developments
3.55.150 Developer construction of transportation facilities.
A. Whenever a developer of a development project would be required by application of City law
or policy, as a condition of approval of a development permit to construct or fmance the
construction of a portion of a transportation facility identified in Section 3.55.030 the City
Council may impose an additional requirement that the developer install the improvements
with supplemental size, length or capacity in order to ensure efficient and timely construction
of the transportation facilities network. If such a requirement is imposed, the City Council
shall, in its discretion, enter into a reimbursement agreement with the developer, or give a
credit against the fee otherwise levied by this chapter on the development project, or some
combination thereof.
B. Whenever a developer requests reimbursement, or a credit against fees, for work to be done or
paid for by the developer under subsection (A) of this section, the request shall be submitted in
writing to the City Manager's designee.
I. The request shall contain a description of the project with a detailed cost estimate
which itemizes those costs of the construction attributable to the transportation facility
project and excludes any work attributable to a specific subdivision project. The
estimate is preliminary and the amount of reimbursement or credit against fees is
subject to fmal determination by the City Manager's designee. Additional information
shall be provided to the City by the developer upon request of the City.
2. Such reimbursement or credit against fees shall be subject to the following conditions:
a. Requirements of Developer.
i. Preparation of plans and specifications for approval by the City;
ii. Secure and dedicate any right-of-way required for the transportation facility
project;
iii. . Secure all required permits and environmental clearances necessary for the
transportation facility project;
iv. Provision of performance bonds (where the developer intends to utilize provisions
for immediate credit, the performance bond shall be for 100 percent of the value of the
transportation facility project);
v. Payment of all City fees and costs.
b. The City will not be responsible for any of the costs of constructing the
transportation facility project. The developer shall advance all necessary funds to construct the
transportation facility project.
c. The developer shall secure at least three qualified bids for work to be done and shall
award the construction contract to the lowest qualified bidder. The developer may combine the
construction of the transportation facility project with other development-related work and
award one construction contract for the combined work based on a clearly identified process
for determining the low bidder, all as approved by the City Manager's designee. Should the
construction contract be awarded to a qualified bidder who did not submit the lowest bid for
the transportation facility project portion of the contract, the developer will only receive
transportation development impact fee credit based on the lowest bid for the transportation
facility portion of the contract. Any claims for additional payment for extra work or charges
shall be justified, shall be documented to the satisfaction of the City Manager's designee and
ORD # 3
5-51
shall only be reimbursed at the prices for similar work included in the lowest bid for the
transportation facility portion ofthe contract.
d. Upon complying with the conditions set forth in subsections (B)(l) and (B)(2)(a) of
this section as determined by the City and upon approval of the estimated cost by the City
Manager's designee, the developer shall be entitled to immediate credit for 50 percent of the
estimated cost of the construction attributable to the transportation facility project. Once the
developer has received valid bids for the project which comply with subsection (B)(2)(c) of
this section, entered into binding contracts for the construction of the project, and met the
conditions set forth in subsections (B)(l) and (B)(2)(a) of this section as determined by the
City, all of which have been approved by the City Manager's designee, the amount of the
immediate credit shall be increased to 75 percent of the bid amount attributable to the
transportation facility project. The immediate credits shall be applied to the developer's
obligation to pay transportation development impact fees for building permits issued after the
establishment of the credit. The developer shall specify these building permits to which the
credit is to be applied at the time the developer submits the building permit applications.
e. If the developer uses all of the immediate credit before final completion of the
transportation facility project, then the developer may defer payment of development impact
fees for other building permits by providing to the City liquid security such as cash or an
irrevocable letter of credit, but not bonds or set-aside letters, in an amount equal to the
remaining amount of the estimated cost of the transportation facility project.
f. When all work has been completed to the satisfaction of the City, the developer shall
submit verification of payments made for the construction of the transportation facility project
to the City. The City Manager's designee shall make the final determination on expenditures
which are eligible for credit or cash reimbursement.
g. After fmal determination of eligible expenditures has been made by the City
Manager's designee and the developer has complied with the conditions set forth in subsection
(B) of this section, the final amount of transportation development impact fee credits shall be
determined by the City Manager's designee. The developer shall receive credit against the
deferred fee obligation in an amount equal to the difference between the fmal expenditure
determination and the amount of the 75 percent immediate credit used, if any. The City shall
notify the developer of the fmal deferred fee obligation, and of the amount of the applicable
credit. If the amount of the applicable credit is less than the deferred fee obligation, then the
developer shall have 30 days to pay the deferred fee. If the deferred fees are not paid within the
30-day period, the City may make a demand against the liquid security and apply the proceeds
to the fee obligation.
h. At the time building permits are issued for the developer's project, the City will
incrementally apply credit which the developer has accrued in lieu of collecting the required
transportation development impact fees. The amount of the credit to be applied to each
building permit shall be based upon the fee schedule in effect at the time of the building permit
issuance. The City Manager's designee shall convert such credit to an EDU basis for
residential development and/or a gross acre basis for commercial or industrial development for
purposes of determining the amount of credit to be applied to each building permit.
i. If the total eligible construction cost for the transportation facility proj ect is more than
the total transportation development impact fees which will be required for the developer's
project, then the amount in excess of development impact fees will be paid in cash when funds
are available as determined by the City Manager; a reimbursement agreement will be executed;
or the developer may waive reimbursement and use the excess as credit against future
transportation development impact fee obligations. The City may, in its discretion, enter into
an agreement with the developer to convert excess credit into EDU and/or gross acre credits for
ORD#3
5-52
use against future development impact fee obligations at the fee rate in effect on the date of the
agreement.
j. The requirements of this subsection (B) of this section may, in the City's discretion,
be- modified through an agreement between the developer and the City and approved by City
Council.
C. Whenever a transportation development impact fee credit is generated by
constructing a transportation facility using assessment district or community .
facilities district financing, the credit shall only be applied to the
transportation development impact fee obligations within that district.
3.55.160 Procedure for fee waiver or reduction.
A. Any developer who, because of the nature or type of uses proposed for a
development project, contends that application of the fee imposed by this
chapter is unconstitutional, or unrelated to mitigation of the traffic needs or
burdens of the development, may apply to the City Council for a waiver,
reduction, or deferral of the fee. A development which is designed and
intended as a temporary use (10 years or less) and which is conducted in
facilities which are, by their nature, short-term interim facilities such as a
portable or modular building (including mobile homes, trailers, etc.) may
qualify for a waiver, reduction, or deferral. In addition, a deferral may be
granted on the basis of demonstrated economic hardship on the condition that:
(1) the use offers a significant public benefit; (2) the amount deferred bears
interest at a fair market rate so as to constitute an approximate value
equivalent to a cash payment; and (3) the amount deferred is adequately
secured by agreement with the applicant. Unless the requirement for timely
filing is waived by the City, the application shall be made in writing and filed
with the City Clerk not later than 10 days after notice of the public hearing on
the development permit application or the proj ect is given, or if no
development permit is required, at the time of the filing of the building permit
application. The application shall state in detail the factual basis for the claim
of waiver or reduction.
B. The City Council shall consider the application at a public hearing on same,
notice of which need not be published other than by description on the agenda
of the meeting at which the public hearing is held. Said public hearing should
be held within 60 days after its filing. The decision of the City Council shall
be final. If a deferral, reduction or waiver is granted, it should be granted
pursuant to an agreement with the applicant, and the property owner, if
different from the applicant, providing that any change in use within the
project shall subject the development to payment of the full fee. The procedure
provided by this section is additional to any other procedure authorized by law
for protesting or challenging the fee imposed by this chapter.
3.55.170 Exemptions.
Development projects by public agencies shall be exempt from the provisions of this fee. Exempt
development uses with the following characteristics or activities as a principal use of land, generally
described as "community purpose facility" as defined above in CYMC Section 3.55.020.
ORD # 3
5-53
3.55.180 Assessment districts.
If any assessment or special taxing district is established for any or all of the facilities listed in Section
3.55.030 the owner or developer of a project may apply to the City Council for a credit against the fee
in an amount equal to the development's attributable portion of the cost of the authorized
improvements as determined by the City Manager's designee, plus incidental costs normally occurring
with a construction project, but excluding costs associated with assessment district proceedings or
financing.
3.55.190 Economic incentive credit.
The City Council may authorize the City to participate in the fmancing of transportation facility
projects or portions of transportation facility projects as defmed in Section 3.55.030 at the time of the
appropriation of funds by City Council for the construction of an eligible transportation facility, the
City shall be eligible to receive a credit known hereafter as an economic incentive credit. Such
economic incentive credit may be applied to development impact fee obligations for those projects
which the City Council determines, in its sole discretion, to be beneficial to the City. The use of the
economic incentive credit may be subject to conditions which shall be set forth in a written agreement
between the developer of the project and the City and approved by City Council.
The City may receive economic incentive credit only for those eligible projects identified in Section
3.55.030 for amounts of funding not identified in the financial and engineering study "Western
Transportation Development Impact Fee" report dated February 2008.
3.55.195 Fnnd loans.
A.
B.
Loans by the City. The City may loan funds to the fund to pay for
facilities should the fund have insufficient funds to cover the cost of
said facility. Said loans, if granted, shall be approved upon the adoption
of the annual City budget or upon resolution of the City Council and
shall carry interest rates as set by the City Council for each fiscal year.
A schedule for repayment of said loans shall be established at the time
they are made and approved by the Council, with a maximum term not
to exceed the life of the fund.
Developer Loans. A developer may loan funds to the City as outlined
in CVMC 3.55.150. The City may repay said developer loans with
interest, under the terms listed in subsection (A) of this section.
3.55.200 Effective date.
This chapter shall become effective
SECTION 3: Effective Date
This Ordinance shall become effective 60 days after its second reading and adoption.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Jack Griffin
Engineering and General Services Director
Ann Moore
City Attorney
5-54
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CllliLA VISTA ACCEPTING
THE WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT
FEE REPORT (TF-358) PREPARED BY STAFF AND
ESTABLISHING A WESTERN TRANSPORTATION
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAM TO MITIGATE
TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS WITHIN WESTERN CHULA
VISTA INCLUDING PROJECT BP-2
WHEREAS, the adoption of the City's General plan indicated that future growth was going to
occur in the City west ofI-805; and
WHEREAS, the traffic studies for the City's General Plan and the Urban Core Specific Plan
show the City's transportation network will be impacted by new development within the western
portion of the City unless new transportation facilities are added to accommodate the new
development; and
WHEREAS, since January 1987, the City has had a program in place for the collection of a
transportation development impact fee for the financing of street improvements in the area east of
Interstate 805.
WHEREAS, the Engineer's Report establishes that the transportation facilities necessitated by
development within the western portion of the City comprise an integrated network; and
WHEREAS, the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee is solely based upon that
portion of the project costs which are attributable to new development; and
WHEREAS, on March 4, 2008, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista held a duly noticed
public hearing at which oral or written presentations regarding the Western Transportation
Development Impact Fee could be made; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Municipal Code and California Government Code Sections 66000,
et. seq., the City Council has accepted a report entitled "Engineer's Report for the Western
Transportation Development Impact Fee" ("Engineer's Report") dated February, 2008 that analyzed
the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee necessary to fund transportation facilities needed
to serve future development within the western portion of the City; and
WHEREAS, the City's 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 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista is placing this ordinance on its first
reading which will establish a development impact fee per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) to finance
transportation facilities within the western portion of the City of Chula Vista; and
ORD#4
5-55
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 66017(a), the fees proposed by this
ordinance will not become effective until sixty (60) days after its first reading; and
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED, that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
does hereby adopt Chapter 3.55 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code relating to transportation
development impact fees to pay for various transportation facilities located on the westside of the City
as follows:
SECTION 1: Findings
The City Council finds, after consideration of the evidence presented to it including the "Engineer's
Report for the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee" dated February, 2008, that the
creation of a transportation development impact fee is necessary in order to assure that there are
sufficient funds available to finance the transportation facilities necessary to serve development west
ofI-805; and
The City Council fmds that new development within the western portion of the City of Chula Vista
should be required to mitigate the burden created by development through the construction of
transportation facilities; and
The City Council finds, based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, and consistent with the
City's General Plan, and the various reports and information received by the City Council in the
ordinary course of its business, that the imposition of traffic impact fees on all development within the
western portion of the City of Chula Vista for which building permits have not been issued is
necessary in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare by providing for the public
transportation facilities to assure effective implementation of the City's General Plan; and
The City Council fmds that the amount of the proposed fees levied by this ordinance does not exceed
the estimated cost of providing the transportation facilities.
SECTION 2: Chapter 3.55 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is hereby adopted and shall read as
follows:
3.55.010 General intent.
The City's General Plan Land Use and Transportation Element requires that adequate public facilities
be available to accommodate increased population created by new development within the City of
Chula Vista.
The City Council has determined that new development will create adverse impacts on the City's
existing public transportation facilities which must be mitigated by the financing and construction of
certain public transportation facilities which are the subject of this chapter. New development
contributes to the cumulative burden on these public transportation facilities in direct relationship to
the amount of vehicular traffic and population generated by the development or the gross acreage of
the commercial or industrial land in the development.
The City Council has determined that a reasonable means of financing the public transportation
facilities is to charge a fee on all developments within the western portion of the City. imposition of
the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee on all new development for which building
5-56
ORD#4
permits have not yet been issued is necessary in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare,
thereby ensuring effective implementation of the City's General Plan.
3.55.020 Definitions.
For the purposes of this chapter, the following words or phrases shall be construed as defrned herein,
unless from the context it appears that a different meaning is intended.
A. "Building permit" means a permit required by and issued pursuant to the
Uniform Building Code.
B. "City Engineer" means the City Engineer, the City Engineer's designee or the
City Manager's designee.
C. "Density" means dwelling units per gross acre identifred for each planning
area shown on the approved tentative map or approved tentative parcel map or
as determined by the City Manager's designee.
D. "Developer" means the owner or developer of a development.
E. "Development permit" means any discretionary permit, entitlement or
approval for a development project issued under any zoning or subdivision
ordinance of the City.
F. "Development project" or "development" means any activity described as the
following:
I. Any new residential dwelling unit developed on vacant land;
2. Any new commercial/offrce or industrial development constructed on vacant land;
3. Any expansions to established developments or new developments on nonvacant land in
those land use categories listed in subsections (F)(I) and (2) of this section, if the result
is a net increase in dwelling units. The fee shall be based solely on this net dwelling unit
increase;
4. Any new or expanding special land use project;
5. Any special purpose project developed on vacant land or nonvacant land, or expanded
within a pre"existing site, if the result is a net increase in dwelling units. The fee shall
be based solely on this net dwelling unit increase;
6. Any other development project not listed above but described in Section 65927 and
65928 of the State Government Code.
"Community purpose facility" means a facility which serves one of the following purposes:
I. Social service activities, including such services as Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts, Boys
and Girls Club, Alcoholics Anonymous and services for the homeless;
2. Public schools;
3. Private schools;
4. Day care;
5. Senior care and recreation;
6. Worship, spiritual growth and development.
H. "Western portion of the City of Chula Vista" generally means that area of the
City located between the City boundary on the west, Interstate 805 on the east,
the City boundary on the north and the City's boundary on the south, as shown
on the map entitled "Figure 1" of the Engineering study.
1. "Engineering study" and "Engineer's Report" means the Engineer's Report for
the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee dated February, 2008
and prepared by City staff on file in the Offrce of the City Clerk.
J. "Regional Arterial System" (RAS) RAS roadways are generally described as
those facilities that act as a critical link in providing direct connections
between communities ensuring system continuity and congestion relief in high
ORD # 4
5-57
volume corridors. They are roadways that are listed in the most recent edition
of SANDAG's Regional Transportation Plan
K. "Special land use" means any nonresidential, non-commercial/office or
nonindustrial development project (e.g., Olympic Training Center, hospitals,
utilities), or non-special purpose project.
1. "Special purpose project" means any for-profit community purpose facility
(e.g., day care).
3.55.030 Public transportation facilities to be l"manced bv the fee.
A. The public transportation facilities ("facilities") which are the subject matter of the fee, are
listed below as detailed in subsection C of this section and in the Engineer's Report on file in
the Office of the City Clerk.
B. The City Council may modify or amend the list of projects in order to maintain compliance
with the circulation element of the City's General Plan.
C. The facilities are as follows:
1. (I-5-1) I-51E Street NB off-ramp restriping add lane
2. (1-5-2) I-5/E Street/Bay Blvd SB off-ramp restriping add lane
3. (I-5-3) I-5INB ramp widening at E, R, J, Ind., Palomar & Main Sts (21 %)
4. (1-5-4) E Street bridge widening over 1-5 (250' X 20' X $3501sf)
5. (1-5-5) F Street bridge widening over 1-5 (250' X 20' X $3501sf
6. (I-5-6) I-5/R Street NB off-ramp restriping add lane
7. (1-5-7) I-5/R Street SB off-ramp restriping add lane
8. (1-5-8) R Street bridge widening over 1-5 (200'X40'X$350/sf)
9. (1-5-9) I-5/J Street NB off-ramp restriping add lane
10. (I-5-10) I-5/J Street undercrossing widening add EB-NB (175x20X$350)
11. (1-5-11) L Street bridge widening overI-5 (S/W for peds 300' X 12')(21 %)
12. (1-5-12) I-5/Bay Blvd (south ofL St.) SB on/off ramps traffic signal
13. (1-5-13) I-5/Industrial Blvd NB on/off ramps traffic signal
14. (1-5-14) I-5/Palomar Street bridge widening (2751fX 50lfX $350/sf)
15. (1-5-15) I-5/Main StreetNB on/off ramps traffic signal (CV share $120k)
16. (I-5-16) I-5/Main Street bridge widening (2751fX 20lfX $350/sf)
17. (/-5-17)/-5 HOV & ManagedLanesfromSR905 toSR54 (63.4% in 0)
18. STM 361
~.
5-58
ORa #4
a. 1-5 Multi-Modal Corridor Study (80% Fed. DEMO funds)
b. (SANDAG cost estimate is $4.3M & CV share TBD.)
Interstate-805 Improvements
19. (1-805-1) NB on-ramp widening & metering at Bonita, East H St (EB-NB),
Telegraph Canyon Road (project 1-805-1 is 100% funded in 2006 RTIP with State
funds.)
20. (1-805-2) Main St. undercrossing widening for EB-NB left turn lane
State Route 54 Improvements
21. (SR-54-1) SR-54 WE off-ramp restripe at Broadway
22. (SR-54-2) SR-54 EB off-ramp at N. Fourth Avenue - add ramp lane
Regional Arterial System (RAS) Projects
23. (RAS-I) Bonita Road from First Avenue to 1-805
24. (RAS-2) Broadway from C Street to south of Main Street (City Limits)
25. (RAS-3) E Street improvements - First Ave to Bonita RoadIE. Flower St
26. (RAS-4) E Street improvements, 1-5 to 300' east ofNB ramp
27. (RAS-5) E Street LRT grade separation (underpass LRT option)
28. (RAS-6) H Street LRT grade separation (underpass LRT option)
29. (RAS- 7) H Street at Broadway EB queue jumper lane & traffic signal modifications
30. (RAS-8) H Street 14'-wide median & street light improvements (same as RAS-9)
31. (RAS-9) H Street widening to 6-1anes from Interstate-5 to Broadway
32. (RAS-lO) H Street improvements from Second Ave to Hilltop Drive
33. (RAS-11) East H St. north side improvements from Hilltop Dr. to 1-805
34. (RAS-12) L StreetlBay Blvd traffic signal & add turn lanes
35. (RAS-B) L Street improvements south side west of Industrial Blvd
36. (RAS-14) Telegraph Canyon Road at 1-805 south side sidewalk
37. (RAS-15) Orange A venue from Palomar Street to Hilltop Drive
38. (RAS-16) Palomar Street improvements from 1-5 to 1-805
5-59
ORD #4
39. (RAS-17) Main St. improvements from 1-5 to 1-805 (See GPU Table 5.10-6)
40. (RAS-I8) H St/4th Ave add WB-NB & EB-SB right turn lanes
41. (RAS-I9) H St/4th Ave add WB-NB & EB-SB right turn lanes
General Plan Impacts and Mitigations
42. (GP-I) E. St. from Marina to 1-5
43. (GP-2) Marina Parkway from E-J St.
44. (GP-3) L St. from Hilltop to 1-805
45. (GP-4) Main St. from 1-5 to Broadway
46. (GP-5) Main St. from Broadway to Hilltop Dr.
47. (GP-6) Third Avenue from L St. to Palomar St.
48. (GP-7) H St. from Marina to 1-5
49. (GP-8) J St. from Marina to 1-5
Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities Improvements (21 % WTDIF share per GPU)
50. (BP-I) Bayshore Bikeway (bike path) between E Street & F Streets
51. (BP-2) F Street sidewalklbike lane improvements from 1-5 to Fourth A venue
52. (BP-3) Industrial Blvd improvements & bike lanes from L St. to Main Street
53. (BP-4) Main Street bike lanes from Industrial Blvd & 1-805
54. (BP-5) Orange A ve. bike lanes from Palomar St. to Hilltop Drive
55. (BP-6) Develop bicycle paths & pedestrian access to Third Avenue
Midbayfront Local Coastal Program Roadways
56. (Mid-I) E Street restripe to add EB-NB dual left turn to NB 1-5 on-ramp.
57. (Mid-2) 1-5/E St. SB off-ramp widening to add fourth lane
58. (Mid-3) Bay Blvd 15' widening along Westerly Curb Line at E St. approach for
I SB/3NB
59. (Mid-4) 1-5/E S1. NB widen off-ramp to add 3rd lane for Right Turn only lane
60. (Mid-5) E St revisions to median and North Curb Line east of 1-5 to add 3rd WB
lane.
5-60
ORD#4
61. (Mid-6) Marina Parkway 4-lane from E St. to ] St.
62. (Mid-7) E St./Woodlawn Ave EB-SB RT lane plus a Traffic Signal)
63. (Mid-8) E St. at Broadway add WB & EB LT lane + WB & EB RT only lane. plus
a Traffic Signal & No R/W costs.
64. (Mid-9) F StJBroadway restriping to provide EB-SB & WB-NB RT lane
65. (Mid-IO) H Street widening at Broadway for WB Tbru & EB Tbru & RT only.
Other Roadways
66. (OR-I) N. 4th Avenue/Brisbane Ave traffic signal modifications
67. (OR-2) Second Avenue/D Street all-way stop installation
3.55.040 Territorv to which fee aoolicable.
The area of the City of Chula Vista to which the fee herein established shall be applicable is the
territorial limits of the western portion of the City of Chula Vista ("territory") as defmed above, as they
may from time to time be amended.
3.55.050 Establishment of a fee.
A development impact fee ("fee") is hereby established to pay for the facilities within the territory. The
fee shall be paid upon the issuance of building permits for each development project within the western
portion of the City of ChuJa Vista. The WTDIF fee in the amounts set forth in CVMC 3.55.030 is
hereby established to pay for transportation improvements and facilities within the western portion of
the City of Chula Vista.
3.55.060 Determination of fees bv land use catelWrv.
A. For purposes of this fee, single-family dwelling units shall include single-
family detached homes and detached condominiums; multifamily dwelling
units shall include attached condominiums, townhouses, duplexes, triplexes,
and apartments. The density of the development type shall be based on the
number of dwelling units per gross acre for single-family or multifamily
residential and shall be based upon the densities identified on the approved
tentative map or approved tentative parcel map entitling the development
unless otherwise approved in writing by the City Manager's designee.
B. Commercial/office and industrial development projects shall be charged on a
per acre or per square footage basis. For purposes of this fee, gross acreage
and lor square footage as it applies to the commercial, industrial and office
development types, means all land area that the City Manager's designee
deems necessary within the boundary of the parcel or parcels of the
development project for which building permits are being requested.
C. The fee multiplied by the total number of dwelling units, square footage or
acres within a given development project represents a developer's fair share
("fair share") for that development project.
3.55.070 Time to determine amount due.
ORD # 4
5-61
The fee for each development shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance and shall be
the amount as indicated at that time, and not when the tentative map or frnal map were granted or
applied for, or when the building permit plan check was conducted, or when application was made for
the building permit. No building permit shall be issued unless the development impact fee is paid. The
fees shall be deposited into a WTDIF fund, which is hereby created, and shall be expended only for the
purposes set forth in this chapter. The Director of Finance is authorized to establish various accounts
within the fund for the various improvements and facilities identifred in this chapter and to periodically
make expenditures from the fund for the purposes set forth herein in accordance with the facilities
phasing plan or capital improvement plan adopted by the City Council. The City Council frnds that
collection of the fees established by this chapter at the time of the building permlt is necessary to
ensure that funds will be available for the construction of facilities concurrent with the need for those
facilities and to ensure certainty in the capital facilities budgeting for the western part of the City.
3.55.080 PurDose and use offee.
The fees collected shall be used by the City for the following purposes as determined by the City
Council:
I. To pay for the construction of facilities by the City, or to reimburse
the City for facilities installed by the City with funds from other
sources.
2. To reimburse developers who have been required by
CVMC3.55.150 A to install improvements that are major streets
and are listed in CVMC 3.55.030.
3. To reimburse developers who have been permitted to install
improvements pursuant to CVMC 3.55.150 B.
3.55.090 Amount of fee.
A. The fee shall be the amounts as set forth below in Table 1. The fee shall be adjusted on July I
of each year beginning in 2009. The annual inflation adjustment will be 2 % or based on
Caltrans highway construction cost index, whichever is higher. The program collects 2% of the
total improvement cost estimate for staff administration and an additional 1% for SANDAG
Administrative costs.
B. Adjustments of the fee based upon the annual inflation adjustment or the Caltrans Highway
Construction Cost Index shall be automatic and shall not require further action by the City
Council. The WTDIF may also be reviewed and amended by the City Council as necessary
based on changes in the type, size, location or cost of the facilities to be frnanced by the fee;
changes in land use designation in the City's General Plan; and upon other sound engineering,
financing and planning information.
5-62
ORD#4
"
Table 1
PROPOSED WTDIF FEE PER LAND
USE CLASSIFICATION
Pro Dosed TDIF Fee per EDU: I $3,243.00
'Land Use C1assificatiori .. I I EDUs I TDIF Rate
RESIDENTIAL
Residential (LOW) 0-6 dwelling units Der acre I Der EDU $3,2431 DU
K.esidential (MED) 6.1 To 20 dwelling units Der acre .8per EDU $2,5941 DU
K.esidential rmOR) Over 20 dwelling units Der acre .6 per EDU $1,9461 DU
Mobile Home . . .5 per EDU $1,6221 DU
COMMERCIAL
Contain 1-5 major dept. stores & usually have
more than 50 tenants. Typically larger than 40
Regional Commercial acres. 20 EDUI Acre $64,860 I Acre
Smaller in that size than regional. Contain junior
Dept. Store or variety Store,( i.e. Target Center
with other commercial stores)as a major tenant
and have 15 to 50 other tenants. Smaller in size,
Community Commercial 8-20 acres. 28EDU/Acre $90,8041 Acre
iNei"hborhood Commercial Less than I 0 acres. Includes supermarket and
drug store. Mav include office SDaces. 48EDU/Acre $155,6641 Acre
iNei"hborhood Commercial Same as above but in Square Footage 4.8 EDU/KSF $15,664/KSF
Commercial activities found along major streets,
not in a planned center with limited on-site
Street Front Commercial Ioarking. 16EDU/Acre $51,8881 Acre
Retail Commercial SDecialtv Retail/StriD Commercial 16EDUlAcre $51,888/KSF
!usually located near transportation facilities.
Structures are usually large and cover majority of
be parcel. Examples are clothing and supply,
Wholesale Trade also includes swaD meet areas. 24EDU/Acre $77,832/Acre
OFFICE
High Rise Office More than 100,000 S.F. and 6+ Stories 60 EDUI Acre $194,580 I Acre
L.ow Rise Office < 6 Stories 30 EDUI Acre $97,290/Acre
Low Rise Office (in thousands < 6 Stories
of souare feet) 2 EDU/KSF $6,4861 KSF
Medical Office Medical and Dental Facilities 50EDU/Acre $162,150/ Acre
LODGING
Low Rise Hotel/Motel < 4 Stories 20EDU/Acre $64,860/Acre
Low Rise Hotel or Motel < 4 Stories I EDU/Room $3,2431 Room
High Rise Hotel >=4 Stories 30lEDU/Acre $97,290 I Acre
INDUSTRY
Shipbuilding, airframe, and aircraft
Imanufacturing. Usually located next to
lHeavy Industrv transportation facilities and commercial areas.
Iparcels are typically 20-50 Acre. 12EDU/Acre $38,916/Acre
~arehouse/Storage lusually large buildings located near freeways,
industrial or strip commercial areas. 6EDU/Acre $19,4581 Acre
Office/industrial uses clustered into a center. The
primary uses are industrial by may include high
percentages of other uses in service or retail
Industrial Park activities. 9 EDUI Acre $29,187 I Acre
Light Industrial All other industrial uses and manufacturing not
included in categories above. 20EDU/Acre $64,860 I Acre
ORD # 4
5-63
3.55.100 Development projects exempt from the fee.
A. Development projects by public agencies shall be exempt from the provisions of the fee if those
projects are designed to provide the public service for which the agency is charged ("public
purpose").
B. Community purpose facilities which are not operated for profit ("nonprofit community purpose
facilities") are also exempt inasmuch as these institutions provide benefit to the community as a
whole, including all land use categories which are the subject matter of the fee. The City
Council hereby determines that it is appropriate to spread any impact such nonprofit
community purpose facilities might have to the other land use categories subject to the fee. In
the event that a court determines that the exemption herein extended to community purpose
facilities shall for any reason be invalid, the City Council hereby allocates the nonprofit
community purpose facilities' fair share to the City of Chula Vista and not to any of the land
use categories which are the subject matter of the development impact land use categories.
C. Development projects which are additions or expansions to existing dwelling units or
businesses, except special land use projects, shall be exempt if the addition or expansion does
not result in a net increase in dwelling units or commercial/industrial acreage.
3.55.110 Authority for accountine: and expenditures.
A. The fees collected shall be deposited into a Western Transportation Development Impact Fee
financing fund ("WTDIF fee fund," or "fund"), which is hereby created and shall be expended
only for the purposes set forth in this chapter.
B. The director of finance is authorized to establish a single fund for the various facilities
identified in this chapter and to periodically make expenditures from the fund for the purposes
set forth herein.
3.55.120 Findine:s.
The City Council fmds that:
A. Collection of the fee established by this chapter at the time of the building permit issuance is
necessary to provide funds for the transportation facilities identified in CVMC 3.55.030 and to
ensure certainty in the capital facilities budgeting for growth impacted public transportation
facilities; and
B. The purpose of the Fees hereby enacted prevents new development from reducing the quality
and availability of public transportation infrastructure facilities provided to residents of the City
by requiring new development to contribute to the cost of additional capital transportation
infrastructure improvements needed to meet the growth generated by such development; and
C. The revenue from the fees hereby enacted will be used to construct public facilities and
infrastructure and pay for other capital expenditures needed to serve new development as
identified in the Engineer's Report dated February, 2008; and
D. Based on analysis presented in the Engineer's Report there is a reasonable relationship between
1. The use of the fees and the types of development projects on which they are imposed and
2. The need for facilities and the types of development projects on which the fees are imposed.
3. The amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility or portion of the public facility
attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.
5-64
ORD # 4
3.55.130 Fee additional to other fees and chare:es.
This fee is in addition to the requirements imposed by other City laws, policies or regulations relating
to the construction or the financing of the construction of public improvements within subdivisions or
developments
3.55.150 Developer construction oftransportation facilities.
A. Whenever a developer of a development project would be required by application of City law
or policy, as a condition of approval of a development permit to construct or finance the
construction of a portion of a transportation facility identified in Section 3.55.030 the City
Council may impose an additional requirement that the developer install the improvements
with supplemental size, length or capacity in order to ensure efficient and timely construction
of the transportation facilities network. If such a requirement is imposed, the City Council
shall, in its discretion, enter into a reimbursement agreement with the developer, or give a
credit against the fee otherwise levied by this chapter on the development project, or some
combination thereof.
B. Whenever a developer requests reimbursement, or a credit against fees, for work to be done or
paid for by the developer under subsection (A) of this section, the request shall be submitted in
writing to the City Manager's designee.
1. The request shall contain a description of the project with a detailed cost estimate
which itemizes those costs of the construction attributable to the transportation facility
project and excludes any work attributable to a specific subdivision project. The
estimate is preliminary and the amount of reimbursement or credit against fees is
subject to fmal determination by the City Manager's designee. Additional information
shall be provided to the City by the developer upon request of the City.
2. Such reimbursement or credit against fees shall be subject to the following conditions:
a. Requirements of Developer.
i. Preparation of plans and specifications for approval by the City;
ii. Secure and dedicate any right-of-way required for the transportation facility
project;
iii. Secure all required permits and environmental clearances necessary for the
transportation facility project;
iv. Provision of performance bonds (where the developer intends to utilize provisions
for immediate credit, the performance bond shall be for 100 percent of the value of the
transportation facility project);
v. Payment of all City fees and costs.
b. The City will not be responsible for any of the costs of constructing the
transportation facility project. The developer shall advance all necessary funds to construct the
transportation facility project.
c. The developer shall secure at least three qualified bids for work to be done and shall
award the construction contract to the lowest qualified bidder. The developer may combine the
construction of the transportation facility project with other development-related work and
award one construction contract for the combined work based on a clearly identified process
for determining the low bidder, all as approved by the City Manager's designee. Should the
construction contract be awarded to a qualified bidder who did not submit the lowest bid for
the transportation facility project portion of the contract, the developer will only receive
transportation development impact fee credit based on the lowest bid for the transportation
facility portion of the contract. Any claims for additional payment for extra work or charges
shall be justified, shall be documented to the satisfaction of the City Manager's designee and
ORD#4
5-65
shall only be reimbursed at the prices for similar work included in the lowest bid for the
transportation facility portion of the contract.
d. Upon complying with the conditions set forth in subsections (B)(1) and (B)(2)(a) of
this section as determined by the City and upon approval of the estimated cost by the City
Manager's designee, the developer shall be entitled to immediate credit for 50 percent of the
estimated cost of the construction attributable to the transportation facility project. Once the
developer has received valid bids for the project which comply with subsection (B)(2)( c) of
this section, entered into binding contracts for the construction of the project, and met the
conditions set forth in subsections (B)(1) and (B)(2)(a) of this section as determined by the
City, all of which have been approved by the City Manager's designee, the amount of the
immediate credit shall be increased to 75 percent of the bid amount attributable to the
transportation facility project. The immediate credits shall be applied to the developer's
obligation to pay transportation development impact fees for building permits issued after the
establishment of the credit. The developer shall specify these building permits to which the
credit is to be applied at the time the developer submits the building permit applications.
e. If the developer uses all of the immediate credit before fmal completion of the
transportation facility project, then the developer may defer payment of development impact
fees for other building permits by providing to the City liquid security such as cash or an
irrevocable letter of credit, but not bonds. or set-aside letters, in an amount equal to the
remaining amount of the estimated cost of the transportation facility project.
f. When all work has been completed to the satisfaction of the City, the developer shall
submit verification of payments made for the construction of the transportation facility project
to the City. The City Manager's designee shall make the final determination on expenditures
which are eligible for credit or cash reimbursement.
g. After fmal determination of eligible expenditures has been made by the City
Manager's designee and the developer has complied with the conditions set forth in subsection
(B) of this section, the final amount of transportation development impact fee credits shall be
determined by the City Manager's designee. The developer shall receive credit against the
deferred fee obligation in an amount equal to the difference between the final expenditure
determination and the amount of the 75 percent immediate credit used, if any. The City shall
notify the developer of the final deferred fee obligation, and of the amount of the applicable
credit. If the amount of the applicable credit is less than the deferred fee obligation, then the
developer shall have 30 days to pay the deferred fee. If the deferred fees are not paid within the
30-day period, the City may make a demand against the liquid security and apply the proceeds
to the fee obligation.
h. At the time building permits are issued for the developer's project, the City will
incrementally apply credit which the developer has accrued in lieu of collecting the required
transportation development impact fees. The amount of the credit to be applied to each
building permit shall be based upon the fee schedule in effect at the time of the building permit
issuance. The City Manager's designee shall convert such credit to an EDU basis for
residential development and/or a gross acre basis for commercial or industrial development for
purposes of determining the amount of credit to be applied to each building permit.
i. If the total eligible construction cost for the transportation facility proj ect is more than
the total transportation development impact fees which will be required for the developer's
project, then the amount in excess of development impact fees will be paid in cash when funds
are available as determined by the City Manager; a reimbursement agreement will be executed;
or the developer may waive reimbursement and use the excess as credit against future
transportation development impact fee obligations. The City may, in its discretion, enter into
an agreement with the developer to convert excess credit into EDU and/or gross acre credits for
5-66
ORD#4
use against future development impact fee obligations at the fee rate in effect on the date of the
agreement.
j. The requirements of this subsection (B) of this section may, in the City's discretion,
be modified through an agreement between the developer and the City and approved by City
Council.
C. Whenever a transportation development impact fee credit is generated by
constructing a transportation facility using assessment district or community
facilities district financing, the credit shall only be applied to the
transportation development impact fee obligations within that district.
3.55.160 Procedure for fee waiver or reduction.
A. Any developer who, because of the nature or type of uses proposed for a
development project, contends that application. of the fee imposed by this
chapter is unconstitutional,. or unrelated to mitigation of the traffic needs or
burdens of the development, may apply to the City Council for a waiver,
reduction, or deferral of the fee. A development which is designed and
intended as a temporary use (10 years or less) and which is conducted in
facilities which are, by their nature, short-term interim facilities such as a
portable or modular building (including mobile homes, trailers, etc.) may
qualify for a waiver, reduction, or deferral. In addition, a deferral may be
granted on the basis of demonstrated economic hardship' on the condition that:
(1) the use offers a significant public benefit; (2) the amount deferred bears
interest at a fair market rate so as to constitute an approximate value
equivalent to a cash payment; and (3) the amount deferred is adequately
secured by agreement with the applicant. Unless the requirement for timely
filing is waived by the City, the application shall be made in writing and filed
with the City Clerk not later than 10 days after notice of the public hearing on
the development permit application or the project is given, or if no
development permit is required, at the time of the filing of the building permit
application. The application shall state in detail the factual basis for the claim
of waiver or reduction.
B. The City Council shall consider the application at a public hearing on same,
notice of which need not be published other than by description on the agenda
of the meeting at which the public hearing is held. Said public hearing should
be held within 60 days after its filing. The decision of the City Council shall
be final. If a deferral, reduction or waiver is granted, it should be granted
pursuant to an agreement with the applicant, and the property owner, if
different from the applicant, providing that any change in use within the
project shall subject the development to payment of the full fee. The procedure
provided by this section is additional to any other procedure authorized by law
for protesting or challenging the fee imposed by this chapter.
3.55.170 Exemptions.
Development projects by public agencies shall be exempt from the provisions of this fee. Exempt
development uses with the following characteristics or activities as a principal use of land, generally
described as "community purpose facility" as defined above in CVMC Section 3.55.020.
ORD # 4
5-67
3.55.180 Assessment districts.
If any assessment or special taxing district is established for any or all of the facilities listed in Section
3.55.030 the owner or developer of a project may apply to the City Council for a credit against the fee
in an amount equal to the development's attributable portion of the cost of the authorized
improvements as determined by the City Manager's designee, plus incidental costs normally occurring
with a construction project, but excluding costs associated with assessment district proceedings or
fmancing.
3.55.190 Economic incentive credit.
The City Council may authorize the City to participate in the fmancing of transportation facility
projects or portions of transportation facility projects as defined in Section 3.55.030 at the time of the
appropriation of funds by City Council for the construction of an eligible transportation facility, the
City shall be eligible to receive a credit known hereafter as an economic incentive credit. Such
economic incentive credit may be applied to development impact fee obligations for those proj ects
which the City Council determines, in its sole discretion, to be beneficial to the City. The use of the
economic incentive credit may be subject to conditions which shall be set forth in a written agreement
between the developer of the project and the City and approved by City Council.
. The City may receive economic incentive credit only for those eligible projects identified in Section
3.55.030 for amounts of funding not identified in the financial and engineering study "Western
Transportation Development Impact Fee" report dated February 2008.
3.55.195 Fund loans.
A.
B.
Loans by the City. The City may loan funds to the fund to pay for
facilities should the fund have insufficient funds to cover the cost of
said facility. Said loans, if granted, shall be approved upon the adoption
of the annual City budget or upon resolution of the City Council and
shall carry interest rates as set by the City Council for each fiscal year.
A schedule for repayment of said loans shall be established at the time
they are made and approved by the Council, with a maximum term not
to exceed the life of the fund.
Developer Loans. A developer may loan funds to the City as outlined
in CVMC 3.55.150. The City may repay said developer loans with
interest, under the terms listed in subsection (A) of this section.
3.55.200 Effective date.
This chapter shall become effective
SECTION 3: Effective Date
This Ordinance shall become effective 60 days after its second reading and adoption.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Jack Griffm
Engineering and General Services Director
Ann Moore
City Attorney
5-68
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING
THE WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT
FEE REPORT (TF-358) PREPARED BY STAFF AND
ESTABLISHING A WESTERN TRANSPORTATION
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAM TO MITIGATE
TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS WITHIN WESTERN CHULA
VISTA INCLUDING PROJECT OR-4
WHEREAS, the adoption of the City's General plan indicated that future growth was going to
occur in the City west of! -805; and
WHEREAS, the traffic studies for the City's General Plan and the Urban Core Specific Plan
show the City's transportation network will be impacted by new development within the western
portion of the City unless new transportation facilities are added to accommodate the new
development; and
WHEREAS, since January 1987, the City has had a program in place for the collection of a
transportation development impact fee for the fmancing of street improvements in the area east of
Interstate 805.
WHEREAS, the Engineer's Report establishes that the transportation facilities necessitated by
development within the western portion of the City comprise an integrated network; and
WHEREAS, the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee is solely based upon that
portion of the proj ect costs which are attributable to new development; and
WHEREAS, on March 4, 2008, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista held a duly noticed
public hearing at which oral or written presentations regarding the Western Transportation
Development Impact Fee could be made; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Municipal Code and California Government Code Sections 66000,
et. seq., the City Council has accepted a report entitled "Engineer's Report for the Western
Transportation Development Impact Fee" ("Engineer's Report") dated February, 2008 that analyzed
the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee necessary to fund transportation facilities needed
to serve future development within the western portion of the City; and
WHEREAS, the City's 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; ther<;:fore,
pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista is placing this ordinance on its first
reading which will establish a development impact fee per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) to finance
transportation facilities within the western portion of the City of Chula Vista; and
ORD#5
5-69
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 660l7(a), the fees proposed by this
ordinance will not become effective until sixty (60) days after its fust reading; and
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED, that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
does hereby adopt Chapter 3.55 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code relating to transportation
development impact fees to pay for various transportation facilities located on the westside of the City
as follows:
SECTION 1: Findings
The City Council finds, after consideration of the evidence presented to it including the "Engineer's
Report for the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee" dated February, 2008, that the
creation of a transportation development impact fee is necessary in order to assure that there are
sufficient funds available to finance the transportation facilities necessary to serve development west
ofI-80S; and
The City Council finds that new development within the western portion of the City of Chula Vista
should be required to mitigate the burden created by development through the construction of
transportation facilities; and
The City Council finds, based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, and consistent with the
City's General Plan, and the various reports and information received by the City Council in the
ordinary course of its business, that the imposition of traffic impact fees on all development within the
western portion of the City of Chula Vista for which building permits have not been issued is
necessary in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare by providing for the public
transportation facilities to assure effective implementation of the City's General Plan; and
The City Council finds that the amount of the proposed fees levied by this ordinance does not exceed
the estimated cost of providing the transportation facilities.
SECTION 2: Chapter 3.55 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is hereby adopted and shall read as
follows:
3.55.010 General intent.
The City's General Plan Land Use and Transportation Element requires that adequate public facilities
be available to accommodate increased population created by new development within the City of
Chula Vista.
The City Council has determined that new development will create adverse impacts on the City's
existing public transportation facilities which must be mitigated by the financing and construction of
certain public transportation facilities which are the subject of this chapter. New development
contributes to the cumulative burden on these public transportation facilities in direct relationship to
the amount of vehicular traffic and population generated by the development or the gross acreage of
the commercial or industrial land in the development.
The City Council has determined that a reasonable means of financing the public transportation
facilities is to charge a fee on all developments within the western portion of the City. imposition of
the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee on all new development for which building
5-70
ORD # 5
permits have not yet been issued is necessary in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare,
thereby ensuring effective implementation of the City's General Plan.
3.55.020 Definitions.
For the purposes of this chapter, the following words or phrases shall be construed as defined herein,
unless from the context it appears that a different meaning is intended.
A. "Building permit" means a permit required by and issued pursuant to the
Uniform Building Code.
B. "City Engineer" means the City Engineer, the City Engineer's designee or the
City Manager's designee.
C. "Density" means dwelling units per gross acre identified for each planning
area shown on the approved tentative map or approved tentative parcel map or
as determined by the City Manager's designee.
D. "Developer" means the owner or developer of a development.
E. "Development permit" means any discretionary permit, entitlement or
approval for a development project issued under any zoning or subdivision
ordinance of the City.
F. "Development project" or "development" means any activity described as the
following:
I. Any new residential dwelling unit developed on vacant land;
2. Any new commercial/office or industrial development constructed on vacant land;
3. Any expansions to established developments or new developments on nonvacant land in
those land use categories listed in subsections (F)(l) and (2) of this section, if the result
is a net increase in dwelling units. The fee shall be based solely on this net dwelling unit
increase;
4. Any new or expanding special land use project;
5. Any special purpose project developed on vacant land or nonvacant land, or expanded
within a pre-existing site, if the result is a net increase in dwelling units. The fee shall
be based solely on this net dwelling unit increase;
6. Any other development project not listed above but described in Section 65927 and
65928 of the State Government Code.
"Community purpose facility" means a facility which serves one of the following purposes:
1. Social service activities, including such services as Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts, Boys
and Girls Club, Alcoholics Anonymous and services for the homeless;
2. Public schools;
3. Private schools;
4. Day care;
5. Senior care and recreation;
6. Worship, spiritual growth and development.
H. "Western portion of the City of Chula Vista" generally means that area of the
City located between the City boundary on the west, Interstate 805 on the east,
the CitY boundary on the north and the City's boundary on the south, as shown
on the map entitled "Figure 1" of the Engineering study.
1. "Engineering study" and "Engineer's Report" means the Engineer's Report for
the Western Transportation Development Impact Fee dated February, 2008
and prepared by City staff on file in the Office of the City Clerk.
J. "Regional Arterial System" (RAS) RAS roadways are generally described as
those facilities that act as a critical link in providing direct connections
between communities ensuring system continuity and congestion relief in high
ORD # 5
5-71
volume corridors. They are roadways that are listed in the most recent edition
of SANDAG's Regional Transportation Plan
K. "Special land use" means any nonresidential, non-commercial/office or
nonindustrial development project (e.g., Olympic Training Center, hospitals,
utilities), or non-special purpose project.
L. "Special purpose project" means any for-profit community purpose facility
(e.g., day care).
3.55.030 Public transportation facilities to be fmanced bv the fee.
A. The public transportation facilities ("facilities") which are the subject matter of the fee, are
listed below as detailed in subsection C of this section and in the Engineer's Report on file in
the Office of the City Clerk.
B. The City Council may modify or amend the list of projects in order to maintain compliance
with the circulation element of the City's General Plan.
C. The facilities are as follows:
1. (1-5-1) 1-5IB Street NB off-ramp restriping add lane
2. (1-5-2) 1-5IB Street/Bay Blvd SB off-ramp restriping add lane
3. (1-5-3) 1-5/NB ramp widening at E, H, J, Ind., Palomar & Main Sts (21%)
4. (1-5-4) E Street bridge widening over 1-5 (250' X 20' X $350/sf)
5. (1-5-5) F Street bridge widening over 1-5 (250' X 20' X $350/sf
6. (1-5-6) 1-5/H Street NB off-ramp restriping add lane
7. (1-5-7) 1-5/H Street SB off-ramp restriping add lane
8. (1-5-8) H Street bridge widening over 1-5 (200'X40'X$350/sf)
9. (1-5-9) 1-5/J Street NB off-ramp restriping add lane
10. (1-5-10) 1-5/J Street undercrossing widening add EB-NB (175x20X$350)
11. (1-5-11) L Street bridge widening over 1-5 (S/W for peds 300' X 12')(21%)
12. (1-5-12) 1-5/Bay Blvd (south ofL St.) SB on/off ramps traffic signal
13. (1-5-13) 1-5/Industrial Blvd NB on/off ramps traffic signal
14. (1-5-14) 1-5/Palomar Street bridge widening (2751fX 501fX $350/sf)
15. (1-5-15) 1-5/Main Street NB on/off ramps traffic signal (CV share $120k)
16. (1-5-16) 1-5/Main Street bridge widening (2751fX 20lfX $350/sf)
17. (I-5-17) 1-5 HOV & Managed LanesfromSR905 to SR54 (63.4% in CJ1
18. STM 361
5-72
ORD#5
a. 1-5 Multi-Modal Corridor Study (80% Fed. DEMO funds)
b. (SANDAG cost estimate is $4.3M & CV share TBD.)
Interstate-80S Improvements
19. (I-805-1) NB on-ramp widening & metering at Bonita, East H St (EB-NB),
Telegraph Canyon Road (Project 1-805-1 IS 100% funded in 2006 RTIP with State
funds.)
20. (I-S05-2) Main St. undercrossing widening for EB-NB left turn lane
State Route 54 Improvements
21. (SR-54-I) SR-54 WB off-ramp restripe at Broadway
22. (SR-54-2) SR-54 EB off-ramp atN. Fourth Avenue - add ramp lane
Regional Arterial System (RAS) Projects
23. (RAS-I) Bonita Road from First Avenue to 1-805
24. (RAS-2) Broadway from C Street to south of Main Street (City Limits)
25. (RAS-3) E Street improvements - First Ave to Bonita Road/E. Flower St
26. (RAS-4) E Street improvements, 1-5 to 300' east ofNB ramp
27. (RAS-5) E Street LRT grade separation (underpass LRT option)
28. (RAS-6) H Street LRT grade separation (underpass LRT option)
29. (RAS-7) H Street at Broadway EB queue jumper lane & traffic signal modifications
30. (RAS-8) H Street 14'-wide median & street light improvements (same as RAS-9)
31. (RAS-9) H Street widening to 6-lanes from Interstate-5 to Broadway
32. (RAS-IO) H Street improvements from Second Ave to Hilltop Drive
33. (RAS-II) East H St. north side improvements from Hilltop Dr. to 1-805
34. (RAS-12) L Street/Bay Blvd traffic signal & add turn lanes
35. (RAS-13) L Street improvements south side west of Industrial Blvd
36. (RAS-14) Telegraph Canyon Road at 1-805 south side sidewalk
37. (RAS-15) Orange A venue from Palomar Street to Hilltop Drive
38. (RAS-16) Palomar Street improvements from 1-5 to 1-805
5-73
ORD # 5
39. (RAS-17) Main Sf. improvements from 1-5 to I-80S (See GPU Table 5.10-6)
40. (RAS-I8) H St/4th Ave add WB-NB & EB-SB right turn lanes
41. (RAS-19) H St/4th Ave add WB-NB & EB-SB right turn lanes
General Plan Impacts and Mitigations
42. (GP-I) E. S1. from Marina to 1-5
43. (GP-2) Marina Parkway from E-] S1.
44. (GP-3) L S1. from Hilltop to I-80S
45. (GP-4) Main St. from 1-5 to Broadway
46. (GP-5) Main S1. from Broadway to Hilltop Dr.
47. (GP-6) Third Avenue from L S1. to Palomar S1.
48. (GP-7) H S1. from Marina to 1-5
49. (GP-8) J S1. from Marina to 1-5
Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities Improvements (21 % WTDIF share per GPU)
50. (BP-I) Bayshore Bikeway (bike path) between E Street & F Streets
51. (BP-2) F Street sidewalklbike lane improvements from 1-5 to Fourth A venue
52. (BP-3) Industrial Blvd improvements & bike lanes from L St. to Main Street
53. (BP-4) Main Street bike lanes from Industrial Blvd & I-80S
54. (BP-5) Orange A ve. bike lanes from Palomar St. to Hilltop Drive
55. (BP-6) Develop bicycle paths & pedestrian access to Third Avenue
Midbayfront Local Coastal Program Roadways
56. (Mid-I) E Street restripe to add EB-NB dual left turn to NB 1-5 on-ramp.
57. (Mid-2) I-5/E St. SB off-ramp widening to add fourth lane
58. (Mid-3) Bay Blvd 15' widening along Westerly Curb Line at E S1. approach for
I SB/3NB
59. (Mid-4) I-5IE S1. NB widen off-ramp to add 3rd lane for Right Turn only lane
60. (Mid-5) E St revisions to median and North Curb Line east of 1-5 to add 3rd WB
lane.
5-74
ORD#5
61. (Mid-6) Marina Parkway 4-lane from E St. to J St.
62. (Mid-7) E St.!Woodlawn Ave EB-SB RT lane plus a Traffic Signal)
63. (Mid-8) E St. at Broadway add WB & EB LT lane + WB & EB RT only lane. plus
a Traffic Signal & No RJW costs.
64. (Mid-9) F St/Broadway restriping to provide EB-SB & WB-NB RT lane
65. (Mid-IO) H Street widening at Broadway for WB Thru & EB Thru & RT only.
Other Roadways
66. (OR-I) N. 4th Avenue/Brisbane Ave traffic signal modifications
67. (OR-2) Second Avenue/D Street all-way stop installation
68. (OR-4) Traffic Management Center (30% TDIF/30% WTDIF/40% TSFund)
3.55.040 Territorv to which fee applicable.
The area of the City of Chula Vista to which the fee herein established shall be applicable is the
territorial limits of the western portion of the City of Chula Vista ("territory") as defined above, as they
may from time to time be amended.
3.55.050 Establishment of a fee.
A development impact fee ("fee") is hereby established to pay for the facilities within the territory. The
fee shall be paid upon the issuance of building permits for each development project within the western
portion of the City of Chula Vista. The WTDIF fee in the amounts set forth in CVMC 3.55.030 is
hereby established to pay for transportation improvements and facilities within the western portion of
the City of Chula Vista.
3.55.060 Determination of fees bv land use cateeorv.
A. For purposes of this fee, single-family dwelling units shall include single-
family detached homes and detached condominiums; multifamily dwelling
units shall include attached condominiums, townhouses, duplexes, triplexes,
and apartments. The density of the development type shall be based on the
number of dwelling units per gross acre for single-family or multifamily
residential and shall be based upon the densities identified on the approved
tentative map or approved tentative parcel map entitling the development
unless otherwise approved in writing by the City Manager's designee.
B. Commercial/office and industrial development projects shall be charged on a
per acre or per square footage basis. For purposes of this fee, gross acreage
and lor square footage as it applies to the commercial, industrial and office
development types, means all land area that the City Manager's designee
deems necessary within the boundary of the parcel or parcels of the
development project for which building permits are being requested.
C. The fee multiplied by the total number of dwelling units, square footage or
acres within a given development project represents a developer's fair share
("fair share") for that development project.
ORO # 5
5-75
3.55.070 Time to determine amount due.
The fee for each development shalI be calculated at the time of building permit issuance and shall be
the amount as indicated at that time, and not when the tentative map or final map were granted or
applied for, or when the building permit plan check was conducted, or when application was made for
the building permit. No building permit shall be issued unless the development impact fee is paid. The
fees shall be deposited into a WTDIF fund, which is hereby created, and shall be expended only for the
purposes set forth in this chapter. The Director of Finance is authorized to establish various accounts
within the fund for the various improvements and facilities identified in this chapter and to periodically
make expenditures from the fund for the purposes set forth herein in accordance with the facilities
phasing plan or capital improvement plan adopted by the City Council. The City Council finds that
colIection of the fees established by this chapter at the time of the building permit is necessary to
ensure that funds will be available for the construction of facilities concurrent with the need for those
facilities and to ensure certainty in the capital facilities budgeting for the western part of the City.
3.55.080 Purpose and use of fee.
The fees collected shall be used by the City for the following purposes as determined by the City
Council:
I. To pay for the construction of facilities by the City, or to reimburse
the City for facilities installed by the City with funds from other
sources.
2. To reimburse developers who have been required by
CVMC3.55.150 A to install improvements that are major streets
and are listed in CVMC 3.55.030.
3. To reimburse developers who have been permitted to install
improvements pursuant to CVMC 3.55.150 B.
3.55.090 Amount of fee.
A. The fee shall be the amounts as set forth below in Table I. The fee shall be adjusted on July 1
of each year beginning in 2009. The annual inflation adjustment will be 2 % or based on
Caltrans highway construction cost index, whichever is higher. The program collects 2% of the
total improvement cost estimate for staff administration and an additional 1 % for SANDAG
Administrative costs.
B. Adjustments of the fee based upon the annual inflation adjustment or the Caltrans Highway
Construction Cost Index shall be automatic and shall not require further action by the City
Council. The WTDIF may also be reviewed and amended by the City Council as necessary
based on changes in the type, size, location or cost of the facilities to be financed by the fee;
changes in land use designation in the City's General Plan; and upon other sound engineering,
financing and planning information.
5-76
ORD#5
Table 1
PROPOSED WTDIF FEE PER LAND
USE CLASSIFICATION
Proposed TDIF Fee per EDU: r $3,243.00
" ce- , I
Land Use Classification ED Us TDIF Rate
RESIDENTIAL
R.esidential (LOW) 0-6 dwellin~ units ner acre 1 per EDU $3,2431 DU
Residential IMED) 6.1 To 20 dwellin~ units oer acre .8 per EDU $2,594 I DU
Residential <HIGH) Over 20 dwelIin2 units ner acre .6 per EDU $1,946/DU
Mobile Home , .5 per EDU $1,6221 DU
COMMERCIAL ,
Contain 1-5 major dept. stores & usually have
Re2ional Commercial ~ore than 50 tellants. Typically larger than 40
acres. 20 EDUI Acre $64,860 I Acre
Smaller in that size than regional. Contain junior
Dept. Store or variety Store,( I.e. Target Center
~ith other commercial stores)as a major tenant
and have 15 to 50 other tenants. Smaller in size,
Community Commercial 8-20 acres. 28 EDU/Acre $90,804/Acre
!Neighborhood Commercial Less than 10 acres. Includes supermarket and
dru~ store. Mav include office soaces. 48 EDUI Acre $155,664/Acre
!Nei~hborhood Commercial Same as above but in Square Footage 4.8 EDU/KSF $15,664/KSF
Cominercial activities found along major streets,
not in a planned center with limited on-site
Street Front Commercial parkin~. 16EDU/Acre $51,888/Acre
R.etail Commercial Snecialtv RetaiVStrip Commercial 16EDU/Acre $51,888/KSF
Usually located near transportation facilities.
Structures are usually large and cover majority of
the parcel. Examples are clothing and supply,
Wholesale Trade also includes swan meet areas. 24 EDUI Acre $77,832/Acre
OFFICE
High Rise Office More than 100,000 S.F. and 6+ Stories 60 EDUI Acre $194,580 I Acre
Low Rise Office < 6 Stories 30EDU/Acre $97,290 I Acre
Low Rise Office (in thousands < 6 Stories
of square feet) 2 EDU/KSF $6,486 I KSF
Medical Office IMedical and Dental Facilities 50 EDU/Acre $162,150 I Acre
LODGING
ow Rise HotellMotel < 4 Stories 20 EDUI Acre $64,860 I Acre
Low Rise Hotel or Motel < 4 Stories 1 EDU/R.oom $3,243 I Room
tHigh Rise Hotel p=4 Stories 30 /EDUI Acre $97,290 I Acre
INDUSTRY
Shipbuilding, airframe, and aircraft
manufacturing. Usually located next to
Heavv IndustrY transportation facilities and commercial areas.
Parcels are tvnicallv 20-50 Acre. 12EDU/Acre $38,916/Acre
Warehouse/Stora2e Usually large buildings located near freeways,
industrial or strip commercial areas. 6EDU/Acre $19,458/Acre
Office/industrial uses clustered into a center. The
primary uses are industrial by may include high
percentages of other uses in service or retail
Industrial Park activities. 9EDU/Acre $29,187/Acre
Light Industrial All other industrial uses and manufacturing not
included in cate20ries above. 20EDU/Acre $64,860 I Acre
ORD# 5
5-77
3.55.100 Development proiects exempt from the fee.
A. Development projects by public agencies shaIl be exempt from the provisions of the fee if those
projects are designed to provide the public service for which the agency is charged ("public
purpose").
B. Community purpose facilities which are not operated for profit ("nonprofit community purpose
facilities") are also exempt inasmuch as these institutions provide benefit to the community as a
whole, including all land use categories which are the subject matter of the fee. The City
Council hereby determines that it is ,appropriate to spread any impact such nonprofit
community purpose facilities might have to the other land use categories subject to the fee. In
the event that a court determines that the exemption herein extended to community purpose
facilities shall for any reason be invalid, the City Council hereby allocates the nonprofit
conimunity purpose facilities' fair share to the City of Chula Vista and not to any of the land
use categories which are the subject matter of the development impact land use categories.
C. Development projects which are additions or expansions to existing dweIling units or
businesses, except special land use projects, shaIl be exempt if the addition or expansion does
not result in a net increase in dwelling units or commercial/industrial acreage.
3.55.110 Authority for accountinl! and expenditures.
A. The fees coIlected shaIl be deposited into a Western Transportation Development Impact Fee
fmancing fund ("WTDIF fee fund," or "fund"), which is hereby created and shaIl be expended
only for the purposes set forth in this chapter.
B. The director of fmance is authorized to establish a single fund for the various facilities
identified in this chapter and to periodically make expenditures from the fund for the purposes
set forth herein.
3.55.120 Findinl!s.
The City Council finds that:
A. CoIlection of the fee established by this chapter at the time of the building permit issuance is
necessary to provide funds for the transportation facilities identified in CVMC 3.55.030 and to
ensure certainty in the capital facilities budgeting for growth impacted public transportation
facilities; and
B. The purpose of the Fees hereby enacted prevents new development from reducing the quality
and availability of public transportation infrastructure facilities provided to residents of the City
by requiring new development to contribute to the cost of additional capital transportation
infrastructure improvements needed to meet the growth generated by such development; and
C. The revenue from the fees hereby enacted wiIl be used to construct public facilities and
infrastructure and pay for other capital expenditures needed to serve new development as
identified in the Engineer's Report dated February, 2008; and
D. Based on analysis presented in the Engineer's Report there is a reasonable relationship between
I. The use of the fees and the types of development projects on which they are imposed and
2. The need for facilities and the types of development projects on which the fees are imposed.
3. The amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility or portion of the public facility
attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.
5-78
ORD # 5
3.55.130 Fee additional to other fees and charl!es.
This fee is in addition to the requirements imposed by other City laws, policies or regulations relating
to the construction or the financing of the construction of public improvements within subdivisions or
developments
3.55.150 Developer construction of translJortation facilities.
A. Whenever a developer of a development project would be required by application of City law
or policy, as a condition of approval of a development permit to construct or finance the
construction of a portion of a transportation facility identified in Section 3.55.030 the City
Council may impose an additional requirement that the developer install the improvements
with supplemental size, length or capacity in order to ensure efficient and timely construction
of the transportation facilities network. If such a requirement is imposed, the City Council
shall, in its discretion, enter into a reimbursement agreement with the developer, or give a
credit against the fee otherwise levied by this chapter on the development project, or some
combination thereof.
B. Whenever a developer requests reimbursement, or a credit against fees, for work to be done or
paid for by the developer under subsection (A) of this section, the request shall be submitted in
writing to the City Manager's designee.
I. The request shall contain a description of the project with a detailed cost estimate
which itemizes those costs of the construction attributable to the transportation facility
project and excludes any work attributable to a specific subdivision project. The
estimate is preliminary and the amount of reimbursement or credit against fees is
subject to final determination by the City Manager's designee. Additional information
shall be provided to the City by the developer upon request of the City.
2. Such reimbursement or credit against fees shall be subject to the following conditions:
a. Requirements of Developer.
i. Preparation of plans and specifications for approval by the City;
ii. Secure and dedicate any right-of-way required for the transportation facility
project;
iii. Secure all required permits and environmental clearances necessary for the
transportation facility project;
iv. Provision of performance bonds (where the developer intends to utilize provisions
for immediate credit, the performance bond shall be for 100 percent of the value of the
transportation facility project);
v. Payment of all City fees and costs.
b. The City will not be responsible for any of the costs of constructing the
transportation facility project. The developer shall advance all necessary funds to construct the
transportation facility project.
c. The developer shall secure at least three qualified bids for work to be done and shall
award the construction contract to the lowest qualified bidder. The developer may combine the
construction of the transportation facility project with other development-related work and
award one construction contract for the combined work based on a clearly identified process
for determining the low bidder, all as approved by the City Manager's designee. Should the
constrUction contract be awarded to a qualified bidder who did not submit the lowest bid for
the transportation facility project portion of the contract, the developer will only receive
transportation development impact fee credit based on the lowest bid for the transportation
facility portion of the contract. Any claims for additional payment for extra work or charges
shall be justified, shall be documented to the satisfaction of the City Manager's designee and
ORD#5
5-79
shall only be reimbursed at the prices for similar work included in the lowest bid for the
transportation facility portion of the contract.
d. Upon complying with the conditions set forth in subsections (B)(1) and (B)(2)(a) of
this section as determined by the City and upon approval of the estimated cost by the City
Manager's designee, the developer shall be entitled to immediate credit for 50 percent of the
estimated Cost of the construction attributable to the transportation facility project. Once the
developer has received valid bids for the project which comply with subsection (B)(2)( c) of
this section, entered into binding contracts for the construction of the project, and met the
conditions set forth in subsections (B)(1) and (B)(2)(a) of this section as determined by the
City, all of which have been approved by the City Manager's designee, the amount of the
immediate credit shall be increased to 75 percent .of the bid amount attributable to the
transportation facility project. The immediate credits shall be applied to the developer's
obligation to pay transportation development impact fees for building permits issued after the
establishment of the credit. The developer shall specify these building permits to which the
credit is to be applied at the time the developer submits the building permit applications.
e. If the developer uses all of the immediate credit before [mal completion of the
transportation facility project, then the developer may defer payment of development impact
fees for other building permits by providing to the City liquid security such as cash or an
irrevocable letter of credit, but not bonds or set-aside letters, in an amount equal to the
remaining amount of the estimated cost of the transportation facility project.
f. When all work has been completed to the satisfaction of the City, the developer shall
submit verification of payments made for the construction of the transportation facility project
to the City. The City Manager's designee shall make the final determination on expenditures
which are eligible for credit or cash reimbursement.
g. After final determination of eligible expenditures has been made by the City
Manager's designee and the developer has complied with the conditions set forth in subsection
(B) of this section, the final amount of transportation development impact fee credits shall be
determined by the City Manager's designee. The develaper shall receive credit against the
deferred fee abligatian in an amount equal ta the difference between the final expenditure
determination and the amount of the 75 percent immediate credit used, if any. The City shall
natifY the develaper of the final deferred fee obligation, and .of the amount of the applicable
credit. If the amount .of the applicable credit is less than the deferred fee obligation, then the
developer shall have 30 days ta pay the deferred fee. If the deferred fees are nat paid within the
30-day periad, the City may make a demand against the liquid security and apply the proceeds
to the fee .obligation.
h. At the time building permits are issued for the develaper's project, the City will
incrementally apply credit which the developer has accrued in lieu .of collecting the required
transpartation development impact fees. The amaunt of the credit to be applied to each
building permit shall be based upon the fee schedule in effect at the time .of the building permit
issuance. The City Manager's designee shall convert such credit to an EDU basis for
residential development and/ar a gross acre basis for commercial or industrial development for
purposes of determining the amount of credit to be applied ta each building permit.
i. If the total eligible construction cost for the transpartation facility proj ect is more than
the total transportatian development impact fees which will be required for the developer's
project, then the amount in excess .of development impact fees will be paid in cash when funds
are available as determined by the City Manager; a reimbursement agreement will be executed;
or the developer may waive reimbursement and use the excess as credit against future
transpartatian develapment impact fee obligations. The City may, in its discretian, enter inta
an agreement with the develaper to canvert excess credit inta EDU and/or gross acre credits for
5-80
ORD#5
use against future development impact fee obligations at the fee rate in effect on the date of the
agreement.
j. The requirements of this subsection (B) of this section may, in the City's discretion,
be modified through an agreement between the developer and the City and approved by City
Council.
C. Whenever a transportation development impact fee credit is generated by
constructing a transportation facility using assessment district or community
facilities district financing, the credit shall only be applied to the
transportation development impact fee obligations within that district.
3.55.160 Procedure for fee waiver or reduction.
A. Any developer who, because of the nature or type of uses proposed for a
development project, contends that application of the fee imposed by this
chapter is unconstitutional, or unrelated to mitigation of the traffic needs or
burdens of the development, may apply to the City Council for a waiver,
reduction, or deferral of the fee. A development which is designed and
intended as a temporary use (10 years or less) and which is conducted in
facilities which are, by their nature, short-term interim facilities such as a
portable or modular building (including mobile homes, trailers, etc.) may
qualify for a waiver, reduction, or deferral. In addition, . a deferral may be
granted on the basis of demonstrated economic hardship on the condition that:
(1) the use offers a significant public benefit; (2) the amount deferred bears
interest at a fair market rate so as to constitute an approximate value
equivalent to a cash payment; and (3) the amount deferred is adequately
secured by agreement with the applicant. Unless the requirement for timely
filing is waived by the City, the application shall be made in writing and filed
with the City Clerk not later than 10 days after notice of the public hearing on
the development permit application or the project is given, or if no
development permit is required, at the time of the filing of the building permit
application. The application shall state in detail the factual basis for the claim
of waiver or reduction.
B. The City Council shall consider the application at a public hearing on same,
notice of which need not be published other than by description on the agenda
of the meeting at which the public hearing is held. Said public hearing should
be held within 60 days after its filing. The decision of the City Council shall
be final. If a deferral, reduction or waiver is granted, it should be granted
pursuant to an agreement with the applicant, and the property owner, if
different from the applicant, providing that any change in use within the
project shall subject the development to payment of the full fee. The procedure
provided by this section is additional to any other procedure authorized by law
for protesting or challenging the fee imposed by this chapter.
3.55.170 Exemptions.
Development projects by public agencies shall be exempt from the provisions of this fee. Exempt
development uses with the following characteristics or activities as a principal use of land, generally
described as "community purpose facility" as defined above in CYMC Section 3.55.020.
ORD # 5
5-81
3.55.180 Assessment districts.
If any assessment or special taxing district is established for any or all of the facilities listed in Section
3.55.030 the owner or developer of a project may apply to the City Council for a credit against the fee
in an amount equal to the development's attributable portion of the cost of the authorized
improvements as determined by the City Manager's designee, plus incidental costs normally occurring
with a construction project, but excluding costs associated with assessment district proceedings or
fmancing.
3.55.190 Economic incentive credit.
The City Council may authorize the City to participate in the financing of transportation facility
projects or portions of transportation facility projects as defmed in Section 3.55.030 at the time of the
appropriation of funds by City Council for the construction of an eligible transportation facility, the
City shall be eligible to receive a credit known hereafter as an economic incentive credit. Such
economic incentive credit may be applied to development impact fee obligations for those projects
which the City Council determines, in its sole discretion, to be beneficial to the City. The use of the
economic incentive credit may be subject to conditions which shall be set forth in a written agreement
between the developer of the project and the City and approved by City Council.
The City may receive economic incentive credit only for those eligible projects identified in Section
3.55.030 for amounts of funding not identified in the fmancial and engineering study "Western
Transportation Development Impact Fee" report dated February 2008.
3.55.195 Fund loans.
A.
B.
Loans by the City. The City may loan funds to the fund to pay for
facilities should the fund have insufficient funds to cover the cost of
said facility. Said loans, if granted, shall be approved upon the adoption
of the annual City budget or upon resolution of the City Council and
shall carry interest rates as set by the City Council for each fiscal year.
A schedule for repayment of said loans shall be established at the time
they are made and approved by the Council, with a maximum term not
to exceed the life of the fund.
Developer Loans. A developer may loan funds to the City as outlined
in CVMC 3.55.150. The City may repay said developer loans with
interest, under the terms listed in subsection (A) of this section.
3.55.200 Effective date.
This chapter shall become effective
SECTION 3: Effective Date
This Ordinance shall become effective 60 days after its second reading and adoption.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Jack Griffm
Engineering and General Services Director
Ann Moore
City Attorney
5-82
5-84
~\f~
---
"- -
~ --=
CnY OF
CHUlA VISTA
Executive Summary
Section 1: Introduction
A. Development Impact Fees
B. Transportration Development Impact Fees
C. Historical Background
Section 2: Development
A. Development Forecast
B. Population Growth Estimates
C. Vehicular Growth Estimates
Section 3: Fee Methodolgy
A. Average Daily Trips (ADTs)
B. Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDUs)
C. Proposed Projects and Fee Calculations
Exhibit 1 Map of Benefit Area within
Jurisdictional Areas of
Western Chula Vista 27
Exhibit 2 SANDAG Vehicular Traffic
Generation Rates for San Diego
Region 29
Exhibit 3 WTDIF Cost Estimates and Project
Descriptions 31
Exhibit 4 WTDIF Master Land Use
Inventory Table 49
Exhibit 5 RTCIP Impact Fee Nexus Study
(Revised Draft) 56
Table A Citywide Land Use Summary
Table 10
Table B Population and Dwelling Unit
Estimates 11
Table C Traffic Volume Growth
Estimates 12
Table D Assignment of ADTs 16
Table E Conversion of ADTs to EDUs 18
Table F Proposlild WTDIF Fee per Land
Use Classification 23
5-85
'-
....."
5-86
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Chula Vista has prepared this Engineer's Report (report) to analyze the impacts
of development on certain transportation facilities located west of Interstate 1-805 and to
calculate development impact fees for those facilities in western Chula Vista. This report
represents the 2008 Chula Vista Western Area Transportation Development Impact Fee
Program for Streets, also known as the Western Transportation DIF, or "WTDIF".
The report includes a discussion of the rationale behind development of these impact fees,
an analysis of the proposed fee program, the Average Daily Trip (ADT) rate assignments for
each land use and associated Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDUs) and the transportation
facility projects to be funded by future development in accordance with this fee program.
The methods used in the report to calculate fees satisfy all legal requirements governing
such fees, including provisions of the U.S. Constitution, the California Constitution and
California Government Code Section 66000 et seq. (the "California Mitigation Fee Act",
"Mitigation Fee Act" or "Act").
The WTDIF is a single program with two separate funding roles. The first portion of the fee
is to be used on Regional Arterial System (RAS) roadway projects, and arterial street
projects within the western jurisdictional boundary of the City of Chula Vista. RAS
roadways are generally described as those roads that act as critical links in providing direct
connections between communities ensuring system continuity and congestion relief in high
volume corridors. The second portion of the fee will be used to make improvements to non-
RAS facilities as described in detail below.
The fee shall be charged to residential as well as non-residential units. The exact amount
charged per dwelling unit varies based on the type of residential unit. The exact amount
charged per non-residential land use also varies as described below. The fees calculated in
this study for all land uses provide for the regional component of the Regional
Transportation Congestion Improvement Program (RTCIP).
City staff reviewed a variety of previously approved documents that dealt with traffic
issues in order to determine the initial fee for the WTDIF program using the best
information available at the time.
The focus of this report then is fourfold:
. To establish the fee program and a benefit area.
. To document the average daily trip (ADT) rates and traffic volume increases for
residential and non-residential land uses due to planned growth.
. To provide descriptions and cost estimates for eligible WTDIF facilities.
. To provide for the justification for future automatic increases of the fee based on
construction cost indices.
Additionally, the report will discuss the principles and requirements of California
Government Code Section 66000 concerning how any proposed fees will not exceed the
i
5-87
estimated reasonable cost of providing the new transportation improvements, i.e., the
Reasonable Relationship Requirement.
The Mitigation Fee Act requires that for fees subject to its provisions, the following
findings must be made:
. Identify the purpose of the fee.
· Identify the use to which the fee is to be put.
lIII Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the use of the fee and
the type of development on which it is imposed.
III' Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the need for a public
facility and the type of development on which a fee is imposed.
· Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee
and the facility cost attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.
Since January 1987, the City has had a program in place for the collection of a
transportation development impact fee for the financing of street improvements in the
area east of Interstate 805. The WTDIF program is designed to complement the original
TDIF program and capture those growth induced impacts and fund improvements on the
west side of the City.
TransNet
In November 2004, San Diego County voters approved local Proposition A extending the
TransNet Yl cent sales tax for transportation programs through 2048. Included in
Proposition A and the TransNet Extension Ordinance is the Regional Transportation
Congestion Improvement Program (RTCIP). The purpose of the RTCIP is to ensure that new
development directly invests in the region's transportation system to offset the negative
impacts of growth on congestion and mobility. The RTCIP provides for the collection of a
fee for each new residential unit. Currently, the RTCIP documents the need to collect a
County-wide fee of $2,000 per residential unit for roadways that are determined to be
Regional Arterial System (RAS) facilities. RAS roadways are listed in SANDAG's Regional
Transportation Plan (RTP), dated November, 2007.
The ordinance states, "Revenue collected through the Funding Programs shall be used to
construct transportation improvements on the Regional Arterial System such as new
arterial roadway lanes, turning lanes, reconfigured freeway-arterial interchanges, railroad
grade separations and new regional express bus services, or similar types of
improvements, preliminary and final engineering, right of way acquisition, and
construction that will be needed to accommodate future travel demand generated by new
development throughout the San Diego region. A reasonable portion of the program
revenue, up to a maximum of three percent, may be used for fund administration. "
ii
5-88
Introduction
9
Page Z
5-90
A. DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
Development impact fees are imposed upon development in an area of benefit, often
. containing a number of different properties, property owners, and land use types.
The WTDIF has two main purposes: (1) To fund the construction of fadlities needed to
reduce, or mitigate, potential impacts, including but not limited to, direct and cumulative
impacts resulting from development within the benefit area; and (2) To spread the costs
associated with construction of the facilities equitably among the developing properties
within the benefit area. The benefit area described herein is that area within the
jurisdictional area of the western portion of the City of Chula Vista, generally meaning that
area of the city located between the city boundary on the west, Interstate 805 on the east,
the city boundary on the north and the city's bqundary on the south, as shown on the map
and attached as Exhibit 1.
In the environmental review process, such as in the California Env;ronmental Quality Act
(CEQA) process, a project's potential impacts are identified and, where feasible, a method
of mitigating those impacts (reducing the actual impact to a level of insignificance) is
identified. In the case of larger projects, the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) identifies
cumulative impacts resulting from the project, as well as direct impacts. Cumulative
impacts are impacts created by overall development, of which individual projects do not
create a significant impact directly, but contribute to an impact through the additive
effect. Since future individual development projects located on the westside of Chula Vista
are not solely responsible for the entire impact on any single segment of roadway,
intersection, pedestrian or bicycle fadlity, they are only required to contribute a portion
of the mitigation costs based on that project's fair share. Each project's fair share of the
impact is based upon the amount of traffic the proposed project generates as measured by
ADT.
B. WESTERN TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE (WTDIF)
As described above, a transportation development impact fee is an impact fee designed to
mitigate cumulative impacts on the local transportation network as a result of new
development. Generally, development of property produces impacts on the local road
network resulting in decreased available traffic capacity on the street system. To measure
the effects of traffic, cities establish capacity or Level of Service (LOS) standards that they
each consider appropriate for their jurisdictions. Where potential impacts resulting from
development are projected to reduce the capacity on streets to the point where the
identified Level of Service will not be maintained, the impacts are deemed to be
significant, and should be mitigated. Typical mitigation for cumulative impacts to the
system would provide a host of improvements designed to restore capacity and maintain
the desirable level of service. Examples of capacity-increasing improvements include but
are not limited to such enhancements as adding new roads to the circulation netwgrk,
widening or improving existing roads, installing new traffic signals or improving existing
signalization, freeway interchange improvements, and improving signal coordination
(management of traffic operations). For the City of Chula Vista, other non-traditional
improvements were included in the calculation of the fee as a result of the City's goal of
improving pedestrian and bicycle capacities as shown below from the city's General Plan.
Page 3
5-91
GENERAL PLAN GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
The following discussion of Goals, Objectives and Polides is taken from the city's recently approved
General Plan in the Land Use and Transportation (LUT) section and is the basis for including bicycle
and pedestrian fadlities in the fee calculation.
GOAL 7. 9 -Improv;ng Vehicular And Transit Mobility
The City of Chula Vista will continue its efforts to develop and maintain a safe and
efficient transportation system with adequate roadway capacity; however, the City's
ability to widen roads to accommodate increased demand from automobife traffic is
limited. Additionally, road widening in some areas is not consistent with goals to create
streets that are pedestrian-friendly and safe. Therefore, the City must seek alternative
ways to increase the capacity to move both people and cars. This includes more efficient
use of roadways, traffic demand reduction, and increased use of transit, bicycles, and
walking.
Objective - LUT 18
Reduce traffic demand through Transportation Demand Management (TOM) strategies,
increased use of transit, bicycles, walking, and other trip reduction measures.
POLICY LUT 18.3 Provide and enhance all feasible alternatives to the automobile, such as
bicycling and walking, and encourage public transit ridership an existing and future transit
routes.
GOAL 7.1 f -Increase Mobility Through Use of Bicycles and Walking
Bicycles are an alternative to driving, accommodating longer trips than walking, especia//y
when combined with transit. Every trip begins and ends with walking, sa the pedestrian
environment becomes the primary transportation element that connects all travel modes.
For walking and bicycling to be viable alternatives to travel by car, the bicycle and
pedestrian systems must efficiently and conveniently connect residential areas and
activity centers in a safe and comfortable manner, and within an interesting environment.
Objective - LUT 23
Promote the use of non-polluting and renewable alternatives for mobility through a
system of bicycle and pedestrian paths and trails that are safe, attractive and convenient
forms of transportation.
POLICY LUT 23. 1 Encourage the use of bicycles and walking as alternatives to driving.
POLICY LUT 23.2 Foster the development of a system 01 inter-connecting bicycle routes
throughout the City and region.
In the case of transportation development impact fee programs, the accepted method of
distributing costs in an equitable manner is to compare traffic generated by each project
that will potentially affect the overall system. This can be done by establishing a uniform
list of trip generation factors typical for the types of uses contemplated for the
developments. This study utilized the "Not So Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation
Rates" published by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) in 2002, Exhibit 2.
Such an analysis is performed when information on the proposed developments is general in
nature. The actual number of trips generated by the final development of individual
Page 4
5-92
parcels may vary from the projections. Due to the tremendous differences between green
field development on the east side of Chula Vista and this new program on the west side of
Chula Vista, constant vigilance should be maintained in monitoring the program including
the assumed land uses actually developed on the west side and the proposed scheduling of
improvements. As a component of the city's Growth Management Program, the City's
Planning Division provides annual growth forecasts for two time frames; 24 months and five
years. Providing this information enables city departments and other service agencies to
assess the probable impacts that growth may have on maintaining compliance with the
city's eleven growth management quality of life threshold standards, including traffic.
Ultimately, through the city's growth management review process, the GMOC will provide a
set of recommendations to the City Council for the purpose of maintaining the city's
quality of life. It is through this program that monitoring of local as well as RAS streets
shall be accomplished within the existing annual Traffic Monitoring Program.
C. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF CHULA VISTA'S
TRANSPORTATION DIF PROGRAM
In February 1986, the Chula Vista City Council adopted a schedule of development impact
fees (DIF) for the Eastlake I development. Eastlake was the first major planned
development that added significant traffic to the street system. Fees were established to
ensure that Eastlake contributed to the cost of certain street improvements, including a
four-lane interim facility in the State Route 125 (SR-125) corridor. Also included in the
development impact fee was the cost of constructing a fire station and a community park
in Eastlake I. While the fees were imposed as a condition of development on Eastlake, City
staff recommended to the Council that a development impact fee ordinance be prepared to
provide for the financing of transportation improvements by all of the developments that
would benefit from the improvements.
Therefore, in January 1987, the Council authorized the preparation of a development
impact fee program for the financing of street improvements in the area east of Interstate
805.
In December 1987, a report entitled "The Interim Eastern Area Development Impact Fees
for Streets" was completed. The "Area of Benefit" included all of the undeveloped lands
that benefited from the proposed transportation improvements, within the City of Chula
Vista and County of San Diego, east of Interstate 805. The Council adopted an Eastern Area
Transportation Development Impact Fee in January 1988 by Ordinance Number 2251 (TDIF).
The fee was established at $2,101 per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU).
In October 1993, the City Council approved the General Plan Amendment for the Otay
Ranch. As a result, the TDIF program was updated in December 1993, including the first
phase of the Otay Ranch. For the first time since the adoption of the original TDIF in 1988,
a comprehensive general plan of land uses and circulation system requirements was in
place in the Otay Valley area.
The TDlF program was subsequently updated again in 1999, 2002 and 2005 to reflect
changes to the circulation element of the General Plan, land use changes and to adjust the
construction cost estimates.
Page 5
5-93
This report analyzes the westside of Chula Vista. The purpose of the WTDIF is to establish a
benefit area and inventory of transportation facilities for Western Chula Vista, in an effort
to mitigate cumulative transportation impacts.
Page 6
5-94
Development
5
~~
Page 8
5-96
A. DEVELOPMENT FORECAST
A fundamental principle in the formulation of a development impact fee is that the need
for additional public facilities is generated by new development, and thus the cost of the
facilities should be paid by that new development. Generally, existing facilities have
adequate capacity to support the existing state of development, and any capacity that is
added to the street network is in response to the need for capacity and other
improvements created by subsequent development, i.e. new demand. It is, therefore,
incumbent upon new development to fully mitigate these impacts.
City staff reviewed a variety of previously approved reports that dealt with western Chula
Vista traffic issues, their consequent impacts and mitigations. These sources included the
recently approved General Plan Environmental Impact Report, and the recently approved
Urban Core Specific Plan (UCSP) Traffic Impact Report.
The proposed Area of Benefit is the area served by the proposed street projects that are
necessary to maintain an acceptable level of service on the City's westside circulation
system. The need for improvements is related to development through changing traffic
patterns on the overall system. Once constructed, the proposed street projects, both RAS
and local streets, will serve the westside area by providing a transportation system for
residents and visitors to use by way of improved roadways as well as improved pedestrian
and bicycle facilities thus freeing up capacity on existing streets which can be used by the
demand generated by new development.
Table A identifies the future development types within the Area of Benefit. New and future
development in the City is generally described in the adopted General Plan and more
specifically in the Urban Core Specific Plan. These two documents were used in tabulating
the information shown in Table A. Typically, residential development is segregated by low
density (1-6 Dwelling Units/Acre or DU/acre), residential medium density (6-20 DU/acre),
residential high density (>20 DU/acre) and mobile home units, while non-residential land
use is separated into general commercial, street front commercial and regional commercial
acreage, office acreage and industrial acreage. In the column labeled Year 2030, Table A
lists the number and types of development proposed based on a General Plan designation.
The "Change" column illustrates the change in units of the differing land use types
between the Year 2002 and the buildout horizon year of 2030. A positive number indicates
an increase in that land use and a negative number indicates a decrease. Later on in the
calculation of the fees, units were backed out of the total units built, to account for those
units placed on the ground between the year 2002 and the current year of 2008.
Pase 9
5-97
Table A
Citywide land Use Summary Table (Adopted land Uses on Bayfront)
SANDAG
Land Use Year 2002 Year 2030 Change Units
Code
101 Single-Family Dwelling Unit 15202.00 14261.00 -941.00! DU ,
,
i ,
102 ,Multi-Family Dwelling Unit 19D28.00 33836.00 14808.001 DU I
I-- I i
103 Mobile Home 3311.00 1885.00 -1426.00 DU
-
1501 Low Rise Hotel! Motel 28.32 44.04 15.n Acre
1502 High Rise Hotel/Motel 0.00 0.50 0.50 Acre
1505 Low Rise Hotel 0.00 1800.00 1800.00 -
Rooms
2001 Heavy Industry 101.83 97.58 -4.25 Acre
2101 I ndustrial Park 84.52 54.63 -29.89 Acre
2103 Light Industrial 226.68 382.17 155.49 Acre
2104 VVarehouse/Storage 90.01 52.97 -37.04 Acre
5001 VVholesale Trade 29.05 0.00 -29.05 Acre
5002 Regional Commerce 55.34 33.20 -22.14 Acre
5003 Community Commercial 103.82 193.39 89.57 Acre
5004 Neighborhood Commercial 71.61 85.99 14.38 Acre
5007 Streetfront Commercial 192.91 290.95 98.04 Acre
5009 Other Commercial 18.59 3.28 -15.31 Acre
[--------- ------------~------------------------- -"----- n__...______.......__ ------------- --
5012 Adopted Bayfront Neighborhood Commercial 0.00 150.00 150.00 KSF
-- --..---- f---- ----- -- ~--
6001 High Rise Office 0.00 17.09 17.09 Acre
6002 Low Rise Office 74.47 138.26 63.79 Acre
6003 Govt. Office 9.99 10.89 0.90 Acre
6005 Adopted Bayfront Low Rise Office 0.00 60.00 60.00 KSF
6509 Medical Office 45 36 -9 Acre
Note: DU = Dwelling Units KSF = Thousands of Square Feet
Page 10
5-98
B. POPULATION GROWTH ESTIMATES
Table B below is derived from the City of Chula Vista's General Plan Update Final
Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) dated December 2005. Table B depicts population and
housing units proposed on the westside of Chula Vista between the General Plan Base Study
Year condition of 2002 and the General Plans Horizon Study Year of 2030. Summarizing the
values for the westside of Chula Vista only, one is able to determine the following:
Population Growth on the westside of the City is proposed to increase from a value of
110,493 to 139,170 which is an increase of 21%. Population growth figures were used in
order to determine fractional responsibility for eligible non-vehicular projects. In other
words, the Engineer's Report utilized the 21% to assign or allocate equitable cost share to
pedestrian and bicycle facilities for the WTDIF program.
Exhibit 3 shows infrastructure improvements such as bicycle and pedestrian improvements
that do not have any Level of Service criteria or thresholds associated with them. These
projects are still viable projects in that they increase the capacity of the entire
transportation system on the west side and their improvement is in line with the General
Plans Mobility goals as stated above. Therefore these projects were included in the
calculations utilizing a separate procedure. This process involved using the population
growth value of 21% as previously described. With that factor in hand, staff multiplied the
eligible 2007 costs to construct non-vehicular infrastructure by 21% (population growth
factor) and placed that dollar amount in the WTDIF column of Exhibit 3. For example, if a
pedestrian facility such as a sidewalk had a total 2007 cost of $100 to construct, $21 dollars
were deemed attributable to new demand and that value ($21) was placed in the WTDIF
program.
Table B
PODulation and Dwellinll Unit Estimates
Existing Conditions Year 2030 Change
Wests;de Westside Westside Westside Westside Westside
Dwelling Population Dweffing Population Dwelling Population
Units Units Units
Northwest 19,711 56,931 27,497 74,861 7,786 17,930
I Southwest 18,368 56,562 22,281 61,790 3,913 5,228
I 0 1,000 2,519 1,000 2,519
I Bayfront 0
,
!-'--.--.--..-- ---.-.-- _.....- .--..
!
. Total 38,071 110,493 50,778 139,170 +12,699 +28,677
i
,
. .
. Percent Change 25% 21%
i
Reference: Table 5. 17-1 General Plan FEIR
Page 11
5-99
C. VEHICULAR GROWTH ESTIMATES
The Engineer's Report also calculated traffic volume increases on the west side of the City.
A summary of the trips generated between 2002 and 2030 is shown below in Table C. Table
C was generated utilizing Exhibit 4, the WTDIF Master Land Use lilVentory Table. This table
inventories land use type and intensities for. all Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ) on the west
side of Chula Vista. It then identifies trips using the trip generating factors shown in Table
D further below, which are themselves taken from the "Not So Brief Guide of Vehicular
Traffic Generation Rates" published by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG)
in 2002. Similarly, then, the Engineer's Report used the vehicular growth value of 28% in
order to determine fractional responsibility for eligible vehicular projects. In other words,
the Engineer's Report utilized the 28% to assignor allocate equitable cost share to
vehicular facilities for the WTDIF program.
With that factor in hand, staff multiplied the eligible vehicular infrastructure costs by 28%.
For example, using the same logic as before, if there was now a vehicular facility such as a
roadway that cost $100.in 2007 dollars to construct, $28 was placed in the WTDIF program.
Table C
Traffic Volume Growth Estimates
. Trips Change
Year Year
2002 2030
Volumes 546,850 762,768 215,918
Percent Increase +28%
Page 12
5-100
Fee Methodology
1
Page 14
5-102
"',-
A. AVERAGE DAILY TRIPS (ADT's)
The basis and methodology used in calculating the fee in this Engineer's Report is consistent with
the basis and methodology used in previous Eastern Area TDIF reports and Eastern Area TDIF
ordinances except for the array of different land uses between the west and east side of the city.
Minor alterations had to be taken but the tasks were conceptually similar.
One of the most common tools used to spread the benefit of traffic related improvements among
different land uses, involves the use and assignment of vehicular trips. Vehicular trips can be
directly correlated to an equivalent dwelling unit or EDU based on trip generating characteristics.
There is a clear relationship between the generation of vehicle trips based on the land use and
density of a specific parcel. In the report dated April, 2002, and titled "(Not So) Brief Guide of
Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region", published and continually updated by
SANDAG, vehicle trips generated by various classifications of land use are detailed. For example,
the SANDAG Report identifies several categories of residential land use generating ADT ranging from
4 to 12 trips per unit. The City historically has refined the SANDAG approach and has identified
three residential categories for this study. This report aggregates residential land uses to utilize
only four categories and recommends the following: 10 ADTs generated from a residential unit with
densities ranging on average from 1 to 6 dwelling units per gross acre; 8 ADTs from a residential
unit with densities from 6 to 20 dwelling units per acre, 6 ADTs for densities greater than 20
dwelling units per gross acre; and 4 ADTs from a mobile home residential unit.
For commercial development, as in previous updates for the Eastern TDIF, the "pass-by"
trip phenomenon was included in setting the generation rate for commercial land uses in
the WTDIF. Pass-by trips are trips in which a stop at a retail commercial facility is one part
of a linked trip to or from home or work. The following is excerpted from the report
"RTCIP Impact Fee Nexus Study (Revised Draft)" dated November 26, 2007 prepared for the
San Diego Association of Governments by Munifinancial, Exhibit 5. "To determine the
amount of commercial development associated with residential development we
conducted an analysis of taxable retail sales data for 2004, the most recent complete year
of data available from the State Board of Equalization. The analysis calculated the total
spending potential of San Diego County households and estimated what portion of that
spending occurred within the County. The result was that 62.6 percent of total taxable
retail sales was estimated to be associated with local household spending. The remainder
was associated with local business and visitor spending. Based on this analysis, residential
development directly causes 62.6 percent of commercial development. Consequently, the
travel demand associated with that share of commercial development is shifted to
residential development." In other words, the SANDAG report is stating that some local
trips to commercial land uses are double counted as both an attraction of the commercial
unit and as a generator of the residential land use. This phenomenon was discovered in the
analysis of the Eastern TDIF program. The Eastern TDIF program analysis found that
approximately n percent of commercial trips were generated from within the City's
eastern TDIF area and 28 percent were observed from outside the TDIF area. The
conclusions of these two analyses are similar in concluding that it is reasonable to discount
some of the trips arriving and departing commercial sites because they are already
accounted for in the residential trip generating rates from SANDAG. Thus, in keeping with
the most recent analysis done by Munifinancial, and in line with procedures previously
documented in the Eastern TDIF program, this report has reduced the trip generating
capability of commercial land uses by 62.6%. For mixed land use projects wherein the same
building contains a mixture of residential and non-residential land use, the fee shall be
calculated based strictly on land use type and intensity with no regard for internal capture.
Table D identifies the ADTs assigned to the various land uses.
Page 15
5-103
lRESIDENTIAL
IResidential (LOW) . 1-6 dwelling units per acre i 1C ADT/DU
!Residential (MED) 6.1- 20 dwelling units per acre ! BADT IOU !
iResidential (HIGH) Over 20 dwellino units per acre , t ADT/DU ,
i
IMobile Home ! ADT/DU
!COMMERCIAL
IRegional Commercial ----- Contain-1-5 major dept. stores tt usually-have morer--18' ADTTAcre I
, than 50 tenants. Typically larger than 40 acres. : !
,
ICommunity Commercial Smaller in that size than regional. Contain junior DePt~ 26, ADT I Acre
, Store or variety Store,( i.e. Target Center with othe,
commercial stores)as a major tenant and have 15 to 501
, other tenants. Smaller in size, 8-20 acres. I
,
INeighborhood Commercial Less than 10 acres. Includes supermarket and drug 449 ADT I Acre
, store. May include office spaces.
INeighborhood Commercial Same as above but in Square Footage 4 ADT IKSF
IStreet Front Commercial Commercial activities found along major streets, not inl 15C ADT I Acre
] a planned center with limited on-site parking. i
IRetail Commercial Specialty Retail/Strip Commercial I 15C ADT I Acre
IWholesale Trade Usually located near transportation facilities.! 22 ADT I Acre
Structures are usually large and cover majority of thel
! parcel. Examples are clothing and supply, also includesl
, swap meet areas.
,
iOFFICE
IHigh Rise Office More than 100,000 S.F. and 6+ Stories I 60C ADT I Acre !
!Low Rise Office (in acreage) < 6 Stories i 30C ADT I Acre !
iLow Rise Office (in thousands of square < 6 Stories I 2C JADT IKSF
ifeet) ,
IMedical Office Medical and Dental Facilities I 50C ADT I Acre
,
,
!LODGING
iLow Rise Hotel! Motel
iLow Rise Hotel or Motel
iHioh Rise Hotel
ilNDUSTRY
iHeavy Industry
< 4 Stories
< 4 Stories
>4 Stories
i
I
20C !ADT I Acre i
1{ IADT I Room'
30C ADT I Acre
iWarehouse IStorage
!Industrial Park
Shipbuilding, airframe, and aircraft manufacturing.!
Usually located next to transportation facilities and!
commercial areas. Parcels are typicallv 20-50 Acre. I
Usually large buildings located near freeways,!
industrial or strio commercial areas. i
Office/industrial uses clustered into a center. Thej
primary uses are industrial by may include high!
percentages of other uses in service or retail activities.!
All other industrial uses and manufacturing noti
included in categories above. i
120 ADT I Acre
6C ADT I Acre
iLight Industrial
9C ADT I Acre
20C ADT I Acre
l!'D~/KSF=:~vera~~ Oaily.__!@.!Jj~er Th_ousand of _~~~~~eet:_.______.___.___._________.__,.___~._.___,._-----.-J
Page 16
5-104
B. Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDUs)
One of the more common methods used to compare trip generation potential among the
different land uses involves the conversion of trips from a particular land use type into
"Equivalent Dwelling Units" or EDUs. Residential dwellings of 0 - 6 dwelling units per acre
(LOW density) are assigned one (1.0) EDU per unit and become the base for assigning EDU
factors to other land uses by comparing the relationship and nature of vehicular trips
generated by those land uses to the ADTs generated by this residential density category.
In other words, EDUs are units of measure that standardize all land use types (housing,
retail, office, etc.) to the level of demand created by one single-family housing unit. For
example, in the case of traffic generation, one EDU is equivalent to the amount of two way
traffic (i.e, ADT) generated from and attracted to a single-detached household. A small
business calculated to generate three times as much traffic as an average single-detached
dwelling unit would have a value of three EDUs in terms of traffic; a large industrial.
complex that generates a thousand times as much traffic each day would have a demand of
1,000 EDUs. The basis and methodology used in calculating the fee in this Engineer's Report
is consistent with the basis and methodology used in previous Eastern TDIF reports and
Eastern TDIF ordinances as amended.
Table E summarizes the EDUs assigned to the various future dwelling units and acres of
non-residential development.
All land uses and their generated trips were summed up and divided by 10 to equate them
to EDU's as shown on the last sheet in Exhibit 4. The total number of future EDU's within
the Area of Benefit for this report is 19,914.
Page 17
5-105
E!i;;n(f'LI~g,:~r~~!f!'e;;qQ':':i~
,RESIDENTIAL
'Residential lOW)
iResidential (MED)
iResidential (HIGH)
iMobile Home
!COMMERCIAl
!Re ional Commercial
iCommunit Commercial
:Neighborhood Commercial
!Nei hborhood Commercial (in thousands of square feet)
iStreet Front Commercial
iRetail Commercial
iWholesale Trade
iOFFICE
,High Rise Office
!low Rise Office
:low Rise Office (in thousands of s uare feet)
Medical Office
flODGING
ilow Rise Hotel/Motel
ilow Rise Hotel or Motel
iHigh Rise Hotel
ilNDUSTRY
iHeavy Industry
,Warehouse /Storage
Industrial Park
Li ht Industrial
iAOT/KSF- Average Daily Traffic per Thousand of Square Feet.
20.
1.
30.
i
EDU/ Acre i
EDU / Acre i
9. EDU/Acre i
20.0 EDU/ Acre i
Page 18
5-106
C. PROPOSED PROJECTS AND FEE CALCULATIONS
The final step in developing the fee was to determine which projects are to be included in the
program. The entire process for calculating impact fees involved two steps and is likened to a
fraction with the numerator or top number representing the total cost of infrastructure
improvements divided by the lower number (denominator) which is allocated to the various land
use types and their consequent trips/EDU's as discussed above. The following paragraphs discuss
staff's method for calculating the total cost of infrastructure improvements.
City staff reviewed a variety of previously approved reports that dealt with western Chula
Vista traffic issues, their consequent impacts and mitigations. These sources included the
recently approved General Plan Environmental Impact Report, and the recently approved
Urban Core Specific Plan (UCSP) Traffic Impact Report. In addition however, other reports
were used in determining impacts and they include the UCSP report entitled, "Chula Vista
Urban Core Specific Plan Facilities Implementation Analysis", the city's Infrastructure
Deficiency Study, The "Final City of Chula Vista, Midbayfront LCP Resubmittal No. 8
Amendment Environmental Impact Report, February, 1991" and project listings from the
city's Capital Improvement Program.
Fees were calculated by allocating costs for a specified set of improvements to a specified
increment of development which is served by the improvements. In this case, the Year
2030 was used as the incremental degree of improvement because it is the study horizon
year for the recently approved General Plan, Urban Core Specific Plan and is the study
horizon year for SANDAG. The total cost of mitigating eligible facilities ($62,691,413.90)
was divided by the total units of demand (19,914 EDU's) to calculate a cost per unit of
demand in EDU's (Base fee of $3,148.11 /EDU). Exhibit 3, WTDIF Cost Estimates, list the
infrastructure projects, describing them as either Regional Arterials or local roads, their
total costs-to-construct in 2007 dollars, the City's share of costs expressed as a percent and
in dollars, and the WTDIF share as a percent and in 2007 dollars. Dividing the costs for RAS
facilities by the total cost of the program determined the percentages of fees charged to
RAS facilities.
The percentage splits are important for allocating correct dollar amounts to separate
accounting funds dealing with Regional Arterial funds and local road funds. The Regional
Transportation Congestion Improvement Program portion of the TransNet ordinance states
that "Each jurisdiction's Funding Program shall be submitted for review by the
Independent Taxpayers Oversight Committee (ITOC) referred to in Section 11 of the
TransNet Ordinance prior to April 1, 2008, approved by Regional Transportation
Commission by June 1, 2008 and shall become operative on July 1, 2008. Failure to submit
a Funding Program for review by ITOC by April 1 of any year beginning April 1, 2008 shall
result in that jurisdiction losing eligibility to receive funding for local streets and roads
under Section 4(D) (1) of the Ordinance until July 1 of the following year. "
Again, the intent of the fee program is to have the costs of all the proposed improvement
projects spread equally to all new development, regardless of the location of the
improvement relative to any particular development. Therefore, the recommended fee is
based on an even distribution of the cost of the entire proposed improvement program
divided by the number of future EDUs in the Area of Benefit.
NOTES ON THE FEE CALCULA T/ON
Amplification for Exhibit 3, WTDIF Cost Estimates. City staff did not include any existing
infrastructure deficiencies to determine the fee amount. The procedure for including an
Pase 19
5-107
infrastructure improvement project onto Exhibit 3, and therefore into the fee calculation,
was that the (potential) infrastructure improvement project had to have an acceptable
existing LOS which degrades to an unsatisfactory LOS in the Year 2030 study time frame
due to development. Locations with an existing deficiency were not included in the fee
computation.
Some items on Exhibit 3, notably project OR-3, do not have dollar amounts listed because
the exact locations and infrastructure improvements are not known at this time. However,
the items were placed in the table in order to keep track of them for future traffic studies
and WTDIF updates.
DEFERRALS
The City has on file some bonds and liens for completion of minor segments of WTDIF
facilities. These bonds and liens will be used to construct facilities once the CIP program is
underway for a given improvement. As with all construction projects, there will be
variations in each project cost so that the actual cost may vary. It is recommended when
the WTDIF program is comprehensively updated, at a minimum of every 5 years, that any
monies collected for deferral for WTDIF listed streets and facilities be added to the fund
balance so that the fee will be lowered in a corresponding amount.
FEE ADJUSTMENT
Because this program is being established and run in conjunction with the TransNet program, fee
adjustments have been set in line with the RTCIP. The RTCIP states "Local agencies and SANLJAG
can ftnd the administrative costs 0/ the RTCIP with a charge added to the RTCIP impact fie. The
RTCIP allows up to 3 percent o/program revenues to be usedftr program administration. SANLJAG
anticipates adding a 1 percent administrative charge to the RTCIP fie to ftnd costs related to the
ITOC. Local agencies may add up to 2 percent ftr their program administration costs. These charges
are similar to any other user fies imposed by local agencies and are not suiject to the Act. These
charges must be justified based on the actual program administration costs 0/ each agency. Agencies
should keep cost records and ac(just the administrative charge as appropnate based on actual costs. "
Therefore, other costs to the TDIF program are as follows:
WTDIF Proiect Administration: Two (2%) percent of the program's direct construction
costs to fund activities related to general administration of the TDIF including the
following:
. Strategic planning and funding advocacy;
. Staff time spent in administering the fee program and the various credits of each
developer;
. Growth Management Activities;
. Geographic Information System (GIS);
. WTDIF program updates;
. Supplies and equipment used to administer the program; and
. Feasibility studies.
ITOC Administration: One (1%) percent of the program's direct construction costs to
fund activities related to administering the program including related fiscal and
performance audit costs.
Page 20
5-108
The final tabulation for Western TDIF fees then breaks down as follows.
The proposed fee is $3,243 per EDU which includes 2%
for WTDIF project administration costs and 1% for SANDAG administration costs.
ADDITIONAL NOTES ON PROCESSING FEES A T COUNTER
Although the issue is not specifically addressed in the Mitigation Fee Act, other provisions
of the Government Code (e.g., see Section 65913.8) prohibit the use of impact fees for
maintenance or operating costs. Consequently, the fees calculated in this report are based
on capital costs only. Additionally, the city is restricted to collecting fees only for facility
improvements over and above the existing land use demand. The intent being that fees are
collected for future demand remediation. Staff went through a meticulous and detailed
process of calculating the baseline condition in order to accurately determine future
demand based solely on new development. The baseline condition includes an inventory of
existing land uses that are on the ground today in western Chula Vista and therefore
generating trips today. The 2002 values from the city's General Plan EIR, were updated
through the city's permit-monitoring software to account for any construction from the
year 2002 to the present. Monitoring the change in land use inventory will be important to
maintain the integrity of the fee program. In practice, the fee shall only apply to a
proposed project that generates more trips than what is presently being generated today.
In other words, the fee is based solely on the change in trip generating potential of
proposed projects. For example, if the city receives a new project application and this
proposed project's trip generating potential is equal to that of the present land use on the
ground that it is replacing, then the developer need not pay any WTDIF fee. However,
through a simple calculation, if the proposed development generates an increased amount
of trips, for example, one hundred more trips, then this project shall pay the WTDIF fee in
an amount equal only to the increase or change in trip generating potential, or in this case,
ten (10) EDUs. Calculations for the WTDIF Cost Estimates included 180 residential EDU's
and 1,241 non-residential EDU's built since 2002 in the WTDIF area of benefit. These values
were subtracted from the EDU count for the final calculation.
PROJECT COST ESTIMATES
Direct Construction Costs
Construction costs were estimated by applying an average of actual unit costs from
recently completed street projects. These projects and their associated unit costs are
shown in Exhibit 3, WTDIF Cost Estimates. The costs of grading, drainage facilities,
improvements and landscaping are all estimated according to project size, complexity and
other project specific constraints. These costs differ according to the scope of the facility.
Estimates of direct construction costs for the purposes of this report were prepared
without benefit of detailed construction drawings. For this reason, the estimates are
considered conceptual in nature and typically include a 15% contingency factor in addition
to the estimated construction costs to cover anticipated minor engineering issues that are
not quantifiable at this level of study.
Developer Credits
The WTDIF program allows for the construction of eligible transportation projects by
developers in lieu of paying the WTDIF at building permit issuance with approval of City
Engineer. Any projects constructed by a developer would be audited and credits issued
Page 21
5-109
incrementally as the facility is constructed. If the total construction costs amount to more
than the total WTDIF fees for the developer's project, the developer is entitled to receive
WTDIF credits in the amount of the excess of construction costs over the required WTDIF
fees. The same builder can use this WTDIF credit to satisfy the fee obligations for a future
development, or the developer will receive cash reimbursement when funds are available,
as determined by the City Manager.
Salt Costs
In addition to direct construction costs, the following "soft costs" associated with
construction of the projects are included in the calculation of the WTDIF fee:
Civil Enr/ineerin'<. Reimbursement shall not exceed 7.5 percent of the WTDIF eligible
improvement cost or actual cost, whichever is less. Civil engineering includes the
cost of preparatory planning, survey, and design of a project.
Soils Enr/ineerin'<. Reimbursement shall not exceed 15 percent of the WTDIF eligible
improvement cost or actual cost, whichever is less, of eligible grading as defined in
the directive.
Landscape Architecture: Reimbursement shall not exceed 10 percent of the WTDIF
eligible cost of improvement or actual cost, whichever is less, of eligible landscape
and irrigation within the TDIF improvement.
Survevin'<. Reimbursement shall not exceed 2 percent of the WTDIF eligible cost of
improvement or actual cost, whichever is less, of the TDIF eligible improvement.
Utilitv En'<ineerin-;/Coordinatiorr. Reimbursement shall not exceed 3 percent of the
WTDIF eligible cost of improvement or actual cost, whichever is less, of eligible dry
utilities within the TDIF improvement.
Environmental Consultin'<. Reimbursement shall be for the actual work required to
conduct, obtain and monitor all necessary environmental clearances required to
construct the TDIF facility
Annual Fee Adjustments & Collection
The fee shall be collected as a condition of building permit issuance. The TransNet
ordinance provides for an annual inflation adjustment to the RTCIP impact fee on July 1 of
each year beginning in 2009. The annual inflation adjustment will be 2 per cent or based on
Caltrans highway construction cost index, whichever is higher. SANDAG will calculate the
fee adjustment for RAS arterials. Fees for non-RAS arterials may also be annually adjusted
based on updated information regarding land use or the type, size, location, or cost of
proposed facilities pursuant to City ordinances and policies. All fees collected shall be
deposited in an interest-accruing fund, and shall be expended only with the approval of the
City Council for the Proposed Projects listed in this report. These automatic adjustments
do not require further action by the City Council.
The proposed fee per land use is shown in Table F below:
pase 22
5-110
TABLE F
WTDIF FEE PER LAND USE CLASSIFicA 'riON
$3,243.00
PROPOSED
Proposed TDIF Fee per EDU:
....""......... .
1Li. nllilu.:>f ..,iK:alh~,",.
.. .,.;....,.,;,._.,..,,~"" ~'_;" .",",.,.....~!'if;;,.
RESIDENTIAL
Residential (LOW)
Residential (MED)
Residential ( HIGH
Mobile Home
COMMERCIAL
$3,2431 DU
$2,5941 DU
$1,9461 DU
$1,622/ DU
0-6 dwelling units per acre
6 - 20 dwelling units per acre
Over 20 dwelling units per acre
1 per EDU
.8 per EDU
.6 per EDU
.5 per EDU
Contain 1-5 major dept. stores & usuallYl
have more than 50 tenants. Typically larger! I
than 40 acres. I
Smaller in that size than regional. Contain!
junior Dept. Store or variety Store, ( i.e.1
arget Center with other commerciall
stores)as a major tenant and have 15 to 50i
other tenants. Smaller in size, 8.20 acres. I
Less than 10 acres. Includes supermarketl
and dru store. May include office s aces. !
Same as above but in Square Foota e !
Commercial activities found along majon
streets, not in a planned center with limitedl
on-site parking.
Specialty Retail/Strip Commercial I
Usually located near transportationl
facilities. Structures are usually large andl
cover majority of the parcel. Examples are!
clothing and supply, also includes swapl
meet areas. I
$64,860 / Acre
20 EDU/ Acre
Re ;onal Commercial
$90,804/Acre
28 EDU / Acre
Commercial
Communi
$155,664/Acre
$15,566/KSF
48 EDU/ Acre
4.8 EDU/KSF
Neighborhood Commercial
Neighborhood Commercial
$51,888/Acre
$51,888/KSF
16EDU/Acre
16EDU/Acre
Street Front Commercial
Retail Commercial
$77,832/Acre
24 EDU/ Acre
Wholesale Trade
OFFICE
High Rise Office More than 100,000 S.F. and 6+ Stories
Low Rise Office < 6 Stories
Low Rise Office (in < 6 Stories
thousands of square feet)
Medical Office
LODGING
Low Rise Hotel/ Motel
Low Rise Hotel or Motel
High Rise Hotel
INDUSTRY
! $194,580/Acre
$97,290/Acre
60 EDU/ Acre
30 EDU/ Acre
$6,486/ KSF
1$162,150/ Acre
2 EDU/KSF
50EDU/Acre
edical and Dental Facilities
$64,860/ Acre
$3,243/ Room
$97,290/Acre
20EDU/Acre
1 EDU/Room
30 /EDU / Acre
< 4 Stories
< 4 Stories
>=4 Stories
Shipbuilding, airframe, and aircraf~
manufacturing. Usually located next tol
transportation facilities and commerciaU
areas. Parcels are t icall 20-50 Acre. !
Usually large buildings located nearl
freeways, industrial or strip commerciall
,
areas. I
Office/industrial uses clustered into a!
center. The primary uses are industrial b~
may include high percentages of other usesl'
in service or retail activities.
!All other industrial uses and manufacturingl.1
Inot included in categories above. !
$38,916/Acre
12EDU/Acre
Heavy Industry
$19,458/Acre
6 EDU/ Acre
arehouse /Storage
$29,187/Acre
9 EDU / Acre
Industrial Park
$64,860/ Acre
20EDU/Acre
Light Industrial
Page 23
5-111
~.~
Pose 24
5-112
Page 26
5-114
Exhibit 1
Map of Benefit Area within
Jurisditional Areas
of Western (hula Vista
Q WDtSlDI TRANSPORtATION
~'_ OMLOPMENT IMPACt FEE
III WUlOflNrHSTlUale +"
JIA -. ClfYOfCHlnA\I1SfA
I. _ llilllSGlOlOlllltoUMbAl'f
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
,
.
,
.
.
,
.
,-
Figure 1
5-115
Page 27
5-116
Page 28
'-
..."
EXHIBIT 2
(NOT SO}
BRIEF GUIDE OF VEHICULAR TRAFFIC GENERATION RATES
FOR THE SAN DIEGO REGION
APRIL 2002
CSAN~~
401 BStreet,Sul!8800
SIltlDiego,CaUfomia92101
(619) 699-1900 0 F8)((619)899-1950
NOTE: This li$ting only ro:presents II gum. of average. Of estimated. mfflc generation 'driveway" rates and some VlIry general trip datil fOf rInd u.ses (emphasis on acraagllllnd ouilding SQUllre footagel
inthll San Dillgo regilln, These",mslbothlocalandnatlonallarllsubjecttochangllssfuturlldocumlll1tBtioncecomessvailllble,ornragionalsou.cesa'eupdBted. I"armaraspecifK:intol'T1llltlon
regarding traffic datil and trip rates, please refer to thll San Diego Traffic Genlllllt<lrs manual. AJw-V1I ched with local juritsdit:titmJ; ftN theN ",..",,~ '" ~1Ii1ItI r-.
LAND USE
TRIP CATEGORIES
[PRIMARY:OlVERTEiD:PASS-BY]'
AGRICULTURE 10pen $paced......
.......180:18:21
.........[78:20:21
AIRPORT..............
Commercial
GllnllrlllAvietian
Hll"pol'ts
AUTOMOBilE"
Car Wash
Automlltic
Self-servll
GlISOline ...............
wnhlFoooMllrt
with/Food Man: & Car Wash
OlderServi~e Station De.sign
Sales IDealer& Repairl
Auto Repa;r Center
AUloPartaSalu
Quldlubll
Tire Store
............[21:51:28]
CEMETERY
CHURCH (orSynagogueJ.....
......[64:25:11]
COMMERCIAURETAIL"
Super Regionll Shopping Cemer
(More than 80 acres, more than
800,000 sq. ft.. wlusually 3+
majolstoresl
Regiona.l Sh~ping Cemer. ........[54:35:11]
(40-80acres, 400,000-800.000
sq.fl..w/usually2+majorllloresl
Cammunity Shopping Canter..... .........[47:31:221
(15-4(1 acres. 12S,000-4OO,000 sq. ft..
w/usually 1major$tore.dellched
restaurllnt(Sl,groceryanddrugstoreJ
Neighborhaod Sholllling Canter
ILesslhan15acres,lesslhen
125,000 sq. ft., wlueuelly grocery
& drugstore, cleaners, beeuty & barber shop,
& !astfoodslS<Vicesl
CommerdalShQJls. .... . [45:40:151
Spec;lIlty RetaillStrip Commen;ia.1
Elec:tranicsSuperstore
Factory Outlet
SUII&nnerket
Druglrtore
ConvenillnceMarket (15-16hoursl
ConvenienceMlIrket 124hoursJ
Conveniern;eMlIrket(w/ga.solinepwnps)
Dis~ountClub
DlscountSlore
FumilureSlore
LumbllrStore
HomelmprovementSuperstore
Hardwara/PeimStore
GardenNursery
Mixed Use: Commarciallw/supennerklltl/Residential
EDUCATIDN
University (4yeers)..........
Junior College (2 yearsl.
High School..............
Middle/Junior High.
Elementury
Dey Care
..............191:9:0]
.........192:7:1]
.......................[75:19:6]
........[63:25:12]
..............;....[57:25:10]
.[28:68:14J
FINANCIAL" ............
81tnk IWalk.ln Gnlyl
with Drive-Through
Drive-Throughanly
Savings & Loan
Drive-Throughonly
.......... [36:42:23]
HOSPITAL ........................................
General
Convalescent/Nursing
...[73:25:21
INDUSTRIAL
IndUStriel/BueinessPerkl~omme,c;elincludedl .......[79:19:2]
Indu$triel Park lnocommorciall
IndustrieIPlentlmultillle.Mtsl. ..........................192:6:31
Manufacturing/Assembly
Wa..,nousin9
Storage
SGience Research & Development
Landfill & Recy~lin9 Center
ESnMATED WEEKDAY VEHICLE HIGHEST PEAK HOUR % Iplua IN:OUT ratlol TRIP LENGTH
TflIP GENERATION RATE lDRIVEWAY} Between 6:00_9,30 A.M. ae_3,OO_6,30P.M. IMII..]'
,""".. 10.8
12.5
60/acre, l00lfllght, 70/1000sq.It.... .. 16:41 .. 15:5)
6/lIcre.2lflight, S/besedaircraft" "" .. 0:31 "., (6:5)
l00/a0:re."
9oo/sita,6OOIacra" .. (5:5] '" (5:5]
lOO1wash$lall.. .. (6:5] '" 15:51
"
160/vehiclllfuelingspllco.. '" l5:51 '" 15:5)
155/vehic:llIfuelingspaca.. '" (5:5] '" (S:5)
150/vehiclefuelingspaCll,9oo/station.. '" l6:5] '" (S:S)
50/1 000 sq. ft., 3oo/ac'e. 60/servico stall' .. .. (7:31 '" (4:61
20/1000 sq. fl" 4oo/acrll, 20/service stall. '" 17:31 ,,. (4:61
6O/1oo0sq.lt. .. .. ",,,
4O/aerw;""ta~OO '" l6:4] ''''' l5:S)
25'1000sq.ft..30/serviceSUlII". '" (6:41 ,,. l6:5)
5/acre.
9/1000sq.It..30/lIcreU(qulldruplllrates .. (6:4) '" (5:5) 5.'
for Sunday, or. days ofassambly.
35/1000 sq. It..~ 400/lcre. '" 0:31 ". 16:5)
60/1000sq.ft"c500/acra" .. 17:31 '" 15:51 5.2
80/1000 sq. It.. 700/acre. .. '" 16:41 "'" (5:51 J.6
120/l000sQ.ft.. 1200/acrll." .. (6:41 "'" (5:5)
4O/10oosq.It.. 400/ilCra. '" (6:41 '" (5:5) "
50/1000sq.ft". "'" (6:51
4O/1000sq.ft... '" (7:31 '" (6:5)
150/1 OOOsq. tt.. 2000/acre. .. .. 17:31 "'" (5:5.
90/'OOOsQ.ft.oo .. (6:41 "'" (6:51
500I1000sq.fl. .. .. (5:51 .. 15:51
7001l000sq.ft.". '" (5:5) '" 15:51
85011000sq.fl., 550/vehicleluelingspace". .. (5:51 '" (6:61
60fl00Qsq.ft,,600/acre. .. '" [7:31 '" (6.51
60/1000 SQ. ft.. 600/acre.. '" (6:41 .. 115:5)
6/1000sq.It..100/acreoo .. [7:31 '" (6:6)
30/1000sq.It..150/llClII" '" (6:41 '" (5:5)
4O/1000sq.ft." '" (6:41 .. (5:5)
60/1000sq. ft., 6oa/acre.. '" 16:4] '" (6:5)
40/1000 sq. ft.. 90/acre" '" (6:41 ''''' 16:5)
{~JdO~:~ :i~2gg/~;;~r~~~~~:~~~~~~nIYI '" (6:4] '" (5:5)
'" (3:71 '''' 16:41
2.4/student, 100 aore. '0% IB:21 '" (3:71 ,.,
1.21student, 24/1000 sq. ft.. 120/ac1"9..' ,,. (8:21 '" (6:41 '.0
1.31student,l!5/1000sq.ft.,60/acre"oo 20% 17:31 ""' 14:61 ...
1.4/student. 12/1000 sq. ft. SO/acre" "'" (6:41 '" (4:61 5.0
t.6/student, 1411000 Sq. ft.. 90/acre" .. 32. (6:41 '" (4:61 J.4
5/ehild,BO/1000sq.ft." '''' (5:51 '" (6:61 J.'
>4
1601,000sq.lt.. 1000/a~re." .. 17:31 .. (4:6)
20011000 sq. ft.. 15oo/acre. .. 15:41 ''''' (5:5)
250l125one-wayl/1ane. '" 15:51 '''' (5:51
60/1ooosq.ft..800/acreoo '" '"
looI50Gne-wlly)/Iane.. .. '"
'.J
201b1ld, 25/1000 sq. ft., 250/acre" '" 0:31 ". 14:61
31bed.. '" 16:41 '" (4:61
18/100Qsq.It..2oo/acre" .. ,,. 18:2l ,,. (2:81 '.0
8/1000 SQ. fl.. SO/acre" '" (9:1) ,,. (2:81
10/1000 sq. ft.. 120/e~re. ,.. (8:21 '" (3:71 11.7
411000 sq. tt" SO/acre" ". (9:1) 2lJ% (2:81
5/1000 sq. ft., 60/aclll." '" (7:31 '" (4:61
2/1000 sq. ft., O.21val,llt. 3O/a~re. '" (5:5) '" 15:5)
8/1000 sq. ft., eO/acre. 16. 19:1} ,.. 11:91
6/acra ". 15:51 "'" 14:61
(OVER}
MEMBER AGENCIES: calas 01 Carlsbed. Chula V~. Cof'<)ll8dc. 0&1 Mil", El Calon. Encinllas. Escondida. Im~rial Belich. La Mssa. Lemon GI'OVtI. NIIttonal City.
O~aanside. PO'o'flly, San Oleg;o. SenMarcoll, Santee, Solane Beach. Villa and County "" San Diego.
ADVISORYIlIAISON MEMBERS: Callfomia Oepartrnenl of Tranaportalion, County Wlllar Authorily, U.S. Oapartmanl of Defenu. S.D. Unjfiad Port Oll;;lric:l end Tijuana/Baje California.
5-117
Page 29
LAND USE
llUP CATEGORIES
[PRIMARY:DIVERTED:PASS.8Y!"
UBRARY
LODGING ................. ...... ......
HotaIlwJco""entiorlfecilili...lrestaursm)
Mo,",
Reson:Hatel
BuslnuaHotel
[44:44:12]
.........158:38:41
MILITARY
....[82:16:2!
OFFICE
SUlnO"rdCammereiaIOHlce. ....[n:19:4]
(lIlssthan 100,OQOsq.ft.)
Large(High-RiselCommereiIlIOffiee....... ........[82:1S:3]
(maretlllln 100,OOOsq. ft.. 6+ $totiea}
Offu::1I Park. (400.000+ sq. ft.)
Single Tenant Otfice
CorparateHeadquarters
Government (Civk: Center) .............................. [50:34:161
Po$totflc"
Central/Welk-lnOnly
Communitvll101includlngmaildrOlllanal
Communitvlw/l'l'laildrap~nel
Mail Drop Lane only
DeparrmentofMotorVahicles
Medical-Dernal ...160:30:101
PARKS............................................................ ...166:28:61
Cltv (devaloPlld wfmaating rooms and 5POru facilitiesl
RagionalldaVftlapedl
Naiyhb<lrhoodlCounty(undeVftloPlld!
Stala(avarage loooacresl
Amusement rThama)
San Diego Zoo
Sea World
RECREATION
Beach.,OcaanorBay.... .... ....................[62:39:91
Beach,Lake(ffest1watar)
Bowling Canter
CampgrOWd
GoIfCoursa
Driving Range only
Marinas
Multi,purllDse Iminiature golf, videa arcade. batting cage. etc.)
RacquelballfHealth Club
TennisCourt$
SpOttS FacUltiu
Outdoor Stadium
Indoor Arena
Raeelr8ck.
Thea1atl5(multiplexw/ma!inee) .........166:17:17J
RESiDENTIAL..... ..................[86:11:3)
Estate. Urban or Rural
(average 1-20Ulacre]
Single Family Detaclled
(average3-60Ulacre)
COndominium
lor any multi.family 6.20 DU/Bcral
Apertment
(ofBny rnulti-family units mora lhan 20 DUlacre)
MilitaryHousing(off-obase,multi-famlly!
([esslhan 6 DU/acre!
(6-20 DU/acrel
MobilaHomfl
Family
AduluOnly
RetiramentCammunity
Congregale Cara Facilitv
RESTAURANT" ............................. [51:37:12J
Quality
sit-down.llightumover
FaslFood Iw/drlve-tllrough)
FaslFood(withoutdrive-1hroughl
Delicatassen(7am-4pml
TRANSPORTATION
6usDepat
Trucl:Term;nal
WaterportlMerineTarminel
TrBn,itstallonIUghtRailw/parkingl
F>ark& RideLols
TRIP LENGTH
(MII...I'
3.9
7.B
",
B.B
10.0
B.B
B.O
..
'-'
a3
6.'
7.9
"
ESTIMATED WEEKDAY VeilCLE
TRIP GENERATION RATE (DRIVEWAY)
HIGHEST PEAle HOUR % (plus IN:OUT 181101
s....... 6:00-9:30 A.M. _.. 3:OO-6:JO P.M.
50/toOO sq. ft.. 400lacrau
'" (7:3) ."" (5:51
.. (6:41 .. (6:41
.. (4:61 '" (6:41
'" (6:41 '" (4:61
.. (4:6) '" !ll:41
'" 19:11 ."" (2:81
14' (9:11 .'" (2:6!
.'" (9:1] '4' "'.
'''' (9:1) '''' (2:61
". (9:1) 15. 12:81
17. 19:1) ". 11:91
'" (9:1) 12. (3:7)
'" '"
.. (6:41 '" 15:51
'" (5:51 "'" (5:51
'" (5:5] 12% f5:S1
.. (6:4] 117. 14:5]
.. 16:2} "' (3:7)
'" ..
13. 15:5) "" (5:S)
.. 16:41
10/occupied room, 300/acre
9/occupied room, 200I-.;re.
Sloceupiedloom.l00/aclfl.
7Ioccupiadroom..
2.S/mililllry&civillanpotfsonnel.
2011000sq.fl.,o3001BCJ1I.
1711000 sq. ft..o 6OOlecra.
1211000sq.ft.. 200/acre. u
14/1000 sq. ft., lSO/acra.
7tlOOO sq. ft., 110/ecre.
3011000 sq. ft...
9011000,q.h:...
200/1000 sq. ft.. 1300lacre.
30011000 sq. ft., 10OOlacre.
15001750ona-way)!Iane.
lSOIloo0sq.ft.,900/acre..
5011000sq. fl., 5oo/acra'
50/aCI8-
20/lIcra.
S/lICre(addforspeciflc$pOrtlJ5o:s!,6Ipicnicaite.'.
1/acr...l0/llicnicsiteu
8O/acre, 130/acra(aummo:ronly!..
115/ecre'
SO/acre.
60011000 ft. sllore1ine, 501acl1l.
5011000 ft. shoreline, 6lacro:.
3D/l000aq.ft.. JOO/acre, JOllane..
4/ca.mpsile..
7/acre, 4Olholo:. 7oolcourse. ..
70/ecre, 141111e box'
4Iberth.,20Iecre. u
90/acto:
30/1000 SC!. ft.. 300/acre. 40/court.
16/acro:.30/caunu
'" 0:31 "' (4:61
"" ..
'" (8:Z! "" (3:7)
"" (7:31 '" 15:S1
'" (3:71 '" (6:4!
2% ..
"" (6:4) "" 16:4)
"" ". (5:6)
'.. .. (6:41
.. "" ''''' t7:31
'" "" ''''' t7:31
.. 12:6) ''''' t7:3)
.. (2:81 '" 0:31
'" (3:71 '" (6:41
'" (3:71 '" (6:4]
'" "" ,.. 16:4]
'" 13:71 ''''' 16:4]
'" (4:61 '" (6:4)
"" (6:41 .. (5:51
'" (6:41 .. (7:31
.. (5:51 .. (6:41
'" (5:5! '" 16:5)
.. (6:41 '" (6:51
'" (6:41 '" ""
.. (4:61 .. 15:5)
'4' (7:3) ". (3:7)
... (7:31 15. (3:7)
50facre,0.2Iseat.
30/Bere.0.llseat.
4OIacre,0.6seat.
SOll000SQ.ft., 1.8/seat, 360/sc....o:n.
12/dweJlingunil.'
10/dweJlingunit..
S/dweJlingunil.'
6/dwemngunit..
Sldwelling unil
8/dwelling unit
5/dweUlngunit,40/aCl'O:'
3/dwo:lling unil, 20/acra.
4/dwellingunilU
2.5/dwelllngunil..
100/1 000 sq. ft.. 3/s8et, SOO/acl8. ..
160/1000sq. ft..a/se!!. 10CO/Bcre. n
65011000sq.ft..20Isllilt.3OOOIacre. ..
70011000sq.ft.u
15011000sq.ft.. 11/seat.
2511000sq.ft...
10/1000sq. ft., 7lbay, SO/acreu
170ibe"tt,12/acreu
300/acra,2'''lparkingspace(4/occupiedl.'
400/acre (600/pav&d acre!,
{5/parking.space1s/oCCUPied).n
. PrimlOl'y,ource:SMID1f1(Jf}Tr.fflcGenarators.
. Othar 'OUICM: fTE Trip Ganar.tiM RapQtt /6th EditilJnl, Trip Ga......tlon Rates (Olher agenCla. and pubUc81ional, vsri<l... SANOAG & CAt TIlANS stw;as. repo", ""d estimates.
. TripcategoryparcomagerlJllocaredailyframlocalholJll~dsu""'eys.oft.ncannOlbeappliedtovety.pedficlendus....anddonotinclud.non.'esid.ntdriva<s
idrattSA/IIOAGAn.aiysi.fpfTripDivarsiDn, ravl.edNovembar. 19901:
PFlIMAFlY-ona"ipdiractlybotw...."origina,.;p,lmlOl'yclaslination.
OIV~IlTEO - IInkad trip lh...ing ona 0< mo,a .tOllS al""lltlla way to a primary destination) wIlosa dists",. comp."'d 10 dirOCl dl$lanc. ~ 1 mila.
PASS-BY'undlve"edordivarled< 1 mil..
, Trip I.ngt;..r.av....g.....ight.d fot all lripS 10 and from g.".rall.nd lJlIesij a. IAlltrip"vstam-wida avarsga length .15.Smilesl
< RtladcurveillQUMian: 1..r1ffi.. O.~02 l.nIl<I ~ 15.945}T tat It' 1000 f1
. FirledC\.IfVeillQuatil)n: I.n01 _ 0.758 lnlxl ~ 3.950 - a rIpS, X... .q..
. F1nedcurvaillQuation: 1__2.1eSLnld1+ 12.8S l-triosIOU.d-densityIOUlecr,l.0U_dwallingunit
. SugjjmedPAss.aYlundl"""edordiv."ad<lmllelpercanlageston,iprete'edUCIioosonly
dunngp.M.p..kpariadlbllledoncombinationoflocaldatalroviewandOlher.ourcos"):
COMMEROAUPETAII,.
Ragionai Shopping Cenl... Zl%
Camm.orilv . . 3:l%
Nl:ighborhoad' 4O'llo
Soecl.ltyRotaWStripCommarciallOlhar! to%
'- ~
Convenl<<>eeMarket m
OlscoumaublStote 3:l%
_CAe
- ""
AUTOMOIIILE
G8S0inaSl81;an !lO'll.
RESTAURANT
Quajity 10%
Sil-dowr1l-Oghlurn""et 20%
FBStFood 4O'llo
t T(ipR8ductlons'lno'.m-tohalPP'omot8raglan.I'~m8"gl'O\lVlh'palici....
andocknowladg.SanO,egO",expandlngmuattana,tsyst.m.consider
vahocleltip"".reduct,onalwnhptopardocumom81,onendnec8SSllry
.djustmentaforpeakpark>d8)_ThafollowingaluomasxatT1Qles:
1'1 AS%daiiytrlpreductionforlandureswijhtran.itaccessornaar
tranailSlalionaaccessiblewijhinll4mila.
(2) IJpto 10'llodallylripraductianformixed."".d.veJopmamswh.",
residamiel and commercial '!lIail are combined ldemonstrata made
.plilofwelkinglripalorepj8C8V.hiculartrips).
5-118
Paje30
EXHIBIT 3
WESTSIDE TRANSPORATION DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE fWTDIF)
Interstate 5 Imorovement Proiects (Year 2007 estimated oroiect cost)
This category is for freeway improvements along/within Interstate-S.
./-5-./ ./-5/E Street HB Ramp restriping to add lane ($12, 627.30).
This project is listed in the Urban Core Specific Plan Tables 3 & S.8-4, p. S-167 (SIS of 768) of
EIR as Intersection #2. The improvements will provide for restriping only on the existing
roadway width to provide a west-to-north right turn lane. Cost does not include drainage inlet
relocation or railroad grade crossing costs. Street width to match recent street widening
completed at 76S E Street. This project is assumed to be a part of the RAS-4 project.
Coordination with LRT, RAS-S, project also needed. Existing level of Service is "C" & for Year
2030 is "E" with no improvements made.
./-5-2 ./-5/E Street/Bay Blvd SB o.ff-ramp restnjJing to add lane ($12, 627.30).
This project is listed in the Urban Core Specific Plan EIR Tables 3 & S.8-4 as Intersection #1.
The improvements will provide for restriping only to provide an eastbound through lane,
eastbound right turn lane, southbound left-turn lane, southbound right-turn lane, and northbound
right-turn lane. Cost does not include roadway widening or westerly extension of E Street.
These are assumed to be a part of the Bayfront Redevelopment Project, BAY-I. A separate
project will be identified for each of the four approaches since they may each be constructed
independent from one another. Existing level of Service is "B" & for Year 2030 is "F" with no
improvements made.
./-5-3 ./-5/NB Ramp widening at: E, H; J, ./ndustnal, Palamar & Main Streets
($8,194,860).
Caltrans has prepared an Interstate-S Project Study report dated January 2002 with a FYOS/06
cost estimate of $7.9S million for nine locations, in South San Diego and Chula Vista. Six of
nine (66.7%) locations are in Chula Vista. Therefore the costs are adjusted to Year 2007 and
apportioned by jurisdiction. Caltrans has not secured funding but anticipates utilizing SHOPP
and/or CMAQ funds. Also, SANDAG 2007 Draft RTP shows $225M access improvement
project for those locations from Sea World Drive (San Diego) to J Street (Chula Vista). WTDIF
contribution to project share is assumed to be 28% of Caltrans cost estimate due to vehicular trip
growth % in GPU. Cost estimate is $7.95M X 1.0308 (ENR construction cost index) X 66.7% X
28% = $1,529,707.20. This estimate was prepared by Caltrans and includes the direct costs and
soft costs. Existing level of Service is "B" to "D" for Year 2030 it is "F" with no improvements
made.
./-5-4 E Street bndge widening over ./nterstate-5 ($2, 143, 750).
Anticipated bridge deck widening of 20-feet between the northbound and southbound ramps, a
distance of approximately 2S0-feet, to accommodate wider shoulder lanes and sidewalks. No
5-119
Page 31
Caltrans study yet. Study expected with Projects 1-5-17 & STM-361. Preliminary cost estimate
is based on 250 LF of work X 20-feet widening X $350/sq.ft. = $1,750,000. In addition, direct
costs of $262,500 (15%) and soft costs of $131,250 (7.5%) have been added to the project
estimate. No project cost share percentage identified yet for WTDIF until studies are completed.
/-5-5 F Street bridge widening over Interstate-5 ($2, 143, 750).
Anticipated bridge deck widening of 20-feet between the LRT R/W and Bay Blvd,
approximately 250-feet, to accommodate wider shoulder lanes, bike lanes and sidewalks. No
Caltrans study yet. Study expected with Projects 1-5-17& STM-361. Preliminary cost estimate
is based on 250 LF of work X 20-feet widening X $350/sq.ft. = $1,750,000. In addition, direct
costs of $262,500 (15%) and soft costs of $131,250 (7.5%) have been added to the project
estimate. No project cost share percentage identified yet for WTDIF until studies are completed.
/-5-6 1-5/NB Off-ramp/H Street restriping to add lane ($I2, 627.30).
This project is listed in the Urban Core Specific Plan Tables 36 & 5.8-4 as Intersection #25. The
improvements will provide for restriping only to provide a westbound through lane, a westbound
right turn lane and a north-to-east right turn lane. See EPS Table 36 (need to confirm). Cost
estimate does not include the roadway widening. This project is assumed to be a part of the
RAS-IO project. Coordination with LRT, RAS-6, project, the 1-5-17 project and STM-361
project also needed. Existing level of Service is "B" & for Year 2030 is "F" with no
improvements made.
/-5-7 /-5/H Street Sll Off-ramp restriping to add lane ($12, 627.30).
This project is listed in the Urban Core Specific Plan Tables 37 & 5.8-4 as Intersection #24. The
improvements will provide for restriping only to provide an eastbound through lane, eastbound
right turn lane, southbound left-turn lane and southbound right-turn lane. Cost does not include
roadway widening. This project is assumed to be a part of the RAS-IO project. Coordination
with LRT, RAS-6 project, the 1-5- I 7 project and STM-361 project also needed. Existing level of
Service is "c" & for Year 2030 is "F" with no improvements made.
/-5-8 /-5/H Street bndge WIdening over Interstate-5 ($3, 430, 000).
Anticipated bridge deck widening of 40-feet between the northbound and southbound ramps, a
distance of approximately 200-feet, to accommodate additional and wider shoulder lanes plus
new wider sidewalks. No Caltrans study yet. Study expected with Projects 1-5-17 & STM-361.
Coordination needed with RAS-6 project. Preliminary cost estimate is based on 200 LF of work
X 40-feet widening X $350/sq.ft. = $2,800,000. In addition, direct costs of $420,000 (15%) and
soft costs of$210,000 (7.5%) have been added to the project estimate. No cost identified yet for
WTDlF until studies are completed. Existing levels of service based on travel time delay from
the City's Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC) Traffic Monitoring Program
(TMP). During the A.M./Mid-day/P.M. peak periods, the levels of service are D/DIE. No Year
2030 projections available.
5-120
Page 32
/-5-9 /-5/J Street HB Ramp restriping to add lane ($12, 627.30.
This project is listed in the Urban Core Specific Plan Tables 3 & 5.8-4 as Intersection #59. The
improvements will provide for restriping only to provide an additional eastbound left tum lane
and an exclusive westbound right turn lane. Cost does not include undercrossing widening
which is Project 1-5-10. This project is also to be coordinated with Projects 1-5-17 & STM-36I.
Existing level of Service is "B" & for Year 2030 is "F" with no improvements made.
/-5-10
J Street undercrossing widening to add EB-HB Itfi /urn lane at 1-5 ($/,500, 625).
In order to provide an additional east-to-north left turn lane for J Street to the northbound on-
ramp at Interstate-5, the undercrossing must be widened by 20-feet. Current undercrossing has
two through lanes eastbound, two through lanes westbound, one east-to-north left tum lane and
one west-to-south left turn lane. This project needs to be coordinated with 1-5-17 & STM-36I.
Preliminary cost estimate is based on 175 LF of work X 20-feet widening X $350/sq.ft. =
$1,225,000. In addition, direct costs of $183,750 (15%) and soft costs of $91,875 (7.5%) have
been added to the project estimate. Existing levels of service based on travel time delay from the
City's Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC) Traffic Monitoring Program
(TMP). During the P.M. peak period only, the levels of service is E. No Year 2030 projections
available.
1-5-11
L Street bn'dge widening over /-5 ($/,543,500)
Anticipated bridge deck widening of 12-feet between Bay Blvd and Industrial Blvd. For
approximately 300 lineal feet along the south side of the roadway to provide for pedestrian
access that does not exist today. The north side of the bridge deck has a narrow sidewalk.
Preliminary cost estimate is based on 300 LF of work X 12-feet widening X $350/sq.ft =
$1,260,000. In addition, direct costs of $189,000 (15%) and soft costs of $94,500 have been
added to this project estimate. This project needs to be coordinated with 1-5-17 & STM-36I.
WTDIF share of costs are 21% of$I,543,500, due to population growth expected as cited in the
GPU Table 5-5. In addition, direct costs of 15% and soft costs of 7.5% have bee added to the
project. Since this project is for missing infrastructure for pedestrians, no level of service
threshold exists. WTDIF share is $324,135.00.
1-5-12
/-5/Bay Blvd (south if L Street) SB on/qff-ramps trqffic signal ($257. 700).
This project is listed in the Urban Core Specific Plan Tables 3 & 5.8-4 as Intersection #63. The
iroprovements will provide for a traffic signal on Bay Blvd at the Interstate-5 southbound on/off
ramps located just south of L Street. There is no cost to the WTDIF since this is an existing
deficiency but not yet identified by Caltrans as a location to signalize.
1-5-13
1-5/1ndustria1Blvd HB on/cfframps trqffic signal ($257. 700).
This project is listed in the Urban Core Specific Plan Tables 3 & 5.8-4 as Intersection #64. The
improvements will provide for a traffic signal on Industrial Blvd at the Interstate-5 northbound
5-121
Page 33
on/off ramps located just south ofL Street. The entire cost is attributed to the WTDIF. Existing
level of Service is "C" & for Year 2030 is "F" with no improvements made.
/-5-14
/-5/Palomar Street bridge widening ($5,895,3/2. 50).
Anticipated bridge deck widening of 50-feet between the northbound and southbound ramps, a
distance of approximately 275-feet, to accommodate exclusive left turn lanes and wider shoulder
lanes to accommodate bike lanes plus new wider sidewalks. No Caltrans study yet. Study
expected with Projects 1-5-17 & STM-361. Preliminary cost estimate is based on 275 LF of
work X 50-feet widening X $350/sq.ft = $4,812,500. In addition, direct costs of$721,875 (15%)
and soft costs of $360,937.50 have been added to this project estimate. No project cost share
percentage identified yet for WTDIF until studies are completed. Existing levels of service
based on travel time delay from the City's Growth Management Oversight Commission
(GMOC) Traffic Monitoring Program (TMP). During the A.M./Mid-day/P.M. peak periods, the
levels of service are DIEIE. No Year 2030 projections available.
/-5-15
/-5/Main Street NB on/o/.f ramps traffic signal & south SIde improvements
($645, 000).
Per Caltrans study and letter dated June 5, 2007, anticipated improvements to signalize and
provide for a sidewalk along south side of Main Street and retaining wall are estimated at
$645,000. Since the City of San Diego and City of Chula Vista city limits are along the
centerline of the roadway, costs have been separated out by jurisdiction, including Caltrans. City
of Chula Vista share of costs is $120,000. Cost should be out of the Traffic Signal Fund due to
existing need for signalization. No cost for WTDIF.
/-5-16
/-5/Main Street bridge widening ($1,925, 000).
Anticipated bridge deck widening of 20-feet between the northbound and southbound ramps, a
distance of approximately 275 feet, to accommodate additional through lanes and wider shoulder
lanes to accommodate bike lanes plus new wider sidewalks. No Caltrans study yet. Study
expected with Projects 1-5-17 & STM-361. Preliminary cost estimate is based on 275 LF of
work X 20-feet widening X $350/sq.ft = $1,925,000. In addition, direct costs of$288,750 (15%)
and soft costs of $144,375 have been added to this project estimate. No project cost share
percentage identified yet for WTDIF until studies are completed.
/-5-17
/-5HOV & ManagedLanesftom SR-905toSR-54 ($216,612,930.48).
This project is identified in the SANDAG Mobility 2030 Plan and also in the 2007 Draft RTP.
Two High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV)/Carpool LanesIManaged Lanes are proposed on Interstate-
5 from SR-54 south to SR-905. Approximately 63.4% of the project is located within the City of
Chula Vista city limits. The area from SR-905 to Main Street is located within the City of San
Diego jurisdiction. The WTDIF share of the cost estimate is based on the 8.2 percent increase in
traffic volumes that the west side will generate onto Interstate-5. WTDIF share is
$216,612,930.48 X 0.634 X 0.082 = $11,261,273.03. Existing level of Service is "D" & for Year
2030 is "F" with no improvements made.
5-122
Page 34
STM-J61
.1-5 Multl~Modal COJ7Jdor Slue(;; ($2, 700, 000).
This corridor study will evaluate and identifY the ultimate transportation infrastructure
improvements needed for several modes of transportation across, along and within the Interstate-
5 corridor. The study will prioritize needed improvements that will then be phased in based on
system need and federal, regional and local funding. SANDAG is the lead on this study with
participation from Caltrans and the City of Chula Vista. Modes to be evaluated include bicycles,
freight rail, light rail trolley, pedestrians, transit, and vehicular users. This study will look at
local roadways that traverse the Interstate-5 corridor and including access to/from Interstate-5
from SR-54 to south of Main Street. Federal funds have been earmarked for the Interstate-5/H
Street interchange improvements (STM-362) but the corridor study needs to be completed first in
order to meet Caltrans and FHW A criteria due to existing interchange spacing that does not meet
the minimum I-mile separation criteria. The Federal earmark is $2,160,000 (80%) of $2.7 M
and the WTDIF share is the matching 20% of the $2.7 M representing $540,000. Staff is
monitoring the HR-1195 bill that will move the money from I-5/H Street interchange into this
study.
Interstate 805 ImDrovement Proiects IY ear 2007 estimated oroiect cost)
This category is for freeway improvements along/within Interstate-805.
1-805-1
.1-805/NB ramp widening and ramp-metering at: Bonda Road, E H St (EB-NB) &
Telegraph Canyon Road ($10,101,840).
This project is listed in the SANDAG 2006 Regional Transportation Improvement program
(RTIP) as "MPO ill: CAL51" and will provide ramp widening for an HOV lane and ramp
metering at three locations all in the northbound direction. All of the project funding has already
been identified totaling $9.808 M in SHOPP & STIP funds. The $9.808 M estimate is based in
Year 2006 construction dollars. The cost shown above totaling $10.1 M is in Year 2007
escalated dollars if the project is delayed. There is no cost to the WTDIF since this is an existing
deficiency. Construction is expected to commence in the first quarter of 2008 and be operational
by 2009.
.1-805-
.1-805/Main Street undercrossing wideningjOr EB-NB ltiji lurn lane ($5, 145, 000).
In order to provide for ultimate improvements in this area, the undercrossing must be widened up
to 40-feet. The widening is necessary in order to provide for an additional east-to-north left turn
lane for Main Street to the northbound on-ramp at Interstate-805. The current undercrossing at
88-feet in width curb-to-curb, has an interim striping of two through lanes eastbound, two
through lanes westbound, one east-to-north left turn lane and two west-ta-south left turn lanes.
The project will provide for wider lanes and will also provide a sidewalk along the north side of
the roadway and restore the shoulder widths to provide for bicycle lanes. Reconstruction of the
south sidewalk will also be required. Preliminary cost estimate is based on 300 LF of work X
40-feet widening X $350/sq.ft. = $4,200,000. In addition, $630,000 (15%) direct costs and
5-123
Page 35
$315,000 (7.5%) soft costs increase project estimate to $5,145,000. The Eastern TDIF has
already paid to provide the second WB-to-SB left turn and Federal & State funds have already
paid for ramp improvements. WTDIF share is $5,145,000. Existing levels of service are based
on travel time delay from the City's Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC)
Traffic Monitoring Program (TMP). During the A.M./Mid-day/P.M. peak periods, the levels of
service are C/ AID. No Year 2030 projections available.
State Route 54 Imnrovement Proiects lYear 2007 estimated oroiect cost)
This category is for freeway improvements along/within State Route-54.
SR-54-1
SR-54/W.B qff-ramp restriping at .Broadway ($1 (U08).
This project is listed in the Urban Core Specific Plan Tables 3 & 5.8-4 as Intersection #34. The
improvements will provide for restriping only to provide an additional westbound-to-northbound
right turn lane. Since this is an existing deficiency at level of Service "F" there is no cost to the
WTDIF.
SR-54-2
SR-54/E.B qff-ramp at North Fourth Avenue to add a ramp lane ($93,442. 02).
This project is listed in the Urban Core Specific Plan Tables 3 & 5.8-4 as Intersection #44. The
improvements will provide for minor improvements to add a second EB-to-SB exclusive right
turn lane at the off-ramp. A cost estimate for the off-ramp improvements is needed. The entire
cost goes to the WTDIF. Coordination with Caltrans is needed to provide a more detailed cost
estimate. Existing level of Service is "C" & for Year 2030 is "F" with no improvements made.
Rel!ional Arterial Svstem (RA.8l Proiects rYear 2007 estimated oroiect cost)
This category of projects is for those roadways that are on the SANDAG Regional Arterial
System (RAS). These roadways are significant regional facilities located within the County and
have met the SANDAG and Caltrans criteria for being classified as an RAS roadway. RAS
roadways handle larger volumes of traffic than other collector roadways and also serve as
secondary access routes when the freeways cannot handle additional traffic due to incidents or
peak hour volumes.
Some of these RAS projects are part of the City of Chula Vista's Infrastructure Deficiency
Report presented to the City Council on April 5, 2007. Per the report, preliminary cost estimates
are based on needed infrastructure unit costs for Year 2006 of: $150/LF of sidewalk, $725/LF for
sidewalk, curb & gutter and $6500 for each pedestrian ramp. These costs have been escalated to
Year 2007 unit costs of $154.62/LF for sidewalk, $747.33/LF for sidewalk, curb & gutter and
$6700 for each pedestrian ramp.
5-124
Page 36
RAS-1
Eonita Road.from First Avenue to 1-805 ($393, 663.55).
This project is part of the City ofChula Vista's Infrastructure Deficiency Report presented to the
City Council on April 5, 2007. Improvements consist of curb, gutter and sidewalk areas
generally along the south side of Bonita Road near Hilltop Drive. Preliminary hard costs for
construction are estimated at $321,358. In addition, $48,203.70 (15%) direct costs and
$24,101.85 (7.5%) soft costs increase project estimate to $393,669.35. The WTDIF share of
costs is 21 % of $393,669.35 due to population growth expected of21 % as cited in GPU Table 5-
5. Therefore, WTDIF share is $393,663.55 X 21 % = $82,669.35.
RAS-2
Eroadway .from C Street to south 0/ Main Street (City Limits) ($539,214.38).
This project is part of the City ofChula Vista's Infrastructure Deficiency Report presented at the
City Council Workshop of April 5, 2007. Improvements consist of curb, gutter and sidewalk
areas mostly south of Main Street. Preliminary hard costs for construction are estimated at
$440,175. In addition, $66,026.25 (15%) direct costs and $33,013.13 (7.5%) soft costs increase
project estimate to $539,214.38. WTDIF share of costs are 21% of $440,175 due to population
growth expected of21% as cited in GPU Table 5-5. Therefore, WTDIF share is $440,175 X
21% = $113,235.02.
RAS-3
E Street improvements .from First Avenue to Eonita RoadiE. Flower Street
($813,532.30).
This project is part of the City ofChula Vista's Infrastructure Deficiency Report. Improvements
consist of curb, gutter and sidewalk areas generally along the north side of the street east of Corte
Maria Avenue. Preliminary hard costs for construction are estimated at $664,108. In addition,
$99,616.20 (15%) direct costs and $49,808.10 (7.5%) soft costs increase project estimate to
$539,214.38. WTDIF share of costs are 21% of$813,532.30 due to population growth expected
of 21% as cited in GPU Table 5-5. Therefore, WTDIF share is $813,532.30 X 21% =
$170,841.78.
RAS-4
E Street improvements .from 1nterstate 5 to 300-ftet east 0/ HE ramp
($175,519.41).
This project is part of the City of Chula Vista's Infrastructure Deficiency Report. Work
generally consists of relocating a drainage inlet to the north and repaving the area to match recent
street widening completed as part of gas station remodeling/reconstruction at 765 E Street in
order to provide an exclusive west-to-north right turn lane onto NB 1-5 on-ramp. Preliminary
hard costs for construction are estimated at $143,281.20. In addition, $21,492.18 (15%) direct
costs and $10,746.09 (7.5%) soft costs increase project estimate to $175,519.47. WTDIF share
of costs are 28% of$175,519.47 due to vehicular trip growth expected of28% as cited in GPU
Table 5-5. Therefore, WTDIF share is $175,519.47 X 28% = $49,145.45. Coordination with
LRT, RAS-5 project, the 1-5-4 & 1-5-17 projects and STM-361 project also needed.
RAS-5
E Street LJ?T grade separation (E St. underpass/LRT overhead option)
($29,023,881.52).
5-125
Page 37
This project does not change the current elevation of E Street. The LRT profile is raised from
about D Street to about F Street so that the LR T goes over the local street. This project is listed
in the General Plan Traffic Study Appendix A. SANDAG's "Concept Engineering Report for E
Street & H Street Grade Separations" dated October 14, 2003, provided an evaluation of
constructing an overpass or an underpass at E Street and at H Street. The report also looked at
the feasibility and probable construction costs associated with each alternative. Although no
specific project has been identified for funding, the report's preferred recommendation is for the
roadway to stay at its' current elevation (roadway overpass) and for the LRT to be an underpass
similar in profile to Interstate-5. The same study also evaluated the H Street at-grade crossing
(RAS-6). SANDAG's "Mobility 2030" plan identifies regional Light Rail Grade Separations at
a cost of $ 100M for the region. Grade separation in the amount of$IOO M to $237 M for both
the LRT & Coaster are shown on the draft "2007 Regional Transportation Plan". It is expected
that funding from other sources such as local, state and federal funds will be used in addition to
TransNet funds. This alternative was estimated at $24,414,436 in Year 2003. The costs have
been increased to Year 2007 and are estimated at $29,023,881.52. WTDIF share of costs are
28% of $29,023,881.52 due to vehicular trip growth expected of28% as cited in GPU Table 5-5.
Therefore, WTDIF share is $29,023,881.52 X 28% = $8,126,686.83. Note that RAS-5 is listed
twice but only one of the two alternatives wiIl be provided. Therefore this option, LR T
overhead, is not listed on WTDlF table.
RAS-5 E Street LRTgradeseparation (E Sf. overpass/lRTundepass option) ($31,796,297.72).
This project does not change the current elevation of E Street. The LRT would be lowered from
about D Street to about F Street in order to cross below E Street similar in profile to the
Interstate-5. This project is listed in the General Plan Traffic Study Appendix A. SANDAG's
"Concept Engineering Report for E Street & H Street Grade Separations" dated October 14,
2003, provided an evaluation of constructing an overpass or an underpass at E Street and at H
Street. The report also looked at the feasibility and probable construction costs associated with
each alternative. Although no specific project has been identified for funding, the report's
preferred recommendation is for the roadway to stay at its' current elevation (roadway overpass)
and for the LRT to be an underpass similar in profile to Interstate-5. The same study also
evaluated the H Street at-grade crossing (RAS-6). SANDAG's "Mobility 2030" plan identifies
regional Light Rail Grade Separations at a cost of $ 100M for the region. Grade separation in the
amount of $ I 00 M to $237 M for both the LRT & Coaster are shown on the draft "2007 Regional
Transportation Plan". It is expected that funding from other sources such as local, state and
federal funds will be used in addition to TransNet funds. This alternative was estimated at
$28,428,918 in Year 2003. The costs have been increased to Year 2007 and are estimated at
$33,796,297.72. WTDIF share of costs are 28% of $33,796,297.72 due to vehicular trip growth
expected of28% as cited in GPU Table 5-5. Therefore, WTDlF share is $33,796,297.72 X 28%
= $9,462,963.36. Note that RAS-5 is listed twice but only one of the two alternatives will be
provided. This LRT underpass option is listed in WTDlF table.
5-126
Page 38
RAS-o
H Street LRF grade separation (H St. underpassiZRF overhead option)
($29-720,274.6/).
This project does not change the current elevation of H Street. The LRT profile is raised from
about G Street to about I Street so that the LRT goes over the local street. This project is listed
in the General Plan Traffic Study Appendix A. SANDAG's "Concept Engineering Report for E
Street & H Street Grade Separations" dated October 14, 2003, provided an evaluation of
constructing an overpass or an underpass at E Street and at H Street. The report also looked at
the feasibility and probable construction costs associated with each alternative. Although no
specific project has been identified for funding, the report's preferred recommendation is for the
roadway to stay at its' current elevation (roadway overpass) and for the LRT to be an underpass
similar in profile to Interstate-5. The same study also evaluated the E Street at-grade crossing
(RAS-5). SANDAG's "Mobility 2030" plan identifies regional Light Rail Grade Separations at
a cost of$IOOM for the region. Grade separation in the amount of$IOO M to $237 M for both
the LRT & Coaster are shown on the draft "2007 Regional Transportation Plan". It is expected
that funding from other sources such as local, state and federal funds will be used in addition to
TransNet funds. This alternative was estimated at $25,000,321 in Year 2003. The costs have
been increased to Year 2007 and are estimated at $29,720,274.61. WTDIF share of costs are 28%
of $29,720,274.61 due to vehicular trip growth expected of 28% as cited in GPU Table 5-5.
Therefore, WTDIF share is $29,720,274.61 X 28% = $8,321,676.89. Note that RAS-6 is listed
twice but only one of the two alternatives will be provided. Existing level of Service is "c" &
for Year 2030 is "F" with no improvements made. Therefore this option, LRT overhead, is not
listed on WTDIF table.
RAS-o
H Street LRF grade separation (H St. overpass/LRF underpass option)
($3/,723,906. 6t5).
This project does not change the current elevation of H Street. The LR T would be lowered from
about G Street to about I Street in order to cross below H Street similar in profile to the
Interstate-5. This project is listed in the General Plan Traffic Study Appendix A. SANDAG's
"Concept Engineering Report for E Street & H Street Grade Separations" dated October 14,
2003, provided an evaluation of constructing an overpass or an underpass at E Street and at H
Street. The report also looked at the feasibility and probable construction costs associated with
each alternative. Although no specific project has been identified for funding, the report's
preferred recommendation is for the roadway to stay at its' current elevation (roadway overpass)
and for the LRT to be an underpass similar in profile to Interstate-5. The same study also
evaluated the E Street at-grade crossing (RAS-5). SANDAG's "Mobility 2030" plan identifies
regional Light Rail Grade Separations at a cost of $IOOM for the region. Grade separation in the
amount of$IOO M to $237 M for both the LRT & Coaster are shown on the draft "2007 Regional
Transportation Plan". It is .expected that funding from other sources such as local, state and
federal funds will be used in addition to TransNet funds. WTDIF share of costs are 28% of
$31,723,906.66 due to vehicular trip growth expected of 28% as cited in GPU Table 5-5.
Therefore, WTDIF share is $31,723,906.66 X 28% = $8,882,693.87. Note that RAS-6 is listed
twice but only one of the two alternatives will be provided. Existing level of Service is "C" &
for Year 2030 is "F" with no improvements made. This LRT underpass option is listed in
WTDIF table.
5-127
Page 39
RAS-7
H Street at Broadway EB queue jumper lane & trqffic signal modifications
($469, 735.56).
This project is listed in the Urban Core Specific Plan Tables 3 & 5.8-4 as Intersection #27. On H
Street at the intersection with Broadway, add an eastbound bus queue jumper lane and an
additional westbound through lane and an exclusive west-to-north right turn lane. Preliminary
estimate of hard costs of $372,000 for construction are taken from the 2006 draft Bayfront report
and escalated to Year 2007, now revised to $383,457.60. In addition, $57,518.64 (15%) direct
costs and $28,759.32 (7.5%) soft costs increase project estimate to $469,735.56. Therefore,
WTDIF share is 100% of $469,735.56. Existing level of Service is "C" & for Year 2030 is "F"
with no improvements made.
RAS-8
H Street 14 '-wide median & street light improvements ($6,25/ 776.23).
This project is listed in the Urban Core Specific Plan Tables I & 3 and is for H Street
improvements for a 6-lane roadway, 14-foot wide raised median and new street light standards
from Interstate-5 to Broadway. Preliminary Year 2006 hard costs for construction are estimated
at $4,951,000 and escalated to be $5,103,490 in Year 2007. In addition, $765,523.62 (15%)
direct costs and $382,761.81 (7.5%) soft costs increase project estimate to $6,251,776.23. See
RAS-9 for revised project scope and costs. Therefore, WTDIF share is zero for RAS-8 since it
is included in RAS-9.
RAS-9
H Street widening to 6-lanes .from Interstate-5 to Broadway ($1/425, 181. 04).
In order to provide a six-lane roadway from Interstate-5 to Broadway, two through lanes must be
added, one for each direction to Broadway. H Street is currently a four-lane roadway.
Preliminary Year 2006 hard costs for construction are estimated at $9,048,000 and escalated to
be $9,326,678.40 in Year 2007. In addition, $1,399,001.76 (15%) direct costs and $699,500.88
(7.5%) soft costs increase project estimate to $11,425,181.04. WTDIF share of costs are 100% of
$11,425,181.04 as cited in Urban Core Specific Plan Tables 5.8-2 & 5.8-7. Existing level of
Service is "B" & for Year 2030 is "F" with no iroprovements made.
RAS-10
H Street improvements .from Second Avenue to Hilltop JJrive ($25,186).
This project is part of the City ofChula Vista's Infrastructure Deficiency Report. Improvements
consist of curb, gutter and sidewalk areas generally along the south side of H Street. Preliminary
hard costs for construction are estimated at $20,560. In addition, $3,084.00 (15%) direct costs
and $1,542.00 (7.5%) soft costs increase project estimate to $25,186. WTDIF share of costs are
21% of $25,186 due to population growth expected of 21% as cited in GPU Table 5-5.
Therefore, WTDIF share is $25,186 X 21 % = $5,289.06.
5-128
Page 40
RAS-ll
East H Street north side improvements.from Hilltop Drive to 1-805 ($226,563. 75).
This project is part of the City ofChula Vista's Infrastructure Deficiency Report. Improvements
consist of curb, gutter and sidewalk areas along the north side of the street. Preliminary hard
costs for construction are estimated at $184,950. In addition, $27,742.50 (15%) direct costs and
$13,871.25 (7.5%) soft costs increase project estimate to $226,563.75. wrDIF share of costs are
21% of $184,950 due to population growth expected of 21% as cited in GPU Table 5-5.
Therefore, WTDIF share is $226,563.75 X 21 % = $47,578.39.
RAS-12
L Street/Bay Blvd trqffic signal & add turn lanes ($474, 000).
This project is listed in the Urban Core Specific Plan Tables 3 & 5.8-4. The Level of Service is
"F" today at this intersection. Since this is an existing deficiency the wrDIF share is zero.
RAS-13
L Street improvements south side west if Industrial Blvd. ($187,863.55).
This project is part of the City ofChula Vista's Infrastructure Deficiency Report. Improvements
consist of curb, gutter and sidewalk areas generally along the south side of L Street from Bay
Blvd to Industrial Blvd. Preliminary hard costs for construction are estimated at $153,358. In
addition, $23,003.70 (15%) direct costs and $11,501.85 (7.5%) soft costs increase project
estimate to $187,863.55. WTDIF share of costs are 21% of $187,863.55 due to population
growth expected of21% as cited in GPU Table 5-5. Therefore, wrDIF share is $187,863.55 X
21% = $39,451.35. Coordination with the 1-5-11 & 1-5-17 project and STM-361 project also
needed.
RAS-/4
Telegraph Canyon Road at 1-805 south side sidewalk improvements
($/4JJ53.63).
This project is part of the City ofChula Vista's Infrastructure Deficiency Report. Improvements
consist of curb, gutter and sidewalk areas generally along the south side of Telegraph Canyon
Road through the 1-805 undercrossing. Preliminary hard costs for construction are estimated at
$117,105. In addition, $17,565.75 (15%) direct costs and $8,782.88 (7.5%) soft costs increase
project estimate to $143,453.63. WTDIF share of costs are 21 % of $143,453.63 due to
population growth expected of 21 % as cited in GPU Table 5-5. Therefore, wrDIF share is
$143,453.63 X 21 % =$30,125.26.
RAS-15
Orange Avenue .from Palomar Street to Hilltop Drive ($500, 871.88).
This project is part of the City ofChula Vista's Infrastructure Deficiency Report. Improvements
consist of curb, gutter and sidewalk areas from Palomar Street to Hilltop Drive. Generally, most
improvements are needed near Palomar Street. Preliminary hard costs for construction are
estimated at $408,875. In addition, $61,331.25 (15%) direct costs and $30,665.63 (7.5%) soft
costs increase project estimate to $500,871.88. wrDIF share of costs are 21 % of $500,871.88
due to population growth expected of 21 % as cited in GPU Table 5-5. Therefore, wrDIF share
is $500,871.88 X 21% = $105,183.09.
5-129
Page 41
JUS-i6
Palomar Street improvements .from .lnterstate-5 to .lnterstate-805 ($432,949.30).
This project is part of the City ofChula Vista's Infrastructure Deficiency Report. Improvements
consist of curb, gutter and sidewalk areas generally along both sides of Palomar Street from 1-5
. .to 1-805. Preliminary hard costs for construction are estimated at $353,428. In addition,
$53,014.20 (15%) direct costs and $26,507.10 (7.5%) soft costs increase project estimate to
$432,949.30. WTDlF share of costs are 21% of $432,949.30 due to population growth expected
of 21 % as cited in GPU Table 5-5. Therefore, WTDlF share is $432,949.30 X 21% =
$90,919.35.
JUS-i7
Main Street improvements.from .lnterstate-5 to .lnterstate-805 ($7,575,959.83).
This project is part of the City of Chula. Vista's GPU Table 5.10-6. Improvements consist of
curb, gutter and sidewalk areas along both sides of Main Street from 1-5 to 1-805. Preliminary
hard costs for construction are estimated at $6,184,457. In addition, $927,668.55 (15%) direct
costs and $463,834.28 (7.5%) soft costs increase project estimate to $7,575,959.83. WTDlF
share of costs are 21% of $7,575,959.83 due to population growth expectedof21% as cited in
GPU Table 5-5. Therefore, WTDIF share is $7,575,959.83 X 21 % = $1,590,951.56.
JUS-i8
H Street/fh Avenue addition if a WB-N.B n"ght tul71 lane & protective-pennissive
10/1 turn trqffic signal modtftcations./Or fh Avenue ($93, 442. 02).
This project is part of the City of Chula Vista's GPU Table 5.10-4 intersection #28.
Improvements consist of widening the westbound H Street approach to Fifth Avenue by
. constructing an exclusive right turn lane. For Fifth Avenue, traffic signal modifications to
provide for protective-permissive left turns on the north and south approaches will be provided.
Preliminary hard costs for construction are estimated at $76,279.20. In addition, $11,441.88
(15%) direct costs and $5,720.94 (7.5%) soft costs increase project estimate to $93,442.02.
WTDIF share of costs are 100% of $93,442.02.
H Street/,fh Avenue addition if a WB-NlJ & E.B-S.B n"ght tul71 lanes ($76,279.20).
JUS-i9
This project is part of the City of Chula Vista's GPU Table 5.10-4 intersection #29.
Improvements consist of widening the westbound and the eastbound H Street approaches to
Fourth Avenue by constructing an exclusive right turn lane. One right turn lane will be for the
WB-NB right turn & the other will be for the EB-SB right turn move. Preliminary hard costs for
construction are estimated at $76,279.20. In addition, $11,441.88 (15%) direct costs and
$5,720.94 (7.5%) soft costs increase project estimate to $93,442.02. WTDIF share of costs are
100% of $93;442.02.
TF-358
West Side Transportation Development impact Fee (ffTDiE) Study ($350, 000).
This project is to establish a development impact fee for the area west of Interstate-805 since the
existing Transportation Development Impact Fee covers the City of Chula Vista area from 1-805
to the east. Since there is no City of Chula Vista DIF for transportation facilities west of 1-805,
5-130
Pase 42
the WTDIF will establish a DIF that will address impacts for those parcels located outside of the
existing TDIF area into their own WTDIF. The WTDIF share of costs is 100% of $350,000.
Bicvcle & Pedestrian Facilities Imorovements IYear 2007 estimated proiect cost)
This category of projects is typically for bicycle and pedestrian related projects identified in the
City's Bikeway Master Plan or General Plan Update document.
lJP-1 lJayshore lJikeway (bike path) between E Street and F Street ($201,568.81).
This project is listed in the January 2005 "City of Chula Vista Bikeway Master Plan" as Project
# I and will provide for a 0.25-mile long bike path parallel to and separate from the Bay Blvd
roadway as part of the Bayshore Bikeway. WTDIF share of costs are 21 % of $201,568.81 due to
population growth expected. Therefore, WTDIF share is $201,568.81 X 21 % = $42,329.45.
lJP-2 F Street sidewalk/bike lane improvements .from /-5 to Fourth Avenue
($10,172,965.20).
This project is part of the Urban Core Specific Plan to make this portion ofF Street more into a
bicycle and pedestrian corridor. WTDIF share of costs are 21% of $10,172,965.20 due to
population growth expected. Therefore, WIDIF share is $10,172,965.20 X 21% =
$2,136,322.69.
lJP-3 /ndustrial Blvd improvements & bike lanes .from L Street to Main Street
($2,482,909.58).
This project is listed in the January 2005 "City of Chula Vista Bikeway Master Plan" as Project
#5 and will provide for approximately 1.5-miles of bike lanes in each direction. WTDIF share of
costs are 21 % of $2,482,909.58 due to population growth expected. Therefore, WTDIF share is
$2,482,909.58 X 21% = $521,411.01
lJP-4 Main Street bike lanes.from /ndustriallJlvd to /-805 ($115,221.21).
This project is listed in the January 2005 "City of Chula Vista Bikeway Master Plan" as Project
#4 and will provide for approximately 2.75-miles of bike lanes in each direction. WTDIF share
of costs are 21 % of $115,227.21 due to population growth expected. Therefore, WTDIF share is
$115,227.21 X 21 % = $24,197.71.
lJP-5 Orange Avenue bike lanes.from Palomar Street to Hilltop Drive ($257, 041.03).
This project is listed in the January 2005 "City of Chula Vista Bikeway Master Plan" as Project
#9 and will provide for approximately 1.56-miles of bike lanes in each direction. WTDIF share
of costs are 21 % of $257,041.03 due to population growth expected. Therefore, WTDIF share is
$257,041.03 X 21 % = $53,978.62.
5-131
Page 43
BP-6
Develop bicycle paths & pedestrian access to Third Avenue ($300, 000).
This project was approved as part of a Federal earmark with SAFETEA-LU Demonstration funds
to develop more bicycle paths and increase pedestrian access to Third Avenue. The Federal
earmark is $240,000 (80%) of $300,000 and the WTDIF share is the matching 20% required in
order to utilize this federal funding source. Therefore, the WTDIF share is $60,000.
Midbavfront Local Coastal Prol!ram Roadwavs
The Midbayfront projects (Mid-#) are from the Final Environmental Impact Report
"Midbayfront LCP Resubmittal No.8 Amendment" Volumes I & II, dated July 1991.
Mid-1
E Street restripe to add EB-NB duall<jl turn to NB on-ramp ($12, 621.30).
This project will restripe the existing E Street bridge deck to provide for an additional EB-NB
left turn lane onto NB on-ramp. The WTDIF share is 100% of$12,627.30.
Mid-2
/-5& St. SB qfframp widening to add.fOurth lane ($1,365,810.00).
This project is to provide four SB off-ramp lanes; dual SB-EB left turns, one shared SB-thru/SB-
WB right turn lane and an exclusive SB. WB right turn lane. The level of service without
mitigation is LOS "F" and with these improvements, it is LOS "D". Therefore, the WTDIF share
is 100% of$I,365,81O.00.
Mid-3
Bay Blvd 15-jOot widening along WCL at E Street approach.fOr 1 SB 13 NB lanes
($141,583.60).
This project will widen the west side of Bay Blvd, south of E Street in order to provide for a 15-
foot widening so that in the northbound direction, three lanes can be provided within the first
300-foot approach to E street. The lanes provided will consist of a NB- WB left turn, and dual
NB-EB exclusive right-turn lanes. Preliminary hard costs for construction are estimated at
$115,578.45. In addition, $17,336.77 (15%) direct costs and $8,668.38 (7.5%) soft costs
increase project estimate to $141,583.60. The WTDIF share is 100% of$141,583.60.
Mid-4
1-51E Sf. NB widen qfframpto addthird lane.fOr right turn lane ($/,365,412.50).
This project is to provide a third NB off-ramp lane at the E Street off-ramp. The lanes would be;
NB-WB left-turn lane, a shared NB-WB & NB-EB turn lane (Caltrans may also determine to
require the NB thru movement to be allowed from this middle lane) and a NB-EB exclusive right
turn lane. The level of service without mitigation is LOS "F" and with these improvements, it is
LOS "D". Therefore, the WTDIF share is 100% of$I,365,412.50.
5-132
Page 44
Mid-5
E Street revisions to median and north curbline east if /nterstate-5 to add r
westbound lane (See JUS-4).
This project to provide an additional westbound lane approaching Interstate-5 is listed as RAS-4
and is already included in the WTDIF.
Mid-6
Manna Parkway 4-lane .from E Street to G Street (1/,826, 79J. 49).
This project is to provide for a 4-lane Marina Parkway as an extension to the west of E Street,
west of Bay Blvd through the intersection of G Street It will angle south and align with the
existing Marina Parkway intersection at G Street. The cross-section is 74-feet and an
approximate length of 2300-feet. The unit costs are taken from the 2006 draft Bayfront report
but is shown in the 1991 Midbayfront FEIR on p.3-172. Preliminary hard costs for construction
are estimated at $1,491,258.36. In addition, $223,688.75 (15%) direct costs and $111,844.38
(7.5%) soft costs increase project estimate to $1,826,791.49. The WTDIF share is 100% of
$1,826,791.49.
Mid-7
E Street/Woodlawn Avenue Ell-Sll right-turn lane (1/07,493.75).
This project is to provide an exclusive EB-SB right-turn lane from E Street to Woodlawn
Avenue. Traffic signal modifications and a pedestrian ramp are part of the street widening. The
level of service without mitigation is LOS "D" and with these improvements, it is LOS "C".
Preliminary hard costs for construction are estimated at $87,750 using unit costs from the 2006
draft Bayfront report. In addition, $\3,162.50 (15%) direct costs and $6,581.25 (7.5%) soft costs
increase project estimate to $107,493.75. Therefore, the WTDIF share is 100% of$107,493.75.
Mid-8
E Street at llroadway add W1J & Ell liff-turn lane and W1J & Ell right turn lane
(1556, 150).
This project to provide an additional WB-SB left turn lane, an additional EB-NB left turn, an
exclusive WB-NB right turn lane, and an exclusive EB-SB right turn lane. Traffic signal
modifications and pedestrian ramps are part of the street widening. Drainage inlet relocation is
required. The level of service without mitigation is LOS "E" and with these improvements, it is
LOS "D". Preliminary hard costs for construction are estimated at $454,000 using unit costs
from the 2006 draft Bayfront report. In addition, $68,100 (15%) direct costs and $34,050 (7.5%)
soft costs increase project estimate to $556,150. Therefore, the WTDIF share is 100% of
$556,150.
Mid-9
F Street/llroadway restriplng to provide Ell-Sll & Wll-Nll right turn only lane
(125,254.60).
This project is to provide for an exclusive EB-SB right turn lane for eastbound F Street
approaching Broadway. In addition, for westbound F Street approaching Broadway, an
exclusive WB-NB right turn only lane will also be provided. The unit costs are taken from the
2006 draft Bayfront report but is shown in the 1991 Midbayfront FEIR on p.3-191. The WTDIF
share is 100% of $2,982,516,72. The level of service without mitigation is LOS "E" and with
5-133
Page 45
these improvements, it is LOS "D". Preliminary hard costs for construction are estimated at
$20,616. In addition, $3,092.40 (15%) direct costs and $1,546.20 (7.5%) soft costs increase
project estimate to $25,254.60. Therefore, the WTDIF share is 100% of$25,254.60.
Mid-10
H Street widening at Broadway fOr WE thru & EB thru & EB-SB right turn only
lane ($469, 7]5.56).
This project is to provide widening on H Street for an additional eastbound through lane at the
approach with Broadway and an exclusive eastbound-to-southbound exclusive right turn only
lane. In the westbound direction;H Street would be widened to provide an additional westbound
through lane at the approach to Broadway. The unit costs are taken from the 2006 draft Bayfront
report since it is similar to project BA Y-5 in scope, but is shown in the 1991 Midbayfront FEIR
on p.3-191. The level of service without mitigation is LOS "E" and with these improvements, it
is LOS "C". Preliminary hard costs for construction are estimated at $383,457.60. In addition,
$57,518.64 (15%) direct costs and $28,759.32 (7.5%) soft costs increase project estimate to
$469,735.56. The WTDlF share is 100% of$469,735.56.
Other Roadwavs IV ear 2007 estimated Droiect cost)
This category of projects is for those roadways that are not on the Regional Arterial System
(RAS) but are circulation element roadways as identified in the City's General Plan Update
Circulation Element.
OR-1 North Fourth Avenue/Brisbane Avenue trqffic signal mod(/1cations ($93,442. 02).
This project is to provide traffic signal modifications at the intersection of North Fourth
AvenuelBrisbane Avenue in order to provide a south-to-west right-turn overlap signal phase.
This project is listed in the Urban Core Specific Plan Table 5.8-4 as Intersection #45. Existing
level of Service is "B" & for Year 2030 is "E" with no improvements made. Preliminary hard
costs for construction are estimated at $76,279.20. In addition, $11,441.88 (15%) direct costs
and $5,720.94 (7.5%) soft costs increase project estimate to $93,442.02. Therefore, the WTDlF
share is 100% of$93,442.02.
OR-2 Second Avenue/D Street all-way stop installation ($12, 627.]0).
This project is to provide all-way stop control at the intersection of Second Avenue and 0 Street.
Today it is currently only stop controlled on D Street. This project is listed in the Urban Core
Specific Plan Table 5.8-4 as Intersection #57. Existing level of Service is "B" & for Year 2030
is "E" with no improvements made. Preliminary hard costs for construction are estimated at
$10,308. In addition, $1,546.20 (15%) direct costs and $773.10 (7.5%) soft costs increase
project estimate to $12,627.30. Therefore, the WTDlF share is 100% of$12,627.30.
OR-] Trqffic signal progression and upgrades (TBD).
5-134
Page 46
This project is to provide improvements to signalized Traffic Monitoring Program corridors in
order to reduce delays to the motorists and pedestrians and comply with the Growth Management
Oversight Commission (GMOC) threshold standards. Typical improvements will be made to
signal indications, traffic signal timing improvements, upgraded traffic signal hardware, new
equipment installation that has been recognized in the industry to improve travel speed by
reducing wait times for users. A project listing is to be determined as needs are identified in the
annual report to the GMOC or other traffic studies done in conjunction with impending
development/redevelopment projects. Once projects are identified, they will be added through
subsequent WTDlF program updates.
OR-4 Trqf1ic Monitonng Center ($~50~198.92).
This project is to provide for a Citywide Traffic Management Center (TMC). The TMC will
contain computer workstations with video & traffic surveillance systems and integration into the
traffic monitoring system. This project is listed in the "Eastern Area Transportation
Development Impact Fee" program update dated March 2005 as TDlF Project #65. The TDIF
share is 60% of the costs and the City share is 40%. The 40% City share is to be funded through
the Traffic Signal Fee fund. The WTDlF will pay one-half of the current TDIF share. The
WTDlF share is 30% of $5,505,198.92. Therefore, the current WTDlF share is $1,651,559.68.
Until the next update to the TDIF program, the TDlF share will be $0.00 (Zero Dollars). With
the next update to the TDIF program, the TDIF share will be reduced by the same amount that
the WTDlF pays so that both the TDIF & WTDIF shares are equal to each other. Therefore,
with the next TDIF update the funding for this project will be: 30% WTDIF, 30% TDIF and 40%
Traffic Signal Fund.
Bavfront Redevelooment (orooosed) Proiect
The Bayfront projects (Bay-#) are from the draft Bayfront Environmental document. Since this
is a proposed document, there is no approval on the environmental document. The roadway
projects identified as mitigation have been listed in Exhibit 3 as WTDIF projects but no WTDlF
obligation is shown. Once the final environmental document has been adopted, then those
roadway projects will be added to the WTDIF program and other projects, primarily the Mid-
bayfront projects, will be reviewed and either removed or amended in the WTDlF program.
J:lEngineer\TRAFFIC\TF358\WTDIF project description.fxr.doc
5-135
Page 47
5-136
Page 48
WTDIF Master Land Use Inventory Table
SANDAG DELTA LU bulldout
TAl: SANDAG LAND USE "" TA' LAND USE YEAR Years2030- Trip rate Delta Trips current trips dellatrlps
CODE CODE 2030 trips
2002
4161 """ NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL 5.75 4161 "'" NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL 5.75 0.00 449.00 0 2581.75 2581.75 0.00
4170 '" SINGLEFAMLY 190.00 4170 '" SINGlEFAMLY 251.00 61.00 10.00 610 1900.00 2510.00 610.00
4170 '" MUlTI.f"AMILV 110.00 4170 '" MULTI-FAMILY 110.00 0.00 8.00 0 880.00 880.00 0.00
4172 '" SINGLE FAMILY "".00 "" '" SlNGLEI'AMLY "'00 56.00 10.00 560 2060.00 2620.00 560.00
4172 '" MULTI-FAMILY 376.00 4172 ,W MULTI-FAMJLY 435.00 59.00 8.00 472 3006.00 3480.00 472.00
4173 '" SINGLE fAMILY 0,01l 4173 '" SINGLE FAMLY 13.00 13.00 10.00 130 0.00 130.00 130.00
4173 211)1 INDUSTRIAL PARK 6.34 4173 2101 INDUSTRIAL PARK '.00 -6.34 90.00 -571 570.60 0.00 -570.60
4173 2103 LIGHTJNDUSTRlAI.. 9.'15 "" 2103 lIGHCINOUSTRIAL 21.75 18.30 200.00 3660 1890.00 5550.00 3660.00
4113 '''" WAREHOUSING_OR _STORAGE '00 4113 2104 WAREHOUSING_OR_STORAGE '.00 -2.55 60.00 -153 153.00 0.00 -153.00
4173 '00' WHOLE SALE TRADE ...... 4113 "" WHOLE SALE TRADE '.00 -6.44 224.00 -1443 1442.56 0.00 -1442.56
"" '00' OTHER RETAIL '" 4173 '"" OTHER RETAIL '.00 -o.B2 150.00 -123 123.00 0.00 -123.00
4113 "'" LOW RISE OFFICE 2.72 4173 "" LOW RISE OFFICE ,." 0.00 300.00 0 B1B.00 816.00 0.00
4116 '" SINGLEFMlILY 203.00 4176 '" SINGLE FAMILY "'.00 26.00 10.00 260 2030.00 2290.00 260.00
4176 '" MULTl-FAMILY 382.00 4176 '" MULTl-FAMILY 367.00 5.00 B.OO '"' 3056.00 3096.00 40.00
4176 2103 LIGHT INDUSTRY 1.11 4176 2103 LIGHT INDUSTRY 1.11 0.00 200.00 0 222.00 222.00 0.00
".. 2103 LIGHT_INDUSTRY 4.72 41B8 2103 LIGHT_INDUSTRY 6.10 1.3B 200.00 276 944.00 1220.00 276.00
4188 """ COMMUNITY_COMMERCIAL ".00 ".. '00' COMMUNllY_COMMERC1AL 20.90 0.00 262.00 0 5475.80 5475.80 0.00
4188 "'" OTHER RETAIL 0.91 4188 '00' OTHER RETAIL '.00 -0.97 150.00 -'48 145.50 0.00 -145.50
".. .= LOWRlSEOFFICE 0.41 4188 6002 LOWRI5EOFFICE '.00 -0.41 300.00 -123 123.00 0.00 -123.00
"" '"" NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL 2.64 4192 ,,~ NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ,... 0.00 449.00 0 1185.36 1185.36 0.00
4192 '"" 8TREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 3.68 4192 .", 8TREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 3.68 0.00 150.00 0 552.00 552.00 0.00
CJ1 4192 "'" LOW RISE OFFICE ,." 4192 6002 LOW RISE OFFICE ,." 0.00 300.00 0 1218.00 1218.00 0.00
I 4192 """ GOV'T OFFICE OR CENTER 3,59 4192 '00' GOV'T OfFICE OR CENTER 3.59 0.00 300.00 0 1077.00 1077.00 0.00
~ 4197 "'" LOW-RISE HOTELOR MOTEL 2.12 4197 ,,,, LOW-RISE HOTEL OR MOTEl 2.12 0.00 200.00 0 424.00 424.00 0.00
4197 "'" STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 2.98 4197 '007 STREETFRONT COMr.lERCIAl 4.27 1.29 150.00 19' 441.00 640.50 193.50
W 4197 '00' STREETFRONTCOMMERCIAL{RE-387 ,." 4197 '00' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL IRE- .." 5.BO 150.00 870 0.00 870.00 B70.00
..... 4197 '00' LOW-RISE OFFICE 1.29 4197 "'" LOW-RISE OFFICE '.00 -1.29 300.00 -387 3B7.00 0.00 -387.00
4199 '" SINGLEFMlILY 29.00 4199 '" SINGLE FMI!LY 29.00 0.00 10.00 0 290.00 290.00 0.00
4199 ,W MULTI-fAMILY 324.00 "" '" MULTl-FAMIt.Y 3301.00 10.00 8.00 00 2592.00 2672.00 BO.OO
'''' ,W MULTI-FAMILY '.00 ,= '" MULTl-FAMILY 1000.00 1000.00 8.00 8000 0.00 BOOO.OO 8000.00
"" '''' HlGHRISEHOTEllMOTEL '.00 ,= '''' HIGH RIS!: HOTEll MOTEL 1800.00 1800.00 10.00 18000 0.00 18000.00 18000.00
'''' 5012 COMMERClALRETAIL '.00 ,= 5012 COMMERCIAL RETAIL 150.00 150.00 45.00 6750 0.00 6750.00 6750.00
4200 '00' LOW RISE OFFICE '.00 ,= .". LOW RISE OFFICE "'.00 60.00 20.00 1200 0.00 1200.00 1200.00
"W ,~ SlNGLEFAMLY 272.00 "" '" SINGLEFAMLY 261.00 -11.00 10.00 -110 2720.00 2610.00 -110.00
"" '" MULTI-FAMILY 111,00 '''' ,W MULT1-fAMILY 212.00 101.00 8.00 808 888.00 1696.00 808.00
"w '00' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL '.00 '''' '00' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 2.87 -0.13 150.00 -20 450.00 430.50 -19.50
'''' .= LOW RISE OFfICE 2.30 '''' '"" LOW RISE OFFICE ,." -1.90 300.00 -570 690.00 120.00 -570.00
"" '" SINGLEFAtJlILY 19.00 '''' '" SINGLEFAMR-Y 79.00 0.00 10.00 0 790.00 790.00 0.00
4204 'W MULTI.fAMILY 231.00 '''' '" MUlTl-FAM1LY 231.00 0.00 8.00 0 1848.00 1848.00 0.00
"" ''''' LOW-RISE HOTEL OR MOTEL 4.02 '''' 1501 LOW-RISE HOTEL OR MOTEL ,.w 0.00 200.00 0 804.00 804.00 0.00
"OO ''''' NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL '.00 "" - NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL 5.91 5.91 449.00 2654 0.00 2653.59 2653.59
"OO '00' STREETFROOT COMMERCIAL 5.12 "" '007 STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 5.78 0.66 150.00 99 768.00 867.00 99.00 m
4209 '" SINC'.lE'-J'.o.MLY 19.00 '''' '" SINGLE FAMILY '.00 -19.00 10.00 -190 190.00 0.00 -190.00
4209 'W MULTI-FAMILY 319.00 4209 '"' MUlTI-FAMILl 531.00 212.00 8.00 1898 2552.00 4248.00 1696.00 ><
"" '''' lOW-RISEHOTELORMora (l.70 "" '''' LOW-RISE HOTEL OR MOTEL 0.00 -0.70 200.00 ~140 140.00 0.00 .140.00 :::I:
"" """ STREETFRONTCOMMERClAL 5.16 4200 ,"" STREETFRONT COMMERCIAl. 6.29 1.13 150.00 170 774.00 943.50 169.50
4210 '" SINGLEFAMLY 408.00 4210 '" SINGLE FAMILY 415.00 7.00 10.00 70 4080.00 4150.00 70.00 -
4214 '" SlNGlEFAtJlILY 38.00 4214 '" SiNGlE FAMILY '.00 --38.00 10.00 -380 380.00 0.00 -380.00 c:J
4214 '"' MULTI--FAMILY 515.00 4214 '" MULTI--FAMILY 754.00 239.00 8.00 1912 4120.00 6032.00 1912.00 -
4214 'W MOBILE HOME PARK 75,00 4214 ,eo MOBILE HOME PARK '.00 -75.00 5.00 -375 375.00 0.00 -375.00 -i
4217 '" SINGLE FAMILY 93,00 4217 '" SINGLE FAMILY 69,00 -24.00 10.00 -240 930.00 690.00 -240.00
4211 'w MULTl-FAMlLY 405.00 4217 'W MULTI-FAMIlY 429,00 24.00 8.00 192 3240.00 3432.00 192.00 ~
cl' 4217 """ STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 1.77 4217 ""' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 227 0.50 150.00 75 265.50 340.50 75.00
':'il
....
'"
J:1ENGINEERrrRAFFICrrF35B1 WTDIF Report Exh 4 Masler land use Table 1-30-08 dek AlTACHMENT 4 PAGE 1
SANDAG SANDAG YEAR DELTA LU bulklout
TAZ CODE LAND USE "" TAZ CODE LAND USE 2030 Yeanl2030_ Triprale DellllTrlps current trips trips dellatrlps
2002
4217 """ LOW RISE OFFICE 0.51 4217 '"'" LOWRIS€OfflCE '" -0.51
"" '" SINGLEfAMK.Y 44.00 .'" '" SlNGLEfAMlLY '" -44.00
.'" ,~ MULTI-FAMILY ~." .'" ", MUlTI-FAMILY 401.00 345.00
4220 '" MOBLE HOME PAAK 127.00 .'" '" MOBLE HOME PARK ,." -127.00
.'" '''' lOW RISE HOTEL OR MOTEL 4.02 "" '''' LOW RISE liOTl:l OR MOTEL 3.91 -0.11
.'" '''' STREETfRONTCOMMERCIAL '.00 .'" '''' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAl 3.91 0.11
"" '" SINGLE fAMILY 92.00 "" '" SINGLEfAMLY n." -15.00
"" ,~ MUlTI-FAMILY 399.00 "" '" MUlTI.f"AMILY 421.00 22.00
"" '" SINGLEfAML.Y 173.00 .'" '" SINGLEFAMLY 120.00 -53.00
4226 ", MULTI-FAMILY 266.00 "" '" MUlTI-FAMILY 423.00 157.00
.'" """ LOW RISE OffICE 1.77 .'" OO~ LOW RISE OFFICE ,.n 0.00
"" '" SINGLE fAMILY 28.00 "'" '" SINGlE FAMILY 0.00 .28.00
4230 ", MULTI-FAMILY 330.00 "'" ", MULTI-FAMILY 504.00 174.00
4230 '" MOBILE HOME PARK 47.00 "'" '" MOBILE HOME PARK 0.00 -47.00
42311 "'" LOW RISE HOTEUMOTEl '" 4230 "'" lOW RISE HOTEUMOTEl 1.97 1.97
"'" "'. NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER: '" "'" "" NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENl 4.03 4.03
"'" "" STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 'n 42311 '''' STREETfRONT COMMERCIAL ." -2.13
4231 '" SINGLE fAMILY "." 4231 '" SINGLE fAMILY 0.00 -36.00
4231 '" MULTI-FAMILY 2113.00 4231 ", MULTI.fAMILY 764.00 556.00
4231 "', STREETfRONT COMMERCIAL '" 4231 '''' sTREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 6.75 0.70
4231 '"'" lOW RISE OFFlCE 4.66 4231 '''' lOW RISE OFFICE ,,, .2.16
4231 '''' OTHER HEALTH CARE 3.20 4231 00'" OTHER HEALTH CARE 0.00 -3.20
"" '" SINGLE FAMILY 52.00 "" '" SINGLEfAMLY 42.00 .10.00
"" ", MULTI-FAMILY 71.00 "" '" MULTI-FAMIlY 242.00 171.00
4236 "" STREETFRONT COMNERCIAL 1.47 .no ""' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 1.76 0.29
CJ'I 4236 '"'" LOW RISE OFFICE 0.62 "" "', lOWRISEOFFlCE 11.72 -0.10
I "" '''' GOVT OFFICE OR CENTER 6.40 "" '''' GOVT OFfICE OR CENTER .." 0.90
~ 4236 '" S!NGLEFAMLY 532.00 4236 '" SINGLEFAMLY 581.00 49.00
(.0) 4238 ", MUlTI-FAMJLY 293.00 4236 '" MUlTJ.fAMllY 293.00 0.00
4242 '" SINGlE FAMILY 113.00 4242 '" SlfIfGlEFAMILY 124.00 11.00
00 4242 '" MULTI.f"AMllY 236.00 4242 '" MIJlTI--FAMILY 236.00 0.00
4243 '" SINGLEFAMLY "''' 4243 '" 5JNGLEFAMLY "''' -10.00
4243 '" MUlTI.fAMILY 00." 4243 '" MULTI--FAMILY 553.00 487.00
4243 '" MOBILE HOME PARK 16S.00 4243 '" MOBILE HOME PARK 0.00 -169.00
4243 '''' LOW-RISE HOTEL OR MOTEl 3.70 4243 '''' LOW-RISE HOTEL OR MOTEL 3.12 ..{l.58
4243 "', STREETfRONT COMMERCIAl 7.91 4243 '''' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 9,37 1.46
4243 '''' OTHER HEALTH CARE 0.14 4243 '''' OTHER HEALTH CARE 0.00 -0.1-4
4244 '" SI~EfAMILY 32.00 4244 '" SINGLE fAMILY 0.00 -32.00
4244 '" MULTl-fMtllY 320.00 4244 '" MULTI-FAMILY 853,00 533.00
4244 "" STREETFRONl COMMERCIAL 4.88 4244 '''' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAl 5.52 0.84
4244 '"'" LOW RISE OFFICE 1.59 .". '"'" LOW RISE OFFICE '" 0.31
".. '''' OTHER HEALTH CARE 0.21 4244 "" OTHER HEALTH CARE 0.00 -0.21
4247 '" SINGLE FAMILY 256.00 4247 '" SiNGlE FAMILY 223.00 -35.00
4247 ,~ MUlTl-I'AMILY 376.00 4247 '" MULTI-FAMlLY 462.00 104.00
4246 '" SINGLEFAMl.Y '" 4246 '" SINGLEFAMLY 0.00 -3.00
4248 '" MULT-FAMILY 442.00 4246 '" MIJlT.f"AMILY lll8O.oo 638.00
4246 "" LOW RISE HOTEL OR MOTEL m 4246 '"'' LOW RISE HOTEL OR MOTEL 4.S7 1.47
4246 "" NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER 4.40 4248 '''. NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENl 0.00 -4.40
4246 '''' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAl 0.90 4248 '''' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAl 7.45 6.55
4246 '00' MIO--HIGHRlSEOFFlCE 0.00 4246 '00' MIO.HIGH RISE OFFICE 2.33 2.33
4248 """ lOW Rise OFFICE ,." 4246 """ LOW RISE OFFICE 0.00 0.00
4250 '" SINGLE FAMILY 57.00 "" '" SINGlI:FAMIlY 0.00 ..fJ7.00
"" ,~ NUlTI.fAMILY 247.00 "" '" MUlTI-FAMILY 309.00 62.00
"" '"'" lOWRISEOFFICE 2.23 "" '"'" LOWRlSEOFFlCE 0.00 .2.23
4250 '''' OTHER HEALTH CARE '" "" 6509 OTHER HEALTH CARE ,." -2.73
4252 '" SINGLE FAMILY 116.00 "" '" SINGlE FAMK.Y 116.00 0.00
~ 4252 '" MULTI.fAMllY 56,00 4252 '" MULTI-FAMILY "." 0.00
~
::g
J:fENGINEERfTRAFFICrrF3581 WTDIF Report Exh 4 Master land use Table 1.30-oa dek
300.00
10.00
6.00
5.00
200.00
150.00
10.00
8.00
10.00
8.00
300.00
10.00
8.00
5.00
200.00
449.00
150.00
10.00
8.00
150.00
300.00
500.00
10.00
8.00
150.00
300.00
300.00
10.00
8.00
10.00
8.00
10.00
8.00
5.00
200.00
150.00
500.00
10.00
8.00
150.00
300.00
500.00
10.00
8.00
10.00
8.00
200.00
449.00
150.00
600.00
300.00
10.00
8.00
300.00
500.00
10.00
8.00
-153
-4'0
2760
-835
-22
17
-150
176
.530
1256
o
.280
1392
-235
,.,
1609
.320
-350
..<8
105
-8<8
-1600
-000
1366
44
-30
270
490
o
110
o
-100
3896
-845
-116
21'
-70
-320
4264
126
93
.105
-350
632
-30
5104
'"
.1976
66'
1400
o
-870
'96
-86,
-1365
o
o
153.00
440.00
448.00
635.00
804.00
570.00
920.00
3192.00
1730.00
2128.00
531.00
280.00
2640.00
235.00
0.00
0.00
1008.00
360.00
1664.00
907.50
1398.00
1600
520.00
668.00
220.50
246.00
1920.00
5320.00
2344.00
1130.00
1904.00
300.00
528.00
845.00
740.00
1186.50
70
320.00
2560.00
702.00
477.00
105
2580.00
3024.00
30.00
3536.00
640.00
1975.60
135.00
0.00
0.00
570.00
1976.00
669.00
1365
1180.00
448.00
0.00
0.00
3208.00
0.00
782.00
586.50
770.00
3368.00
1200.00
3384.00
531.00
0.00
4032.00
0.00
394.00
1809.47
688.50
0.00
6112.00
1012.50
750.00
o
420.00
1936.00
264.00
216.00
2190.00
5810.00
2344.00
1240.00
1904.00
200.00
4424.00
0.00
624.00
1405.50
o
0.00
6824.00
828.00
570.00
o
2230.00
3856.00
0.00
8640.00
934.00
0.00
1117.50
1400.40
0.00
0.00
2472.00
0.00
o
1180.00
448.00
-153.00
--440.00
2760.00
-635.00
.22.00
16.50
-150.00
176.00
-530.00
1256.00
0.00
.280.00
1392.00
-235.00
394.00
1809.47
-319.50
.360.00
4448.00
105.00
-648.00
-1600
.100.00
1368.00
43.50
.30.00
270.00
490.00
0.00
110.00
0.00
-100.00
3896.00
-845.00
.116.00
219.00
-70
-320.00
4264.00
126.00
93.00
.105
--350.00
832.00
.30.00
5104.00
294.00
-1975.60
982.50
1400.40
0.00
.570.00
496.00
-669.00
.1365
0.00
0.00
ATTACHMENT 4
PAGE 2
.
~
:s
.
~
.
~
:s
0 .
~ ~
="
,-
~
.
~
:s
:s
~
,
0
.
~
"
...
.
~
.
Q
.
. .
~
~
=~
~~
c(~~
~2!~
.. .
Q.
>
<<a
~S
>"
..
.
"
0
z
:l
.
<W
00
zO
<0
.
S
"
.
.
"
W
.
"
0
z
:l
.
oW
00
zO
00
.
S
888g8~ggg88g888g8ggggggggg8gg8~gggg2~~gg~gg~gg~8g8gg~8ggg
g~~~g~~gg~~~~dg~~~~dgg~~~~dcid~gg~~~~~~~~~~~~ddg~dg~,~~dg~~
0<11...............""0) N..-Il) '<'IlO" "'0.....,.<'1 "'......."""'.............. r- '<TN ...~ J<Ja:lM01i'l",O
'7 'Il) '7 " 10 M"i ell '7 ,...,..... , ... r "l' -, I C\I";' 10 ' .,-...
88888~~88gg88gg88~g88g2ggI0888g~8g8ggg~gg~g8088~88gg8~8ggg
d~d~d~~ci.ci~~ggd~d~cidci~~~~~g~d~gci~d~~~.~~~~~ gg~dci~~~gd~~~
~ ~ lOll) ~ "'~ ~ E N ~1l)~lO; ~.... ~ ""~"''''IO~ ....10 ~r-a:l M~Ng IO~
&assaaas&&~ss&&&S~~&&&~&a~aasa&aaa&~a&&assam&S~&&&&&&&ssa
2NOQO~NOa:l""$O""OO;IO"'IOOOIO"'OIO o",OOOONIOO~OOO..,....or- 00(")1'-0000000<'10
~~~~~....~~~....... ~~"'~~g'" ffi~M ~ e- ~~g ~ "'m~N ~ ~~~IO ~ ~ g~~
ggg~g~~go""~g~o~~~~~ogg~~~goooa;8mlO~~~N~O*~~O*oo~r-og~~m~~~~
om~~~~~N8~N~~ 'N~" ~O~~N~ M~~~ ~___~~ ~N~ _~ ~~MO~~O
'";" '~'7 "<l) (0)'7 m";" .,."", _,~ _.""" -r N'";"<l)"_
ggggggggggggggg8gggggggg88ggggggggggg88gggggggggggggggggg
g~g~~ggg=ggggggm~ggggmg2ggg~ggggm~gggggmgggggm~ggggg~gg~g
N~ N~~~ ~~~ ~~M<l) N~~ N~~~ ~~~<l) ""'_M Nt'lN~ ~
gggggg~gg~~~~g8gg~~ggg~~~~ggg~~ggg~~~~gggg~~gg~~gg~~~g8g~
g~~~~o~~~q~~~o~~~qqd~g~N9NdOO~~~~~N9do~~ooo~dod9dm~~~~$~d
";" ~ '(DC')! '..... ~ l'} II) 10 ~
88888~~g.~8~~~88~g~ggg8~~~~888 ~g8g~~~~88 m~o88~oo8~~;888;
o~ogo'-"-'o~oN~Cid~d~ddd~MNNV~Nci~~d~dN~Qci~~OON~~g~~~~~~~o~~o
o ~S! ~~~ ~ 0 ~~~i ~~ 0 ~ C ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ ~~E~~~ $ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ $ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ $~ ~~ ~ $~~
<I. .. <I.
15 ~ ~
:::E 0 ~
, " '
8w~~>- fi:~~
!!l:&i1i..l~t;zl::;;;
f~~~~a~~~
~&W~~.i:;t:;a:w
[f~i=~~~~~~
O....O",:::E...."'....<0
~ ~ ~ ~
ffi ~ ~ ffi ~
::! ~ !!!!:1 0 3i!:\j
~ ::!!:: :;; lL:I: 0 :!
c: SOW 8\!)~~ ~S
~~~~~~~i~!~!~~~~
~~~~G~w~t:;~a:WW~~~t:;
:J=w~~O:::Jl-w"" :I: J-~W
~~~~.~~~3~~~~ 5ffi~
~~~ ..~w:::E"':::E....OVJ::EzVJ
~ uj ~ ~
15 'Q ~ ffi
~::!! ~~ ~~
~ul8 ~8 w ~u
~>-~>-~g~~>-b~~~;';j~>-~~
~~~~~Qif~j;!;li!~O~~~gli!
. .w,1~~:I:w~lL~lLW~
w~w~w....t:;..!:t~wyo::Ul::J..r.=w
~~~~~~~Cl:J!:~lL313Cl~8~
VJ :;; VJ ::!! :! :I: '" ~ ~ 9 t; ~ 9 ~ ~ :::E :::E '"
W
d ~ ~
~ \!) :;;
w ~ <
i ~ ~
b ~ VJ
o
> z
",0
~ ~
~ :;;
~ ll!
. :;
... ~ .i
l!! ~ ~ (J
o u w c::
:::e a:::::E UJ
~ ~ ~ ~
~ >- ill >- ~ (J 0
~d~~~~~~~
~~w~~lt~~e:
~~~~~lii~~tu
~ ~ '~ ~ :! ~ ~ ~ ~
.... ~ .... .... 8 VJ ~ ::!! '"
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 5 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g 8 8 8 ~ 8 ~ 8 8 ~ 8 ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ ~
g;""/<l~ N!i ~ ~~ "'; ~ ~~oiciticici:8~o'o'~~~..,
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~re~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~re
v v v V V V V V . v v V V v V v V V V V V v V v v v v V V V V V V V V V V V v v v V V "'" V V V v V v v V V V V V V
o'~~;~~~~~
3! ld~ ~ :!! w"" :t :ot W ~:i! ill ;i ..J
~ ~!i ~i ~ 5 i ~~ ~~ ~ i~ ~ il i
~irl~ 05 ~o ~:I: ~ ~ ~~ ~~:I: 8~ O:::EO ~
~~u uju ~ ~u ~ u ~~ >-o~ ~ u~~ u\!)~~ cu~ irl>-~u 0
~~~~~~d~~l::~~~~~~l::~~~~&~~~~~l::i~~irl~~~~~~~l::~~~~~l::~b~~~~~~
:;;ocO~~:I:oo::o~~~oo::~o~~c::C::O:I::::E~~ o~~o~oc::o~:::Ec::c::o:I:<:::Ec::c::o~:I:~~c::<~c::
~:I;~ ff: ~ < ~e:J: * lL lL <( j;lL ll!~if< LL i'ljj~Lf<2 if\l5u. <(:I: g::t:I:\lli1 <<: lL :I:\ljO::lL< 0 LL llju.ll:I2ZlL lL< LL
5~o~o~~.~~~~~~~~~oi~~~_~~~~~~z5~i~~~~o~oi~g~~.~i~_~~o~~~wi~~_~~_~o*~_~i
~ :;; ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ 9 ~ ~ i :::E ~ 5 9 ~ i ~ 0 9 5 ~ ~ ~ w 9 ~ i :::e ~ W :;; 9 '" i w :;; 9 ~ i z ~ 9 '" 9 ~ 0 w ~ i w
~ ~ ~
> - >
< > <
. < .
~ ~ ~
:;:; 5 ~
. > .
o ~ U 0
.nu
.. ~ ~ ~
~..o~~~~..~~~~..~~~.~"
u
- . ~
. ;; Ii 8 8 .
~ ~ ,... <IS '" lil
o ~ ~ C C ~ ~
~ ~
~;:~~
N ~~ ~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~ ~~ ~: ~~~ ~~ ~ ~~~~~~
5-139
.. '" '" 0
N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
..
G
it
~
...
Z
..
"
"
"
~
~
.
~
~
~
~
..
~
.
...
$
,
~
~
.
"
.
"
~
~
x
..
~
~
.
~
~
~
"
~
~
~
5
"
~
o
~
~
~
..
..
z
5
z
~
Page 51
SANDAG SANDAG YEAR DELTA LU bulldout
TAZ CODE LAND USE 20" TAZ CODE LAND USE 2030 Years20JO_ Trip rate DeRaTrlps c:urrenttrlps trips delta trips
'00'
42811 """ lOWRISEOFFICE 4.15 "'" 61102 lOW RISE OFFICE 4.14 ..0.01 300.00 -3 1245.00 1242.00 -3.00
42811 ''''' OTHER HEALTH CARE 0.17 428n "'" OTHER HEALTH CARE 0."' ..0.17 500.00 -8, 85 0 -8'
4281 '''' MUlTI-FAMllY 352.00 "" '''' MUlTI-FAMllY 778.00 426.00 8.00 3408 2816.00 6224.00 3408.00
4281 ''''' HOTEUMOTa 0."' 4281 "'" HOTEUMOTEl a.5n 0.50 300.00 150 0.00 150.00 150.00
4281 '"" STREETFRONT COMMERCIAl 1.4n 4281 ,." STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL '" ..0.02 150.00 -3 210.00 207.00 -3.00
4281 '0" MlO-HlGH RISE OFFICE 0."' 4281 anOl MlO-I-IlGHRISEOfFICE '.00 1.00 600.00 600 0.00 600.00 600.00
4281 """ lOW R-tSE OFFICE 0.00 4281 '00' lOW RISE OFFICE 0.00 0.00 300.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
"" "'" HEAVY INDUSTRY 49.88 "" '"" HEAVY INDUSTRY 54.42 4.54 120.00 54' 5985.60 6530.40 544.80
4284 21n3 LIGHT INDUSTRY 3.12 4284 2103 lIGHT INDUSTRY In.31 7.25 200.00 1450 624.00 2074.00 1450.00
4284 "'''' LOWRJSEOFFICE 11.42 4284 ''''' LOW RISE OFFICE 11.42 0.00 300.00 0 3428.00 3426.00 0.00
4285 '''' RESIOENTIALHIGH 0,01l 4285 '''' RESIOENTIALHIGH 531.00 531.00 8.00 4248 0.00 4248.00 4248.00
4285 "'" REGIONAl COMMERCIAL 55.34 4285 "'"' REGIONAl COMMERCIAL 33.W -22.14 187.00 -4139 10348.58 6209.15 -4139.43
"" ''''' LOW-NIO RISE OFFICE 000 4285 '"" lOW-M1D RISE OFFICE 11.07 11.07 300.00 3320 0.00 3320.40 3320.40
4292 '00' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 0.00 .m ,"'" STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 0.'" 0.00 150.00 0 135.00 135.00 0.00
4295 '" SINGlEFMlILY ".00 "" '" SINGl..EFAMILY 56.00 -12.00 10.00 -120 680.00 560.00 -120.00
4295 '''' MULTI-FAMllY 189.00 "" '''' MULTI-FAMILY 2111.00 12.00 8.00 96 1512.00 1606.00 96.00
4295 ''''' NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL 1.50 4295 ''''' NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL 0.," -1.50 449.00 -8" 673.50 0.00 -673.50
4295 "'" STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 2.10 4295 5007 STREETFRONTCOMMERCIAL 1.82 -0.28 150.00 -42 315.00 273.00 -42.00
4295 '00' LOW RISE OFFICE 9.12 "" "'"' lOW RISE OFFICE 11.46 2.34 300.00 702 2736.00 3438.00 702.00
.'" '" SINGLEF.......ILY 19.00 "" '" SINGLEFAMLY 0.00 ~19.00 10.00 -190 190.00 0.00 -190.00
4298 '''' MULTI-FAMiLY 69.00 "" '" MULTj.f'AMtlY 100.00 31.00 8.00 248 552.00 800.00 248.00
4298 1501 HOTEUMOTEL 0.00 4298 "'" HOTEUMOTEL 2.81 2.81 200.00 562 0.00 562.00 562.00
4298 "'" NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAl 7AO 4298 """ NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL 0.00 -7.40 449.00 -3323 3322.60 0.00 -3322.60
"" """ STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 3.711 .", '00' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 12.59 8.89 150.00 1334 555.00 1888.50 1333.50
4298 "'" MIO--HIGH RISE OFFICE 0.00 4298 '"" MID-HIGHR1SEOFFICE 1.38 1.38 600.00 828 0.00 828.00 828.00
01 4301 '" SINGLE FAMILY 21.00 .~, '" SlNGLEFAMLY 0.00 -21.00 10.00 ~210 210.00 0.00 .210.00
43nl '" MUlTI-FAMILY 156.00 .~, '''' MULTI-FAMILY 199.00 43.00 8.00 34. 1246.00 1592.00 344.00
I 4301 '" MOBILE HOME PARK 71.00 4301 '" M0fI1LE HOME PARK 0.00 -77.00 5.00 -385 385.00 0.00 -365.00
~ 43Gl "'" LOW~ISE HOTEL AND MOTEL OA3 "0' 1501 LOW~ISE HOTEL AND MOTEL 0.00 -0.43 200.00 -86 86.00 0.00 -86.00
-1>0 ."" '00' STREETFRONTCOMMERCIAL 1.63 .~, '"" STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 8.29 6.66 150.00 988 244.50 1242.90 998.40
0 "'" '00' MIO-HIGH RISE OFFICE 0.00 4301 "''' MID-HIGH RISE OFFICE 2.16 2.76 600.00 1657 0.00 1657.20 '1657.20
"'" "'" LOW RISE OFFICE 0.35 .~, "'" LOW RISE OFFICE 0.00 -0.35 300.00 -105 105.00 0.00 -105.00
4302 'OT SINGLEFAMtLY 2-93,00 .~, '" SINGLE FAMILY 294,00 1.00 10.00 " 2930.00 2940.00 10.00
.= TO> MUlTI-FAMILY ~.oo 4302 '" MUlTI-FAM1LY 21.00 1.00 8.00 8 160.00 168.00 8.00
4301 '" sINGLEFAMl.Y 328.00 .~, 101 SINGLEFAMLY 328.00 0.00 10.00 0 3280.00 3260.00 0.00
4301 '''' MULTI-FAMJLY ".00 4301 "" MULT1-FAMlLY 29.00 0.00 6.00 0 232.00 232.00 0.00
.~. '" SINGLE FMUlY 112.00 .~, TO' SINGlE F"MILY 112.00 0.00 10.00 0 1120.00 1120.00 0.00
.~. '" MULTI-FAMllY 142.00 .~. TO> MULTl-FAMILY 142,00 0.00 8.00 0 1136.00 1136.00 0.00
"'" '"" lOW RISE OFFICE 0.00 .~. ''''' lOW RISE OFFICE G.40 0.40 300.00 120 0.00 120.00 120.00
4310 TO' SINGlE FAMILY 126.00 4310 TO' SINGLEFAMLY 726,00 0.00 10.00 0 7260.00 7260.00 0.00
4310 "'" STREETFRONT COMMERCIAl OAO 4310 "''' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAl 0.40 0.00 150.00 0 60.00 60.00 0.00
4313 TO' SINGLE FAMilY 402.00 4313 '" SiNGlE FAMILY 4G7.00 5.00 10.00 50 4020.00 4070.00 50.00
4314 TO' SINGLE fAMilY 158.00 4314 '" SINGLE FAMILY 131.00 -27.00 10.00 -270 1580.00 1310.00 -270.00
4314 '''' MUlTI-FAMllY 167.00 4314 '" MIJlTI-FAM1LY 249.00 82.00 8.00 656 1336.00 1992.00 656.00
4314 '" MOBlE HOME PARK 63.00 4314 '" MOBLE HOME PARK '.00 --63.00 5.00 -315 315.00 0.00 -315.00
4314 '00' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAl 0.00 4314 "'" STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 3.41 3.41 150.00 '" 0.00 511.20 511.20
4314 '00' MlD-HlGHRISEOfFICE '00 4314 '00' MID-HIGHRlSEOFF1CE 1.14 1.14 600.00 .82 0.00 681.60 681.60
4315 TO' SINGLE FAMILY 1&1.00 4315 '" SINGLE FAMILY 161.00 -3.00 10.00 -30 1640.00 1610.00 -30.00
4315 TO> MlJlTI-FAMILY '.00 4315 '''' MULTI-FAMJlY 139.00 137.00 8.00 1096 16.00 1112.00 1098.00
4315 '00' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL ,.'" 4315 '00' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAl. '.00 -2.90 150.00 -43. 1020.00 585.00 -435.00
4315 '00' lOWRlSEOFFICE 0.00 4315 500' LOW RISE OFFICE 0.12 0.72 300.00 '" 0.00 214.50 214.50
4316 TO' SINGLE FAMILY 72.00 4316 '" SINGlE FAMILY 70.00 -2.00 10.00 -20 720.00 700.00 -20.00
4316 '''' MULTI-FAM1LY 126.00 4316 '''' MULTI-FAMILY 126.00 0.00 8.00 0 1008.00 1008.00 0.00
4316 ''''' NElGHBORIiOOO SHOPPING CENTER ,." 4316 "". NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENl 6.11 0.23 449.00 T03 2840.12 2743.39 103.27
4316 '00' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL '" 4316 "'" STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 2.43 -0.38 150.00 -57 421.50 364.50 -57.00
4316 '00' LOW RISE OFFICE .." 4316 "'"' LOW RISE OFFICE 4.80 0.34 300.00 102 1278.00 1380.00 102.00
ti' 4319 '" SINGlEFAMl.Y 293.00 4319 '" SINGLE FAMILY =.00 9.00 10.00 90 2930.00 3020.00 90.00
':1:
~
J:fENGINEERrrRAFFICfTf3581 WTDIF Report Exh 4 Master land use Table 1-30-08 dek ATTACHMENT 4 PAGE 4
SANDAG DELTA LU bulldout
TAZ SANDAG LAND USE 2002 TAZ LAND USE TEAR YlIars2030- Trip rate Della Trips current trips delta trips
CODE CODE 2030 trips
2002
43111 '" MULTI.f"AMILY 103.00 4319 '" MUlTI-FAMILY 103.00 0.00 6.00 0 824.00 824.00 0.00
4319 "'" LOW RISE OFFlCE 0.54 4319 "'" LOW RISE OFFICE ,." 0.00 300.00 0 162.00 182.00 0.00
"" '" SINGLEFAMLY 49<1.00 4320 '" SINGLE FAMILY 4116.00 2.00 10.00 20 4940.00 4960.00 20.00
"" '" MULTI-f'AMILY 2:00 "" '" MULTI-FAMILY '.00 0.00 8.00 0 16.00 16.00 0.00
"m '" SINGLEFAMLY ".00 4326 '" SINGLE FAMILY ".00 0.00 10.00 0 920.00 920.00 0.00
"m '" MUlTI.f"AMILY 213.00 "m '" MUlTI-FAMILY 399.00 186.00 8.00 1488 1704.00 3192.00 1488.00
"" "" LOW-RISE HOTEL OR MOTEL ,." "" "" LOW-RISE HOTEL OR MOTEL '.00 -0.99 200.00 ~198 198.00 0.00 -198.00
"" .., STREETFRONT COMMERCW. 4.15 ",. """ STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL .." 0.84 150.00 125 622.50 747.75 125.25
"" "'" OTHER COMMERCIAl 2.33 "" "'" OTHER COMMERCIAl ,." ~2.33 150.00 -350 349.50 O.DO -349.50
"" .., LOW RISE OFFlCE '.00 .m 00" LOW RISE OFFICE '.00 1.00 300.00 2.. 0.00 299.10 299.10
"" '" SINGLE FAMLY 296.00 4328 '" SINGLE FAMILY 296.00 0.00 10.QO 0 2960.00 2960.00 0.00
"" '" SINGLEFAMLY 12.00 4330 '" SINGLE FAMILY 11.00 5.00 10.00 50 120.00 170.00 50.00
,,~ '" MULTI.f"AMILY 261.00 ,,~ '" MULTI.f"AMILY 261.00 0.00 8.00 0 2088.00 2088.00 0.00
,,~ ... NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL 5.28 "'" ... NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL 5.28 O.DO 449.00 0 2370.72 2370.72 0.00
030 "" STREETFROHT COMMERCIAl '0' .", .., STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL '00 --3.15 150.00 -473 786.00 313.50 -472.50
4330 "" LOWRISEOFFlCE 3.16 ,,~ 00" LOWRISEOFFlCE 10.38 7.20 300.00 2160 948.00 3108.00 2160.00
4330 ''''' OTHER HEALTH CARE 3.69 4330 "" OTHER HEALTH CARE 0.00 -3.69 500.00 -1845 1845 0 -1845
4331 '" MULTI.f"AMILY 0.00 4331 '" MUlTl-FAMILY 103.00 108.00 6.00 864 O.DO 864.00 864.00
4332 '" SINGLE FAMLY 161.00 4332 '" SINGLEFAMH..Y 161.00 0.00 10.00 0 1610.00 1610.00 0.00
4332 '" MVlTI.f"AMILY 13.00 4332 '" MULTI.f"AMILY 13.00 0.00 8.00 0 104.00 104.00 0.00
4333 '" SINGLE FAMILY 21.00 4333 '" SiNGlE FAMILY 21.00 0.00 10.00 0 210.00 210.00 O.DO
033 '" MUlTI-FAMILY '.00 .m '" MULTI-FAMILY 110.00 110.00 6.DO 980 0.00 880.00 880.00
4333 "'. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL 1.93 4333 ... NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL 1.93 0.00 449.00 0 866.57 866.57 0.00
4340 '" SINGLE FAMILY 00.00 "" '" SINGLEFAMLY 90.00 0.00 10.00 0 ODD.oo 900.00 0.00
4340 '" MULTI-FAMIL'i 266.00 .~ '" MULTI-FAMILY 286.00 0.00 8.00 0 2288.00 2288.00 0.00
"" "" LIGHT INOUSTRY 18.96 .~ 2103 L1GHTNDUSTRY 18.116 O.DO 200.00 0 3792.00 3792.00 0.00
(11 4340 2104 WAREHOUSINGiPUBLIC STORAGE 3.511 "" ,,~ WAREHOUSINGJPUBlIC STORAGE 3.59 0.00 60.00 0 215.40 215.40 0.00
I "" '" SINGLEFMlILY ".00 4342 '" SINGLE FAMILY ".00 0.00 10.00 0 660.00 660.00 0.00
..... ..., '" MULTI.f"AMILY ".00 4342 '" MULTI-FAMILY 316.00 218.00 8.00 1744 764.00 2528.00 1744.00
"'" ..., '00' LOW-RISE HOTEL OR MOTEL 0.61 ..., "'" LCUlRISEOFFICE 0.92 0.31 300.00 92 183.00 275.40 92.40
..... ..., .., STREETFRONTCOMMERCIAL 4.22 ..., '00' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 4.65 0.43 150.00 85 633.00 697.50 64.50
..., "'" OTHER COMMERCIAL 7.63 4342 ... OTHER COMMERCIAl 3.26 -4.35 150.00 -853 1144.50 492.00 -652.50
4345 '" SINGLE FAMILY '.00 4345 '" SINGLE FAMILY '.00 -7.00 10.00 -70 70.00 0.00 -70.00
4345 '" MULTI-FAMILY 191.00 4345 '" MULTI.f"AMILY 442.00 251.00 8.00 2008 1526.00 3536.00 2008.00
4345 '00' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL ,W ..., .., sTREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 2.27 0.07 150.00 11 330.00 340.50 10.50
..., ,,,. OTHER HEALTH CARE 4A8 4345 6509 OTHER HEALTH CARE 4.48 0.00 500.00 0 224() 2240 0
.... '" SiNGlE FAMILY 263.00 ..., '" SINGLEFAMLY 2113.00 0.00 10.00 0 2830.00 2830.00 0.00
"00 '" SINGLE FAMILY 177.00 .'" '" SINGLE FAMILY 221.00 44.00 10.00 440 1770.00 2210.00 440.00
4350 '" MULTI-FAMILY 119.00 "" '" MULTI-FAMIlY 230.00 111.00 8.00 68' 952.00 1840.00 888.00
4352 "" HEAVY NDUSTRY o.oa 4352 '00' HEAVY NDUSTRY 33.16 33.16 120.00 3979 0.00 3979.20 3979.20
4352 "" LIGHT INDUSTRY 25.70 4352 2103 LIGHT INDUSTRY 51.73 26.03 200.00 5208 5140.00 10346.00 5206.00
"" '" SINGLEFAMLY '159.00 4353 '" SINGLE FAMILY 4511.00 O.DO 10.00 0 4590.00 4590.00 0.00
4355 '" SINGLEFAMLY ".00 .", '" SINGLE FAMH..Y 10,00 -12.00 10.00 -120 220.00 100.00 -120.00
4355 '" MULTI.f"AMILY 498.00 "" '" MULTI.f"AMILY 689,00 191.00 8.00 1528 3984.00 5512.00 1528.00
4355 '''' LOW-RISE HOTEL OR Mora 0.75 .", '00' LCUI-RIBE HOTEL OR MOTEL '.00 -0.75 200.00 -150 150.00 O.DO -150.00
4355 2103 LIGI-iTt/OUSTRY 6.511 "" 2103 LIGHT INDUSTRY 12.32 3.73 200.00 746 1718.00 2464.00 746.00
4355 ,,~ WAREHOUSING AND STORAGE 1.32 4355 2104 WAREHOUSING AND STORAGE '.00 -1.32 60.00 -79 79.20 O.DO -79.20
4355 ,~ NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAl '.00 .", ... NEIGl-IBORHOOD COMMERCIAL '.00 0.00 449.00 0 0.00 O.DO 0.00
4355 .., STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 9A2 .", "" STREfTFRONT COMMERCIAL .... -4.48 150.00 -873 1413.00 740.40 -672.60
4355 '00' LOW RISE OffICE 4355 .., LOW RISE OFFICE 1.23 1.23 300.00 370 O.DO 370.20 370.20
4357 '" SINGt.EFAMLY 14.00 .", '" SINGLE-FAMILY '.00 .14.00 10.00 -140 140.00 0.00 ~140.00
4357 '" MULTI-FAM1LY 2aO.OO 4357 '" MULTI.f"AMllY 32a.00 68.00 8.00 544 2080.00 2624.00 544.00
4357 .., COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL 17.65 4~57 "" COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL 17.65 0.00 262.00 0 4624.30 4624.30 0.00
4357 "" STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 3.78 4357 5a07 STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 4.21 0.43 150.00 85 567.00 631.50 64.50
4358 '" SINGLE FAMILY 2110.00 4358 '" SINGLE FAMILY 290.00 0.00 10.00 0 2900.00 2900.00 0.00
.". '" MULTI.f"AMILY "'.00 "" '" MULTI.f"AMllY 112.00 32.00 8.00 256 640.00 896.00 256.00
;j' 4359 '" SlNGlEFAMILY 453.00 4359 '" SINGLE fAMILY 456.00 3.00 10.00 30 4530.00 4560.00 30.00
~
~
J:/ENGINEERffRAFF1CffF3581 WT01F Report Exh 4 Master Land use Table 1-30-08 dek ATTACHMENT 4 PAGE 5
SANDAG SANOAG YEAR DELTA LU bulldoul
TAZ LAND USE 20" TAZ LAND USE Years 2030- Triprale Delta Trips currenltrlps deltalrlps
COOE CODE 2030 lrlps
2002
4359 '" MULTi-fAMILY ".00 4359 ,~ MULTI-FAMILY ".00 0.00 8.00 0 688.00 688.00 0.00
"" '" SINGLE FAMILY ".00 "'" '" SINGLEFAMl-Y ".00 12.00 10.00 120 540.00 660.00 120.00
"'" "" MUlTI-FAMILY 432.00 "'" '" MULTI-FAMII..Y 530.00 98.00 8.00 784 3456.00 4240.00 784.00
"'" '" SJNGLEFAMLY 95.00 "" '" SINGLEFAt.4ILY 95.00 0.00 10.00 0 950.00 950.00 0.00
"" ,~ MULTI-FAMILY 310.00 "" ,~ MULTI-FAMILY 310.00 0.00 8.00 0 2480.00 2480.00 0.00
"'" '" SINGLEFANILY 95.00 "'" '"' SINGLEFAMl-Y 95.00 0.00 10.00 0 950.00 950.00 0.00
"" "" MOBILE HOME PARK 132.00 "'" '" MOBn...E HOME PARK 132.00 0.00 5.00 0 660.00 660.00 0.00
"'" 2103 LIGI-ITINOUSTRY 9.07 "'" 2103 L1GHTt/OUSTRY 10.84 1.77 200.00 354 1814.00 2168.00 354.00
4363 2104 WAREHOUSING AND STORAGE '.00 "" "'" WAREHOUSING AND STORAGE '.00 -1.00 60.00 ..., 60.00 0.00 --60.00
4363 '00' NEIGHElORHOOD SHOPPI'jG CENTER ,." "" 000' NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENT ,." 0.00 449.00 0 3434.85 3434.85 0.00
"'" '" SINGlEFANILY 342.00 "" '" SINGLE FAMILY 342.00 0.00 10.00 0 3420.00 3420.00 0.00
,~, ,~ MULTI-FAMILY 153.00 "" ,~ MUlTI-FAMILY 153.00 0.00 8.00 0 1224.00 1224.00 0.00
"" 000' STREET FRONT COMNERCIAL 'TO ,~, 000' STREE:T FRONT COMMERCIAL ,." 0.00 150.00 0 180.00 180.00 0.00
"" '" SINGLEFAMl-Y 101.00 "" '" SINGLEFAt.4l.Y '.00 -101.00 10.00 -1010 1010.00 0.00 -1010.00
'''' "2 MULTI-FAM1LY 399.00 .'" ,~ MULTI-fAMILY 575.00 176.00 8.00 1408 3192.00 4600.00 1408.00
.'" "" LOW-RISE HOTEL OR MOTEL 0.50 .~. .002 LOWRlSEOfFlCE '" 0.36 300.00 108 150.00 258.00 108.00
"" 000' STREETFRONT COMNERCIAL 6.11 "'" 000' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL W -2.67 150.00 -401 916.50 516.00 -400.50
4367 '" SiNGlE FAMILY ....00 "'" '" SINGLEFAIIIILY 27.00 -17.00 10.00 -170 440.00 270.00 -170.00
"" ,~ MULTI..fAMILY 46.00 ,~, ,~ MULTI-FAMILY 683.00 637.00 8.00 5096 368.00 5464.00 5096.00
"'" '" MOSIlE HOME PARK 129.00 "'" '" MOSILE HOME PARK '.00 -129.00 5.00 -645 645.00 0.00 -645.00
4367 2104 WAREHOUSING OR STORAGE 2.27 "" 2104 WAREHOUSING OR STORAGE ,.'" -2.27 60.00 -136 136.20 0.00 -136.20
4367 '''''' NEIGHBORHOOD SHOf'PING CENTER '.00 "'" 000' NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENl '.00 0.00 449.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
.~, '00' STREETFR9NT COMMERCIAL 8.52 "" '00' STREETFRONT COMMERC LAL 9.79 1.27 150.00 190 1278.00 1468.43 190.43
4367 '"" OTHER COMMERCIAL 0.62 "" '''''' OTHER COMMERCIAL '.00 -0.62 150.00 -93 93.00 0.00 -93.00
'~7 '002 LOWRISEOFFICE 2.52 ,~, "oo LOW RISE OFFICE 0.00 -2.52 300.00 -7&; 756.00 0.00 -756.00
en .'" '" SfNGLEFAMtLY 479.00 ,~. '" SINGLE FAMILY 482.00 3.00 10.00 30 4790.00 4820.00 30,00
I .~. ,~ NULTl-FAMllY 14.00 "" ,~ MULTI..fAM1LY 14.00 0.00 8.00 0 112.00 112.00 0.00
~ 4370 '" SINGLEFANILY 81.00 4370 '" SINGLEFAMLY 71.00 -10.00 10.00 -100 810.00 710.00 -100.00
-1>0 4370 ,~ MUlTl-FAMILY 382.00 4370 ,~ MULTI-fAMILY "".00 84.00 8.00 672 3056.00 3128.00 672.00
4370 2104 WAREHOUSINGIPUBLlC STORAGE ,.'" 4370 2104 WAREHOUSINGiPUBLIC STORAGE 0.66 0.00 60.00 0 39.60 39.60 0.00
'" 4372 '" SINGLE FAMLY 377.00 "" '" SINGlE FAMILY 378.00 1.00 10.00 10 3770.00 3780.00 10.00
4374 '" SiNGlE FAMILY 77.00 4374 '" SINGl-EFANILY 7200 -5.00 10.00 -60 770.00 720.00 -50.00
4374 ,~ MULTl-FAMILY 141.00 4374 ,~ MULTl-FAMlLY 160.00 19.00 8.00 152 1128.00 1280.00 152.00
4375 '" SLNGLEFAMLY '.00 4375 '" SINGLEFAMLY '.00 -9.00 10.00 -90 90.00 0.00 -90.00
4375 ,~ MULTl-FAMILY 309.00 4375 ,~ MULT1-FAMILY 707.00 398.00 8.00 3184 2472.00 5656.00 3184.00
4375 '00' NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER 0.00 4375 "" NElGHBORHOOO SHOPPING CENl '.00 0.00 449.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
4375 000' S7REE:TFRONT COMMERCIAL 13.87 4375 000' STREE:TFRONT COMMERCIAL ... -5.41 150.00 -812 2080.50 1268.93 -811.58
4375 ""' LOW RISE OFFICE 0.39 4375 '002 LOW RISE OFFICE '.00 -0.39 300.00 -117 111.00 0.00 -117.00
4378 '" SINGLEFAMl-Y '.00 4376 '" SINGLE FAMILY '.00 -1.00 10.00 -10 10.90 0.00 -10.00
4376 ,~ MULTI-FAMlLY 202.00 4376 M NULTI-FAMLY 202.00 0.00 8.00 0 1616.00 1616.00 0.00
4376 '00' NEIGHI3ORHOOD COMMERCIAL 2.7" 4376 "" NEIGHBORHOOO COMMERCIAL 3.28 0.52 449.00 233 1239.24 1472.72 233.48
4376 000' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 2.69 4376 000' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL '" -0.43 150.00 -65 403.50 339.00 -64.50
4376 ""' LOVVRISEOFFICE 2.00 4378 ~2 LOWRISEOFFIC€ 2.'" 0.00 300.00 0 618.00 618.00 0.00
4318 '00' COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL 31.38 4378 '00' COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL 31.39 0.00 262.00 0 8221.56 6221.56 0.00
4319 '" SINGLE FANLY 7100 4379 '" SINGLEFAMLY 71.00 0.00 10.00 0 710.00 710.00 0.00
4379 1~ MULTI-FAMlLY 13.00 4379 ,~ MULTI-FAMlLY 13.00 0.00 8.00 0 104.00 104.00 0.00
4379 000' STREETFRONT COMNERCIAL 1.48 4379 000' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 1.48 0.00 150.00 0 222.00 222.00 0.00
4382 '" SlNGlEfAMILY 69.00 "" '" SINGlE I'AMILY 53.00 -16.00 10.00 -160 690,00 530.00 -160.00
"" ,OO MULTI-FAMILY 832.00 4382 ,~ MULTI-FAM1LY "".00 24.00 8.00 192 6656.00 6848.00 192.00
4384 '" SINGLE FAMLY 91.00 "" '" SINGLEFAMl.Y 74.00 -17.00 10.00 -110 910.00 740.00 -170.00
4384 ,~ MULTI-FAMILY 23.00 4384 ,~ MULTI-FAMtlY 63.00 40.00 8.00 320 184.00 504.00 320.00
4365 '" SINGlEFANILY 11.00 '''' '" SINGLEFAMtLY 0.00 -11.00 10.00 -110 110.00 0.00 -110.00
"" ,OO MULTI-FAMILY 38.00 "" ,~ MULTl-FAMJLY 303.00 265.00 8.00 2120 304.00 2424.00 2120.00
4385 '" MOBtlEHOMEPARK 119.00 4385 '" MOBU HOME PARK 119.00 0.00 5.00 0 595.00 595.00 0.00
4385 151)1 LOW.flISE HOTEL OR MOTEL '" 4395 151)1 LOW-RISE HOTEL OR MOTEL -0,85 200.00 -170 170.00 0.00 ~170.00
.~, 2103 LfGHTINDUSTRY 1.13 4385 2103 LlGHTtNDUSTRY 0.00 -1.13 200.00 -226 226.00 0.00 -226.00
cl' 4385 "'" WAREHOUSING AND STORAGE 7.11 "" 2104 WAREHOUSING AND STORAGE 6.95 -0.16 60.00 -10 426.60 417.00 -9.60
'"
<0
~
J:JENGINEERfTRAFFICfTF358/ WTDIF Report Exh 4 Master Land use Table 1-30-08 dek ATTACHMENT 4 PAGE 6
SANOAG DELTA LU bulldout
TAZ SANDAG LAND USE 2002 TAZ LAND use Y,",R Years2030_ Trip rate Delta Trips currenttrlps delta trips
CODE CODE 2030 trips
2002
4385 """ STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 0.69 "" ,." STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 1.81 1.12 150.00 167 103.50 270.90 167.40
4385 ,." LOW RISE OFFICE 0.00 4385 ''''' LOW RISE OFFICE 0.00 0.90 300.00 271 0.00 270.90 270.90
4387 '" SiNGlE FAMILY 57.00 ,~, '" SINGLE FAMILY ".00 -11.00 10.00 -110 570.00 460.00 -110.00
4387 '" MULTI-FAMILY ....00 4387 "" MULTI-FAMILY 948.00 60.00 8.00 480 7104.00 7564.00 460.00
4387 """ NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL 2.25 4387 """ NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL 2.25 0.00 449.00 0 1010.25 1010.25 0.00
4361 5"" STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 1.16 4387 '00' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 1.16 0.00 150.00 0 174.00 174.00 0.00
4391 "'" LIGHTlNDUSTRjAL 0.01l 4391 2103 LlGHTlNDUSTRIAL 0.00 0.00 200.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
4391 5"" WHOLESALE TRADE '.M 'm ..., WHOLESALE TRADE '.00 -9.98 224.00 -2231 2231.04 0.00 -2231.04
4391 "'" COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL 18Al 4391 ~'" COMMUNITY COMMERCIAl.. 18A1 0.00 262.00 0 4823.42 4623.42 0.00
4391 '"'' STREET FRONT COMMERCIAL 4.13 ,~, ~" STRECT FRONT COMMERCIAL 2.82 -1.31 150.00 -197 619.50 422.70 -196.60
4391 '"'' LOW-MIDRISEOFFICE 0.00 4391 "" LOW-MlD RISE OFFICE 1.41 1.-41 300.00 423 0.00 422.70 422.70
4392 '" SINGlEFAMLY 147.00 4392 '" SINGLEFANILY 0.00 -147.00 10.00 -1470 1470.00 0.00 -1470.00
"" '" MULTI-FAMILY 263.01l "" '" MULTI-FAMILY 4l4.oo 171.00 8.00 1368 2104.00 3472.00 1368.00
"" '" MOBILE HOME PARK 296.01l "" '" MOBILE HOME PARK 296.00 0.00 5.00 0 1460.00 1480.00 0.00
4395 '" SINGLE FAMILY 192.00 "" '" SINGLE FAMILY 192,00 0.00 10.00 0 1920.00 1920.00 0.00
4395 "" MULTI-FAMILY ~.oo 4395 '" MULT1-FAMILY ~oo 0.00 6.00 0 432.00 432.00 0.00
4395 '''' MOBILE HOME PARK 191.00 4395 '" MOBILE HOME PARK 191.00 0.00 5.00 0 955.00 955.00 0.00
"" '" SINGLE FAMILY 89.00 "" '" SINGLE FAMILY 113.00 24.00 10.00 240 690.00 1130.00 240.00
"M '" MULTI-FAMILY 201.00 "M '" MULTI-FAMILY 201.00 0.00 6.00 0 1608.00 1606.00 0.00
"" .... NEIGHBORHOOO COMMERCIAL 6.85 '''' 50" NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ,." 0.00 449.00 0 3075.65 3075.65 0.00
4397 '" SINGt-EFAMILY 399.00 4397 '" SINGLE FAMILY ....00 0.00 10.00 0 3990.00 3990.00 0.00
4397 '" MULTI-FAMILY 116,00 4397 '" MULTI-FAMlLY 116.00 0.00 8.00 0 928.00 926.00 0.00
4398 '"' SINGLE FAMILY 27.1l0 4398 '"' SINGLE FAMILY '.00 ~27.oo 10.00 -270 270.00 0.00 -270.00
"" '"' MULTI--FAMILY 12.00 "" '" MULTI--FAMILY 0.00 -12.00 8.00 -96 98.00 0.00 -96.00
4398 2103 LIGHT INDUSTRY S.20 439B 2103 LIGHT INDUSTRY '.00 -5.20 200.00 -1040 1040.00 0.00 -1040.00
4398 50"' WHOLESALE TRADE '.00 4398 ~"' WHOl-ESALE TRADE 0,00 -2.00 224.00 -4" 446.00 0.00 -446.00
C11 4398 ..., RETAIL COMMERCIAL 0.00 4398 ~"' RETAIL COMMERCIAL 17.51 17.51 150.00 2627 0.00 2627.10 2627.10
I 4398 ..., LOW RISE OFFICE 0.35 4398 ''''' LOW-MlDRISEOFFICE 40.87 40.52 300.00 12155 105.00 12259.80 12154.60
~ 4399 '" 8INGlEFAMLY '.00 '''' '" SINGLE FAMILY 0.00 -2.00 10.00 -20 20.00 0.00 -20.00
.j>. "" '" MULTI--FAMILY '.00 4399 '" MULTI-FAMILY 213.00 211.00 6.00 1666 16.00 1704.00 1686.00
W 4399 '" MOBILE HOME PARK 18.00 4399 '"' MOBILE HOME PARK 0.00 -16.00 5.00 -90 90.00 0.00 -90.00
4399 '"'" LOW-RISE HOTEL OR MOTel 0.50 "" 1501 LOW-RISE HOTEL OR MOTEL 0.00 -0.50 200.00 -100 100.00 0.00 -100.00
,,,. '007 STREET FRONT COMMERCIAL 0.01l 4399 '00' STREET FRONT COMMERCIAL 1.27 1.27 150.00 191 0.00 190.50 190.50
4399 ''''' LOW RISE OFFICE 0.01l 4399 ''''' LOW RISE OFFICE '" 0.64 300.00 191 0.00 190.50 190.50
"00 '" SINGLE FAMILY 27.00 "00 '"' SINGLE fAMILY ".00 --4.00 10.00 -40 270.00 230.00 -40.00
"00 '" MULTI-FAMILY 590.00 "00 '" MUlTI.f'AMILY 616.00 26.00 6.00 208 4720.00 4926.00 208.00
,,00 '00' STREETFRONTCOMMERCIAL 5.27 "00 '007 sTREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 7.49 2.22 150.00 333 790.50 1123.50 333.00
"00 ..., LOW RISE OFFlCE 0.51 "00 ..., LOW RISE OFFICE 0.00 -0.51 300.00 -153 153.00 0.00 -153.00
4401 '"' s!NGLEfAMILY 96.00 4401 '"' SINGLEfAMLY 0.00 -96.00 10.00 -980 980.00 0.00 -960.00
4401 '"' MULTI-FAMILY 111.00 4401 '"' MULTI--FAMILY 1207.00 1096.00 8.00 6766 686.00 9656.00 8766.00
"'" '" MOBIlE HOME PARK 23.00 4401 '" MOBILE HOME PARK 0.00 -23.00 5.00 -115 115.00 0.00 -115.00
4401 2101 t/OUsTRIALPARK 34.25 "0' 2101 lNDUSTRIALPARK 32.24 -2.01 90.00 -161 3062.50 2901.60 -180.90
,,", 2103 LIGHT INDUSTRY 1.61 "'" 21113 LIGHT INDUSTRY O.M ~1.61 200.00 -322 322.00 0.00 -322.00
4401 2103 LIGHT INDUSTRY 0.00 "" "'" LlGHTlNDUSTRY 2.05 2.05 200.00 410 0.00 410.00 410.00
4401 .." STREET FRONT COMMERCIAL 0.62 "'" ~"' STREET FRONT COMMERCIAL 2.98 2.36 150.00 354 93.00 447.00 354.00
4401 ..., LOW-MID RISE OFFICE 0.01l 4401 '00' LOW-t.lIDRISEOFFICE 0,75 0.75 300.00 224 0.00 224.40 224.40
4402 '"' SINGlE FAMILY '.00 '''' '" SINGLE FAMILY 0.00 -1.00 10.00 -10 10.00 0.00 -10.00
"'" '" MULTI--FAM!LY 0.01l "" '" MULTI-FAMILY 11l7.oo 107.00 8.00 856 0.00 856.00 856.00
4402 '00' COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL 15.48 44112 '00' COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL 15.48 0.00 262.00 0 4055.76 4055.76 0.00
4402 '00. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL 2.91l ,," '"'" NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL 0.00 -2.90 449.00 -1302 1302.10 0.00 ~1302.10
"" ..., STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL U2 4402 ..., STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL '" 2.56 150.00 384 273.00 657.00 364.00
4402 .... OTHER COMMERCIAL 1l.90 "" "" OTHER COMMERCIAL 0.00 -0.90 150.00 -135 135.00 0.00 -135.00
"" ..., LOW--MIO RISE OFFICE 0.00 "" ..., LOW--MtD RISE OfFICE 1l.24 0.24 300.00 71 0.00 71.40 71.40
"'" '" SiNGlE FAMILY 451.00 "'" '"' SINGLEFAMLY 488.00 15.00 10.00 150 4510.00 4660.00 150.00
4404 '" MULTI-FAMILY 77.00 "'" '" MUlTI-FAMILY 77.00 0.00 8.00 0 816.00 616.00 0.00
"'" '00' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 0." "" ..., STREETFROOT COMMERCIAL 0,99 0.00 150.00 0 148.50 148.50 0.00
cl' "" '"' SINGLE FAMILY 300.00 "" '" SINGLEFANILY 331.00 31.00 10.00 310 3000.00 3310.00 310.00
""
"
~
J:1ENGINEERfTRAFFICfTF3561 WTDIF Report Exh 4 Master Land use Table 1-30-06 dek ATTACHMENT 4 PAGE 7
SANDAG SANDAG YEAR DELTA LU bulldout
TAZ LAND USE 2002 TAZ LAND USE Years 2030. Trip rate Delta Trips current trips
COOE CODE 2030 trips delta trips
2002
4405 "" MUlII-FAMILY 00.00 "00 '" MULTI-FAMIlY 90.00 0.00 8.00 0 720.00 720.00 0.00
"" 2103 lIGHT INDUSTRY 0.82 "'" 2103 LIGHTt/OUSTRY '.00 -0.82 200.00 -184 164.00 0.00 -164.00
"" '" MOBILEHOME~ARK '.00 ""' '" MOOK.E HOME PARK '.00 -5.00 5.00 -25 25.00 0.00 -25.00
""' "" LOW RISE HOTEL OR MOTEL 1.35 ,.. "'" LOW RISE HOTEL OR MOTEL '.00 -1.35 200.00 ~270 270.00 0.00 -270.00
""' '''' WAREHOUSINlJ OR STORAGE 13.42 ... '''" WAREHOUSING OR STORAGE ,.'" ~13.42 60.00 -805 805.20 0.00 -805.20
""' ''''' NEIGHBOflWOOD COMMERCIAL 0.00 ,.. "'" NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ,.'" 0.00 449.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
4406 ~, STREET FRONT COMMERCIAl ,." ,.. ''''' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAl 1.33 -0.93 150.00 ~140 339.00 199.50 ~139.50
""' "" OTHER COMMERCIAL 0.11 ""' '"'" NEIGHBORHOOO COMMERCIAl 14.35 13.84 449.00 6124 318.79 6443.15 6124.36
""' 6002 LOW RISE OFFICE 0.62 ""' "'" LOW RISE OFFICE 1.79 1.17 300.00 351 186.00 537.00 351.00
4407 '" SINGlEFAMILV 1.'" 441J7 '" SINGLE FAMILY 1.1J1J 0.00 10.00 0 10.00 10.00 0.00
4407 '''' MULTI-FAMK.Y 127.00 4407 '''' MULTI-FAMILY 142.00 15.00 8.00 120 1016.00 1136.00 120.00
'''''' '" MOBILE HOME PARK 115.00 ""' '" MOBILE HOME PARK 9IJ.01J -25.00 5.00 -125 575.00 450.00 ~125.oo
4401 2101 lNOUSTRIAlPARK 21.73 441J7 2101 INOUSTRIAlPARK 22.39 0.66 90.00 59 1955.70 2015.10 59.40
""' 2103 L1GHTI'lOUSTRY 23.53 4407 2103 LIGHT INDUSTRY 23.95 0.42 200.00 84 4706.00 4790.00 84.00
4407 2104 WAREHOUSING OR STORAGE '" 4407 ""' WAREHOUSING OR STORAGE ,." 0.00 60.00 0 272.40 272.40 0.00
4407 ""'" NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ,.'" 4407 '""' NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAl ,.'" 0.00 449.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
"" '"' SINGLE FAMilY 87.00 "" '" SINGLE FAMILY ,"00 -11.00 10.00 -110 670.00 560.00 -110.00
4408 '''' MUlTI.fAMILY 180.00 "" '''' MULTI-FAMILY 14lloo -40.00 8.00 -320 1440.00 1120.00 -320.00
"" '" MOBILE HOME PARK 502.00 '''''' '"' MOBILE HOME PARK 502,00 0.00 5.00 0 2510.00 2510.00 0.00
4408 2103 LlGHTlNDUSTRY '" "" 2103 LIGHT INDUSTRY 13.11 4.72 200.00 94. 1798.00 2742.00 944.00
.." ""' .....AAEHOUSING OR STORAGE 2.31 .." ""' WAREHOUSING OR STORAGE 2.31 0.00 60.00 0 138.60 138.60 0.00
'''''' "'" STREET FRONT COMMERCIAL 0.97 4408 "'" STREET FRONT COMMERCIAL 0.00 -0.97 150.00 -146 145.50 0.00 -145.50
.." '"' MULTI-FAMIlY 45.00 .." '''' MULTI-FAMILY 45.00 0.00 '.00 0 360.00 360.00 0.00
.." '"' MOBILE HOME PARK 428.00 '''''' '" MOOK.E f-lOME PAAK 426.00 0.00 5.00 0 2130.00 2130.00 0.00
"'" '"' SINGLEFAMLY 231.00 4410 '" SINGLEFAMLY 189.00 -42.00 10.00 -420 2310.00 1890.00 -420.00
Cl'1 4411J '"' MUlTJ-FAMILY "'" 4410 '"' MULTI-FAMIlY ".00 8.00 8.00 " 208.00 256.00 48.00
I 4410 '"' MOBILE HOME PARK 129.00 ..'" '"' MOBILE HOME PARK 129.00 0.00 5.00 0 845.00 645.00 0.00
~ 4410 2103 LIGHT INDUSTRY 1.43 4410 2103 RESEARCH & LIMITED INDUSTRIAL 7.65 6.22 200.00 1244 286.00 1530.00 1244.00
.j:>o 4410 "'" STREET FRONT COMMERCIAL 0.57 4410 "'" STREET FRONT COMMERCIAL '00 -0.57 150.00 -86 85.50 0.00 -85.50
.j:>o 4413 '"' MULTI-FAMILY 10.00 .." '"' MULTI-FAMllY '.00 -10.00 '.00 -80 60.00 0.00 -aO.OO
"" '"' MOBILE HOME PARK 52,00 4413 '"' MOBILE f-lOME PARK 0,00 -52.00 5.00 -260 260.00 0.00 -260.00
4413 "" NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAl 10.41 4413 .00. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAl 15.57 5.16 449.00 2317 4674.09 6990.93 2316.84
"" "" OTHER RETAIL 0.54 4413 '00' OTHERRETAlL '.00 -0.64 160.00 -9, 96.00 0.00 -96.00
4413 '00' LOW RISE OFFICE 0.11 "" "'" LOW RISE OFFICE '.00 -0.11 300.00 -'33 33.00 0.00 -33.00
4414 '"' SINGlE FAMilY 144.00 4414 '" SINGL!:FAMlLY 110.00 -34.00 10.00 -340 1440.00 1100.00 -340.00
.... '"' MULTl-FAMlLY 117.00 4414 '" MUlTI-FAMILY 89.00 ~28.00 6.00 -224 936.00 712.00 -224.00
".. 2103 LIGHTJNOUSTRY 9,41 4414 2103 L1GHTINOUSTRY 18.18 8.77 200.00 1754 1882.00 3636.00 1754.00
4414 '00' WHOLESAlE TRADE '" 4414 "'" 'M--iOlESALETRADE '.00 -1.06 224.00 -237 237.44 0.00 -237.44
4414 "'" STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 8.82 4414 "'" STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL '" 0.52 150.00 " 1323.00 1401.00 78.00
4414 ,"'. OTHERRETAlL 0.48 4414 ,"'. OTHERRETAlL '.00 -0.48 150.00 -72 72.00 0.00 -72.00
4414 ''''' OTHER HEALTH CARE 0.&1 4414 ""' OTHER HEALTH CARE '" -0.61 500.00 -305 305 0 -'305
4416 '"' SINGLEFAMlLY 1,00 4418 '"' SINGlE FAMILY '"' -1.00 10.00 -10 10.00 0.00 -10.00
441& 2101 INDUSTRIAlPAAK 11.38 4418 2101 NOUSTRIALPARK '.00 -11.38 90.00 -1024 1024.20 0.00 -1024.20
4418 2103 LIGHTlNDUSTRY 12.27 4416 2103 LlGHTlNDUSTRY '" -12.27 200.00 -2454 2454.00 0.00 -2454.00
4416 '00' COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL '" 4418 ''''' COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL 21.27 27.27 262.00 7145 0.00 7144.74 7144.74
4418 "'" OTHER RETAIL 2.03 4418 "'" OTf--lERRETAli. '.00 -2.03 150.00 -305 304.50 0.00 -304.50
4417 2101 J.lDUSTRIAl PARK 4.27 "" 2101 >>-IDUSTRIAlPARK '.00 -4.27 90.00 -384 384.30 0.00 -384.30
4417 2103 lIGHT INDUSTRY 24.20 4417 2103 lIGHT INDUSTRY 60.71 36.51 200.00 7302 4840.00 12142.00 7302.00
4417 2104 WAREHOUSING OR STORAGE 2.83 4417 ""' WAREHOUSING OR STORAGE 2.83 0.00 60.00 0 169.80 169.80 0.00
4417 '''"' LOW RISE OFFICE 0.69 "" "'" LOW RISE OFFICE '.00 -0.69 300.00 -207 207.00 0.00 -207.00
4418 '"' SINGLE FAMilY '.00 4418 '" SiNGlE FAMILY ,.'" -4.00 10.00 -40 "'.00 0.00 -40.00
"" '''' MULTI-FAMlLY '.00 4418 '''' MUlTl-f'AMILV 133.00 130.00 6.00 1040 24.00 1064.00 1040.00
4418 2101 lNDUSTRIAlPARK 8.55 4418 2101 INDUSTRIAl PAAK '.00 -6.55 90.00 -590 589.50 0.00 -589.50
4418 2103 l]GHTlNDUSTRY '"' 4416 2103 llGHTNQUSTRV 32.49 29.45 200.00 5890 608.00 6498.00 5690.00
4418 2104 WAREHOUSING OR STORAGE 25.83 4418 ""' WAREHOUSING OR STORAGE 16.85 -8.98 60.00 -539 1549.80 1011.00 -538.80
4418 '00' WHOLESALE TRADE "" "" '"" WHOLESALE TRADE '.00 -2.70 224.00 -605 604,60 0.00 -604.60
." .." '"' SINGLE FAMILY "." 4422 '"' SINGlEFAMLY '.00 -22.00 10.00 .220 220.00 0.00 -220.00
"
'"
<0
'"
'"
J:/ENGINEERlTRAFFICrrF3581 WTDIF Report Exh 4 Master land use Table 1-30-08 dek ATTACHMENT 4 PAGE 6
SANDAG SANDAG YEAR DELTA LU bulklout
TAl LAND USE 2002 TAl LAND USE Years 2030_ Tripl'lIte Della Trips current trips dellatrips
CODE CODE 2030 "'p'
2002
.." "'" LOW RISt: HOTEL OR t.lOTEL 0.33 .." 1501 LOW RISE HOTEL OR t.lOTEL 0,00 -0.33 200.00 -66 66.00 0.00 -66.00
.." 2103 LIGHTINDUS1RY 26.95 ~~22 2103 LIGHT INDUSTRY ~7.56 20.61 200.00 4122 5390.00 9512.00 4122.00
.." "'" WAREHOUSING OR STORAGE 18,33 ~~22 "'" WAREHOUSING OR STORAGE 10,99 -7.34 60.00 -440 1099.60 659.40 -440.40
.." &"" STREETFRONT COt.lMERCIAL 0.51 .." '00' STREETFRONT COMt.lERCI1U. 0.00 -0.51 150.00 -77 76.50 0.00 -76.50
.." """ OTHERCOt.lMERCIAL 1,35 .." '"'' OTHER COMMERCIAL '.00 -1.35 150.00 -203 202.50 0.00 -202.50
'l~22 """ LOW RISE OFFICE 0.50 .." '"" LOW RISE OFFICE '.00 -0.50 300.00 -150 150.00 0.00 -150.00
4~23 "" MULTI-FAMILY 49.00 4423 '" MULTI-FAMILY '.00 -49.00 8.00 -392 392.00 0.00 -392.00
.." 2103 LlGHTI'lOUSTRY 9.93 .." 2103 llGHTINDUSTRY 26.11 16.16 200.00 3'56 1966.00 5222.00 3236.00
4423 2104 WAREHOUSING OR STORAGE 4.25 4~23 2104 WAREHOUSING OR STORAGE .." 0.00 60.00 0 255.00 255.00 0.00
.." "" MULTI-I=AMILY "'.00 4~25 "" MULTI-I=AMIlY "'.00 0.00 8.00 0 5248.00 5248.00 0.00
4425 "" LOW-RISE HOTEL OR MOTEL 1.76 4425 1501 LOW-RISE HOTEL OR MOTEL 1.76 0.00 200.00 0 352.00 352.00 0.00
4425 =. NEIGHBORHOOD COMt.lERCI1U. 2,51 ~425 "'" NEIGHElORHOOD COt.lt.lERCIAL 2,51 0.00 449.00 0 1126.99 1126.99 0.00
4425 =, STREETFRONTCOMt.lERCIAl 1.30 4425 '00' STRt:ETFRONT COMMERCl,I,L 2.25 0.95 150,00 143 195.00 337.50 142.50
.." '" SINGLEFAt.lILY 195.00 4426 '" SINGlE FAMILY 2~7.00 62.00 10.00 620 1850.00 2470.00 620.00
4426 "" t.lULTI-FAMILY 69.00 .." '" MULTI-FAMILY 69.00 0.00 8.00 0 552.00 552.00 0.00
"" "" HEAVY INDUSTRY 51.95 4612 "''' HEAVY tf[IUSTRY 10.00 -41.95 120.00 -5034 6234.00 1200.00 --5034.00
4612 =, WI"IOLESALETRADE 6.89 ~612 '"'' WHOLESALE TRADE '.00 -6.69 224.00 .1543 1543.36 0.00 -1543.36
4612 =, COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL 0.00 ~S12 "" COMMUNITY COMMERCiAl 42.99 42.99 262.00 11263 0.00 11263.38 11263.38
4612 =, STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL '.00 "" .00' STREETFRONT COMMERCIAL 48.37 48.37 150.00 7256 0.00 7255.50 7255.50
"" '00' LOW RISE OFFICE 1.44 4612 '"" LOW RISE OFFICE 10.00 656 300.00 2568 432.00 3000.00 2568.00
213350 539447 762797 213360
Total EDU's from table above 21,335 EDU's
AD.fiJSTMENTS Residential Units built since 2001 1 aD EDU's
NON.Residential Units built since 2001 1241 EDU's
en ITotal EDU's 19914\
I COSTS - $62,691,413
.....
-1>0 $3,148 per EDU + soft costs
en
cl'
""
'"
'"
"
J:JENGINEERlTRAFFIClTF358/ wrDlF Report Exh 4 Master Land use Table 1-30..08 dek
ATTACHMENT 4
PAGE 9
~~".
5-146
Page 58
RTCIP IMPACT FEE NEXUS STUDY-
FINAL REPORT
NOVEMBER 26, 2007
PREPARED FOR THE
SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS
MuniFinancial Oakland Office
1700 Broadway, 6th Floor
Oakland, California 94612
Tel: (510) 832-0899
Fax: (510) 832-0898
MuniFinancial
A WILLDAN COMPANY
Anaheim, CA
Industry, CA
Lancaster, CA
Oakland, CA
Orlando, FL
www.munLcom
5-147
EXHIBIT 5
Phoenix, AZ.
Sacramento, CA
Seattle, WA
Temecula, CA
Page 59
5-148
Page 60
'-
""
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARy........................................................... 1
~m~~ 1
New Development Investments in Regional Transportation 1
Purpose of Study 2
Regional Arterial System 3
Initial RTCIP Impact Fee Calculation 3
2. NEXUS ANALySiS.............................................................................. 6
Approach 6
Growth Projections 6
Facilities Standard and Need for Transportation Improvements 12
Facility Costs and Available Funding 14
Cost Allocation and Fee Schedule 17
Extension of RTCIP to Nonresidential Land Uses 20
3. IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................................ 22
Adoption By Local Agencies 22
Inflation Adjustment 23
Collection and Administration 24
Use of Revenues 24
Exemptions 25
4. MITIGATION FEE ACT FINDINGS ........................................................26
Purpose of Fee 26
Use of Fee Revenues 26
Benefit Relationship 27
Burden Relationship 27
Proportionality 28
ApPENDIX A: REGIONAL ARTERIAL SYSTEM.. .......................... ............ .A-1
ApPENDIX B: RETAIL SPENDING AND SALES ANALySiS.......................... B-1
Total Household Spending B-1
Capture and Leakage B-4
Local Spending Share ofTotal Sales B-5
Visitor Indust~ Spending 8-5
ApPENDIX C: LOCAL AGENCY IMPLEMENTATION CHECKLISTS ................C-1
Initial RTCIP Fee Adoption - Local Agency Implementation Checklist C-2
Annual and Five-Year RTCIP Fee Update - Local Agency Implementation
Checklist C-4
IIMuniFinancial
November 26,2007
;
Page 61
5-149
LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES
FIGURE 1: REGIONAL ARTERIAL SySTEM...................................................................5
TABLE 1: POPULATION, EMPLOYMENT & LAND USE FORECASTS................................8
TABLE 2: OCCUPANT DENSiTY............................ ...... ......... ...... ............ ... .............. ... 9
TABLE 3: TRAVEL DEMAND FACTORS.....................................................................10
TABLE 4: ALLOCATION OF TAXABLE RETAIL SPENDING AND COMMERCIAL
SQ. FT. IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY..............................................................................12
TABLE 5: TRAVEL DEMAND FROM EXISTING AND NEW DEVELOPMENT ...................... 12
TABLE 6: REGIONAL ARTERIAL SYSTEM ROADWAY STATISTICS................................ 13
TABLE 7: ESTIMATED ARTERIAL SYSTEM CAPACITY INVESTMENTS ($2008) ..............15
TABLE 8: RTP INVESTMENT PLAN, 2002-2030 ($2002) .........................................16
TABLE 9: REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT PLANNED ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS ................. 18
TABLE 10: RESIDENTIAL COST PER TRIP (ESTIMATED FOR $2008)...........................19
TABLE 11: RTCIP IMPACT FEE (ESTIMATED FOR $2008) ........................................20
TABLE 12: NONRESIDENTIAL COST PER TRIP (ESTIMATED FOR $2008) ....................21
TABLE 13: NONRESIDENTIAL IMPACT FEE (ESTIMATED FOR $2008) .........................21
TABLE A.1: REGIONAL ARTERIAL SYSTEM ............................................................ A-1
TABLE B.1: TAXABLE RETAIL SALES (2004) ......................................................... B-2
TABLE B.2: HOUSEHOLD TAXABLE RETAIL SPENDING POTENTIAL (2004) ............... B-3
TABLE B.3: SAN DIEGO COUNTY LOCAL HOUSEHOLD TAXABLE RETAIL
SPENDING & SALES (2004).... ...... ...... ... ........ ........ .... ........ ......... ........ .............. .... B-4
TABLE B.4: ALLOCATION OF TAXABLE RETAIL SPENDING IN SAN DIEGO
COUNTY (2004) .... .... ............ .............. ......... ............ ...... ............ ....... .... .......... .... B-5
TABLE B.5: VISITOR INDUSTRY RETAIL SPENDING (2004)...................................... B-6
i\l1iIJiFillflllt1al
J,,&17.2001 11
Page 62
5-150
1 . INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
Tills chapter provides a summary of the study's results and explains the background and
purpose for the study. The chapter also describes the initial nexus analysis that preceded the
current study.
SUMMARY
The purpose of this study is to provide a single nexus analysis that all local agencies in San
Diego County can use to adopt an impact fee and fulfill their contribution to the Regional
Transportation Congestion Improvement Plan (RTCIP). Tills report documents the required
statutory findings under California's Mitigation Fee Actl. The nexus analysis conducted for
this study finds that the impact fee required by the RTCIP of $2,000 per residential unit is
justified based on the requirements of the Act.
Tills report is an update to the first version of this study dated September 5, 2006. The
changes made in this report from the prior version are:
· Merged the mobile home land use category into the multi-family category
because of the minimal amount of projected mobile home development and to
simplify administration of the fee; and
· Updated unit cost inflation adjustment based on more accurate construction cost
index (Caltrans highway cost index instead of a combination of several national
indices) .
· Clarified that the initial RTCIP fee beginning in 2008 will be $2,000 per
residential unit regardless of type of unit.
The $2,000 fee per residential unit will be updated annually for cost inflation following initial
adoption by local agencies in 2008.
NEW DEVELOPMENT INVESTMENTS IN REGIONAL
TRANSPORTATION
In 2004 voters in San Diego County approved a 40-year extension to TransNet, a program
designed to fund improvements to the region's transportation system first initiated in 1987.
The prime component of the program is a half-cent sales tax increase that is projected to
raise over $10 billion for improvements through 2030.2 Expenditure of TransNet funds is
implemented through the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), prepared by the San Diego
Association of Governments (SANDAG) and updated periodically as mandated.
1 California Government Code, ~~66000-66025.
2 San Diego Association of Governments, Draft 2007 Rtgiona/TnmspOrlation Plan (June 2007), Table 4.1, p. 4-9.
BMuniFmncial
1\!ove11Iber 26,2007
5-151
1
Page 63
San Diego AIsociation of Governments
RTQP Impact Fee Nexus Study
The draft 2007 RTP details the need for $58 billion in transportation improvements.3 Of
that total, $27 billion in funding will come from a variety of state and federal sources. The
remaining $31 billion will come from local funding sources including the TransNet sales tax
extension. These amounts represent the Reasonably Expected Scenario, one of three
scenarios examined in the draft 2007 RTP.4
In addition to the sales tax extension, the TransNet program requires implementation of a
new local funding source for the draft 2007 RTP, the Regional Transportation Congestion
Improvement Program (RTCIP).5 The purpose of the RTCIP is to ensure that new
development directly invests in the region's transportation system to offset the negative
impacts of growth on congestion and mobility.
Key components of the RTCIP include:
. Beginning July 1, 2008 each local agency must contribute $2,000 from exactions
imposed on the private sector for each new residence constructed in the County.
. Although the RTCIP does not specify a revenue source for this contribution,
most local agencies are likely to collect this revenue as a development impact fee
imposed on new dwelling units at building permit issuance.
. Revenues must be expended on improvements to the Regional Arterial System
(RAS), described below, and in a manner consistent with the expenditure
priorities in the most recent adopted RTP.
. The Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee, created for the TransNet
program, is responsible for reviewing local agency implementation of the RTCIP.
. If a local agency does not comply with the RTCIP the agency can lose TransNet
sales tax funding for local roads.
Cities have the authority to impose impact fees under the Mitigation Fee Act contained in
California Government Code sections 66000 through 66025. Counties have the same
authority for their unincorporated areas. In doing so, each local agency is required to make
findings demonstrating a reasonable nexus between the collection of fees, the need for
facilities created by new development, and the expenditure of fee revenues to benefit new
development.
PURPOSE OF STUDY
The purpose of this study is to provide a single nexus analysis that all local agencies in San
Diego County can use to adopt an impact fee and fulfill their contribution to the RTCIP.
This report documents the required statutory findings under the Mitigation Fee Act.
3 Ibid., Table 4.3, page 4-11.
4 Ibid., Table 4.1, page 4-9.
5 San Diego Association of Governments, TransNet Extension Ordinance and Expenditure Plan, Commission
Ordinance 04-01, May 28, 2004, Sec. 9.
IIlIilMuniF_
1\TolJIIIJlbttr26,2007
o
.
Page 64
5-152
San DiegoA.rsociation of Governments
RTCIP Impact Fee Nexus Slutfy
REGIONAL ARTERIAL SYSTEM
SANDAG employs a rigorous process to define the RAS.6 The most important criterion for
determining whether to include an arterial in the RAS is the arterial's role as a "critical link".
Critical links provide direct connections between communities ensuring system continuity
and congestion relief in high volume corridors. The other criteria for inclusion of an arterial
in the RAS include:
· Links to areas with high concentrations of existing' or future population or
employment;
· Links to activity centers such as hospitals, retail centers, entertainment centers,
hotels, colleges, and universities;
· Accommodate high future traffic volumes;
· Accommodate Regional Transit Vision (Red and Yellow Car,service); and
· Provide access to intermodal (freight, port, military, or airport) facilities.,
As of the date of the first version of this report in Septembe. 2006, the RAS included 777 '
route miles (not lane miles) of arterials. Figure 1 is a map of the Regional Arterial System
from the adopted 2005 RTP. The RAS included both the regionally significant arterials and
the other regional arterials indicated on the map. A list of arterial segments included in this
version of the RAS is provided in Appendix A to this report. A list of the types of
improvements that the RTCIP can fund on the RAS is discussed in the Implementation chapter
of this report.
INITIAL RTCIP IMPACT FEE CALCULATION
SANDAG staff developed the RTCIP contribution amount of $2,000 per residence using an
approach that allocated transportation system improvements proportionately across both
existing development and projected growth. The methodology was as follows:
1. The Regional Arterial System carried 10.8 million vehicle miles traveled (VM1) in
2000 and was projected to carry 14.9 million VMT in :2030. The difference of 4.1
million VMT, or 27 percent of the 2030 VMT total was attributed to growth (4.1
+ 14.9 = 27 percent).
2. The entire transportation network was projected to accommodate 60.1 million
vehicle miles traveled (VM1) in 2030. Of this total, 37.4 million VMT, or 62
percent, were attributed to residential development (37.4 + 60.1 = 62 percent).
This amount included any trip that started or ended at a home (home-work,
home-school, home-college, and home-other).
3. Multiplying the results of steps #1 and #2 resulted in 16 percent of total VMT in
the County in 2030 attributed to new, residential development (0.27 x 0.62 = 16
percent).
6 San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), Pinal 2030. Regional Transportation PIa,t, MobilifY 2030
(February 2005), Technical Appendix 7 - Evaluation Criteria and R=kings, Table TA 7.1, p. 105.
lBMun;Rnancial
NOflember 26,2007
5-153
3
Page 65
San Diego Association of Governments
RTGP Impact Fee NeXNS Study
4. As of 2000, SANDAG and local agencies had identified improvements for 710
additional lane miles to complete the Regional Arterial System. At a cost of $5.1
million per lane mile (in 2002 dollars) this equals a total cost of $3.6 billion (710
x $5.1 million = $3.6 billion).
5. If all development, existing and new, paid a proportionate share of this cost new
residential development's share would be $593 million (0.16 x $3.6 billion =
$593 million).
6. Allocating the new residential development share over a projected increase in
dwelling units of 320,000 from 2000 to 2030 yielded a cost per unit of slighrly
less than $2,000 ($593 million + 320,000 = $1,853).
The methodology described above and employed by SANDAG to calculate the RTCIP
assumes that all development, existing and new has the same impact on the need for RAS
improvements based. on the amount of travel demand generated (vehicle trips). Thus existing
and new development should share proportionately in the cost of transportation system
improvements. For descriptive purposes this can be considered an "average cost" approach.
The "average cost" approach probably results in a lower fee and is therefore more
conservative and defensible compared to other approaches used for impact fee nexus
analysis. The "average cost" approach does not focus on the marginal impacts of new
development on congestion. A "marginal cost" approach examines the cost of additional
transportation improvements needed to mitigate impacts by maintaining existing levels of
services. Based on our experience preparing transportation fee studies, this "marginal cost"
approach would probably result in allocating to new development a greater share of planned
transportation system improvements compared to the "average cost" approach. The
approach used by SANDAG to justify the RTCIP impact fee is therefore more conservative.
I!lMuniHnancial
lVo!1(!171/m" 26,2007
4
Page 66
5-154
San Diego Auociation 0/ Gowrnments
RTaP Impact Fee Nexus Stlldy
Figure 1
Regional Arterial System
~................................
aJII
.........
(-
~=ll
Q>Qnt)'ds..Diego
umnnSTA1tS
......
BMuniFrnancial
I\,To/1('1Jlber 26,2007
5-155
5
Page 67
2. NEXUS ANALYSIS
This chapter documents a reasonable relationship between increased travel demand from
new development on the Regional Arterial System (RAS), the cost of RAS improvements
needed to accommodate that growth, and an impact fee to fund those investments.
ApPROACH
Impact fees are calculated to fund the cost of facilities required to accommodate growth.
The four steps followed in any development impact fee study and described in detail in the
sections that follow include:
1. Prepare growth projections;
2. Identify facility standards;
3. Determine the amount and cost of facilities required to accommodate new
development based on facility standards and growth projections;
4. Calculate the public facilities fee by allocating the total cost of facilities per unit
of development.
Due to policy considerations SANDAG indicated that the nexus study should employ the
same "average cost" approach used in the initial fee calculation to the greatest extent
technically defensible under the Mitigation Fee Act. Consistent with the initial SANDAG
approach, the need for RAS improvements determined by this nexus study is based on the
relative amount of travel demand generated by all existing and new, residential and
nonresidential, development. As mentioned above (see page 3), this is a conservative
approach because a more detailed impact analysis probably would result in allocating to new
development a greater share of planned RAS improvements.
The analysis required for each of the four steps listed above is conducted on a countywide
basis consistent with SANDAG's initial fee calculation. We updated certain assumptions
with more recent data when available. The approach takes a countywide perspective because
the RAS represents a countywide network that facilitates mobility between and through cities
and unincorporated areas. New development, regardless of location, both adds congestion
(increased vehicle trips) to a range of artetials within the RAS and benefits from the
expenditure of fee revenue on a range of RAS facilities.
GROWTH PRO.JECTIONS
This section describes the SANDAG forecast for population and employment, and estimates
of land use in terms of dwelling units and nonresidential building square feet. Land use
forecasts are converted to vehicle trips to provide a measure of travel demand (further
discussed below).
IIlIMunW""""",,
f\Towmber 26,2007
6
Page 68
5-156
San Diego Associatz"on of Governments
RTCIP Impact Fee Nexus 51lidy
Population, Employment, and Land Use
The planning horizon for this analysis is 2030, consistent with current land use and
transportation forecasts adopted by SANDAG. The nexus analysis uses forecasts of dwelling
units and employment to estimate new development demand for transportation
improvements. Forecasts for 2030 are from SANDAG's Urban Development Model
(UDM). The UDM is one of four interrelated forecasting models used by SANDAG to
project land use and transportation for the region.! The UDM allocates changes in the
region's economic and demographic characteristics to jurisdictions and other geographic
areas within the region. The model is based on the spatial interrelationships among
economic factors, housing and population factors, land use patterns, and the transportation
system. The model generates 2030 forecasts for small geographic areas including the traffic
analysis zones used in the transportation modeling process. The UDM complies with federal
mandates that transportation plans consider the long-range effects of the interaction
between land uses and the transportation system.
The initial SANDAG fee calculation used 2002 as the base year for cost estimates so that is
the base year used for this nexus analysis. Dwelling units and employment for 2002 are based
on interpolations of development estimates for 2000 and 2005 from the UDM model. Total
employment was allocated to land use categories based on analysis of employment by land
use using data from five counties and conducted for the Southern California Association of
Governments.
Table 1 lists the 2002 and 2030 land use assumptions based on SANDAG forecasts and
used in the nexus analysis. The land use categories shown in Table 1 and used in this nexus
analysis are the same that are used in the SANDAG forecasts with one exception. This
nexus analysis includes mobile homes in the multi-family category because of the minimal
amount of forecast mobile home development. SANDAG forecasts mobile homes to
increase by 2,000 units during the planning horizon, or 1.3 percent of forecast growth in
multi-family units.
The employment forecasts are converted to building square footage shown in Table 1 by
land use using occupant densities factors shown in Table 2. These factors are derived from a
study of employment, building square feet, and land use conducted for the Southern
California Association of Governments (SCAG). The density factors were derived from a
random sample of 2,721 parcels drawn from across five counties (Los Angeles, Orange,
Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura). We could not identify such a study for San Diego
County. The SCAG study's density factors are based on the largest sample of properties that
we are aware of, and are used in development impact fee studies throughout the State.
1 For more information on SANDAG's economic, demographic, and transportation forecasting models. see
San Diego Association of Governments, Final2030 Forecast Process and Model Documentation, April 2004.
IlIIlMuniF01anCiaI
J:\TOllembcl' 26,2007
5-157
7
Page 69
San Diego Arsodation of Governments
RTOP Impact Pee Nexus S tUfty
Table 1: Population, Employment & land Use Forecasts
2002 2030 Increase Percent
Residents 2,909,000 3,855,000 946,000 33%
Dwelling Units
Single Family 648,000 778,000 130,000 20%
Multi-family' 419,000 576,000 157,000 37%
Total 1,067,000 1,354,000 287,000 27%
2
Employment
Retail 295,000 393,000 98,000 33%
Office/Services 348,000 451,000 103,000 30%
Industrial 383,000 628,000 245,000 64%
Subtotal 1,026,000 1,472,000 446,000 43%
Residential3 138,000 149,000 11,000 8%
Public' 139,000 157,000 29,000 ~%
Total 1,303,000 1,778,000 475,000 36%
Building Square Feet (000S)5
Retail 148,000 197,000 49,000 33%
Office/Services 104,000 135,000 31,000 30%
Industrial 345 000 565 000 220,000 64%
Total 597,000 897,000 300,000 50%
1 Multi-family population includes mobile homes.
2 Based on Series 10 forecast data provided by SANDAG. Estimates by major land use type rolled up from County
Assessor's categories. Interpolated 2008 data based on 2005 and 2010 forecasts.
3 Employment on residential land uses such as home-based businesses. Travel demand included in estimates for
residential land uses.
4 Travel demand caused by public land uses so excluded from nexus analysis.
5 Based on occupant density factors shown in Table 2.
Sources: San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) Data Warehouse (http:datawarehouse.sandag. org),
SANDAG Series 10 forecast of employment by land use; MuniFinancial.
llMuniFinancial
l\ToIJet71ber 26,2007
8
Page 70
5-158
San Diego As.rociation ofGovernmentJ
RTOP Impact Fee N,xus Study
Table 2: Occupant Density
Land Use
Commercial
Office/Services
Industrial'
500 Square feet per employee
300 Square feet per employee
900 Square feet per employee
Note: Source data based on random sample of 2,72-1 developed parcels across
five Los Angeles area counties (Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino,
and Ventura). MuniFinancial estimated weighting factors by land use categories
used in the survey to calculate average employment densities by major category
(commercial, office, industrial).
1 Adjusted to correct for over-sampling of industrial parcels in Ventura County.
Source: The Natelsan Company, Inc., Employment Density Study Summary
Report, prepared for the Southern California Association of Governments;
October 31, 2001, Table 2-A, p. 15. MuniFinanciaL
Travel Demand By Land Use Category
To estimate travel demand by type ofland use the nexus study uses vehicle trips rather than
vehicle miles traveled (VM1) that were used in the initial SANDAG calculation. Vehicle
trips can be calculated in a consistent manner across land use categories based on population
and employment estimates by land use category. This enables the impact of development to
be distinguished between land use categories, a key requirement of the Mitigation Fee Act.
VMT, on the other hand, is available from transportation models only for a limited number
of "production and attraction" categories: home-work, home-school, home-college, home-
other, and non-home.
A reasonable measure of vehicle trips is weekday average daily vehicle trips ends. Because
automobiles are the predominant source of traffic congestion, vehicle trips are a reasonable
measure of demand for new capacity even though the measure excludes demand for
alternative modes of transportation (transit, bicycle, pedestrian).
The following two adjustments are made to vehicle trip generation rates to better estimate
travel demand by type of land use:
· Pass-by trips are deducted from the trip generation rate. Pass-by trips are
intermediates stops between an origin and a final destination that require no
diversion from the route, such as stopping to get gas on the way to work.
· The trip generation rate is weighted by the average length of trips for a specific
land use category compared to the average length of all trips on the street system.
Table 3 shows the calculation of travel demand factors by land use category based on the
adjustments described above. Data is based on extensive and detailed trip surveys conducted
in the San Diego region by SANDAG. The surveys provide a robust database of trip
generation rates, pass-by trips factors, and average trip length for a wide range of land uses.
I1lMunO'inanclal
l\lo/Jembef" 26,2007
5-159
9
Page 71
San Diego AsIociation ofGovemments RTCIP Impact Fee Nexu, Study
Table 3: Travel Demand Factors
E"'CxDI
A B C=A+B 0 6.S F G "'Ex F
TriD Rate Adiustment Factor
Total Average Adjust- Average Travel
Primary Diverted Excluding Trip ment Daily Trip Demand
Trips1 Tri S1 Pass-b 1 Len th2 Factor' Ends' Factor'
Residential:
Single Family 86% 11% 97% 7.9 1.11 10 11.10
Multi-famill 86% 11% 97% 7.9 1.11 8 8.88
Nonresidential ~
Commercial 47% 31% 78% 3.6 0.41 68 27.88
Office/Services 77% 19% 96% 8.8 .1.22 20 24.40
Industrial 79% 19% 98% 9.0 1.28 8 10.24
1 Percent of total trips. Primal)' trips are trips with no midway stops, or "links". Diverted trips are linked trips whose distance adds at least one
mile to the primary trip. Pass-by trips are links that do not add more than one mile to the total trip.
2ln miles.
3 Systemwide average trip length is 6.9 miles.
4 Trip ends or travel demand per dwellfng unit or per 1,000 building square feel
5 Single family based on 3-6 units per acre category. MultHamily based on 6-20 units per acre category.
6 Multi-family deman factos include mobile homes. The combined average daily trip ends calculation multiplies 2002 population by average
daily trip ends for both muiti~family and mobile homes and then weights the sum by the 2002 population.
7 Commercial based on "community shopping center" category. Office/services based on "standard commercial office" categol)'. Industrial
based on "industrial park (no commercial)" category.
Sources: San Diego Association of Govemm8flts, Brief Guide of Vehicular Trafflc Generation Rates for the San Diego Region, July 1998;
Shifting Burden of Commercial Development to Residential
Development
Applying the travel demand factots shown in Table 3 directly to development by land use
category implicitly assumes that the cause of each vehicle trip on the transportation network
is shared equally by the land use at each trip end (origin and destination). But depending on
the regional economic forces affecting development in a particular area, the cause of a trip
may be related more to the land use at the origin or the destination. For example, in some
areas residential development may be caused by job growth, while in other areas the
opposite may occur Gobs follow housing). These cause and effect relationships may change
over time in the same area. Given the complexity of these regional economic and land use
relationships, most.transportation impact fee nexus studies make the simplifying but
reasonable assumption to weight the origin and destination of a trip equally when identifying
the cause of travel demand on a transportation system.
However, there is one regional economic and land use cause and effect relationship that
remains consistent across geographical areas and over time. Commercial development is to a
jarge extent caused by the spending patterns of local residents. Commercial development
follows residential development or anticipates new development occurring in the near term.
This development pattern can be observed throughout metropolitan regions and is driven by
the site location process followed by retailers. When seeking new locations, the most
common measure of a potential market used by site location analysts is the number of
BMuniFinanciaI
November 26,2007
10
Page 72
5-160
S a11 Diego As.roaation of Government.r
RTOP Impact Fee Nexus Study
households within a reasonable driving distance for shopping trips and the median income
of those households.
Given this consistent regional economic and land use cause and effect relationship, it is
reasonable to allocate at least some of the burden of commercial trip ends to residential
development. This approach is used in impact fee nexus studies to more accurately allocate
the burden of transportation improvements needed to accommodate growth.2
Not all retail spending is related to local residential development. By "local" we mean
residents (or businesses) located within the area subject to the impact fee. There are three
major sources of retail spending:
1. Local households;
2. Local businesses; and
3. Visitors that travel to the area to shop.
The RTCIP impact fee is limited to residential development so the focus of this nexus study
was shifting the appropriate share of travel demand from commercial to residential
development. The demand for commercial development by local businesses was not
identified.
To determioe the amount of commercial development associated with residential
development we conducted an analysis of taxable retail sales data for 2004, the most recent
complete year of data available from the State Board of Equalization. The analysis calculated
the total spending potential of San Diego County households and estimated what portion of
that spending occurred within the County. The result was that 62.6 percent of total taxable
retail sales was estimated to be associated with local household spending. The remainder was
associated with local business and visitor spending. Based on this analysis, residential
development direcdy causes 62.6 percent of commercial development. Consequendy, the
travel demand associated with that share of commercial development is shifted to residential
development.
The results of this analysis are summarized in Table 4 and presented in detail in Appendix
B.
Total Travel Demand By Land Use Category
Table 5 shows estimates of travel demand from existing and new development and the
shares that residential and nonresidential development comprise of the total. Travel demand
is based on the travel demand factors calculated in Table 3 and the growth estimates in Table
1. Commercial development associated with local household spending as shown in Table 4 is
included in the residential land use category. Based on this analysis new residential
development will represent about 13 percent of total travel demand in 2030.
2 See Economic and Planning Systems. Inc.. Infrastructure Financing Technical &port Southwe.rt Area Pian, prepared
for the City of Santa Rosa Department of Community Development, January 1995, p.28. See also Economic
and Planning Systems, Inc., Road Impact Mitigation Fee Nexu.r Stu&, prepared for the Calaveras Council of
Goverrunents, April 28, 2004, p.20.
IllMunmancia'
Nowmber 26,2007
5-161
11
Page 73
San Diego Association of Governments
RTGP Impact Fee Nexus Study
Table 4: Allocation of Taxable Retail Spending & Commercial Sq. Ft.
in San Die 0 Coun
Taxable
Retail Sales
2004 Share
Buildina Sauare Feet
2002
2025
Growth
Total Taxable Retail Spending & Commercial Sq. Ft.
$44,470,000
100.0% 148,000 197,000 49,000
Local Residential Taxable Spending & Sq. Ft.
Local Business and Visitor Taxable Spending & Sq. Ft.
27,856,000
16,614,000
62.6%
37.4%
93,000
55,000
123,000
74,000
30,000
19,000
Sources: Tables 1 and 8.4: MunlRnancial.
Table 5: Travel Demand From Existin and New Develo ment
Oevelooment
Travel Demand
Travel Demand Growth1 Existing
Land Use Cate 0 Factor' 2002-2030 2002) Total
Residential
Single Family 11.10 648,000 130,000 7,193,000 1,443,000 8,636,000
Multi-family4 8.88 419,000 157,000 3,721,000 1,394,000 5,115,000
Local-serving Commercials 27.88 93,000 30,000 2,593,000 836 000 3,429,000
Subtotal 1,160,000 317,000 13,507,000 3,673,000 17,180,000
Percent of Total 47.7% 13.0% 60.7%
Nonresidential
Other Commercials 27.88 55,000 19,000 1,533,000 530,000 2,063,000
OfficeJServices 24.40 104,000 31,000 2,538,000 756,000 3,294,000
Industrial 10.24 345 000 220,000 3 533 000 2 253 000 5786,000
Subtotal 1,757,000 617,000 7,604,000 3,539,000 11,143,000
Percent of Total 26.8% 12.5% 39.3%
Total 21,111,001 7,212,000 28,323,000
Percent of Total 75.0% 25.0% 100.0%
t Per dwelling unil for residential land uses and per 1,000 square feet for nonresidential land uses.
" Dwelling units for residential land uses and 1.000 square feet for nonresidential land uses.
~ Estimated total trip ends adjusted for the factors shown in Table 3.
. The multi-family travel demand factor and demand calculations include mobUe homes.
3 Represents share 01 total commercial square feet and travel demand associated with spending by San DIego County households.
~ Represents share of total commerclal square feet aoo travel demand associated with spending by San DIego County businesses and visitors.
Source: Tables 1, 3 and 4; MunlFinancial.
FACILITIES STANDARD AND NEED FOR
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS
The critical policy issue in a development impact fee nexus study is the identification of a
facility standard. The facility standard detennines new development's need for new facilities.
The facility standard is also used to evaluate the existing level of facilities to ensure that new
development does not fund infrastructure needed to serve existing development.
The facility standard used by this nexus analysis is average weekday vehicle hours of delay on
the Regional Arterial System (RAS) in 2008. Hours of delay provide a reasonable system-
wide measure of the impact of new development on congestion and mobility. SANDAG's
IIllMuniFinancial
f\.TOfJel71ber 26,2007
12
Page 74
5-162
San Diego A.rsociation of Governments
RTGP Impact Fee Nexus Study
transportation forecasting model (TransCAD) demonstrates that hours of delay increase
with the level of new development, and decrease with investment in additional
transportation system capacity. Projected hours of delay in 2002 is used for the standard
because that is the implementation date for the RTCIP, representing existing conditions at
the time new development would begin contributing to transportation system
improvements.
The original RTCIP fee estimate was based on the need for 710 additional lane miles to
complete the RAS as of the year 2000 (see "Initial RTCIP Impact Pee Calculation" in
Chapter 1). Through 2002 the region added 73 lane miles to the RAS. This effort reduces the
level of investment needed to complete the RAS to 637 lane miles.
The data in Table 6 from the TransCAD model demonstrates a reasonable relationship
between new development and the need for additional investment in the RAS. The table
shows the projected increases in vehicle hours of delay from 2002 to 2030 and the benefits
of adding 637 lane miles to the RAS. Without any investment in the RAS vehicle hours of
delay will increase by 114 percent during this period. With an investment of 637 new lane
miles in regional arterials vehicle hours of delay will increase substantially less, by 68 percent.
Table 6: Regional Arterial System Roadway Statistics
Proiected 2030
Without With
Improvements Improvements
Exist; ng
2002
Lane Miles
Change, 2002-2030 (amount)
Change, 2002-2030 (percent)
2,805
2,805 3,442
637
0% 23%
137,481 108,350
73,129 43,998
114% 68%
Average Weekday Vehicle Hours of Delay
Change, 2002-2030 (amount)
Change, 2002-2030 (percent)
64,352
Note: 2002 data interpolated based on 2000 and 2005 data provided by model output (see Source).
Source: San Diego Association of Governments. TransCAD model output.
New development is not the entire cause of the forecasted increase in vehicle hours of delay.
As discussed above, new development is only allocated a share of RAS investment costs.
The SANDAG transportation model assumes that vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per capita
for all existing and new development will increase 9.6 percent from 2000 to 2030 continuing
recent trends.3 Thus some of the increased in vehicle hours of delay is caused by increased
travel from existing development. This trend does not affect the nexus analysis under the
"average cost" approach taken by this nexus analysis (see "Initial RTCIP Impact Fee
Calculation" in Chapter 1). Under this approach RAS investment costs are allocated
3 Email communication from Bill McFarlane, Transportation Modeling Section, San Diego Association of
Goverrunents, March 8, 2006.
IIMuniFinancial
lVolJember 26,2007
5-163
13
Page 75
San Diego Association of Governments
RTOP Impact Fee Nexus Study
proportionately across existing and new development based on total travel demand, thus
incorporating the impact of changes in travel behavior such as increased VMT per capita.
FACILITY COSTS AND AVAILABLE FUNDING
This section estimates total costs associated with RAS improvements that are the
responsibility of new development. The need for RTCIP funding based on available
revenues identified in the adopted 2005 RTF is evaluated. Finally, this section provides a
current list of specific projects identified for investment in the RAS.
Unit Cost Estimates and Total Facility Costs
For the purposes of this nexus analysis, facility costs are estimated in 2008 dollars, the first
year of implementation of the RTCIP. This subsection explains the approach taken to
increase unit costs from 2002 dollars to 2008 dollars.
Historically, SANDAG has assumed an annual increase of 2.6 percent for road construction
costs based on the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) construction cost
index average annual compounded rate from 1980-2004. In recent years that rate has risen
significandy and grown increasing volatile. To examine this issue SANDAG commissioned a
study in 2005 by URS, a private consulting firm, that examined a range of data on
transportation capital project cost inflation since 2002. The URS study recommended use of
several national highway construction cost indices to adjust transportation project cost
estimates for SANDAG's financial planning purposes. 4 These rates were used in the prior
version of this nexus study dated September 5, 2006.
Analysis of actual costs for road construction projects in the San Diego region conducted by
SANDAG staff during the past year has determined that the Calttans highway remains the
best indicator of local construction cost inflation. Indeed, the URS study recognized that
California's construction costs are higher than those in national indexes.S Consequendy this
nexus analysis returns to the use of the Caltrans construction cost index to inflate unit cost
estimate from 2002 dollars to 2008 dollars. Estimates for 2008 are based on Calttans index
data through 2007.
Annual Caltrans index data was available through 2006 at the time of this study. Index data
for 2007 should be available by February 2008 when SANDAG will inform local agencies of
the RTCIP impact fee amount that must be adopted by July 1, 2008 (see "Adoption By
Local Agencies" in Chapter 3). For the purposes of this study the 2007 index was estimated
based on the average annual compounded growth rate in the index for the ten-year period
from 1996 through 2006. A ten-year average was used because of the high volatility of the
index in recent years. The approach taken in this report is to estimate 2008 costs based on
inflation through 2007.
As shown in Table 7, the cost estimate for an arterial lane mile is estimated at $10.9 rnillion
in 2008 dollars. The total compounded increase from the 2002 is 115 percent. Total costs to
4 San Diego Association of Governments, Transportation Project Cost AnalYsis Gune 17, 2005) completed by URS,
p.8-1.
S Ibid., p. 4-1.
II!lMuniF"""",""
l"Jo/)('fJlber 26,200/
14
Page 76
5-164
San Diego As.rociation of Government.r
RTGP Impact Pee NI!XUJ Study
complete the arterial system are estimated at $7.0 billion based on this revised unit cost
estimate.
Table 7: Estimated Arterial System Capacity Investments
($2008)
Caltrans Inflation Rate
Year Index Annual Cummulative
2002 142.2 NA NA $
2003 148.6 4.50% 4.50%
2004 216.2 45.49% 52.04%
2005 268.3 24.10% 88.68%
2006 280.6 4.58% 97.32%
2007' 305.7 8.94% 114.96%
Cost
5,100,000
5,330,000
7,754,000
9,623,000
10,063,000
10,963,000
Regional Arterial Widenings & Extensions (lane miles) (2002-2030) 637
Total Regional Arterial System Capacity Investments (2002-2030)
(Est. $2008) $ 6,981,238,400
1 Annual inflation rate for 2007 was estimated using the ten-year compounded annual growth rate from 1996 to
2006 for the CalTrans highway construction annual cost index. The actual rate for 2007 will be upclated after
the annual index data is published by CalTrans on January 30th of 2008. '
Sources: San Diego Association of Governments, Final 2030 Regional Transportation Plan, Mobility 2030
(February 2005), Technical Appeicix 9. Project Cost Estimates, p. 159; California Dept. of Transportation,
Price Index for Selected Highway Constroction Items (Second Quarter Ending June 30, 2007); Table 6;
MuniFinancial.
Available RTP Funding
To justifY the need for the RTCIP impact fee, the fee should only be imposed to the extent
additional funding is needed to accommodate new development net of other anticipated
funding sources. The adopted 2005 RTF examined three funding and expenditure scenarios
described below.6 All dollars are in $2002 and are for the planning horizon 2002 to 2030.
· The Revenue Constrained scenario ($30 billion) was based on existing revenue
sources and did not assume extension of the TransNet sales tax.
· The Reasonably Expected scenario ($42 billion) was based on extension of the
TransNet sales tax ($8 billion) plus $4 billion more from higher levels of state
and federal discretionary funds and increases in state and federal gas taxes based
on historical trends.
· The Unconstrained Revenue scenario ($67 billion) was based on an analysis of
transportation system needs to 2030 and identified potential revenue sources but
did not specifY which ones to implement.
6 SANDAG. Pinal2030 Regional Tramportation Pkm, Mobility 2030 (February 2005), Chapter 4, pp. 35-53.
.MuniFinancial
1\'olJet1Jber 26,2007
5-165
15
Page 77
San Diego Association of Governments
RTCIP Impact Pee Nexus Study
SANDAG adopted the Reasonably Expected scenario. Under this scenario the adopted 2005
RTP invests $24.5 billion for projects that expand system capacity. Other improvements
totaling $17.5 billion would improve operations, maintenance, and rehabilitation of highway,
road, and transit, and related facilities. The adopted 2005 RTP expenditure plan is
summarized in Table 8, below.
Table 8: RTP Investment Plan, 2002-2030 ($2002)
$ Millions
($2002)
Capacity Expansion Investments
New Transit Facilities $ 8,500 20%
Managed High Occupancy Vehicle Lane Facilities 7,450 18%
Highway System CompletionlWidening Projects 3,580 9%
New Local Streets and Roads 4,430 11%
Regional Significant Arterials 500 1%
Subtotal $ 24,460 58%
Other Investments' 17.485 42%
Total Expenditures $ 41,945 100%
1 Includes projects that improve the operations, maintenance, and rehabilitation of highway, road,
and transit, and related facilities.
Source: San Diego Association of Governments, Final 2030 Regional Transportation Plan, Mobility
2030 (February 2005), p. 44; MuniFinancial.
As shown in Table 8, the adopted 2005 RTP allocates $500 million for investment in the
RAS. Under the Revenue Constrained and Unconstrained Revenue scenarios the total
allocation is $350 million and $700 million, respectively.7 Given the need for a $6.98 billion
total investment (Table 7), substantial additional resources are needed.
The adopted 2005 RTP indicates that local jurisdictions need to identify matching funds for
investment in the RAS because the regional funding provided through the adopted 2005
RTP:
. . .is intended to be matched with revenues from the local jurisdictions, which are
responsible for improving regional roadways and local streets to meet their residents
needs and mitigate the effects of local land use developments.8
7 Ibid., Table 4.3, p. 46, Table 4.5, p. 49.
8 Ibid., p. 103.
IIMuniFInancial
1'\[oPftJlber26,200;
16
Page 78
5-166
San DiegoA.rsociation ojCovernments
RTGP Impact Fee Nexus Study
The adopted 2005 RTP further indicates that a regional development impact fee as
contemplated by the RTCIP is one of the potential revenues sources for supplementing
adopted 2005 RTP resources.9
The funding assumptions discussed above are based on the most recendy adopted 2005 RTP
because the draft 2007 RTP has not been adopted as of the date of this report. These
assumptions are likely to vary in the final adopted 2007 RTP. However, the draft 2007 RTP
continues to indicate that funding is needed from the RTCIP to mitigate the impacts of new
development on the transportation system.
Specific RAS Improvement Projects
Table 9 shows the adopted 2005 RTP's initial planned improvements in the RAS. These
projects represent a $700 million investment under the Unconstrained Revenue scenario, or
136 additional lane miles at the 2002 cost estimate of $5.1 million per lane mile. Under the
adopted Reasonably Expected scenario the adopted 2005 RTP allocates $500 million,
sufficient to fund 98 additional lane miles in $2002. These projects are candidates for
funding with RTCIP contributions. Funding these improvements with the RTCIP would
enable RTCIP resources to expand improvements in the RAS towards full completion of the
system (637 lane miles from 2002 to 2030).
COST ALLOCATION AND FEE SCHEDULE
The vehicle trip rates described in the Growth Projections section, above, provide a means to
allocate a proportionate share of total RAS improvements to each new development project.
Trip rates are a reasonable measure of each development project's demand on the regional
transportation system. New development's share of total RAS improvements is divided by
total trips generated by new development to calculate a cost per trip. The cost per trip
multiplied by the trips generated by a development project determines that project's fair
share of total RAS improvements.
New development could contribute up to $320 per trip as shown in Table 10. This amount
is based on' the nexus approach taken for this analysis that allocates RAS costs to new
residential development based on shares of total travel demand in 2030. This approach is
based on allocating to residential development the entire burden of trips associated with
commercial development that serves households within the County (see earlier discussion
under "Shifting Burden of Commercial Development to Residential Development").
9 Ibid., p. 50.
IIMuniFrnancial
j\TofJember26,2007
5-167
17
Page 79
San Diego Association of Governments
RTGP Impact Fee N,xus Study
Table 9: Regionally Significant Planned Arterial Improvements
Arterial Limits Type Jurisdiction
Balboa Ave.
Bear Mountain Pkwy.
Black Mountain Rd.
Black Mountain Rd.
Cannon Rd.
Cannon Rd.
Cannon Rd.
Citracado Pkwy.
Citracado Pkwy.
College Ave.
College Ave.
Deer Springs Rd.
Del Dios Hwy.
East Valley Pkwy.
EI Camino Real
El Camino Real
EJ Camino Real
Friars Rd.
Friars Rd.
Genesee Ave.
Genesee Ave.
HStreet
Harbor Dr.
Heritage Rd.
Jamacha Blvd.
Kearny Villa Rd.
Manchester Ave.
Melrose Dr.
Melrose Dr.
Mission Ave.
Oceanside Blvd.
Siempre Viva Rd.
South Santa Fe Ave.
Torrey Pines Rd.
Twin Oaks Valley Rd.
Twin Oaks Valley Rd.
Via de la Valle
Vista Sorrento Pkwy.
Vista Way
Kearney Villa Rd. - Ruffin Rd. Widen
Canyon Rd. - Valley Pkwy. Widen
Mercy Rd. - Mira Mesa Bivd. Widen
Emden Rd. - Caramel Valley Rd. Extend
Hidden Valley Rd. - Frost Rd. Extend
EI Camino Real - Mystra Dr. Extend
Melrose Dr. - SR 78 Extend
1-15 - Scenic Trail Way Extend
Avenida Del Diablo - Vineyard Ave. Extend
Montezuma Rd. - Alvarado Widen
EI Camino Real- Cansbad Village Dr. Extend
1-15 - Twin Oaks Valley Rd. Widen
Via Rancho Pkwy. - Valley Pkwy. Widen
East Valley Blvd. - Bear Valley Pkwy. Widen
Camino Santa Fe - EJ Camino Real Widen
Manchester Ave. - Tamarack Ave. Widen
Tamarack Ave. - SR 76 Widen
Colusa St. - Lis Las Cumbres Widen
SR-163 - Frazee Rd. Widen
1-5 - Campus Point Dr. Widen
Osler St. - Marlesta Dr. Widen
Bonita Vista High - Otay Lakes Widen
Pacific Hwy. - California St. Widen
Airway Rd. - Siempre Viva Rd. Extend
Omega SI. - Pointe Pkwy. Widen
SR 52 - Ruffin Rd. Widen
1-5 - Lux Canyon Dr. Widen
Spur Ave. - N Santa Fe Ave. Extend
Aspen Way - Palomar Airport Rd. Extend
Enterprise SI. - Centre City Pkwy. Widen
Oceanside Blvd. - Rancho Del Oro Widen
Heritage Rd. - La Media Rd. Widen
Mar Vista Dr. - Bosstick Blvd. Widen
N. of Callan SI. - S. of Carmel VaHey Rd. Widen
Craven Rd. - Rancho Santa Fe Rd. Extend
Deer Springs Rd. - Craven Rd. Widen
Camino Santa Fe - El Camino Real Widen
Rose Coral Row - Sorrento Valley Blvd. Extend
Emerald Dr. - Melrose Dr. Widen
City of San Diego
City of Escondida
City of San Diego
City of San Diego
City of Cansbad
City of Cansbad
County of San Diego
City of Escondida
City of Escondida
City of San Diego
City of Carls bad
County of San Diego
City of Escondida
City of Escondida
City of San Diego
City of Cansbad
City of Oceanside
City of San Diego
City of San Diego
City of San Diego
City of San Diego
City of Chula Vista
City of San Diego
City of San Diego
County of San Diego
City of San Diego
City of Encinitas
City of Oceanside
City of Carlsbad
City of Escondido
City of Oceanside
City of San Diego
County of San Diego
City of San Diego
City of San Marcos
City of San Marcos
City of San Diego
City of San Diego
City of Vista
Source: San Diego Association of Governments, Fina/2030 Regional Transportation Plan, Mobility 2030 (Febrosry 2005), Technical
Appendix 9 - Proiect Cost Estimates, P. 160.
IIlIMunF_
1'-TolJembel' 26,2007
5-168
18
Page 80
San Diego Association of Governments
RTCIP Impact Fee Nexus Study
Table 10: Residential Cost per Trip (Estimated for $2008)
Allocation of Total Costs to Residential Land Uses
Total Regional Arterial System Investments ($2008)
New Residential Development Share of Total Trips
New Residential Development Share of Total Costs
$ 6,981,238,400
13.0%
$ 907,561,000
New Residential Vehicle TriDs 12002-20301
Single Family
Multi-family'
Total New Residential Vehicle Trips
1,443,000
1,394,000
2 837 000
New Residential Development Cost per Trip (Est. $2008)
$
320
, Multi-family travel demand factor and demand calculations include mobile homes.
Tables 5 and 7; MuniFinancial.
The cost per trip of $320 is estimated in 2008 dollars the first year for implementation of the
RTCIP. As explained in the "Facility Costs and Available Funding" section above this
estimate is based on actual Caltrans construction cost index data through 2006 and an
estimate for 2007.
The RTCIP specifies that new development must contribute $2,000 per dwelling unit. A
single fee for all dwelling units may not adequately ensure a reasonable relationship between
each new development project's proportionate share of total improvements and the amount
of the fee. Separate fees by major residential land use category based on trip generation rates
would more likely fulfill this statutory requirement.10
To test whether the required RTCIP contribution of $2,000 per unit is justified for different
types of units, Table 11 provides a fee schedule by major residential land use category based
on the calculated RTCIP cost per trip from Table 10. As explained above in the "Growth
Projections" section mobile homes are forecast separately by SANDAG but because of the
extremely limited number they have been included in the multi-family land use category. The
fee ranges from a low of $2,842 for multi-family units to a high of $3,552 for single family
units. The average fee per dwelling unit is $3,164. The impact fee required by the RTCIP of
$2,000 per residential unit is therefore well below the amount justified under the Mitigation
Fee Act for major residential land use categories.
10 Mitigation Fee Act, California Government Code, 566001(b).
IIMuniFlllancial
I\JOllt'17lbc,,26,2007
5-169
19
Page 81
San Diego Arsodation of Governments
RTOP Impact Fee Nexus Study
Table 11: RTCIP Impact Fee (Estimated for $2008)
Trip New
Demand Development
Factor Fee' (dwelling units)
Cost Per
Trip
Estimated
Revenue2
Land Use
Single Family $ 320 11.10 $ 3,552 130,000 $ 461,760,000
Multi-family' 320 8.88 2,842 157,000 446,194,000
Total Estimated Revenue $ 907,954,000
Total New Dwelling Units (2006-2030) 287.000
Weighted Average RTCIP Impact Fee Per Dwelling Unit (Est. $2008) $ 3,184
1 Fee per dwelling unit.
2 Numbers may vary due to rounding.
3 Multi-family travel demand factor and demand calculations include mobile homes.
Sources: Tables 1, 3 and 10; MuniFinancial.
EXTENSION OF' RTCI P TO NONRESIDENTIAL LAND
USES
The RTCIP specifically exempts all nonresidential development. However, one option for
increasing contributions from new development for RAS improvements would be to apply
the RTCIP to nonresidential development as well. Table 12 shows new development's total
investment in the RAS that could be made under this approach.
A fee schedule by major nonresidential land use category based on the calculated RTCIP
cost per trip from Table 12 is shown in Table 13. Fees per 1,000 building square feet range
from a low of $2,519 for industrial and $2,704 for commercial and to a high of $6,002 for
office/ services.
.MuniFonan""
November 26,2001
20
Page 82
5-170
San Diego Auociation of Govmtment,r
RTCIP Impact Fee NeXUJ StUffy
Table 12: Nonresidential Cost Der TriD (Estimated for $2008)
OffIce/Services & Industrial
Commercial
New NonrA.<:identia/ Develooment Share of Total Trias
Commercial1
Office/Services
Industrial
New Nonresidential Vehide Trips (2002-2030) t
Total Vehicle Trips (2030)1
New Nonresidential Development Share
NA
756,000
2 253 000
3,009,000
28 323 000
10.6%
530,000
NA
!!Ie>
530,000
283'-3000
1.9%
Allocation of Tota' Casts to Nonresidential Land Uses
Total Regional Arterial System Investments ($2008)
New Nonresidential Development Share of Total Trips
New Nonresidential Development Share of Total Costs
$ 6,981,238,400 $ 6,981,238,400
.1.Q.lli l.lli
$ 740,011,000 $ 132,644,000
NA 1,366,000
756,000 NA
2 253 000 !!Ie>
3 009 000 1366 noo
$ 246 $ 97
New Nonresidential Vehicle Trio.<: f'200'2-'2030J
Commercial2
Office/Services
Industrial
Total Nonresidential Vehicle Trips (2030)1
Cost per Trip (Est $2008)
I For the purpose of determmmg new commel'Clal developmenfs fair share of total costs, trips exdude those assocateld With spendIng by local (San Diego County)
resdients. Commerciel trips associated with local residentisl spending are used to allocat. total costs to residential development (set! Tabie 10).
2 Includes local and regional commercial trips. It would be inpradical to identify on a project..tly-projec\ basis that portion of new commercial development :associsted only
with non-local residential spending. Therekml, new commercial development's fair share of total costa is allocated ac:roas all new commercial vehicle trips (see Table 5).
Tables 5 and 7; MunlFinencial.
Table 13: Nonresidential Impact Fee (Estimated for $2008)
Trip New
Demand Development
Factor Fee 1 (ks/)
Cost Per
Trip
Estimated
Revenue
Land Use
Commercial
Office/Services
Industrial
$
97
246
246
27.88 $
24.40
10.24
2,704
6,002
2,519
49,000 $
31,000
220,000
132,496,000
186,062,000
554 180.000
Total Estimated Revenue (Est. $2008).
$ 872,738,000
1 Fee per 1,000 square feet
Sources: Tables 1, 3 and 10; MuniFinancial.
.MuniF<nancial
.i.'\J0I~mb('1'26, 2007
5-171
21
Page 83
3. IMPLEMENTATION
Local agencies need to adopt a "Funding Program" to implement the RTCIP.l The Funding
Program must generate the funding per new residential unit required by the RTCIP. This
chapter provides guidance on use of this nexus study by local agencies to implement a
Funding Program and comply with the RTCIP. "Local agencies" includes all cities in the
County plus the County of San Diego for development in the unincorporated area.
The guidance provided in this study is not a substitute for legal advice and all local agencies
should consult with their legal counsel regarding compliance with the Mitigation Fee Act VIet).
Local agencies are hereby put on notice that the findings and guidance in this study are
generalized, and were created for use as a framework to be tailored by each local agency.
SANDAG disclaims any responsibility for any liability to users of this study, or any other
party, for any loss or damages, consequential or otherwise, including but not limited to time,
money, or goodwill, arising from the use, operation or modification of the information in
the study. In using this report, local agencies further agree to indemnify, defend, and hold
harmless SANDAG, its officers and employees, for any and all liability of any nature arising
out of or resulting from use of the study. Distribution of this study shall not constitute any
warranty by SANDAG.
ADOPTION By LOCAL AGENCIES
Adoption Schedule
To meet the requirements of the Act and the July 1, 2008 RTCIP deadline, local agencies will
need to adopt the RTCIP impact fee by May 1, 2008. This allows for the sixty-day period
required under California Government Code section 60017 of the Act between the date of
adoption and the date the fee becomes effective. The same section of the Act includes
certain notice and public hearing requirements as well that each local agency must follow.
Legal counsel should also advise on timelines, hearings requirements, and all other actions
required for fee adoption by the Act.
A checklist for the initial adoption of the RTCIP with a schedule of steps required for
implementation is included in Appendix C of this study. The checklist is tided, "RTCIP
Impact Fee Initial Adoption - Local Agency Implementation Checklist."
Ordinance, Resolution, and Nexus Study
Local agencies may need to adopt an ordinance and resolution to implement the fee. The
ordinance would provide the authority for the agency to impose the RTCIP impact fee. The
resolution would specify the fee amount. Setting the fee by resolution avoids having to
amend the local agency's municipal code whenever the fee must be adjusted, facilitating
annual updates to the fee for cost inflation.
1 San Diego Association of Governments, TransNet Extrnsion Regional Transportation Congestion Improvement
Program, Sec. A.
EiMuniFlnancial
NOJH:17,ber26,2007
22
Page 84
5-172
San Diego A.rsodation of Governments
RTGP Impact Fee N,xus Study
To adopt the initial fee of $2,000 per residential unit the local agency fee resolution may
reference this nexus study for documentation of the findings required by the Act.
The local agency may reference this nexus study to support adoption of a fee on residential
development up to the maximum amounts shown in Tables 11. The adopted fee should be
no higher than the levels indicated in the table by land use category. Fee revenues should
only be used for the purposes described in this report. For the purposes of this study "single
family" includes projects at net development densities of six or fewer units per acre (see
Table 3, footnote 5). "Multi-family" includes projects at net development densities of over
six units per acre.
To facilitate integration with existing fee schedules, there are several conditions under which
the local agency's fee schedule may vary while still referencing this nexus study for
documentation of the findings required under the Act.
· The fee schedule shown in Table 11 may be applied to single family and multi-
family land use categories that do not vary substantially from the definition of
those categories used in this nexus study. For example the "break point" between
the definition of single and multi-family may be at a different development
density level.
· The fee may be applied to different residential land use categories, e.g.
condominiums or mobile homes, using the cost per trip calculated in the this
nexus study (see Table 10 for the cost per trip). The trip rate used to calculate the
fee should reasonably reflect travel demand generated by new development
within the land use category.
Local agencies must conduct a separate nexus study if the conditions described above are
not met.
Applying Fee To Nonresidential Development
The local agency may also apply an impact fee to nonresidential development to fund
improvements to the RAS. However, as mentioned above in the Nexus AnalYsis chapter,
expansion of the RTCIP Funding Program to nonresidential development is not a
requirement of the TransNet ordinance and is not necessary for a local agency to implement
the RTCIP. If the agency chooses to apply the fee to nonresidential development and adopts
the fee schedule as shown in Table 13, above, then the fee resolution can reference this
nexus study and the local agency does not have to conduct a separate study. If the local
agency adopts a different nonresidential fee schedule then the agency will need to conduct a
new nexus study to justify the nonresidential fee.
INF"LATION ADJUSTMENT
The initial RTCIP funding requirement of $2,000 per new dwelling unit will apply upon
initial adoptions of the fee in 2008. The TransNet ordinance provides for an annual inflation
adjustment to the RTCIP impact fee onJuly 1 of each year beginning in 2009.2 The inflation
2 San Diego Association of Govem.ments, TransNet Extension Regional Transportation Congestion Improvement
Program, Sec. C
IIMuniFlllanCiaI
lVo/Jf1JIbef'26,2007
23
5-173
Page 85
San Diego.Auociation ofGowrnmmtJ
RTOP Impact Fee Nexus Stu&
adjustment will be two percent or based on tbe Caltrans highway construction cost index,
whichever is higher. SANDAG may choose to use a different cost index. Each local agency
will need to adjust their RTCIP impact fee annually.
A checklist for tbe annual update and a five-year update of tbe RTCIP fees along with a
schedule of steps required for implementation is included in Appendix C. This checklist is
tided, "RTCIP Impact Fee Annual and Five-Year Update - Local Agency Implementation
Checklist."
COLLECTION AND ADMINISTRATION
Each local agency will be responsible for the collection, administration, and expenditure of
RTCIP impact fee revenues generated within its jurisdiction. Fee revenues should be placed
in a separate fund and administered pursuant to tbe requirements of tbe Act. For example,
interest earnings on fund balances need to be credited to the fund. In addition, tbe Act
requires tbat the local agency provide specific information regarding fee revenues and
expenditures annually and every five years in a public report.3
The Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee (ITOC), created for the TransNet
program, is responsible for reviewing local agency implementation of tbe RTCIP. Each local
agency must submit their Funding Program for review by the ITOC by Apcll, 2008. The
ITOC must review and audit each local agency's program annually. The reporting
requirements required by the Act should be sufficient to meet tbe ITOC's needs in this
regard. If a local agency does not comply with the RTCIP the agency can lose TransNet sales
tax funding for local roads.
Local agencies and SANDAG can fund the administrative costs of the RTCIP with a charge
added to the RTCIP impact fee. The RTCIP allows up to three percent of program revenues
to be used for program administration.4 SANDAG anticipates adding a one percent
administrative charge to the RTCIP fee to fund costs related to tbe ITOC. Local agencies
may add up to two percent for tbeir program administration costs. These charges are similar
to any otber user fees imposed by local agencies and are not subject to tbe Act. These
charges must be justified based on the actual program administration costs of each agency.
Agencies should keep cost records and adjust the administrative charge as appropriate based
on actual costs.
USE OF" REVENUES
RTCIP impact fee revenues must be expended on improvements to tbe RAS in a manner
consistent with tbe expenditure priorities in tbe most recent adopted RTF. Fee revenues may
not be expended on road maintenance. RTCIP impact fee revenues may be used for any
capital costs associated with improving the RAS including costs associated witb:
3 California Government Code, 5566001(d) and 66006(b).
4 San Diego Association of Governments, TransNet Extension &giona! Transportation Congestion Improvement
Program, Sec. D(2).
IlllMun;F_
Nopember 26.2007
24
Page 86
5-174
San Diego Association of Governments
RTClP Impact Pee Nexus 51.&
. Arterial widenings, extensions, and turning lanes;
. Traffic signal coordination and other traffic improvements;
. Reconfigured freeway-arterial interchanges;
. Railroad grade separations; and
. Expanded regional express bus service.
Costs funded by the RTCIP impact fee may include project administration and management,
design and engineering, right-of-way acquisition, and construction. The RTCIP requires that
each local agency expend revenues within seven years of receipt or have an expenditure plan
that justifies keeping revenues for a longer period.5 The Act has a similar requirement with a
five years limitation unless there is an expenditure plan that justifies keeping revenues for a
longer period.
EXEMPTIONS
The RTCIP program exempts the following residential development from the impact fee:6
. New moderate, low, very low, and extremely low income residential units as
defined in Health & Safety Code sections 50079.5, 50093, 50105, 50106, and by
reference in Government Code section 65585.1;
. Government/public buildings, public schools and public facilities;
. Rehabilitation and/or reconstruction of any legal, residential structure and/ or the
replacement of a previously existing residential unit;
. Development projects subject to development agreements prior the effective
date of the TransNet ordinance (May 28, 2004) that expressly prohibit the
imposition of new impact fees, however if the terms of the development
agreement are extended beyond July 1, 2008, the requirements of the RTCIP
shall apply;
. Guest dwellings;
. Additional residential units located on the same parcel regulated by the
provisions of any agricultural zoning;
. Kennels and catteries established in conjunction with an existing residential unit;
. The sanctuary building of a church, mosque, synagogue, or other house of
worship eligible for property tax exemption;
. Residential units that have been issued a building petrnit prior to July 1, 2008;
and
. Condominium conversions.
5 Ibid., Sec. G( 4).
6Ibid, Sec. E.
lilMun;F_
NO/Jembl!1" 26,2007
,-
"J
Page 87
5-175
4. MITIGATION FEE ACT FINDINGS
Development impact fees are one-time fees typically paid when a building permit is issued
and imposed on development projects by local agencies responsible for regulating land use
(cities and counties). To guide the widespread imposition of public facilities fees, the State
Legislature adopted the Mitigation Fee Act (Ad) with Assembly Bill 1600 in 1987 and
subsequent amendments. The Act, contained in CalifOrnia Government Code Sections 66000
through 66025, establishes requirements on local agencies for the imposition and
administration of fee programs. The Act requires local agencies to document five findings
when adopting a fee.
Sample text that may be. used for the five statutory findings required for adoption of the
RTCIP impact fee are presented in this chapter and supponed in detail by the Nexus AnalYsis
chapter of this repon. All statutory references below are to the Act. This sample framework
for the mitigation fee act findings is only to provide local agencies with guidance and is not a
substitute for legal advice. Local agencies should customize the findings for their jurisdiction
and consult with their legal counsel prior to adoption of the RTCIP impact fee.
PURPOSE OF FEE
For the first finding the local agency must:
Identify the purpose of the fee. (~66001(a)(1))
SANDAG policy as expressed through the TransNet Extension Ordinance and Expenditure
Plan (Commission Ordinance 04-01) is that new development shall contribute towards the
Regional Anerial System (RAS) through the Regional Transportation Congestion
Improvement Program (RTCIP). The purpose of the RTCIP impact fee is to implement this
policy. The fee advances a legitimate public interest by enabling SANDAG to fund
improvements to transponation infrastructure required to accommodate new development.
USE OF FEE REVENUES
For the second finding the local agency must:
Identify the use to which the fee is to be put. If the use is financing public facilities,
the facilities shall be identified. That identification may, but need not, be made by
reference to a capital improvement plan as specified in Section 65403 or 66002, may
be made in applicable general or specific plan requirements, or may be made in other
public documents that identify the public facilities for which the fee is charged.
(~66001(a)(2))
The RTCIP impact fee will fund eXpanded facilities on the Regional Anerial System (RAS)
to serve new development. These facilities include:
.
Roadway widening;
· Roadway extension;
· Traffic signal coordination and other traffic improvements;
liI!IlMuniF<nancial
J."'\!olJenlber26,2007
5-176
26
Page 88
San Diego Arsodation of Governments
RTOP Impact Pee Nexus StJlriy
.
Freeway interchanges and related freeway improvements;
Railroad grade separations; and
.
. Improvements required for regional express bus and rail transit.
Costs for planned traffic facilities are preliminarily identified in this report. Costs funded by
the RTCIP impact fee may include project administration and management, design and
engineering, right-of-way acquisition, and construction. More detailed descriptions of
planned facilities, including their specific location, if kriown at this time, are shown in the
SANDAG's Regional Transportation Plan and other documents. Local agencies implementing
the RTCIP may change the list of planned improvements to meet changing circumstances
and needs, as they deem necessary. Fee revenues will be used for the sole purpose of
expanding capacity on the RAS to accommodate new development. The RTCIP impact fee
will not be used for the purpose of correcting existing deficiencies in the roadway system.
BENEFIT RELATIONSHIP
For the third finding the local agency must:
Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the fee's use and the type
of development project on which the fee is imposed. (566001(a)(3))
The local agency will restrict fee revenues to capital projects that expand capacity on the
RAS to serve new development. Improvements funded by the RTCIP impact fee will
expand a region-wide arterial system accessible to the additional residents and workers
associated with new development. SANDAG has determined that the planned projects
identified in this report will expand the capacity of the Regional Arterial System to
accommodate the increased trips generated by new development. Thus, there is a reasonable
relationship between the use of fee revenues and the residential and nonresidential types of
new development that will pay the fee.
BURDEN RELATIONSHIP
For the fourth finding the local agency must:
Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the need for the public
facility and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed.
(566001 (a) (4))
New dwelling units and building square footage are indicators of the demand for
transportation improvements needed to accommodate growth. As additional dwelling units
and building square footage are created, the occupants of these structures generate additional
vehicle trips and place additional burdens on the transportation system.
The need for the RTCIP impact fee is based on SANDAG transportation model projections
of growth that show an increase in vehicle hours of delay on the RAS primarily as a result of
new development even with planned improvements to that system. The model estimated
impacts from new development based on trip generation rates that varied by land use
category, providing a reasonable relationship between the type of development and the need
for improvements.
I1MunjFinancial
NOI~1Jlber26, 200i
27
Page 89
5-177
San Diego AIsoaatiol1 of Governments
RTCIP Impact Fee Nexus Stu4Y
PROPORTIONALITY
For the fifth finding the SANDAG must:
Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and
the cost of the public facility or portion of the public facility attributable to the
development on which the fee is imposed. (~66001(b))
This reasonable relationship between the RTCIP impact fee for a specific development
project and the cost of the facilities attributable to that project is based on the estimated
vehicle trips the project will add to the Regional Arterial System. The total fee for a specific
residential development is based on the number and type of new dwelling units multiplied
the trip generation rate for the applicable residential land use category. The fee for a specific
nonresidential development is based in a similar manner on the amount of building square
footage by land use category. Larger projects generate more vehicle trips and pay a higher fee
than smaller projects of the same land use category. Thus, the fee schedule ensures a
reasonable relationship between the RTCIP impact fee for a specific development project
and the cost of the Regional Arterial System improvements facilities attributable to the
project.
IIlIiMun;F"ancial
I\TolJembl1r26,2007
5-178
28
Page 90
ApPENDIX A: REGIONAL ARTERIAL SYSTEM
Table A.l lists the arterials included in the Regional Arterial System by the Rtgional
Transportation Plan adopted in 2005.
Table A.1: Regional Arterial System
Arterial Limits
1st St
2nd St
30th St
32nd St
54th St
70th St
Ardath Rd
Avocado Ave
Avocado Blvd
Balboa Ave
Ballantyne St
Barham Dr
Barnett Ave
Bay Marina Way (24th St)
Bear Valley Pkwy
Bernardo Center Dr
Beyer Blvd
Black Mountain Rd
Bobier Dr
Bonita Rd
Borden Rd
Borrego Springs RdlYaqui Pass Rd (S-3)
Bradley Ave
Broadway (EI Cajon)
Broadway (Lemon Grove)
Broadway (San Diego)
Broadway (Vista)
Buckman Springs Rd/Hwy 80/Sunrise Hwy (S-1)
Buena Creek Rd
Cabrillo Dr (SRZ09)
Camino del Norte
Camino Del Rio North
Camino Ruiz
Camino Santa Fe Ave
Cannon Rd
Cannon Road
Canon St
Carlsbad Blvd
IiIMuniF"1llaI1Cia1
j'\..TofJl'171ber 26,200/
5-179
ASt-KS!.
Greenfield Dr - Main St
National City Blvd - 2'. St
Harbor Dr - Norman Scott Rd
EI Cajon Blvd - SR94
University Ave - 1-8
Hidden Valley Rd - 1-5
Main St - Chase Ave
Chase Ave - SR94
Mission Bay Dr - 1-15
Broadway - Main St
La Moree Rd - Mission Rd
Saint Charles St - Pacific Highway
1-5 - Terminal Ave
East Valley Pkwy - Sunset Dr
Camino Del Norte - 1-15
Main St -Dairy Mart Road
Del Mar Heights - Pomerado Rd
Melrose Dr - E Vista Way
E St - San Miguel Rd
Las Posas Rd - Woodland Pkwy
Palm Canyon Dr (S-22)- SR78
Marshall Ave - 2nd St
SR67 - E. Main S!.
Spring St - College Ave
C St - Main St
Lincoln Pkwy/SR78 - Washington Ave
SR94 - SR79
Las Posas Rd - Twin Oaks Valley Rd
Cochran St - Cabrillo Monument
Camino Ruiz - Pomerado Rd
Mission Center Rd - Mission Gorge Rd
Camino del Norte - SR56
Sorrento Valley Blvd - Miramar Rd
Carls bad Blvd - Melrose Dr
Melrose Drive - SR 78
Rosecrans St - Jennings St
Eaton St - La Costa Ave
A.I
Page 91
Sat! Diego Association of Governments
RTCIP Impact Fee N""" Study
Table A.1: Regional Arterial System (continued)
Arterial Limits
Carls bad Village Dr
Carmel Mountain Rd
Carmel Valley Rd
Centre City Pkwy
Citracado Pkwy
Clairemont Mesa Blvd
Coast Hwy (S-21)
College Ave
College Blvd
Community Rd
Convoy St
Crosby St
Cuyamaca St
Dairy Mart Rd
Deer Springs Rd
Dehesa Road
Dehesa Road'
Del Dios Hwy
Del Mar Heights Rd (SA 710)
Discovery St
Douglas Dr
E St
East H St
East Main St
East Valley Pkwy
East Via Rancho Pkwy
East Vista Way
EI Cajon Blvd
EI Cajon Blvd
EI Camino Real
EI Camino Real
EI Camino Real (S-11)
EI Norte Pkwy
Encinitas Blvd
Espola Rd
Euclid Ave
Fairmount Ave
Faraday Ave
Federal Bivd
Fletcher Pkwy
Friars Rd
Garnet Ave
Genesee Ave
Gilman Dr
Grand Ave
1-5 - Coast Blvd/Coast Hwy
Sorrento Valley Rd - EI Camino Real
North Torrey Pines Rd - EI Camino Real
1-15(N) -1-15(S)
Centre City Pkwy - SR78
1-15 - Moraga Ave
La Costa Ave - Via de la Valle
Federal Blvd - Waring Rd
North River Rd - Palomar Airport Rd
Twin Peaks Rd - Scripps Poway Pkwy
Linda Vista Rd - SR 52
1-5 - Harbor Dr
Mission Gorge Rd - Marshall Ave
SR-905 - 1-5
Twin Oaks Valley Rd -1-15
Jamacha Rd - Harbison Canyon Rd
Harbison Canyon Rd - Sycuan Rd
Via Rancho Pkwy - Claudan Rd
1-5 - Camino Del Norte
San Marcos Blvd - La Moree Rd
SR76 (Mission Ave) - North River Rd
1-5 - E Bonita Rd
Hilttop Dr - Mount Miguel Rd
Broadway - Greenfield Dr
Lake Wohlford Rd - East Valley Pkwy
Broadway - Bear Valley Pkwy
Vista Village Dr - SR76
Park Blvd - 1-8
Chase Ave - Washington Ave
Via de la Valle - Carmel Valley Rd/SR56
SR 56 - Carmel Mountain Rd
Dougias Dr - Manchester Ave
Woodland Pkwy - Washington Ave
First St - Ei Camino Real
Summerfield Ln - Poway Rd
SR94 - Sweetwater Rd
1-8 - EI Cajon Blvd
Meirose Dr - College Blvd
College Ave - SR94
1-8 - SR-67
Sea World Dr - Mission Gorge Rd
Balboa - Mission Bay Dr
N. Torrey Pines Rd - SR163
La Jolla Village Dr - 1-5
Mission Blvd to Mission Bay Dr
IiMuniFrnancial
A..2
Page 92
Nouenrber 26,2007
5-180
San Diego Association of Governments
RTGP Impact Fee Nexus Study
Table A.1: Regional Arterial System (continued)
Arterial Limits
Grape St
Greenfield Dr
Grossmont Center Dr
H St
Harbor Dr
Hawthorn St
Heritage Rd
Hill St
Hunte Pkwy
Imperial Ave
Jackson Dr
Jamacha Blvd
Jamacha Rd
Keamy Villa Rd
Kettner Blvd
LSt
La Costa Ave
La Jolla Village Dr
La Media Rd
La Mesa Blvd
Lake Jennings Rd
Lake Murray
Lake Wohlford Rd
Las Posas Rd
Laurel St
Lemon Grove Ave
Leucadia Blvd
Linda Vista Rd
Lomas Santa Fe Ave
Lytton St
Main St
Manchester Ave
Mapleview St
Mar Vista Dr
Market St
Marshall Ave
Marshall Ave
Marshall Ave
Massach usetts Ave
Massach usetts Ave
Melrose Dr
Mira Mesa Blvd
Miramar Rd
Mission Ave
Mission Ave
Mission Ave
North Harbor Dr - 1-5
E Main St - 1-8
1-8 - Fletcher Pkwy
1-5 - Hilltop Dr
Pacific Hwy - 1-5 (National City)
1-5 - North Harbor Dr
Otay Mesa Rd - Siempre Viva Rd
1-5 (Oceanside) - Eaton St
Proctor Valley Rd - SR 125
Valencia Pkwy - Lisbon St
Mission Gorge Rd - 1-8
Sweetwater Pkwy - SR94
Main St - SR94
Pomerado Rd - Waxie Way
1-5 - India St
1-5 -1-805
Carlsbad Blvd - EI Camino Real
North Torrey Pines Rd - 1-805
Telegraph Canyon Rd - SR905
Univers~y Ave - 1-8
Mapleview St - 1-8
I -8 - Navajo Rd
Valley Ctr Road (N) - Valley Ctr Rd (S)
Discovery St - Buena Creek Rd
North Harbor Dr - 1-5
Lisbon St - SR94
1 st St - EI Camino Real
Morena Blvd - Convoy St
1-5 - Coast Hwy
Rosecrans St - Saint Charles St
1-5 - Hilltop Dr
EI Camino Real - 1-5
SR67 - Lake Jennings Rd
Buena Vista Dr - SR78
Harbor Dr - Valencia Pkwy
Fletcher Pkwy - West Main St
Cuyamaca - Fletcher Pkwy
Main St - Washington Ave
Broadway - University Ave
Lemon Grove Ave - Broadway Ave
SR76 - Rancho Santa Fe Rd
1-805 -1-15
1-805 to 1-15
Andreason Dr - Center City Pkwy
Escondido Blvd - Broadway Ave
Coast Hwy - Frazee Rd
IIIMun;Financial
1Vovenlber 26,200/
A-3
Page 93
5-181
San Diego Association of Government!
RTGP Impact Fee Nexus Study
Table A.1: Regional Arterial System (continued)
Arterial Limits
Mission Bay Dr
Mission GorQe Rd
Mission Rd
Mission Road (S-13; inc/. Main St in Failbrook)
Montezuma Rd
Montezuma Vailey Rd/Palm Canyon Dr (S-22)
Morena Blvd
National City Blvd
Navajo Rd
Nimitz Blvd
Nobel Dr
Nordahi Rd
North Harbor Dr
North River Rd
North Santa Fe Ave
North Torrey Pines Rd (S-21)
Ocean View Hills Pkwy
Oceanside Blvd
Old Highway 80
Old HiQhway 80
Olivehain Rd
Olympic Pkwy
OranQe Ave
Otay Lakes Rd
Otay Mesa Rd
Otay Vailey Rd
Pacific HiQhway
Palm Ave
Palomar Airport Rd
Palomar SI
Paradise Vailey Rd
Paseo Ranchero
Plaza Blvd
Poinsettia Lane
Pomerado Rd
Poway Rd
Proctor Valley Rd
Questhaven Rd
Rancho Bernardo Rd
Rancho Del Oro Dr
Rancho Penasquitos Blvd
Rancho Santa Fe Rd
Regents Rd
Rosecrans St
Ruffin Rd
San Felipe Rd/Great S. Overland Route (S-2)
Grand Ave to 1-5
1-8 - MaQnolia Ave
Rancho Santa Fe Rd - Andreason Dr
1-15 - SR76
Fairmount Ave - EI Cajon Blvd
SR79 - Imperial Co Line
Balboa Ave - 1-8
1-5-CSt
WarinQ Rd - Fletcher Pkwy
1-8 - Harbor Dr
1-5 -1-805
SR78- Nordahl Rd
Rosecrans St - Grape St
Douglas Dr - SR76 (Mission Rd)
SR76 - Melrose Dr
Carmel Vailey Rd - La Joila VillaQe Dr
1-805 - SR905
Hill St - Melrose Dr
SR79 - Sunrise Hwy
Buckman Springs Rd - 1-8 (In-ko-pah)
EI Camino Real - Rancho Santa Fe Rd
Brandywine Ave - SR125
Palomar St - Brandywine Ave
Bonita Rd - SR 94
SR905 - SR125
Hilltop Dr - HeritaQe Rd
Sea World Dr - Harbor Dr
1-5 - 1-805
Carlsbad Blvd - Business Park Dr
1-5 - Orange Ave
8th Street - Sweetwater Pkwy
East H St - Otay Mesa Rd
National City Bivd - 8th St
Carlsbad Blvd - Melrose Dr
1-15 (N) -1-15 (S)
1-15 - SR67
Mount Miguel Rd - Hunte Pkwy
Twin Oaks Vailey Rd - Rancho Santa Fe Rd
1-15 - Summerfield Ln
SR 78 - SR 76
SR56 -1-15
Mission Rd - Olivenhain Rd
MoraQa Ave - Genesee Ave
1-8 - Canon St
Waxle Way - Balboa Ave
S-22 - Imperial Co Line
IIMuniFinancial
A-4
Page 94
;:',TolJember26,2007
5-182
San Diego Association 0/ Governments
RTap Impact Fee Nexus Study
Table A.1: Regional Arterial System (continued)
Arterial Limits
San Marcos Blvd
Scripps Poway Pkwy
Sea World Dr
Siempre Viva Rd
Sorrento Valley Blvd
Sorrento Valley Rd
South Santa Fe Ave
Sports Arena Blvd
Spring St
SR75
Sunrise Highway
Sunset Cliffs Blvd
Sweetwater Rd
Sweetwater Rd
Sweetwater Road
Sycamore Avenue
Ted Williams Pkwy
Telegraph Canyon Rd
Torrey Pines Rd
Twin Oaks Valley Rd
Twin Peaks Rd
Twin Peaks Rd
University Ave
Valencia Pkwy
Valley Center Rd
Vandegrift Blvd
Via de la Valle
Via Rancho Pkwy
Via Rancho Pkwy
Vista Sorrento Pkwy
Wabash Blvd
Washington Ave
Washington Ave
Washington St
West Main St
West Valley Pkwy
West Vista Way
Wildcat Canyon Rd'
Willow St
WillowSt
Willows Road
Winter Gardens Blvd
Woodland Dr
Woodside Ave
Business Park Dr - Mission Rd
1-15 - SR67
W Mission Bay Dr - Morena Blvd
Heritage Rd - SR905
Sorrento Valley Rd - Camino Santa Fe Ave
Carmel Mountain Rd - 1-805
Broadway (Vista) - Pacific SI
Sea World Dr - Rosecrans StlSR209
1-8 - SR125
No limits
SR79 - 1-8
1-8 - W Mission Bay Dr
2nd St - Willow St
2nd St to Willow St
Broadway Ave - Troy SI
South Santa Fe Avenue - S. Melrose Dr
1-15 - Twin Peaks Rd
1-805 - Otay Lakes Rd
Prospect PI - La Jolla Village Dr
Deer Springs Rd - Questhaven Rd
Pomerado Rd - Espola Rd
Ted Williams Pkwy - Espola Rd
54th St - La Mesa Blvd
Market - Imperial Ave
SR76 - Lake Wohlford Rd
North River Rd - Camp Pendleton
Hwy 101 (S-21) - EI Camino Real
1-15 - Del Dios Hwy
Sunset Dr - 1-15
Sorrento Valley Blvd - Carmel Mtn Rd
Norman Scott Rd - 1-5
EI Norte Pkwy - Center Valley Pkwy
EI Cajon Blvd - Jamacha Rd
Pacific Hwy - Park Blvd
1-8 - Marshall Ave
Claudan Rd - Broadway
Jefferson StlSR78 - Vista Village Dr
Mapleview Street - San Vicente Rd
Sweetwater Rd - Bonita Rd
Sweetwater - Bonita Rd
1-8 - Viejas Casino
SR67 - Greenfield Dr
Barham Dr - EI Norte Pkwy
Magnolia Ave - SR67
.. Inclusion in ReQional Arterial System contingent upon designation as a four-lane arterial by the County of San Diego.
I!llMun;Fmncial
Nouember 26, 200i
A-5
Page 95
5-183
ApPENDIX B: RETAIL SPENDING AND SALES
ANALYSIS
This appendix presents the analysis conducted to estimate the amount of commercial
development within San Diego County that is associated with spending by local (San Diego
County) households. The following steps summarize the approach taken for the analysis and
are explained in more detail below.
1. Estimate total potential spending by local households based on estimates of per
household spending by retail category;
2. Compare total local household spending potential with total retail sales to
estimate by retail category:
a. Leakage of spending by local households to retail establishments outside the
County,
b. Capture of sales from visitors outside the County by local retail
establishments;
3. Calculate the share of retail sales associated with local household spending; and
4. Validate the estimate of total local household spending by analyzing visitor
industry data.
All data is from 2004 because this was the last complete year of retail sales data available
from the State Board of Equalization (SBOE) at the time of this report.
TOTAL HOUSEHOLD SPENDING
Total spending by San Diego households is estimated by adjusting per household spending
based on statewide data for the difference in median household income between the State
and the County.
As an initial step in the analysis, statewide taxable retail sales by category were compared
with San Diego County sales to determine if any anomalies existed in San Diego sales
patterns that should be accommodated in the model. As shown in Table B.t, San Diego has
about $44 billion in taxable retail sales in 2004 compared to statewide sales of $500 billion.
Sales patterns in the County are very similar to the statewide sales though the County has
slighrly more spending in retail stores compared to non-retail stores. The retail store
categories that exhibit higher levels of spending compared to the state as a whole (apparel,
general merchandise, specialty, and food and beverage) are associated with visitor spending,
indicative of San Diego's strong tourism industry. We also conjecture that the higher levels
of spending in the building material category are associated with spending by Mexican
visitors, though we could not find specific data to support this hypothesis.
IiIMuniFlflancial
J:-..ToM17lbllf'26,2007
5-184
B-t
Page 96
St111 Diego Association ojGovernments RTGP Impact Fee Nexus SIH4;
Table B.1 - Taxable Retail Sales (2004)
Taxable Retail Sales 2004 (SOOOs} Percent of Cateoorv
San
San Diego Diego Callf~ Diff-
Retail Cate 0 Coun California Cou ornla erence
Aooarel Store.,,>
Women's Apparel 420,000 4,617,000 0.9% 0.9% 0.0%
Men's Apparel 107,000 1,034,000 0.2% 0.2% 0.0%
Family Apparel 907,000 8,819,000 2.0% 1.8% _0.3%
Shoes 210,000 2 487 000 0.5% .Q2f, m.O%)
Subtotal 1,644,000 16,957,000 3.7% 3.4% 0.3%
General MArchandise
General Merchandise 4,721,000 47,948,000 10.6% 9.6% 1.0%
Drug Store 484,000 5 992 000 .1.J.!1 1.2% lQ.J:t.l
Subtotal 5,205,000 53,940,000 11.7% 10.8% 0.9%
~
Gift, Art Goods, Novelty 167,000 1,858,000 0.4% 0.4% 0.0%
Sporting Goods 353,000 3,652,000 0.8% 0.7% 0.1%
Florists 122,000 1,078,000 0.3% 0.2% 0.1%
Photo Equip., and Supplies 37,000 523,000 0.1% 0.1% (O.O%)
Musical Instruments 121,000 1,516,000 0.3% 0.3% (0.0%)
Stationery and Books 356,000 4,018,000 0.8% 0.8% (0.0%)
Jewelry 258,000 2,638,000 0.6% 0.5% 0.1%
Office and School Supply 1.411,000 15,661,000 3.2% 3.1% 0.0%
Other Specialties 1,716,000 18018000 3.9% ;;&!, 0.3%
Subtotal 4,541,000 48,962,000 10.2% 9.8% 0.4%
Jlroilli
Grocery - All Type Liq. 1,005,000 12,550,000 2.3% 2.5% (0.2%)
Grocery. All Other 732,000 7 276 000 1.6% 1.5% 0.2%
Subtotal 1,737,000 19,826,000 3.9% 4.0% (0.1%)
Food and Beveraoe
Restaurant - No Alcohol 1,890,000 19,960,000 4.3% 4.0% 0.3%
Restaurant. Bar -Beer-Wine 795,000 10,792,000 1.8% 2.2% (0.4%)
Restaurant - Bar -All Type Liq. 1,363,000 12523000 .illi 2&& 0.6%
Subtotal 4,048,000 43,275,000 9.1% 8.7% 0.4%
Household
Home Furnishings 1,162,000 11,991,000 2.6% 2.4% 0.2%
Household Appliances 387,000 4414 000 0.9% 0.9% m.O%)
Subtotal 1,549,000 16.405,000 3.5% 3.3% 0.2%
Buildina Material
Building Material 2,649,000 25,603,000 6.0% 5.1% 0.8%
Hardware Stores 231,000 3,392,000 0.5% 0.7% (0.2%)
Plumbing and Elec. Supply 414,000 4,086,000 0.9% 0.8% 0.1%
Paint, Glass, Wallpaper 47,000 1 074000 .Q."lli 0.2% l..QJ..'&l
Subtotal 3,341,000 34,155,000 7.5% 6.8% 0.7%
Automotive
Auto Dealers - New 5,541,000 59,683,000 12.5% 11.9% 0.5%
Aut Dealers - Used 551,000 5,752,000 1.2% 1.2% 0.1%
Auto Supplies and Parts 421,000 5,334,000 0.9% 1.1% (0.1%)
Service Stations 2,805,000 32 760 000 6.3% 6.6% m.2%)
Subtotal 9,318,000 103,529,000 21.0% 20.7% 0.3%
Other Retail Stores
Liquor Stores 186,000 2,350,000 0.4% 0.5% (0.1%)
Second-hand Merch. 66,000 534,000 0.1% 0.1% 0.0%
Farm Imp!. Dealers 177,000 2.976,000 0.4% 0.6% (0.2%)
Farm and Garden Supply 95,000 2,386,000 0.2% 0.5% (0.3%)
Fuel and Ice Dealers 9,000 321,000 0.0% 0.1% (0.0%)
Mobile Home and Camper 108,000 1,453,000 0.2% 0.3% (0.0%)
Boat, Motorcycle, Plane 321,000 3104000 0.7% 0.6% Q..lli
Subtotal 962,000 13,124,000 2.2% 2.6% (0.5%)
Subtotal Retail Stores 32,345,000 350,173,000 72.7% 70.0% 2.7%
Non-Retail stores
Business and Personal Services 2,147,000 22,307,000 4.8% 4.5% 0.4%
All Other Outlets 9 978 000 1 ?7 597 000 ~ ~ (31%)
Subtotal 12,125,000 149,904,000 27.3% 30.0% (2.7%)
Total 44,470,000 500,077,000
Source: Taxable Salt3$ln Canfomia (Sales & Use Tv) DUring 2004, California State Board of Equalization.
IIlMun;Fmncial l\"'olJe1J1ber 26,2007 E.2
Page 97
5-185
San Diego As.rociation of Government.r
RTCIP Impact p" Nexus Study
To separate out household from business spending, all household spending is assumed to
occur in retail stores and all business-to-business spending is assumed to occur in non-retail
stores. As shown in Table B.l, non-retail stores include "Business and Personal Services"
and "All Other Outlets". Both categories are largely composed of retail establishments that
sell primarily to businesses. The "All Other Outlets" category primarily includes
manufacturing, warehousing and other establishments that sell primarily to businesses. There
is some overlap in the source of spending (household versus business) across all retail (store
and non-store) categories but this overlap is assumed to be largely offsetting between total
retail store and total non-store spending. This approach is commonly used in retail spending
and sales analysis to separate household from business spending.
Per household spending estimates were generated based on statewide data for retail stores
adjusted for the difference in median household income between the State and the County.
San Diego's median income is about one percent less than the State's median income
resulting in a commensurate adjustment to state per household spending patterns by retail
store category.
San Diego per household spending is multiplied by the number of households in San Diego
to estimate total spending for 2004. As shown in Table B.2 this approach results in a total
spending potential for San Diego households of $30 billion.
Table B.2 - Household Taxable Retail Spending Potential (2004)
Total Saendina Per Household Saendina
California
Householdes
($0005)
State
San Diego
County
Total Soendina
San Diego
Households
($OOOs )
Major Business Group
Households 12,015,591 1,043,221
Median Household Income $ 47,493 $ 47,067
Household 8oendino and Sales Per Household Soendina
Apparel Stores $ 16,957,000 $ 1,411 $ 1,399 $ 1,459,000
General Merchandise 53,940,000 4,489 4,449 4,641,000
Specialty 48,962,000 4,075 4,038 4,213,000
Grocery 19,826,000 1,650 1,635 1,706,000
Food and Beverage 43,275,000 3,602 3,569 3,724,000
Household 16,405,000 1,365 1,353 1,412,000
Building Material 34,155,000 2,843 2,817 2,939,000
Automotive 103,529,000 8,616 8,539 8,908,000
Other Retail Stores 13.124000 1092 1082 1 129.000
Total - Consumer $ 350,173,000 $ 29,143 $ 28,882 $ 30,131,000
Source: u.S. Census, Table P53; California Department of Finance, Rerpot E-5; Table A.1; MuniFinancial.
llMuniF'tnancial
ll\JolJemOel' 26,200/
5-186
B-3
Page 98
San Diego Association of Governments
RTaP Impact Fee Nexus Study
CAPTURE AND LEAKAGE
Capture and leakage are common concepts used in retail analysis. Not all local household
spending occurs in San Diego County; some spending leaks out to other areas when
residents travel or are otherwise attracted to retail opportunities outside the County.
Furthermore, not all retail store sales in San Diego County are generated by local
households; some are captured by stores from customers visiting the County from other
locations including Mexico. Given San Diego's attractiveness as a tourist destination and its
proximity to the Mexican border, one would expect that a significant share of total retail
store sales would represent capture of visitor spending.
Given this regional economic context, we estimated leakage rates by major store category to
calculate net local household spending in San Diego County by categcry. We then compared
this estimate of spending with actual sales by store category and calculated the amount of
outside capture that the category would need to force local household spending to equal
local sales. This analysis is shown in Table B.3. The model resulted in a leakage estimate of
eight percent of household spending, and capture estimate of 14 percent of retail store sales.
The differences between the estimates of local spending and sales by category shown io the
middle columns are due to rounding.
Table B.3 . San Diego County Local Household Taxable Retail Spending & Sales (2004)
A S C=Ax(1-S) = IE E=Gx(1-F) =1-( I )
Potential SDendino local SDendlna/Sales Reconciliation Actual Sales
San Diego Based on San Diego
Households Spending Olff- County Sales
Ma"or Business Grou $0009 leaka e $0009 erence' $0009
Apparel Stores $ 1,459,000 15% $ 1,240,000 1% $ 1,233,000 25% $ 1,644,000
General Merchandise 4,641,000 15% 3,945,000 (0%) 3,956,000 24% 5,205,000
Specialty 4,213,000 15% 3,581,000 (0%) 3,587,000 21% 4,541,000
Grocery 1,706,000 0% 1,706,000 0% 1,702,000 2% 1,737,000
Food and Beverage 3,724,000 15% 3,165,000 0% 3,157,000 22% 4,048,000
Household 1,412,000 0% 1,412,000 0% 1,410,000 9% 1,549,000
Building Material 2,939,000 0% 2,939,000 (0%) 2,940,000 12% 3,341,000
Automotive 8,908,000 0% 8,908,000 (0%) 8,945,000 4% 9,318,000
Other Retail Stores 1129000 150/0 960 000 JQ'!cl 962 000 Ql!, 962 000
Total $ 30,131,000 a% $ 27,856,000 (0%) $ 27,892,000 14% $ 32,345,000
Leakage/Capture Total $ 2,275,000 $ 4,453,000
Difference not equal to zero due to rounding.
SOlSCe: Tables A.1 and A.2: MuniFlnancial.
The leakage rates in Table B.3 that determine the local spending amounts and outside
capture rates were estimated based on (1) survey data of visitor spending in San Diego
estimating spending by retail category, and (2) an assumptions that comparison goods such
as apparel and general merchandise are likely to have higher leakage rates compared to
convenience goods such as groceries. Local households are most likely to spend on
comparison goods and travel related activities outside the County in the "apparel stores",
"general merchandise", "specialty", and "food and beverage" categories. For these categories
a leakage rate of 15 percent was estimated. For all other categories all household spending
was assumed to remaio local (zero leakage). The "other retail store" was a special case in that
llMuniFinancial
~~ofle1JJber 26,2007
B4
Page 99
5-187
San Diego Arsociation of Governments
RTGP Impact Fee Nexu.r Sl1iify
it was the only category where potential local spending was greatet than total sales. For this
category we assumed a 15 percent leakage rate to generate a zero percent capture rate.
LOCAL SPENDING SHARE OF TOTAL SALES
The share of total retail sales in the County associated with spending by local residential
development can be calculated from the results of Tables B.l and B.3. As shown in Table
B.4, an estimated 62.6 percent of total retail spending (store and non-store) is associated
with spending by residential development (households) located in San Diego County.
Table 8.4: Allocation of Taxable Retail Spending in
San Diego County (2004)
Taxable
Retail Sales
($0005) Share
Total Taxable Retail Spending
$ 44,470,000
100.0%
Local Residential Taxable Spending
Local Business and Visitor Taxable Spending
27,856,000
16,614,000
62.6%
37.4%
Sources: Tables 8.1. and 8.3; MuniFinancial.
VISITOR INDUSTRY SPENDING
Visitor industry spending was analyzed to validate the estimate of retail spending associated
with local households. Data regarding spending by overnight visitors from the San Diego
Conventions and Visitor Bureau (SDCVB) was supplemented with research on cross-border
spending by residents of Mexico (primarily day visitors) to conStruct a comprehensive model
of visitor spending. As shown in Table B.S, visitors spent about $8.249 billion in San Diego
County in 2004. Of the amount about $3.901 billion was associated with hotel
accommodations, food, drugs, services, and other non-retail taxable items. Taxable retail
spending equaled the remaining $4.348 billion split between two categories, "restaurants and
dining" and "shopping". This estimate of taxable retail spending is nearly equal to the
estimated $4.489 billion in capture shown at the bottom of Table B.3, suggesting that the
model's estimates of local household spending based on the SBOE data and estimated
leakage rates are reasonable.
BMuniFlOanciat
I\[ovembcl" 26,2007
5-188
B.5
Page 100
San Diego A..rJociation ofGovernmentJ
RTCIP Impact Pee Nexus Study
Table 8.5: Visitor Indust
Percent
Non-taxable Taxable Retail
Amount Retail Sales Sales
1,324,000 $ 1,324,000 $
1,821,000 273,000 1,548,000
552,000 552,000
1,269,000 1,269,000
552.000 552 000
5,518,000 2,701,000 $ 2,817,000
Visitor Soendino (Non-Mexican Visitors - see Notel
Lodging 24% $
Restaurants & Dining' 33%
Attractions & Entertainment 10%
Shopping 23%
Other 10%
Subtotal
100% $
VisitorSoendina (Mexican Visitors ~ see Note)
Lodging2 [Incl. in "Othe~']
Restaurants & Dining'" 5% 137,000
Attractions & Entertainment' [Incl. in "Other1
Shopping4 52% 1,420,000
Other' 43% 1 174 000
Subtotal
100% $
2,731,000 $
Total Taxable Retail Visnor SDendina
Lodging
Restaurants & Dining
Attractions & Entertainment
Shopping
Other (prtmartly groceries)
Total
Note: NonMMexican visitor spending data based on San Diego Conventions & Visitor Bureau (SDCVB) estimates. Shares by
category based on a 2002 visitor survey. The survey focused on overnight visitors and therefore excluded most spending by
visitors from Mexico because a large majority of visits are day trips. This study assumes that the SDCVB estimates exclude all
Mexican visitor spending. Mexican visitor spending is based on the Ghaddar and Brown study.
1 NonMtaxable retail sales represent tips for service estimated by SDCVB. Same percentage applied to estimate of visitor spending
from Mexico.
:/. The Ghaddar and Brown study did not separate out this category in estimates of spending.
3 Ghaddar and Brown study did not separate out this category for California estimates. Share of spending estimated at one--half of
share estimated for Texas and Arizona Mexican visitors based on a higher percentage of day trips in California. Share deducted
from food and groceries category.
... Includes the clothing (46 percent) and appliances and furniture (six percent) from Ghaddar and Brown study.
~ Includes groceries (32 percent) personal hygiene (five percent) and other (six percent) from Ghaddar and Brown study.
Sources: San Diego Conventions & Visitor Bureau, San Diego County Visitor Industry Summary (2004); San Diego Conventions &
Visitors Bureau, email from Susan Bruinzeel, June 11, 2006; Ghaddar, Suad and Cynthia J. Brown, The Economic Impact of
Mexican Visitors Along the U. S.-Mexico Border: A Research Synthesis, Center for Border Economic Studies, University of Texas-
Pan American, December 2005, Table 4, FiQures 1,2, and 3; MuniFinancial.
The only significant discrepancy between the visitor 'pending estimates based on SDCVB
and Mexican visitor survey data, and the outside capture estimates based on the SBOE data,
is in the food and beverage category. The visitor spending data for restaurants and dining,
substantially the same category as the SBOE food and beverage category, resulted in an
IIilIMun;F_
November 26,2001
B-6
Page 101
5-189
San Diego Association of Governments
RTaP Impact Pee Nexus Study
estimate of $1,664 million in taxable spending (see Table B.5). The SBOE model tesulted in
an outside capture estimate of $883 million (see the difference between total sales and the
local spending estimate for this category in Table B.3). The visitor spending estimate of
$1,664 million would represent a significant share, about 41 percent, of total sales in the
SBOE food and beverage category. Consequendy, we suspect that the visitor survey data
ptobably overestimates spending in this category. Rather than reduce estimates of total
capture, the approach taken for this study assumes that the visitor survey data
underestimates taxable retail spending by an equal amount across all other categories.
Therefore the estimate of total retail sales associated with local household spending remains
a reasonable estimate for the purposes of this analysis (shifting the burden of commercial
traffic associated with local household spending to residential land uses).
IllMun;F"""",
],ropcmber26,200/
5-190
B-!
Page 102
ApPENDIX C: LOCAL AGENCY IMPLEMENTATION
CHECKLISTS
Tbis appendix presents the steps that local agencies are required to take when adopting and
updating a funding prograni to implement the RTCIP. The first checklist describes steps for
initial adoption of the RTCIP impact fee and the second checklist shows steps for the
required annual and five-year updates. These checklists follow a timeline that meets the
requirements established by the California Government Code section 60017 and the
TransNet Ordinance.
IIlIMuniF<nan<:iaI
NOlJe17Jb~r 26,2007
c-!
Page 103
5-191
Sail Diego ASJoci'ation of Govemment.r
RTClP Impact Pee N,xu.r S tu4J
INITIAL RTCI P FEE ADOPTION - LOCAL AGENCY
IMPLE.MENTATION CHECKLIST
Note: Local agencies with existing impact fee programs that meet the requirements of
the RTCIP impact fee may not need to complete all steps outlined below.
o Prepare initial Funding Program! 2007
o Estimate annual RTCIP impact fee revenues
o Identify Regional Arterial System2 improvements
(location and description) and estimate costs
o Estimate construction schedule and program RTCIP
impact fee for identified improvements (minimum five-
year planning horizon)
o For improvements to be funded with RTCIP fees and
other revenues, identify the anticipated source, amount,
and timing of other revenues
o Work with adjacent local agencies if improvements
extend beyond boundaries
o Optional- Prepare local nexus study (if required to
substitute for or supplement SANDAG's RTCIP Impact
Fee Nexus Study)
o
Prepare fee adoption documents for Council action
o Draft ordinance and resolution to enable local agency to
impose RTCIP impact fee
o If using SANDAG's RTCIP Impact Fee Nexus Study revise
Funding Program based on updated fee schedule
Early 2008
o
Prepare for Council public hearing and fee adoption3
o At least 14 days prior mail notice to any interested party
that has filed a written request to be notified
o At least 10 days prior make nexus study, Funding
Program, and fee schedule available to public
o At least 10 days prior publish notice of meeting
o Place public hearing and adoption of
ordinance/resolution on agenda of regularly scheduled
meeting
Before April 1 , 2008
1 The term "Funding Program" is used in the Regional Transportation Congestion Improvement Program of
the TransNet Extmsion, Ordinance and Expenditure Plan (RTCIP). The Funding Program as described herein
is designed to meet certain requirements of both the RTCIP and the Mitigation Fee Act (California Govmzmmt
Cod, Sections 66000-660025).
2 The Regional Arterial System is defined by SAND.AG. See San Diego Association of Governments
(SANDAG), Pinal2030 fugionalTranportation Plan, Mobility 2030 (February 2005) and applicable amendments.
3 (:alifornia Government Cod, Sections 6062, 66002, 66016(a), 66018, and 65090.S
IIlMuniRnancial
l:',lollember 26,2007
5-192
C-2
Page 104
San Diego.AfJociation ofGovmrments
RTCIP Impact Fee Nexus Study
o
Adopt RTCIP impact fee and Funding Program at
regularly scheduled Council meeting and submit to
Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee4
By April 1 , 2008
o
Incorporate RTCIP impact fee and Funding Program
into local agency's FY 2008-09 budget process5
(J Establish separate account for collection of fee revenue
(J Appropriate annual estimate of fee revenues and
expenditures
By July 1, 2008
o
Collect RTCIP impact fee
(J Fees become effective no sooner than 60 days following
adoption6
(J Collect at same time as other building permit fees
o Deposit revenues in separate account
By July 1, 2008
4 RTCIP, Section A(5).
5 California Government Code Section 66007(b). Adoption of the Funding Program and appropriation of fee
revenues will enable collection of the fee at building permit issuance rather than at final inspection or issuance
of certificate of occupancy.
6 California Govemmmt Code Section 66017(.).
Ili!lMunFonancial
r-,ro/Je17Jber 26,2001
C--
-,
Page 105
5-193
San Diego Association ?/ Governments
RTGP Impact F.. Nexuf Study
ANNUAL AND FIVE-YEAR RTCI P FEE UPDATE-
LOCAL AGENCY IMPLEMENTATION CHECKLIST
Note: Local agencies with existing impact fee programs that meet the requirements
of the RTCIP impact fee will need to integrate the steps outlined below into the
periodic update of their existing programs.
Note: Years shown are for the first fiscal year of RTCIP implementation. Schedule
would repeat annually thereafter.
o
Receive transmittal from SANDAG of RTCIP impact
fee schedule updated for cost inflation
o
Update Funding Program 7
o Estimate annual RTCIP impact fee revenues
o Update Regional Arterial System8 improvements ~ocation
and description) and estimated costs
o Update construction schedule and program RTCIP
impact fee for identified improvements (minimum five-
year planning horizon)
o For improvements to be funded with RTCIP fees and
other revenues, identify the anticipated source, amount,
and timing of other revenues
o Continue to work with adjacent local agencies if
improvements extend beyond boundaties
o Optional- Update local nexus study (if required to
substitute for or supplement SANDAG RTGP Impact Fee
Nexus Sttl&)
o
Prepare for Council public hearing and fee
update9
o Draft resolution updating fee schedule
o At least 14 days prior mail notice to any interested party
that has filed a written request to be notified
o At least 10 days prior make nexus study, Funding
Program, and fee schedule available to public
o At least 10 days prior publish notice of meeting
By February 1 (2009)
February (2009)
March (2009)
7 The term "Funding Program" is used in the Regional Transportation Congestion Improvement Program of
the Tran,rNet Extension, Ordinance and Expenditure Plan (RTCIP). The Funding Program as described herein
is designed to meet certain requirements of both the RTCIP and the J.\.1itigation Fee Act (California Government
Code Sections 66000-660025).
8 The Regional .Arterial System is defined by S.ANDAG. See San Diego Association of Governments
(SANDAG), Flnal2030 &gionalTrantportation Plan, Mobility 2030 (February 2005) and applicable amendments.
9 California Government Code Sections 6062, 66002, 66016(a), 66018, and 65090.
IIMuniFrnancial
lVol;ember26,2007
5-194
C4
Page 106
San Diego Association of Governments
RTOP Impact Pee Nexus Stu&
0 Adopt updated RTCIP impact fee and Funding By Aprill (2009)
Program at regularly scheduled Council meeting and
submit to Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee
(ITOC)10
0 Update RTCIP impact fee and Funding Program as By July 1 (2009)
part of local agency's annual budget processll
0 Appropriate annual estimate of fee revenues and
expenditures
0 Prepare Annual RTCIP report based on audited financial Fall (2009)
data for prior fiscal year 12
0 Brief description of the fee
0 Fee schedule
0 Fiscal year beginning and ending balance of fee account
0 Fee revenue collected and interest earned
0 Identification of each improvement funded by the fee and
amount of the expenditures on each improvement
including the total percentage of the public improvement
cost funded with fees
0 Identification of an approximate date by which the
construction of the improvement will commence if the
local agency determines that sufficient funds have been
collected to complete the improvement (may refer to
adopted Funding Program)
0 Description of each interfund transfer or loan made from
the account including the public improvement on which
the transferred or loaned fees will be expended, and, in
the case of an interfund loan, the date on which the loan
will be repaid, and the rate of interest that the account or
fund will receive on the loan.
0 Amount of refunds made, if any
0 Submit Funding Program and Annual RTCIP report Fall (2009)
to ITOC13
10 RTCIP, Section A(5).
11 California Government Code Section 66007(b). Adoption of the Funding Program and appropriation of fee
revenues will enable collection of the fee at building permit issuance rather than at final inspection or issuance
of certificate of occupancy.
12 California Government Code Section 66006(b)(1) and RTCIP, Section G(2).
13 (RTCIP, Section G(2). TIlls schedule may require amendment of Section G(2).
IIMuniFinancial
lVovembe-r 26,2007
C.j
Page 107
5-195
San DiegoAIIociation of Governments
RTOP Impact Pee Nexus Study
o
Submit Funding Program and Annual RTCIP report
to Council14
o Make annual RTCIP report available to the public
o Review annual RTCIP report at regularly scheduled
Council meeting at least 15 days following issuance of
report (by January 15)
o At least 15 days prior to review of annual RTCIP report
at regularly scheduled Council meeting mail notice to any
interested party that has filed a written request to be
notified
o
Prepare and submit Five-Year RTCIP Report to ITOClS
o To be done after the end of every five years following
adoption of the program in FY 2008-09
o Use Funding Program as basis for report
o Identify the purpose of the fee, i.e. improvement of
Regional Arterial System to accommodate new
development
o Demonstrate a reasonable relationship between the fee
and the purpose of the fee by referencing the Funding
Program and showing that anticipated fee revenues are
fully programmed to fund planned improvements
o Identify soutces, amounts, and riming of other revenues if
needed to complete planned improvements
o Fee revenues not committed to a planned improvement
within five years of collection must be refunded to the
ITOC
o
Prepare and submit Five-Year RTCIP Report to Council16
o To be done after the end of every five years following
adoption of the program in FY 2008-09
14 California Government Cod, Section 66006(b)(2).
15 RTClP, Section G(4). This schedule may require amendment of Section G(4).
16 Califomia Go"""",..t Code Section 66001 (d).
January 1 (2010)
Fall (2013)
January 1 (2014)
I!IllMuniRnancial
1'iofll'flZber26,2007
Co
Page 108
5-196
.~
5-197
TORY R. WALKER ENGINEERING, INC.
WATER RESOURCES PLANNING & ENGINEERING
September 24, 2007
Kirk Ammerman
City of Chula Vista
315 Fourth Avenue, Suite M
Chula Vista, CA 91910
RE: Otay Ranch Village 11 - Chula Vista Tract No. 01-11
Scour Estimation and Riprap Repair Below Gabion Drop Structure #1
Dear Kirk,
We have prepared this letter to summarize our analysis of scour, or slope
equilibrium, downstream of Gabion Drop Structure #1 below Tract No. 01-11 and to
provide supporting calculations for the proposed riprap repair downstream of the
structure. As we have previously stated, Gabion Structure #2 appears to be stable
and not in need of any remedial repairs.
SCOUR ANALYSIS
The expected long-term scour within the channel between Gabion Structures #1 and
#2 was evaluated by applying fluvial geomorphic principles. Field observations and
survey data were used in conjunction with these principles to estimate an anticipated
scour depth at Gabion Structure #1.
From field observations, it is evident that, for most of the reach between the two
gabion structures, the channel bed has reached a new state of equilibrium based on
the new (developed) hydrologic regime. The comparison of the channel profile over
time, based on survey data, verifies this observation. The attached profile exhibit
illustrates this with the old channel profile, the existing channel profile, and the
anticipated long-term profile. It is evident from the application of fluvial geomorphic
principles to the field observations and surveyed data that a uniform equilibrium
slope of approximately 0.0095 flit! is forming between the two gabion structures.
The advantage of having the above data, especially the gap in years between the
two profiles, is that it provides a better basis for estimating scour and an equilibrium
973 VALE TERRACE DRIVE. SUITE 202, VISTA, CA 92084 I PH: 760.414.9212 Fx: 760.414.9277 I WWW.TRWENGINEERING.COM
5-198
Otay Ranch Village 11 - Chula Vista Tract No. 01-11
Scour Estimation and Riprap Repair Below Gabion Drop Structure #1
February 26, 2008
slope than mathematical predictive models, which are based on empirical formulas
from other stream systems.
RIPRAP DESIGN
A HEC-RAS model was prepared to estimate average velocities in the channel
downstream of Gabion Structure #1. Flow rates for the analysis were taken from
Chapter 9 of the Master Drainage Study for Otay Ranch Village 11. The upstream
end of the model was the top of the upstream row of gab ion baskets, and the
downstream end of the model was at Channel Sta. 7+50, as shown on the attached
exhibit. The sections were taken from the recent survey of the drop structure.
Sections 80 through 105 were adjusted in elevation and cross-sectional shape to
reflect the anticipated equilibrium condition of the reach, which consisted of a
. trapezoidal section with 5-foot bottom width and 2:1 side slopes.
The results of the HEC-RAS analysis were used to size the riprap that will be placed
downstream of the gabion structure. . The unit weight of the rock riprap was
assumed to be 165 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). % Ton gradation riprap is
recommended, based on the velocity midwayan the rip rap slope. The calculated
velocity at the lowest point of the riprap slope is not appropriate, as this would be the
potential scour hole where riprap is designed to unravel and fill in the scour hole.
Therefore our recommendation is to use the RSP Class % Ton riprap with the
minimum layer thickness of 4.0 feet. The recommended riprap gradation is
presented below, as presented by Caltrans and adopted by the City.
Rock Ri ra Gradations
Caltrans RSP Class, % Ton Riprap
La er Thickness = 4.0 feet
% Larger Than Rock Size
1-ton
50 - 100
0-5
1/2-ton
1/4-ton
A filter blanket is required, as well as RSP-fabric type A. An upper layer of smaller
rock and a lower layer of sand are needed for % Ton riprap.
Riorao Installation Method
The Caltrans Rock Slope Protection Design Manual suggests that Method B
placement be used for % Ton Riprap. With Method B placement, rock is dumped
near the planned location, and then worked into place using machinery.
973 V AlJ!. TERRACE DRIVE, SUITE 202, VISTA., CA 92084 I PH: 760.414.92.12. Fx: 760.414.9277 1 WWW.TRWENGINEERlNG.COM
5-19il
Otay Ranch Village 11 - Chula Vista Tract No. 01-11
Scour Estimation and Riprap Repair Below Gabion Drop Structure #1
February 26, 2008
Should you have any questions, please call Tory Walker at (760) 414-9212 or
(760) 420-7922.
Sincerely,
+~~
TORY R. WALKER ENGINEERING, INC.
Tory R. Walker, P.E.
Presiden
973VALETERRACEDRlVE,SUlTE202, VISTA,CA92084 I PH: 760.414.9212 FX:760,414.9277) www.TRWENGINEERING.COM
5-20:1)
MasterOralnage S~
may Ranch VlJIage 11
CHAPTER 9
OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 11
EXISTING ANO PROPOSED CONOrnON COMPARISON
Longitude: 11ft'5T - Velocity Flow V_
"" ""
100-Year,l- 3JI" ... 7,02 1170 7.72
5G-Year, 1.2.25" .... 8.13 ... 7,02
26-Yesr, I ==2.0'" ,sa ~sa ... 6.57
iQ-Year.I-1.7" 133 5.11 2>1 e,"
5--Vear I=-Ui" .. 4.85 '83 5,84
iOU-Year, 1..3.0" .... .,82 .61 7.69
6Q..Year, ,..2:lS" 272 6.92 ..., ....
26-Year, 1-2.0" '09 .... .64 6.4'
1o-Year,I~1.'" 148 .... ... .,..
5-Vacl-1.5" 111 ".70 214 5.6.
1BI BASIN INLET
1OQ.Vesr,I-3,a" ... 8.75 70' 7,2'
5Q..Yeer,r-2.26" 303 .... ... B.7S
2&-Y~,I.2.0. .33 e,,, 402 8.56
io-Vear,I=1.r ,.. e,eo 307 8.a1
S-Year.I-1.6" 12. 5,99 .... 8,34
UNIVERSITY SITE NORMAL DEPTH CHANNEL ANALYSIS
C11
I
N
o
~
Summary of Existing and Developed
Condition Channel VeJociIIes
H.....ECtDATA~~.....
ESI.t_~~
W.cL.I!lle&.021~
SNOI8'Q'~
1 3S'Q'Hd 'll1J~31J.o!O~d 13NN'V'
'Q'lll^H:)N'n:!A~l~
I,
\\ \\\ .:',\.' j
'\ .\ ,'\ I,
\, \ ' '\" \". \ \,
.\. \ \.\\, "-
\ \ \ "-
" \, '~'
\ ',,- ' '"
.'\ '" -,< "'< ' "
\'" '" <. '-',-, -'-
" " '---
'-...,.... ~',-
" .......~ .
j
",
Ii
I
"
"
,
,
"
/,//
~
j
/
.;
Ii:
,
,!!
,:I,
.,
\,
\,\
\
\
.
.
I
I
_:.~ ~
/~.//
.:.--....
i
Ii
,
../".,---~.
"
" ""
,
"
'-,
/~/
\
;\
/
---.-.-",.
.....,.
'"
",
,
-~" ',.,
"
,
"',
"
"
"'"
"
,//)
../'
//"'/
/
/"~/"//'
/
"
,/~
/
i
\,
i,
I'
\,
.\
;'"
'.
,
\
,
,
"
"
'-
.
~
,
, "
.\
\"
!
I
/
,
,
",
\,
"
"
\
-,
'-,
"
5 202
"
"
"
"~I
"
/
~-_....,
,.",
.---.-..,'.....
...~-_..
..-"'-:-
..->...~/"'
;./-
/",.,-'
/
!
I
(,
//
'-,
"
,
"
"
~'f1: . . 0
;:;Q; III l
5~; {Ol
::c.a: :-1
- ..
Ill!!
/
-'
/" ;0:' ~'i
-/
" ~
.
~
I ~
~ iii_
ii ~i
~ !<j
. ~~
,~.
g~
,1I.!;
<( ...'"
~~
> z"
~ s
5!t>
1
-:---~
,-..------
',-;
,~,/
)
/
/
,/
/ /"'-~. /::~
"
\
~,
jjl
.\
i
)
r\
\
\
\
\
\
\
'.
i
\',
\.'
/
"~
\ \
\ ')
,'I. \
,.. \ .
, ,
\,
\.
\.
.1
I
j,
,
ii
[
CJ1
I
...,
o
to>
.. 126167"
R,rp.-'RAf'.",.
a-423'.51 . i
126188 ..r",
J!;420. ~ 1 126146X,
GROUNo '
El.-419.68 I
1261
RIP-
- :~1 a=420.1'
25168.
lP-RAP
<#23.22
126185 ~
CROlW
a-,420.011261
11 . RIP
~4~111 EL-4!9.79
261
tp ,P" 126140
v.~ GROlW
6184 a-419.33x
L=420-.1e-....
"116173 ..." .
126160 ~ ~R!E;fW'23 '2"..m
TOt' '~ E1:~ .~. '_.
' EL-424.71 ""..
. '," "JJDf~181' . II?"
126177 128178 a"424.~"
RIP-R " .. RiP-1W'
EL"424.77. 51""". a=424;'84
TOP .~po.
EL-424.69 . ~ .
EL-425.84
126183
RIP-R
a-425.23
126164
RIP-'RAP
EL=425.39
126162
T
EL-425.15
128165
RIP-
'EL=424.37 . " 2
~ 1'2617 -
'RIP
EL""2423 126187. ,
-----"- TCExl
EL-4~ I.A5 I
. "--~l
8-' r-_ \, RI\.~~'71 .
. /{:;tI.S f'- a=424:08 :
. p~lr_. .. 1251Be :
.1 pu+tJ/) GROlW.
'\... .'.....,.. a.421.04\.
126170
,"r", RIP-R
( '/"1 s~~. E1:-423.94 1
.6 ~_. I
J>IC"'. ) :
.. ...,.;
. '.. P~I ..' 126183
. ---.............~, ../ GRQUIlO
'126176 a-.421. 72X
RIP~ .
a-423.98 ~
126158
X.TOP- ' ..
.-::EL'i'427.7.4 '-I
x~I60,__'"
EL-=425.52
126157
XTOP
......~.EL...27.64
. '''':':~:'.12615& -~ . ."
,"---)<:TOE
a424.94
26135
IP-RAP
-;419.62
126149
, TOP
~~19...]O
.' ':- ~;... .'I~- 'f._ 'X
125151 \"'"
fa::
a-413.,64,p-
126152'<",' .
~A-i.~4: I
.:\ ,.
126'143:
T(lp'-~ 1', '
E\.-42D.67
f2~i39 .'
RIP.-RAP ..
\E1:~4'19.27
6141
" E1:-4ZL'25"
'--'
'1~6142
,~~.~~
liD.
J
..;:;.
, ./
."\" \
,.1.f2:.0
. 1/
i
5)50' .
-'19.08'26154 '. T
, . ..w-.12.79 \!.
126.153, . ,... .'..... '1'
.. ',TOE I
E1:=412.85
, 12614'1
, TOP
"E1:-419.46
126128
T
E1:-412.66
125127
T
;: a-411.63.
-.,..'
126146
GROUNo
a...421.02
lo~
Ii
.'
... ;,'
I
I
(-()f-/'"3
126133
. XTOP
....a~43Q,.69
. -.
'.."'Tl6132
~TOE
a=422.3D
126131
="KTOP
E1:-422.04
126130
X TOE
EL~419.21
126129
TOP
0.-418.28
126126
TOP
EL-418.05
26125
ROlINJ
-419.69
100
"-"I7'IY'
1/ I.!. L r7 G;E.
<. ->'''1 .
.>~.t- Cl
)>
P71/ucA(
/1 Crl-EIM}
;"-=Jo'
SNOIE~J LY 31iJOl:ld l.3NN'dH:l
L 3S'o'Hd 'LL3~'d11lAH:JN'o'MA'dl.O
5-204
'......,....'0.
~~
"
l ·
;
!
i
,~
~ iz
~ ,~=
j ~~i
.~<!-
;j~
,,~
~~
.~.
>- g~
~ z-
S
:>~u
~l
oj
.
.
;
'I
.
I
"'
~
..-
"'
~
iii
o
CD
~
s
'"
o
~
~
o
~
.
c
o
:c
"
.--~-<l>-
4
,.
.
o
.
--.....--
-~
HEC-RAS Plan:
un River: Otay Reach: Gabion
QT<lliiI'~ J, MinChEl'
651.001
441.001
354.00'
269.00
214.00
651.00
441.001
354.00 i
269.00 :
214.001
651.00
441.00
354.00
269.00
214.001
423.79
423.79
423.791
423.79!
423.79 (
I
423.791
423.79
423.79
423.79
423.79
"'--420.071
420.07 i
420.07 !
420.07
420.07
651.00 419.27
-- 419.271
441.00
354.00 419.27i
269.00 419.271
-,.-
214.00 419.27
_.. I
651.001 413.64
441.00~ 413.64
354.001 413.64
269.001 413,64!
214.00 413.64
- I
651.00 409.20
- 441.001
409.20
-- 354.00 i
409.20
269.001 409.20
214.00 - 409.20!
:
1)'i,"S:aoV"11C'~ '11Jll'"C'.\11C,11F._:11111'low.,Aiila": 'ToP.Wldli>l'!"
425.98'j 425.62 426.41 -0~Oi02ii5 5.28 123_35 73.001 __ o,n,
425.61 425.29L_.. 4-25.94 0.010138' 4.56 --- 96.73 71.43l__~
425.43 425.121 425.71 0.010401 ..4.24 83.42 70.121. 0.69'
425.23 __424.94: 425.46 0.0099621 _.. 3.85 69.82 65.nl 0.66
425.08 __ 424-821 425.281 0.0097491 3.53 80-601 . ~I 0.64
425.62 425.621 426.321-.'~~O:O21607! 6.681 97.411-'-- 71.5O! j-.01
_.__'_ 425.291 425.29 425.841 0.0229781 5.98) 73.721 67.13i ...~~::". 1.011
425.12] 425.12 425.611 0.0240421 5.651 62.671 64.37i .___~
424.941 424.94 425.36 0.025402 5.22j~ 51.57 62.211 1.01
424.82 424.a2L_~. 425.19 0.026625 .~ 43.88 6O.67L,~_ -,- -U1j
! __ I
421.03 422.05: 425.66 0.282572 17.27 37.70 _ 45.71 3.351
420.n 421.63! 425.16 0.420407 1EL80 26.241 44.78 3.871
420.6SL_,' 421.43 424.911 0.526905 ... 16.54 2U11! __ "'44.38 4.201
420.561_ 421.22 424.64j O.702529[ 16.22 16.59! ___ 43.981 4.65)
420.48j 421.08 424.441 0.896626;._ 15.971 13.40'._._ 43.711 5.081
1 I! I i
___ 421.43 421.731 422,711 _~o.0356561 9,06! -2!E __ 48.201
.__.., _ 421.12 421,31 i 422.051 0.034118 7.751 _~81_ 46.71
_ 420.97 421.10; 421.75 __ 0.033121 7.081 49.97 46.01
420.811 420.891 421.431 0.031971 6.331 ___ '42:52T 45_24
420_69; 420,741 421.201 0.031036 5.751 37.201 44.68
-~. I I=! , [~_ i
416.861 418.35i 421.671 0.095417\ 17.60( 37.001
416.141 417.541 420.931 -- 0.1250921 17.5sf""" 25.111
.- _ 415.801 417.14; ..420.591 0.14678e! 17.56r 20.151
415.421 416.67i 420.22 0.180246! -'7.5if 15.31
415.,51 415.33: ~ 419.951 0.2'4953~--'7'~=i=- 12.17
412,031 413.89[-" 419.271 0.1554461 21,591= 30.151
411.451 413.101.. 418.06: 0.1935501 . 20.S,!! 21.371
411.18~ 412.69L 417.401 0.2095221 .3.Q,:021 17.681
410.881 412.23[ 416.59 0.2285761 .____ 19.17: 14.031
410.si 411.901._ 415.91 0.242648 ..._18.38] 11.64
!
413.65!
412.84!
412.441
411.99
411.63
1.31i
1.24'
-.uOr
._._..-.._~
----~
1.11
-...-=
....~
"'-~-~
--_.~..~
2.55
2.76!
2.SS!
17,971
15.081
13.691
12.181
11.09l.
16_3)--
14.00t
12.901
11.71!
10.871
= 2.801
2.94
------;;c:;:
n~~.~
._-~
.,-~
651.00 408.801 414.31
441.00 408.80' 413.48
_.__ 354_00 408.80.._ 413.041
269.00 408.80 412.54!
- 214.00: ~ -~ 412.17;
-- 651.001 408.50;- 414.'01
441.00 408.50(-- h 413.2,T
354.00
269_00
214.00
651~OO!
441.ooi
354.00 i-
269.00
---
214.00
415.25
414.22
413.70
.'-413.121
412.691
- --.I
. 41:O~f---
413.85
413.34
412.76
412.32
!
413.54\
412.51fn--
411,991
411.411
410.981
86.67 27.121--- 0.74
.----- ----=-=
64.29 23.45! ___~
_.....__... 54.34 21.61 _...' ._.-2:72:
44.051 19.54 o_nl
37.02\ 17.98. .--- O.?!]
i :
.- 91.491 27.691 --- -0.69
__.~ 24.08! 0.67
__58.10 22.27; 0.66
47.37 20.231 0.65
40_00 18_691 0.84
. 87,':lu::-__~1 -=
65.21l .. . 23.38 0.71:
55.36] 21.63 0.70i
45.12! ..--.- 19.65 0.691
38.091___ .~t,6t_-____ 0.681
0.009789
0.009984
0.0100901
0,0102241
0,0103201
I
7.51
---..as
6.51
6.11
5.781--'
I
7.12["..
6.451
6.09
5.68
5.35
0.0084071
0.0084021
0.008396
0.008395
0.008378
0.009510
0,0095011
0.009503 :
0.009509 i
0.009503 r
7.47
8_76
6.39
5.96
5.62
5-206
4301' -
Otay Reach with Gabions, Trib to Salt Ck Plan: Otay Reach - Uitimate 2/25/2008
..--.. ......-- Olay Gablon - ............---..--.-..
~1
420
. '
, '
"
"
...-
"- .",
. n n__ .._..__ _. _ .....,.:: _. _. . ':._' ~':.: _. .~_.: _;_::'"..": :_. ..-~-.,".,,_-.---::.......--:
f'
.f
,,'
,,'
....
....
,,'
w
ili
1, . '-'
..- ..,.,-
..' ;::.:.:..:.~.:.-.-. ,.-
415- ,:."",-
~.-'.~.-~....~;....
,
J
f-
410'
405-L-
o
g
8
~
50
100
150
Main Channel Distance (ft)
'"
<>
~
~
-
'"
-
200
,
250
I
._..__._.~
.- f~~~~~~01
; .
WS 050
WS 025
WS 010
.
WS.05 \
Ground \
['~~::
<> '" <0
NNN
~ --
300
Olay Reach with Gabions, Trlb to Salt Ck Plan: Olay Reach - Ultimate 2/25/2008
RS = 126
,04-
426.0
425.5-
g 425.0-
c
.9
~ 424.5-1
.
In
1
4240t , -'--, ,
423.5'
0 10 20 30 40 50
60
Station (fl)
Olay Reach with Gablons, Trib to Salt Ck Plan: Otay Reach - Ultimate 2/25/2008
RS = 125
"
426.01-
425.5..1
425.0-
. 424.5
In
424.0'
423.5 ",'--
0 10
.04 "0 "-'-~--"------__.".,",__'^
20
30
40
50
60
r(----."'."'"
425j-..
424-
g 423"
c
0
~
.
> 422~
.
m
421'
420-
0 10
Slalion (ft)
Olay Reach wllh Gabions, Trlb to Salt Ck Plan: Otay Reach - Ultimata 2/25/2008
RS '" 120 Just D/S of upper Gablon
--...-------...- --.~,.-.,-,..,------ .--.04'"
20
30
Slation(ft)
40
'1_.-
Legen(r~
WS 0100
,
WS Q50
WS '025
WS010
70
i WSQS
~.
Ground
Ban~ S~__
60
...:~, ---
I Lege'ocr'
70
i WSQ100
I WS Q50
I ~:: ~~:
.
. WSQ5
.
. B:~;;..
60
legend
WS 0100
,
WSQ50
WS 025
WSQ10
WSQ5
.
Ground
.
Bank Sla
50
60
f---'"
424
J
423i
g "'1
c
9
ii
. 421
ill
420-1
i
419 I
0 10
\.(~-~
424 .j-- .
1
422'
w.----.~--,04-"--......
420
Olay Reach with Gablons, Trlb to Salt Ck Plan: Olay Reach - Ultimate 2125/2006
RS = 115 Top of lower Gablon
'-"--"-.04-'''''-'-''
......_.__..~-_...._...._~'~._--- _._._.__...~~._.,,-
,
20
30
Slalion 1ft)
40
50
Otay Reach with Gabions, Tob to Salt Ck Plan: Olay Reach - Ultimate 212512008
RS=110
,._.....____.__.__~__"..._"___ -"-~ .04----=~:=.____..____..__^_~.~=~======~_:>.t -...--.-- ,04-"~
J!1:....--------
.....1_....__.
418-
.
iil 416
414
j
412 ~ ,
0 10 20 30
420'.
I
.04 --'->r==
4161
4161
1
414-
g
c
o
~
~
..,
w
412
410
408
o
Stalion(ft}
Olay Reach with Gabions, Tob to Salt Ck Plan: Olay Reach - Ultimate 212512006
RS = 105 Invert lowered 3.500
,,-.,,----.-.-~.-..._--- '-,04--
10
20
30
StaUon(f1)
40
40
L.g.nd~
WS Q100
ws 050
WS 025
WSQ10 .
.
WS05
.
Ground
.
Bank Sta
60
.J.._..
. ~'Leoend
WS 0100
WSOSO
WS '025
WSQ10
.
WS05
.
Ground
.
Bank Sla
50
__ Legen~J
WS 0100
.
WS050
WS Q25
WSQ10
WSQ5
.
Ground
.
Bank Sla
50
424- ~__.,._.,_~_~~.,~,~~:_=i-=----__
422
420.
418'
i
:;:~I..
412-
410.
406.
o
g
5
~
~
.
m
420- _._~?~,.~.,+--,._._._~.~.~.
418-
416~
414'
m 412.j
j
:::1
o
g
o
g
.
>
..
w
Jc-~.
416j
414-:1
i
412J -
410'
406
408
o
'."--'-"----,04--"""
,
10
10
Olay Reach with Gablon., Tl1b to Sail Ck Plan: Olay Reach - Ultimate 2/25/2008
RS = 100 Invert lowered 2.8311
.04-........m.-
- -:::::-~~:::i
~ ---- -
-
""II
~
30
,
40
20
Station (ft)
Olay Reach with Gabions, Trib to Salt Ck Plan: Olay Reach - Ultimate 2/2512008
RS ;:: 90 Section 105, lowered O.79ft. invert adjusted l:Jy ~3.5n for ulllm
-.......,04----.-
20
30
40
Slation(ft}
Otay Reach with Gabions, Tl1b 10 Salt Ck Plan: Otay Reach - Ultimale 2/25/2008
RE ;:: 80 Section 105, lowered 5.500
-- .--'t=----.::
.04---
10
20
30
40
StaUcn (ft)
,
50
50
.... .__.1:::::: .. .04 =:::'I.,
Leg-~-
WS Q100
,
WE Q50
wsa25
WS010
.
WSQ5
.
Ground
.
Bank Sla
60
__.~~~end
WS 0100
WS 050
WSQ25
WSalD
.
WSQ5
.
. Ground
l...~~_~_~_.~
60
r..~::~:O-
, WS Q50
WE 025
WSQ1Q
.
WSQ6
.
Ground
.
Bank Sta
50
TORY R. WALKER ENGINEERING, INC.
Project Qtay Ranch Village 11 Date 2125/08 By T JS
Client Brookfield San Diego Builders Checked By
Subject Gabion Drop Structures 1 & 2 Approved By
RIPRAP ENERGY DISSIPATOR DESIGN
Ref: U,S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Hydraulic Design of
Energy Dissipators for Culverts & Channeis, Hydraulic Engineering Circuiar No. 14, 1975
Assume: SSD Specific Weight of Stone, Ws = 165 pel
Given: Exit Velocity = 17.6 fps (or less)
Then: D50(avg) = 1.98 ft (from Figure II-C-1)
D50(min) = 1.76 ft
W50(min) - 467 Ibs (1/2 ton ciass)
D50(min) = 1.76 ft D100(max) = 3.00 ft
D30(min) = 1.46 ft D90(min) = 2.11 ft
D15(min) = 1.19 ft D85(min) = 2.07 It
RIPRAP GRADATION
Percent Lighter Limits of Stone
By Weight (SSO) Weight, ibs
1 00 934 2335
50 467 692
15 146 346
SIZE
Limits of Stone
Diameter. in
26.53 - 36.01
21.06 24.01
14.29 - 19.06
Minimum Layer Thickness, T" =
I Use Layer Thickness, T =
46.9 in
48.0 in
= 3.91 feet
= 4.00 feet
. minimum layer thickness is 1.5 times 01 OO(avg).
riprap dissipator trwe.xIs/EnElrgy Dissipalor
2/2512008
5-211
TORY R. WALKER ENGINEERING, INC.
Project Otay Ranch Village 11 Date 25-Feb-08 By T JS
Client Brookfield San Diego Builders Checked By
SUbject Gabion Drop Structures 1 & 2 Approved By
Estimation of Launch Toe Riprap Volume
Required Volume
(from Design of Riprap Revetment (HEC No. 11), FHWA, March 1989)
R., = [d, * T * (FS)]/sine
where: R., = required riprap quantity, fr' per foot of bank
ds = estimated depth of scour below existing channel bottom, feet
e = angle of bank with the horizontal, degrees
T = riprap layer thickness, feet
FS = factor of safety
ds = 4.0 feet (from scour calculations)
e = 0.59 radians for H:V = 1.5
e = 33.7 degrees
T = 4.0 feet
FS = 1.25 (from Table 3-2, Hydraulic Design of Flood Control Channels, USACOE, July 1991)
Then Rq= 36.1 ft'
Try:
channel side slope = 2.0
stream side siope = 0.0
Base, B = 5.1
Height, H = 4.0
Then:
Area = 36.4 ft' OK
Topwidth, TW = 13.1 feet
'~I
5.9 ft---j
channel side slope ---+
T
Y
t
1---- B -.1
stream side slope
Launch Toe trwe.xls
Page 1 of 1
5-212
9201 Spectrum Center Blvd., Suite 110
San Diego, CA 92123.1407
P 858.450.1221
F 858.552.1445
www.biasandiego.org
PRESIDENT
Sherman D. Harmer, Jr.
Urban Housing Partners, Inc.
VICE PRESIDENT
Andrew Murphy
American Property Enterprises
TREASURER I SECRETARY
Bob Cummings
Barratt American
IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT
Scott Brusseau
Newport Na1ional Corpora1ion
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
Paul A. Tryon
AFFILIATES
California Building
Industry Association
National Association
of Home Builders
National Association
of Industrial and
Office Properties
,t.TT A.CHMENT
2
February 12, 2008
Mr. David R. Garcia
City Manager
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue, MS A-100
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Re: Western Transportation Impact Fee
Dear Mr. Garcia,
The Building Industry Association of San Diego County continues to review
the city's proposed transportation impact fee (TIP) for the Western portion of
Chula Vista. Based on our examination, we believe additional analysis and
clarification is warranted in the project list and fee methodology.
The city has identified nearly $400 million in transportation needs for the
Western section of Chula Vista. Of that, new development will be required to
assume approximately $63 million of obligation. It is our understanding
that the TIF will satisfy direct and indirect traffic impacts of new
development.
Our region, as is it nationwide, suffers from the worst housing recession in a
generation. Economic uncertainty coupled with the lending crisis has brought
our industry to a standstill. The housing market cannot absorb an
additional $63 million in government mandates and the city should
reconsider implementing the TIF at a time when builders are shutting
down and jobs are being lost.
The BIA recognizes the city's plan to implement a $2,000 per unit fee on
residential development in order to comply with the voter approved Transnet
Sales Tax Initiative. Those funds are intended for use on the Regional
Arterial Network and jurisdictions are required to establish this fee in prior to
July 2008.
However, the city's plan goes far beyond the Transnet obligation and is
requiring funding for projects that require additional examination.
Most notably is the nearly $12 million private sector charge for the study and
creation of the 1-5 HOV & Managed Lanes from SR 905 to SR 54. This
represents 20% of the pri vate sector fee and goes far
BUILDING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY
5-213
beyond what is legally required for traffic impact mitigation. Projects such as these are financed
by separate funding sources including gas taxes and other federal funding sources. Requiring
mitigation for the 1.5 HOV and Managed lanes is an unjustified financial burden that places
an additional economic hardship on new development.
Under this new fee, commercial and office transportation development impact fees for Western
Chula Vista would be 26% and 30% higher, respectively, than they are in Eastern Chula Vista.
Development in Western Chula Vista involves higher land costs, potential demolition of existing
buildings, and a more constrained development envelope than development in Eastern Chula
Vista. The higher fees could serve as a deterrent commercial and office development.
The proposed TIP will impede the city's efforts to attract new capital to its redevelopment area.
The city should provide meaningful incentives in order to 'jump start' redevelopment in the
downtown area. The BIA would request additional time to confer with city staff to identify
appropriate incentives that will facilitate development within the urban areas.
The BIA requests that the city allocate a portion of redevelopment tax increment revenue toward
its transportation needs since it will be new development that will generate the additional
resources. Allocating a portion of tax increment dollars will reduce the economic burden
without jeopardizing the resources necessary to finance the proposed road network.
We also recommend that the city consider allocating a portion of other revenue sources such as
Transnet and gas tax that are generated by future growth toward future growth. For example, if
20 percent of the total Transnet sales tax will be generated by future growth, than 20% of all
Transnet sales tax dollars that the city receives should be dedicated to road needs of future
growth.
The city should also allow for the payment of fees at the "Certificate of Occupancy," rather than
at building permit. Fee payments are a tremendous economic burden and requiring payment prior
to building absorbs much-needed capitol at a critical stage of development. Paying at certificate
of occupancy would provide important flexibility while still meeting the financial obligations
required by the city.
The BIA appreciates the willingness of city staff to meet and discuss the merits of the TIP
program. We have found the meetings to be informative and professional and look forward to
continued dialogue on this important subject.
~~
Staff Vice President Government Affairs
Cc: Mayor Cheryl Cox and Council Members
5-214
~M?-
:::.c:_ -:
~~~~
CITY OF
CHULA VISTA
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
February 26, 2008
Mr. Matthew J. Adams
Building Industry Association of San Diego County
9201 Spectrum Center Blvd., Suite liD
San Diego, CA 92123-1407
Dear Mr. Adams:
It was a pleasure meeting you on Wednesday, February 12, 2008. I thought the meeting went
well and was quite constructive. I am confident that by working together on these complex fee
issues, we will be able to find common ground in order to make the proposed Western
Transportation Development Impact Fee (WTDIF) Program a success for the BlA as well as the
City of Chula Vista.
Thank you for your letter dated February 12, 2008 concerning some issues the BIA has on the
City's proposed WTDIF program.
In reference to your concern as to whether or not paying the fee satisfies "direct and indirec/
traffic impacts of new development", it is our intention that the fee does satisfy both direct and
indirect impacts. The Urban Core Specific Plan, on which this program is partially based,
reviewed the west side of Chula Vista, utilizing the City's best estimates for land use over the
next 25 years. Future large projects could require an Initial Study and potential CEQA
document, including a Traffic Impact Report. Consequently, this review could lead to additional,
newly discovered impacts and additional project-related mitigations. It is the City's intention to
streamline the land development process by having the traffic liabilities mitigated by the
payment of the WTDIF. The WTDIF will not cover costs associated with improvements a
development would be required to provide for access to the development site. Should a new
driveway or access roadway require improvements, such as signalization, turning lanes:
enhanced signage, or other site-specific improvements that are not part of the WTDIF, those
improvements would be the direct responsibility ofthe development.
The institution of a west side TDIF progranl will not contribute to the existing housing crisis
brought about by an economic down turn and problems with the sub-prime lending industry. A
15% increase to fees will have a nominal impact on project feasibility, adding only 1 % to 2% to
the total development costs.
The west side TDIF allows in-fill developers to pay a manageable "fair share" fee toward
cumulative traffic impacts rather than pay for the full cost of the cumulative mitigation. Staff is
concerned that the in-fill developer will be unable to absorb the cost of a cumulative impact that
must be built prior to construction of their project. A cumulative impact like splitting the grade
crossing at the H Street or E Street Trolley line ($35 million) would render any future projects
276 FOURTH AVENUE' CHULA VISTA' CALIFORNIA 91910' (619) 691-5031 . (619) 409-5884
@ 1'r.l9_C()n~1JmCrRl;cydl)<l !'1lJ.l!ll
5-215
Mr. Matthew Adams
Febmary 26, 2008
Page 2
infeasible should the improvements need to be built prior to or concurrently with the in-fill
development.
The greatest issue for the BIA seems to be n... the nearly $12 million private sector charge for
the study and creation of the 1-5 HOV & Managed Lanes... n. The $217 million Interstate-5
project fair-share represents only $11.2 million of the $137 million of the project costs within the
City ofChula Vista. The proposed WTDIF does not take into consideration over $79 million of
the project costs outside of the City limits. The 8.2% represents the amount of traffic western
Chula Vista will add to Interstate-5. Thus, the $11.2 million in the WTDIF represents only 8.2%
of the estimated costs within the City limits. Please take note that in order to obtain Federal
funds, a local agency must typically provide at least 11.47% to 20% of total project costs as the
"local match" contribution. The City and Region will have to pursue other revenue sources to
come up with the shortfall needed. Recently, we have used TDIF funds in eastern ChuIa Vista as
our local match for work on the 1-805 interchanges at East Orange A venue/Olympic Parkway
and at Main Street/Auto Park Way. We also utilized TDIF funds for improvements at Telegraph
Canyon Road and I-80S and East H Street and 1-805 that were not pal1 of a cost sharing with
Federal funds.
The City is very sensitive to the needs of the development community on the west side of town.
Your observation of rates being 26% and 30% higher for commercial and office, respectively is
noted. However, our calculations, as shown on Table I, indicate that rates are comparable, ifnot
less than, those on the east side of the city.
TABLE 1 - DIF Fees Comparison
LAND USE
EDU
TDIF
WTDIF
COMMERCIAl- NEIGHBORHOOD (Per Acra)
COMMERCIAL. STREET FRONT {Per Acre)
INDUSTRIAL PARK (Per Acre)
LODGING - LOW RISE HOTEL
(Example: a 30 room hotel)
MEDICAL OFFICE (Per Acre)
OFFICE -lOW RI SE (Per Acre)
45/Acre
$484,965
$145,935
,$ 48,645
$ 29,187
$ 97,290
151Acre
S.O/Acre
l.a/Room
$161.655
$96,993
$323,310
RESIDENTIAL - SINGLE FAMILY HOME
SO/Acre
30fAcre
1.0
$538,850
$:123.310
,$ 10,777
$162.150
$ 97,290
$ 3,243
RESIDENTIAL. MUl TJ.FAMll Y HOME 0.8
I $ 8.621
i I Credn) I
I I
.--
(Credit)
$ 2,594
------
(Trip rate credil is provided for redevelopment i
projects by subtracting oul 8)(istmg land uses) !
We welcome the opportunity to continue our working relationship with the BIA on development
incentives. Our working relationship with the BIA, lenders, developers and the community
helped develop "Incentive Zoning" included within the Urban Core Specific Plan. If there are
new ideas or additional incentives to be considered, we welcome those suggestions.
Tax increment dollars are best utilized to make an investment in projects as an incentive to bring
in new development that will generate additional resources for the community. Some
developments require tax increment investment for transp0l1ation needs, however some
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
P.Ol.o'.........~F"'...
5-216
-
Mr. Matthew Adams
February 26, 2008
Page 3
developments need assistance in other areas (acquisition financing, construction lending, land
write downs, environmental studies, etc), and it would not be prudent to arbitrarily allocate tax
increment resources solely to transportation needs when the need might be greater in other areas.
Your letter fUl1her states that the BIA would, "also recommend that the city consider allocating
a portion of other revenue sources such as TransNel and gas tax...towardjilture growth ". The
City needs to spend upwards of $19 million per year to rehabilitate and maintain its entire
pavement inventory. The City has available to it approximately $7 million per year for pavement
rehabilitation, mostly consisting of TransNet funding. Any reduction in funding for rehabilitation
will cause the City's pavement inventory to degrade at a faster rate, resulting in more expensive
rehabilitation treatments.
I appreciate your suggestion that fees be paid upon "Certificate of Occupancy". Staff has
considered your comments and believes that there may be some merit to moving to an occupancy
permit trigger for some developments. While not included in the ordinance at present, statlwill
work with the BIA to further investigate this idea and come back to Council within 120 days
with recommendations for any potential changes.
Again, I thank you for taking time out of your busy schedule to review our program. We look
forward to working with you on these and other important issues in the future.
2EiL~
City Manager
cc: Scott Tulloch, Assistant City Manager
Jack Griffin, Director of Engineering and General Services
Eric Crockett, Assistant Director of Housing and Redevelopment
Rick Hopkins, Assistant Director of Engineering and General Services/City Engineer
Frank Rivera, Principal Civil Engineer
Dave Kaplan, Transportation Engineer
J:\Engincer\AGENDA\CAS200&\03-04-08\WTDlF\FINAL LETTER FROM CITY MANAGER to MA IT AD^MS 2-25-08 DEKFXR.doc
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
<:,":PooI-C_Fito<>doIt"'\ll'I
5-217
~I~
=~_:
~~~~
Mayor and City Council
City Of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, Ca 91910
619.691.5044 - 619.476.5379 Fax
I;fi
FEB 2 5 2008 1l'J.;o
(jV'-- 4i'l\
MEMO
ellY OF
CHULA VISTA
February 22, 2008
TO:
Lorraine Bennett, Deputy City Clerk
RE:
Lori Peoples, Senior Deputy City Clerk
Jennifer Quijano, Constituent Services Manage~
Board of Appeals & Advisors
CC:
FROM:
Mayor Cox would like to recommend Albert Sides for appointment to the Board of
Appeals & Advisors. Albert will replace Bill Hieronimus.
Please place Albert on the March 4, 2008 Council agenda for ratification and schedule
the oath of office for the March 11, 2008 Council agenda.
Thank you.
cc: Mayor Cox
,:J~.s,.6f' -
./~ /'16/- CG-ft-'Y'eI"-'t
~r. ~~~1 '1:r}Q ~CC 'J:.
"" CfI"{ ~u/q y /,
~~
7-/
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
~
BOMA International and Clinton Climate Initiative Sign Memorandum of Understanding
Collaboration will offer solution-oriented programs to enhance energy performance across
commercial properties and major cities
(W ASHINGTON, DC-October 4,2007) The Building Owners and Managers Association
(BOMA) International and the Clinton Climate Initiative (CCI) of the William J. Clinton Foundation
(WJCF) announced today the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to define the
collaborative relationship between CCI and BOMA to accomplish shared goals of improving energy
efficiency and reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the world's large cities, as well as throughout
major national and international real estate portfolios.
The partnership will include, but not be limited to, the following activities:
. Large Portfolio Participation in CCI Building Retrofit Program: BOMA will collaborate with
CCI to identify, introduce and encourage BOMA's leading and large portfolio members to
participate in the CCI Building Retrofit Program.
. Training and Capacity Building: BOMA will work with CCI to enhance and expand the
BOMA Energy Efficiency Program (BEEP) to include information on the CCI Building
Retrofit Program. Furthermore, BOMA will work with CCI to make the BEEP training
available to all CCI Building Retrofit Program cities by the first quarter of 2008.
. Identification of Best Practice Procurement Processes and Energv Services Agreements:
BOMA and CCI and its partners will collaborate to identifY best practices or standard models
for energy performance contracting so as to reduce process and transactional time and cost
that currently exist, as well as remove barriers to participation.
. Policv Development: BOMA will work collaboratively with CCI and C40 partner cities to
promote policies that stimulate the rapid implementation of building energy efficiency,
distributed energy, and renewable energy production and help building owners and managers
to achieve the shared goal of decreasing energy consumption.
"We are honored to collaborate with The Clinton Climate Initiative on these crucial sustainability
and energy efficiency initiatives," said BOMA International Chairman and Chief Elected Officer
Brenna S. Walraven, RPA, CPM, executive managing director, national property management,
USAA Real Estate Company. "By aligning our respective programs - the BOMA Energy Efficiency
Program and the CCI Building Retrofit Program - and the network of BOMA local associations with
the C40 partner cities, we will expand our outreach to municipalities and commercial properties to
markedly improve energy performance and reduce greenhouse gas emissions,"
#####
The Building Owners and Managers Association (BOMA) International is an international
federation of more than 90 local associations and affiliated organizations. BOMA's 16,500-plus
members own or manage more than 9 billion square feet of commercial properties in North America
and throughout the world. The mission of BOMA International is to enhance the human, intellectual
and physical assets ofthe commercial real estate industry through advocacy, education, research,
standards and information. Founded in 1907, BOMA International celebrates 100 years of
commercial real estate in 2007. Learn more at www.boma.org.
In August 2006, President Clinton launched the Clinton Climate Initiative, a project dedicated to
making a difference in the fight against climate change in practical, measurable, and significant
ways. In its first phase, CCI is serving as the exclusive implementing partner of the C40 Large Cities
Climate Leadership Group, an association of large cities that have pledged to accelerate their efforts
to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. CCI is assisting its partner cities to develop and implement
large-scale programs that directly result in substantial greenhouse gas emissions reductions.
The C40 Large Cities Climate Leadership Group consists of the following cities: Addis Ababa,
Athens, Bangkok, Beijing, Berlin, Bogota, Buenos Aires, Cairo, Caracas, Chicago, Delhi, Dhaka,
Hanoi, Hong Kong, Houston, Istanbul, Jakarta, Johannesburg, Karachi, Lagos, Lima, London, Los
Angeles, Madrid, Melbourne, Mexico City, Moscow, Mumbai, New York, Paris, Philadelphia, Rio
de Janeiro, Rome, Sao Paulo, Seoul, Shanghai, Sydney, Toronto, Tokyo, and Warsaw.
CONTACT:
Laura Horsley
Director of Communications
BOMA International
(202) 326-63] 5 or lhorsleyimboma.org
-_....._--~,...._"---------->-_..
.
. .
The Building Owners and Managers Association (BOMA) International recognizes that current
research estimates that energy consumption in commercial buildings accounts for 18 percent of
U.S. greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. BOMA also recognizes that responsible building operating
and management practices can significantly reduce energy consumption, diminish a building's
carbon footprint, and thus lower GHG emissions. By working with real estate professionals, through
our network of 92 local BOMA associations with all levels of government, and the myriad of public
and private groups with similar goals, market transformation will be realized.
Commercial real estate owners and operators understand the triple bottom line of reducing energy
consumption and implementing "green" management practices is a social and environmental
responsibility, and can result in a positive return on investment (ROI).
BOMA INTERNATIONAL CALLS UPON ITS MEMBERS TO ACCEPT THIS 7-POINT CHALLENGE TO
REDUCE THE USE OF NATURAL RESOURCES, NON-RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES, AND WASTE
PRODUCTION AND WORK IN COORDINATION WITH BUILDING MANAGEMENT, OWNERSHIP AND
TENANTS TO ACHIEVE THE FOLLOWING GOALS
1. Continue to work towards a goal to decrease energy consumption by 30 percent across
your portfolios by 2012 - as measured against an "average building" measuring a 50 on
the ENERGY STAR<1!> benchmarking tool in 2007;
2. At least once a year, benchmark your energy performance and water usage through
EPA's ENERGY STAR benchmarking tool and share your results with BOMA;
3. Provide education to your managers, engineers and others involved in building
operations, to ensure that equipment is properly installed, commissioned, maintained
and utilized;
4. Perform an energy audit and/or retro-commissioning of your building, and implement
low-risk, low-cost and cost effective strategies to improve energy efficiency with high
returns;
5. Extend equipment life by improving the operations and maintenance of building systems
and ensure equipment is operating as designed;
6. Through leadership, positively impact your community and your planet by helping to
reduce your industry's role in global warming; and
7. Position yourself and the industry as leaders and solution providers to owners and
tenants seeking environmental and operational excellence.
BOMA International believes that through implementation of these no- and low-cost operation
and management practices, buildings may see a reduction in energy consumption alone of up to
30 percent. In addition to lowering operating costs and enhancing asset value, these measures
will improve tenant comfort and satisfaction with better building temperature control and lower
absenteeism and increase your tenants' productivity, resulting in real cost savings for tenants.
BOMA International also calls on its network of 92 federated local associations to accept the challenge
to work at the local and state level to implement responsible government programs and voluntary
incentives to facilitate market transformation.
. .
SPECIFICALLY, WE CALL ON BOMA LOCAL ASSOCIATIONS TO:
1. Partner with local government, other industry groups and associations, as well as utilities,
to identify voluntary energy efficiency strategies with proven results and application to
existing buildings;
2. Partner with local government to share education and case studies on no- and low-cost
building operating and management practices to assist in efforts to transform state and
municipal buildings;
3. Work with policymakers to enact voluntary, incentive-based programs to accomplish their
goals of implementing green communities; and
4. Work cooperatively with state and local government to update, at a reasonable frequency,
its model building and energy codes.
BOMA INTERNATIONAL BELIEVES THAT MARKET TRANSFORMATION IS THE MOST IMPORTANT
CONTRIBUTION OUR ASSOCIATION CAN MAKE TO OUR SOCIETY AND TO OUR COMMUNITIES. IN
ADDITION TO ENCOURAGING OUR MEMBERS AND NETWORK OF LOCAL ASSOCIATIONS TO WORK
TO IMPLEMENT ENVIRONMENTALLY AND SOCIALLY RESPONSIBLE BUILDING MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
THAT RESULT IN REDUCED RELIANCE ON NON-RENEWABLE RESOURCES AND A FAVORABLE RETURN
ON INVESTMENT, BOMA PLEDGES TO:
1. Work with our members to encourage them to decrease energy consumption by 30
percent across their portfolios by 2012. However, we understand that many buildings
have already achieved these reductions, and some older buildings may not be able to
attain this level of energy reduction;
2. Continue to develop education programs for building owners and managers that can
result in immediate reduction of energy consumption and reduce energy costs by as much
as 30 percent;
3. Join forces with other organizations, the scientific research community and industry
leaders engaged in issues related to sustainable building operating and management
practices to facilitate the dialogue, conduct any needed research, share knowledge and
best practices, and accelerate market transformation;
4. Participate in building codes and standards development efforts for energy efficiency
and green buildings standards that promote aggressive but attainable and cost-effective
results;
S. Work with the United States Congress, Administration and federal agencies to implement
responsible energy policy that encourages voluntary action and resorts to mandates only
with commensurate and offsetting incentives;
6. Promote documentation and benchmarking, through the EPA ENERGY STAR benchmarking
tool (for energy and water), of the measurable contributions resulting from implemented
sustainable operation and management approaches;
7. Promote research by industry, scientific, and governmental entities to provide the
commercial real estate industry with full life cycle assessment data for all products,
materials and equipment used in the construction, operation and management of the built
environment to facilitate decision-making;
8. Promote research that will result in technological advances necessary to make buildings
operate even more efficiently and achieve the goal of carbon-neutral buildings;
9. Communicate the benefits of environmentally responsible management practices,
including higher occupancy rates, rental rates, asset value, and tenant satisfaction, to both
the public and private sector;
10. Work with utilities to encourage voluntary demand-side management (DSM) and rebate
programs to encourage energy efficiency:
11. Assume a global leadership role as advocates for sustainable operations and management
practices in the built environment and share knowledge and promote sustainable practices
throughout the world.
ROMA Intemational, Suite 300, 1201 Ne\<v York Ave., N\,v, \VJ.shiilgton, D.C., 2000.5, (202) 326~630(J, vI/w\\'.botna.org
((.) Copyright 2007 B01\:lA Intt'mation,,!
Not for Immediate Release
BOMA International's 7-Point Challenge Gains Momentum
Commercial real estate organizations commit to improving energy performance by 30% by 2012
(February XX, 2008-Washington, DC) The Building Owners and Managers Association
(BOMA) International's 7-Point Challenge, an innovative energy reduction plan to achieve
market transformation in the commercial real estate industry, is gaining momentum as the
leading companies and BOMA local associations around the country sign on to endorse the
challenge.
BOMA International introduced its Market Transformation Energy Plan, which includes the 7-
Point Challenge, to its members in July 2007 as an aggressive but realistic strategy to reduce the
use of natural resources, non-renewable energy sources and waste production in commercial
buildings. The goals of the plan include decreasing energy consumption by 30 percent across
portfolios by 2012; benchmarking energy performance and water usage through the
Environmental Protection Agency's ENERGY STAR@ benchmarking tool; and providing
education to building owners and operators and others involved in building operations, to ensure
that equipment is properly operated and maintained.
"We are very proud to see this important initiative gaining momentum in the industry," said
BOMA International Chairman and Chief Elected Officer Brenna S. Walraven, RP A, CPM,
executive managing director, national property management, USAA Real Estate Company.
"Commercial real estate professionals understand that in addition to the tremendous financial
value created by adopting and executing on the goals of the 7 Point Challenge, implementing
'green' management practices also results in a positive return for building occupants and for the
environment. "
Through the 7-Point Challenge, BOMA is working with real estate professionals, government
officials at all levels, as well as a myriad of public and private groups to achieve market
transfonnation. Real estate companies and organizations are using the 7-Point Challenge as both
a call to action and a template for developing sustainability programs and improving energy
perfonnance.
Companies endorsing the challenge include Carr Services, CB Richard Ellis, Colonial
Properties Trust, Cousins Properties, Cushman & Wakefield, Glenborough, Hines, LBA
Realty, Opus, Parmenter Realty Group, PM Realty Group, Stream Realty Partners,
Transwestern and USAA Real Estate Company.
BOMA local associations endorsing the challenge include Austin, Boston, Greater Cleveland,
Columbus, Dallas, Denver Metro, Metropolitan Detroit, Houston, Miami-Dade, New
Mexico, New York, Oakland-East Bay, Orange County, Orlando and Philadelphia.
The EP A's ENERGY STAR program has also given the challenge its endorsement.
For more infonnation on the 7-Point Challenge, visit www.boma.orgl7pointchallenge.
For more infonnation on the 7-Point Challenge or to schedule an interview with one of the
participating organizations, contact Laura Horsley at Ihorsley@boma.org, 202-326-6315.
...
Founded in 1907, the Building Owners and Managers Association (BOMA) International is an
international federation of more than 100 local associations and affiliated organizations. The
l7,OOO-plus members ofBOMA International own or manage more than 9 billion square feet of
commercial properties in North America and abroad. BOMA's mission is to enhance the human,
intellectual and physical assets of the commercial real estate industry through advocacy,
education, research, standards and infonnation. On the Web at www.boma.org.
CONTACT:
Laura Horsley
Director of Communications
BOMA International
(202) 326-6315 or Ihorsley@boma.org
BOMA INTERNATIONAL CONTACT INFORMATION
David Stucky
Secretary/Treasurer
]250 Sixth Avenue, Suite 520
San Diego, CA 92]0]
(6] 9) 685-1328
dstucky@boma.org
Karen Penafie], Vice President of Advocacy
] ] 0] ] 5th Street, NW, Suite 800
Washington, DC 20005
(202) 326-6323
kpenafiel@boma.org
www.boma.org
BOMA SAN DIEGO CONTACT INFORMATION
Ted Kimball, President
Audrey Benedetto, Association Executive
P.O. Box ]2] ]66
San Diego, CA 92 II 2
(6]9)243-]8]7
bae@bomasd.org
yv,^,w.bomasa.org