HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Rpts./1996/04/25 (3)
SPECIAL JOINT MEETING
CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL,
PLANNING COMMISSION AND
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
COUNCIL CONFERENCE AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 1...-
Meeting Date 4/25/96
ITEM TITLE: Review and Consideration of the Growth Management Oversight
Commission's (GMOC) 1995 Annual Report
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning~!
REVIEWED BY: City Manager (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No.-X)
On April 11, 1996, the GMOC finalized its 1995 Annual Report to the City Council regarding
compliance with the City's Quality-of-Life Thresholds Standards. The Report focuses on the
period from July 1, 1994 through June 30, 1995, although issues identified in the second half
of 1995 and early 1996 are also included where pertinent. The chairman's cover memorandum
to the Report provides a summary of the GMOC's [mdings and recommendations (please see
Attachment A). The workshop will give the GMOC an opportunity to discuss in detail the
Report's full findings and recommendations with the Planning Commission and City Council.
The GMOC is scheduled to commence its next review in October 1996, and will focus on the
period from July 1, 1995 to June 30, 1996.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
(1) That the Planning Commission accept the 1995 GMOC Annual Report and
recommendations as presented, and adopt a motion recommending that the City Council
do the same.
(2) That Council:
(a) Accept the GMOC's 1995 Annual Report and the recommendations contained
therein; and,
(b) Direct staff to undertake actions necessary to implement those recommendations
as presented in Attachment B - "1995 GMOC Recommendations / Implementing
Actions Summary".
Page 2, Item-L
Meeting Date 4/25/96
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS: The Planning Commission is
jointly participating in the workshop with Council, and wil1 provide its comments and
recommendations at that time.
DISCUSSION:
Main Conclusions / Issues of the 1995 Annual Reoort
The GMOC approved their fInal 1995 Annual Report and recommendations on April 11, 1996,
In summary, the GMOC found the fol1owing with respect to Threshold Standard compliance as
presented in greater detail in Attachment A:
Thresholds in comDliance -
Libraries
Drainage
Sewer
Water
Parks & Recreation
Schools
TraffIc
Fiscal
Thresholds not in ful1 comDliance -
Police
Fire/EMS
Air Quality
With regard to the thresholds not found in ful1 compliance, the foJlowing GMOC positions and/
or recommendations should be noted:
Police - Regarding non-compliance for the Police threshold, the shortfall continues to
be slight, and only related to one of the two measures for Priority I (emergency) cal1s
for service (CFS). The Priority II CFS Threshold was met and exceeded. As discussed
in the GMOC's report, although the shortfaJl was slight, the GMOC has concern since
this is the fIfth consecutive year that the Police Department has been very close to
compliance, but has not fuJly achieved such. The Police Department continues to
implement a variety of operational and managerial changes which have resulted in ever-
improving threshold performance over the last three years. Based on this trend, the
Police Department's report indicates that they anticipate meeting compliance for the
7/1/95 through 6/30/96 review period, Because similar indications have been given in
past years, but not ful1y achieved, the GMOC is recommending that should statistics for
the forthcoming review period continue to indicate non-compliance for the PI-CFS
Threshold, the Police Department be required to include in their report to the GMOC,
an evaluation of why the slight defIciency in PI -CFS response continues to occur.
Page 3, Item....1-
Meeting Date 4/25/96
Towards a more comprehensive evaluation of this and other police service delivery
considerations, the Police Department and the GMOC continue to stress the need to
purchase and install the proposed CAD/RMS. Without such a tool, the GMOC
understands that it will continue to be difficult for the Police Department and the GMOC
to understand new growth's influence on maintaining the standard, and whether
managerial and operational techniques can resolve the matter, or whether a reevaluation
of the threshold standard is warranted.
Fire/EMS - As presented in detail in previous GMOC reports, non-compliance for the
Fire/EMS threshold is attributable to a change in the manner of response time data
collection, and not the result of a reduction in fIre service levels for Fiscal Year 1994-95.
In July 1992, new automated communications equipment was installed in the Dispatch
Center. ' That system now captures the actual total response time, including the call
intake and dispatch components. The result is that available threshold reporting statistics
now include time frames inconsistent with those represented in the present threshold
standard, and result in an inability to directly detennine compliance. ~: /, '
Along with the Police Department, the Fire Department is also relying on the proposed
installation of the CAD/RMS to facilitate better management of resources, and to resolve
the present statistical inconsistencies in threshold response time measurement. Once the
CAD/RMS system has been operational for at least one year, the GMOC is again
recommending that the Fire/EMS Threshold (as well as that for Police) be reviewed for
possible revision. At least one year of CAD/RMS statistics are believed necessary in
order to produce reliable indicators and/or measurable results for use in the re-evaluation.
Air Ouality - On Air Quality, the draft revision to the Threshold Standard is again being
proposed, and is presented in Appendix D to the 1995 Annual Report. That Appendix
is part of Attachment C to this agenda statement. The revision was initially presented
in last year's report, and given Council's conceptual approval, has now been reviewed
and supported by the APCD. Based on this, the GMOC is now recommending that
Council direct staff to promptly forward the amendment for fonnal adoption. Staff is
prepared to accomplish such, and will bring the amendment forward for public hearing
within the next 5 months, and prior to commencement of the next GMOC review cycle
as requested.
With regard to some of the thresholds found in compliance, the GMOC is also making several
recommendations which should be noted:
Librarv - The GMOC is again stressing the need to update the City's 1987 Library
Master Plan, to address future library funding, siting and timing issues with respect to
the Sweetwater/Bonita Community (Rancho del Rey site) and the Eastern Territories
Community (Eastlake and/or Otay Ranch site(s)), While the Library Director explained
that the proposed FY1997-98 update time frame is based on an existing site option within
Page 4, Item~
Meeting Date 4/25/96
the Eastlake Village Center, the GMOC is recommending that Council direct appropriate
staff to ensure that future library siting issues are fully considered as part of the current
EastLake Master Plan reevaluation effort, The GMOC sees a potential problem should
the present Village Center site be detennined inadequate, and selection of a new site be
necessary, since the land planning re-evaluation will not necessarily be considering an
alternate site location.
Drainage - Installation of previously recommended drainage monitoring devices to
measure the effect of developments in eastern Chula Vista upon older infrastructure in
western Chula Vista, is proposed for the Telegraph and Poggi Canyon drainage basin as
part of the FY1996-97 CIP. The Engineering Division and the GMOC are
recommending that Council approve the proposed CIP.
Sewer - Presently, there is considerable activity and effort occurring toward ensuring
the availability of adequate, cost-effective sewage treatment capacity to meet the long-
tenn needs for buildout of the City's General Plan Area, These efforts are also
strategically related to the future availability of reclaimed water. The GMOC is
requesting that Council continue to support and fund staff and consultive efforts, and that
more infonnation about the status of these efforts, and related considerations, be included
in the next sewer threshold report to the GMOC in October 1996,
Parks and Recreation - Revision of the threshold to apply City-wide is again being
requested. In order to address previous comments regarding varying issues between
eastern and western Chula Vista, an amended draft version of a revised City-wide
standard (over that presented to Council last year) is presented in Appendix I to the
GMOC's 1995 Annual Report. That Appendix is part of Attachment C to this agenda
statement. The GMOC supports this draft, and, based on the relationship of infonnation
in the forthcoming Parks Implementation Plan (PIP) to the standard's implementation
provisions, the GMOC is recommending that Council direct staff to expeditiously
complete the PIP and to fmalize the current, proposed amendment, and return both for
fonnal public hearing adoption in the Fall/Winter of 1996. Based on present schedules
for the PIP, staff believes this time table is feasible,
Schools - Now that the SourcePoint School Emollment Impact Study has been
completed, the GMOC is requesting that Council and the Chula Vista Elementary School
District Board fonn a subcommittee to work with appropriate staff to evaluate the Study's
findings, and consider the development and adoption of appropriate mitigation strategies.
Regarding the Sweetwater Union High School District, the GMOC recommends that
issues regarding the funding, location and phasing of secondary schools to serve Salt
Creek Ranch, San Miguel Ranch and Otay Ranch be resolved as indicated in their report.
Page 5, Item--1-
Meeting Date 4/25/96
Traffic - The GMOC remains concerned over the longer-tenn outlook for threshold
compliance on H Street, both east and west of 1-805, as well as on other major arterial
street in eastern Chula Vista including Bonita Rd, and Telegraph Canyon Rd, Pursuant
to the Engineering Division's responses, the GMOC is requesting that 5 to 7 year
perfonnance projections for major arterial streets (such as H S1.) be included as part of
future annual traffic threshold reports.
Fiscal - At present, several of the DIF's, and related facility master plans need to be
updated to include the Otay Ranch project, as well as to reflect changes in other
assumptions and cost factors, Given the important role of the DIF's in maintaining
compliance with Fiscal and other thresholds, and considering increasing budget pressures,
the GMOC is recommending that the Council ensure adequate staffmg and fiscal
resources continue to be allocated so that the DIF's can be updated on a regular, periodic
schedule (every 1-2 years).
This is particularly true for the pending FY1996-97 budget. At present, affected
departments and City Administration recognize, and agree with the need for update of
these plans, As of the time of this report's preparation, however, it is the Planning
Department's understanding that preparation of such updates is not directly contemplated
in the FY 1996-97 staffing and/or work plans of the affected departments, nor have the
master plan update efforts themselves been fully scoped so that related staffmg and
funding implications can be identified.
Given this it will be necessary for staff to address work program considerations, and to
evaluate staffing, funding and prioritization matters relative to already scheduled or
contemplated major work efforts for each of the affected departments for both the
balance of FY 1995-96, and in their proposed FY1996-97 budgets. Council should
accordingly provide further direction to staff to develop and present proposals to
accomplish these efforts either within the remainder of FY1995-96, or as part of pending
FY1996-97 budget submittals.
The GMOC's 1995 Annual Report, included as Attachment A, contains complete discussions on
each threshold topic. Related, specific recommendations for Council action may be found within
the report in bold italic print, and denoted by "." markings, To assist the Council in
evaluating and acting upon the Report's many recommendations, a more concise summary of
recommendations and proposed Council implementing actions is presented in Attachment B.
Staff requests that Council direct staff to implement those recommendations through actions as
outlined in the right hand column of Attachment B. Appendices to the 1995 Annual Report,
presented in Attachment C, contain the threshold compliance reports presented to the GMOC
by City departments and outside agencies.
Page 6, Item--L
Meeting Date 4/25/96
FISCAL IMPACT: None at this time. As specific follow-up actions, such as the DIF and
facility master plan updates, are brought forward to City Council, fiscal analysis of these actions
will be provided.
Attachments:
A. Chairman's cover memo and GMOC 1995 Annual Report.
B. 1995 GMOC Recommendations /lmplementing Actions Summary
C. Appendices to the 1995 Annual Report.
(GMOC-95\GM95-CC .RPT)
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
1995 REPORT
SUBMITTED
APRIL 1996
Attachment A
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
1995 REPORT
Commission Members
Tris Hubbard, Chairman (Education)
James Kell, Vice Chairman (Eastern Territories)
Will T. Hyde (Environmental)
Chuck Peter (Business)
John Ray (Planning Commission)
Mike Armbrust (Center City)
Elizabeth Allen (Montgomery)
C. Lynn Dull (Sweetwater)
Glen Goerke (Development)
Staff
Edgar Batchelder, Senior Planner
April 1996
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TODic
Introduction
Review Process
Development Forecasts
Threshold/Annual Review Summary
Annual Review of Thresholds
Thresholds Reflectina Non-Compliance
Police
Fire/EMS
Air Quality
Thresholds Reflectina Compliance
Libraries
Drainage
Sewer
Water
Parks and Recreation
Schools
Traffic
Fiscal
Paae
1
2
2
5
6
9
12
15
16
18
20
24
27
32
35
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix
A. Police Department Memorandum
B. Fire Department Memorandum
C. APCD and City Environmental Resource Manager Communications
D. Draft Revised Air Quality Threshold Standard
E. Library Memorandum
F. Engineering Drainage and Sewer Report
G. Water District Communications
H. Parks and Recreation Department Memorandum
I. Draft Revised Parks and Recreation Threshold Standard
J. School District Communications
K. Engineering Traffic Reports and Memoranda
L. Finance Department Memorandum
M. Development Forecast Information
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
1995 REPORT
April 12, 1996
INTRODUCTION
In November 1987, through the input of citizens and developers, the City Council adopted
the Threshold/Standards Policy for Chula Vista. The policy addresses eleven public
facilities and services, and each is discussed in terms of a goal, objectives, "threshold" or
standard, and implementation measures. The standards form the backbone of an overall
growth management program for the City which has evolved since 1987 through adoption
of a Growth Management Element of the General Plan in 1989, and a Growth Management
Program document and implementing ordinance in 1991. Adherence to these Citywide
standards is intended to preserve and enhance both the environment and residents'
quality-of-life as growth occurs.
To provide an independent annual City-wide Threshold/Standards compliance review, a
Growth Management Oversight Committee (GMOC) was created. The GMOC was
originally appointed by the City Council in the summer of 1988. It is composed of nine
members representing a geographical balance of residents, as well as a cross section of
interests including education, environment, business and development. There is also
representation from the City Planning Commission. In April of 1991, the City Council
changed the designation of the Committee to a full City Commission.
The GMOC's review is structured around a fiscal year cycle. The intent is to accommodate
City Council consideration of GMOC recommendations which may have budget
implications. The official review period for this report is July 1, 1994 through June 30,
1995, although pertinent issues identified during the second half of 1995 and early 1996
are also addressed as necessary. The next GMOC review period is scheduled to begin
in October, 1996, and will address the period from July 1, 1995 through June 30, 1996.
In conducting its annual review, the GMOC's responsibilities include the following:
a determination of whether the thresholds have been complied with on both a
project and cumulative basis over the prior year;
whether compliance is likely to be maintained based on both short-term and long-
term development forecasts;
whether each threshold is appropriate for its goal;
whether any new thresholds should be adopted for any issues;
whether any issues should be added to or deleted from the threshold group;
whether the City has been using developer fees for the intended purpose;
what the fiscal impact of threshold compliance may be; and
whether the means of compliance are appropriate and being achieved.
1
Development projects in Chula Vista are required to demonstrate that the Threshold
Standards will be maintained as growth occurs. Each project is reviewed, and
appropriately conditioned to assure that needed facilities and services are in place in
advance of, or concurrent with, proposed development. This requirement promotes the
continuation of a high quality-of-life for existing as well as future City residents.
REVIEW PROCESS
The Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC) held a series of 11 meetings
from November 1995 through April 1996. The Commission spent the first meeting
reviewing the City Council's actions on their 1994 Annual Report and recommendations,
and in reviewing the established thresholds, Commission responsibilities, and the status
of City-wide development as an orientation. The next 7 meetings were spent reviewing
threshold reports submitted by both individual City departments and external agencies, and
in determining the status of compliance. Presentations were made by representatives of
the Sweetwater and Otay water districts, Chula Vista Elementary and Sweetwater Union
High School Districts, the San Diego County Air Pollution Control District, and City staff
including Public Works, Traffic Engineering, Parks and Recreation, Library, Fire, Police,
Finance, and Planning. The GMOC also reviewed whether or not it was appropriate to
issue a "statement of concern" or to make other recommendations regarding each
threshold. Following completion of the individual threshold reviews, the GMOC prepared
and adopted this annual report to the Planning Commission and City Council.
DEVELOPMENT FORECASTS
The Threshold/Standards Policy calls for the City to prepare both short-range (12 to 18
month) and mid-range (5 to 7 years) development forecasts at the beginning of the annual
GMOC review process. Complimentary to threshold performance evaluation, which
reviews the prior year period, these forecasts serve to provide a common basis by which
the GMOC, staff and external agencies can identify and address any potential threshold
issues before a problem arises. Over the years, the City has adjusted its forecasting
approach to be more cognizant of sub-regional development patterns and forecasts, such
as SANDAG's Series 8, which could influence infrastructure and services within the City's
Planning Area. A copy of this year's forecast information is included as Appendix M and
summarized below.
2
12-18 Month Forecast
The 12-18 month forecast is the main set of development projections upon which the
annual threshold reviews are based. The intent in preparing this forecast is to focus on
that near-term, more imminent development which will place demands on available
infrastructure and services. As such, the forecast derives largely from a survey of local
developers and builders as to their anticipations, and from a review of associated levels
of development under processing by the City including design review, subdivision maps,
plan checks and building permits.
Two tables are used in Appendix M to present the forecast figures; one for the Otay Water
District area which encompasses new development east of the 1-805 freeway, and one for
the Sweetwater Authority area which encompasses mostly infill development in older areas
of the City west of 1-805. The figures cover the 18-month period from July 1995 through
December 1996, and are intended to present a "worst-case" condition which allows
evaluations of the maximum anticipated demands on infrastructure and services. In
accordance with the tables, approximately 1911 housing units are anticipated to be
authorized for construction, and 1549 housing units are anticipated to reach occupancy
within the Otay District. For the Sweetwater Authority area, the 18-month projections are
for 65 housing units to be authorized for construction, and 49 units to reach occupancy.
This equates to annualized averages on a City-wide basis of 1317 housing unit
authorizations, and 1066 housing unit occupancies.
By comparison, these' annualized, "worst case" rates are consistent with historic annual
averages for the City since 1980. While this may be reflective of an optimistic turn in
development outlook toward recovery from the recession of the early 1990's, it is atypical
of recent, actual experiences. During 1994 and 1995, actual residential development
activity levels were about one half of the average annual levels experienced during the
mid- to later 1980's when development was at a high point. In general, most current
economic thinking indicates that the housing market will not recover until about 1997, and
then not to the growth rate levels seen in the later 1980's.
5-7 Year Forecast
The City's intent in preparing the mid-range (5-7 year) forecast is to provide sufficient
foresight as to any perceived, potential growth management issues before they become
a problem. In addition, this mid-range forecast is also intended to take into consideration
other factors at the regional and sub-regional level which may influence growth within the
City. Therefore, the City has revised its approach in recent years to coordinate with
SANDAG's "Series" growth forecasts to further improve forecasting methodology consistent
with the regional and sub-regional models, and to allow for easier and more consistent
updates of these forecasts, In doing so, the same assumptions utilized in SANDAG'S
Series 8 Interim Forecast have been applied to the City's forecast for the 1995-2000 time
frame. These assumptions include, but are not limited to, population and economic trends,
and infrastructure needs.
3
As indicated in the third table in Appendix M, the average annual number of housing units
anticipated for construction City-wide during the 1995-2000 time frame is approximately
910 units per year. This number takes into consideration development in the first phases
of Otay Ranch which is anticipated to commence construction in 1997, as well as known
facility capacity limitations, particularly those related to traffic circulation such as State
Route 125.
While a majority of the forecast is attributable to growth in eastern Chula Vista, the above
figures include approximately 100 dwelling units per year of infill development in western
Chula Vista (Sweetwater Authority area), based primarily on an analysis of historic trends.
4
II)
'"
'"
....
>-
II::
<
~
~
;:)11)
(/)e
~:;
wiD
>J:
WC)
11::;:)
...10
<II::
;:)J:
ZI-
Z"",
<e
, ....
-
(/)....
Cc
~o
ell::
ZW
<Q.
I-~
(/)w
c-
...I>
OW
J:II::
(/)
w
II::
J:
I-
o
...10 W
<...IwO
-o"z
I-::tzw
z(l)<~
I!!w::t~
00::00
D..::t 0
I- W
0::
(I)
ooww
Zl=>o
<o!!:!:i
I-<::t-
D..I-o...l
oo<!i
ozoo
<='1-0
...
...
oowo W
I-I-~I-WO
ifj~iij>[j:i
~w~~:E:J
WOD..woD..
!;;(~:3"<~
1-00::< 0
(I)
W
...1'0
<zz
1=0<
zZ:J
wO::D..
I-o:!!
0"'0
D.. 0
OW
...10
o:il-
::t-w
(1)...1""
WD..oc
O::~
::to
1-0
III~'
III
t_il;
:;::;t(\':;-,
1:,',111:'
::::::..' "~'
:~: ':~
" ;,
Illi
I()
w
'~' ~", , ,::~,::~".:::. ',.;.,'<...< ..~....
1111
::::4::=f',": :}f.-B~,* ":;:x:;:'} ,~-:,'}>.:
~t::t :~*-~~ :-: B ::: ~..;':::>>~x
~@W :~~~:t mV~-::: > ~ ~ ~~
14ft *fKt lt~;~ ~~~it
,",
~:::::~::::~f-
.:-:.
@h' !~c;,!~.,~,~,J~?:;,.:
illl; :;:f~.
II
..
~ .c
CI
ftI :I:
-
c
.. c
~ E 0
.. ';:
'I: - C W ='
0 u 0
.c 'I: ;0 ftI ..
- -
" .. ftI - ..
< is I!! .. -
w :> !
=' .. .. ~ ftI
(I) .. .. ..
- - :; ;
~ ~ ~ ~ 'a .c
(I) .. .. c 0 (I)
~ ii .. CI >- .. ..
.. w " 'I: .. .. .. ; is .. g u ii
,~ 0 I! c ; .. IE
f 'f! - (I) of .c u
'0 .. .Q .. ~ ftI U I! ..
D.. u: :<( :J 0 (I) .. .&:i D.. (I) .. .&:i I- u:
N ...; ... oft ui ,..: cO ... .,; ....
.... .... ....
-ANNUAL REVIEW OF THRESHOLDS-
THRESHOLDS REFLECTING NON-COMPLIANCE
D POLICE -
THE GMOC FINDS THAT THE CITY IS NOT IN FULL COMPLIANCE WITH THE
POLICE THRESHOLD STANDARD FOR PRIORITY I CALLS FOR SERVICE
(CFSI, ALTHOUGH THE SHORTFALL WAS AGAIN SLIGHT, THE GMOC
EXPRESSES CONCERN SINCE THIS IS THE FIFTH CONSECUTIVE YEAR IN
WHICH THE PI-CFS STANDARD HAS NOT BEEN FULLY MET. DESPITE A 1.2%
DECREASE IN CFS VOLUME OVER THE LAST YEAR, AND AN OVERALL
INCREASE IN PATROL STAFFING,
STANDARDS FOR PRIORITY II CFS WERE AGAIN MET AND SURPASSED.
The GMOC is concerned over the continued PI CFS deficiency despite continued
increases in patrol staffing, and the overall reduction in CFS volume. As stated in
prior years, the Police Department has been implementing a variety of operational
and managerial changes since its present administration took over in 1991. Many
of those changes are designed to improve call-for-service (CFS) response
performance, and intended to address non-conformance with the Police Threshold
Standard. Despite commendable efforts on the part of the Department to effect
community based policing, and other significant managerial and deployment tactics,
the Police Department continues to not meet full compliance with the PI-CFS
Standards as evidenced by the following statistics:
Priority I Calls for Service (PI CFS)-
Period
Response Time
w/in 7 minutes
Reported
Av. Resp. Time
Threshold
FY1992-93
FY1993-94
FY1994-95
84.0%
84.2%
85.4%
84.9%
4:30
4:44
4:35
4:37
Priority II Calls for Service (PII CFS)-
Response Time
Period w/in 7 minutes
Reported
Av. Resp. Time
Threshold
FY1992-93
FY1993-94
FY1994-95
62%
64.2
63.5%
63.4%
7:00
6:33
6:48
6:39
6
While the GMOC considers the PI CFS shortfall to be a modest deficiency, we
none-the-Iess remain concerned since this is fifth consecutive year in which Police
performance has been very near, but below, the minimum acceptable standard.
Based on oral presentations, the GMOC believes extension of pOlice services into
the expansive eastern area of the city may actually be having a negative impact on
the ability to meet Priority I threshold response times. This is mainly attributable to
topography (canyons, etc.), the resulting winding, loop roads and cul-de-sac streets,
and the fact that several of the major north/south connections to the east/west
arterial street system are not in place.
It is difficult for the GMOC to specifically pinpoint causes and/or recommend
remedial actions. There was no conclusive evidence presented to indicate that the
P1-CFS Threshold deficiency is attributable to new growth. In this regard, the
Police Department continues to indicate that present dispatch and record keeping
systems do not enable data management in a fashion which can readily quantify
whether increases in CFS are growth related. Since adequate tools do not exist to
conduct an evaluation of these eastern Chula Vista conditions, and their actual
affect to response times, purchase and installation of the full Computer-Aided
Dispatch Records Management System (CAD/RMS) is crucial to evaluating police
efficiency. The GMOC therefore recommends:
. That the City Council aggressively support the timely purchase,
installation and operation of the proposed CAD/RMS by directing
staff to develop viable funding proposals for Council action as
part of the FY 1996-97 budget submittal,
As of the time of this report's preparation, the GMOC understands that two
successful bidders for the CAD/RMS project (PS-115) have been identified, and are
reviewing various component and cost information per the City's request. City staff
and Administration are continuing to evaluate funding proposals. While this
represents progress, the GMOC would, however, like to stress the need to expedite
vendor selection, and to purchase and install the CAD/RMS during FY1996/97. The
GMOC has been faced with the P1-CFS non-compliance for five years already, and
at least one year of CAD/RMS statistics will be needed to enable the GMOC's
review. Therefore, if the CAD/RMS is not in place promptly, there may be several
more years of non-compliance before the GMOC has enough information to
adequately address the issue.
As noted last year, once better data is available through the CAD/RMS, re-
evaluation of the threshold standard is warranted. In order to produce worthwhile
indicators and/or measurable results for use in the reevaluation, it is anticipated that
at least one year of CAD/RMS statistics will be necessary to determine if current
issues influencing police performance can be solved through managerial
techniques, or if an alteration of the current Standard is warranted. Therefore, the
GMOC recommends:
7
. That re-evaluation of the Police Threshold Standard occur
approximately one year subsequent to the implementation of the
CAD/RMS system,
In the interim, and in order to better anticipate if non-compliance will continue, and
to accordingly adjust resources to hopefully preclude it from happening, the GMOC
recommends:
. That the Police Department be required to provide the City
Council with semi-annual compliance evaluations for the Priority
I CFS portion of the Police Threshold Standard,
In addition to this semi-annual reporting, the GMOC further requests that:
. Should monitoring statistics for the forthcoming review period
(7/1/95 - 6/30/96) be indicative of continued non-compliance for
the PI-CFS Threshold, that the Police Department be required to
include in thier report to the GMOC, an evaluation of why the
slight deficiency continues to occur.
As regards the longer-term outlook, the GMOC recognizes that it will continue to be
difficult for the Police Department and the GMOC to determine whether threshold
performance issues will continue to exist without the CAD/RMS. It is also difficult
to determine how best to structure and manage police resources in combating crime
and maintaining appropriate service levels for a growing city, both population and
geographic-wise. Several large projects in eastern Chula Vista will be undergoing
major planning activities over the next year, among them EastLake, San Miguel
Ranch and Otay Ranch. As the City grows and expands to the east and south, it
is becoming increasingly necessary to consider how best to deliver services to
those extending geographic areas in an efficient and timely manner.
The GMOC is aware of recent discussion of ideas and issues regarding potential
future expansion of police facilities and services. However, to our understanding,
this is occurring absent anything to formally evaluate or direct those efforts to a
result, such as a strategic or master plan. This is true despite ongoing development
planning and approvals in eastern Chula Vista which are effecting the physical and
social environment in which the services will ultimately be delivered. As noted
earlier, one example is the layout and street configuration in eastern Chula Vista
which are having an affect on response times. Additionally, by way of comparison,
Police is one of the only thresholds which does not have the more-or-Iess standard,
forward looking master plan. Presently, the "plan" for police facilities is part of the
City's Civic Center Master Plan, which assumes that the police facility will remain
in its present location, and thereby does not address planning issues with respect
to extending services and facilities to a growing and geographically expanding city.
Therefore, the GMOC recommends:
8
.
That the City Council direct staff of appropriate City
Departments, and allocate the necessary resources and budget
in FY1996-97, to commence preparation of a long-range strategic
plan for the future delivery of police services to the expanding
eastern area of the City consistent with threshold standards,
This plan should address expansions and/or changes in the level
and methods of deployment, as well as any needed or desirable
physical facility expansions, and/or relocations.
Beyond the CAD/RMS proposal and updating the master plan for police facilities,
the Police Department should be recognized and commended for continuing to
expand on a multi-faceted proactive policing effort under the well-grounded
philosophy that it is more effective in the long run to prevent crime than to respond
to calls-for-service. In this light, the GMOC recommends:
. That the City Council continue to actively support the further
expansion of proactive community policing efforts such as the
School Resource Officer, Community Resource Officers and the
Senior Volunteer Patrol.
Given the apparently related CFS decrease, coupled with growing fiscal constraints
to significantly expanding the police force, the GMOC believes that this emphasis
to proactive, crime preventative policing may prove to be a significant component
in maintaining police thresholds over the longer term.
D FIRE/EMS -
THE GMOC FINDS THAT THE CITY IS NOT IN FULL COMPLIANCE WITH THE
FIRE/EMS THRESHOLD STANDARD, THIS NON-COMPLlANCE IS ATTRIBUTED
TO CHANGES IN THE MANNER OF DATA COLLECTION. AND NOT A
REDUCTION OF FIRE SERVICE ,LEVELS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1994-95, THE
GMOC IS STILL CONCERNED. HOWEVER, SINCE THIS IS THE THIRD
CONSECUTIVE YEAR IN WHICH THE CURRENT SYSTEM OF MEASUREMENT
DOES NOT AFFORD A DIRECT EVALUATION CONSISTENT WITH THE
STRUCTURE OF THE PRESENT FIREIEMS THRESHOLD.
The Fire/EMS Threshold Standard requires that 85% of all emergency fire and
medical calls be responded to within 7 minutes. Response statistics presented for
Fiscal Year 1994-95 indicate that only 82% of all emergency calls were responded
to within 7 minutes (3% less than the standard). 85% of the calls were responded
to within 7 minutes, 16 seconds (16 seconds over standard).
As outlined in greater detail in last year's report (1994), this apparent non-
compliance continues to result from statistical inconsistencies in the manner in
which the present automated system records total call response time. The present
9
standard allocates a flat 30 seconds for call dispatch, not the actual time for call
intake and dispatch, as is now recorded by the new communications equipment
installed in the Dispatch Center in July, 1992. This could be adding 20 to 60
seconds to overall response time per call, and causing the statistical non-
compliance indicated above. The Fire Department continues to emphasize that the
turnout and travel time components of response remain largely unchanged from
prior years, illustrating that delivery of fire and emergency medical services has not
deteriorated. In addition, the Fire Department continues in its efforts to maximize
performance and minimize response times.
As the GMOC understands, since tools do not exist for an adequate evaluation
consistent with the present standard, purchase and installation of the full Computer-
Aided Dispatch Records Management System (CAD/RMS) is necessary to maximize
dipatcher performance, decrease dispatch times, and to enable the Fire Department
to properly evaluate its response time performance. This evaluation is needed in
part to correct present statistical inconsistencies, as well as to provide a true and
accurate measurement of compliance with the present standard, in order to
determine whether any changes to the Threshold Standard are needed. Given the
significance of the CAD/RMS system to both the Police and Fire Department, the
GMOC recommends:
. That the City Council aggressively support the timely purchase,
installation and operation of the proposed CAD/RMS by directing
appropriate staff to develop viable funding proposals for Council
action as part of the FY 1996-97 budget submittal,
The GMOC strongly re-emphasizes its understanding that if only existing systems
remain in place, there will be a continuation of the present inability to evaluate
threshold performance consistent with the provisions of the current standard. Again,
given the aforementioned beneficial information the CAD/RMS system will provide,
the GMOC also recommends:
. That re-evaluation of the Fire/EMS Threshold Standard occur
approximately one year subsequent to implementation of the
CAD/RMS.
In response to last year's recommendation to commence update of the City's Fire
Station Master Plan, the Fire Department indicated in its report that due to staffing
and budget considerations, it may be three to five years before a full and exhaustive
update would take place. Similar to issues raised under the Police discussion,
however, both the GMOC and the Fire Department recognize that several large
projects in eastern Chula Vista will be undergoing major planning activities during
the next year. This includes remaining areas of EastLake, as well as neighboring
San Miguel Ranch and Otay Ranch.
10
Given this, the Fire Department's report indicates the urgency to immediately
undertake an interim update of the Fire Station Master Plan. This stems largely
from the need to locate permanent Fire Station #6 (Interim station #6 is located in
the EastLake Business Park area), and to address potential coverage and threshold
response issues between the Sunbow and Otay Ranch SPA One projects, and the
Salt Creek Ranch, Salt Creek I/San Miguel Ranch projects. In both instances, the
projects in which the existing Fire Station Master Plan and City General Plan
indicate station location (Sunbow and Salt Creek Ranch), have been stalled due to
financial problems.
While the GMOC recognizes that a full and comprehensive Fire Station Master Plan
update may take a number of years to complete, we also understand and concur
with the immediate needs, and therefore recommend:
. That the City Council direct staff of the Fire, Planning and other
appropriate City Departments to promptly commence preparation
of the Interim Fire Station Master Plan Update as has been
proposed, and ensure that necessary priority is given, so that the
effort may be completed by the end of 1996.
This timetable is intended to ensure that Fire/EMS Threshold-related planning
matters can be sufficiently addressed, and appropriate conditions established
through the Public Facility Financing Plans (PFFP's), in conjunction with master
planning reviews for Eastlake, Otay Ranch, and San Miguel Ranch which are being
processed in that same general time window.
Beyond the above noted Interim Update effort, it is the GMOC's position that as the
City grows and expands to the east and south, it is becoming increasingly
necessary to consider how best to deliver services to those extending geographic
areas in an efficient and timely manner. Therefore, the GMOC:
. Continues to emphasize the need to conduct a full and complete
update of the City's 1989 Fire Station Master Plan within the next
3 years.
Such a schedule is viewed as necessary so that the full update may be initially
considered as part of FY1996-97 budget deliberations, to ensure that the update is
actually to be completed and adopted within the next three years.
11
C AIR QUALITY -
THE GMOC FINDS THAT DESPITE CONTINUED OVERALL IMPROVEMENT IN
AMBIENT AIR QUALITY, THE SAN DIEGO REGION STILL DOES NOT MEET
STATE AND FEDERAL STANDARDS FOR AIR QUALITY, AND THEREFORE,
TECHNICALLY IS OUT OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE PRESENT THRESHOLD
STANDARD. THE GMOC, HOWEVER, FURTHER FINDS THAT A "STATEMENT
OF CONCERN" IS UNWARRANTED,
First and foremost, it should be noted that the GMOC received reports and oral
presentations under the spirit of the proposed, revised Air Quality Threshold
Standard included with last year's report. Even though the revision has yet to be
formally adopted, the GMOC concurred that the reporting under the new standard
would be much improved.
Based on the trial reports and presentations pursuant to the proposed, amended Air
Quality Threshold, both the GMOC and the APCD find that the draft (as presented
in Appendix D) appears well-reasoned and innovative, and forms a workable and
logical foundation for annual progress/compliance reporting on air quality
improvements efforts at the local and regional level. Given this, and Council's
favorable response to the proposed amendment (initially presented with last year's
[1994] GMOC Report, the GMOC recommends:
. That the City Council direct appropriate City staff to promptly
initiate formal review and adoption proceedings for the proposed
Air Quality Threshold Standard revision. The GMOC further
requests that adoption occur prior to September 1996, so that the
revision will be in full effect prior to commencing the next
threshold review cycle in October 1996,
As noted above, the GMOC this year received reports and presentation from both
the San Diego County Air Pollution Control District (APCD), and the City's
Environmental Resource Manager. Under the new threshold standard, the focus
of both reports was towards those activities and efforts being undertaken regionally
and locally to improve air quality, regardless of whether the San Diego Region is
presently in or out of compliance with regard to a number of State and Federal
criteria pollutants. The GMOC believes that the new focus is a better, and more
realistic and measurable approach to ensuring air quality improvement, especially
since Chula Vista cannot improve its air quality separate from the regional air basin,
and the fact that import pollution from the Los Angeles basin will continue to affect
our ability to comply with State and Federal standards for the foreseeable future.
As an example, 10 of the Region's 12 days federal standards violation days during
1995 were directly attributable to Los Angeles import. A summary of air quality
conditions for 1995 is presented in the following table:
12
...:....:.~J~JIIIII~1Iil~~~jlf:I!IIIIII;
iilliff:U.~l'~~I.~fl~L'I~fft ~lilllflll[llllilllli\lllll~
San Diego Region
Chula Vista
139
21
90
12
96
6
~.I.!I.~III!~ J~~~l: .....
San Diego Region
Chula Vista
39
3
14
1
12
o
The APCD continues to note that Chula Vista enjoys some of the best air quality in
the Region, and applauded the City for its leadership efforts in local air quality
improvement activities. The GMOC was also impressed by the amount and
diversity of air quality improvement activities being undertaken through the office of
the City's Environmental Resource Manager. Following is an overview of these
activities, which were also highlighted in the Mayor's recent State of the City
Address:
Development of a C02 Reduction Plan as part of an international
consortium, to serve as a model of community-based progressive
environmental initiatives for other cities. Chula Vista is the first city in the
State to have developed such a plan.
Smog busters Alternative Fuel Rebate Program which is the first municipal
program in the U.S. to provide cash rebates to local citizens and businesses
for replacing gasoline powered vehicles to electric or Compressed Natural
Gas (CNG).
Hydrogen Fuel Cell Project which will place three state-of-the-art buses into
service in place of three diesel buses.
Chula Vista Telecenters. The City has opened two such centers which allow
local residents to conduct work from the centers without the need to
commute to their normal place of work. Additionally, the City has initiated a
distance learning program for college courses in conjunction with both
National University and the University of Phoenix.
Participation as a model city in the SMART Communities program, which
focuses on automating city services to enable residents and local business
to conduct city business from their home or workplace.
13
Chula Vista's Business for an Environmentally Sustainable Tomorrow (BEST)
Awards program to provide local business with awards and recognition for
energy efficiency and conservation efforts.
Employee VanPool Program which will place three CNG vans into service to
drive employees from their homes to City Hall and back, reducing vehicle
miles traveled and air pollution.
Several other matters were addressed in APCD's presentation regarding the current
activities of the APCD as they may affect the City in the future, as follows:
Recent completion of its Triennial Update of the Regional Air Quality Strategy
(RAQS) to address compliance with State standards.
The State Implementation Plan (SIP) is nearing Federal EPA approval, and
through its programs, projects that the Region will attain federal standards
by 1999.
Adoption of the Mobile Source Emission Reduction Credit (MERC) Rule
enabling businesses to offset new or increased emissions from stationary
sources (factories, etc.) with credits from reducing mobile sources in their
fleets, etc.
Establishment of the Indirect Source Program as a voluntary program for
local jurisdictions to receive technical assistance on amending the local
General Plan and/or other local land use plans to reduce bias against
walking, and promote design which encourages biking and the use of transit.
APCD will produce a set of General Plan guidelines by the end of 1996.
Working toward implementation and enforcement of the Border Vehicle
Program to address issues involved with implementing AB2008, which
extends emission control requirements to vehicles from Mexico used in
commuting to work in California. APCD is working to establish better
controls and enforcement mechanisms, and Representative Bilbray has filed
a bill to fund a study of border vehicle emissions.
In addition, the GMOC also notes that the State Air Resources Board's (ARB)
deadline of 1998 for requiring 2% of automakers inventory of new vehicles in
California to be "0 emission", has now been pushed back beyond the year 2003.
14
THRESHOLDS REFLECTING COMPLIANCE
C LIBRARIES -
THE GMOC FINDS THAT THE CITY IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE LIBRARY
THRESHOLD BASED ON THE OPENING OF THE SOUTH CHULA VISTA
LIBRARY IN APRIL, 1995. GIVEN GROWTH AND POPULATION PROJECTIONS,
COMPLIANCE WILL BE MAINTAINED AT LEAST THROUGH THE YEAR 2000,
THE GMOC COMMENDS THE LIBRARY DEPARTMENT FOR ITS DILIGENT
FORWARD PLANNING IN BRINGING ABOUT THE SOUTH CHULA VISTA
LIBRARY,
The Library Threshold Standard requires that 500 square feet of library space
(adequately equipped and staffed) be provided per each 1,000 population. Based
on an estimated City population of 154,350 as of June 30, 1995, a total of 77,175
square feet of library space is required. As of that date, 102,000 square feet was
available through the Chula Vista Public Library at 365 "F" Street with 55,000
square feet, the Eastlake Library at 1120 Eastlake Parkway with 10,000 square feet,
and the new South Chula Vista Library with 37,000 square feet. Based on even the
highest City population projection of 196,680 persons for the year 2000, compliance
will be maintained.
Despite this projected compliance, the GMOC continues to note that most of the
present library facilities are located in western Chula Vista. As discussed in detail
in last year's (1994) report, the next library scheduled for construction is in the
Sweetwater/Bonita General Plan Community, and slated for location at the
northeastern corner of East 'H' Street and Paseo Ranchero, within the Rancho Del
Rey development. At issue for the GMOC last year, was that the timing may be
delayed despite the fact that development and population already exist in eastern
Chula Vista, and substantial growth is on the immediate horizon, The Library's
1994 report indicated that the project will be funded by Development Impact Fees,
and its timing may be delayed beyond the turn of the century, dependant on the
collection of fees to cover the estimated $9.5 million needed to construct, furnish
and equip the facility. This situation, in conjunction with the need to address
longer-term disposition of a permanent library for the Eastern Territories General
Plan Community (which contains the EastLake and Otay Ranch project areas),
raised the GMOC's concern, and prompted a recommendation calling for a much-
needed update of the City's present 1987 Library Master Plan. Based on these
conditions being largely unchanged from last year, the GMOC:
. Continues to stress the need to undertake, in a timely manner, an
update of the City's 1987 Library Master Plan,
In response to that recommendation, the Library's current (1995) report calls for the
update to be conducted in FY1997/98, and funded through Public Facility
Development Impact fees. The stated rationale for this time table is the need to
15
make a determination as to whether or not to use the 1 acre site that has been
offered at EastLake Village Center for a permanent library no later than June 30,
1998.
While the proposed preparation date of FY1997-98 has been rationalized in terms
of the present EastLake site option, the GMOC remains concerned since current
land planning re-evaluations for EastLake, and portions of neighboring Otay Ranch,
will likely be completed prior to that time. The GMOC sees a potential problem
should the presently proposed Village Center site be determined inadequate, and
selection of a new site be necessary, since the land planning re-evaluation will not
necessarily be considering an alternate site location. Therefore, regardless of
timing for the formal Library Master Plan Update as proposed by the Library Director
(currently for fiscal year 1997/98), the GMOC:
. Requests that Council direct staff to ensure that interim and
permanent library siting issues are fully considered during the
course of the EastLake Master Plan re-evaluation effort, and the
ongoing Otay Ranch planning efforts,
Regarding the GMOC's prior recommendation to consider amendments to the
Library Threshold, more time is still needed for technological developments to take
place before considering any potential revisions.
D DRAINAGE -
THE GMOC FINDS THAT THE CITY IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE DRAINAGE
THRESHOLD STANDARD ON BOTH A PROJECT AND CUMULATIVE BASIS,
Similar to last year's findings, no major drainage problems or threshold compliance
issues can be attributed to new growth during the review period. City growth
management programs continue to require major developments to construct
detention basins and other infrastructure so that downstream flows are not
increased. Each new subdivision is required to construct all drainage facilities to
handle storms of a 10 to 100 year magnitude, depending on the facility and size of
the drainage basin. The Environmental Impact Report for each development must
address any possible drainage problems either on-site or off-site. The developer
is then required to implement mitigation measures as necessary. There are a
number of drainage studies, facilities design work, and CIP projects currently
underway, and which are outlined in the detail report in Appendix F.
Last year, in response to the GMOC's expressed concern that quantifiable
data/evidence was not available to demonstrate that new growth in eastern Chula
Vista is not negatively impacting older facilities in western Chula Vista, the Public
Works Department, Engineering Division, responded with a recommendation for
development of a monitoring system to definitively resolve whether such conditions
16
exist, and indicated that such a system was feasible and desirable from a number
of standpoints. Based on the City Council's further direction, the Engineering
Division completed an evaluation of potential sites for such stations in the Poggi
Canyon and Telegraph Canyon drainages in the vicinity of 1-805. The proposal is
to acquire and install one monitoring station in each of the noted drainage basins
as part of the FY 1996-97 CIP budget. Therefore, the GMOC recommends:
. That Council approve the additional drainage monitoring stations
proposed in the FY 1996-97 CIP for the Telegraph and Poggi
Canyon drainage courses.
While the GMOC again commends the City for ongoing attentiveness to threshold
maintenance for new development, we remain concerned over needed, but
unfunded drainage improvements throughout western Chula Vista. As noted
previous reports, the City Council accepted an Engineering Department report in
May 1992, which included proposals for construction of drainage facilities to correct
deficiencies. and established a priority list of needed drainage improvement
projects. That list contained a total of 84 needed but currently unfunded
improvements with an approximated cost of $23,025,000. Considering an inflation
rate of 4% per year, funding of $1,695,000 per year for 20 years would be
necessary to complete the projects.
In conjunction with this year's Drainage Threshold report, the Engineering Division
again presented a select list of the current 14 top priority projects, totaling
$3,858,500, along with their present status and an indication of necessary new
budget appropriations through FY 2000-01 to accomplish them. This list represents
only a portion of the needed, remaining projects from the original 1992 study's list.
The GMOC is acutely aware of funding deficiencies, specifically for those more
significant projects which could present a problem in the case of a major storm.
The GMOC is also aware that current sources of funding for drainage projects are
severely limited in comparison to the total cost of the needed improvements as
indicated above. The $1.6+ million in annualized costs to complete these
improvements over a 20-year period is staggering in light of the many other
demands vying for ever-limited fiscal resources. It is the GMOC's position that if the
City intends to remediate even the most significant of these deficiencies in a
relatively timely manner, and before they present a threshold problem, concerted
effort and attention need to be given to devising an aggressive funding effort.
Therefore, the GMOC recommends:
. That Council direct appropriate staff to undertake a proactive re-
evaluation of potential funding sources for needed drainage
improvements in western Chula Vista, and report back to the
Council and the GMOC on prospects and proposed efforts to
obtain them. Several of the identified priority projects have no
17
funding source, and need to be given attention through an
aggressive effort.
D SEWER -
THE GMOC FINDS THAT THE CITY IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SEWER
THRESHOLD STANDARD ON BOTH A PROJECT AND CUMULATIVE BASIS,
There were no significant instances of the threshold standard for sanitary sewers
being exceeded as a result of new growth during the reporting period. City design
standards for sewers limit the flow in sewers up to 12" in diameter to 50% full, and
to 75% full for sewers larger than 12". The City has also allowed flow up to 75%
full in 8", 10", and 12" diameter sewers if it can be shown that ultimate development
has already occurred in the area served by that sewer.
The Engineering Division's report outlined several significant activities either recently
completed, or presently underway, to address the provision of adequate sewer
facilities and maintenance of threshold compliance:
1) Pending review and potential update of the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin
DIF based on land use changes within the basin, as well as present out-of-
basin pumped flows.
2) Continuing progress toward a Trunk Sewer Usage Agreement with the
County regarding the Proctor Valley Road Sewer which will serve Salt Creek
I, Salt Creek Ranch, San Miguel Ranch, and the Bonita Meadows
developments, as well as other adjacent parcels.
3) Completion of a sewer replacement and upgrade from an 8 to 12 inch line
in the Palm Canyon area.
4) FY 1995-96 CIP inclusion for a major reconstruction of sewers under Bonita
Rd. between 1-805 and Plaza Bonita Rd.
5) The City's sewer TV inspection crew continues to monitor problem sites in
order to determine if the condition of the sewer lines has affected the flow.
An additional 54,320 linear feet of sewer lines were televised during 1995 for
Phase VII of the Sewer Rehabilitation Program. Crews will be concentrating
their efforts on the Montgomery area during 1996.
6) A developer-funded study of the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin to determine
needed improvements and related funding mechanisms, is planned and work
should commense during FY 1995-96.
18
San Dieao MetroDolitan Seweraae Svstem
At present, the City's total daily wastewater flow into the Metropolitan Sewage
System (Metro) is approximately 11.198 million gallons per day (mgd), which is
down slightly from last year (12.048 mgd), but still well within our current contract
capacity of 19,2 mgd, The 11,198 mgd includes 9,267 mgd of metered flows
discharged directly to the Metro sewer line, and 1,931 mgd of metered and non-
metered flows discharged through the Spring Valley Outfall Sewer. Annual
wastewater flows continue to change at a rate much less than predicted due
primarily to the recent building slowdown and water conservation efforts, and are
now more accurately tracked by new metering stations.
As required by the Threshold Standard, staff indicates that there is adequate
capacity in the Metro system to serve growth for the coming 12 to 18 months based
on the City's growth forecasts. With regard to longer-term growth projections, our
remaining contract capacity of 8.002 mgd should serve the City until approximately
2010 or later, depending on the rate of growth. Although the City's 1960 Metro
agreement expires in 2004, the agreement allows the City, at its option, to extend
the contract to 2014.
It is with regard to this longer-term situation that the GMOC continues to express
concern. As was initially presented last year, the prior Metro management system,
under which we have our present contracts, was replaced by the San Diego Area
Wastewater Management District (SDAWMD). The SDAWMD was intended to
manage construction and operation of Metro and Clean Water Program sewage
transportation and treatment facilities. Chula Vista exercised its option to withdraw
from the SDAWMD without penalty in June, 1994. Since then, the City of San
Diego has also withdrawn, along with other cities, and the SDAWMD has been
dissolved. At present, all Metro and Clean Water Program facilities will be owned
and operated by the City of San Diego. Current efforts on the part of the City and
other South Bay jurisdictions are focusing on various options for financing, design,
construction and operation of a treatment/water reclamation plant in the Otay Valley,
which has been indefinitely postponed by the City of San Diego, but no decisions
have been made yet. The City is also negotiating with San Diego regarding our
Metro contract to determine the City's responsibility to participate in the funding of
wastewater transportation, treatment, and water reclamation facilities other than the
original Point Loma plant.
The GMOC sees the results of these discussions as critical to resolving the
uncertainty which presently exists regarding the availability and costs for future
sewerage treatment capacity sufficient to meet buildout needs of the City's adopted
General Plan. The GMOC therefore recommends:
. That Council continue to support staff and consultive efforts to
expeditiously develop a strategic plan which ensures sufficient
future sewage treatment capacity to meet the long-range,
buildout needs of the City's adopted General Plan.
19
The GMOC further requests that the available results of this
strategic planning effort be presented to the GMOC during the
next threshold review cycle commencing in October, 1996.
In addition, the discussions form another critical link with respect to the future
availability and usage of reclaimed water. The North City Plant, the South Bay
Treatment Plan adjacent to the International Boundary and Water Commissions
(IBWC) Plant in the Tijuana River Valley, and the proposed Otay Valley Plant will
provide the majority of reclaimed water which could be used locally in Chula Vista,
In this regard, the success of discussions and negotiations regarding the financing
and construction of proposed Clean Water Program facilities will largely determine
whether reclaimed water usage on a meaningful scale will ever become a reality.
As discussed further in the following section, development of significant reclaimed
water resources is key to attaining local water district's goals to reduce dependance
on imported water supply.
C WATER -
THE GMOC FINDS THAT BOTH THE SWEETWATER AUTHORITY AND OTAY
WATER DISTRICT HAVE SUFFICIENT WATER SUPPLY AND AVAILABILITY TO
MEET THE NEEDS OF LOCAL GROWTH OVER THE NEXT 12 TO 18 MONTHS,
AND ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE WATER THRESHOLD STANDARD,
Both water districts reported that the overall outlook for water supply at the State,
County and local (Chula Vista) for the next 12 to 18 months is excellent. The future
picture is also becoming very positive, and capable of supporting the City's long-
term growth plans, including Otay Ranch.
The GMOC again commends both water districts for their continuing cooperative
efforts together, with other water districts, and with the City regarding the supply
and delivery of water to meet the needs of existing and future development. Both
Otay Water District and Sweetwater Authority have been quite responsive in
addressing prior GMOC concerns regarding longer-term supply and storage issues.
Based on the continued cooperation and progress toward ensuring sufficient long-
term supply, as outlined below, the GMOC is again not recommending issuance of
a "Statement of Concern" to either district.
Following are examples of the substantial progress made in the area of long-term
supply at the State, County and local level since the GMOC last issued a
"Statement of Concern" to the districts in our 1993 report:
The Metropolitan Water District (MWD) has implemented a water policy to
assure long-term supply. MWD's goal is to meet 100% of the water demand
90% of the time, and the remaining 10% of the time meet a minimum of 80%
of the water demand. To achieve this goal, MWD is investing in recharge
projects, desalinization, and funding of recycled water and other new water
sources.
20
MWD has commenced construction of Domenigoni Reservoir in Riverside
County which is scheduled for completion in the year 2000, and will store
excess water in times of plentiful supply to be used in the San Diego Region
in drought or other emergencies, such as earthquakes.
MWD has adopted an integrated resources plan which includes six
implementation policies covering the following topics; reliability, balance,
competitiveness, completion of the Eastside (Domenigoni) Reservoir,
Colorado River Aqueduct operation capacity, and adaptability.
The San Diego County Water Authority (CWA) and local water districts are
working to develop a region-wide "Highly Reliable Water Supply Rate" for
industry. This proposal has been merged with the City of San Diego's
SWAP program (San Diego Water Availability Plan), which proposes to
collect slightly higher rates to fund water transfers.
The CWA and local districts continue to discuss the potential exchange of
water between agencies and the "wheeling" of water by CWA.
The CWA is also studying the feasibility of bringing excess Imperial Irrigation
District water to San Diego.
The CWA's Pipeline NO.4 is expected to be in operation by February 1997,
and will substantially increase the capacity of the treated water delivery
system to Otay Water District (OWD).
OWD is developing an Integrated Resource Plan to assure the reliability of
water supply through a multi-faceted approach involving development of
wells, recharge, desalinization, local treatment plants, local storage, recycled
water and conservation.
OWD has completed preparation of a Draft Water Resources Master Plan
which incorporates the concepts of water storage and supply from
neighboring water agencies to meet operational and emergency supply.
OWD has been working closely with City staff in developing the plan,
particularly in the context of the City's Sphere of Influence Update effort and
provision of water to the Otay Ranch project.
The Sweetwater Authority (SWA) has prepared a preliminary design and an
Environmental Impact Report for a plant to extract brackish groundwater in
the Lower Sweetwater River area.
The SWA is proceeding with design and environmental compliance to
increase the storage capacity of Sweetwater Reservoir by approximately
2000 acre-feet.
The SWA is in discussion with the County of San Diego regarding the
County's proposed construction of an 8 to 10 MGD reclaimed water
21
treatment plant on the Spring Valley trunk sewer near the South Bay
Swap meet. SWA would plan to use the reclaimed water in the seawater
barrier along 1-5 to protect future Phase II of the Lower Sweetwater River
Demineralization Facility from saltwater intrusion.
These and a number of other efforts on the part of both districts are contained in
the reports in Appendix G.
From among the number of regional and local water planning activities presently
taking place, the GMOC would like to highlight the matter of reclaimed water since
it is stated to playa reasonably significant role in meeting long-term needs, and in
reducing dependance on imported supply. As introduced in the preceding Sewer
section of this report, reclaimed water is taking an increasing role in meeting
regional sewage treatment mandates, as well as in meeting the water demands of
future growth. Given this increasing role in both arenas, the GMOC believes that
there is a need to focus attention on the topic to ensure public awareness and
involvement about its usage. Such awareness and involvement will assist in
building a market for reclaimed water, the economics of which will have a direct and
fundamental bearing on whether significant future use of reclaimed water becomes
a reality of not.
Towards ensuring that reclaimed water takes on a meaningful role in the South Bay
and Chula Vista, the GMOC requests:
. That focus be given to the to the topic of future availability and
useage of reclaimed water, and that both local water districts
include discussion of the present efforts and status of reclaimed
water development in next year's reports to the GMOC,
Since most of the region's future reclaimed water will be generated from sewage
treatment plants, the location and timing of reclaimed water transmission
infrastructure, and establishment of a consumer market needs to be coordinated
with long-range sewage treatment proposals.
On the local front, both water districts continue to actively participate on the
Interagency Water Task Force (IAWTF) which has proven to be an excellent forum
for the City and the districts to develop strategies for immediate and long range
water delivery to the South Bay area, including state-wide water matters which may
impact development within Chula Vista. As the City moves forward with sphere of
influence implementation and development of the Otay Ranch and other large
projects, this type of ongoing coordination will continue to be invaluable, and
therefore, the GMOC recommends:
. That the City Council continue to support the City's involvement
with the IAWTF, and direct staff to work cooperatively with both
local water agencies and the CWA to further the mutual goals of
reducing dependence on imported water supply, and developing
22
a sufficient storage and supply network to meet the demands of
future growth,
In each of the last two annual reports, the GMOC has presented Sweetwater
Authority's request for increased coordination regarding the consideration of water
transmission line capacity to support rezonings and infill development, particularly
in the northwestern quadrant of the City. While the Sweetwater Authority notes
improved communication between project proponents and the City, their current
report continues to indicate that multi-unit housing's fire flow demands continue to
exceed the capacity of existing, small diameter cast iron pipes. The GMOC would
therefore recommend:
. That the City Council direct staff of the Public Works, Planning,
Building and Housing, and Fire Departments to confirm that a
coordinated process does, or will, exist to accomplish advance
notification to project applicants regarding water system
adequacy to meet the fire flow demands for intill development in
western Chula Vista,
In order to further address this issue, perhaps it would be prudent for City staff to
undertake an effort with Sweetwater Authority to comprehensively evaluate infill
development potential in western Chula Vista, as a means to identify necessary
water supply infrastructure improvements. This would essentially amount to a
Western Chula Vista Water Improvement Master Plan, which developers and the
City alike would be aware of well in advance of need.
23
C PARKS AND RECREATION -
THE GMOC FINDS, BASED ON THE PRESENT STANDARD, THAT THE CITY IS
IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE PARKS AND RECREATION THRESHOLD ON BOTH
A PROJECT AND CUMULATIVE BASIS
The Parks and Recreation threshold is a population-based standard calling for 3.0
acres of neighborhood and community park land to be provided for every 1,000
residents east of 1-805. This standard has been met as of June 30, 1995, as
illustrated by the following table:
Acres of Acres/ Acre Shortfall
Area Population Parks 1,000 or Excess
East of 1-805 44,161 203,40 4,61 +70,92
West of 1-805 110,228 129.45 1.17 -201.23
City-Wide 154,389 332.85 2.16 -130.32
Standardlldeal 154,389 463.17 3.00 -130.32
While demonstrating compliance (based on the present standard applying east of
1-805 only), this table also reflects the continuing shortfall in park land both for
western Chula Vista, and for the City as a whole. The matter of City-wide and
western Chula Vista conditions under the spirit of the Threshold Standard for
eastern Chula Vista, has been an issue with the GMOC since 1990.
At that time, the GMOC first recommended that the Parks and Recreation Threshold
be revised to apply City-wide. The thrust was to exemplify that growth management
policy, and the related "quality-of-life" goals, were city-wide concepts, and not
intended to create perceptions of "haves" and "have-nots" with regard to new and
existing development areas respectively. Concerns initially expressed at that time
dealt with the fact that the Thresholds were intended to ensure a standard for new
Qrowth. Since the vast majority of new growth was to occur east of the 1-805, the
standard was established to apply there. A secondary concern was that the older,
western area of the City had developed since 1911, without the guidance of such
a standard. When coupled with the Montgomery annexation area, western Chula
Vista was understood to have a substantial pre-existing deficiency, making
application of the new growth standard there questionable, particularly any standard
which required growth moratoriums for non-compliance.
In 1992, the City Council endorsed the concept of such an amended, city-wide
standard, but called for a study of a ootential credit system (parks equivalency
factor), and/or other innovative approaches, which could be employed toward
addressing the pre-existing deficient conditions in western Chula Vista. The Council
24
indicated that it desired completion of this study, before it would consider adoption
of a revised, city-wide standard. It was agreed at that time, that any application of
a 3 acres/1000 population parks standard in western Chula Vista would be a long-
term (20+ years) goal, and not a rigid requirement whose non-compliance would
result in a growth moratorium, as is the case under the present eastern Chula Vista
Standard.
This study, under the title of the Western Chula Vista Parks Implementation Plan
(PIP), was initiated by staff in 1993, but has yet to be completed and adopted. The
GMOC is frustrated that adoption of the revised Threshold policy has been delayed
contingent upon completion of the PIP. The GMOC believes the PIP should be
completed expeditiously so that a revised threshold standard can be adopted.
Toward accomplishing this, the GMOC again recommends:
. That the City Council direct that the PIP be completed and
available when the GMOC commences its next review cycle in
October, 1996,
The GMOC finds that this action is necessary in view of the number of issues
whose resolution is contingent upon completion of the PIP. Such issues include
private parks credit, potential open space and Greenbelt credits, and active
recreation facility equivalency factors to name a few. In addition, the majority of the
GMOC's recommendations regarding parks, as originally presented in our 1993
report, are still outstanding and contingent upon completion of the PIP.
With regard to a revised City-wide Parks and Recreation Threshold Standard, the
GMOC has been presented with an amended draft which is included as Appendix
I. This draft represents a revision from that originally presented to Council in 1992,
and is intended to address concerns regarding pre-existing deficiencies and
moratorium provisions within western Chula Vista. In summary, the revision
establishes a 3 acre/l000 population city-wide standard, and divides compliance
requirements for eastern and western Chula Vista, such that existing provisions for
the east remain as is, but in the west, the "standard" is made a 20+ year goal for
which annual compliance is based upon reported progress toward reaching that
goal in accordance with provisions and schedules contained in a master plan (the
PIP). Should the GMOC find that implementation progress is not occurring in a
timely fashion, then it shall report such to Council along with any related
recommendations. Since progress is toward a "goal", there would be no rigid
penalty clause, other than the City being held to implementing its adopted, long-
term Parks Master Plan. In order, however, for such a standard to be feasible, it
cannot be adopted absent the Parks Master Plan to which it is linked. Therefore,
the GMOC recommends:
. That the City Council direct appropriate staff to finalize the
revised, draft Parks and Recreation Threshold Standard
amendment presented in Append,ix I, and return it for formal
public hearing adoption with the PIP no later than October, 1996.
25
D SCHOOLS -
THE GMOC FINDS. BASED ON THE CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
AND SWEETWATER UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICTS' RESPONSES TO THE
CITY'S 12-18 MONTH GROWTH FORECAST, THAT SUFFICIENT CAPACITY
EXISTS TO ACCOMMODATE PROJECTED NEW STUDENTS, AND
THEREFORE, THE SCHOOLS THRESHOLD STANDARD IS BEING MET,
Both districts again reported that sufficient capacity exists to accommodate student
enrollment as forecast from City development projections for the period of July 1,
1995 to December 31, 1996. This condition is due in part to the reduced volume
of development resulting from continued recession, but also from the fact that much
of the growth will occur in eastern Chula Vista where sufficient new facilities are
being provided through Mello-Roos Community Facilities Districts (CFD's). This is
not to say that capacity issues do not exist in schools, particularly west of the 1-805
where the majority are operating above capacity, and where students are being
accommodated through a combination of relocatable classrooms, classroom
reconfiguration, busing, and multi-track year-round (Mueller) school.
Following are highlights of currently relevant school planning activities and/or issues
as presented and discussed by the GMOC specific to each district.
a. Chula Vista Elementary School District
Based upon the City's 12 to 18 month growth forecast, the Chula Vista
Elementary School District (CVESD) has estimated that it will need to
accommodate 16 new students west of 1-805, given the 52 residential units
forecast for completion there from July, 1995 through December, 1996.
Currently, most of the schools west of 1-805 are at or over permanent
capacity, although some capacity does exist in certain schools at various
grade levels. As of January 5, 1996, a total of 385 children throughout the
District were being bused to relieve this situation. This is down from 584
children previously reported for April, 1995. The District, however, has
indicated that it can accommodate the projected new students within existing
facilities through a combination of the techniques previously noted:
As has been stated in previous reports, only limited opportunities exist for
adding capacity and physically expanding existing schools in the area west
of 1-805. Vista Square and Rice Elementary Schools could potentially be
expanded, and a 4-acre vacant land site. adjacent to Feaster School could
be acquired. On December 12, 1995, the Board of Education authorized
school staff to enter into formal discussions with that property owner. In all
these instances, however, lack of funding continues to be an obstacle to
progress.
On the matter of longer-range school capacity planning and related impact
mitigation programs, the joint SourcePoint School Enrollment Impact Study
26
involving the City and both school districts has been completed. The Study
analizes both residential and non-residential growth, and projects related
student enrollment growth for each school attendance area (including primary
and secondary facilities) through the year 2010. Based on the Study's
conclusions, it is now necessary for the City and the districts to meet and
discuss the development of equitable strategies to ensure sufficient
mitigation of those impacts. Regarding this effort, it is important to note that
the Sweetwater Union High School District (SUHSD) has indicated that it will
not be participating. The reason for this is that SUHSD believes that
formation of such a subcommittee may lead to policy decisions which cannot
be attained in the four remaining local governmental jurisdictions
encompassed by their district. It is of the utmost importance to the SUHSD
that it be consistent in its aplication of developer fee programs and the
administration of Mello-Roos Community Facility District programs.
Regardless, the Study remains valuable to the City and the CVESD, and
therefore the GMOC recommends:
. That the City Council and the CVESD Board form a
subcommittee to evaluate the SourcePoint study's
findings, and to consider development of appropriate
mitigation strategies,
That consideration should include evaluation of multi-track
scheduling which is considered to be one possible form of
mitigation where projected enrollment increases do not
wa"ant significant new, or expanded facilities,
With regard to proposed development of the City's bayfront, both the CVESD
and the SUHSD continue to indicate that the project does not have an
established full mitigation program for school impacts, and stress the need,
through future approvals, for the City to require such mitigation to the
satisfaction of the districts. Therefore, the GMOC:
. Continues to stress that any major development, both
residential and non-residential, on the City's bayfront be
appropriately conditioned to require full mitigation of its
school impacts,
East of 1-805, the CVESD estimates it will need to accommodate
approximately 465 new students, given the 1549 new residential units
forecast for completion in the area from July, 1995 through December, 1996.
Approximately 96% of these housing units are in the Eastlake, Rancho Del
Rey, Telegraph Canyon Estates, and East Palomar Estates, all of which are
within Mello-Roos Community Facilities Districts (CFD) and therefore
mitigated. Clear View is the home school for the remaining 4.4% (20
students) who can be accommodated there.
27
The EastLake Community now has two elementary schools, Eastlake and
Olympicview, which also serve the Salt Creek I project. Discovery School
serves the majority of Rancho del Rey, with three neighborhoods scheduled
to attend Clear View. Children from Telegraph Canyon Estates attend
Tiffany School, and those from East Palomar Estates will attend Palomar
School. The CVESD continues to work with developers to establish
additional CFD's, or other forms of full mitigation to address schools
provision for the Salt Creek Ranch, Otay Ranch and Rancho San Miguel
projects. Other smaller projects continue to be annexed to generic CFD No.
5.
b. Sweetwater Union Hiah School District
The Sweetwater Union High School District (SUHSD) reported an enrollment
of 29,596 students throughout the district, a 651 student (2.2%) increase
over the 1994-95 school year. Of these students, 15,502, or 52% of the
total, attend the five high schools, three middle schools and one junior high
school in Chula Vista. By comparison, enrollment in secondary schools in
Chula Vista grew by 502 students over 1994-95 levels. Most of that growth
occurred at Bonita Vista High, Bonita Vista Middle School and Hilltop High
School. Eastlake High experienced a 14% increase, however, that school
is only at 65% of capacity, and can accommodate approximately another 850
students. With the exception of Eastlake High, all high schools are operating
above capacity. Bonita Vista Middle School is over capacity. All other
middle/junior high schools are either at or below capacity.
Given the 12-18 month forecast provided by the Chula Vista Planning
Department, the SUHSD projects an increase of 444 students in Chula Vista
middle, junior high and high schools for the period of July 1, 1995 through
December 31, 1996. Of this enrollment growth, 96% will be absorbed at
Bonita Vista Middle, Bonita Vista High and Eastlake High Schools. Bonita
Vista Middle and Bonita Vista High will be the "resident schools" for 64%
(284 students) of that enrollment growth. Bonita Vista High and Middle
Schools will have difficulty accepting these new "resident" students without
the addition of classroom space. EastLake High School has capacity to
reduce overcrowding at Bonita Vista High. The District anticipates opening
a new middle school in the Rancho del Rey project in the Fall of 1998. The
addition of this new middle school will relieve overcrowding at Bonita Vista
Middle School. In addition, as Eastlake and Rancho Del Rey build out,
attendance area adjustments for Bonita Vista and Eastlake High Schools are
expected to balance enrollment increases, and alleviate overcrowding at
Bonita Vista High.
The GMOC would like to point out that some of the present overcrowding at
Bonita Vista High School results from the District's approach on optional
attendance areas. Eastlake High School's optional areas A (Sunnyside), B
(Bonita Highlands) and C (Bonita Long Canyon) have approximately 425
28
students attending Bonita Vista High School. Had it not been for the optional
area designations, these students would attend Eastlake High School.
Bonita Vista High is presently overcrowded by about 400 students; Eastlake
High is under capacity by 856 students. With this in mind, the GMOC
recommends:
. That the City Council take this issue under advisement,
and determine whether it desires to approach the SUHSD
Board to reevaluate its approach regarding the present
optional attendance areas for Bonita Vista and Eastlake
High Schools,
The SUHSD continues to work with other major development projects to
establish Mello-Roos CFD's or other forms of full mitigation. Projects for
which negotiations have not yet been completed are San Miguel Ranch and
Salt Creek Ranch. The Baldwin Company has recently commenced Mello-
Roos CFD formation proceedings for the Otay Ranch project. The SUHSD
continues to draw attention to Salt Creek Ranch and Otay Ranch in terms of
school timing. As planned, in addition to students from EastLake, students
from the nearly completed Salt Creek I project are to attend Eastlake High
School, as are students from Salt Creek Ranch. The schools in Otay Ranch
are to be constructed large enough to accommodate the equivalent number
of students which will come from Salt Creek Ranch. This is in anticipation
that when a high school opens in Otay Ranch, attendance area boundaries
for Eastlake High would be adjusted.
In its current report, the SUHSD indicates that based on the City's
development projections, and related student generation and absorbtion, it
will be necessary for a new high school to be open in approximately seven
years. This would require the site to be rough graded, and with utilities
available, in approximately five years (about the year 2000). Based on the
number of dwelling units proposed in Otay Ranch SPA One, it will be
necessary for a high school to open commensurate with that development.
In the presently approved Otay Ranch GDP, however, the intended high
school sites are in Villages 7 and 11, not in the SPA One (Villages 1 and 5)
area which will be the first increment of development. Therefore, the GMOC
recommends:
. That the City Council ensure through conditions of
approval on Otay Ranch SPA One, that delivery of the first
high school be accelerated to a site within or adjacent to
SPA One, and which will be developed commensurate with
construction in SPA One in accordance with requirements
in the project's Public Facilities Finance Plan (PFFP), This
would include processing any necessary amendments to
the City's General Plan and/or Otay Ranch General
Development Plan to facilitate that siting.
29
Such a schedule is necessary to avoid potential overcrowding at Eastlake
High, and further overcrowding at Bonita Vista High.
Due to the above stated relationship of the Salt Creek Ranch project to
middle and high school facility timing considerations, the SUHSD also
indicated the ever-pressing need to resolve schools mitigation requirements
for that project, which has already received Tentative Map Approval. In July,
1993, Community Facilities District (CFD) proceedings were formally
abandoned by the Baldwin Company, and more recently the project has
been acquired by the JM Development Co. Negotiations have yet to be
resumed with the District. It takes some time to form a new CFD, and to
generate adequate revenue to finance construction of a needed schools. If
mitigation is to be in the form of a CFD, it is essential that formation occur
well in advance of development (approx. 2-3 years) to assure facilities will
be available when children begin to arrive. At the behest of both school
districts, the GMOC therefore recommends:
. That the City encourage the new developer of the Salt
Creek Ranch project (JM Development Co.) to promptly
commence mitigation negotiations with both school
districts, and to provide evidence of such commencement
to the City prior to the City's accepting for processing any
Final Subdivision Maps for the project, This is especially
relevant for the SUHSD, since the project does not include
any middle or high school facilities,
One final issue raised by the SUHSD, regards the co-siting of school and
parks sites in new development, and the related consideration of potential
joint use agreements for the sharing of facilities. They specifically indicated
in their report that they encourage the City to develop a joint use agreement
for the new middle school and adjacent Voyager Park prior to the opening
of either facility. As the GMOC understands, the City has several such
agreements with both school districts regarding the usage of various City and
district facilities, which have produced greater assets for the entire
community. The GMOC wholly supports the concept of such agreements,
which can be of great benefit to all parties. This is particularly true of the
present and future, where ever-diminishing resources more often demand the
creative solutions only brought about by partnerships. With this intent in
mind, the GMOC recommends:
. That a standing subcommittee of select members of the
City Council and both school district Boards be created to
work with appropriate staff to develop a plan/strategy
regarding school facility joint usage endeavors for both
the shared use of existing grounds and facilities, as well
as for the co-siting and shared financing and development
of new facilities,
30
As a closing note, the GMOC would also like to draw attention to the
relationship of such joint use agreements in addressing the expansion of
available parks and recreation facilities in western Chula Vista. As the
GMOC understands, the PIP will likely rely on promotion of joint use
agreements as a means of dealing with the land availability and cost
constraints to adding significant new parkland in western Chula Vista.
C TRAFFIC -
THE GMOC FINDS THAT THE CITY IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE TRAFFIC
THRESHOLD STANDARD ON BOTH A PROJECT AND CUMULATIVE BASIS. AS
EVIDENCED BY THE FINDINGS OF THE 1995 TRAFFIC MONITORING
PROGRAM (TMP\ REPORT,
The threshold for traffic requires that Level-of-Service (LOS) "C" or better as
measured by observed average travel speed on all signalized arterial segments,
except that during peak hours, LOS of "D" can occur for no more than any two
hours of the day. Those signalized intersections west of 1-805 which did not meet
the above standard when it was established in 1991, may continue to operate at
their 1991 LOS levels, but shall not worsen. The traffic threshold utilizes the
Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) method which analyzes conditions over whole
roadway segments, and is intended as a more comprehensive measurement since
it considers the overall "driving experience" in terms of time delay.
1995 Traffic Monitorino Prooram
The 1995 Traffic Monitoring Program (TMP) summarizes the results of
analysis performed on all arterial street segments from the last three TMP
reports (1992, '93 and '94) which were found to operate at LOS C or less in
at least one direction for each of the affected time periods (AM, Mid-day,
PM). Additional studies were also performed on H St. from 1-5 to 1-805, and
on East H St. from 1-805 to Rutgers Ave. The 1995 TMP's travel time
surveys were conducted from March to mid-September, 1995.
The 1995 TMP's results indicate that all arterial segments studied during
each time period operate at LOSC or better, except for the following which
operate at LOS D for a portion of one or more of each of the affected two
hour periods (AM, Mid-day, PM):
Third Ave. (C St. - H St.)
Otay Lakes (E. H St. - Tel. Cyn. Rd.)
- SB
- NB & SB
Of all segments studied, only the above noted northbound segment of Otay
Lakes Rd. operated at LOS D for more than two hours, and thereby would
not meet the Traffic Threshold Standard for a Class I arterial. All other
segments found to operate at LOS 0 did so for less than two hours in any
of the affected periods, and are thereby in compliance with the Standard.
31
With regard to the noted Otay Lakes Rd. segments, staff indicates that a
Class I arterial is an inappropriate designation. Class I arterials have free
flow traffic speeds of 35 to 45 mph, the number of signals per mile are less
than four, and there is no parking and generally no access to abutting
property. As outlined in detail in the Engineering Division's report, these
characteristics are not representative of the noted segment, and it should be
designated as a Class II arterial. With this change, the segment would
function within the Threshold Standards.
With regard to other segments studied, the following were found to be
operating in the lower 1/3 of the LOS C travel speed standards, meaning
they could be approaching LOS D, and should be watched closely in the
futu re:
Third Ave.
E. H St.
Otay Lakes
Palomar St.
(C St. - H St.)
(SW College - Rutgers Ave.)
(E. H St. - Tel. Cyn. Rd.)
(1-5 NB ramps - Broadway)
- SB
- EB & WB
- NB & SB
- EB & WB
In addition to studying arterial segments, the 1995 TMP also reevaluated
those arterial interchanae segments found by the 1994 TMP to be operating
at LOC C or less during each affected time period. Although such
interchange segments are not subject to the Threshold Standard, their
evaluation is a growth management consideration in situations where
proposed developments have a significant impact at interchanges, which
indirectly, can affect adjoining arterial segments covered under the
Standards. The results indicate that all arterial interchange segments
operate at LOS C, except for the following which operate at LOS D:
AM Period
Palomar St. (Bay BI. - Industrial BI.) - EB
Mid-dav Period
H St. (Bay BI. - Woodlawn Ave.) - EB & WB
PM Period
ESt. (Bay BI. - Woodlawn Ave.) -WB
H St. (Bay BI. - Woodlawn Ave.) -WB
Palomar St. (Bay BI. - Industrial) - EB
With regard to arterial interchange segments with freeways, particularly at 1-5
as reflected above, the 1995 TMP continues to reflect marginal levels-of-
service performance. This is due primarily to the close spacing of the
signals, signal timing at the freeway ramps which is controlled by
CAL TRANS, and the high volume of vehicles entering and exiting the
32
freeway. This is especially true of the short segment of westbound "H"
Street between Woodlawn Ave. and Bay Blvd. A related concern remains
with the trolley crossing gates at "E", "H" and Palomar Streets which interrupt
flows every 5 to 7.5 minutes. The GMOC reiterates the need to continue to
urge the Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) to eventually
construct grade separations or other solutions to improve long-term traffic
flow.
The 1995 TMP's evaluation of H Street both east and west of 1-805 found
that all segments are presently operating at acceptable Levels of Service.
The GMOC continues, however, to be cautious based on a statement in the
1995 TMP regarding H Street which reads "Staff will continue to monitor this
traffic corridor and, when necessary, will recommend any operational
changes that may be appropriate to maintain the hiahest Level of Service
possible." The latter portion of that statement appears to imply that H Street
may not meet adopted LOS standards in the future.
This is precisely the question which initially raised GMOC concerns over H
Street; whether already approved, but not-yet-built development will overtax
the street? While the GMOC wants to emphasize the significant
improvement in the monitoring and reporting of both short- and long-term
traffic conditions, we still, however, believe that potential problems may arise
in the future. At the present time, that concern stems from the fact that 2
major hospital approvals (Kaiser and Scripps) have yet to be built, as well as
the buildout of the Rancho del Rey Commercial Center, including a possible
movie theater which is an additional traffic generator. In addition, there is
the buildout of adjoining, substantial residential developments in SPAs II and
III of Rancho del Rey. All these projects will affect the H Street corridor and
add additional traffic, despite the fact that significant volumes already exist
on the street today, and that it is essentially built to its ultimate configuration
given that development flanks up to either side of its right-of-way. It is with
this in mind that the GMOC:
. Requests that the City Council direct the Engineering
Division to continue to include 5 to 7 year performance
projections for major arterial streets, such as H Street, as
part of its annual reporting to the GMOC.
In this way, the GMOC will be afforded reasonable foresight as to potential
traffic issues before they become a problem, and can apprise the Council
accordingly in our annual report.
The GMOC also continues to be aware of the long-range need for SR125 in
the context maintaining threshold compliance on the arterial street system.
Simlar to our 1994 report, the GMOC continues to recommend:
. That the City Council actively support plans for
development of the full SR125 freeway or tollway facility,
33
Notwithstanding the traffic issues presented in this section, the GMOC again
commends the Engineering Division for a thorough monitoring program and an
informative report.
D FISCAL -
THE GMOC FINDS THAT THE CITY IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE FISCAL
THRESHOLD STANDARD ON BOTH A PROJECT AND CUMULATIVE BASIS,
NEW GROWTH CONTINUES TO PRODUCED SUFFICIENT REVENUES
THROUGH THE VARIOUS DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE (DIF\ SYSTEMS TO
FUND CURRENT, RELATED FACILITIES AND SERVICES,
The Fiscal threshold standard addresses the impacts of growth on the City's fiscal
well being, particularly the collection and expenditure of impact fees from new
development. The Fiscal threshold calls for the preparation of a report to the
GMOC which evaluates the fiscal impacts of growth on operations and capital
improvements over both the previous 12 months, and the coming 12-18 month
period, including an analysis of development impact fee collection and expenditure
over the previous 12-month period.
The Finance Department's report was presented in two major parts; one addressing
the overall fiscal status of the City with regard to the ability to maintain operations
and services, and the other providing an overview of the status of each of the City's
DIF programs including recent project expenditures. The following highlights major
points in each of the two parts, which are described in greater detail in Appendix L.
DeveloDment ImDact Fee Proarams
The GMOC finds that evaluation of facility needs, and related phasing and
financial planning for major developments and other activities, have become
an integral part of the day-to-day development review process. The Public
Facility Finance Plans (PFFP) required of major new developments
effectively ensure that financial aspects are addressed. The subsequent
special assessments and financing techniques employed for major new
developments are designed to generate sufficient revenue to fund current
projects and services. In addition, an annual DIF funds financial report is
prepared by the Finance and Public Works Departments to review the
funding status of each DIF and its projects, and to update the associated
costs for these and any new facilities necessary to support future
development. The reports analyze the apportionment of costs to projected
development in order to adjust the DIF's to be applied to new development.
In accordance with the current annual DIF reports, the Finance Director
indicated that the various DIF's (Transportation, Traffic Signal, Parks,
Drainage, Sewers and Public Facilities), as well as related CIP planning
efforts, are generally working as planned, and appear in good fiscal health.
This takes into consideration that some of the DIF's (being 15-20+ year
facility plans) are still in their relative infancy, and that some facilities, such
34
as major roadways, have been advance constructed by developers who then
receive credit against DIF payments at the time of building permit issuance.
With respect to long-range DIF planning and update, last year the GMOC
recommended that the annual update process for the Public Facilities DIF be
expanded to include a five-year projection of needs based on the City's 5-7
year growth forecasts called for under the Growth Management Program
(GMP). The intent was to provide consistency in the growth assumptions
used among the various OIFs, and in the identification of issues before they
become a problem. Five year projections are already effectively incorporated
in the other DIFs, either directly or through the City's Capital Improvement
Program (CIP) budget process. The Finance Director's report expressed
agreement on this issue, and indicated that an update of the Public Facilities
DIF to add the Otay Ranch project was forthcoming, and should occur in
FY1995/96 or 1996/97. That update affords an opportunity to include
program scheduling that projects future needs and revenues for the next five
years.
Dialog with the Finance Oirector also indicated, however, that for various
reasons, some of the OIFs have not been updated for several years. Given
the fundamental role of the OIF's in maintaining compliance with the Fiscal
Threshold, the GMOC finds it necessary, and desirable, to adhere to a
standard schedule for update of the DIF's and other fee systems, in order to
ensure that the impacts of development have been accurately assessed, and
that an adequate fee is being levied to fund needed improvements. The
GMOC therefore recommends:
. That the City Council ensure that adequate staffing and
resources are provided to conduct review and necessary
update of the DIF's every one to two years, to ensure the
accuracy of projections, facility costs and other
assumptions, This should include a requirement for the
inclusion of standard, five-year growth projections in each
of the DIF updates,
City-wide Fiscal Overview
Overall, the City is showing signs of recovery from the recession. Two major
recession-related revenue catagories, sales tax and property tax, registered
moderate increases for FY1994-95. While overall revenues increased by
$1,627,857 (3.4%), included in that amount was a one-time refund of
$1,878,000 from the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS).
Excluding this PERS refund, revenues decreased by $250,142. On the other
side of the ledger, total expenditures decreased by $1,810,332 (3.2%) when
compared to FY1993/94, due mainly to freezing or eliminating vacant staff
positions, and cutting back on supplies and services.
35
In general, the City has lost approximately $3.5 million per year over the last several
years due to various state budget actions, and the lingering recession. Given
present uncertainties regarding State revenues, and the slow pace of economic
recovery, the GMOC remains concerned about the future fiscal conditions for the
City relative to maintaining service levels. Many cities in the region have already
been faced with wholesale cuts and the related deterioration of services. Under
such a scenario, the GMOC envisions potential impacts to threshold standards as
staffing and/or services could be cut, and feels it prudent to make our concern
known, even though this situation derives from non-growth related fiscal issues.
(GMOC-95\FIN-ANUL.RPT)
36