HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008/07/22 Agenda Packet
I declare under penalty of perjury that I am
employed by the City of Chula Vista In the
Office of the City Clerk and that I posted t~ ~ ft...
ment on the bulletin board accordin~___:::;"..4
,,,,,,- ~
/lIs/oK Signed. ~~7srA
Cheryl Cox, Mayor
Rudy Ramirez, Council member David R. Garcia, City Manager
John McCann, Councilmember Bart Miesfeld, Interim City Attorney
Jerry R, Rindone, Council member Donna Norris, Interim City Clerk
Steve Castaneda, Councilmember
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
July 22, 2008
6:00 P.M.
Council Chambers
City Hall
276 Fourth Avenue
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL: Councilmembers/Agency Members: Castaneda, McCann, Ramirez, Rindone,
and Mayor/Chair Cox
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG AND MOMENT OF SILENCE
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
. POWERPOINT PRESENTATION ON "THE DANGERS OF PLASTIC BAGS"
· PRESENTATION ON THE CITYWIDE FULL COST RECOVERY PROGRAM
CONSENT CALENDAR - fiCity Council and Redevelopment Agency
(Items 1- 9) City Council .
(Items 10-11) City Council and Redevelopment Agency
The Council/Agency will enact the Consent Calendar staff recommendations by one
motion, without discussion, unless a Councilmember/Agency Member, a member of the
public, or staff requests that an item be removed for discussion. If you wish to speak on
one of these items, pleasejill out a "Request to Speak " form (available in the lobby) and
submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Items pulled from the Consent Calendar
will be discussed immediately following the Consent Calendar.
City Council Consent Calendar:
I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of June 5, 2008.
Staff recommendation: Council approve the minutes.
Page 1 - Jt. CC/RDA Agenda
htto:/ Iwww.chulavistaca.Qov
July 22, 2008
I .
2. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA REVISING THE SPEED LIMIT
FOR HIDDEN VISTA DRIVE BETWEEN EAST H STREET AND SMOKY CIRCLE
(SECOND READING AND ADOPTION)
Adoption of the ordinance implements a revision in the speed limit on Hidden Vista
Drive between East H Street and Smoky Circle from 25 mph to 30 mph, with SmokY
Circle and Terra Nova Drive retaining the existing 25 mph speed limit. This ordinance
was first introduced on July 15,2008. (City EngineerlEngineering Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the ordinance.
3. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
DEEMING THE EMERGENCY REPAIR OF MANHOLES LOCATED ALONG
HUNTE PARKWAY BETWEEN OTAY LAKES ROAD AND KING CREEK WAY
TO BE OF URGENT NECESSITY FOR THE PRESERVATION OF LIFE, HEALTH
OR PROPERTY, ACCEPTING THE FINAL REPORT OF EXPENDITURES FOR THE
"EMERGENCY MANHOLE REPAIRS IN THE EASTERN PART OF CHULA
VISTA" AND RATIFYING THE ACTION OF THE CITY MANAGER AND
DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING IN ISSUING AND EXECUTING A CONTRACT
FOR THESE EMERGENCY REPAIRS WITH MJC CONSTRUCTION
Section 1009 of the City Charter authorizes the City Manager to make emergency repairs
for the preservation oflife, health and property. In May of 2008, several manholes were
found to be severely deteriorated and in need of immediate repair. Adoption of the
resolution accepts the final report of expenditures and ratifies the action of the City
Manager and Engineering Director. (City Engineer/Engineering Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
J
4. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR INSTALLATION OF
THE LOMA VERDE POOL SOLAR PANEL SYSTEM TO AQUATIC RESOURCES
INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $79,500 AND AUTHORIZING STAFF TO PURCHASE
SOLAR PANELS AND RELATED EQUIPMENT FROM AQUATIC RESOURCES
INC. FOR $34,049
The pool solar panel arrays at the Lorna Verde Recreation center have exceeded their
useful life and are in need ofreplacement. Adoption of the resolution awards installation
of the pool solar hot water system to Aquatic Resources, Inc., and authorizes staff to
purchase related panels and equipment. Funds are available in Capital Improvement
Project GG202 and eligible for reimbursement from the California Energy Commission
Loan Program. (City EngineerlEngineering Director, Recreation Director, Conservation
& Environmental Services Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
5. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND
ALTA PLANNING + DESIGN FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A PEDESTRIAN
MASTER PLAN FOR A TOTAL COST OF $152,002 AND AUTHORIZING THE
CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT TO
ADD SPECIFIC TASKS TO THE SCOPE OF WORK FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $50,000
Page 2 - Jt. CClRDA Agenda
http://www .chula vistaca. gOY
July 22, 2008
I .
A Pedestrian Master Plan will identify and prioritize pedestrian improvement projects
based on technical analysis and community input, thereby promoting orderly
implementation on a citywide basis and enhancing the City's ability to receive grant
funding for these projects. Adoption of the resolution awards the agreement to Aha
Planning + Design. (City EngineerlEngineering Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
6. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
SUPPORTING SENATE BILL 1016 (WIGGINS), REGARDING COMPLIANCE
WITH THE CALIFORNIA INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT
The current measurement system for the Integrated Waste Management Act (Assembly
Bill 939) which "counts" the amount of waste diverted from landfills has proven to be
burdensome, overly complex, and inaccurate. Senate Bill 1016 proposes a new system
that should increase timeliness and accuracy, provide a streamlined review for cities that
are meeting their diversion requirements, and maintain allowances for rural justifications.
This topic is not covered by the City's Adopted Legislative Program; therefore Council
approval is required for Chula Vista to support for this measure. (Legislative
Subcommittee)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
7. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT
DISTRICT FOR A SALT MARSH EDUCATION PROGRAM AT THE CHULA
VISTA NATURE CENTER
Nature Center staff has been working with the San Diego Unified Port District to partner
in the coordination of educational field trips for schools located within the watershed
areas of the San Diego Bay. The goal of the program is to encourage participation in
existing Nature Center education programs, which promote environmental stewardship
and educate students about the importance of conserving coastal resources. Adoption of
the resolution approves the agreement. (Recreation Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
8. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT
DISTRICT FOR AN ENDANGERED LIGHT-FOOTED CLAPPER RAIL
PROPAGATION PROGRAM AT THE CHULA VISTA NATURE CENTER
Nature Center staff has been working with the San Diego Unified Port District to partner
in the coordination of a propagation program at the Chula Vista Nature Center for the
critically endangered Light-footed Clapper Rail. The Nature Center currently participates
in a breeding program for these birds along with other agencies, including the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service. Adoption of the resolution approves the agreement. (Recreation
Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
Page 3 - Jt. CC/RDA Agenda
htto://www.chulavlstaca.!lOV
July 22, 2008
I .
9. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
PROBATION DEPARTMENT FOR THE PROVISION OF WORK CREWS UNTIL
MAY 30, 2009 AND AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASING AGENT TO APPROVE
AND EXECUTE AMENDMENTS TO THE AGREEMENT EXTENDING THE
TERM FOR AN ADDITIONAL FIVE ONE-YEAR PERIODS
The San Diego County Probation Department administers and operates work camps in
eastern San Diego County which are available to government entities to perform labor
intensive maintenance projects such as weed abatement, culvert cleaning, litter patrol,
park maintenance, and brush abatement. Since approval by Council in 1987, County
work crews have been utilized by the City for labor in Open Space and Community
Facility Districts, Streets, Wastewater and Parks. Adoption of the resolution updates this
agreement and authorizes renewal options for these services. (Public Works Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
Joint City Council and Redevelopment Agency Consent Calendar:
10. A. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
WAIVING THE FORMAL CONSULTANT SELECTION PROCESS FOR AN
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY AND THE URBAN LAND INSTITUTE
,
B. RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND THE URBAN LAND INSTITUTE IN THE
AMOUNT OF $120,000, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR (4/5THS
VOTE REQUIRED)
In the coming years, Chula Vista's vacant bayfront may soon transform into a world class
destination. The H Street corridor provides an opportunity to connect the bayfront and the
Chula Vista community and revitalize it along the way. Adoption of the resolutions
authorizes the City Council and Redevelopment Agency to enter into a contract with the
Urban Land Institute Five-Day Advisory Services Program to bring real estate experts from
around the country to provide an unbiased implementation program for redevelopment of
the H Street Corridor between Interstate 5 and Third Avenue. (Redevelopment and
Housing Assistant Director)
Staff recommendation: Council/Agency adopt the resolutions.
Page 4 - Jt. CClRDA Agenda
htto:I !www.chulavistaca.gov
July 22, 2008
. -
11. JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AMENDMENT NO.3 TO
THE LETTER OF INTENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, THE SAN DIEGO
UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT, AND GAYLORD ENTERTAINMENT COMPANY
EXTENDING THE TERM OF THE LETTER OF INTENT THROUGH DECEMBER
31, 2008, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGERlEXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO
EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO THE LETTER OF INTENT ON BEHALF OF
THE CITY AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AND AUTHORIZING THE
CITY MANAGERlEXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO APPROVE AND EXECUTE AN
ADDITIONAL SIX MONTH EXTENSION OF THE TERM OF THE LETTER OF
INTENT THROUGH JUNE 30, 2009 ON BEHALF OF THE CITY AND THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, IF NEEDED
In July 2006 a Letter of Intent (LOl) was entered into between the City, the
Redevelopment Agency, the San Diego Unified Port District and Gaylord Entertainment
Company relative to a major hotel and convention center, and associated public
improvements, that would serve as an economic catalyst for the development of the
Chula Vista Bayfront. The term of the LOl was extended via the first amendment,
approved by the Council in May 2007, and the second amendment approved by the
Council in February 2008, which is set to expire July 30, 2008. The parties to the LOl
still agree on the fundamental goals and objectives set forth, however, they require
additional time to finalize the formal agreements. Adoption of the resolution extends the
LOI through the end of December 2008 and authorizes a six month extension through
June 2009, if needed. (Economic Development Officer)
Staff recommendation: Council/Agency adopt the resolution.
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
PUBLIC COMMENTS - City Council and Redevelopment Agency
Persons speaking during Public Comments may address the Council/Agency on any
sl1bject matter within the Council/Agency's jurisdiction that is not listed as an item on the
agenda. State law generally prohibits the Council/Agency from discussing or taking
action on any issue not included on the agenda, but, if appropriate, the Council/Agency
may schedule the topic for fUture discussion or refer the matter to staff. Comments are
limited to three minutes.
ACTION ITEMS - City Council
The Item(s) listed in this section of the agenda will be considered individually by the
Council/Agency and are expected to elicit discussion and deliberation. If you wish to
speak on any item, please fill out a "Request to Speak" form (available in the lobby) and
submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting.
12. PRESENTATION BY INTERIM FIRE CHIEF GEERING ON THE REGIONAL FIRE
PROTECTION COMMITTEE
Staff recommendation: Council hear the presentation.
Page 5 - Jt. CCIRDA Agenda
htt.p ://www.chulavlstaca.!lav
July 22, 2008
. -
13. RECONSIDERATION FOR CHARGING XR PROMOTIONS, LLC FOR
CHAMPIONSHIP OFF-ROAD RACING, FULL COST RECOVERY FOR THE
CHAMPIONSHIP OFF ROAD RACING (CORR) RACE EVENTS
At the July 8, 2008 City Council meeting, XR Promotions, LLC for Championship Off-
Road Racing (CORR) applied for and Council approved a two-year temporary
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for three off-road race events scheduled for 2008 and
three similar race events in 2009. Council also approved a Mitigated Negative
Declaration. Resolutions B and C proposed by the Police and Fire Departments,
recommending approval of an "overtime plus 20-percent" charge for public safety
services rather than Full Cost Recovery and appropriating $27,859 and $33,567
respectively, to offset the costs were not approved. Due to his absence from the July 8,
2008 Council meeting, Councilmember Castaneda has requested these resolutions be
brought back for discussion. (Interim Fire Chief, Police Chief)
Staff recommendation: That either Council take no action thereby affirming the decision
made July 8, 2008 to charge full cost recovery, or consider adoption of the following
resolutions:
B. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO WAIVE THE FULL COST
RECOVERY RATE FOR POLICE SERVICES FOR THE CHAMPIONSHIP
OFF ROAD RACING (CORR) RACE EVENTS, AUTHORIZING AN
ALTERNATIVE RATE OF COST RECOVERY OF OVERTIME PLUS 20%,
AND APPROPRIATING $27,859 TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT FISCAL
YEAR 2008/2009 PERSONNEL SERVICES BUDGET FOR OVERTIME
COSTS (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED)
C. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO WAIVE THE FULL COST
RECOVERY RATE FOR FIRE AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES
FOR THE CHAMPIONSHIP OFF ROAD RACING (CORR) RACE EVENTS,
AUTHORIZING AN ALTERNATIVE RATE OF COST RECOVERY OF
OVERTIME PLUS 20%, AND APPROPRIATING $33,567 TO THE FIRE
DEPARTMENT FISCAL YEAR 2008/2009 PERSONNEL SERVICES
BUDGET FOR OVERTIME COSTS (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED)
OTHER BUSINESS - City Council and Redevelopment Agency
14. CITY MANAGER/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORTS
The Chula Vista Municipal Code provides for the cancellation of certain Council
meetings, including the Tuesday following Thanksgiving (December 2, 2008). These
meetings may be reinstituted by a majority of the Council. In accordance with the Chula
Vista Charter, terms for elective office commence on the first Tuesday of December of
the election year. As such, it is necessary to reinstitute the December 2, 2008 City
Council meeting for the purpose of declaring results of the November 4, 2008 election,
and installation of newly elected CounciImembers.
City Manager's Recommendation: Council move to reinstitute the December 2, 2008
Council meeting.
Page 6 - Jt. CClRD A Agenda
htto:! !www.chulavistaca.gov
July 22, 2008
I .
15. MAYOR/CHAIR'S REPORTS
A. Ratification of appointment of Mauricio Torre to the Housing Advisory
Commission.
B. Ratification of the appointment of Ed Herrera to the Human Relations
Commission.
16. COUNCIL/AGENCY MEMBERS' COMMENTS
CLOSED SESSION - City Council
Announcements of actions taken in Closed Session shall be made available by noon on
Wednesday following the Council Meeting at the City Attorney's office in accordance
with the Ralph M Brown Act (Government Code 54957. 7).
17. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING EXISTING LITIGATION
PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(a)
Deanna Morv. et al. v. City of Chula Vista. et a!., United States District Court, Case No.
06 CV 1460 JAH (BLM)
Deanna Mory. et al. v. City of Chula Vista. et a!., United States District Court, Case No.
07 -CV -0462 JLS (BLM)
Jackie Lancaster v. City of Chu1a Vista et a!., San Diego Superior Court, Case No. 37-
2008-00086916-CU-MC-CTL
Thanh Le v. City of Chula Vista, et al.. San Diego Superior Court, Case No. 37-2007-
000076220-CU-PA-CTL.
ADJOURNMENT to an Adjourned Regular Meeting, July 23, 2008 at 6:00 p.m. in the
Executive Conference Room, followed by a Special Meeting at 8:00 p.m.
in the Council Chambers. The next Regular Meeting of the City Council
will be August 5, 2008 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
Materials provided to the City Council/Redevelopment Agency related to any open-session item
on this agenda are available for public review at the City Clerk's Office, located in City Hall at
276 Fourth Avenue, Building 100, during normal business hours.
In compliance with the
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
The City of Chula Vista requests individuals who require special accommodations to access,
attend, and/or participate in a City meeting, activity, or service, contact the City Clerk's Office
at (619) 691-50415041 or Telecommunications Devicesfor the Deaf (TDD) at (619) 585-5655 at
least forty-eight hours in advance for meetings and five days for scheduled services and
activities. California Relay Service is also available for the hearing impaired
Page 7 - Jt. CClRDA Agenda
htto ://www.chulavistaca.gov
July 22, 2008
I .
DRAFT
MINUTES OF ADJOUfu'\TED REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL,
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
June 5, 2008
6:00 P.M.
Adjourned Regular Meetings of the City Council, GroVv1h Management Oversight Commission,
and Planning Commission of the City of Chula Vista were called to order at 6:02 p.m. at the
Chula Vista Police Headquarters, Community Meeting Room, 315 Founh Avenue, Chula Vista,
California.
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: Councilmembers: Castaneda (arrived at 6:20 p.m.), McCann, Ramirez,
and Mayor Cox
Growth Management Oversight Commissioners: Bazzel, Canaris, Hall
(arrived at 6: 13 p.m.), Jones, Palma, Sutton, Chair O'Neill
Planning Commissioners: Bensoussan, Felber, Moctezuma, Spethman,
Vinson, and Chair Trip
ABSENT:
Councilmembers: Rindone (excused)
GroVvih Management Oversight Commissioners: Clayton, Krogh
Planning Commissioners: Clayto'n'
ALSO PRESENT: City Manager Garcia, Deputy City Attorney Shirey, Interim City
Clerk Norris, and Deputy City Clerk Bennett
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG ANTI MOMENT OF SILENCE
PUBLIC HEARING - City Council, GMOC, Planning Commission
I. REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT
OVERSIGHT COMMISSION'S 2008 ANNUAL REPORT
Each year, the Growth Management Oversight Commission submits its Annual Report to
the Planning Commission and City Council regarding compliance with threshold
standards for eleven Quality-of-Life indicators. The 2008 Annual Report covers the
period from July I, 2006 through June 30, 2007; identifies current issues in the second
half of 2007 and early 2008; and assesses any threshold compliance concerns looking
forward over the next five years. The report discusses each threshold in terms of current
compliance, issues, and corresponding recommendations. (Planning and Building
Director)
Notice of the public hearing was given in accordance with legal requirements, and the
hearing was held on the date and at the time specified in the notice.
Page 1 - CC/GMOCIPC Minutes
JlUle 5, 2008
/-/
DRAFT
PUBLIC HEARlNG (Continued)
Assistant Director of Planning Lytle introduced Advanced Plalll1ing Manager Batchelder and
Associate Plalll1er Vanderbie. Staffinember Vanderbie then provided an overview of the
function of the Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC).
GMOC Chair O'Neill expressed appreciation for the time and professional expertise by City
staff, assistance from the School District, Water District, and Air Pollution Control District, and
the GMOC members with the completion of the AIll1ual Report. He then presented the 2008
GMOC AIll1ual Report regarding compliance with threshold standards for 11 Quality-of-Life
indicators that covered Fiscal Year 2006/2007, identified current issues in the second half of
2007 and early 2008, and expressed concerns with threshold compliance for the next five years.
The following thresholds were found to be in compliance during Fiscal Year 2006/2007: Fiscal,
Air Quality, Water, Drainage, Parks & Recreation, Fire/Emergency Medical Service, and
Schools. Those thresholds not in compliance included Libraries, Police, Traffic and Sewer.
Mayor Cox opened the public hearing.
Peter Watry expressed his appreciation of the efforts by the GMOC in developing parks located
west of Interstate 805.
There being no further members of the public who wished to speak, Mayor Cox closed the public
hearing.
Mayor Cox asked City Manger Garcia whether City staif would have the ability to accomplish
the GMOC's recommendations, given the City's current fiscal status. City Manager Garcia
responded that the recommendations allowed flexibility to work within current budget
constraints, using the recommendations as a guiding principle.
Discussion ensued regarding plalll1ed projects and those completed usmg Public Facilities
Development Impact Fees.
Mayor Cox explained that each threshold would be addressed separately to offer the Council and
Commissions an opportunity for questions and comments.
FISCAL THRESHOLD
The Fiscal Threshold was in compliance with the threshold standards, and was discussed at this
time.
Councilmember Ramirez stated he would like to see a priority list of projects on a regular basis.
Councilmember Castaneda suggeste.d implementation of a policy on the construction of facilities,
including language for the way priorities were dealt with, on how facilities would be funded,
how they would be reported, and impacts of the expenditures, in order to ensure adequate
funding for all projects slated for construction.
Page 2 - Joint CouncillGMOC/Plng Minutes
I )
/"" .,...,-:,\
June 5. 2008
DRAFT
PUBLIC HEAR1'\fG (Continued)
AIR QUALITY THRESHOLD
The Air Quality Threshold was in compliance with the threshold standards, and was discussed at
this time.
Councilmember Ramirez spoke of the importance of air quality, stating that it was a regional
issue, and he suggested that staff involve San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) on
the issue.
SEWERS THRESHOLD
Mayor Cox stated that since the sewers threshold was a non-compliant threshold, staff would
return to the item once the compliant thresholds had been addressed.
WATER THRESHOLD
The Water Threshold was in compliance with the threshold standards, and was discussed at this
time.
Commissioner Felber referenced the water capacity and demand tables in the staff report (page
1-29, 1-30) for Otay Water District and Sweetwater Authority, and requested that demand tables
for Otay Water District be included in the future.
LIBRARIES THRESHOLD
Mayor Cox stated that since the Libraries threshold was 'a non-compliant threshold, staff would
return to the item once the compliant thresholds had been addressed.
DRA1'\fAGE
The Drainage Threshold was in compliance with the threshold standards, and was discussed at
this time.
Councilmember Castaneda commented that drainage had been directed to western Chula Vista,
and the system was dilapidated. He stated that the threshold was inadequate to protect private
property. He suggested that staff look at how to best approach the problem of where the
conveyance system needed to be improved, and that those improvements should be added into
Development Impact Fees, to ensure an accurate assessment of fees for those individuals who
created more drainage flow.
Mayor Cox asked whether the City kept track of flooded property. City Manager Garcia replied
that regularly updated maps of flood-prone areas were provided to the City from the Corps of
Engineers. Staffmember Hopkins added that some of the problem areas were identified as a
result of complaints received about flooding issues. Commissioner O'Neill stated the biggest
problem was the lack of funding to address drainage.
At 8:04 p.m., Mayor Cox announced a brief recess of the Joint Meeting. The Joint Meeting
reconvened at 8:18 p.m., with all Councilmembers, Growth Management Oversight
Commissioners, and Planning Commissioners present, except Councilmember McCann who
arrived at 8: 19 p.m.
Page 3 - Joint CouncillGMOC/Plng Minutes
June 5. 2008
j.'-. :Ji
.- -........
DRAFT
PUBLIC HEARING (Continued)
PARKS & RECREATION THRESHOLD
The Parks & Recreation Threshold was in compliance with the threshold standards, and was
discussed at this time.
Commissioner Moctezuma stated that it would be valuable to define western Chula Vista in the
threshold, so that excess parks on the east would not count towards fulfilling a threshold in the
west, and suggested for the future, there be a matrix for parks with a definite radius for
accessibility by the residents.
Commissioner Spethman spoke about assessments for parks, and asked whether a detailed
master plan was presented to the GMOC. Chair O'Neill responded that a master plan was not
presented, and that the GMOC would be coming back with recommendations on what the west
side might look like, and how to account for old growth and the existing shortage relative to the
new standards. Mayor Cox expanded on the comments by Chair O'Neill, stating that as a result
of state law, the Chula Vista Elementary School District had an all-encompassing community
facility district that provided funds where the funds were needed. Additionally, she stated that
the Otay Valley Regional Park that provided new trails and active recreation extending for 13
miles, ii'om Interstate 5, up through the river valley to Otay Lakes was available to the
community.
Commissioner Bensoussan commented on the need to look at elements of the Parks Master Plan
and the revision of thresholds, particularly for pocket parks and recreation centers in western
Chula Vista. She suggested reviewing the plan and setting priorities. Assistant Director of
Recreation Hall responded that an update to the existing'Master Plan would be forthcoming for
the next review cycle for review by the commission. Landscape Planner Gamble added that on
the topic of pocket parks, the General Plan Update recognized the necessity for more creativity in
the delivery of different types of parks for western Chula Vista in the overall solution for
delivering parks. With respect to staffing and maintenance of parks, City Manager Garcia
responded that the Parks Department would be looking at competitive bidding for park
maintenance in order to achieve the most cost effective method of maintaining parks. Mayor
Cox was apprehensive to amend a threshold during lean years. Chair O'Neill added that the City
would need to have the ability to move with changes in the economy.
FIRE & EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES THRESHOLD
The Fire & Emergency Medical Services Threshold was in compliance with the threshold
standard, and was discussed at this time, with a focus on the transition of the fire dispatch center
and the system now used. Interim Fire Chief Geering indicated that sharing resources had
resulted in improved response times.
SCHOOLS THRESHOLD
The Schools Threshold was in compliance with the threshold standard, and was discussed at this
time. Mayor Cox noted that the threshold was an accounting for the number of classroom seats
for the students in the City, rather than the quality and quantity of education.
Page 4 - Joint Council/GrvIOClPlng Minutes
./--i/..
June 5, 2008
DRAFT
PUBLIC HEARING (Continued)
LffiRARIES THRESHOLD
The Libraries Threshold was not in compliance with the threshold standards, and was discussed
at this time.
Councilmember McCann asked why the County library located in Bonita was not included in the
thresholds. Chair O'Neill responded that it was not within the purview of the GMOC. Mayor
Cox suggested that the County library be counted to determine if that would bring this threshold
closer to compliance. Councilmember McCann concurred with the suggestion by Mayor Cox,
and also requested that staff work with the County library to secure the percentage of Chula
Vista patrons to the facility.
Commissioner Moctezuma did not think a consultant was needed for the update of the Library
Master Plan. Library Director Browder responded that a consultant would provide a nationwide
and statewide comparative analysis, and assist staff with understanding the service level delivery
as compared to other libraries in jurisdictions oflike size.
COlllmissioner Felber agreed tllGt the City should receive credit for the County Library, as it ""1S
relieving some pressure from the Rancho DelRey Library. He also supported looking at
threshold standards of other municipalities.
POLICE THRESHOLD
The Police Threshold was not in compliance with the threshold standards, and was discussed at
this time.
Mayor Cox noted that the Priority 2 levels of service by the Police Department were not III
compliance.
Commissioner Vinson stated that in the past 10 consecutive years, the threshold on Priority 2
calls had not been met, and he asked staff if unattainable levels had been set, whether the
threshold could be met in the future, and whether adjustments should me made. Chief Emerson
replied that in the first 8 months of Fiscal Year 2007/2008, an increase in the number of sworn
officers on the street had resulted in a closer approach to the 57 percent threshold standard.
TRAFFIC THRESHOLD
The Traffic Threshold was not in compliance with the threshold standards, and was discussed at
this time.
Mayor Cox requested that staff bring back to the GMOC, non-compliant segments, and measures
that could be implemented in order to bring the segments into better compliance.
Page 5 - Joint CounciUGMOC/Plng Minutes
June S, 2008
r-
/-,.
.' --'
DRAFT
PUBLIC HEARlNG (Continued)
SEWERS THRESHOLD
The Sewers Threshold was not in compliance with the threshold standards, and was discussed at
this time.
Councilmember McCann spoke of the need for a long-term strategy, stating that the City was at
the mercy of the Point Lorna Sewer Treatment Plant with respect to fee increases. He suggested
collaborative efforts with the water agencies and municipalities in the south county to seek long
term plans to treat the sewage, and water recycling for landscaping and other beneficial uses. He
requested that the commissioners be involved.
ACTION:
Planning Commissioner Felber moved to adopt the following Planning
Commission Resolution No. PCM-08-04:
RESOLUTION NO. PCM-08-04 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING THE 2008
GMOC At'\l0iLJAL REPORT At'W RECOMMENDING ACCEPTANCE BY
THE CITY COUNCIL
Planning Commissioner Moctezul11a seconded the motion and it canied 6-0.
ACTION:
Councilmel11ber Castaneda moved to 'ldoPl the following Council Resolution No.
2008-142, heading read, text waived:
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-142, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING THE 2008 GMOC ANNUAL
REPORT, AND DIRECTING THE CI<TY MANAGER TO UNDERTAKE
ACTIONS NECESSARY TO IMPLEMENT REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS
AS PRESENTED IN THE STAFF RESPONSES AND PROPOSED
IMPLEMENTING ACTIONS SUMMARY
Councilmember McCann seconded the motion and it carried 4-0.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - Council, GMOC, Planning Commission
There were none.
Mayor Cox thanked the GMOC, Planning Commission and staff for their work on the report.
Chair O'Neill stated that the GMOC proposed to bring next year's report earlier than June in
order to coordinate with the City's budget process.
At 9:34 p.m., the Growth Management Oversight Commission and the Planning Commission
adjourned to their respective meetings, and the Council convened in Closed Session.
CLOSED SESSION - City Council
2. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE APPOINTMENT PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE
SECTION 54957
City Attorney
ACTION:
Appointment of Bart Meisfeld as Interim City Attorney (4-0).
Page 6 - Joint CouncitlGMOc/Plng Minutes
"
" ---
i
,
;
June 5, 2008
DRAFT
CLOSED SESSION - City Council (Continued)
3. CONFERENCE WITH NEGOTIATOR PURSUANT TO GOYER.1"\IMENT CODE
SECTION 54957.6
City Negotiators: City Council and City Attorney
No reportable action was taken on this item.
ADJOURNMENT
At 11 :20 p.m., Mayor Cox adjourned the City Council Meeting to its Regular Meeting on June
10, 2008 at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers.
~- -~
.---.
/'
Lorraine Belmett, CMC, Deputy City Clerk
Page 7 - Jomt Council/GMOCfPlng Minutes
June 5, 2008
. -7
1-
,
r:::R\\O~
~'i) \'.\)
ORDINA..l\fCE NO. S~P\~G ~
~'i) ~
ORDINA.NCE OF THE CIT'S~'CHULA VISTA REVISING
THE SPEED LIMIT FOR HIDDEN VISTA DRIVE BETWEEN
EAST H STREET AND SMOKY CIRCLE
ViHEREAS, based on the provisions of the California Vehicle Code and pursuant to authority
under the Chula Vista Municipal Code, the City Engineer has determined that the speed limit on Hidden
Vista Drive between East H Street and Smoky Circle should be 30mph; and
WHEREAS, the prevailing speeds, accident history, roadway design characteristics and land use
justify a 30 mph posted speed limit; and
W1IEREAS, the Engineering and Traffic Survey was prepared pursuant to all provisions of the
California Vehicle Code and the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices; and
WHEREAS, the Safety Commission concurs with staff's recommendation to revise the speed
limit on Hidden Vista Drive between East H Street and Smoley Circle to 30mph; and
WHEREAS, this recommendation and other information in the City Engineer's report has been'
fully considered by the Ciry .Council;
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City ofChula Vista ordains as follows:
SECTION I: That the speed limit on Hidden Vista Drive between East H Street and Smoky Circle is
revised to 30mph.
I
I
SECTION II: That Schedule X of the Register of Schedules maintained by the City Engineer as
provided in Section 10.48.020 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, "Established Speed Limits in Certain
Zones-Designated," is amended to include the following inforination:
10,48.020 Schedule X - Established Speed Limits in Certain Zones - Designated
I Name of Street Beginning At I Ending At I Proposed Speed Limit
Hidden Vista Drive East H Street I Smoky Circle I 30 mph
Hidden Vista Drive Smoky Circle I Terra Nova Drive I 25 mph
SECTION ill: This ordinance shall take efrect and be in full force on the thirrieth day from and after its
adoption.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Rick Hopkins
Director of Engineering
i{d "L:h-f
l.-r' .j t,-
. I " I.=-C^-- {~, /(~ - i ,''--
Bart Miesreld
1,terim Ciry Attorney
N:\ENGrNEER.\QrdinancesIOrd2008\07-l5-08\Hidden V;sta Spe"d Limil.joc
C?~/
,
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
.sWf:. CITY OF
~CHULA VISTA
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
7/22/08, Item:3
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA DEEMING THE EMERGENCY REPAIR OF
MAi'ffiOLES LOCATED ALONG HUNTE PARKWAY BETWEEN
OT A Y LAKES ROAD Al'ID KING CREEK WAY TO BE OF
URGENT NECESSITY FOR THE PRESERVATION OF LIFE,
HEALTH OR PROPERTY, ACCEPTING THE FIN,A.L REPORT OF
EXPENDInJRES FOR THE "EMERGENCY lvLtIu'ffiOLE REPAIRS
IN THE EASTERi\! PART OF CHULA VISTA" AL'ID RATIFYING
THE ACTION OF THE CITY MAl"\lAGER Al'ID DIRECTOR OF
ENGINEERING IN ISSUING AND EXECUTING A CONTRACT
FOR THESE EiVIERGENCY REPAIRS WITH MlC
CONSTRUCTION
DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING rJ$r
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC OR! S l::,'i'
CITY MANAGER
ASSIST,tIu"\lT CITY
4/STHS VOTE: YES ~ NO 0
SUMMARY
Section 1009 of the City Charter authorizes the City Manager to make emergency repairs for the
preservation of life, health and property. On May IS, 2008, four manholes were found to be
severely deteriorated and in need of immediate repair. An informal contract was prepared to
repair the four sewer manholes located along Hunte Parkway between Otay Lakes Road and
King Creek Way. In addition to this work, three more manhole frames and covers in need of
repairs were identified along Otay Lakes Road between Fenton Street and Hunte Parkway.
Failure to repair the manholes could have led to undermining of the roadway and potential risk
to public safety and/or damage to public or private property. This report represents the total
expenditures for the repairs completed on Hunte Parkway and Otay Lakes Road.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the project qualifies
for a Stahltory Exemption pursuant to Section 15269 (Emergency Projects) of the State CEQA
Guidelines. Thus, no further environmental review is necessary.
3-1
7/22/08, Item~
Page 2 of 4
RECOMMENDATION
Council adopt the resolution.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Not applicable.
DISCUSSION
As part of the ongoing program to rehabilitate the sewer system throughout the City, a priority
list was developed to guide the City's sewer rehabilitation effort. On May 15, 2008, Public
Works' staff informed Engineering staff that four manholes were severely deteriorated and in
need of immediate repair. Staff was asked to prepare an informal contract to repair the four
sewer manholes located along Hunte Parkway, between Otay Lakes Road and King Creek Way.
The following condition assessments were prepared by Public Works staff:
. Manhole Number 1653: sewer manhole cones and shafts were corroded and chunks of
concrete were falling to the bottom of the manhole; manhole base and channel were
deteriorated. No strength remains on existing sewer manhole wall.
o Manhole Number 1781: sewer manhole cones and shafts were corroded; manhole base
and channel were deteriorating and collapsing.
o Manhole Number 1927: sewer manhole cones and shafts were corroded and chunks of
concrete were falling to the bottom of the manhole;,manhole base and channel show
some signs of deteriorating and some signs of corrosion.
. Manhole Number 2022: sewer manhole cones and shafts show signs of corrosion.
Based on the assessment of these sewer facilities, City staff concluded that the four manholes
were severely damaged and required immediate repair. If the manholes were not immediately
repaired, failure of the manholes could have led to undermining of the roadway and potential risk
to public safety and/or damage to public or private property.
Therefore, the Engineering Department, along with the Public Works Department, deemed that it
was important to complete the repairs immediately by using an informal bidding process and
issuing an emergency repair contract.
Stall entered into an emergency repair contract in accordance with the emergency provision of
Section 1009 of the City Charter; based upon the urgent necessity for the preservation of life,
health and property. City staff received four bids from responsible contractors that have worked
previously on City of Chula Vista contracts.
Bidding Process
Engineering staff prepared specifications and solicited bids from six contractors. On May 21,
2008, staff opened bids for the Emergency Repair project. Four contractors responded with
submittals for the required work. A thorough check of the bid documents was conducted and ail
submittals met the City's requirements.
3-2
/J
7/22/08, Item 5'
Page 3 of 4
The four bids received are as follows:
Contractor Base Bid Amount
MJC Construction - Bonita, CA $66,300
Bonita Pipeline - National City, CA $68,538
Zondiros Corporation - San Marcos, CA $72,400
Cass Construction - El Cajon, CA $80,900
The bid submitted by MJC Construction is above the Engineer's estimate of $55,000 by $11,300,
or approximately 17%. Staffs bid estimate was based on average prices for manhole repairs less
than 10 feet completed during the last three years. The manholes on Hunte Parkway were
slightly greater than 10 feet. With the added depth and for the safety of the workers, a larger
trench was needed, thereby increasing the project cost. Staff has worked with MJC Construction
in the past and their work has been determined to be satisfactory. Their Contractor's License No.
754128 is clear and current.
Additional Work Required
While work was being conducted to repair the four manholes, on June 5, 2008, Public Works
staff indicated to Engineering staff that three manholes. covers within the area were in need of
grade adjustments. The work for these manholes requirbd adding additional manhole rings to
bring the manholes up to the current street grade. Public Works' staff solicited a cost from MJC
Construction to have these adjustments done and found it to be reasonable. Since there were no
unforeseen issues found with the initial manhole repairs, contingency funds were utilized to pay
for the additional work. This work consisted of the removal and disposal of the existing manhole
components, asphalt concrete pavement, and backfill with sand/cement slurry, and the restoration
of the street's structural section.
The work required was expedited through the informal bidding process. The City was able to
avert potential risk to public safety and/or damage to public or private property. All work for the
repair of the initial four manholes on Hunte Parkway between Otay Lakes Road and Kings Creek
Way, as well as the additional work of adjusting three manholes to grade on Otay Lakes Road
between Fenton Street and Hunte Parkway has now been completed.
Wage Statement
Contractors bidding this project were not required to pay prevailing wages to persons employed
by them fQr the work under this project.
DECISION MAKER CONFLICT
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council and has found no property holdings
within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property that is the subject of this action.
3-3
7/22/08, Item 3
Page 4 of 4
FISCAL IMP ACT
FUNDS REQUIRED FOR PROJECT
A. Construction Amount (MJC Construction) $66,300.00
B. Contingencies (approximately 10% of construction costs)
(Change Order Additional Work) $ 6,630.00
C. City Staff Costs (Environmental, Design, Inspection, Survey, $ 7,200.00
Traffic)
TOTAL FUNDS REQUIRED FOR PROJECT 580,130.00 I
FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR PROJECT
Existing capital improvement project "Sewer Rehabilitation FY 07-08
(SW-250) $80,130.00
TOT AL FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR PROJECT $80,130.00
There is no net impact to the General Fund for the Emergency Sewer repairs as there were
sufficient funds in the existing capital improvement project, "Sewer Rehabilitation FY 07-08
(SW-250)", funded by the Sewer Facility Replacement Fund. The remaining available balance
in the project will be utilized in subsequent phases of the City's Sewer Rehabilitation Program.
At completion, the improvements require only routine City maintenance, which is funded from
the Sewer Service Revenue Fund.
ATTACHMENTS
1 - Informational Item dated May 20, 2008
2 - Change Order No.1
Prepared by: Paten San Pedro, Sr. Engineering Technician, Engineering Dept.
J:IGeneral ServiceslGS AdminisrrarionlCouncil AgendalSW250C Emergency k!anhole RepairslSW250C AI 13
Emergency Repair.rev.rnl.doc
3-4
~w~
--:-~-
_...--.0
ATIACHMEi'JT
I
Cll'I OF
CHUL&. VISTA
Engineering & General Services Department
Informational Item
May 20, 2008
File: SW-250
TO:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
VL~:
David R. Garcia, City Manager
Scott Tulloch, Assistant City Manager Sr
Jack Griffin, Director of Engineering an. d Q?neral Services \.. /
Dave Byers, Director of Public Works/rJ \jO
{,::7 .
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Emergency Manhole Repair (SW -250)
As part of the ongoing program to rehabilitate the sewer system throughout the City, a priority
list was developed to guide the City's sewer rehabilitation effort. On May 15, 2008 Public
Works staff informed Engineering and General Services staff that four manholes are severely
deteriorated and in need of immediate repair. Staff was asked to prepare an informal contract to
repair the four se';v-er manholes located along Hume Parkway, bel\veen Otay Lakes Road and
King Creek 'Nay. The following condition assessments were prepared by Public Works staff:
. Manhole Number 1653: sewer manhole cones and shafts are corroded and chun.i(s of
concrete are falling to the bottom of the manhole; manhole base and charmel are
deteriorated. No strength remains on existing sewer manhole wall.
. Manhole Number 1781: sewer manhole cones and shafts are corroded; manhole base and
channel are deteriorating and collapsing.
. Manhole Nmnber 1927: sewer manhole cones and shafts are corroded and chunks of
concrete are falling to the bottom of the manhole; manhole base and channel show some
signs of deteriorating and some signs of corrosion.
. Manhole Number 2022: sewer manhole cones and shafts show signs of corrosion.
Based on the current assessment of these sewer facilities, City staff concluded that the four
manholes are severely damaged and require immediate repair. If the manholes are not
immediately repaired, failure of the manholes could lead to the undermining of the roadway and
potentia! risk to public safety and/or damage to public or private property.
3-5
Honorable Mayor & City Council
Page -2-
May 20, 2008
Therefore, the Engineering and General Services Department, along with the Public Works
Department, believes that it is important to complete these repairs immediately by using an
informal bidding process and issuing an emergency repair contract.
Staff intends to enter into an emergency repair contract in accordance with the emergency
provision of Section 1009 of the City Charter; based upon the potential urgent necessity for the
preservation of life, health and property. City staff will solicit three or more bids from
responsible contractors that have worked previously on City of Chula Vista contracts. Upon
receipt of the contract bid documents, staff will proceed with repairs using the lowest bidder.
The preliminary estimated cost for this repair is approximately 545,000 to 555,000. This
estimate includes construction a.,'1d City staff cost. Staff will be using a portion of the Sewer
Facilitv Replacement funds available in Canital Improvement Proiect No. SW-250 to perform
this emergency work. Staff will return to Council with a full report in June 2008 after the repairs
have been completed.
ivl:\Generai Services\Design\SW-2.50\SW-250 fNFO ITD.l FOR THE3~tl:(GENCY MANHOLE REPLACE:VIBH finaJ.dcc
~If?
~
- --
- - -':;"'"0:;,...
- --
ATTA.CHMEm
2/
CITY OF
CHUlA VISTA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBllC WORKS OPERATIONS
June 10, 2008
SW250C
CHANGE ORDER NO.1
CONTRACT: EMERGENCY MANHOLE REPAIR ON HUNTE PARKWAY
CONTRACTOR: MJC CONSTRUCTION
The following changes shall be made to the above referenced contract between the
CITY OF CHULA VISTA and MJC CONSTRUCTION (Contractor):
Add: Adjust to eXisting street grade three (3) sewer manholes located within the eastbound lanes of Otay
Lakes Road between Fenton Street and Hunte Parkway
Additional items added by Wastewater Collections Manager Dave McRoberts
Bid Itenn Decription Qty I Unit Cost Extended Cost
3 Public Safetv -Traffic Controls 1 I LS $ 500.00
4 Remove manhole frame and cover 3 I LS $ 6,130.00
I
I Total $ 6,630.00
Bid item 4 shall include the removal and disposal of the existing manhole components, asphalt concrete
pavement and backfill with sand/cement slurry, and the resioration or the structural street section.
Total Contract Change Order #1 Cost = ($6,630.00)
The adjustment or contract time for this change order wili add:.IThree (3) working days.
ORIGINAL CONTRACT PRICE:
PREVIOUS CHANGE ORDERS:
NET COST THIS CHANGE ORDER # 1:
REVISED TOTAL CONTPJ\CT PRICE:
$ 66,300.00
$
S (6.630.00)
$ 72,930.00
The agreed upon lump sum prices include all costs for furnishing all tools, labor, materials, equipment, Incidental
costs, profit and fees for performing the work in this contract change and no additional compensation will be due.
It is agreed by the undersigned that this work shall be performed and materials furnished in accordance wilh the
original contract, Green Book specifications, newly provided plans and specifications, and applicable standard
drawings.
(
~ t?!tln'
ORDERED BY
Jim Biasi
Senior Civil Engineer
~~~.
Principal Civil Engineer
Engineering -r ~,...,. e-s:l
g..cr,:cc.s
~ ~
Matt Little
Assistant Director of PW
1 BOO Maxwell Rd.
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Phone (619) 397-6000
~\Ie.,
PRIDE
AT WORK
www.chulavista.gov
~ POI1.C~n,um'" it=rc:I~ PJp'"
3-7
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA DEEMING THE EMERGENCY REPAIR OF
MANHOLES LOCATED ALONG HUNTE PARKWAY
BETWEEN OT A Y LAKES ROAD At,ID KING CREEK WAY
TO BE OF URGENT NECESSITY FOR THE PRESERVATION
OF UFE, HEALTH OR PROPERTY, ACCEPTING THE FINAL
REPORT OF EXPENDITURES FOR THE "EMERGENCY
MANHOLE REPAIRS rN THE EASTERt'i PART OF CHULA
VISTA" AND RATIFYING THE ACTION OF THE CITY
MANAGER AND DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING IN ISSUING
Al'\iTI EXECUTrNG A CONTRACT FOR THESE EMERGENCY
REPAIRS WITH MJC CONSTRUCTlON
WHEREAS, on May IS, 2008, Public Works staff informed Engineering staff that four
manholes located along Hunte Parkway between Otay Lakes Road and King Creek Way were
severely deteriorated and in need of immediate repair; and
WHEREAS, the conditions of the manholes included corroded cones and shafts, concrete
falling to the bottom of the manhole, manhole bases and channels collapsing, and no strength
existing on sewer manhole walls; and
WHEREAS, staff prepared an informal contract to, repair these four sewer manholes and
solicited six contractors to perform the repairs; and ,I
WHEREAS, four contractors responded with submittals for the reqllired work and on
ivlay 21, 2008, the Director of Engineering opened the sealed bids; and
WHEREAS, the bid sllbmitted by MJC Constmction was the lowest bid but was above
the Engineer's estimaIe of $55,000 by $11,300, or approximately 17%; and
WHEREAS, because staff has worked with MJC Construction in the past and their work
has been detem1ined to be satisfactory, staff awarded the contract to MJC Constmction to begin
the Emergency Manhole Repairs; and
WHEREAS, while the repair work was being done, Public Works staff alerted
Engineering staffehat three manhole covers within the area needed grade adjustments; and
WHEREAS, the contingency fund was available to pay for the change order to perfolm
the necessary work to adjust these three manholes to grade: and
WHEREAS, MJC Construction agreed to perfom1 additional work at a cost savings (0 the
City: and
WHEREAS, MJC Construction has now completed all required work to the satisfaction
of staff
3-8
NOW, THEREFORE, BE !T RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
as follows:
1
That it deems the emergency repair of manholes located along Hunte
Parkway between Gtay Lakes Road and King Creek Way to be of urgent
necessity for tile preservation of life, health or property.
7
That it accepts the final report of expendihlres for the "Emergency Manhole
Repairs in the Eastern Par1 of Chula Vista" and ratifies the action of the City
Manager and Director of Engineering in issuing and executing a contract for
these emergency repairs with MJC Construction.
Presented by
Approved as to fOlm by
R A Hopkins
Director of Engineering
A
,,~J!(~ d/G~r'~
Bart Miesfeld
interim City Attomey
3-9
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
~\~ CITY OF
~ (HULA VISTA
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
SUMMARY
7/22/08, Item~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA ACCEPTING BIDS At'ill AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR
THE INST ALLA TION OF THE LOMA VERDE POOL SOLAR PANEL
SYSTEM TO AQUATIC RESOURCES INC. IN THE A.MOUNT OF
:579,500 At,,]) AUTHORIZING STAFF TO PURCR<\SE SOLAR
PAt""ELS AND RELATED E MENT FROM AQUATIC
RESOURCES INC. FOR $34,049
DIRECTOROFENGINEERWG
DIRECTOR OF RECREATION ~
DIRECTOR OF CONSE V ATI9N IRONMENT AL SERVICES ~"'
CITY MANAGER ~ J
ASSISTANT CITY TANAGER ~f
4/5THS VOTE: YES 0 NO ~
,I
The pool solar panel arrays at the Lorna Verde Recreation Center have exceeded their useful life
and are in need of replacement. This resolution will award installation of the pool solar hot
water system to Aquatic Resources, Inc. and authorize staff to purchase related panels and
equipment. Funds for this project are available in Capital Improvement Project GG202 and
eligible for reimbursement from the California Energy Commission (CEC) Loan Program.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that there is no possibility
that the activity may have a significant effect on the environment because it involves only
replacement of a heater that is enclosed entirely within the existing pool equipment room;
therefore, pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the activity is not
subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is necessary.
RECOMMENDATION
Council adopt the resolution. .
4-1
7/22/08, Item !.
Page 2 of 4
DISCUSSION
The Lorna Verde solar panel array went into service on October 20,1980. The first panels were
replaced in March 1995, since then staff has been replacing from 2 to 3 panels every couple of
years as they have become inoperative.
A solar panel array assessment was completed in 2007, the results were that 4 panels were worn
beyond use and/or repair and were completely removed. Eleven panels are at the end of their
useful life and 50% of the panels are showing signs of deterioration and corrosion, with their
flow-balancing valves frozen and inoperable. Typically the life of these systems is approximately
20 years before replacement is warranted. Because of good water chemistry management and a
good maintenance program the life of this system was extended about 6 years before the wear
and age started to reduce the systems efficiency to the point necessitating replacement of the
entire system.
An earlier energy project at Lorna Verde, which provided for the heater replacement was
previously approved by Council on June 17, 2008. This was part of a comprehensive energy
project which includes the heater, solar arrays and pool. cover. StatY is recommending the
replacement of the pool solar arrays at Lorna Verde. Bid documents were prepared for
installation only. There were provisions in the specifications that provided instructions that the
City would provide the solar panels.
Bid Process
Bid documents soliciting bids for the installation of the Lorna Verde Pool Solar panel system
were prepared and advertised by staff. The Director of Engineering received one formal bid for
,
the "Lorna Verde Pool Solar Panel Replacement, 1420 Lorna Lane, in the City of Chula Vista,
California (CIP No. GG202C)" project on May 15, 2008. Aquatic Resources Inc. of San Diego,
California submitted a bid of $79,500. The formal bid process authorizes the City to award a
contract to a responsible bidder even if only one bid is received. All stipulations within the bid
package submitted by Aquatic Resources Inc. conform to the City's requirements. Thus, Aquatic
Resources Inc. of San Diego was declared responsive and cleared to perform the necessary work.
Aquatic Resources Inc.'s license number is 882232 and is clear and current.
Wage Statement
The source of funding for this project is the CEC loan. Contractors bidding this project are
required to pay prevailing wages to persons employed by them for the work under this project.
Disadvantaged businesses were encouraged to bid through the sending of the Notice to
Contractors to various trade publications.
Disclosure Statement
Attachment 1 is a copy of the Contractor's Disclosure Statement.
Purchase of Equioment
Based on staff s experience with previous repairs to the solar panel system, it was determined to
utilize the informal bid process for the purchase of the replacement panels. This procurement
method ensures better control over the selection of the cost and type of solar panel to be
installed. Utilizing the City's Purchasing Guidelines for equipment purchases between $10,000
4-2
7/22/08, ItemL
Page 3 of 4
and $100,000 three informal quotations are required whereby staff obtained four quotes from
various companies. They are as follows:
VENDOR SOLAR PANEL A1VIOUNT
Aquatic Resources Inc. - San Diego, CA $34,049.00
Radford Industries, Inc. - Santa Maria, CA $46,899.22
illvli\ Solar - Altamonte Springs, FL $51,350.00
SunEarth, Inc. - Fontana, CA $84,530.00
Staff is recommending authorization to purchase the solar panels and related equipment from the
lowest quote provided by Aquatic Resources, Inc. for $34,049. This is the same contractor selected
under the formal bid process to complete the installation at Lorna Verde.
Summary
This capital improvement project is part of a City\vide effort to promote renewable energy at
municipal sites and lower citywide greenhouse gas or "carbon" emissions. The SDG&E
partnership program has provided financial support for evaluation, identification and
coordination of various facility energy retrofit projects. These capital project costs are approved
and eligible for the CEC Loan Program approved by Council in April 2008. The CEC loans are
designed to provide local agencies with capita!" funding to install renewable energy systems and
are repaid through the resulting energy savings. Once the loan debt is repaid, the City would
capture the net savings on its annual energy costs. The projected anIlllal project energy savings
is $10, 606. ,
J
This project is also eligible for a SDG&E energy rebate in the amount of $8,848 and a recycling
recovery cost of$IO,OOO reducing the overall cost of the project.
DECISION MAKER CONFLICT
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council and has found no property holdings
within 500 feet ofthe boundaries of the property, which is the subject of this action.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no impact to the General Fund. The contract amount and costs for implementing the
renewable energy improvement project will be paid through the CEC Energy Efficiency Loan -
Phase I (GG202) capital improvement project (CIF) which was approved by City Council on
April 1, 2008.
The expenses for "Lorna Verde Pool Solar Panel Replacement, 1420 Lorna Lane, in the City of
Chula Vista, California (CIF No. GG202C)" project is as follows:
4-3
i
7/22/08, Item I!
Page 4 of 4
FUNDS REQUIRED FOR PROJECT
A. Contract Amount $ 79,500
B. Equipment Purchase: Solar Panels 34,049
C. Contingencies (10% of contact amount) 7,950
Subtotal (not including rebate and recovery cost) 121,499
D. Less SDG&E Rebate (8,848)
E. Less Recycling Recovery Cost (10,000)
PROJECT TOTAL $102,651 I
FUNDS A V AILABLE FOR PROJECT
A. Existing CIF, GG202 $102,651
TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION $102,651
Upon completion of this project, the improvements will require only routine City maintenance
services as directed by the Department of Public Works.
The CIP's expenditures are reimbursed through the CEC loan program, which uses the project's
resulting energy savings estimated at $10,607 annually to repay the loan debt resulting in a
simple payback period of 9 years. The City is also eligible for an energy efficiency rebate
incentive 01'$ 8,848 from SDG&E and a recycling recovery cost of$10,000.
,
,
In addition, as mentioned above, staff costs for the work involved with "Loma Verde Pool Solar
Panel Replacement, 1420 Loma Lane, in the City of Chula Vista, California (CII' No. GG202C)"
project is eligible for reimbursement from the SDG&E Partnership Program.
ATTACHMENTS
1 - Aquatic Resources Inc.'s Disclosure Statement
2 - Quote for new solar panels
Prepared by: Gordon Day, Building Project !v[anager, Engineering Department
,,[:IGeneral ServiceslGS AdministrationlCol,"cil AgendaIGG202C\GG202C Solar Panel Replace A[ 13 FlNAL2.doc
4-4
ATTA.cHMENT
I
City of Chula Vista Disclosure Statement
Pursuant to Council Policy 101-01, prior to any action upon matters that will require discretionary action
by the Council, Planning CorrurJssion and all other official bodies of the City, a statement of disclosure of
certain o\\lnership or financial interests, paym.ents, or campaign contributions for a City of Chula Vista
election must be filed. Tne following information must be disclosed:
1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the property that is the subject of the
application or the contract~ e.g., Dv"ner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier.
K/ If rJ{.
,
2. If any person' identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all
individuals with a $2000 investment in the business (carporationlpa.~ership) entity.
11/(1 f/ d:-
3. If any person* identified pursuant to (1) above is a non-profit organization or trust, list the names
of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or
trustor of the trust. ./
NDtllf;
d Please identify every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent
contractors you have assigned to represent you before the City in L.'Us matter.
Ndf:,/i
,
..
Has any person* associated with this contract had any financial dealings with an official** o:Uhe
Cil'j ofChula Vista as it relates to Lois contract withb the past 12 months? Yes_ No V
No r--e
lfYes, briefly describe the nature of the financial interest the official" may have in this contract.
15
C:\Documents and Settings\GordonD\Desktop\LOma Verde\gg202c Solar Panel Replacement.doc
4-5
6.
Have you made a contribution of more than $25l}within the past tweive (12) months to a current
member of the Chula Vista City Council? No ~Yes _ If yes, which Council member?
7.
Have you provided more fhan $340 (or an item of equivalent value) to an official" of fhe City
ofChula Vista in the past twelve (12) monfhs? (ThiVncludes being a source of income, money to
retire a legal debt, gift, loan, etc.) Yes _ No ~
liYes, which official** and what was fhe namre of item provided?
Date:
)-(<;-07
;iJ~,
Signature of Contractor/A. licant
1:41<,.1- J::16zUL,.f'7C-
PD.,>! or type name of Contractor/Applicant
.,
* Person is defined as: any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, soci.al club,
fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, any other county, city,
municipaiity, district, or ot.~er political subdivision, -or any other group or combination acting as
a unit.
** Official includes, but is not limited to: Mayor, Council member, Planning Commissioner,
ivlember of a board, commission, or committee of the City, employee, or staff members.
16
C\Documcnts and Settings\GordonD\Desktop\LOma Verde\gg202c Solar Panel Replacement-doc
4-6
z,
.AT! ACHMENT
AQUATIC RESOURCES INC.
9074 Hatcher Ln_ San Diego, Ca 92126
(858) 610-4673
Fax 271-1265
Lic # 882232
Quotation
~-~-..--_.._--- .. . -----._--.
1'_ DATE._ ' . QUOTE# ~
7/312008 -r--- 237
_._--~._--_.__.
1'- ----.----..---.
CUSTOMER
I
I
L....___..
Ui
I
Cirt Of Chula Vista
Purchasing Oi".
276 Fourth Ave. MS-106
C;1ufa Vista, Ca 91910
Attn. Gorden
r-.-----oESCRIPTJON.------- ~
~:~VlDE 79 4-FT'-SY 8FT -S:Lf'H PAN~~LS TO REP:::~~NG I
SY A TEM.
. -ciTyn'l'- RP-.TE.----. AMOUNT !
_on 'r-' .-- --- --.-.--'!
79 I 400.00 31.600.00"; ,
SHIPPING INCLUDED
0.00
Expea 3-4 weeks far delivery once order has been placed.
0.00
31,600.00 !
_::'~~.O~ !
: SubiotaJ
-~~;'
. _._ _ 34.049.00.1
!_--
4-7
RESOLUTION 2008-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING BIDS AND A WARDING A
CONTRl-\CT FOR THE INSTALLATION OF THE LOwL<-I.
VERDE POOL SOLAR PA1'\[EL SYSTEM TO AQUATIC
RESOURCES INC. IN THE A1VfOUNT OF $79,500 ANTI
AUTHORIZING STAFF TO PURCHASE SOLAR PA..!"\fELS
AND RELATED EQUIPMENT FROM AQUATIC RESOURCES
INC. FOR $34,049
WHEREAS, the Loma Verde Pool solar panel array went into service on October 20,
1980; and
WHEREAS, the tlrst panels were replaced in March 1995, and since then staff has been
replacing from two to three panels every couple of years as they have become inoperative; and
WHEREAS, a solar panel array assessment was completed in 2007 and the results were
that four panels were worn beyond use and/or repair and were completely removed, eleven
panels are at the end of their usetullife, and 50% of the panels are showing signs of deterioration
and corrosion, with their flow-balancing valves frozen and inoperable; and
WHEREAS, staff is recommending the replacement of the pool solar arrays at Loma
. ,
Verde; and '
WHEREAS, staff obtained four quotes for the purchase of the replacement panels and
related equipment, utilizing the City's the informal bid process; and
WHEREAS, the lowest quote was provided by Aquatic Resources Inc. for $34,049; and
WHEREAS, bid documents soliciting bids for the installation of the Lorna Verde Pool
so lar panel system were prepared and advertised by staff; and
WHEREAS, on May 15,2008, the Director of Engineering received one formal bid from
Aquatic Resources Inc. in the amount of $79,500; and
WHEREAS, all stipulations within the bid package submitted by Aquatic Resources Inc.
conform to the City's requirements; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends accepting bids and awarding the contract for installation of
the Loma Verde Pool solar panel system to Aquatics Resources, Inc. in the amount of $79,500 and
authorizing staff to purchase solar panels and related equipment from Aquatic Resources, Inc. for
$34,049.
4-8
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
tbat it accepts bids and awards the contract for tbe installation of the Lorna Verde Pool solar
panel system to Aquatic Resources Inc. in the amount of $79,500 and authorizes staff to
purchase solar panels and related equipment from Aquatic Resources Inc. for $34,049.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
R. A. Hopkins
Director of Engineering
~~~ tL
Bart Miesfeld
Interim City Attorney
/ ~-zs t-~
tI
4-9
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
~ ('f:.. Cln' OF
~CHULA VISTA
:-
7/22/08, Item~
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
SUlVIMARY
A Pedestrian Master Plan will identify and prioritize pedestrian improvement projects based on
technical analysis and community input, thereby promoting orderly implementation on a
citywide basis and enhancing the City's ability to secure funding for these projects. Based on the
results of an interview process and evaluation criteria, it is recommended that an agreement be
approved with AHa Planning + Design for development of a Pedestrian Master Plan.
4/STHS VOTE: YES 0 NO I3l
I
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the project qualifies
for a Class 6 categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15306 (Information Collection) of the
State CEQA Guidelines. Thus, no further environmental review is necessary.
RECOMMENDATION
Council adopt the resolution.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Not applicable.
DISCUSSION
In order to use the region's transportation funding most effectively, the San Diego Association of
Governments (SAl'lDAG) recommends, and in the future will require, that each local agency in
5-1
7/22/08, Item 5
Page 2 of 3
the region have a Pedestrian Master Plan in order to compete for and receive funding for
pedestrian projects. A Pedestrian Master Plan will also strengthen the City's projectjustrncation
in applying for State and Federal funding (such as Safe Routes to Schools) for pedestrian
improvements. Agencies may apply for funding to develop their Pedestrian Master Plans
through SAl"iDAG's annual TDAlTransNet Claim cycle for pedestrian and bicycle project
funding. On May 11, 2005, SA1"iDAG awarded the City a $150,000 Transportation
Development Act (TDA) grant for the development of a Citywide Pedestrian Master Plan.
A Request for Proposals (RFP) to develop a Pedestrian Master Plan was circulated with the
following given as major tasks:
. Identifying stakeholders and developing a public involvement plan
. Identifying existing pedestrian needs and conditions within the City
. Developing options tor addressing concerns identified by project stakeholders and the
public
. Developing pedestrian design guidelines and standards, including accessibility
recommendations, that meet or exceed SAl"iDAG guidelines
. Coordinating recommendations with other City planning documents and the City's
Walking Audit effort funded by a Safe Routes to School grant
. Providing a quarter-mile radius plan for elementary school routes within City limits
. Recommending zoning ordinance changes
. Recommending future Capital Improvement Projects. This includes developing a method
of prioritizing projects, recommending funding sources and strategies and developing a
proposed timetable.
. Finalizing the Pedestrian Master Plan for presentatipn to City leaders and the public
The consultant selection process was conducted in accordance with Section 2.56.110 of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code. It was determined that this work should be performed by a
consultant as City staff does not have the specialized experience in preparing a pedestrian plan.
A mandatory pre-submittal conference was held in January 2008. City staff received proposals
from five of the firms who attended the conference. Since all five firms met the qualifications
stated in the RFP, they were all invited to the interview process. The interviews were held
between February 18 and 22, 2008. The results of the interview process are as follows:
.... ;,pjj\m .'
Alta Planning + Design, La
Jolla, CA
KTU+A, San Diego, CA
Stantec, San Diego, CA
Rick Engineering, San Diego,
CA
Glatting Jackson Kercher
Analin, Orlando, FL
'.FinaIiRaiik< .<o,Combined-Rahk'..,
1 3
,:.CostPro oilal.:.
$170,561
2
3
4
6
11
12
$149,870
$293,458
$221,100
5
13
$149,065
The interview panel unanimously agreed that Alta Planning + Design (Alta) should be ranked as
the number one firm. Alta has extensive local experience in the preparation of bicycle and
pedestrian master plans. The key staff members proposed for the Chu1a Vista project are all very
well qualified. Their presentation demonstrated that they are already familiar with pedestrian
5-2
7/22/08, Item .E7
Page 3 of 3
issues iTI Chula Vista. They had the best presentation on the public participation element, and
they demonstrated that they have been successful in encouraging public participation of bilingual
communities.
During negotiations, staff discussed the proposed list of tasks to be performed as a part of the
contract, as well as the proposed cost estimate. The Consultant and staff agreed that the cost
could be reduced to $152,002 without reducing the quality of the Plan. This fee includes a
presentation to Council, which was originally included as an optional item with an additional
cost in the RFP.
Although no additional work is anticipated on the development of the Plan at this time, staff
would like the flexibility to amend the agreement to add specific tasks to the scope of work if
necessary. Staff therefore requests that the City Manager be authorized to execute an
amendment to the Agreement to add specific tasks to the scope of work for an amount not
exceeding $50,000, if necessary.
DECISION i'HKER CONFLICT
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council Members and has determined that
the effect of the decision contemplated by this action on the public officials' interest in real
property also affects ten percent or more of all property owners in the public officials'
jurisdiction or 5,000 property owners in the jurisdiCtion of the officials' agency in substantially
the same manner. Therefore, pursuant to California Code of Regulations sections 18707 and
18707.1, the Public Generally Exception applies.
FISCAL IlVIPACT
Approval of this agreement will not impact the General Fund. Funding for this project has been
included in the Capital Improvement Program under STL-323. This includes $150,000 in a TDA
grant and $61,000 in Transnet funds. Staff intends to apply for an additional IDA grant in the
future to cover the funds being advanced from I ransne!.
ATTACHMENTS
None.
Prepared by: Elizabeth Chopp, Senior Civil Engineer, Engineering Department
J:\ENGINEERIAGENDAICAS2008107-15-081A113 PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN. DOC
5-3
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND ALTA PLANNING +
DESIGN FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A PEDESTRlAL'l
MASTER PLAN FOR A TOTAL COST OF 5152,002 Al'lD
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MA.NAGER TO EXECUTE ,A..J.'\I
,A..J.VlENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT TO ADD SPECIFIC
TASKS TO THE SCOPE OF WORK FOR "A..J.'l AMOUNT NOT
TO EXCEED 550,000
WHEREAS, on May 11, 2005 the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG)
awarded the City a 5150,000 Transportation Development Act (TDA) grant for the preparation
of a Pedestrian Master Plan; and
WHEREAS, staff issued a Request for Proposals for a Consultant to assist the City in
developing a Pedestrian Master Plan; and
WHEREAS, Alta Planning -+- Design was unanimously selected by the interview panel as
the most qualified linn to develop the Plan; and
WHEREAS, staff has negotiated an agreement with Alta Planning + Design for the
development of a Pedesrrian Master Plan for a total costofS 152,002; and
WHEREAS, City Council approved a total of 5210,000 in the 2008-09 Capital
Improvement Program under STL-323. including the 5150,000 TDA grant and 56l,000 in
Transnet funds to cover the cost of developing the Plan; and
WHEREAS, although no additional work Is anticipated on the development of the Plan at
this time, staff would like the flexibility to amend the Agreement to add specific tasks to the
scope 0 f work i I' necessary; and
WHEREAS, staff is requesting that City Council authorize the City Manager to execute
an amendment to the Agreement to add specific tasks to the scope of work for an amount not
exceeding S50,000, if necessary.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City ofChula Vista as
follows:
I. That it approves an agreement between the City of Chula Vista and Alta Planning -+-
Design for the development of a Pedestrian Master Plan for a total cost of $152,002.
2. That it authorizes the City Manager to execute an amendment to the Agreement to
add speci fie tasks to the scope of work for an amoLlnt not to exceed $50,000 if
necessary.
5-4
Presentee! by
Approved as to form by
R.A. Hopkins
Director of Engineering
'--r:)~",,- /L ~~ (h,-
Bart Miesfeld
Interim City Attorney
5-5
THE ATTACHED AGREEJ\1ENT HAS BEEN REVIEWED
AND APPROVED AS TO FORM BY THE CITY
A TTOR..NEY'S OFFICE AND WILL BE
FORlYlALL Y SIGNED UPON APPROVAL BY
THE CITY COUNCIL
,,---!_jL.~, .(~ 0~
Bart C. Miesfeld {;
Interim City Attorney
Dated:
1//0 h y
, I
Agreement between City ofChula and
Alta Planning + Design
for Developing a Pedestrian Master Plan
.1
5-6
Parties and Recital Page(s)
Agreement between
City of Chula Vista
and
Alta Planning + Design
for Developing a Pedestrian Master Plan
This agreement ("Agreement"), dated for the purposes of reference
only, and effective as of the date last executed unless another date is otherwise specified in
Exhibit A, Paragraph 1, is between the City-related entity as is indicated on Exhibit A,
Paragraph 2, as such ("City"), whose business form is set forth on Exhibit A, Paragraph 3, and
the entity indicated on the attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 4, as Consultant, whose business form
is set forth on Exhibit A, Paragraph 5, and whose place of business and telephone numbers are
set forth on Exhibit A, Paragraph 6 ("Consultant"), and is made with reference to the following
facts:
Recitals
Whereas, the City requires that a consulting tirm develop a Pedestrian Master Plan (Plan).
The purpose of the Plan is to guide the way the City plans and implements pedestrian
improvements; and,
Whereas, the Consultant selection process has been co~ducted in accordance with Section
2.56.110 of the Chula vista Municipal Code. The selection panel has determined that Consultant
is the firm best qualified to undertake the services described in the Agreement; and,
Whereas, Consultant warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed in a
manner such that they are and can prepare and deliver the services required of Consultant to City
within the time frames herein provided all in accordance with the terms and conditions of this
Agreement;
(End of Recitals. Next Page starts Obligatory Provisions.)
5-7
Page 1
Obligatory Provisions Pages
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City and Consultant do hereby mutually
agree as follows:
1. Consultant's Duties
A. General Duties
Consultant shall perform all of the services described on the attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 7,
entitled "General Duties"; and,
B. Scope of Work and Schedule
In the process of performing and delivering said "General Duties", Consultant shall also
perform all of the services described in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, entitled "Scope of Work and
Schedule", not inconsistent with the General Duties, according to, and within the time frames set
forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, and deliver to City such Deliverables as are identified in Exhibit
A, Paragraph 8, within the time frames set forth therein, time being of the essence of this
agreement. The General Duties and the work and deliverables required in the Scope of Work and
Schedule shall be herein referred to as the "Defined Services". Failure to complete the Defined
Services by the times indicated does not, except at the option of the City, operate to terminate
this Agreement.
C. Reductions in Scope of Work
City may independently, or upon request from Consultant, from time to time reduce the
Defined Services to be performed by the Consultant under this Agreement. Upon doing so, City
and Consultant agree to meet in good faith and confer for the purpose of negotiating a
corresponding reduction in the compensation associated with said reduction.
D. Additional Services
In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set forth, City may require Consultant
to perform additional consulting services related to the Defined Services (" Additional Services"),
and upon doing so in writing, if they are within the scope of services offered by Consultant,
Consultant shall perform same on a time and materials basis at the rates set forth in the "Rate
Schedule" in Exhibit A, Paragraph IO(C), unless a separate fixed fee is otherwise agreed upon.
All compensation for Additional Services shall be paid monthly as billed.
E. Standard of Care
Consultant, in performing any Services under this agreement, whether Defined Services or
Additional Services, shall perform in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill
ordinarily exercised by members of the pro fession currently practicing under similar conditions
and in similar locations.
5-8
Page 2
F. Insurance
Consultant must procure insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to
property that may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work under the
contract and the results of that work by the Consultant, his agents, representatives, employees or
subcontractors and provide documentation of same prior to commencement of work. The
insurance must be maintained for the duration of the contract.
Minimum Scope of Insurance
Coverage must be at least as broad as:
(l) Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence Form
CGOOOl).
(2) Insurance Services Office Form Number CA 0001 covering Automobile Liability,
Code 1 (any auto).
(3) Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of Cali fomi a and
Employer's Liability Insurance.
(4) Professional Liability or Errors & Omissions Liability insurance appropriate to the
Consultant's profession. Architects' and Engineers' coverage is to be endorsed to
include contractual liability.
Minimum Limits of Insurance
J
J
Contractor must maintain limits no less than:
1. General Liability:
(Including operations,
products and completed
operations, as applicable)
2. Automobile Liability:
3. Workers' Compensation
Employer's Liability:
4. Professional Liability or
Errors & Omissions
Liability:
$1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and
property damage. If Commercial General Liability insurance
with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general
aggregate limit must apply separately to this project/location or
the general aggregate limit must be hvice the required occurrence
limit.
$1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
Statutory
$1,000,000 each accident
$1,000,000 disease-policy limit
$1,000,000 disease-each employee
$1,000,000 each occurrence
Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions
5-9
Page 3
Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At
the option of the City, either the insurer will reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured
retentions as they pertain to the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the
Consultant will provide a financial guarantee satisfactory to the City guaranteeing payment of
losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses.
Other Insurance Provisions
The general liability, automobile liability, and where appropriate, the worker's compensation
policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
(I) The City of Chula Vista, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers are
to be named as additional insureds with respect to liability arising out of automobiles
owned, leased, hired or borrowed by or on behalf of the Consultant, where applicable,
and, with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on
behalf of the Consultant, including providing materials, parts or equipment furnished
in connection with such work or operations. The general liability additional insured
coverage must be provided in the form of an endorsement to the contractor's
insurance using ISO CG 2010 (1l/85) or its equivalent. Specifically, the endorsement
must not exclude Products/Completed Operations coverage.
(2) The Consultant's General Liability insurance coverage must be primary insurance as
it pertains to the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers. iilly
insurance or self-insurance maintained by theOity, its officers, officials, employees,
or volunteers is wholly separate from the insurance ofthe contractor and in no way
relieves the contractor from its responsibility to provide insurance.
(3) The insurance policy required by this clause must be endorsed to state that coverage
will not be canceled by either party, except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice
to the City by certified mail, return receipt requested.
(4) Coverage shall not extend to any indemnity coverage for the active negligence of the
additional insured in any case where an agreement to indemnify the additional insured
would be invalid under Subdivision (b) of Section 2782 of the Civil Code.
(5) Consultant's insurer will provide a Waiver of Subrogation in favor of the City for
each required policy providing coverage during the life of this contract.
If General Liability, Pollution and/or Asbestos Pollution Liability and/or Errors & Omissions
coverage are written on a claims-made form:
(1) The "Retro Date" must be shown, and must be before the date of the contract or the
beginning of the contract work.
(2) Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least
five (5) years after completion of the contract work.
5-10
Page 4
(3) If coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claims-made
policy form with a "Retro Date" prior to the contract effective date, the Consultant
must purchase "extended reporting" coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after
completion of contract work.
(4) A copy of the claims reporting requirements must be submitted to the City for review.
Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with licensed insurers admitted to transact business in the State of
California with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A V. Ifinsurance is placed with a
surplus lines insurer, insurer must be listed on the State of California List of Eligible Surplus
Lines Insurers ("LESLI") with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A X. Exception may
be made for the State Compensation Fund when not specifically rated.
Verification of Coverage
Consultant shall furnish the City with original certificates and amendatory endorsements
effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements should be on insurance industry
forms, provided those endorsements or policies conform to the contract requirements. All
certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work
commences. The City reserves the right to require, at any time, complete, certified copies of all
required insurance policies, including endorsements evidencing the coverage required by these
specifications. . : .
Subcontractors
Consultants must include all subconsultants as insureds under its policies or furnish separate
certificates and endorsements for each subconsultant. All coverage for subconsultants are subject
to all of the requirements included in these specifications.
G. Security for Performance
(1) Performance Bond
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 18, indicates the need for Consultant to provide
a Performance Bond (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately
preceding the subparagraph entitled "Performance Bond"), then Consultant shall provide to the
City a performance bond in the form prescribed by the City and by such sureties which are
authorized to transact such business in the State of California, listed as approved by the United
States Department of Treasury Circular 570, http://wv/w.tins.treas.gov/c570, and whose
underwriting limitation is sufficient to issue bonds in the amount required by the agreement, and
which also satisfy the requirements stated in Section 995.660 of the Code of Civil Procedure,
except as provided otherwise by laws or regulations. All bonds signed by an agent must be
accompanied by a certified copy of such agent's authority to act. Surety companies must be duly
licensed or authorized in the jurisdiction in which the Project is located to issue bonds for the
5-11
Page 5
limits so required. Form must be satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney which
amount is indicated in the space adjacent to the term, "Performance Bond", in said Exhibit A,
Paragraph 18.
(2) Letter of Credit
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 18, indicates the need for Consultant to provide
a Letter of Credit (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding
the subparagraph entitled "Letter of Credit"), then Consultant shall provide to the City an
irrevocable letter of credit callable by the City at their unfettered discretion by submitting to the
bank a letter, signed by the City Manager, stating that the Consultant is in breach of the terms of
this Agreement. The letter of credit shall be issued by a bank, and be in a form and amount
satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney which amount is indicated in the space
adjacent to the term, "Letter of Credit", in said Exhibit A, Paragraph 18.
(3) Other Security
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 18, indicates the need for Consultant to provide
security other than a Performance Bond or a Letter of Credit (indicated by a check mark in the
parenthetical space immediately preceding the subparagraph entitled "Other Security"), then
Consultant shall provide to the City such other security therein listed in a form and amount
satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney.
H. Business License
I
,
Consultant agrees to obtain a business license from the City and to otherwise comply with
Title 5 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code.
2. Duties of the City
A. Consultation and Cooperation
City shall regularly consult the Consultant for the purpose of reviewing the progress of the
Defined Services and Schedule therein contained, and to provide direction and guidance to
achieve the objectives of this agreement. The City shall permit access to its office facilities, files
and records by Consultant throughout the term of the agreement. In addition thereto, City agrees
to provide the information, data, items and materials set forth on Exhibit A, Paragraph 9, and
with the further understanding that delay in the provision of these materials beyond thirty (30)
days after authorization to proceed, shall constitute a basis for the justifiable delay in the
Consultant's performance of this agreement.
B. Compensation
Upon receipt of a properly prepared billing from Consultant submitted to the City
periodically as indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 17, but in no event more frequently than
monthly, on the day of the period indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 17, City shall compensate
Consultant for all services rendered by Consultant according to the terms and conditions set forth
5-12
Page 6
in Exhibit A, Paragraph 10, adjacent to the governing compensation relationship indicated by a
"checkmark" next to the appropriate arrangement, subject to the requirements for retention set
forth in Paragraph 18 of Exhibit A, and shall compensate Consultant for out of pocket expenses
as provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 11.
All billings submitted by Consultant shall contain sufficient information as to the propriety of
the billing to permit the City to evaluate that the amount due and payable thereunder is proper,
and shall specifically contain the City's account number indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 17(C)
to be charged upon making such payment.
3. Administration of Contract
Each party designates the individuals ("Contract Administrators") indicated on Exhibit A,
Paragraph 12, as said party's contract administrator who is authorized by said party to represent
them in the routine administration of this agreement.
4. Term
This Agreement shall terminate when the Parties have complied with all executory provisions
hereo f.
5. Liquidated Damages
The provisions of this section apply if a Liquidated Damages Rate is provided in Exhibit A,
. ,
Paragraph 13. . ,
It is acknowledged by both parties that time is of the essence in the completion of this
Agreement. It is difficult to estimate the amount of damages resulting from delay in
performance. The parties have used their judgment to arrive at a reasonable amount to
compensate for delay.
Failure to complete the Defined Services within the allotted time period specified in this
Agreement shall result in the following penalty: For each consecutive calendar day in excess of
the time specified for the completion of the respective work assignment or Deliverable, the
Consultant shall pay to the City, or have withheld from monies due, the sum of Liquidated
Damages Rate provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 13 ("Liquidated Damages Rate").
Time extensions for delays beyond the Consultant's control, other than delays caused by the
Clty, shall be requested in writing to the City's Contract Administrator, or designee, prior to the
expiration of the specified time. Extensions of time, when granted, will be based upon the effect
of delays to the work and will not be granted for delays to minor portions of work unless it can
be shown that such delays did or will delay the progress of the work.
6. Financial Interests of Consultant
A. Consultant is Designated as an FPPC Filer
5-13
Page 7
If Consultant is designated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 14, as an "FPPC filer", Consultant is
deemed to be a "Consultant" for the purposes of the Political Reform Act conflict of interest and
disclosure provisions, and shall report economic interests to the City Clerk on the required
Statement of Economic Interests in such reporting categories as are specified in Paragraph 14 of
Exhibit A, or if none are specified, then as determined by the City Attorney.
B. Decline to Participate
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant shall not make,
or participate in making or in any way attempt to use Consultant's position to influence a
governmental decision in which Consultant knows or has reason to know Consultant has a
financial interest other than the compensation promised by this Agreement.
C. Search to Determine Economic Interests
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant warrants and
represents that Consultant has diligently conducted a search and inventory of Consultant's
economic interests, as the term is used in the regulations promulgated by the Fair Political
Practices Commission, and has determined that Consultant does not, to the best of Consultant's
knowledge, have an economic interest which would conflict with Consultant's duties under this
agreement.
D. Promise Not to Acquire Conflicting Interests
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant further warrants
and represents that Consultant will not acquire, obtain, or assume an economic interest during the
term of this Agreement which would constitute a conflict of interest as prohibited by the Fair
Political Practices Act.
E. Duty to Advise of Conflicting Interests
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant further warrants
and represents that Consultant will immediately advise the City Attorney of City if Consultant
learns of an economic interest of Consultant's that may result in a conflict of interest for the
purpose of the Fair Political Practices Act, and regulations promulgated thereunder.
F. Specific Warranties Against Economic Interests
Consultant warrants and represents that neither Consultant, nor Consultant's immediate
family members, nor Consultant's employees or agents ("Consultant Associates") presently have
any interest, directly or indirectly, whatsoever in any property which may be the subject matter
of the Defined Services, or in any property within 2 radial miles from the exterior boundaries of
any property which may be the subject matter of the Defined Services, ("Prohibited Interest"),
other than as listed in Exhibit A, Paragraph 14.
Consultant further warrants and represents that no promise of future employment,
remuneration, consideration, gratuity or other reward or gain has been made to Consultant or
5-14
Page 8
Consultan1 Associates in connection with Consultant's performance of this Agreement.
Consultant promises to advise City of any such promise that may be made during the Term of
this Agreement, or for twelve months thereafter.
Consultant agrees that Consultant Associates shall not acquire any such Prohibited Interest
within the Term ofthis Agreement, or for twelve months after the expiration of this Agreement,
except with the written permission of City.
Consultant may not conduct or solicit any business for any party to this Agreement, or for
any third party that may be in conflict with Consultant's responsibilities under this Agreement,
except with the written permission of City.
7. Hold Harmless
Consultant shall defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its elected and
appointed officers and employees, from and against all claims for damages, liability, cost and
expense (including without limitation attorneys fees) arising out of or alleged by third parties to
be the result of the negligent acts, errors or omissions or the willful misconduct of the
Consultant, and Consultant's employees, subcontractors or other persons, agencies or firms for
whom Consultant is legally responsible in connection with the execution of the work covered by
this Agreement, except only for those claims, damages, liabiIlty, costs and expenses (including
without limitations, attorneys fees) arising from the sole negligence or sole willful misconduct of
the City, its officers, employees. Also covered is liability arising from, connected with, caused
by or claimed to be caused by the active or passive negligent acts or omissions of the City, its
agents, officers, or employees which may be in combinatidn with the active or passive negligent
acts or omissions of the Consultant, its employees, agents or officers, or any third party.
With respect to losses arising from Consultant's professional errors or omissions, Consultant
shall defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officers
and employees, from and against all claims for damages, liability, cost and expense (including
without limitation attorneys fees) except for those claims arising from the negligence or willful
misconduct of City, its officers or employees.
Consultant's indemnification shall include any and all costs, expenses, attorneys fees and
liability incurred by the City, its officers, agents or employees in defending against such claims,
whether the same proceed to judgment or not. Consultant's obligations under this Section shall
not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the Consultant. Consultant's obligations
under this Section shall survive the termination of this Agreement.
For those professionals who are required to be licensed by the state (e.g. architects, landscape
architects, surveyors and engineers), the following indemnification provisions should be utilized:
(I) Indemnification and Hold Harmless Agreement
With respect to any liability, including but not limited to claims asserted or costs, losses,
attorney fees, or payments for injury to any person or property caused or claimed to be caused by
the acts or omissions of the Consultant, or Consultant's employees, agents, and officers, arising
5-15
Page 9
out of any services performed involving this project, except liability for Professional Services
covered under Section 7.2, the Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, protect, and hold
harmless the City, its agents, officers, or employees from and against all liability. Also covered is
liability arising from, connected with, caused by, or claimed to be caused by the active or passive
negligent acts or omissions of the City, its agents, officers, or employees which may be in
combination with the active or passive negligent acts or omissions of the Consultant, its
employees, agents or officers, or any third party. -The Consultant's duty to indemnify, protect and
hold harmless shall not include any claims or liabilities arising from the sole negligence or sole
willful misconduct of the City, its agents, officers or employees. This section in no way alters,
affects or modifies the Consultant's obligation and duties under Section Exhibit A to this
Agreement.
(2) Indemnification for Professional Services.
As to the Consultant's professional obligation, work or services involving this Project,
the Consultant agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its agents, officers and
employees from and against any and all liability, claims, costs, and damages, including but not
limited to, attorneys fees, that arise out of, or pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness
or willful misconduct of Consultant and its agents in the performance of services under this
agreement, but this indemnity does not apply liability for damages for death or bodily injury to
persons, injury to property, or other loss, arising from the sole negligence, willful misconduct or
defects in design by City or the agents, servants, or independent contractors who are directly
responsible to City, or arising from the active negligence of City.
8. Termination of Agreement for Cause
If, through any cause, Consultant shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper manner
Consultant's obligations under this Agreement, or if Consultant shall violate any of the
covenants, agreements or stipulations of this Agreement, City shall have the right to terminate
this Agreement by giving written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the
effective date thereof at least five (5) days before the effective date of such termination. In that
event, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, reports and
other materials prepared by Consultant shall, at the option of the City, become the property of the
City, and Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any work
satisfactorilycompleted on such documents and other materials up to the effective date of Notice
of Termination, not to exceed the amounts payable hereunder, and less any damages caused City
by Consultant's breach.
9. Errors and Omissions
In the event that the City Administrator determines that the Consultants' negligence, errors,
or omissions in the performance of work under this Agreement has resulted in expense to City
greater than would have resulted if there were no such negligence, errors, omissions, Consultant
shall reimburse City for any additional expenses incurred by the City. Nothing herein is intended
to limit City's rights under other provisions of this agreement.
10. Termination of Agreement for Convenience of City
5-16
Page 10
City may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any reason, by giving specific written
notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof, at least thirty
(30) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all finished and unfinished
documents and other materials described hereinabove shall, at the option of the City, become
City's sole and exclusive property. If the Agreement is terminated by City as provided in this
paragraph, Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any
satisfactory work completed on such documents and other materials to the effective date of such
termination. Consultant hereby expressly waives any and all claims for damages or
compensation arising under this Agreement except as set forth herein.
11. Assignability
The services of Consultant are personal to the City, and Consultant shall not assign any
interest in this Agreement, and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by assignment
or notation), without prior written consent of City.
City hereby consents to the assignment of the portions of the Defined Services identified in
Exhibit A, Paragraph 16 to the subconsultants identified thereat as "Permitted Subconsultants".
12. Ownership, Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material
All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms, designs, plans, procedures, systems
and any other materials or properties produced under this Agreement shall be the sole and
exclusive property of City. No such materials or propertie~'produced in whole or in part under
this Agreement shall be subject to private use, copyrights or patent rights by Consultant in the
United States or in any other country without the express written consent of City. City shall have
unrestricted authority to publish, disclose (except as may be limited by the provisions of the
Public Records Act), distribute, and otherwise use, copyright or patent, in whole or in part, any
such reports, studies, data, statistics, forms or other materials or properties produced under this
Agreement.
13. Independent Contractor
City is interested only in the results obtained and Consultant shall perform as an independent
contractor with sole control of the manner and means of performing the services required under
this Agreement. City maintains the right only to reject or accept Consultant's work products.
Consultant and any of the Consultant's agents, employees or representatives are, for all purposes
under this Agreement, an independent contractor and shall not be deemed to be an employee of
City, and none of them shall be entitled to any benefits to which City employees are entitled
including but not limited to, overtime, retirement benefits, worker's compensation benefits,
injury leave or other leave benefits. Therefore, City will not withhold state or federal income tax,
social security tax or any other payroll tax, and Consultant shall be solely responsible for the
payment of same and shall hold the City harmless with regard thereto.
14. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures
5-17
Page 11
No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this agreement, against the City unless a
claim has first been presented in writing and filed with the City and acted upon by the City in
accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, as
same may from time to time be amended, the provisions of which are incorporated by this
reference as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and procedures used by the City in the
implementation of same.
Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in good faith with City for the
purpose ofresolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement.
15. Attorney's Fees
Should a dispute arising out ofthis Agreement result in litigation, it is agreed that the
prevailing party shall be entitled to a judgment against the other for an amount equal to
reasonable attorney's fees and court costs incurred. The "prevailing party" shall be deemed to be
the party who is awarded substantially the relief sought.
16. Statement of Costs
In the event that Consultant prepares a report or document, or participates in the preparation
of Heport or document in performing the Defined Services, Consultant shall include, or cause
the inclusion of, in said report or document, a statement of the numbers and cost in dollar
amounts of all contracts and subcontracts relating to the preparation of the report or document.
17. Miscellaneous
I
J
A. Consultant not authorized to Represent City
Unless specifically authorized in writing by City, Consultant shall have no authority to act as
City's agent to bind City to any contractual agreements whatsoever.
B. Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman
If the box on Exhibit A, Paragraph 15 is marked, the Consultant and/or their principals is/are
licensed with the State of California or some other state as a licensed real estate broker or
salesperson. Otherwise, Consultant represents that neither Consultant, nor their principals are
licensed real estate brokers or salespersons.
C. Notices
All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to be given pursuant to this
Agreement must be in writing. All notices, demands and requests to be sent to any party shall be
deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served or deposited in the United
States mail, addressed to such party, postage prepaid, registered or certified, with return receipt
requested, at the addresses identified herein as the places ofbusiness for each of the designated
parties.
5-18
Page 12
D. Entire Agreement
This Agreement, together with any other written document referred to or contemplated
herein, embody the entire Agreement and understanding between the parties relating to the
subject matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof may be amended,
modified, waived or discharged except by an instrument in writing executed by the party against
which enforcement of such amendment, waiver or discharge is sought.
E. Capacity of Parties
Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and represents to the other party that it has
legal authority and capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this Agreement, and that
all resolutions or other actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter into this Agreement.
F. Governing LawNenue
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State
of California. Any action arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought only in the
federal or state courts located in San Diego County, State of California, and if applicable, the
City of Chula Vista, or as close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement, and performance
hereunder, shall be the City of Chula Vista.
(End of page. Next page is signature page.)
5-19
Page 13
Signatl.l.re Page
to
Agreement bet'Neen
City of Chula Vista
and
Alta Planning -+- Design
for Developing a Pedestrian Master Plan
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed LlJis Agreement thereby
indicating thanhey have read and understood same, and indicate their ful1 alid complete consent
to its terms:
Dated:
City ofChula Vista
By:
Cheryl Cox, Mayor
Attest:
Donna Norris, Interim City Clerk
Approved as to form:
Bart Miesfeld, Interim City Attorney
Dated:
By:
'lei G. Jones,.PrincipaI
\
By:
'7 1\ <;; ! o~
I '
Exhibit List to Agreement
( X ) Exhibit A.
5-20
~~",I~:',;iJiutli;[D:i-"'""'~'~'~~~~~;"~.'1o''''<;'~ "_:;",,"';01,",,,"~",'~;~""'-'~''''_'''''~''''''''''''"'""
-~'"'""'~
."__"__,,,,,,_=<i>'..._~, ~
-~"""="".-,.==,,...~~._."
Exhibit A
to
Agreement between
City of Chula Vista
and
Alta Planning + Design
1. Effective Date of Agreement: Julv 15. 2008
2. City-Related Entity:
(X) City ofChula Vista, a municipal chartered corporation of the State of California
() Redevelopment Agency of the City ofChula Vista, a political subdivision of the
State of California
( ) Industrial Development Authority of the City of Chula Vista, a
( )
Other:
form]
, a [insert business
3. Place of Business for City:
City of Chula Vista,
276 Fourth Avenue,
Chula Vista, CA 91910
4. Consultant:
Alta Planning + Design
3920 Conde Street Suite B
San Diego, California 92110
5. Business Form of Consultant:
( ) Sole Proprietorship
( ) Partnership
(X) Corporation
6. Place of Business, Telephone and Fax Number of Consultant:
Alta Planning + Design
3920 Conde Street Suite B
San Diego, California 92110 - (619) 269-6043/ Fax: (619) 269-6288
5-21
1 of 18
7. General Duties: Consultant shall prepare a Pedestrian Master Plan in accordance with
requirements of the San Diego Association of Governments (S.A.i~'DAG). The framework for the
Pedestrian Master Plan shall include identifying specific Plan goals, policies, actions,
implementation strategies, pedestrian route types and design-guiding principles, and developing a
prioritization methodology appropriate for the City of Chula Vista. Consultant shall build on the
City and SANDAG's existing pedestrian and planning documents such as SAi\iTIAG's "Planning and
Designing for Pedestrians" and other relevant sources.
Consultant shall identify and analyze existing pedestrian conditions, existing and potential pedestrian
routes, and potential pedestrian infrastructure improvement projects for specific locations that focus
on providing and improving connections along pedestrian routes. Consultant shall identify the need
for pedestrian related studies and development of pedestrian safety and education programs, as
appropriate.
8. Scope of Work and Schedule:
A. Detailed Scope of Work:
Task I :Develop Timeline and Meeting Schedule
Consultant shall conduct an organization and scoping meeting to: review project and task
objectives, review scope of services and data collection methodology, collect available
data and published materials, establish the meeting and presentation schedule, review and
list regional and state required elements; and revievy and list all applicable design and
planning standards.
Consultant shall participate in at least four (4) meetings with staff, six (6) meetings with the
Project Working Group, two (2) public meetings, and two (2) meetings with
Council/Commission.
Deliverables
Project Timeline and Meeting Schedule
Meeting minutes within one week of meeting
Task 2: Identify Stakeholders
Consultant shall identify potential stakeholders who will provide input, policy issues,
principles, methods of prioritizing projects, structure and content of the Plan, design
guidelines and standards. The stakeholders group may include elementary school staff, City
commissions, boards, community groups, and civic organizations. These stakeholders my
include, but shall not be limited to, the Chula Vista Planning Commission, the parks and
recreation commission, if any, the Planning and Building Department, the Engineering
Department, the General Services Department, the Chula Vista Safety Commission, the
Chula Vista Elementary School District, the Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce and the
Chula Vista Downtown Association.
5-22
2 of 18
The Consultant shall coordinate with and keep these groups advised as needed t.1Jroughout the
proj ect.
Deliverable
Stakeholder Contact List
Task 3 : Develop a Public Involvement Plan
The Consultant shall develop a Public Involvement Plan within four (4) weeks of being
selected.
The following sections outline the major components of the proposed Public Involvement
Plan, including establishing a Project Working Group (PWG), conducting Public Workshops
and developing and maintaining web-ready materials.
Project Working Group
Consultant shall establish a Project Working Group (pWG) to guide the development of the
Project and to evaluate the quality and effectiveness of the Project's work products.
Consultant anticipates that the Project Working Group will be comprised of at least one
representative from each ofthe following groups: staff from the City ofChula Vista Planning
and Building Department and Engineering Department; Pedestrian Interest Groups (Walk
San Diego);Chula Vista elementary school principals and staff; Planning Commission; Park
and Recreation Commission, if any; Design Review Commission; Safety Commission;
Commission on Aging; and Police and Fire Depart~ents.
Consultant shall convene meetings of the PWG every two months (up to 6 meetings), or at
key stages of the project.
Consultant shall plan, prepare, facilitate and document all PWG meetings. The Consultant
shall also arrange all logistics for meeting planning including strategy development, meeting
location, notification, agenda and preparation of all background information needed to
support a productive discussion by PWG members. Consultant shall document each meeting
with a Meeting Summary that details agreements, requests for information, and decisions of
the PWG. Meeting Summaries shall be prepared within five working days.
Public Workshops/Open Houses
Consultant shall plan, prepare, and facilitate two (2) public workshops, in addition to
meetings with individuals and small groups as needed for the duration of the Agreement.
The first workshop shall be held early in the process to explain the process, outline the goals
and vision for the plan, and discuss the findings of the preliminary field and data inventory.
The second workshop shall be to obtain comments about needs, concerns, and
recommendations for pedestrian facilities throughout each sub-area of the City, and to get
feedback on recommended facility projects. Consultant shall prepare a meeting notice,
display ad for placement in newspapers, and agenda for each public workshop. Consultant
shall strategically design and \YTite each notice to catch the reader's attention and include the
5-23
3 of 18
meeting purpose, date, time, location, and contact information. Consultant shall also prepare
a meeting packet for distribution at each workshop.
Consultant shall prepare all visual presentations for each public workshop, including
storyboards and graphics, and PowerPoint presentations. Consultant shall also facilitate each
workshop and record the discussions on flip charts. Consultant shall prepare summary notes
of public workshops for the PWG, and shall be responsible for all meeting logistics including
facilitation, room rental, room set-up and clean-up, sign-in, name tags, refreshments,
comment cards, and a written meeting summary. Consultant shall take extra steps to ensure
high attendance and participation at the public workshops. The Consultant shall provide
bilinguaVinterpreter services for all public meetings.
Project Web site/On-Line Survey
If directed by City staff, Consultant shall prepare web-ready materials for use by the City,
either placed directly on the City's website or hosted on the Consultant's webpage with direct
links from the City's website. The web-ready materials shall provide the public and
interested stakeholders updated project information (such as meeting dates or the availability
of draft documents) and contact information. Consultant shall include a pedestrian user
survey on the web-ready materials that can be completed by the public, indicating their needs
and concerns.
Public Hearings
In addition to the public workshops and regular meetings with the PWG, Consultant shall
also be available for up to two public hearings before the City Council and! or specified
Commissions. Consultant shall develop a professional PowerPoint presentation to be given
at each Commission/Council hearing at the direction of staff. The PowerPoint shall be
delivered on CD to the City so it can be given to other committees and groups whenever
needed.
Deliverables
Consultant's presentation at PWG, public workshops, and public hearings as outlined above.
Meeting attendee lists.
Meeting minutes within one week of each meeting.
Public meeting PowerPoint presentations on CD-ROM.
Pedestrian user survey.
Task 4: Identifv Existing Conditions
Consultant shall evaluate needs and conditions within the City. Consultant shall identify and
evaluate existing conditions using the following: GIS Mapping and inventory, Mapping
System Software, Space Syntax Pedestrian Modeling Tool, the City street plan, the City's
missing infrastructure data, City's land use data, community walking audits, field review and
pedestrian related accidents. Consultant shall use elementary school attendance areas to
organize the existing condition data and subsequent analyses. Consultant shall obtain
community walking audit information from WalkSanDiego, as available. In the event that
WalkSanDiego does not complete all 36 walk audits around Chula Vista elementary schools
5-24
4 of 18
by the conclusion of Task 7, the Alta Team will rely upon the Missing Infrastructure dataset
available from the City for the schools that have not been completed.
Consultant shall assess the completeness and quality of this data, and determine which key
data types may require further inventory. Consultant shall provide Arc View shapefiles for
each of the facilities inventoried, as well as high quality paper maps of these facilities.
Consultant shall work with the City to provide this information in formats that are
compatible with the City's databases and software.
Consultant shall identify important areas of pedestrian generators by looking at the
distributions of sub-populations that tend to have relatively higherrates of walking, such as
youth, walking commuters, total population density, total employment density, the elderly
and the disabled.
Consultant shall then assess the location of pedestrian attractions, including those land uses
that tend to artract a walking trip, such as elementary schools, transit centers and stops,
neighborhood civic facilities, retail facilities, waterfronts, and parks and recreation facilities.
Consultant shall assess pedestrian barriers, or those features of the built environment that
impede or discourage walkers, such as high rates of pedestrian collisions (indication of
potential safety issue), freeways and rail rights-of-way, 6-lane and 4-lane arterials, high
traffic speeds and volumes, and steep slopes.
Deliverables I
Preliminary Mapping Analysis of Missing Pedestrian Infrastructure (shapefiles and paper
maps)
Preliminary Mapping Analysis of pedestrian attractors, generators, and barriers (shapefiles
and paper maps)
Task 5:Provide a Status Report and Receive Public Comment on existing Citywide
Accessibilitv and Pedestrian Facilities
Consultant shall analyze data collected from the public workshops, walk audits, GIS-
mapping and composite modeling, surveys, PWG, and staff input, to identify Chula Vista
areas of highest need. Consultant shall recommend opportunities for future projects based on
their potential to improve access for pedestrians, increase the number of pedestrians, and
improve the safety of pedestrians.
Consultant shall develop an Existing Conditions Status Report that documents its
methodology and illustrates its key findings.
Deliverables
Draft Existing Conditions Report
Summary of Walk Audit Results in GIS and paper formats
5-25
5 of i8
Task 6: Identify Goals and Obiectives for the Pedestrian Master Plan
Consultant shall use input from the public process, surveys, field review, Project Working
Group and City staff input, and other sources to identify issues and opportunities that are
related to achievement of the plan goals. Consultant shall develop consistent overall goals
and objectives for the Plan building on existing documents. The Consultant shall also review
other relevant planning documents to ensure compatibility.
Consultant shall develop draft goals using existing City plans and infrastructure reports, the
PWG, and local community input. Consultant shall evaluate pedestrian goals from other
communities and those developed by state and national pedestrian organizations. City staff
shall add to, change, and/or refine the draft goals.
Consultant shall develop policies and standards out of the broader goals and objectives. City
staff shall use these policies to manage the future pedestrian system.
Consultant shall inventory and summarize existing and emerging pedestrian-related plans.
Consultant shall ensure the consistency of these plans with the General Plan the Chula Vista
Municipal Code, master plans, trail plans, regional and local park plans, short-range transit
plans, open space district trails plans, specific plans, and capital improvement plans in Chula
Vista.
Consultant shall summarize all relevant legislation (local, regional, state and Federal) that
might affect implementation of the Plan, for review,by City staff.
J
Deliverable
Memorandum on proposed goals and objecti ves
Task 7: Identify Issues and OpportUnities after community input
Consultant shall use input from the public process, surveys, field review, PWG and staff
input, and other sources to identify issues and opportUnities that are related to achievement of
the plan goals. Consultant shall provide summary results ofthe comments received through
the public process to the City in written form.
Deliverable
Memorandum on issues and opportunities
Task 8:Develop Pedestrian Design Guidelines and Standards that meet or exceed those set
forth in SANDAG's "Planning and Designing for Pedestrians: Model Guidelines for
the San Diego Region"
Consultant shall prepare strategies, guidelines, and standards with respect to pedestrian
facilities for inclusion in the City's Street Design Standards. The standards shall compliment
the Circulation Element. A summary of design elements may include ADA features (ramps,
detectable warnings, etc.), sidewalks (width, surface), shared use trails, lighting, crosswalks
(mid-block, signalized), signing, signals (timing, pedestrian heads), transit stops, nodes or
5-26
6of18
actIVIty areas, landscaping, trees, public art, under-or overcrossings, benches, shelters,
drinking fountains, pedestrian districts, historical/interpretive walks, land use/
zoning/setbacks/density, and plazas / pocket parks / woonerfs.
Consultant may include traffic calming and traffic engineering tools that may also benefit
pedestrians such as roundabouts', reduced lanes /lane widths, school commute routes, curve
radii / pork-chop design, one-way / two-way streets, improved right turn slip-lane design,
chokers, chicanes, mini-circles, raised crosswalks, modified intersections, moving stop bars,
driveway improvements, raised medians / crossing islands, speed tables, curb extensions,
partial street closures / bike boulevards, and wide crosswalks.
Consultant shall conduct a working session with the PWG to determine how to modift
existing City strategies, guidelines, and standards. Consultant shall provide the PWG with a
Decision-Matrix that clearly shows areas where these existing strategies, guidelines, and
standards can be refined or expanded. Where appropriate, Consultant shall provide an
analysis of potential benefits and impacts of proposed changes to strategies, guidelines, and
standards and recommend methods of implementation ofthose proposed changes. Based on
these meetings, the Consultant shall recommend a series of changes to strategies, guidelines,
and standards.
Consultant shall review the existing City standards and develop a set of design guidelines
and standards on a parallel timeline with the Pedestrian Master Plan development.
Consultant shall evaluate the detailed engineering standards for curb ramps, signs, sidewalk
construction, signal design, and crosswalk placemeIjt, the detailed engineering standards for
multi-use trails or Class I bike paths, or the detailed engineering standards for the design and
placement of drainage, lighting, utility poles, conduit, and other features that impact
pedestrian circulation.
All drawings shall be completed in AutoCAD 2000, using a template provided by the City.
Deliverable
Memorandum on proposed Design Guidelines and Standards
Task 9: Accessibility Recommendations
Consultant shall develop ADA recommendations and improvements for transit accessibility,
review the City's method of ranking ADA ramps and provide comments. Consultant shall
also ensure that pedestrian design strategies, guidelines and standards are consistent with
ADA accessibility requirements, California Code of Regulations Title 24 and City policies.
Consultant shall develop ADA recommendations for improvements for transit accessibility,
and recommend a ranking system for prioritizing installation of access ramps. Consultant
shall prepare a funding strategy to help implement ADA improvements, and identift
responsible agencies.
5-27
7 of 18
Consultant shall re,iew the City's current procedures and policies for compliance with ADA
accessibility requirements with the planning and engineering staff, and compare those
procedures with other cities and with those developed by the U.S. Access Board and State
Architects Office.
Consultant shall provide expert consultation on Universal Design and ADA considerations
for pedestrian design strategies, guidelines and standards to ensure that they are consistent
with ADA accessibility requirements, CCR Title 24 and City policies. Consultant shall
develop project priorities in consultation with appropriate stakeholders, using ranking
systems that have proved successful in other communities, and identify funding sources for
financing the cost of the improvements.
Deliverable
Memorandum on proposed Accessibility Improvements
Task 10: Coordinate pedestrian recommendations with the General Plan and Urban Core
Specific Plan. and coordinate with the Safe Routes to Schools Walking Audits.
Consultant shall work with the City and its consultants to coordinate recommended
pedestrian improvements with these planning efforts.
Task II: Provide a one-quarter mile radius school plan
Using the results of the Safe Routes to Schools Walking Audits, Consultant shall provide a
one-quarter mile radius school-plan for elementa..ry ~chools routes within City Limits. In the
event that WalkSanDiego does not complete the Walk Audits at the conclusion of the Chula
Vista Pedestrian Master Plan - Task 7, the Alta Team will utilize the Missing Infrastructure
database to complete the Quarter Mile School Plans. Consultant shall create materials for the
City and schools including pedestrian awareness campaign materials and pedestrian safety,
marketing, and education handbook.
Consultant shall develop a priority project list for Safe Routes to School (SR2S I SRTS)
funding in Chula Vista. Consultant shall use the pedestrian priority analysis developed in
Task 4. The Consultant shall work with City staff, the PWG, and School District officials to
identify existing schools locations that may qualify for SR2S I SRTS funding for pedestrian
facilities, school signage, school crosswalks or other enhancements related to existing or
proposed safe routes. Consultant shall develop preliminary school-area improvement plans
within a one-quarter mile radius of all elementary schools in Chula Vista that can be used as
part of future SR2S I SRTS grant applications.
Deliverable:
Memorandum identifying Safe Routes to School Priority List and Plans
Task 12:
Recommend Zoning Ordinance Changes
Consultant shall examine potential zoning ordinance changes that are related to the
pedestrian environment. Consultant shall use the Land Use and Transportation Element of
5-28
8 of18
the General Plan and the Urban Core Specific Plan and coordinate with the Planning and
Building Department. Consultant shall analyze existing City policies, plans and the
Municipal Code provisions with respect to pedestrian facilities and travel.
Consultant shall compare the City's policies, plans, and Municipal Code provisions with
those from around California and the United States. Consultant shall develop a matrix that
summarizes current City codes, plans and policies, identifies the key differences with other
plans, shortcomings and strengths, and provides potential remedial actions. Consultant shall
examine such features as the mix or separation of land uses, the density and compactness of
land uses, the density of storefronts in retail districts,. the location, quantity and design
guidelines for parking, the location of building entrances in relationship to sidewalks, the
size of city blocks, and the width of streets.
Consultant shall propose prototypes of modified codes that will guide new development so
the people can conveniently walk between land uses, especially to and from schools and
transit stops.
Deliverable
Memorandum on proposed zoning changes
Task 13:
Recommend Future Capital Improvement Proiects
The Consultant shall do the following:
A. Priorities and Phasing - Develop a set of criteria and a mechanism for evaluating the
performance of the proposed pedestrian improvements consistent with the Federal
Highway Administration (FHW A) "Pedestrian and Bicyclist Intersection Safety Indices",
publication No. FHWA-HRT-06-130. Develop a proposed timetable for the City to
determine progress in reaching goals and making changes to those goals. Consultant
shall examine each of the following criteria:
Connectivitv - Provides connectivity between existing segments of sidewalks.
Overcomes major gaps and barriers between regional destinations.
Multi-Modal Coordination - Connects to major multi-modal destinations, whether a bus
transfer station or light rail station.
Accessibilitv - Enhances access from residential neighborhood to major regional
destinations within the region, including schools, community centers, employment
centers, and commercial centers.
Usa~e - Serves the greatest number of users possible, focusing on major destinations.
Safety - Provides the highest level of safety possible while addressing major safety
concerns such as narrow, high traffic roadways. Consultant shall rely on discussions with
staff, field observations, and safety analyses carried out under the existing conditions
analysis.
Planned Transportation Improvement Proiects - Takes advantage of opportunities such as
planned roadway improvements that may accommodate pedestrian enhancement facilities
with relatively little additional cost.
5-29
9 of 18
Consultant shall recommend and prioritize capital, traffic safety, educational projects,
and other projects based on input from the PWG, public input, and analysis of existing
conditions. The proposed capital projects shall include new pedestrian connections,
physical and cultural improvements and amenities, removal of pedestrian barriers, and
improved access for pedestrians within and between all neighborhoods as well as major
recreation, cultural, tourist and commercial attractions. The proposed projects may
include a signage program for pedestrian routes throughout the city that link various
neighborhoods and attractions. Consultant shall include projects to enhance existing or
develop new partnerships with civic organizations, community groups, public agencies,
and schools, and encourage increased walking.
Consultant shall prioritize proposed pedestrian improvements both by type of
improvement, and areas to be improved. The ranking shall be conducted with City staff
and PWG input, using a ranking system that assigns values to current conditions and
opportunities. The ranking will be used to develop a priority list for future projects.
Working closely with staff, the Consultant shall separate the projects/programs into high,
medium, and low-priority categories. The ranking evaluation process shall include
additional criteria reflecting funding and other factors, such as project readiness - is the
project ready-to-go in terms of completed preliminary designs, control of right of way,
and local political approval; costs - has the proj ect been developed in enough detail and
been reviewed by appropriate agencies so that the estimated cost is reasonably accurate;
public support -does the proj ect have strong local support, was it presented in a public
forum, and does it have letters of support; master plan- is the project identified as a high
priority on an adopted local master plan thilt conforms to FHW A and Caltrans
requirements; matching funds- are there adequate local matching funds and other outside
matching funds sufficient to complete the project; design -does the project conform to
appropriate ADA, tvfUTCD, and other design standards; multi-jurisdictional -is the
project a multi-jurisdictional project that demonstrates cooperation between agencies
seeking to overcome a major gap or barrier; benefits-does the project have a reasonable
projection of the benefits in terms of users, reduced crashes, air quality benefits.
Consultant shall fold the prioritized list of high-priority projects/programs into a capital
improvement plan, and shall propose follow-up analyses.
B. Capital Improvement Program - Consultant shall develop a 20-year capital
improvement program that is specific for the first five (5) years, and then provides a Tier
I and 2 sets oflists of mid-term and longer-term projects.
Consultant shall develop cost estimates using GIS databases listing detailed information
on each proposed project locations and characteristics. The costs shall be separated
between land cost (if any), site preparation, planning, design and engineering costs,
construction costs, and environmental documentation/mitigation costs (if any).
Consultant shall use the latest unit costs provided by the City engineering department.
Consulta..'lt shall evaluate each project according to an estimated cost-per-mile or linear
feet and estimated on-going maintenance and operation costs by implementation phase
5-30
10 oflS
based on comparable experiences. Consultant shall identify City department
responsibility as well as the possible funding and specific requirements.
C. Develop Project Sheets for High Priority Projects - Describe each of the top 30
pedestrian projects in a one-page Project Description sheet that clearly presents the
project and its cost, responsible agencies, a graphic or digitized aerial photo of the
location or proposal, a list of specific improvements, and other information. Consultant
shall develop AutoCAD drawings on available aerial photos of proposed improvements,
provide concept sketches of improvements, or use Adobe Photoshop to simulate
improvements, or any combination as needed. The Consultant shall develop prototype
graphics (plans, sections) showing how the proposals from previous tasks would translate
into a variety of locations in Chula Vista, including at school sites, transit stations,
shopping centers, neighborhood commercial areas, old and new residential areas, historic
districts, planned communities, and other areas.
D. Funding Plan and Strategy - Identify potential matching and major funding sources for
the prioritized list of projects. Compare the costs of the phased improvements with
funding needs, so that long term programming for local matching funds can be
accomp lished.
Consultant shall identify potential matching and major tUnding sources, compile criteria
and requirements, assist with completing applications, design this plan to serve as an
appendix to the funding application, and relate anticipated schedule of funding to the
prioritized list of pedestrian proj ects. Consuli!mt shall compare costs of the phased
improvements with funding needs, so that long term programming for local matching
funds can be accomplished. The Consultant shall explore all funding options from public
and private sources.
Based on the recommended phasing schedule, ranking system, cost information, and
funding opportunities, the Consultant shall produce a final priority list and 20-year
Financial Plan that clearly identifies the funding requirements by year for the life of the
plan, along with estimates of local matching funds. The final priority list shall include
estimates of operating and maintenance costs that are usually borne by local
governments. Consultant shall develop an Implementation Plan for fundable, higb
priority projects over the next 10 years, along with an unconstrained implementation plan
for the next 20 years.
Consultant shall estimate maintenance and other operating expenses (including added
policing costs) based on experiences in comparable regions. Consultant shall develop a
recommended maintenance program shall be developed that identifies minimum tasks
and schedules including erosion control, street sweeping, surface repair, and other efforts.
Deliverables
. Project location maps
. Project description sheets
5-31
11 of 18
. Prototype graphics and drawings
. Implementation steps
. Project prioritization
. Financial Plan
. Funding Plan and Applications
Task 14: Submit a Draft Pedestrian Master Plan for Review
Consultant shall prepare a draft Pedestrian Master Plan composed of the tasks completed up
to this point in the process. Consultant shall provide five (5) hard copies of the draft plan
and an electronic copy in PDF format on CD-ROM.
Consultant shall suggest to the City various graphic, formatting, and other options for the
Pedestrian Master Plan to maximize access and readability, including producing separate
documents for various topics. The draft Plan shall include goals, issues, recommended
options for policy and capital projects and an estimated cost for implementation. Consultant
shall include an action plan for implementation of policies and objectives, including
education and enforcement, as part of the Plan.
Consultant shall follow an outline for the Plan agreed upon by City staff and the PWG.
Consultant shall receive public comment on the draft plan through presentation to the City
Councilor Planning Commission
Task 15: Revise Plan Alternative Based on Public Review
Based on comments received by the Consultant from the public, all stakeholders, City staff
and the Planning Commission or City Council, Consultant shall revise the draft Plan and
present a final draft Plan for review and approval to the PWG, City staff, the Planning
Commission, and the City Council.
Task 16: Final Report Preparation and Printing
Following the City's review and approval of the Pedestrian Master Plan, the Consultant shall
provide 15 copies ofthe final version of the Plan to be presented to various City leaders and
to be made available to the public. One (1) copy shall be printed on one side only and
clipped together (not bound) to facilitate copying. The consultant will provide a master copy
of the Plan and a copy, in PDF format, on CD-ROM for future duplicating needs.
B. Date for Commencement of Consultant Services:
(X) Same as Effective Date of Agreement
( ) Other:
5-32
12 of 18
C. Dates or Time Limits for Delivery of Deliver abies:
D. Date for completion of all Consultant services: June 30, 2010.
9, Materials Required to be Supplied by City to Consultant:
10. Compensation:
A () Single Fixed Fee Arrangement
For performance of all of the Defined Services by Consultant as herein required, City
shall pay a single fixed fee in the amounts and at the times or milestones or for the
Deliverables set forth below:
Single Fixed Fee Amount: $
, payable as follows:
Milestone or Event or Deliverable
Amount or Percent of Fixed Fee
( ) 1. Interim Monthly Advances. The City shall make interim advances against the
compensation due for each phase on a percentage of completion basis for each given phase
such that, at the end of each phase only the compensation for that phase has been paid. Any
payments made hereunder shall be considered as int;erest free loans that must be returned to
the City ifthe Phase is not satisfactorily completed. If the Phase is satisfactorily completed,
the City shall receive credit against the compensation due for that phase. The retention
amount or percentage set forth in Paragraph 19 is to be applied to each interim payment such
that, at the end of the phase, the full retention has been held back from the compensation due
for that phase. Percentage of completion of a phase shall be assessed in the sole and
unfettered discretion by the Contracts Administrator designated herein by the City, or such
other person as the City Manager shall designate, but only upon such proof demanded by the
City that has been provided, but in no event shall such interim advance payment be made
unless the Contractor shall have represented in writing that said percentage of completion of
the phase has been performed by the Contractor. The practice of making interim advances
shall not convert this agreement to a time and materials basis of payment
B. (X) Phased Fixed Fee Arrangement
For the performance of each phase or portion of the Defined Services by Consultant
as are separately identified below, City shall pay the fixed fee associated with each phase of
Services, in the amounts and at the times or milestones or Deliverables set forth. (Consultant
shall not commence Services under any Phase, and shall not be entitled to the compensation
for a Phase, unless City shall have issued a notice to proceed to Consultant as to said Phase.
5-33
13 of 18
r-----.-----------.-
i
Components
Fee for !
Said
Phase
$24,907
iI, Tasks 1-4 Major Deliverables: Memorandum Outlining Public Outreach
i Strategy, PWG Membership, Preliminary Mapping Analysis, Meeting
I
i Schedule.
r 2. Tasks 5-7 Major Deliverables: Technical Memorandum on Existing
i Conditions, Technical Memoranda on Goals and Objectives and Issues
I
I and Opportunities.
13. Tasks 8-12 Major Deliverables: Technical Memoranda on Design
i Guidelines and ADA Accessibility, Technical Memoranda on Safe Routes
I to School.
4. Tasks 13-14 Major Deliverables: Zoning Ordinance Changes, and Capital
I
1___.!J:1:1:)Jrovement Pr_ojects, Draft Pedestrian Master Plan.
! 5. Tasks 15-16 Major Deliverables: Final Pedestrian Master Plan
I (Completion). All work on this contract shall be completed by the
! Consultant.
I
I
-j
$31.090 '
$50.304
$29,825
$15,876
.. ____.,_ . ...." .._.......... _.._ .,_,,___,,___..._._.______.__..______.__......_. __ _____",.._.._._.__.....___..._m__.._..._.____.___.____...._...."_____._..____"._________
For a total amount of
i
I
I
I
I
$L52,QQ~ I
l() 1. Interim Monthly Advances. The City shall make interim monthly advances
against the compensation due for each phase on a percentage of completion basis for each
given phase such that, at the end of each phase only the compensation for that phase has been
paid. Any payments made hereunder shall be consil'lered as interest free loans that must be
returned to the City ifthe Phase is not satisfactorily completed. lithe Phase is satisfactorily
completed, the City shall receive credit against the compensation due for that phase. The
retention amount or percentage set forth in Paragraph 19 is to be applied to each interim
payment such that, at the end of the phase, the full retention has been held back from the
compensation due for that phase. Percentage of completion of a phase shall be assessed in
the sole and unfettered discretion by the Contracts Administrator designated herein by the
City, or such other person as the City Manager shall designate, but only upon such proof
demanded by the City that has been provided, but in no event shall such interim advance
payment be made unless the Contractor shall have represented in writing that said percentage
of completion of the phase has been performed by the Contractor. The practice of making
interim monthly advances shall not convert this agreement to a time and materials basis of
payment.
c. ( ) Hourly Rate Arrangement
For performance of Additional Services not included in the Defined Services by Consultant
as requested in writing by the City, City shall pay Consultant for the productive hours oftime
spent by Consultant in the performance of said Services, at the rates or amounts set forth in
the Rate Schedule herein below according to the following terms and conditions.
(1) () Not-to-Exceed Limitation on Time and Materials Arrangement
5-34
14 of 18
Notwithstanding the expenditure by Consultant of time and materials in excess of
said Maximum Compensation amount, Consultant agrees that Consultant will
perform all of the Defined Services herein required of Consultant for
$ including all Materials, and other "reimbursable" ("Maximum
Compensation").
(2) () Limitation without Further Authorization on Time and Materials
Arrangement
At such time as Consultant shall have incurred time and materials equal to
("Authorization Limit"), Consultant shall not be entitled to any
additional compensation without further authorization issued in writing and approved
by the City. Nothing herein shall preclude Consultant from providing additional
Services at Consultant's own cost and expense.
Rate Schedule
Name of Consultant
Category of Employee
Hourly Rate
() Hourly rates may increase by 6% for service~ rendered after [month], 20 , if delay in
providing services is caused by City.
II. Materials Reimbursement I\rrangement
For the cost of out of pocket expenses incurred by Consultant in the performance of services
herein required, City shall pay Consultant at the rates or amounts set forth below:
(X) None, the compensation includes all costs.
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
Reports not to exceed $
Copies, not to exceed $
Travel, not to exceed $
Printing, not to exceed $
Postage, not to exceed $
Delivery, not to exceed $
Long Distance Telephone Charges, not to exceed $
Other Actual Identifiable Direct Costs:
, not to exceed $
, not to exceed $
Cost or Rate
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
5-35
15 of 18
12. Contract Administrators:
City:
Roberto Sol6rzano, Associate Engineer
Public Services Building
276 Fourtb Avenue
Chula Vista, California 91910
(619) 409-5420
Consultant:
Sherry Ryan, Associate
Alta Planning + Design
3920 Conde Street Suite B
San Diego, California 92110
(619) 269-6043 / Fax: (619) 269-6288
1 '
-~.
Liquidated Damages Rate: N/ A
( ) $_ per day.
( ) Other:
14. Statement of Economic Interests, Consultant Reporting Categories, per Conflict of Interest
Code:
.I
,
(X) Not Applicable. Not an FPPC Filer.
( ) FPPC Filer
( ) Category No. 1. Investments and sources of income.
() Category No.2. Interests in real property.
() Category No.3. Investments, interest in real property and sources of income
subject to the regulatory, permit or licensing authority of the department.
( ) Category No.4. Investments in business entities and sources of income that
engage in land development, construction or the acquisition or sale ofreal
property.
() Category No.5. Investments in business entities and sources of income of
the type which, within the past two years, have contracted with the Ciry of
Chula Vista (Redevelopment Agency) to provide services, supplies,
materials, machinery or equipment.
() Category No.6. Investments in business entities and sources of income of
the type which, within the past two years, have contracted with the designated
5-36
16 of [8
employee's department to provide services, supplies, materials, machinery or
equipment.
( ) Category No.7. Business positions.
( ) List "Consultant Associates" interests in real property within 2 radial miles of Project
Property, if any:
15. () Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman
16. Permitted Subconsultants:
CityWorks, Catherine Smith, 427 C Street Suite 200, San Diego, California
92101
Wilson & Company, Nicholas Abboud, 701 B Street, Suite 1220 San Diego, CA
92101
17 Bill Processing:
,
I
A. Consultant's Billing to be submitted for the followh'1g period of time:
( ) Monthly
( ) Quarterly
(X) Other: See 11- B above
B. Day of the Period for submission of Consultant's Billing:
( ) First of the Month
( ) 15th Day of each Month
( ) End of the Month
(X) Other: See II-B above
C. City's Account Number:
18. Security for Performance
( ) Performance Bond, $
( ) Letter of Credit, $
( ) Other Security:
Type:
Amount: $
() Retention. If this space is checked, then notwithstanding other provisions to the
contrary requiring the payment of compensation to the Consultant sooner, the City
5-37
17 of 18
shall be entitled to retain, at their option, either the following "Retention Percentage"
or "Retention Amount" until the City determines that the Retention Release Event,
listed below, has occurred:
( ) Retention Percentage: %
( ) Retention Amount: S
Retention Release Event:
( ) Completion of All Consultant Services
( ) Other:
5-38
18 of 18
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
~:'f:.. CllYOF
~
- - (HUlA VISTA
JULY 22, 2008, Item_
ITEM TITLE:
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHOLA VISTA SUPPORTING SENATE BILL 1016 (WIGGINS),
REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE CALIFORJ'IIA
INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT
LEGISLATIVE SU~C9~E
CITY MANAGER
ASSISTANT cy 1 A ER '7 ~
4/5THS VOTE: YES 0 NO ~
SUBMITTED BY:
REVJ:E"VED BY:
SUMMARY
Since the passage of the Integrated Waste Management Act (Assembly Bill 939) in 1989, the measurement
system which 'counts' the amount of waste diverted from 1~dfi11s has proven to be burdensome, overly
complex, and inaccurate in the wake of a burgeoning population. Senate Bill I 0 16 will implement a system
that should increase timeliness and accuracy, provides a streamlined review for cities that are meeting their
diversion requirements, and maintains allowances for rural jurisdictions. The topic of this legislation is not
covered by the City's Adopted Legislative Program, therefore City Council approval is required for Chula
Vista to support this measure.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with t..'1e
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined: "The activity is not a "Project" as
defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines; registering support for legislation does not
result in a physical. change to the environment and the legislation addresses only a system for
measurement of waste diversion; therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA
Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is necessary."
RECOMMENDATION
Council adopt the Resolution
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Not Applicable
6-1
!
JULY 22, 2008, Item~
Page 2 of2
DISCUSSION
In an effort to reduce the amount of material going into landfills throughout California, the State
Legislature approved AB 939, the Integrated Waste Management Act, in 1989. The law required each
city or county 'source reduction and recycling element' to include an implementation schedule that
would divert 25% of solid waste from landfill disposal or transformation by January 1, 1995 and 50% by
January 1,2000. Each city, county or regional agency submits an annual report to the Integrated Waste
Management Board that summarizes their progress in reducing solid waste. The report contains
information such as: calcualtions of annual disposal reduction, information on changes in the kinds of
waste generated or disposed, progress in diverting construction and demolition waste.
In 2000, SB 2202 was passed and requires the Waste Management Board to examine and revise the
disposal reporting system. The consensus of the Board was to recommend moving from a diversion-
based system to a disposal-based system to determine compliance with the law.
SB 1016, authored by Senator Wiggins (attached) implements the recommendations of the Waste
Management Board. Passage of this bill will require the Waste Management Board to compare each
jurisdiction's 'per capita disposal rate' with that jurisdiction's "50% equivalent" per capita disposal rate
on January 1,2007.
The bill also clarifies and consolidates the information required for the annual report submitted by
jurisdictions, including source reduction and recycling elements, household hazardous waste elements
and any new or expanded programs.
In addition, those jurisdictions meeting the 50% equivalent i,ler capita disposal rate or making a 'good
faith effort' to reach that requirement, will be granted a review frequency reduction by the Waste
Management Board. The Board will reduce the frequency with which it conducts a complete review of
that jurisdiction from every two years to once every four years. SB 10 16 is pending ill the Assembly
Appropriations Committee.
DECISION MAKER CONFLICT
Staffhas reviewed.the decision contemplated by this action and has determined 1:,'1at it is not site specific
and consequently the 500 foot rule found in California Code of Regulations section 18704.2(a)(1) is not
applicable to this decision.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no direct impact to the Genera! Food. Waste Management Plan activities are funded through an
existing AB 939 fee on all solid waste services within the City. Passage of this bill will ease reporting
requirements and staff time to complete reports.
ATTACHMENTS
Text ofSB 1016 (Wiggins) as amended July 2,2008
Prepared by: Colleen Carnevale, Government Relations Liaison, Office of the City Manager
Lynn France, Environmental Services Program lHanager
6-2
k\1ENDED IN ASSEMBLY JULY 2, 2008
k\1ENDED IN ASSEMBLY JUNE 10,2008
AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 10,2007
SENATE BILL
No. 1016
Introduced by Senator Wiggins
February 23, 2007
An act to amend Sections 40181, 40183, 40184, 41780, 41783,
41820.6,41821,41850,42921, and 42926 of, to amend the headings
of Article 4 (commencing with Section 41825) and Article 5
(commencing with Section 41850) of Chapter 7 of Part 2 of Division
30 of, to add Sections 40127, 40144, 40150.1, 41780.05, 42921.5, and
42927 to, and to repeal and add Section 41825 of, the Public Resources
Code, relating to solid waste.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
,
SB 1016, as amended, Wiggins. Diversion: compliance: per 'capita
disposal rate.
(1) The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, which
is administered by the California Integrated Waste Management Board,
requires each city, county, and regional agency, if any, to develop a
source reduction and recycling element of an integrated waste
management plan containing specified components. Those entities are
required to divert, from disposal or transformation, 50% of the solid
waste through source reduction, recycling, and composting subject to
the element, except as specified. A city, county, or regional agency is
required to submit an annual report to the board summarizing its
progress in reducing solid waste. Existing law requires the board to
review, a least once every 2 years, a jurisdiction's source reduction and
96
6-3
SB 1016
-2-
recycling element and household hazardous waste element. The board
is required to issue an order of compliance if the board finds that a
jurisdiction has failed to implement its source reduction and recycling
element or its household hazardous waste element, pursuant to a
specified procedure. If, after issuing an order of compliance, the board
finds the city, county, or regional agency has failed to make a good
faith effort to implement those elements, the board is authorized to
impose administrative civil penalties upon the city, county, or regional
agency.
This bill would define the terms "diversion program," "jurisdiction,"
and "multicounty regional agency," for purposes of the act and would
revise the definitions of the terms "rural city" and "rural county." The
bill would delete the condition that the solid waste subject to source
reduction, recycling, and composting under these provisions, be diverted
from landfill disposal or transformation.
The bill would repeal the board's existing 2-year process and instead
require the board to make a finding whether each jurisdiction was in
compliance with the act's diversion requirements for calendar year 2006
and to review a jurisdiction's compliance with those diversion
requirements in accordance with a specified schedule, which would be
conditioned upon the board finding that the jurisdiction is in compliance
with those requirements or has made a good faith effort to implement
its source reduction and recycling element and household hazardous
waste element.
The bill would require the board to issue an order of compliance if
the board finds that the jurisdiction has failed to make a good faith effort
to implement its source reduction and recycling element or its hOljsehold
hazardous waste element, pursuant to a specified procedure. The board
would be required to comply with certain requirements, in making this
determination.
The bill would revise the information required to be included in the
jurisdiction's annual report to the board and would require the report
to be submitted to the board electronically. The bill would make
conforming changes regarding the compliance order and related
enforcement provisions. The bill would impose a state-mandated local
program by lmposing new duties upon local agencies.
(2) Existing law requires each state agency, as defined, to develop
and adopt, in consultation with the board, an integrated waste
management plan. Each state agency and large state facility is required
to divert at least 50% of the solid waste generated by the state agency
96
6-4
-3-
SB 1016
or large state facility from landfill disposal or transformation facilities.
"State agency" is defined, for purposes of these requirements, to include
the California Community Colleges.
This bill would require the board to determine if a state agency or
large state facility is in compliance with the 50% diversion requirement
by comparing the annual per capita disposal rate of the state agency or
large state facility with the per capita disposal rate that the agency or
facility. would be necessary to comply with =h .The the 50% diversion
requirement. The board would be authorized to consider an agency's
or facility's per capita disposal rate as a factor in determining whether
the agency or facility is adequately implementing its integrated waste
management plan.
The bill would require a community college dishict to expend the
revenues derived from the sale of recyclable materials for the purposes
of offsetting recycling program costs and to expend aU cost savings that
result from implementation of the district's integrated waste management
plan to fund the continued implementation of the plan. A community
college district would also be required to expend the revenues and cost
savings to offset recycling program costs incurred from the initial date
when the community college district became subject to these
requirements. A community college district would be required to provide
information to the board at least annually, on the quantities of recyclab Ie
materials collected for recycling, according to a schedule detennined
by the board and the district. The bill would impose a state-mandated
local program by imposing new duties upon community colleges.
(3) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local
agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by th~' state.
Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this. act
for a specified reason.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: yes.
The people of the Stote of California do enact as follows:
1 SECTION 1. Section 40127 is added to the Public Resources
2 Code, to read:
3 40127. "Diversion program" means a program in the source
4 reduction and recycling element ofajurisdiction's integrated waste
5 management plan, specified in Chapter 2 (commencing with
96
6-5
SB 1016
-4-
Section 41000) of, or Chapter3 (conunencing with Section 41300)
of, Part 2 and that has the purpose of diverting solid waste from
landfill disposal or transformation through source reduction,
4 recycling, and composting activities. "Diversion program"
5 additionally includes any amendments, revisions, or updates to the
6 element, and any programs set forth in a time extension, alternative
7 requirement, or compliance order approved by the board pursuant
8 to Part 2 (conunencing with Section 40900).
9 SEC. 2. Section 40144 is added to the Public Resources Code,
10 to read;
11 40144. "Jurisdiction" means a city, county, or regional agency
12 that is approved by the board pursuant to Section 40975.
[3 SEC.3. Section 401 SO. I is added to the Public Resources Code,
14 to read:
IS 40150.1. "Multicounty regional agency" means a regional
16 agency, as defined in Section 40181, that includes all of the
17 jurisdictions that are located in at least two or more rural counties.
18 SEe. 4. Scotia" 10181 of the Pclblie RC36UfCC3 Cade i3
19 amended ta read;
20 40181. "Rcgianal agency "61 "rcgi,'mal planning agency" meal'3
21 an agency formed ptli"stlant to Chapter 5 (com.i1Kneing ,,.ith Seeti!'}!,
22 6500) ofDi,.i3i6Il 7 6fTitlc 16fthc Co,.e,l,iTIont Code and Articlc
3 (cOIllilleIlcing "ith Section 409(0) ofChaptc:r I oUart 2.
SEe. 5.
SEe. 4. Section 40183 of the Public Resources Code IS
amended to read;
40183. (a) "Rural city" or "rural regional agency" mhns a
city or regional agency that is located within a rural county as
defined in Section 40184.
(b) (I) Unless the board takes action pursuant to paragraph (2),
this section does not affect any reduction granted to a rural city-m
rural COtti,\}. by the board pursuant to Section 41787 prior to
January 1,2008.
(2) The board may review and take action regarding any
reduction granted to a rural city or ltlral cotml'} by the board in
accordance with subdivision (b) of Section 41787.
SEe. 6.
SEe. 5. Section 40184 of the Public Resources Code IS
amended to read:
l
2
,
o
~'
_0
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
"
00
34
35
36
37
38
39
96
6-6
-5-
SB 1016
1 40184. (a) "Rural county" means a county or multicounty
2 regional agency that annually disposes of no more that 200,000
3 tons of solid waste.
4 (b) (1) Unless the board takes action pursuant to paragraph (2),
5 this section does not affect any reduction granted to a rural city or
6 rural county by the board pursuant to Section 41787 prior to
7 January 1,2008.
8 (2) The board may review and take action regarding any
9 reduction granted to a rural county in accordance with subdivision
10 (b) of Section 41787.
11 SEC.;.
12 SEC 6. Section 41780 of the Public Resources Code is
13 amended to read:
14 41780. (a) Each jurisdiction's source reduction and recycling
15 element shall include an implementation schedule that shows both
16 of the following:
17 (1) For the initial element, the jurisdiction shall divert 25 percent
18 of all solid waste by January 1, 1995, through source reduction,
19 recycling, and composting activities.
20 (2) Except as provided in Sections 41783 and 41784, for the
21 first and each subsequent revision of the element, the jurisdiction
22 shall divert 50 percent of all solid waste on and after January 1,
23 2000, through source reduction, recycling, and composting
24 activities.
25 (b) This section does not prohibit a jurisdiction from
26 implementing source reduction, recycling, and composting
27 activities designed to exceed the requirements of this division.
28 SEC. 8.
29 SEC 7. Section 41780.05 is added to the Public Resources
30 Code, to read:
31 41780.05. (a) On and after January 1,2009, pursuant to the
32 review authorized by Section 41825, the board shall determine
33 each jurisdiction's compliance with Section 41780 for the years
34 commencing with January 1, 2007, by comparing each
35 jurisdiction's change in its per capita disposal rate in subsequent
36 years with the equivalent per capita disposal rate that would have
37 been necessary for the jurisdiction to meet the requirements of
38 Section 41780 on January 1, 2007, as calculated pursuant to
39 subdivisions (c) and (d).
96
6-7
SB 1016
-6-
1 (b) (1) For purposes of paragraph (5) of subdivision (e) of
2 Section 41825, in making a determination whether a jurisdiction
3 has made a good faith effort to implement its source reduction and
4 recycling element or its household hazardous waste element, the
5 beald may consider ajmi3dictiGn'3 per capita dispe3a1 anI) as all.
6 indicatior, of "hcthcr the;Ul ;sdictiofl has adc'1:uatclj in1pkhlcntcd
7 its diicrsi0fl pIO!;IaItB. The board shall not cOll.3idcI an iI"cleasc
8 in tl,e pel capita disposal rate to be ,ktcrm:inati. e as to "Lether
9 the j tuisclictim, has made a ,l;ood faith efrart. board shall consider,
10 but is not limited to the consideration of the jurisdiction's per
11 capita disposal rate and whether the jurisdiction adequately
12 implemented its diversion programs.
13 (2) When determining whether a jurisdiction has made a good
14 faith effort pursuant to Section 41825 to implement its source
15 reduction and recycling element or its household hazardous waste
16 element, the board shall consider that an increase in the per capita
17 disposal rate is the result of the amOlmt of the jurisdiction's
18 disposal increasing faster than the jurisdiction's growth. The board
19 shall use this increase in the per capita disposal rate that is in excess
20 of the equivalent per capita disposal rate as a factor in determining
21 whether the board is required, pursuant to Section 41825, to more
22 closely examine a jurisdiction's program implementation efforts.
23 This examination may indicate that a jurisdiction is required to
24 expand existing programs or implement new programs, in
25 accordance with the procedures specified in Article 4 (commencing
26 with Section 41825) and in A.rticle 5 (commencing with Section
27 41850). i
28 (3) When reviewing the level of program implementation
29 pursuant to Sections 41825 and 41850, the board shall use, as a
30 factor in determining compliance with Section 41780, the amount
31 determined pursuant to subdivision (d) when comparing a
32 jurisdiction's per capita disposal rate in subsequent years.
33 (c) (1) Except as otherwise provided in this subdivision, for
34 purposes of this section, "per capita disposal" or "per capita
35 disposal rate" means the total annual disposal, in pounds, from a
36 jurisdiction divided by the total population in a jurisdiction, as
37 reported by the Department of Finance, divided by 365 days.
38 (2) (A) If a jurisdiction is predominated by commercial or
39 industrial activities and by solid waste generation from those
96
6-8
-7-
SB 1016
sources, the board may alternatively calculate per capita disposal
to reflect those differing conditions.
(B) When making a calculation for ajurisdiction subject to this
4 paragraph, "per capita disposal" or "per capita disposal rate" means
5 the total annual disposal, in pounds, from a jurisdiction divided
6 by total industry employment in a jurisdiction, as reported by the
7 Employment Development Department, divided by 365 days.
8 (e) The board shall calculate the per capita disposal rate for a
9 jurisdiction subject to this paragraph using the level of industry
10 employment in a jurisdiction instead oftbe level of population in
1 I a jurisdiction.
12 (3) If tbe board determines that the method for calculating the
13 per capita disposal rate for a jurisdiction provided by paragraph
14 (I) or (2) does not accurately reflect that jurisdiction's disposal
15 reduction, the board may use an alternative method of calculating
16 the per capita disposal rate that more accurately reflects the
17 jurisdiction's efforts to divert solid waste.
18 (d) The board shall calculate the equivalent per capita disposal
19 rate for each jurisdiction as follows:
20 (1) Except as otherwise provided in this subdivision, the
21 equivalent per capita disposal rate for a jurisdiction shall be
22 determined using the method specified in this paragraph.
(A) The calculated generation tonnage for each year from 2003
24 to 2006, inclusive, shall be multiplied by 0.5 to yield the 50 percent
25 equivalent disposal total for each year.
26 (B) The 50 percent equivalent disposal total for each year shall
27 be multiplied by 2,000, divided by the population of the juris~iction
28 in that year, and then divided by 365 to yield the 50 percent
29 equivalent per capita disposal for each year.
30 (e) The four 50 percent equivalent per capita disposal amounts
from the years 2003 to 2006, inclusive, shal! be averaged to yield
the equivalent per capita disposal rate.
(2) If a jurisdiction is predominated by commercial or industrial
activities and by solid waste generation from those sources, the
board may alternatively calculate the equivalent per capita disposal
rate to reflect those conditions by using the level of industry
employment in a jurisdiction instead of the level of population in
that jurisdiction.
(3) If the board determines that the method for collecting the
equivalent per capita disposal rate for a jurisdiction pursuant to
1
2
,
~
7'
-~
31
32
"
00
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
96
6-9
SB 1016
-8-
1 this subdivision does not accurately reflect a jurisdiction's per
2 capita disposal rate that would be equivalent to the amount required
3 to meet the 50 percent diversion requirements of Section 41780,
4 the board may use an alternative method for calculating the
5 equivalent per capita disposal rate that more accurately reflects
6 the jurisdiction's diversion efforts.
7 (4) The board shall modify the percentage used in paragraph
8 (1) to maintain the diversion requirements approved by the board
9 for a rural jurisdiction pursuant to Section 41787.
10 (5) The board may modify the years included in making a
11 calculation pursuant to this subdivision for an individual
12 jurisdiction to eliminate years in which the calculated generation
13 amount is shown not to be representative or accurate, based upon
14 a generation study completed in one of the four years 2003 to 2006,
15 inclusive. In these cases, the board shall not allow the use of an
16 additional year other than 2003, 2004, 2005, or 2006.
17 (6) The board may modify the method of calculating u1e
18 equivalent per capita disposal rate for an individual jurisdiction to
19 accommodate the incorporation of a new city, the formation of a
20 new regional agency, or changes in membership of an existing
21 regional agency. These modifications shall ensure that a new entity
22 has a new equivalent per capita disposal rate and that the existing
23 per capita disposal rate of an existing entity is adjusted to take into
24 account the disposal amounts lost by the creation of the new entity.
25 (7) The board shall not incorporate generation studies or new
26 base year calculation for a year commencing after 2006 into the
27 equivalent per capita disposal rate. "
28 (8) If the board determines that the equivalent per capita disposal
29 rate cannot accurately be determined for a jurisdiction, or that the
30 rate is no longer representative of a jurisdiction's waste stream,
31 the board shall evaluate trends in the jurisdiction's per capita
32 disposal to establish a revised equivalent per capita disposal rate
33 for that jurisdiction.
34 SEe. 9.
35 SEe. 8. Section 41783 of the Public Resources Code is
36 amended to read:
37 41783. (a) For a jurisdiction's source reduction and recycling
38 element submitted to the board after January 1, 1995, and on or
39 before January 1, 2009, the 50 percent diversion requirement
40 specified in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 41780 may
96
6-10
-9-
SB 1016
include not more than 10 percent through transformation, as defined
in Section 40201, if all of the following conditions are met:
(1) The transformation project is in compliance with Sections
21151.1 and 44150 of this code and Section 42315 of the Health
and Safety Code.
(2) The transformation project uses front-end methods or
programs to remove all recyclable materials from the waste stream
prior to transformation to the maximum extent feasible.
(3) The ash or other residue generated from the transformation
project is routinely tested at least once quarterly, or on a mOre
frequent basis as determined by the agency responsible for
regulating the testing and disposal of the ash or residue, and,
notwithstanding Section 25143.5 of the Health and Safety Code,
ifhazardous wastes are present, the ash or residue is sent to a class
1 hazardous waste disposal facility.
(4) The board holds a public hearing in the city, county, or
regional agency jurisdiction within which the transformation
project is proposed, and, after the public hearing, the board makes
both of the following findings, based upon substantial evidence
on the record:
(A) The city, county, or regional agency is, and will continue
to be, effectively implementing all feasible source reduction,
recycling, and composting measures.
(B) The transformation project will not adversely affect public
health and safety or the environment.
(5) The transformation facility is permitted and operational on
or before January 1, 1995. i
(6) The city, county, or regional agency does not include
biomass conversion, as authorized pursuant to Section 41783, in
its source reduction and recycling element.
(b) On and after January 1, 2009, for purposes of the review
authorized by Section 41825, with regard to a jurisdiction's
compliance with Sectiorr41780 for each year commencing January
1, 2007, the board may reduce the per capita disposal rate for a
35 jurisdiction, as calculated pursuant to subdivision (d) 0 f Section
41780.05, by no more than 10 percent of the average of the
calculated per capita gerreration tonrrage amount that is subject to
transformation pursuant to this section.
1
2
o
o
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
?'
_0
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
"
00
34
36
37
38
96
6-11
SB 1016
-10-
1 see. 10.
2 SEe. 9. Section 41820.6 of the Public Resources Code is
3 amended to read:
4 41820.6. (a) In addition to its authority under Section 41820,
5 the board may, after a public hearing, grant a time extension from
6 the requirements of Section 41780 to a city ifboth of the following
7 conditions exist:
8 (1) The city was incorporated pursuant to Division 3
9 (commencing with Section 56000) of Title 5 of the Government
10 Code on or after January 1,2001.
11 (2) The county within which the city is located did not include
12 provisions in its franchises that ensured that the now incorporated
13 area would comply with the requirements of Section 41780.
14 (b) The board may authorize a city that meets the requirements
15 of subdivision (a) to submit a source reduction and recycling
16 element that includes an implementation schedule that shows that
17 the city shall comply with the requirements of Section 41780,
18 within three years from the date on which the source reduction
19 and recycling element is due pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section
20 41791.5, through 'source reduction, recycling, and composting
21 activities.
22 SEe. 11.
23 SEe. 10. Section 41821 of the Public Resources Code is
24 amended to read:
25 41821. (a) (1) Each year following the board's approval ofa
26 jurisdiction's source reduction and recycling element, household
27 hazardous waste element, and nondisposal facility elenieht, the
28 jurisdiction shall submit a report to the board summarizing its
29 progress in reducing solid waste as required by Section 41780, in
30 accordance with the schedule set forth in this subdivision.
31 (2) The annual report shall be due on or before August 1 of the
32 year following board approval of the source reduction and recycling
33 element, the household hazardous waste element, and the
34 nondisposal facility element, and on or before August 1 in each
35 subsequent year. The information in this report shall encompass
36 the previous calendar year, January 1 to December 31, inclusive.
37 (b) Each jurisdiction's annual report to the board shall, at a
38 minimum, include the following:
39 (1) Calculations of annual disposal reduction.
96
6-12
-11-
SB 1016
1 (2) A summary of progress made in implementing the source
2 reduction and recycling element and the household hazardous
3 waste element.
4 (3) An update of the jurisdiction's source reduction and
5 recycling eLement and household hazardous waste element to
6 include any new or expanded programs the jurisdiction has
7 implemented or plans to implement.
8 (4) An update of the jurisdiction's nondisposal facility element
9 to reflect any new or expanded nondisposal tacilities the
10 jurisdiction is using or planning to use.
11 (5) A summary of progress made in diversion of construction
12 and demolition of waste material, including information on
13 programs and ordinances implemented by the local govermnent
14 and quantitative data, where available.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
(6) Other information relevant to compliance with Section
41780.
(c) A jurisdiction may also include, in the report required by
this section, all of the following:
(1) Information on disposal reported pursuant to Section 41821.5
that the jurisdiction believes may be relevant to the board's
determination of the jurisdiction's per capita disposal rate.
(2) Disposal characterization studies or other completed studies
that show the effectiveness of the programs being implemented.
(3) Factors that the jurisdiction believes would affect the
accuracy of, or mitigate the amount ot~ solid waste disposed by
the jurisdiction, including, but not limited to, either Pf the
following:
(A) Whether the jurisdiction hosts a solid waste facility or
regional diversion facility.
(B) The effects of selt~hauled waste and construction and
demolition waste.
(4) The extent to which the jurisdiction previously relied on
biomass diversion credit and the extent to which it may be impacted
by the lack of the credit.
(5) Information regarding the programs the jurisdiction is
undertaking to address specific disposal challenges, and why it is
not feasible to implement programs to respond to other tactors that
affect the amount of waste that is disposed.
96
6-13
SB 1016
-12-
(6) Other information that describes the good faith efforts of
the jurisdiction to comply with Section 41780.
(d) The board shall use, but is not limited to the use of, the
annual report in the determination of whether the jurisdiction's
5 source reduction and recycling element needs to be revised or
6 updated.
7 (e) (1) The board shall adopt procedures for requiring additional
8 information in a jurisdiction's annual report. The procedures shall
9 require the board to notifY a jurisdiction of any additional required
10 information no later than 120 days after the board receives the
11 report from the jurisdiction.
12 (2) Paragraph (l) does not prohibit the board from making
13 additional requests for information in a timely manner. A
14 jurisdiction receiving a request for information shall respond in a
15 timely manner.
16 (3) If the schedule for the submission of an annual report by a
17 jurisdiction does not correspond with the scheduled review by the
18 board specified in subdivision (a) of Section 41825, the board shall
19 utilize the information contained in the annual report only to assist
20 the board in providing technical assistance and informally
21 reviewing the jurisdiction's diversion program implementation.
22 The board is not required to otherwise review the annual report
23 for those years that are in addition to the review required by
24 subdivision (a) of Section 41825.
25 (f) The board shall adopt procedures for conferring with a
26 jurisdiction regarding the implementation of its diversion programs.
27 (g) Notwithstanding the Uniform Electronic TransactiClhs Act
28 (Title 2.5 (commencing with Section 1633.1) of Part 2 of Division
29 3 of the Civil Code), a jurisdiction shall submit the progress report
30 required by this section to the board electronically, using the
31 board's electronic reporting format system.
32 (h) Notwithstanding the reporting schedule required by this
33 section, and in addition to the review required by Section 41825,
34 the board shall visit each jurisdiction not less than once each year
35 to monitor the jurisdict:ons', jurisdiction's implementation and
36 maintenance of its diversion programs.
see. 12.
SEe. 11. The heading of Article 4 (commencing with Section
41825) of Chapter 7 of Part 2 of Division 30 of the Public
Resources Code is amended to read:
1
2
o
o
4
37
38
39
40
96
6-14
-13-
SB 1016
1 Article 4. Review and Compliance Orders
2
3 SEe. 1~.
4 SEe. 12. Section 41825 of the Public Resources Code 1S
5 repealed.
6 SEC. 14.
7 SEe. 13. Section 41825 is added to the Public Resources Code,
8 to read:
9 41825. ( a) The board shall make a finding whether each
10 jurisdiction was in compliance with Section 41780 for calendar
11 year 2006 and shall review a jurisdiction's compliance with Section
12 41780 in accordance with the following schedule:
13 (1) If the board makes a finding that the jurisdiction was in
14 compliance with Section 41780 for calendar year 2006, the board
15 shall review, commencing January 1,2012, and at least once every
16 four years thereafter, whether the jurisdiction has made a good
17 faith effort to implement its source reduction and recycling element
18 and household hazardous waste element.
19 (2) If the board makes a finding that the jurisdiction did not
20 meet the requirements of Section 41780 for calendar year 2006 or
21 for any other subsequent calendar year, but made a good faith
22 effort to implement its source reduction and recycling element and
23 household hazardous waste element, the board shall review,
24 commencing January 1,2010, and at least once every two years
25 thereafter, whether the jurisdiction has made a good faith effort to
26 implement its source reduction and recycling element and
27 household hazardous waste element. :
28 (3) Ifthe board makes a finding that the jurisdiction was not in
29 compliance with Section 41780 for calendar year 2006 or for any
30 subsequent calender year, the board shall review, commencing
31 January 1, 2010, and at least once every two years thereafter,
32 whether the jurisdiction has made a good faith effort to implement
33 its source reduction and recycling element and household hazardous
34 waste element.
35 (4) If, after determining that a jurisdiction is not in compliance
36 with Section 41780 and is subject to paragraph (2) or (3), the board
37 subsequently determines that the jurisdiction has come into
38 compliance with Section 41780, the board shall review, at least
39 once every four years, whether the jurisdiction has made a good
40 faith effort to implement its source reduction and recycling element
96
6-15
SB 1016
-14-
I and household hazardous waste in the same manner as a jurisdiction
2 that is subject to paragraph (1).
3 (b) In addition to the requirements of subdivision (a), the board
4 may review whether a jurisdiction is in compliance with Section
5 41780 in accordance with the requirements of this section at any
6 time that the board receives information that indicates the
7 jurisdiction may not be making a good faith effort to implement
8 its source reduction and recycling element and household hazardous
9 waste element.
10 (c) (1) Before issuing a compliance order pursuant to
II subdivision (d), the board shall confer with the jurisdiction
12 regarding conditions relating to the proposed order of compliance,
13 with a first meeting occurring not less than 60 days before issuing
14 a notice of intent to issue an order of compliance.
15 (2) The board shall issue a notice of intent to issue an order of
16 compliance not less than 30 days before the board holds a hearing
17 to issue the notice of compliance. The notice of intent shall specify
18 all of the following:
19 (A) The proposed basis for issuing an order of compliance.
20 (B) The proposed actions the board recommends are necessary
21 for the jurisdiction to complete to implement its source reduction
22 and recycling element or household hazardous waste element.
23 (C) The proposed recommendations to the board.
24 (3) The board shall consider any information provided pursuant
25 to subdivision (c) of Section 41821 if the proposed issuance of an
26 order of compliance involves changes to ajurisdiction's calculation
27 of annual disposal. >'
28 (d) (1) If, after holding a public hearing, which, to the extent
29 possible, shall be held in the local or regional agency'sjurisdiction,
30 the board finds that a jurisdiction has failed to make a good faith
31 effort to implement its source reduction and recycling element or
32 its household hazardous waste element, the board shall issue an
33 order of compliance with a specific schedule for achieving
34 compliance.
35 (2) The compliance order shall include those conditions that the
36 board determines to be necessary for the jurisdiction to imp lement
37 its diversion programs.
38 (3) In addition to considering the good faith efforts of a
39 jurisdiction, as specified in subdivision (e), to implement a
96
6-16
-15-
SB 1016
I diversion program, the board shall consider all of the following
2 factors in detennining whether or not to issue a compliance order:
3 (A) The rural nature of the jurisdiction.
4 (B) Whether an exceptional growth rate may have affected
5 compliance.
6 (C) Other information that the jurisdiction may provide that
7 indicates the effectiveness of the jurisdiction's programs, such as
8 disposal characterization studies or other jurisdiction specific
9 information.
10 (e) For purposes of making a determination pursuant to this
II section whether a jurisdiction has failed to make a good faith effort
12 to implement its source reduction and recycling element or its
13 household hazardous waste element, the board shall consider all
14 of the following criteria:
15 (1) For the purposes of this section, "good faith effort" means
16 all reasonable and feasible efforts by a jurisdiction to implement
[7 those programs or activities identified in its source reduction and
18 recycling element or household hazardous waste element, or
19 alternative programs or activities that achieve the same or similar
20 results.
21 (2) For purposes of this section. "good faith effort" may also
22 include the evaluation by a jurisdiction of improved technology
23 for the handling and management of solid waste that would reduce
24 costs, improve efficiency in the collection, processing, or marketing
25 of recyclable materials or yard waste, and enhance the ability of
26 the jurisdiction to adequately address all sources of significant
27 disposal, the submission by the jurisdiction of a cOn1p1iance
28 schedule, and the undertakers of all other reasonable and feasible
29 efforts to implement the programs identified in the jurisdiction's
30 source reduction and recycling element or household hazardous
31 waste element.
32 (3) In determining whether a jurisdiction has made a good faith
33 effort, the board shall consider the enforcement criteria included
34 in its enforcement policy, as adopted on April 25, 1995, or as
35 subsequently amended.
36 (4) The board shall consider all of the following when
37 considering whether a jurisdiction has made a good faith effort to
38 implement its source reduction and recycling element or its
39 household hazardous waste element:
40 (A) Natural disasters.
96
6-17
SB 1016
-16-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
(B) Budgetary conditions within a jurisdiction that could not
be remedied by the imposition or adjustment of solid waste fees.
(C) Work stoppages that directly prevent a jurisdiction from
implementing its source reduction and recycling element or
household hazardous waste element.
(D) The tmpact of the failure of federal, state, and other local
agencies located within the jurisdiction to implement source
reduction and recycling programs in the jurisdiction.
(E) The extent to which the jurisdiction has implemented
additional source reduction, recycling, and composting activities.
(F) The extent to which the jurisdiction has made program
implementation choices driven by considerations related to other
environmental issues, including climate change.
(G) Whether the jurisdiction has provided information to the
board concerning whether construction and demolition waste
material is at least a moderately significant portion of the waste
stream, and, if so, whether the locat jurisdiction has adopted an
ordinance for diversion of construction and demolition waste
materials from solid waste disposal facilities, has adopted a model
ordinance pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 42912 for
diversion of construction and demolition waste materials from
solid waste disposal facilities, or has implemented another program
to encourage or require diversion of construction and demolition
waste materials from solid waste disposal facilities.
(H) The extent to which the jurisdiction has implemented
programs to comply with Section 41780 and to maintain its per
capita disposal rate. "
(5) In making a determination whether a jurisdiction has made
a good faith effort, pursuant to !Vis section, the board may consider
a jurisdiction's per capita disposal rate as a factor in determining
whether the jurisdiction adequately implemented its diversion
programs. The board shall not consider a jurisdiction's per capita
disposal rate to be determinative as to whether the jurisdiction has
made a good faith etTort to implement its source reduction and
recycling element or its household hazardous waste element.
SEe. 15.
SEe. 14. The heading of Article 5 (commencing with Section
41850) of Chapter 7 of Part 2 of Division 30 of the Public
Resources Code is amended to read:
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
"
00
34
35
36
37
38
39
96
6-18
-17-
SB 1016
1 Article 5. Enforcement and Penalties
2
3 SEC. [6. Section 41850 of the rlthlic Resources Code is
4 amended to rcad:
5 41850. (a) Except as specifically pro,ided i., SeUion 418)],
6 if; aftcr holding the public hearing and is3tling ad ordcr of
7 cOILpliance pursuant to Section 41825, the board finds that the
8 j urisdicti0n has failed :0 make a geed faith effort to impkmcr.t its
9 SOttIee reduction and reG} cling c!et..cflt or its household hazardotls
10 ,;aste clemcat, the heald may rn.pese adminisfiati ,e cr. il penalties
11 uper, the city or county Of, pursuant to Section 409'74, upon tLe
12 city or COttnly as a n.eli'lBcr of a regional agene), of up to ten
13 thousand 0011.1" ($10,000) Fr day until the jeIrisdictiot. implements
14 the dement.
15 (b) In dctc,tl;;ning ..hethel or not tv impose any pCMltics, 01
16 in elctcn"init,g the amount of all) penalties imposed ,mdel this
17 section, including any pcnalties imposed dlte to the exdmiofl of
18 so:id.. aste ptll3U3nt to Section 41 '781.2 (Lat results in a rcduet:ofl
19 it. tte quafltity" of solid .iustc di..erted by aj,tfisdieL6I" the board
20 shall comidel "hctber thc city, count}, or legioual agel,C}
21 jtl:fisdietion has wade a good faith dfert to in,plcmcnt its S6tlrCe
22 ledtletion aHd recycling clement or its hvltsd,eld ::,azardoU3 ,caste
23 clement. 11, additior" the beard shall cOflsidel oul} thosc rcleiant
24 eircttmstances th"t ha ie prc iented a j ttlisdiction fr on, mectin; the
25 rcquirclTlCflts of this ill ,i3iofl, itlcltlding, but not limited to, tbe
26 factors dcsclibcd in 3Ubdi";isions (d) and (e) o;'Seetic)fl 41825.
27 SEe. 15. Section 41850 of the Public Resourcesc.bde is
28 amended to read:
29 41850. (a) Except as specifically previded in Section 41813,
30 if, after holding the pnblic hearing and issuing an order of
31 cempliance pursuant to Section 41825, the board finds that the
32 city", counl], vr rcgior,al agcncy jurisdiction has failed to make a
33 good faith effort to implement its source reduction and recycling
34 element ()[ its household hazardous waste element, the board may
35 impose administrative civil penalties upon the city or county or,
36 pursuant to Section 40974, upon the city or county as a member
37 ef a regional agency, of up to ten thousand dellars ($10,000) per
38 day until the city, COUllty, 01 rcgiol,al agency jurisdiction
39 implements the element.
96
6-19
SB 1016
-18-
I (b) In determining whether or not to impose any penalties, or
2 in determining the amount of any penalties imposed under this
3 section, including any penalties imposed due to the exclusion of
4 solid waste pursuant to Section 41781.2 that results in a reduction
5 in the quantity of solid waste diverted by a eil), county', or regiofial
6 agcficy jurisdiction, the board shall consider whether the
7 jurisdiction has made a good faith effort to implement its source
8 reduction and recycling element or its household hazardous waste
9 element In addition, the board shall consider only those relevant
10 circumstances that have prevented a eil)', eawI), or fcgiofial
II agcncyjurisdiction from meeting the requirements ofthis division,
12 including the cli.cniofi requllet.1entJ 6fparagrapl13 (1) and (2) 6f
13 subdiiision (a) of Seeti6n41780, including, but not limited to,-aH
14 ofn,e f611o,iing. the factors described in subdivisions (d) and (e)
15 of Section 41825.
16 (1) ~;atural disasters.
17 (2) Dtldgetary cor,diti6fi3 ,iithill a cit"y, "6Ullty, or rcgional
18 agene} that eatlld not be remcdied b} the irflpositian Of adjmtme"t
19 of SGlid "aste fees.
20 (~) \Y6Ik ,toppages that directly pre,ent a elti, counti, or
21 regional age"e} frOM implc1,ler,ting it3 source rcdtletioll and
22 r,ej"cling clewent or hOU3ehold hazardoU3 "aste cleltlerl!.
23 (4) 111e iIdpaet of tl,e failttlc of federal, state, frllcl ather la~al
24 ager.eic, located ,~,ittir. the juri,dietion t5 ll1)'lle.ueIA 30trIee
25 reduction and ree/cling j'lI6g,aInS in the jtl,isdi~tioh Oll the l,a3t
26 jurisdiction's abilit} to n,ect tIle rquiren,cI,t3 afparagraph (2) of
27 3ubdi,isien (a) of Section 41780. "
28 (c) In addition to thc factors ,pecified in sclbdi i;3ion (5), the
29 bofrrdshatt eou,ider at: ofthc fOUo",I.g:
30 (I) Tte exter,; to "hich a eit}, eaclrit/, 0, regional agency ha3
31 implemented additial.al sOUIce reddeti611, Icejeling, and
32 eGIL1po3ting acti,itie3 te campI} "ith the d;icni6n rcquircIde,}ts
33 ofparagraph3 (1) and (2) of3ubd;,i3ior, (a) ofSecti6l141780.
34 (2) 11,e extcr,t to "hieh a city, eoune-y, or r,gier,al agerle} is
35 meetiI,g the diieI3i0n requirement, af pa.agraphs (1) and (2) of
36 stlodiii,ien (a) of Section 41780.
37 (3) '",'hether the j tlIisdietior, ha3 req,leskd and oe,n grallted an
38 cxtd.t3~0n t6 ~hc Icqt.in:lJ.1Cllts GfScction 41780, pUUtlfrlrt ~0 SC...tiOlJ.
39 41820, or an alte'flati,c rcqtlire.ncnt t6 SeetiGn 41780, purstlal'lt
40 to SectioIl ~ 1785.
96
6-20
-19-
SB 1016
1 (4) ',Yhethcr a localjtlli3dieti6n has pro,ided infennation to the
2 board eOhe~ming ~hctha <omt! uction and demolition "a3te
3 n,aterial is at least a moderately ,ignifiefrllt portion of the v,aste
4 stream, and, if so, "bether the local jurisclietion ha3 adopted an
5 ordinance for di. enion of construction frlld den,uiition "aste
6 wateria13 fI,,,,, solid .,ast, disposal facilit_s, has ad"ptccl a model
7 Gfdinfrllc, p~sl:raItt to 3Ubdi,~ision (a) of Section 42912 fOf
8 di.ersion of comtl"lKtiea and dcme!;tien "aste materials fi61,1
9 solid "aste disposal facilities, or has implemented aoothn prograr.l
10 to en00urage or r("iuffe cli.ersiofi of constmetioa and dcuwlit,m
II "a3te materials Lorn solid" "ste disp6sal facilities.
12 (d) (I) fer the parp030S of this 3ectiGh, "good faith effort"
13 mefrllS all rea30nable and fea3ible efforts 10 j a clrj, counrj, or
14 rogional agEnE) to ij'r1pLment tho"e programs or adi,itiu
15 ide'1tifkd ir, it3 source led"eti"" a,rd recycling dcn,cnt Of
16 homeho:cl ha:z:ardous >,~aste clement, or altemati;e programs or
17 acti. ities that aehie. c the sa1,,':: or similar re3ult3.
18 (2) for purposcs of this section "gaod faith effort" 1nay. a130
19 indtldc the c ialuation b) a city, COUfity, ar regional agency of
20 i1apro ;ed tcchnology for th.:: handling and waaagcmcnt of solid
21 '"aste that Nauld leduc.:: e03ts, impro .~e effie:cuey in thc eol!cetior"
22 processing, or marketing of lccyclab!c raatClia13 or yard ".astc,
23 and cn:hB:tlCe the ability of the citY, county, 01 regional ag([,.;:) to
24 meet the di.Trsion requiremcftts of paragrap!,s (I) alid (2) Gf
25 3tlbdi,ision (a) of Scetion 41780, pro ,ideA that the city, county,
26 Of regional a!Senc] has sllbulittcd a cOflipliarice seheduk pl:lI3Uallt
27 to Sectian 41825, andl,as n,ade all other r~c,sonabk and tloa,:blc
28 efforts to implc1,1el.j tl,c program3 identified in its source reduction
29 and ree) eli],g clewent or hom.::held hazard0lls .. aste clemcnt.
30 (3) 11, dctelll,iaing ...),ethe! ajtllisd;etioll 1,a3 made a good faith
31 effort, tl.c board shall e6mider tk e,liore_weht ctitcria iriellldcd
32 in its cnferc'::Mcnt policy, as adopted on April 25, 1995, or as
33 3ubse"iuentlj amcnclcd.
34 SIT 17.
35 SEe. 16. Section 42921 of the Public Resources Code is
36 amended to read:
37 42921. (a) Each state agency and each large state facility shall
38 divert at least 25 percent of an solid waste generated by the state
39 agency by January I, 2002, through source reduction, recycling,
40 and compo sting activities.
96
6-21
SB 1016
-20-
(b) On and after January 1,2004, each state agency and each
large state facility shall divert at least 50 percent of all solid waste
through source reduction, recycling, and composting activities.
SEC. 18.
SEe. 17. Section 42921.5 is added to the Public Resources
Code, to read:
42921.5. (a) On and after January I, 2009, the board shall
determine each state agency's or a large state facility's compliance
with Section 42921, for each year commencing with January I,
2007, by comparing the per capita disposal rate in subsequent years
with the equivalent per capita disposal rate that would have been
necessary for the state agency or large state facility to comply with
Section 42921 on January I, 2007, as calculated pursuant to
subdivision (d).
(b) In making a detennination whether a state agency or large
state facility is in compliance with the requirements of Section
42921, the board may consider an agency's or facility's per capita
disposal rate as a factor in determining whether the state agency
or large state facility is adequately implementing its integrated
waste management plan. The board shall not consider a state,
agency, or large state facility's per capita disposal rate to be
determinative when considering whether the agency's or facility
is implementing its integrated waste management plan.
(c) When determining whether an agency or facility is in
compliance with Section 42921, the board shall consider that an
increase in the per capita disposal rate is a result of disposal
amounts increasing faster than the growth of the state age,/lcy or
large state facility. The board shall use an increase L\1. the per capita
disposal rate that is in excess of the equivalent per capita disposal
rate as a factor in determining whether the board is required to
more closely examine the agency's or facility's plan
implementation efforts. If indicated by this exaJ:Jlli,ation, the board
may require a state agency or large state facility to expand existing
34 programs or implement new programs.
(d) (I) Except as provided in paragraph (2), "per capita
disposal" or "per capita disposal rate" means the total annual
disposal by a state agency or large state facility, in pounds, divided
by total number of employees in that state agency or large state
facility, and divided by 365 days.
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
?"
-~
24
?~
_J
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
""
.00
35
36
37
38
39
96
6-22
-21-
SB 1016
1 (2) The board may alternatively define per capita disposal or
2 per capita disposal rate for a state agency or large state facility that
3 has a significant amount of disposal from nonemployees or for
4 other reasons that would make calculation of per capita disposal
5 by the number of employees inaccurate.
6 SIT 19.
7 SEe. 18. Section 42926 of the Public Resources Code is
8 amended to read:
9 42926. (a) In addition to the information provided to the board
10 pursuant to Section 12167.1 of the Public Contract Code, each
II state agency shall submit an annual report to the board summarizing
12 its progress in reducing solid waste as required by Section 4292l.
13 The annual report shall be due on or before September 1, 2009,
14 and on or before September I in each subsequent year. The
15 information in this report shall encompass the previous calendar
16 year.
17 (b) Each state agency's annual report to the board shall, at a
18 minimum, include all of the following:
19 (1) Calculations of annual disposal reduction.
20 (2) Information on the changes in waste generated or disposed
21 of due to increases or decreases in employees, economics, or other
22 factors.
23 (3) A summary of progress made in implementing the integrated
24 waste management plan.
25 (4) The extent to which the state agency intends to utilize
26 programs or facilities established by the local agency for the
27 handling, diversion, and disposal of solid waste. Ifthe state ~gency
28 does not intend to utilize those established programs or facilities,
29 the state agency shall identify sufficient disposal capacity for solid
30 waste that is not source reduced, recycled, or composted.
31 (5) Other information relevant to compliance with Section
32 4292l.
33 (c) The board shall use, but is not limited to the use of, the
34 annual report in the determination of whether the agency's
35 integrated waste management plan needs to be revised.
36 SEe. 20.
37 SEe. 19. Section 42927 is added to the Public Resources Code,
38 to read:
39 42927. (a) Notwithstanding Section 12167 of the Public
40 Contract Code, a community college district shall expend the
96
6-23
SB 1016
-22-
1
2
revenues derived from the sale of recyclable materials for the
purposes of offsetting the recycling program costs imposed
pursuant to this chapter.
(b) A community college district shall expend all cost savings
that result from implementation of the district's integrated waste
management plan pursuant to this chapter to fund the continued
implementation of the plan.
(e) A community college district shall expend the revenues and
cost savings specified in subdivisions (a) and (b) to offset recycling
program costs incurred pursuant to this chapter from the initial
date when the community college district became subject to this
chapter.
(d) A community college district shall provide information on
the quantities of recyclable materials collected for recycling at
least annually to the board, according to a schedule determined by
the board and the district.
SEe. 21.
SEe. 20. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to
Section 6 of Article XlIIB ofthe California Constitution because
a local agency or school district has the authority to levy service
charges, fees, or assessments sufficient to pay for the program or
level of service mandated by this act or because the act provides
for offsetting savings to local agencies or school districts that result
in no net costs to the local agencies or school districts, within the
meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code.
,
~
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
o
96
6-24
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA SUPPORTING SB 1016 (WIGGINS),
REGARDING COiVIPLlA1'-1CE WITH THE CALIFORNIA
INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT
WHEREAS, California's Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939) provided a
measurement system to determine whether cities and counties were diverting acceptable amounts of
waste from landfills; and
WHEREAS, the system adopted in 1989 has proven to be cumbersome, misleading and
filled with time-consuming calculations that do not reflect the goals of AB 939; and
WHEREAS, SB 1016 (Wiggins) will implement a system that should increase the
timeliness and accuracy of the information reported by focusing on a 'per capita disposal rate' as
well as the programs implemented at a local level to reduce that disposal rate; and
WHEREAS, Chula Vista has established itself as a leader in promoting waste reduction,
re-use and recycling.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
supports SB 1016 (Wiggins), statutes of2008..
,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City's support for this measure will be
communicated to the City's legislative delegation in Sacramento, as well as to the League of
California Cities.
Presented by
Approved as to fom1 by
David R. Garcia
City Manager
, ~J /) j1 ~ I
"". avA:'-J L"L/tA,C<2_-0l~' rf"'--
Bart C. Miesfeld
Interim City Attorney
6-25
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
~\ff:. CITY OF
~ (HULA VISTA
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
SUMiVL<\RY
JULY 22, 2008, Item---=--
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING At'T AGREEMENT WITH
THE S.t\N DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT FOR A SALT
MARSH EDUCATION PROGRA...T\1 AT THE CHULA VISTA
NATlJRECENTER.' ~
RECREATIONDIRECTO.
CITY MANAGER . .~~~ ,/
ASSIST A...l\fT CITY ,AGER 'S r
4/STHS VOTE: YES D NO 0
,
,
Nature Center staff has been working with the San Diego Unified Port District to partner in
the coordination of educational field trips for schools located within the watershed areas of
the San Diego Bay. The goal of the program is to encourage and increase participation in
existing Nature Center programs, which promote environmental stewardship and educate
snldents and visitors about the importance of conserving coastal resources.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined
that the project qualifies for a Class 22 categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15322
(Educational or Training Programs Involving No Physical Changes) of the State CEQA
Guidelines. Thus, no further environmental review is necessary.
RECOMMENDATION
Council adopts the Resolution.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Not applicable.
7-1
;:;:r
JULY 22, 2008, Item ~
Page 2 of3
DISCUSSION
Nature Center staff has been working with the San Diego Unified Port District (port) to
partner in the coordination of educational field trips for schools located within the watershed
areas of the San Diego Bay. The goal of the program is to encourage and increase
participation in existing Narure Center programs, which promote environmental stewardship
and educate students and visitors about the importance of conserving coastal resources.
The project makes use of the existing Nature Center educational programs for elementary
school students. For 21 years, the Narure Center has been offering field trips to San Diego
County school children. Approximately 15,000 srudents visit the Narure Center and the
Sweerwater Marsh National Wildlife Refuge annually on strucrured field trips.
Because of the current budget constraints, many schools cannot afford to pay the modest
Nature Center fees for teacher training, student admission, or transportation to the Narure
Center. According to the agreement, the City will provide the following components of the
project at the Nature Center:
. Cuniculum and instmction of the Education Program for up to 90 classes. These
classes will consist of approximately 30 third grade classes within the District's
School Partnership Program (Logan, Bayside, Harborside, Silver Gate, Silver
Strand, Perkins, and Kimball), and up to, but not exceeding 60 classes (of all grades)
from other schools within the San Diego Bay watershed.
. Cuniculum and instruction of the teacher-training program for the teachers
participating in the Program.
. Program administration.
. Educational staff required to run the project.
. Project facilities.
. Transportation for students and teachers by school bus or trolley to the Chula Vista
Narure Center.
. Implementation of an Effectiveness Assessment consisting of pre- and post-tests to
be administered to all participating students.
. A short report on the Project.
Transportation for classes as required by the agreement is paid on a reimbursement basis.
Schools are responsible for contracting and planning their own transportation either by
school bus, private charter bus, or public transportation.
This agreement is a renewal of the ongoing partnership between the Port and the Nature
Center. In the past, the agreement has been issued on an annual basis; however, the new
proposed agreement provides a four-year term. The Port will compensate the City with four
lump sum payments as outlined below for services to be performed on an annual basis for
four years, totaling $60,000 for the life of the agreement.
Fiscal Year
2009
2010
Lump Sum Payment
$15,000
$15,000
7-2
JULY 22, 2008, Item --;-
Page 3 of3
2011
2012
$15,000
$15,000
DECISION MAKER CONFLICT
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council and has found no property
holdings within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property which is the subject of this
action.
FISCAL IMPACT
The agreement will provide an increase of $15,000 in annual general fund revenue for
Nature Center operations. Actual costs to support the program (such as the production of
sets of teaching material, etc.) are expected to be minimal and can be absorbed by the
approved operating budget, and will not impact the General Fund.
ATT ACHlVIENTS
A. Agreement Between San Diego Unified Port District and City of Chula Vista for
Salt Marsh Education Program
Prepared by: Kerry Laube, Program lvfanager, Nature Center
7-3
RESOLUTION NO. 2008 -
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AGREEMENT
WITH THE SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRlCT
FOR A SALT MARSH EDUCATION PROGRAM AT
THE CHULA VISTA NATURE CENTER
WHEREAS, the San Diego Unified Port District ("Port") wishes to partner with
the Chula Vista Nature Center in the coordination of educational field trips for schools
located within the San Diego Bay watershed; and
WHEREAS, the goal of the program is to encourage and increase participation in
Nature Center programs, which promote environmental stewardship and educate students
and visitors about the importance of conserving coastal resources; and
WHEREAS, the proposed project makes use of the existing Chula Vista Nature
Center educational programs for elementary school students through exhibits and
emphasis on the Sweetwater River watershed and what each individual can do to protect
the watershed, the bay, and the ocean.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista does hereby approve the agreement with the San Diego Unified Port District
. ,
and the City of Chula Vista for Salt Marsh Education Program at the Chula Vista Nature
Center.
Proposed by
Approved as to form by
Buck Martin
Recreation Director
7
~,' ,,/ ~
(, {v-j!~c-.... ! '- /\ ,{j-:7~. :-..
Bart Miesfeld
Interim City Attorney
,.
,YY'--'
~
7-4
THE ATTACHED AGREEl'vIENT KA.S BEEN REVIEWED
AND APPROVED AS TO FORi\tI BY THE CITY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND WILL BE
FORMALL Y SIGNED UPON APPROV ALBY
THE CITY COUNCIL
~~ Il./ ,/~/;'-0-
- Bart C. Miesfeld {/
Interim City Attorney
Dated:
II IS-I ,)y
j J
Agreement between San Diego Unified Port District and
the City of Chula Vista for
Salt Marsh Education Program
7-5
AGREEMENT BETWEEN
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT
and
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
for
SALT MARSH EDUCATION PROGRAM
The parties to this Agreement arethe SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT (District),
a public corporation and THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA (Service Provider), a municipal
corporation. Both parties agree to the following:
1. SCOPE OF SERVICES: Service Provider shall furnish all technical and
professional labor, and materials to satisfactorily comply with Attachment A,
Scope of Services as requested by District. Service Provider shall keep the
Executive Director of the District or his designated representative informed of the
progress of said services at all times.
2. TERM OF AGREEMENT: This Agreement shall commence on September 1,
2008, and shall terminate on August 31,2012, subject to earlier termination as
provided below.
3. COMPENSATION: For performance of services to be rendered pursuant to this
Agreement and as further described in Attachment B, Compensation and
Invoicing; District shall compensate Service Provider based on the following,
subject to the limitation of the maximum expenditure provided herein:
3.1 Maximum Expenditure. The maximum expenditure under this Agreement
for each year of services is outlined below for a total Agreement amount
not to exceed $60,000.00 (Sixty Thousand Dollars).
Fiscal Year
Maximum Expenditure
$15,000
$15,000
2008-2009
2009-2010
Service Provider: City of Chula Vista
Board Date: N/A
Requesting Department Environmental Services
Page 1 of 15
7-6
2010-2011
2011-2012
$15,000
$15,000
Said expenditure shall include without limitation all sums, charges,
reimbursements, costs and expenses necessary to satisfactorily comply with
Attachment A. Service Provider shall not be required to perform further services
after compensation has been expended.
4. RECORDS: In accordance with generally accepted accounting principles,
Service Provider shall maintain full and complete records of the cost of services
performed under this Agreement. Such records shall be open to inspection of
District at all reasonable times in the City of San Diego and such records shall be
kept for at least three (3) years after the termination of this Agreement.
Such records shall be maintained by Service Provider for a period of three (3)
years after completion of services to be performed under this Agreement or until
all disputes, appeals, litigation or claims arisirrlg from this Agreement have been
resolved, whichever is later.
Service Provider understands and agrees that District, at all times under this
Agreement, has the right to review project documents and work in progress and
to audit financial records, whether or not final, which Service Provider or anyone
else associated with the work has prepared or which relate to the work which
Service Provider is performing for District pursuant to this Agreement regardless
of whether such records have previously been provided to District. Service
Provider shall provide District at Service Provider's expense a copy of all such
records within five (5) working days of a written request by District. District's right
shall also include inspection at reasonable times of the Service Provider's office
or facilities, which are engaged in the performance of services pursuant to this
Agreement. Service Provider shall, at no cost to District furnish reasonable
facilities and assistance for such review and audit. Service Provider's failure to
Page 2 of 15
Service Provider: City or Chula Vista
Board Date: N/A
Requesting Department Environmental Services
7-7
provide the records within the time requested shall preclude Service Provider
from receiving any compensation due under this Agreement until such
documents are provided.
5. SERVICE PROVIDER'S SUB-CONTRACTORS: It may be necessary for
Service Provider to sub-contract for the performance of certain technical services
or other services for Service Provider to perform and complete the required
services; provided, however, all Service Provider's sub-contractors shall be
subject to prior written approval by District. The Service Provider shall remain
responsible to District for any and all services and obligations required under this
Agreement, whether performed by Service Provider or Service Provider's sub-
contractors. Service Provider shall compensate each Service Provider's sub-
contractors in the time periods required by law. Any Service Provider's sub-
contractors employed by Service Provider shall be independent Service
Providers and not agents of District. Service Provider shall insure that Service
Provider's sub-contractors satisfy all substantive requirements for the work set
forth by this Agreement, including insurance 'ahd indemnification.
Service Provider shall also include a clause in its Agreements with Service
Provider's sub-contractors which reserves the right, during the performance of
this Agreement and for a period of three (3) years following termination of this
Agreement, for a District representative to audit any cost, compensation or
settlement resulting from any items set forth in this Agreement. This clause shall
also require Service Provider's sub-contractors to retain all necessary records for
a period of three (3) years after completion of services to be performed under this
Agreement or until all disputes, appeals, litigation or claims arising from this
Agreement have been resolved, whichever is later.
6. COMPLIANCE: In performance of this Agreement, Service Provider and Service
Provider's sub-contractors shall comply with the California Fair Employment and
Housing Act, the American with Disabilities Act, and all other applicable federal,
Service Provider: City of Chula Vista
Board Date: N/A
Requesting Department: Environmental Services
Page 3 of 15
7-8
state, and local laws prohibiting discrimination, including without limitation, laws
prohibiting discrimination because of age, ancestry, color, creed, denial of family
and medical care leave, disability, marital status, medical condition, national
origin, race, religion, sex, or sexual orientation. Service Provider shall comply
with the prevailing wage provisions of the Labor Code, and the Political Reform
Act provisions of the Government Code, as applicable.
Service Provider shall comply with all Federal and State laws, and district
Ordinances and Regulations applicable to the performance of services under this
Agreement as exist now or as may be added or amended.
7. INDEPENDENT ANALYSIS: Service Provider shall provide the services required
by this Agreement and arrive at conclusions with respect to the rendition of
information, advice or recommendations, independent of the control and direction
of District, other than normal contract monitoring provided, however, Service
Provider shall possess no authority with respect to any District decision beyond
rendition of such information, advice, or recommendations.
8. ASSIGNMENT: This is a personal services Agreement between the parties and
Service Provider shall not assign or transfer voluntarily or involuntarily any of its
rights, duties, or obligations under this Agreement without the express written
consent of Executive Director (President/CEO) of District in each instance.
9. INDEMNIFICATION:
9.1 Indemnification for Non-Professional Services: To the fullest extent
provided by law with respect to all liability except liability for Professional
Services, covered under Section 9.2, the Service Provider agrees to
defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless District, its agents, officers
and employees, from and against any claim, demand, action, proceeding,
suit or liability for damages, costs (including reasonable attorneys' fees) or
expenses for damages to property or the loss of use thereof or injuries or
Service Provider: City of Chula Vista
Board Date: N/A
Requesting Department: Environmental Services
Page 4 of 15
7-9
death to any person (including Service Provider's employees), caused by,
arising out of or related to the performance of, Service Provider as
provided in the Scope of Services, or failure to act by Service Provider, its
officers, agents, and employees, The Service Provider's duty to defend,
indemnify, protect, and hold harmless shall not include any claims or
liabilities arising from the active negligence, sole negligence or willful
misconduct of District, its agents, officers, or employees,
The Service Provider further agrees that the indemnification, including the
duty to defend District, requires the Service Provider to pay reasonable
attorneys' fees and costs District incurs that are associated with enforcing
the indemnification provision, and defending any claims, demands, or
liabilities arising from the services of the Service Provider performed
pursuant to this Agreement.'
District may, at its own election, conduct its defense, or participate in the
defense of any claim demand related ,'in any way to the Agreement. If
District chooses at its own election to conduct its own defense, participate
in its own defense or obtain independent legal counsel in defense of any
claim, demand or liability related to Service Provider's Scope of Services,
the Service Provider agrees to pay the reasonable value of attorneys' fees
and all of District's costs associated with its defense.
9.2 Indemnification for Professional Services: To the fullest extent
provided by law, the Service Provider agrees to defend, indemnify, protect
and hold harmless District, its agents, officers and employees from and
against any and all claims, demands, liability for any damages, costs
(including reasonable attorneys' fees and costs), or expenses, arising from
the actions or omissions of the Service Provider as provided in the Scope
of Services. The Service Provider's duty to defend, indemnify, protect,
and hold harmless shall not include any claims or liabilities arising from
Service Provider: City of ChuJa Vista
Board Date: N/A
Requesting Department: Environmental Services
Page 5 of 15
7-10
the active negligence, sole negligence or willful misconduct of District, its
agents, officers, or employees.
The Service Provider further agrees that the indemnification, including the
duty to defend District, requires the Service Provider to pay reasonable
attorneys' fees and costs District incurs that are associated with enforcing
the indemnification provision, and defending any claims, demands, or
liabilities arising from the services of the Service Provider performed
pursuant to this Agreement.
District may, at its own election, conduct its defense, or participate in the
defense of any claim or demand related in any way to the Agreement. If
District chooses at its own election to conduct its own defense, participate
in its own defense or obtain independent legal counsel in defense of any
claim, demand or liability related to the Scope of Services, the Service
Provider agrees to pay the reasonable value of attorneys' fees and all of
District's costs associated with its deferlse.
10. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS: Service Provider shall at all times during the
term of this Agreement maintain, at its expense, the following minimum levels
and types of insurance:
10.1 Commercial General Liability (including, without limitation, Contractual
Liability, Personal and Advertising Injury, and Products/ Completed
Operations) coverages, with coverage at least as broad as Insurance
Services Office Commercial General Liability Coverage (occurrence Form
CG 0001) with limits no less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) per
occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage.
10.1.1 The deductible or self-insured retention on this Commercial
General Liability policy shall not exceed $5,000 unless District has
ServIce Provider: City of Chula Vista
Board Date: N/A
Rec;uesung Department: Environmental Services
Page 6 of 15
7-11
approved of a higher deductible or self-insured retention in
writing.
10.1.2 The Commercial General Liability policy shall be endorsed to
include the District; its agents, officers, and employees as
additional insureds in the form as required by the District. An
exemplar endorsement is attached (Exhibit A, Certificate of
Insurance ).
10.1.3 The coverage provided to the District, as an additional insured,
shall be primary.
10.2 Commercial Automobile Liability (Owned, Scheduled, Non-Owned, or
Hired Automobiles) written at least as broad as Insurance Services Office
Form Number CA 0001 with limits of no less than two million dollars
($2,000,000) per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
10.3 Worker's Compensation in statutory required limits and Employer's
Liability in an amount of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) per
accident for bodily injury or disease. This policy shall be endorsed to
include a waiver of subrogation endorsement.
10.4 Professional Liability Insurance in the amount of $1 ,000,000 per claim and
$1,000,000 aggregate.
10.4.1 At the end of the agreement period, Consultant shall maintain, at
its own expense, continued Professional Liability insurance of not
less than five (5) years, in an amount no less than the amount
required pursuant to this Agreement
Service Provider: City of Chula Vista
Board Date: N/A
Requesting Department: Environmental Services
Page 7 of 15
7-12
10.4.2 Alternately, if the existing Professional Liability is terminated
during the above referenced five-year period, Consultant shall
maintain at its own expense, "tail" coverage in the same minimum
amount as set forth in this paragraph.
10.4.3 All coverages under this section shall be effective as of the
effective date of this Agreement or provide for a retroactive date
of placement that coincides with the effective date. of this
Agreement.
Service Provider shall furnish District with certificates of insurance coverage for
all the policies described above upon execution of this Agreement and upon
renewal of any of these policies. A Certificate of Insurance in the form
acceptable to the District, an exemplar Certificate of Insurance is attached as
Exhibit A and made a part hereof, evidencing the existence of the necessary
insurance policies and endorsements required shall be kept on file with the
District. Except in the event of cancellatio8 for non-payment of premium, in
which case notice shall be 10 days, all such certificates shall indicate that the
insurer must notify District in writing at least 30 days in advance of any change
in, or cancellation of, coverage. Service Provider shall also provide notice to
District prior to cancellation of, or any change in, the stated coverages of
insurance.
The Certificate of Insurance must delineate the name of the insurance company
affording coverage and the policy number(s) specifically referenced to each type
of insurance, either on the fact of the certificate or on an attachment thereto. If
an addendum setting forth multiple insurance companies or underwriters is
attached to the certificate of insurance, the addendum shall indicate the
insurance carrier or underwriter who is the lead carrier and the applicable policy
number for the CGL coverage.
SeliJice Provider: City of Chula Vista
Board Date: N/A
Requesting Department: Environmental SelVices
Page 8 of 15
7-13
Furnishing insurance specified herein by the District will in no way relieve or limit
any responsibility or obligation imposed by the Agreement or otherwise on
Service Provider or Service Provider's sub-contractors or any tier of Service
Provider's sub-contractors. District shall reserve the right to obtain complete
copies of any of the insurance policies required herein.
11. ACCURACY OF SERVICES: Service Provider shall be responsible for the
technical accuracy of its services and documents resulting therefrom and District
shall not be responsible for discovering deficiencies therein. Service Provider
shall correct such deficiencies without additional compensation. Furthermore,
Service Provider expressly agrees to reimburse District for any costs incurred as
a result of such deficiencies. Service Provider shall make decisions and carry
out its responsibilities hereunder in a timely manner and shall bear all costs
incident thereto so as not to delay the District, the project, or any other person
related to the project, including the Service Provider or its agents, employees, or
subcontractors.
12. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR: Service Provider and any agent or employee
of Service Provider shall act in an independent capacity and not as officers or
employees of District. The District assumes no liability for the Service Provider's
actions and performance, nor assumes responsibility for taxes, bonds, payments
or other commitments, implied or explicit by or for the Service Provider. Service
Provider shall not have authority to act as an agent on behalf of the District
unless specifically authorized to do so in writing. Service Provider acknowledges
that it is aware that because it is an independent contractor, District is making no
deductions from its fee and is not contributing to any fund on its behalf. Service
Provider disclaims the right to any fee or benefits except as expressly provided
for in this Agreement.
13. ADViCE OF COUNSEL: The parties agree that they are aware that they have
the right to be advised by counsel with respect to the negotiations, terms and
Service Provider: City of Chufa Vista
Board Date: N/A
Requesting Department: Environmental Services
Page 9 of 15
7-14
conditions of this Agreement, and that the decision of whether or not to seek the
advice of counsel with respect to this Agreement is a decision which is the sole
responsibility of each of the parties hereto. This Agreement shall not be
construed in favor of or against either party by reason of the extent to which each
party participated in the drafting of the Agreement. The formation, interpretation
and performance of this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of
California.
14. INDEPENDENT REVIEW: Each party hereto declares and represents that in
entering into this Agreement it has relied and is relying solely upon its own
judgment, belief and knowledge of the nature, extent, effect and consequence
relating thereto. Each party further declares and represents that this Agreement
is being made without reliance upon any statement or representation not
contained herein of any other party, or any representative, agent or attorney of
any other party.
15. INTEGRATION AND MODIFICATION: ThIs Agreement contains the entire
Agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations,
discussion, obligations and rights of the parties in respect of each other regarding
the subject matter of this Agreement. There is no other written or oral
understanding between the parties. No modifications, amendment or alteration
of this Agreement shall be valid unless it is in writing and signed by the parties
hereto.
16. OWNERSHIP OF RECORDS: Any and all materials and documents, including
without limitation drawings, specifications, computations, designs, plans,
investigations and reports, prepared by Service Provider pursuant to this
Agreement, shall be the property of District from the moment of their preparation
and the Service Provider shall deliver such materials and documents to District at
the Don L. Nay Port Administration Building (located at 3165 Pacific Highway,
San Diego. California 92101) whenever requested to do so by District. However,
Service Provider: City of Chula Vista
Board Date: N/A
Requesting Department: Environmental Services
Page 10 of 15
7-15
Service Provider shall have the right to make duplicate copies of such materials
and documents for its own file, or other purposes as may be expressly authorized
in writing by District. Said materials and documents prepared or acquired by
Service Provider pursuant to this Agreement (including any duplicate copies kept
by the Service Provider) shall not be shown to any other public or private person
or entity, except as authorized by District. Service Provider shall not disclose to
any other public or private person or entity any information regarding the
activities of District, except as expressly authorized in writing by District.
17. TERMINATION: In addition to any other rights and remedies allowed by law, the
Executive Director (President/CEO) of District may terminate this Agreement at
any time with or without cause by giving thirty (30) days written notice to Service
Provider of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof. In that
event, all finished or unfinished documents and other materials shall at the option
of District be delivered by Service Provider to the Don L. Nay Port Administration
Building (located at 3165 Pacific Highway, San Diego, California 92101).
Termination of this Agreement by Executive Director (President/CEO) as.
provided in this paragraph shall release District from any further fee or claim
hereunder by Service Provider other than the fee earned for services which were
performed prior to termination but not yet paid. Said fee shall be calculated and
based on the schedule as provided in this Agreement.
18. DISPUTE RESOLUTION: If a dispute arises out of or relates to this Agreement,
or the alleged breach thereof, and is not settled by direct negotiation or such
other procedures as may be agreed, and if such dispute is not otherwise time
barred, the parties agree to first try in good faith to settle the dispute amicably by
mediation administered at San Diego, California, by the American Arbitration
Association, or by such other provider as the parties may mutually select, prior to
initiating any litigation or arbitration. Notice of any such dispute must be filed in.
writing with the other party within a reasonable time after the dispute has arisen.
Service Provider: City of Chula Vista
Board Date: N/A
Requesting Department: Environmental Services
Page11of15
7-16
Any resultant Agreements shall be documented and may be used as the basis
for an amendment or directive as appropriate.
If mediation is unsuccessful in settling all disputes that are not otherwise time
barred, and if both parties agree, any still unresolved disputes may be resolved
by arbitration administered at San Diego, California, by the American Arbitration
Association, or by such other provider as the parties may mutually select,
provided, however, that the Arbitration Award shall be non-binding and advisory
only. Any resultant Agreements shall be documented and may be used as the
basis for an amendment or directive as appropriate. On demand of the arbitrator
or any party to this Agreement, sub-contractor and all parties bound by this
arbitration provision agree to join in and become parties to the arbitration
proceeding.
The foregoing mediation and arbitration procedures notwithstanding, all claim
filing requirements of the Agreement documents, the California Government
Code, and otherwise, shall remain in full force/and effect regardless of whether or
not such dispute avoidance and resolution procedures have been implemented,
and the time periods within which claims are to be filed or presented to the
District Clerk as required by said Agreement, Government Code, and otherwise,
shall not be waived, extended or tolled thereby. If a claim is not timely filed or
presented, such claim shall be time barred and the above dispute avoidance and
resolution procedures, whether or not implemented or then pending, shall
likewise be time barred as to such claims.
19. PAYMENT BY DISTRICT: Payment by the District pursuant to this Agreement
does not represent that the District has made a detailed examination, audit, or
arithmetic verification of the documentation submitted for payment by the Service
Provider, made an exhaustive inspection to check the quality or quantity of the
services performed by the Service Provider, made an examination to ascertain
how or for what purpose the Service Provider has used money previously paid on
Service Provider: City of Chula Vista
Board Date: N/A
Requesting Department: Environmental Services
Page 12 of 15
7-17
account by the District, or constitute a waiver of claims against the Service
Provider by the District. The District may in its sole discretion withhold payments
or seek reimbursement from the Service Provider for expenses, miscellaneous
charges, or other liabilities or increased costs incurred or anticipated by the
District which are the fault of or as result of work performed or negligent conduct
by or on behalf of the Service Provider. Upon five (5) day written notice to the
Service Provider, the District shall have the right to estimate the amount of
expenses, miscellaneous charges, or other liabilities or increased costs and to
cause the Service Provider to pay the same; and the amount due the Service
Provider under this Agreement or the whole or so much of the money due or to
become due to the Service Provider under this Agreement as may be considered
reasonably necessary by the District shall be retained by the District until such.
expenses, miscellaneous charges, or other liabilities or increased costs shall
have been corrected or otherwise disposed of by the Service Provider at no
expense to the District. If such expenses, miscellaneous charges, or other
liabilities or increased costs are not corrected or otherwise disposed of at no
expense to the District prior to completion da',te of the Agreement, the District is
authorized to pay for such expenses, miscellaneous charges, or other liabilities
or increased costs from the amounts retained as outlined above or to seek
reimbursement of same from the Service Provider. It is the express intent of the
parties to this Agreement to protect the District from loss because of conduct by
or on behalf of the Service Provider.
20. CAPTIONS: The captions by which the paragraphs of this Agreement are
identified are for convenience only and shall have no effect upon its
interpretation.
21. EXECUTiVE DIRECTOR'S SIGNATURE: It is an express condition of this
Agreement that said Agreement shall not be complete nor effective until signed
by either the Executive Director (President/CEO) or Authorized Designee on
behalf of the District and by Authorized Representative of the Service Provider.
Page 13 of 15
Service Provider: City of Chula Vista
Board Date: N/A
Requesting Department: Environmental Services
7-18
21.1 Submit all correspondence, including invoices, regarding this Agreement,
including Insurance Certificates and Endorsements to:
David Merk, Director
Environmental Services Department
San Diego Unified Port District
P.O. Box 120488
San Diego, CA 92112-0488
Tel: (619) 686-6254
Fax: (619) 686-6467
Email: dmerk@portofsandiego.org
21.2 The Service Provider's Authorized Representative assigned below has the
authority to authorize changes to the scope, terms and conditions of this
Agreement:
Buck Martin, Director
Chula Vista Nature Center
1000 Gunpowder Point Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91910-1201
Tel: (619) 409-5900
Fax: (619) 409-5910
Email: bmartin@ci.chula-vista.ca.us
.'
I
Service Provider: City of Chula Vista
Board Date: N/A
Requesting Department: Environmental Se0lices
Page 14 or 15
7-19
21.3 Written notification to the other party shall be provided, in advance, of
changes in the name or address of the designated Authorized
Representative.
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT
David Merk
Director, Environmental Services
PORT ATTORNEY
Duane E. Bennett
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Cheryl Cox
Mayor
Approved as to form:
CITY ATTORNEY
Bart Miesfeld, Interim City Attorney
,
,
Service Provider: City of Chula Vista
Board Date: NJA
Requesting Department: Environmental Services
Page 15 of 15
7-20
ATTACHMENT A
SCOPE OF SERVICES
San Diego Unified Port District
The District and Service Provider desire to combine efforts in order to continue an
ongoing Education Program focused on San Diego Bay wildlife and habitats.
Services Provided bv the City:
1) Curriculum and instruction of the Education Program for up to 90 classes. These
classes will consist of approximately 30 third grade classes within the District's
School Partnership Program (Logan, Bayside, Harborside, Silver Gate, Silver
Strand, Perkins and Kimball), and up to, but not exceeding, 60 classes (of all
grades) from other schools within the San Diego Bay watershed.
2) Curriculum and instruction of the teacher-training program for the teachers
participating in the Program.
3) Program administration.
4) Educational staff required to run the Project.
5) Project facilities.
6) Transportation for students and teachers by school bus or trolley to the Chula Vista
I
Nature Center.
7) Implementation of an Effectiveness Assessment consisting of pre- and post-tests to
be administered to all participating students. The pre- and post-tests will be geared
towards the third grade level and consist of at least five multiple-choice questions.
Pre-tests will be mailed to the teachers before the Education Program occurs so that
they can be administered in the classroom. Post-tests will be sent back with the
teachers to be administered in the classroom after the Education Program takes
place. All tests will be returned to the District for scoring and completion of the
Effectiveness Assessment.
8) A short report on the Project, including the numbers of students who participated
and a list of the participating schools.
Attachment A
Service Provider: City of Chura Vista
Board Date: N/A
Requesting Department: Environmental Ser.-ices
Page 1 of 1
7-21
ATTACHMENT B
COMPENSATION & INVOICING
San Diego Unified Port District
I. COMPENSATION:
For the satisfactory performance and completion of the services under this
Agreement, District shall pay Service Provider compensation as set forth
hereunder.
A. Service Provider shall be compensated by District with four lump sum
payments as outlined below for services to be. performed on an annual
basis for four years, totaling $60,000 (Sixty Thousand Dollars) for the life
of the Agreement.
Fiscal Year
2008-2009
2009-2010
2010-2011
2011-2012
Lump Sum Payment
$15,000
$15,000
$15,000
$15,000
II. INVOICING:
A. Payment Documentation. As a prerequisite to payment for services, .
Service Provider shall invoice District annually for services to be
performed.
Service Provider shall include the following information on each invoice
submitted for payment by District, in addition to the information required in
Section I, above:
1) The following certification phrase, with printed name, title and signature
of Service Provider's. project manager or designated representative:
"I certify under penalty of perjury that the above statement is
just and correct according to the terms of Document No.
, and that payment has not been received."
2) Dates of service provided
3) Date of invoice
Attachment 8
Service Provider: City of Chula Vista
Board Date: N/A
Requesting Department: Environmental Services
Page 1 of 2
7-22
4) A unique invoice number
District shall, at its discretion, return to Service Provider, without payment,
any invoice, which has been submitted without the above information and
certification phrase.
B. Invoices shall be mailed to the attention of: Kelly Makley, Environmental
Services Department, P.O. Box 120488, San Diego Unified Port District,
San Diego, CA 92112-0488.
C. Should District contest any portion of an invoice, that portion shall be held
for resolution, but the uncontested balance shall be processed for
payment. District may, at any time, conduct an audit of any and all
records kept by Service Provider for the Services. Any overpayment
discovered in such an audit may be charged against the Service
Provider's future invoices and any retention funds.
D. Service Provider shall submit all invoices within thirty (30) days of
completion of work. Payment will be made to Service Provider within thirty
(30) days after receipt by District of a proper invoice.
,
,
Attachment B
Service Provider: City of Chula Vista
Board Date: N/A
Requesting Department; Environmental Services
Page 2 of2
7-23
By signing this fonm, the authorized agent or broker certifies the following:
(1) The Policy or Poiicies described below have been issued by the noted Insurer(s) [Insurance Company(ies)] to the Insured and
is (are) in force at this time.
(2) As required in the. Insured's Agreement(s) with the District. the poiicies include, or have been endorsed to include, the
coverages or conditions of coverage noted on page 2 of this certificate.
(3) Signed copies of all endorsements issued to effect require coverages or conditions of coverage are attached to this
certificate.
Return this form to: San Diego Unified Port District
Attn: Linda Wikstrom, Audit, Risk Management & Safety
P. O. Box 120488, San Diego, CA 92112-0488
FAX: 866.875-1993
Name and Address of Insured (Contractor or Vendor) SDUPD Agreement Number
This certificate applies to all operations of named Insureds property in
connection with all Agreements between the District and Insured.
CO LTR TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NO. DATES LIMITS
Commencement Date: Each Occurrence:
Commercial General Liability $
[J Occurrence Farm
[J Claims~made Form Expiration Date: General Aggregate:
Retro Date
Q Liquor Liability $
Deductible/SIR: S
Commercial Automobile Liability Commencement Date: Each Occurrence:
0 All Autos Expiration Date: $
0 Owned Autos
0 Non-Owned & Hired Autos ,I
Workers Compensation - Statutory Commencement Date: E.L. Each Accident $
Employer's Liability Expiration Date: E.L. Disease Each Employee $
E.L. Disease Policy Limit $
Professional Liability Commencement Date: Each Claim
0 Claims Made Expiration Date: $
Retro-Active Date
Excess/Umbrella Liability Commencement Date:
Each Occurrence: $
Expiration Date:
General Aggregate:$
CO L TR COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGE BEST'S RATING
A
B
C
D
A. M. Best Financial Ratings of Insurance Companies Affording Coverage Must be A- VII or Better unless Approved in Writing by the District.
Name and Address of Authorized Agent(s) or Broker(s) E-Mail Address:
Phone: Fax Number:
Signature of Authorized Agent(s) or Broker{s)
Date:
EXHIBIT A
CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE
San Diego Unified Port District
ONLY THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE WILL BE ACCEPTED
Exhibit A
Service Provider: City of Chula Vista
Board Date: N/A
Requesting Department: Environmental Sen/ices
Page 1 of2
7-24
ENDORSEMENT NO. EFFECTIVE DATE POLICY NO.
NAMED INSURED:
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF AGREEMENT(S) AND/OR ACTlVITY(IES):
All written Agreements, contracts and leases with the San Diego Unified Port District and/or any and all activities
or work performed on district premises
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT
REQUIRED INSURANCE ENDORSEMENT
All written Agreements, contracts, and leases with the San Diego Unified Port District
and/or any and all activities or work performed on District owned premises.
Notwithstanding any inconsistent statement in the policy to which this endorsement is attached or in
any endorsement now or hereafter attached thereto, it is agreed as follows:
1. The San Diego Unified Port District, its officers, agents, and employees are additional insureds in relation to
those operations. uses, occupations, acts, and activities described generally above, including activities of the
named insured, its officers, agents, employees or invitees, or activities performed on behalf of the named
insured.
2. Insurance under the policy(ies) listed on this endorsement is primary and no other insurance or self-Insured
retention carried by the San Diego Unified Port District will be called upon to contribute to a loss covered by
insurance for the named insured.
3. The policy(ies) listed on this endorsement will apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made
or suit is brought except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability.
4. As respects the policy(ies) listed on this endorsement, with the exception of cancellation due to nonpayment
of premium, thirty (30) days written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, will be given to the San
Diego Unified Port District prior to the effective date of cancellati<Dn, change in coverage, reduction of limits or
non-renewal. In the event of cancellation due to nonpayment of premium, ten (10) days written notice shall be
given.
Except as stated above, and not in contiict with this endorsement, nothing contained herein shall be held to
waive, alter or extend any of the limits, Agreements or exclusions of the policy(ies) to which this endorsement
applies.
(NAME OF INSURANCE COMPANY)
(SIGNATURE OF INSURANCE COMPANY AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE)
MAIL THIS ENDORSEMENT AND NOTICES OF CANCELLATION,
LIMIT REDUCTIONS, AND CHANGES IN COVERAGE TO:
San Diego Unified Port District
Audit, Risk Management & Safety
P.O. Box 120488
San Diego, CA 92112-0488
Exhibit A
Service Provider: City of Chula Vista
Board Date: N/A
Requesting Department Environmental Services
Page 2 of 2
7-25
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
~(~ CITY OF
~-..:s (HUlA VISTA
Jill Y 22, 2008, Item~
ITEM TITLE:
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE AGREEMENT WITH
THE SAt'\! DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT FOR AN
ENDANGERED LIGHT-FOOTED CLAPPER RAIL
PROPAGATION PROGRAM'" THE CHULA VISTA
NATURE CENTER.
RECREATION D~~
CITY MANAGER ~ -
ASSISTAt'\!T CITY 1, AGER =;>'/
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
4/STHS VOTE: YES D NO 0
SUMMARY
Nature Center staff has been working with the San Diego Unified Port District to partner in
the coordination of a propagation program at the Chula Vista Nature Center for the critically
endangered Light-footed Clapper Rail. The Nature Center currently participates in a
breeding program for these birds along with other agencies, including the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service.
ENVIRONlVIENTAL REVIEW
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined
that the project qualifies for a Class 7 categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15307
(Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of Natural Resources) of the State CEQA
Guidelines. Thus, no further environmental review is necessary.
RECOM..IVIENDATION
Council adopts the resolution.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Not applicable.
8-1
JUL Y 22, 2008, Item q
Page 2 of3
DISCUSSION
Nature Center staff has been working with the San Diego Unified Port District (port) to
partner in the coordination of a propagation program at the Chula Vista Nature Center
(CVNC) for the critically endangered Light-footed Clapper Rail. The Nature Center
currently participates in a breeding program for these birds along with other agencies,
including the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
The Light-footed Clapper Rail, Rallus longirostris levipes, is a year-round resident (non-
migratory). Its population has been declining due to the loss of its habitat: coastal salt and
freshwater marshes. It was listed as federally endangered in 1970. The Nature Center
actively participates in a breeding program, which has successfully released over 170
captive-bred birds into the wild.
According to the agreement, the City agrees to the following components of the project at
the Nature Center:
. The CVNC shall maintain a minimum of two breeding pairs of Light-footed Clapper
Rails (rails).
. The CVNC shall continue husbandry, exhibition and breeding of the rail pairs.
. The CVNC shall continue prerelease conditioning, observation and care for all
captive-bred rails by CVNC staff.
a The CVNC shall continue yearly rail surveys in the spring.
a The CVNC shall improve rail-breeding opportunities by deploying and maintaining
. ,
artificial nest structures to assist with breeding success.
. The CVNC shall release young rails into the wild, in conjunction with the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service. Since 2000, the CVNC has released over 170 young rails into
the wild.
a The CVNC shall acknowledge support from the Port and the environmental fund in
publications and during events.
a The CVNC shall provide proof of matching funds.
a Once the project is completed, the CVNC shall make a presentation to the Board of
Port Commissioners, Environmental Committee, and/or Port Environmental
Department Staff.
a The CVNC shall provide written progress reports in January 2009, July 2009,
January 2010, July 2010, January 2011, and a final report in June 2011.
This agreement is the renewal of the ongoing partnership between the Port and the Nature
Center for Clapper Rail breeding. The matching funds described in the agreement currently
exist within the Nature Center budget. Funds currently budgeted include staffing, supplies,
maintenance costs, and animal food costs. In the past, the agreement has been issued on an
annual basis; however, the new proposed agreement provides a three-year term. The Port
will compensate the City with semi-annual payments of $15,000.
8-2
JULv 77 7008 I c'.
L __,_ , tem~
Page 3 of3
DECISION MAKER CONFLICT
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council and has found no property
holdings within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property which is the subject of this
action.
FISCAL IMPACT
The agreement will provide an increase of $30,000 in annual general fund revenue for
Nature Center operations. Actual costs to support the program (such as animal food) are
expected to be minimal and can be absorbed by the approved operating budget.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Agreement Between San Diego Unified Port District and City of Chula Vista for
Light-footed Clapper Rail Propagation Program
Prepared by: Kerry Laube, Program }vfanager, Nature Center
,
!
8-3
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AGREEMENT
WITH THE SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT
FOR A LIGHT-FOOTED CLAPPER RAIL
PROPAGATION PROGRAM AT THE CHULA VISTA
NATURE CENTER.
WHEREAS, the San Diego Unified Port District ("Port") wishes to partner with
the Chula Vista Nature Center in the coordination of a propagation program at the Chula
Vista Nature Center for the critically endangered Light-footed Clapper Rail (Rail); and
WHEREAS, over 170 captive-bred birds have been released into the wild since
the Nature Center established the program in 2002; and
\VHEREAS, the proposed project makes use of the existing breeding program
staff and supplies at the Chula Vista Nature Center, in conjunction with the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service and other like agencies.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista does hereby approve the agreement with the San Diego Unified Port District
and the City of Chula Vista for Light-footed Clapper Rail Propagation Program at the
. J
Chula Vista Nature Center. !
Proposed by
Approved as to form by
Buck Martin
Recreation Director
~~ d- L~ )~~
Bart Miesfeld (/
Interim City Attorney
8-4
THE A IT ACHED AGREEMENT HAS BEEN REVIE 'NED
ANTI APPROVED AS TO FORi\1 BY THE CITY
ATTORi"\!EY'S OFFICE AND WILL BE
FORi\1ALL Y SIGNED UPON APPROVAL BY
THE CITY COUNCIL
.~L~~ (L k~ i-t~
Bart C. Miesfeld (J
Interim City Attorney
Dated:
7//Jh1
I I
Agreement between San Diego Unified Port District and
City of Chula Vista for
Light-Footed Clapper Rail Propa,gation Program
8-5
AGREEMENT BETWEEN
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT
and
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
for
LIGHT-FOOTED CLAPPER RAIL PROPAGATION PROGRAM
The partieslo this Agreement are the SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT (District),
a public corporation and THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA (Service Provider), a municipal
corporation. Both parties agree to the following:
1. SCOPE OF SERVICES: Service Provider shall furnish all technical and
professional labor, and materials to satisfactorily comply with Attachment A,
Scope of Services as requested by District. Service Provider shall keep the
Executive Director of the District or his designated representative informed of the
progress of said services at a[1 times.
i
2. TERM OF AGREEMENT: This Agreement shall commence on July 1, 2008, and
shall terminate on June 30, 2011, subject to earlier termination as provided
below.
3. COMPENSATION: For performance of services rendered pursuant to this
Agreement and as further described in Attachment B, Compensation and
Invoicing; District shall compensate Service Provider based on the following,
subject to the limitation of the maximum expenditure provided herein:
3.1 Maximum Expenditure. The maximum expenditure under this Agreement
shall not exceed $30,000 for each year of services for a total Agreement
amount not to exceed $90,000. Said expenditure shall include without
limitation all sums, charges, reimbursements, costs and expenses.
Service ?rovider: C tV of Chula Visca
Board Date: Ju~e 1 ,'2003
Requescing Depa~tme t: 2nviror-ment~1 Se~~ices
Page 1 of 15
8-6
Service Provider shall not be required to perform further services after
compensation has been expended.
3.2 Lump Sum Payments. District shall pay Service Provider Fifteen
Thousand Dollars ($15,000) semi-annually. As a prerequisite to payment
for services, Service Provider shall invoice District on a semi-annual basis
based on progress reports as described in subparagraph (3.3) below.
Service Provider shall submit one (1) original and one (1) copy of each
statement for payment in the format and containing the information
specified in Exhibits A and B.
3.3 Progress Documentation. Service Provider shall provide District
progress reports in January 2009, July 2009, January 2010, July 2010
January 2011 and a final report in June 2011. Progress reports shall
include a description of work completed, anticipated work for the next
reporting period, percentage of work complete, and the expected
I
completion date for remaining work. I The report shall identify problem
areas and important issues that may affect project cost and/or schedule.
The report shall present actual percent completion versus planned percent
completion.
4. RECORDS: In accordance with generally accepted accounting principles,
Service Provider shall maintain full and complete records of the cost of services
performed under this Agreement. Such records shall be open to inspection of
District at all reasonable times in the City of San Diego and such records shall be
kept for at least three (3) years after the termination of this Agreement.
Such records shall be maintained by Service Provider for a period of three (3)
years after completion of services to be performed under this Agreement or until
Page 2 of 15
Se~ice Provider: City oE Chula Vista
Board Date: June 10, 2008
Reques~ing Depa=tment: Envircnmental Services
8-7
all disputes, appeals, litigation or claims arising from this Agreement have been
resolved, whichever is later.
Service Provider understands and agrees that District, at all times under this
Agreement, has the right to review project documents and work in progress and
to audit financial records, whether or not final, which Service Provider or anyone
else associated with the work has prepared or which relate to the work which
Service Provider is performing for District pursuant to this Agreement regardless
of whether such records have previously been provided to District. Service
Provider shall provide District at Service Provider's expense a copy of all such
records within five (5) working days of a written request by District. District's right
shall also include inspection at reasonable times of the Service Provider's office
or facilities, which are engaged in the performance of services pursuant to this
Agreement. Service Provider shall, at no cost to District furnish reasonable
facilities and assistance for such review and audit. Service Provider's failure to
provide the records within the time requested shall preclude Service Provider
,
from receiving any compensation due under this Agreement until such
documents are provided.
5. SERVICE PROVIDER'S SUB-CONTRACTORS: It may be necessary for
Service Provider to sub-contract for the performance of certain technical services
or other services for Service Provider to perform and complete the required
services; provided, however, all Service Provider's sub-contractors shall be
subject to prior written approval by District. The Service Provider shall remain
responsible to District for any and all services and obligations required under this
Agreement, whether performed by Service Provider or Service Provider's sub-
contractors. Service Provider shall compensate each Service Provider's sub.
contractors in the time periods required by law. Any Service Provider's sub-
contractors employed by Service Provider shall be independent Service
Providers and not agents of District. Service Provider shall insure that Service
Serrice Provider: City of Chula Vista
Board Date: June 10, 2008
Requesting Department: Environmental Services
Page 3 of 15
8-8
Provider's sub-contractors satisfy all substantive requirements for the work set
forth by this Agreement, including insurance and indemnification.
Listed below are the firms that the District has approved as Service Provider's
sub-contractors to provide services under this Agreement:
NAME OF FIRM
TYPE OF SERVICES PROVIDED
No subcontractors will be used without the written consent of District
Service Provider shall also include a clause in its Agreements with Service
Provider's sub-contractors which reserves the right, during the performance of
this Agreement and for a period of three (3) years following termination of this
Agreement, for a District representative to audit any cost, compensation or
settlement resulting from any items set forth in this Agreement. This clause shall
also require Service Provider's sub-contractors to retain all necessary records for
a period of three (3) years after completion of services to be performed under this
.1
Agreement or until all disputes, appeals, litigation or claims arising from this
Agreement have been resolved, whichever is later.
6. COMPLIANCE: In performance of this Agreement, Service Provider and Service
Provider's sub-contractors shall comply with the California Fair Employment and
Housing Act, the American with Disabilities Act, and all other applicable federal,
state, and local laws prohibiting discrimination, including without limitation, laws
prohibiting discrimination because of age, ancestry, color, creed, denial of family
and medical care leave, disability, marital status, medical condition, national
origin, race, religion, sex, or sexual orientation. Service Provider shall comply
with the prevailing wage provisions of the Labor Code, and the Political Reform
Act provisions of the Government Code, as applicable.
Se~rice Provider: Cicy of Chula Vista
Board Date: June 10, 2008
Requestir.g De~artment: Envircnmental Se~rices
Page 4 of 15
8-9
Service Provider shall comply with all Federal and State laws, and district
Ordinances and Regulations applicable to the performance of services under this
Agreement as exist now or as may be added or amended.
7. INDEPENDENT ANALYSIS: Service Provider shall provide the services required
by this Agreement and arrive at conclusions with respect to the rendition of
information, advice or recommendations, independent of the control and direction
of District, other than normal contract monitoring provided, however, Service
Provider shall possess no authority with respect to any District decision beyond
rendition of such information, advice, or recommendations.
8. ASSIGNMENT: This is a personal services Agreement between the parties and
Service Provider shall not assign or transfer voluntarily or involuntarily any of its
rights, duties, or obligations under this Agreement without the express written
consent of Executive Director (President/CEO) of District in each instance.
,I
9. INDEMNIFICATION: ,I
9.1 Indemnification for Non-Professional Services: To the fullest extent
provided by law with respect to all liability except liability for Professional
Services, covered under Section 9.2, the Service Provider agrees to
defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless District, its agents, officers
and employees, from and against any claim, demand, action, proceeding,
suit or liability for damages, costs (including reasonable attorneys' fees) or
expenses for damages to property or the loss of use thereof or injuries or
death to any person (including Service Provider's employees), caused by,
arising out of or related to the performance of, Service Provider as
provided in the Scope of Services, or failure to act by Service Provider, its
officers, agents, and employees. The Service Provider's duty to defend,
indemnify, protect, and hold harmless shall not include any claims or
Se=vice Provider: City of Chula Vista
3ca=~ Date: June 10,-2008
Requesti~g Depa=tmen~: Env~=onme~~al Se~~ices
Page 5 of 15
8-10
liabilities arising from the active negligence, sole negligence or willful
misconduct of District, its agents, officers, or employees.
The Service Provider further agrees that the indemnification, including the
duty to defend District, requires the Service Provider to pay reasonable
attorneys' fees and costs District incurs that are associated with enforcing
the indemnification provision, and defending any claims, demands, or
liabilities arising from the services of the Service Provider performed
pursuant to this Agreement.
District may, at its own election, conduct its defense, or participate in the
defense of any claim demand related in any way to the Agreement. If
District chooses at its own election to conduct its own defense, participate
in its own defense or obtain independent legal counsel in defense of any
claim, demand or liability related to Service Provider's Scope of Services,
the Service Provider agrees to pay the reasonable value of attorneys' fees
"
and all of District's costs associated witli its defense.
9.2 Indemnification for Professional Services: To the fullest extent
provided by law, the Service Provider agrees to defend, indemnify, protect
and hold harmless District, its agents, officers and employees from and
against any and all claims, demands, liability for any damages, costs
(including reasonable attorneys' fees and costs), or expenses, arising from
the actions or omissions of the Service Provider as provided in the Scope
of Services. The Service Provider's duty to defend, indemnify, protect,
and hold harmless shall not include any claims or liabilities arising from the
active negligence, sole negligence or willful misconduct of District, its
agents, officers, or employees.
Service Provider: City of Chula Vista
Bear:: Date: June 10, 2008
Requesting Department: Environmental SerJices
Page 6 of 15
8-11
The Service Provider further agrees that the indemnification, including the
duty to defend District, requires the Service Provider to pay reasonable
attomeys' fees and costs District incurs that are associated with enforcing
the indemnification provision, and defending any claims, demands, or
liabilities arising from the services of the Service Provider performed
pursuant to this Agreement.
District may, at its own election, conduct its defense, or participate in the
defense of any claim or demand related in any way to the Agreement. If
District chooses at its own election to conduct its own defense, participate
in its own defense or obtain independent legal counsel in defense of any
claim, demand or liability related to the Scope of Services, the Service
Provider agrees to pay the reasonable value of attorneys' fees and all of
District's costs associated with its defense.
10. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS: Service Provider shall at all times during the
I
term of this Agreement maintain, at its expehse, the following minimum levels
and types of insurance:
10.1 Commercial Generai Liability (including, without limitation, Contractuai
Liability, Personal and Advertising Injury, and Products/Completed
Operations) coverages, with coverage at least as broad as Insurance
Services Office Commercial General Liability Coverage (occurrence Form
CG 0001) with limits no less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) per
occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage.
a. The deductible or self-insured retention on this Commercial
General Liability shall not exceed $5,000 unless District has
approved of a higher deductible or self-insured retention in writing.
Service P~ovider: City of Chula Vista
Board Date: June 10,-2008
Requesting Department: Environmental Services
Page 7 of 15
8-12
b. The Commercial General Liability policy shall be endorsed to
include the District; its agents, officers and employees as additional
insureds in the form as required by the District. An exemplar
endorsement is attached (Exhibit A, Certificate of Insurance).
c. The coverage provided to the District, as an additional insured,
shall be primary.
10.2 Commercial Automobile Liability (Owned, Scheduled, Non-Owned, or
Hired Automobiles) written at least as broad as Insurance Services Office
Form Number CA 0001 with limits of no less than two million dollars
($2,000,000) per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
10.3 Worker's Compensation in statutory required limits and Employer's
Liability in an amount of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) per
accident for bodily injury or disease. This policy shall be endorsed to
include a waiver of subrogation endorsement.
,
,
10.4 Professional Liability Insurance in the amount of $1,000,000 per claim and
$1,000,000 aggregate.
At the end of the agreement period, Consultant shall maintain, at it's own
expense, continued Professional Liability insurance of not less than five
(5) years, in an amount no less than the amount required pursuant to this
Agreement
a. Alternately, if the existing Professional Liability is terminated during
the above referenced five-year period, Consultant shall maintain at
its own expense, "tail" coverage in the same minimum amount as
set forth in this paragraph.
Page 8 of 15
Ser/ice ~rovicer: City ~f Chula Vis~a
Board Date: June 10, .2008
Requesting De?art~ent: Environmental Se~Eices
8-13
b. All coverages under this section shall be effective as of the effective
date of this Agreement or provide for a retroactive date of
placement that coincides with the effective date of this Agreement.
Service Provider shall furnish District with certificates of insurance coverage for
all the policies described above upon execution of this Agreement and upon
renewal. of any of these policies. A Certificate of Insurance in the form
acceptable to the District, an exemplar Certificate of Insurance is attached as
Exhibit A and made a part hereof, evidencing the existence of the necessary
insurance policies and endorsements required shall be kept on file with the
District. Except in the event of cancellation for non-payment of premium, in
which case notice shall be 10 days, all such certificates shall indicate that the
insurer must notify District in writing at least 30 days in advance of any change
in, or cancellation of, coverage. Service Provider shall also provide notice to
District prior to cancellation of, or any change in, the stated coverages of
insurance.
"
The Certificate of Insurance must delineate the name of the insurance company
affording coverage and the policy number(s) specifically referenced to each type
of insurance, either on the fact of the certificate or on an attachment thereto. If
an addendum setting forth multiple insurance companies or underwriters is
attached to the certificate of insurance, the addendum shall indicate the
insurance carrier or underwriter who is the lead carrier and the applicable policy
number for the CGL coverage.
Furnishing insurance specified herein by the District will in no way relieve or limit
any responsibility or obligation imposed by the Agreement or otherwise on
Service Provider or Service Provider's sub-contractors or any tier of Service
Provider's sub-contractors. District shall reserve the right to obtain complete
copies of any of the insurance policies required herein.
SerJice Provider: city of Chula Vista
Board Date; June 10,+2008
Requesting Depa=tmenc; ~nvircnmental SerJ~Ce5
Page 9 of 15
8-14
11. ACCURACY OF SERVICES: Service Provider shall be responsible for the
technical accuracy of its services and documents resulting therefrom and District
shall not be responsible for discovering deficiencies therein. Service Provider
shall correct such deficiencies without additional compensation. Furthermore,
Service Provider expressly agrees to reimburse District for any costs incurred as
a result of such deficiencies. Service Provider shall make decisions and carry
out its responsibilities hereunder in a timely manner and shall bear all costs
incident thereto so as not to delay the District, the project, or any other person
related to the project, including the Service Provider or its agents, employees, or
subcontractors.
12. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR: Service Provider and any agent or employee
of Service Provider shall act in an independent capacity and not as officers or
employees of District. The District assumes no liability for the Service Provider's
actions and performance, nor assumes responsibility for taxes, bonds, payments
or other commitments, implied or explicit by 'ot for the Service Provider. Service
Provider shall not have authority to act as an agent on behalf of the District
unless specifically authorized to do so in writing. Service Provider acknowledges
that it is aware that because it is an independent contractor, District is making no
deductions from its fee and is not contributing to any fund on its behalf. Service
Provider disclaims the right to any fee or benefits except as expressly provided
for in this Agreement.
13. ADVICE OF COUNSEL: The parties agree that they are aware that they have
the right to be advised by counsel with respect to the negotiations, terms and
conditions of this Agreement, and that the decision of whether or not to seek the
advice of counsel with respect to this Agreement is a decision which is the sole
responsibility of each of the parties hereto. This Agreement shall not be
construed in favor of or against either party by reason of the extent to which each
Service Provider: City of Chula Vista
Beard Dat~: June 10,"2003
~eques~ing Depa=~merr~: Environmental Ser.ices
Page 10 of 15
8-15
party participated in the drafting of the Agreement. The formation, interpretation
and performance of this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of
California.
14. INDEPENDENT REVIEW: Each party hereto declares and represents that in
entering into this Agreement it has relied and is relying solely upon its own
judgment, belief and knowledge of the nature, extent, effect and consequence
relating thereto. Each party further declares and represents that this Agreement
is being made without reliance upon any statement or representation not
contained herein of any other party, or any representative, agent or attorney of
any other party.
15. INTEGRATION AND MODIFICATION: This Agreement contains the entire
Agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations,
discussion, obligations and rights of the parties in respect of each other regarding
the subject matter of this Agreement. There is no other written or oral
"
understanding between the parties. No modifications, amendment or alteration
of this Agreement shall be valid unless it is in writing and signed by the parties
hereto.
16. OWNERSHIP OF RECORDS: Any and all materials and documents, including
without limitation drawings, specifications, computations, designs, plans,
investigations and reports, prepared by Service Provider pursuant to this
Agreement, shall be the property of District from the moment of their preparation
and the Service Provider shall deliver such materials and documents to District at
the Don L. Nay Port Administration Building (located at 3165 Pacific Highway,
San Diego, California 92101) whenever requested to do so by District. However,
Service Provider shall have the right to make duplicate copies of such materials
and documents for its own file, or other purposes as may be expressly authorized
in writing by District. Said materials and documents prepared or acquired by
Page 11 of 15
Ser~ice Provide=: City of Chula Vista
Board Date: June 10, 2008
Requesting !Jepart:me~':; ::;r,:/i::"c:,~men':3.1 Ser<.rices
8-16
Service Provider pursuant to this Agreement (including any duplicate copies kept
by the Service Provider) shall not be shown to any other public or private person
or entity, except as authorized by District. Service Provider shall not disclose to
any other public or private person or entity any information regarding the
activities of District, except as expressly authorized in writing by District.
17. TERMINATION: In addition to any other rights and remedies allowed by law, the
Executive Director (President/CEO) of District may terminate this Agreement at
any time with or without cause by giving thirty (30) days written notice to Service
Provider of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof. In that
event, all finished or unfinished documents and other materials shall at the option
of District be delivered by Service Provider to the Don L. Nay Port Administration
Building (located at 3165 Pacific Highway, San Diego, California 92101).
Termination of this Agreement by Executive Director (President/CEO) as
provided in this paragraph shall release District from any further fee or claim
hereunder by Service Provider other than the fee earned for services which were
I
performed prior to termination but not yet paid. Said fee shall be calculated and
based on the schedule as provided in this Agreement.
18. DISPUTE RESOLUTION: If a dispute arises out of or relates to this Agreement,
or the alleged breach thereof, and is not settled by direct negotiation or such
other procedures as rnay be agreed, and if such dispute is not otherwise time
barred, the parties agree to first try in good faith to settle the dispute amicably by
mediation administered at San Diego, California, by the American Arbitration
Association, or by such other provider as the parties may mutually select, prior to
initiating any litigation or arbitration. Notice of any such dispute must be filed in
writing with the other party within a reasonable time after the dispute has arisen.
Any resultant Agreements shall be documented and may be used as the basis
for an amendment or directive as appropriate.
Service Provider: City of Chula Vista
Board Date: June 10, 2008
Requesting Depa=tmen~: En~iro~menta~ Se~Jices
Page 12 of 15
8-17
If mediation is unsuccessful in settling all disputes that are not otherwise time
barred, and if both parties agree, any still unresolved disputes may be resolved
by arbitration administered at San Diego, California, by the American Arbitration
Association, or by such other provider as the parties may mutually select,
provided, however, that the Arbitration Award shall be non-binding and advisory
only. Any resultant Agreements shall be documented and rnay be used as the
basis for an amendrnent or directive as appropriate. On demand of the arbitrator
or any party to this Agreement, sub-contractor and all parties bound by this
arbitration provision agree to join in and become parties to the arbitration
proceeding.
The foregoing mediation and arbitration procedures notwithstanding, all claim
filing requirements of the Agreement documents, the California Government
Code, and otherwise, shall remain in full force and effect regardless of whether or
not such dispute avoidance and resolution procedures have been implemented,
and the time periods within which claims are to be filed or presented to the
I
District Clerk as required by said Agreement, Government Code, and otherwise,
shall not be waived, extended or tolled thereby. If a claim is not timely filed or
presented, such claim shall be time barred and the above dispute avoidance and
resolution procedures, whether or not implemented or then pending, shall
likewise be time barred as to such claims.
19. PAYMENT BY DISTRICT: Payment by the District pursuant to this Agreement
does not represent that the District has made a detailed examination, audit, or
arithmetic verification of the documentation submitted for payment by the Service
Provider, made an exhaustive inspection to check the quality or quantity of the
services performed by the Service Provider, made an examination to ascertain
how or for what purpose the Service Provider has used money previously paid on
account by the District, or constitute a waiver of claims against the Service
Provider by the District. The District may in its sole discretion withhold payments
Page 13 of 15
Service Provider: City of Chula Vista
Board Date: June 10,"2003
Requesting Department: Environmental Services
8-18
or seek reimbursement from the Service Provider for expenses, miscellaneous
charges, or other liabilities or increased costs incurred or anticipated by the
District which are the fault of or as result of work performed or negligent conduct.
by or on behalf of the Service Provider. Upon five (5) day written notice to the
Service Provider, the District shall have the right to estimate the amount of
expenses, miscellaneous charges, or other liabilities or increased costs and to
cause the Service Provider to pay the same; and the amount due the Service
Provider under this Agreement or the whole or so much of the money due or to
become due to the Service Provider under this Agreement as may be considered
reasonably necessary by the District shall be retained by the District until such
expenses, miscellaneous charges, or other liabilities or increased costs shall
have been corrected or otherwise disposed of by the Service Provider at no
expense to the District. If such expenses, miscellaneous charges, or other
liabilities or increased costs are not corrected or otherwise disposed of at no
expense to the District prior to completion date of the Agreement, the District is
authorized to pay for such expenses, miscellaneous charges, or other liabilities
I
or increased costs from the amounts retairied as outlined above or to seek
reimbursement of same from the Service Provider. It is the express intent of the
parties to this Agreement to protect the District from loss because of conduct by
or on behalf of the Service Provider.
20. CAPTiONS: The captions by which the paragraphs of this Agreement are
identified are for convenience only and shall have no effect upon its
interpretation.
21. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S SIGNATURE: It is an express condition of this
Agreement that said Agreement shall not be complete nor effective until signed
by either the Executive Director (President/CEO) or Authorized Designee on
behalf of the District and by Authorized Representative of the Service Provider.
Service !?~ovider: Citv of Chula vis:::a
30ard Da~e: June 10, .200B
~equesting Department; Environmental Services
Page 14 of 15
8-19
21.1 Submit all correspondence, including invoices, regarding this Agreement,
including Insurance Certificates and Endorsements to:
E. David Merk, Director
Environmental Services Department
San Diego Unified Port District
P.O. Box 120488
San Diego, CA 92112-0488
Tel. 619-686-7239
Fax: 619-686-6467
Email: dmerk@portofsandiego.org
21.2 The Service Provider's Authorized Representative assigned below has the
authority to authorize changes to the scope, terms and conditions of this
Agreement:
Buck Martin, Director
Chula Vista Nature Center
1000 Gunpowder Point Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91910-1201
Tel (619) 409-5900
Fax: (619) 409-5910 ,
Email: BMartin@ci.chula-~ista.ca.us
21.3 Written notification to the other party shall be provided, in advance, of
changes in the name or address of the designated Authorized
Representative.
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
E. David Merk
Director, Environmental Services
Cheryl Cox
Mayor
PORT ATTORNEY
CITY ATTORNEY
Approved as to form
Duane E. Bennett
Bart Miesfeld, Interim City Attorney
Service Provider: Citv of C~~la vi$~a
Bca=d Date: J~ne 10, .2008
Requesting Department: Environmental Services
Page 15 0115
8-20
ATTACHMENT A
SCOPE OF SERVICES
San Diego Unified Port District
The District and the City of Chula Vista's Chula Vista Nature Center (CVNC) desire to
combine efforts in order to continue an ongoing Light-Footed Clapper Rail Propagation
Program. To continue the success of this program:
1) The CVNC shall maintain a minimum of two breeding pairs of Light-footed Clapper
Rails (rails).
2) The CVNC shall continue husbandry, exhibition and breeding of the rail pairs.
3) The CVNC shall continue prerelease conditioning, observation and care for all
captive-bred rails by CVNC staff.
4) The CVNC shall continue yearly rail surveys in the spring.
5) The CVNC shall improve rail breeding opportunities by deploying and maintaining
artificial nest structures to assist with breeding success.
6) The CVNC shall release young rails back into the wild, in conjunction with the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service. Since 2000, the CVNC has released over 170 young rails
into the wild.
,
7) The CVNC shall acknowledge support from the District and the environmental fund
in publications and during events.
8) The CVNC shall provide proof of matching funds.
9) Once the project is completed, Service Provider shall make a presentation to the
Board of Port Commissioners, Environmental Committee, and/or District
Environmental Department Staff.
1 O)Service Provider shall provide District written progress reports in January 2009, July
2009, January 2010, July 2010 January 2011 and a final report in June 2011.
Attachment A
Service Provider: City of Chula Vista
Board Date: June 10, 2008
Requesting Department Environmental Services
Page 1 of 1
8-21
ATTACHMENT B
COMPENSATION & INVOICING
San Diego Unified Port District
I. COMPENSATION:
For the satisfactory performance and completion of the services under this Agreement, District
shall pay Service Provider compensation as set forth hereunder.
Service Provider shall be compensated and reimbursed by District in lump sum payments of
$15,000 each on the basis of invoices submitted semi-annually with the required progress
report.
II. INVOICING:
A. Service Provider shall include the following information on each invoice submitted for
payment by District, in addition to the information required in Section I, above, and
Section 3 of the Agreement:
1) The following certification phrase, with printed name, title and signature of Service
Provider's project manager or designated representative:
"1 certify under penalty of perjury that the above statement is just and correct
according to the terms of Document No. , and that payment has not
been received."
2) Dates of service provided
3) Date of invoice
4) A unique invoice number
5) Progress Report for the previous half year
District shall, at its discretion, return to Service Provider, without payment, any invoice,
which has been submitted without the above information and certification phrase.
B. Invoices shall be mailed to the attention of: E. David Merk, Environmental Services
Department, P.O. Box 120488, San Diego Unified Port District, San Diego, CA 92112-
0488.
C. Service Provider shall indicate on last invoice submitted for payment: FINAL INVOICE.
Page 1 of 1
Attachment B
Service Provider: City of Chula Vista
Board Date: June 10, 2003
Reques~ing De~art~ent: ~nvironmen~al Se~~ices
8-22
EXHIBIT A
CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE
San Diego Unified Port District
By signing this form, the authorized agent or broker certifies the following:
(1) The Policy or Policies described below have been issued by the noted Insurer(s) [Insurance Company(les)] to the Insured and is
(are) in force at this time.
(2) As required in the Insured's Agreement(s) with the District, the policies include, or have been endorsed to include, the
coverages or conditions of coverage noted on page 2 of this certificate.
(3) Signed copies of all endorsements issued to effect require coverages or conditions of coverage are attached to this
certificate.
Return this form to: San Diego Unified Port District
Alln: Linda Wikstrom, Audit, Risk Management & Safety
P. O. Box 120488, San Diego, CA 92112-0488
FAX: 866-875-1993
Name and Address of Insured (Contractor or Vendor) SOUPO Agreement Number
This certificate applies to all operations of named insureds property in
connection with all Agreements between the District and Insured.
CO LTR TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NO. DATES LIMITS
Commercial General Liabilitv Commencement Date: Each Occurrence:
u Occurrence Form
- Claims-made Form $
Retro Date
D Liquor Liability Expiration Date: General Aggregate:
Deductible/SIR: $ $
Commercial Automobile Liability Commencement Date: Each Occurrence:
0 All Autos Expiration Date; $
0 Owned Autos i
~ ,
Workers Compensation - Statutory Commencement Date: E.L. Each Accident $
Employer's Liability Expiration Date: E.L. Disease Each Employee $
E.L. Disease Polio' Limit $
Professional Liability Commencement Date: Each Claim
0 Claims Made Expiration Date: $
Retro-Active Date
Excess/Umbrella Liability Commencement Date:
Each Occurrence: $
Expiration Date:
General Aggregate:$
CO LTR COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGE BEST'S RATING
A
B
C
D
A. M. Best Financial Ratings of Insurance Companies Affording Coverage Must be A. VII or Better unless Approved in Writing by the District.
Name and Address of Authorized Agent(s) or Broker(s) E-Mail Address:
Phone: Fax Number:
Signature of Authorized Agent(s) or Broker(s)
Date:
ONLY THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE WILL BE ACCEPTED
Exhibit: A
Se:r-vice Prov.:.d.er: C:.t:v of Chula Vista
Board Date: June 10,"2008
Requesting Cepartment: Environmental Serfices
Page 1 of 2
8-23
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT
REQUIRED INSURANCE ENDORSEMENT
ENDORSEMENT NO. EFFECTIVE DATE POLICY NO.
NAMED INSURED:
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF AGREEMENT(S) AND/OR ACTIVITY(IES):
All written Agreements, contracts and leases with the San Diego Unified Port District and/or any and ali activities
or work performed on district premises
All written Agreements, contracts, and leases with the San Diego Unified Port District
and/or any and all activities or work performed on District owned premises.
Notwithstanding any inconsistent statement in the poiicy to which this endorsement is attached or in
any endorsement now or hereafter attached thereto, it is agreed as follows:
1. The San Diego Unified Port District, its officers, agents, and employees are additional insureds in relation to
those operations, uses, occupations, acts, and activities described generally above, including activities of the
named insured, its officers, agents, employees or invitees, or activities performed on behalf of the named
insured.
2. Insurance under the policy(ies) listed on this endorsement is primary and no other insurance or self-insured
retention carried by the San Diego Unified Port District will be called upon to contribute to a loss covered by
insurance for the named insured.
3. The policy(ies) listed on this endorsement will apply separateiy to each insured against whom claim is made
or suit is brought except with respect to the limits of the insurer's ligbilily.
4. As respects the policy(ies) listed on this endorsement, with thJ exception of cancellation due to nonpayment
of premium, thirty (30) days written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, will be given to the San
Diego Unified Port District prior to the effective date of cancellation, change in coverage, reduction of limits or
non-renewal. In the event of cancellation due to nonpayment of premium, ten (10) days written notice shall be
given.
Except as stated above, and not in conflict with this endorsement, nothing contained herein shall be held to
waive, alter or extend any of the limits, Agreements or exclusions of the policy(ies) to which this endorsement
applies.
(NAME OF INSURANCE COMPANY)
(SIGNATURE OF INSURANCE COMPANY AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE)
MAIL THIS ENDORSEMENT AND NOTICES OF CANCELLATION,
LIMIT REDUCTIONS, AND CHANGES IN COVERAGE TO:
San Diego Unified Port District
Audit, Risk Management & Safety
P.O. Box 120488
San Diego, CA 92112-0488
Page 2 of 2
Exhibit A
Serrice Provider: City of Chula Vista
aoa~c Date: June 10, 2008
Requesting Departmenc; Envircnmental SerJices
8-24
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
~If~ CITY OF
~ (HULA VISTA
07/22/2008
Item '1
ITEM TITLE:
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING At"J AGREEMENT
WITH THE COUNTY OF SAt"J DIEGO PROBATION
DEPARTMENT FOR THE PROVISION OF WORK
CREWS UNTIL MAY 30, 2009 AND AUTHORlZING THE
PURCHASING AGENT TO APPROVE AND EXECUTE
AMENDMENTS TO THE AGREEMENT EXTENDING
THE TER1\1f FOR AN ADDITIONAL FIVE ONE-YEAR
PERIODS
REVIEWED BY:
DIRECTOR OF PUBLI9 WORKS ~ &b.
CITY MANAGER /t!IIY'- ~J
ASSIST ANT CIyfMANAb~'I
SUBMITTED BY:
4/5THS VOTE: YES
NO X
SUMMARY
The San Diego County Probation Department administers and operates work camps in
eastern San Diego County. Work crews of 8 to 12 low security inmates, closely supervised
by an Assistant Deputy Probation Officer, are available to government entities to perform
labor intensive maintenance projects such as weed abatement, culvert cleaning, litter patrol,
park maintenance, and brush abatement. COlillcil approved Resolution 13293, on September
20, 1987 to contract work crews with the San Diego County Probation Department. Since
that resolution, work crews have been utilized for labor in Open Space and Community
Facility Districts, Streets, Wastewater and Parks sections.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed actiVity for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined
that the activity is not a "Project" as defined under Section 15378(b)(2) of the State
CEQA Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA
Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is
necessary.
9-1
07/22/2008, [leml
Page 2 of2
RECOiVIMENDATION
Council adopt the resolution.
BOARDS/COMJ\USSION RECOMMENDATION
Not applicable.
DISCUSSION
The COlll1ty Probation Department provides work crews at a cost below other private
contract services utilized by the City. This value has enabled City staff to augment service in
Departments with limited labor resources and Open Space Districts where budgets are
restricted due to failed ballot measures as well as areas requiring additional brush and weed
abatement. Annual spending in the various Departments and Open Space Districts is
approximately $150,000. The Purchasing Agent would be given the authority to renew
additional annual contracts with the COlll1ty in the future.
DECISION MAKER CONFLICT
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council and has found a conflict
exists, in that Councilmember McCann has property holdings within 500 feet of the
boundaries of the property, which is the subject of this action.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no direct fiscal impact to the General Flll1d from approving this resolution in that
funds expended for this contract are maintained within existing General Flll1d budgets
and Special Tax Assessment District budgets. Pl\rchase orders will be issued as
authorized departmental requests are received.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Prior Resolution
B. Renewed Agreement from 2006
C. New Proposed Agreement for FY 2009
9-2
Attachment A
RESOLUT ION NO. 13293
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA APPROVING AMENDED AGREEMENT BETWEEN .THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AND THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO PROBATION
DEPARTMENT TO CONTRACT FOR INMATE WORK CREWS TO PERFORM
PARK MAINTENANCE PROJECTS, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
EXECUTE SAID AMENDMENT
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Ci ty Council of
the City of Chula Vista that that certain Amended Agreement
between THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a municipal corporation, and THE
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, Probation Department, to contract for inmate
work crews to perform park maintenance projects, dated the 19th
day of October, 1987, a copy of which is attached hereto and
incorporated herein, the same as though fully set forth herein
be, and the same is hereby approved.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
Chula vista be, and he is hereby authorized and directed to
execute said amendment for and on .behalf of the City of Chula
vis ta .
Presented by
,
.1
Approved as to form by
~q:~
Manuel A. Mollinedo, Director
of Parks and Recreation
3457a
9-3
.
AGPEEMENT
'Ihis Agreement, made and entered into this _ 20 tlL day of October I 1987,
by and between the em OF CEU"IA v:r.:,~_, hereinafter refa.'"TEd to as the City of
Chula Vista, and the COJNI'Y OF SAN Dnx:;Q, hereinaf'"...er referre:l. to as "County".
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, the County is authorized to require imnatesjwards to perfonn
work under Sections 1203.1, 4017 and 4014.2 of the Penal Cede, sections 25359
and 36904 of the Government Cede, and Secti~s 730, 731, 731.5 and 883 of the
Welfare and Institutions Cede.
WHEREAS, the city of Chula vista has responsibility for the operation ar.d
mai.'1tenance of Parks and Open Space Lands , and desires to =rrtrct
with the County for the supplying of certain services;
Ncm, THERE."DRE, it is mutually agreed as follows:
1. Upon request of t.1;e City of Chula Vw..a and at ti.'lleS that <L-re
mutually agreeable to the city of Chula vista and County, County shall supply
the he...reinaft.er des=ibed ,,-ark c:re<.v"S to perfoIjIn work for the City of Chula
vista. The city of Chula vista anticipates that the work will =nsist
primarily of cleaning trash and weeds fram along roadway, and general cl~'1-up
and sweeping.
2. The city of Chula vista agrees to reilnburse County for
administrative =sts .i.na=ed in the a:mcunt of $260 a day for each full crew.
A full crew is designated at 12 or more persons for 8 hours.
3. The city of Chula vista shall be resp:>nsible to the extent provided
by law for injury to inmates or public se...."'"Vice workers or County employees
caused by intentional acts or negligence of the City of Chula Vista I S
personnel or by dangerous =r.di tiors on the City of Chula vista I s property.
The City of Chula vista shall hold County hannless fram liability or daniages
resulting fram property damage or pe...rsonal injury to any pe...rson caused by said
intentional acts, negligence or dangerous =nditions.
4. COUnty shall be responsible to the extent: provided by law for
property damage or injury to the city of Chula vista 1 s employees = members of
the gena.>al public who are utilizing the City of Chula vista's facilities when
suc.1; da"'!lage or inju..ry is caused by tbe intentional acts or negligence of
inmates or County errployees or public service workers. County shall hold the
City of Chula vista h.a.>1lIless from liability or damages resultirq from property
damage or personal injury to any person caused by said intentional acts or
neglige.'1Ge .
9-4
;" ~
, ,., '1 r
'~'rc,../
-2-
5. The city of Chula vista sr>..all provide a lead !===n to desigI'ate
work sites, give directions as to work perfo= and provide assistance and
entry to the grounds for the inmate ~ and Adult Institutions creN
.supervisors .
6. County shall provide inmate laJ:;or from the Probation Depa..--bnent' s
Adult Institutions or the l?tJblic service Prc:gram in a manageable creN size.
Adult Institutions r staff shall be responsible for the actual and direct
supervision and security of inmates or public service workers in carrying out
the work L'lStructions.
7 . In providing such work crews, County shall provide and be responsible
for the follcvling: .
a. Provide the p= ntmlber of staff to ac=nnanv and
supervise inlnates. - -
b. Have full responsibility for the custody and supervision
of the work creN.
c. Provide necessary tra'1Sp:lrtation.
8. 'Ir,e County rec::gnizes no workmen 's =mpensation liability for
inmatesjwa.-rds who are not involved in fire suppression activities.
9 . All work to be perfonned will be of such nature as to not supplant
work perfonned by regular employees of the CitY of Chula vista.
10. County shall invoice the City of Chula vista cin a monthly basis for
any re:iJnburseIr.ent due unr::ler the terms of this Agraerrent.
n. '!he city of Chula Vista will notify eounty at least two weeks in
advance when work crews are needed, a.-d COUl"lty will schedule VIOrk =ews on an
as available basis.
12. This agro...ement shall became effective October 20, 1987 ard shall
remain in effect: until amended by nutual =nsent of the parties hereto or
tenninated by either of the parties by giving fifteen (15) days notice in
wTitLT1g .
ill WI'INESS WHEREOF, t.'1e duly authorized officials of w.e parties hereunto
have, in their representative capacities, set their hands as of the date first
hereinabove written.
OJUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
THE CITY OF Ch1lIA VISTA
~ w, t~~
CECIL H. STEPPE
Chief Probation Officer
Ara R ex
9-5
I '?.. .; c,
i Jd.'-)")
ADOPTED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
1...JLA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 20th
day of
October
/9 A7 . by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES: Coune i 1 members McCandliss, Cox, Moore, Nader, !'.alcolm
NAYES; Counei 1 members None
ABSTAIN: Counei lmembers None
ASSENT: Counei 1 members None
~}.~
~ . ~ ' of Ih. Cit; '.~, Ch"" V;,I,
ATTEST . ~ /?(? ~
t/ City Clerk
~ . E OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
)
) ss.
)
,I
, )
/'
I, JENNIE M. FULASZ, CMC, CITY CLERK of the City of Chula Vista, California,
DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the aoove and foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of
RESOLUTION NO. 13293
,and thot the some has not been amended or repealed.
DATED
~~,~
~,"".""~-:-::"'"
'-', ~ ,.-,,:.,., ,~. "1ij;;l
~:~..., .
. .
~
enY Of
CHUtA VaSfA
City Clerk
C(-660
9-6
Attachment B
VINCE.NT J.IAl=ltA
CHIEr: PFlQB,.l..T10N OFfiCER
(858)514-3148
FAX: (858) 514-3121
DEPARTMENT OF PROBATION
POST OFFICE BOX 23597, SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92-:93-3597
April 26, 2006
City of Chula Vista Public Works
PO Box 1087
Chula Vista, CA 91912
RE: SAN DIEGO C01.JNTY PROBATION DEP ARTMENT WORK CREW
Dear MS. JULIE LINDSAY,
On June 13,2006, the Probation Department will request the County Board of
Supervisors to approve changes in various fees allei charges for L~e provision ofProb2.tion
services. Included in this request is an incre2.Se from $364 to $414 per crew for the daily
fee charged to public agencies to recover the cost of supervision and supplies for public
service work crews.
,
,
The Probation Depa.-tment h2.S recently evaluated the costs of operating the Public Work
Service Progranl. Due to cost incre2.Ses, t.':te Probation DeparL'I1ent will recommend that
the Board of Supervisors incre2.Se the daily fee to $414 per crew per day effective August
1 st, 2006. The fee illCre2.Se is contingent on approval by the Board of Supervisors;
however, we are notifying you of this planned rate change pursuant to section lOaf our
contract. After the Board of Super/isors approved this rate change, the amended
agreement will be forwarded to your agency.
Thank you for your support of the Probation Department and our work programs. {fyou
have aIlY questions regarding this increase, please call Deputy Chief Probation Officer
Susan Mallett at (858) 514-3108.
\
CE T . IARIA
hief profion Officer
9-7
',-_/
AGREEMENT 0
City of Ch~~~~~blic Works RIG I N A L
Al'm
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO PROBATION DEPARTMENT
This agreement, is made and entered into this I st day of Aul!Ust. 2006. by and between,
City of Chula Vista Public Works, hereinal1.er referred to as CV-PW and the County
Of San Diego Probation Department, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY".
Whereas, the cotTNjY is authorized to require inmates/wards, and Public
Service Workers to perforn1 work under sections 1203.1,4017, and 4024.2 of the Penal
Code, Sections 25359 and 36904'ofthe Government Code, and Sections 730,731,731.5,
and 883 of the Welfare and Institutions Code; and
Whereas, CV-PW has responsibility for t.'1e operation of CV-PW owned and
leased facilities, arld desires to contract with t.'1e COtJNTY for the supplying of certain
servIces.
A. RESPONSIBILITITES OF THE COUNTY:
I, Upon request of CV-PW, and at times that are mutually agreeable to both
parties, the COUNTY shall supply the/hereinafter described work crews to
perfonn work for CV-PW,
2, C01.TNTY shall provide labor from the Probation Depar"illlent's Public
Service Program. Probation Depa.rtment staff shall be responsible for the
actual and direct supervision and security of public service workers in
carrying out the work instructions,
3, In providing such work crews, COUNTY shall provide and be responsible
for the following:
a. Provide the proper number of staff to accompariY and supervise
the work crew,
D, Have full responsibility for the custody and supervision of the
work crew,
c, Provide necessazy transportation.
4, COUNTY shall invoice CV-PW on a monthly basis for any
reimbursement due under the terms oftrus agreement.
"
'-..~
'-\
\
\
,
9-8
\'~_...
B.
RESPONSIBILITITES OF THE City of Chula Vista Public Works:
1. CV-PW will notify COUNTY at least two weeks in advance when work
crews are needed, and COUNTY will schedule work crews on an as
available basis.
2. All work to be performed will be of such nature as to not supplant work
performed by regular employees of the CV-PW,
3. CV-PW agrees to reimburse COUNTY for administrative costs incurred
in the amount of up to $414.00 a day for each full crew. A full crew is
defined as 8 or more persons for a minimum of 5 hours inclUding travel
time. The payment to the COUNTY shall be made upon receipr of each
monthly invoice.
4. CV -PW shall provide a lead person to designate work sires, give
directions as to work performance and provide assistance and entry to the
grounds, where necessary, for the work crew, and crew supervisors.
C. DEFENSE and INDEM.NITY:
1. Claims 1'-..rising From Sole Acts or Omission of County
,
The County hereby agrees to defendabd inder:mify the CV-PW, its
agents, officers and employees ('nereinafter collectively referred to in this
paragraph No.3 as 'CV-PW'), from any claim, action or proceedings
against CV-PW. arising solely out of the acts or omissions of County in
the performance of this Agreement. At its sole discretion, CV-PW may
participate at its own expense in the defense of any claim, action or
proceedings, but such participation shall not relieve County of any
obligation imposed by this Agreement. CV-PW shall notify County
promptly of any claim, action or proceedings and cooperate fully in the
defense.
2. Claims Arising From Sole Acts or Omissions of City of Chub. Vista
Public Works
The CV -PW hereby agrees to defend 8.",d indemnify the County of San
Diego Probation Department, its agents, officers and employees, (hereafter
collectively referred to in this paragraph No.2 as 'County') from any
claiITI, action or proceedings against County, arising solely out of the acts
or omissions ofCY-PW in the performance of this Agreement. At its sole
discretion, County may participate at its own expense in the defense of
9-9
"----'
my such claim, action or proceeding, but such participation shall not
relieve CV-PW of any obligation imposed by this Agreement. County
shall notify CV -PW promptly of any claim, action or proceeding and
cooperate fully in the defense.
3. Claims Arising From Concurrent Acts or Omissions
County hereby agrees to defend itself, a..ld CV-PW hereby agrees to
defend itself, from any claim, action or proceedings arising out of the
concurrent acts or omissions of County and CV-PW. In. such cases,
COIUlty and CV-PW agree to retain their own legal counsel, bear their
own defense costs, and waive their right to seek reimbursement of such
costs, except as provided in paragraph 5 below.
4. Joint Defense
'..-----
Notwithstanding paragraph 3 above, in cases where County and CV-PW
agree in writing to a joint defense counsel to defend the claim, action or
proceeding arising out oftne concurrent acts or omission ofCV.PW and
County. Joint defense counsel shall be selected by mutual agreement of
County and CV-PW. County and CV.PW agree to share the costs of such
joint defense and any agreed settlement in equal a..nounts, except as
provided in paragra~h 5 below. County and CV.PW further agree that
neIther party may bU\d the other to a settlement agreement without the
written consent of both County and CV-PW,
5. Reimbursement md/or Reallocation
Where a trial verdict or arbitration award allocates or determines the
comparative fault of the parties, County and CV-PW may seek
reimbursement and/or reallocation of defense costs, settlement payments,
judgments and awards, consistent with such comparative fault.
D. TER..M: .
This agreement shall become effective on or after the date entered above, and
shall remain in effect until emended by mutual consent of the parties hereto or
terminated by eit.f:ler of the parties by giving fifteen (15) days notice in
writing.
9-10
'-'- .
In witness whereof, the duty authorized officials of the parties hereunto have, in their
representative capacities, set their hands as of the date hereinabove written.
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
PROBATION DEPARTMENT
9444 BALBOA A VENliE
SAN DIEGO, CA 92123
City of Chula Vista Public Works
PO Box 1087
Chula Vista, CA 91912
r-
By: ~ &wts
JULIE LIJ';1lSA Sl.t z.l ~&ad1.S
~~:
Date: --(-.2..5-or:. P~WI
By:
'1N~~T J. IARIA
C~;?~:0:
Date:
.~
,
,
./
9-11
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF .
CHULA VISTA APPROVING Al'J AGREEMENT WITH THE
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO PROBATION DEPARTMENT FOR
THE PROVISION OF WORK CREWS UNTIL MAY 30, 2009
AND AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASING AGENT TO
APPROVE Al'JD EXECUTE A.lvIENDMENTS TO THE
AGREEMENT EXTENDING THE TERM FOR AN
ADDITIONAL FIVE ONE-YEAR PERIODS
WHEREAS, the San Diego County Probation Department administers and operates work
camps in eastern San Diego County; and
WHEREAS, work crews of eight to twelve low security inmates, closely supervised by
an Assistant Deputy Probation Officer, are available to government entities to perform labor
intensive maintenance projects such as weed abatement, culvert cleaning, litter patrol, park
maintenance, and brush abatement; and
WHEREAS, on September 20, 1987, the City Council approved an agreement with the
San Diego County Probation Department for the City's use of these work crews pursuant to
Resolution No. 13293; and
WHEREAS, since that action, work crews have been utilized for labor in Open Space and
Community Facility Districts, streets, wastewater and parks sections; and
WHEREAS, the County Probation Department provides work crews at a cost below other
pri vate contract services utilized by the City; and . I
WHEREAS, the term of the proposed Agreement iS,one year until May 30, 2009 and
staff recommends that the Purchasing Agent be authorized to approve and execute amendments
to the Agreement for five additional one-year periods.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
as follows:
1.
That it approves an Agreement with the County of San Diego Probation
Department for the provision of work crews.
That it authorizes the Purchasing Agent to approve and execute amendments
to the Agreement extending the term for an additional five one-year periods.
2.
Presented by:
Approved as to form by:
~Yh--~ 4~JJ~ hr\
Bart C. Miesfeld (J-
Jack Griffin
Director of Public Works
Interim City Attorney
9-12
THE ATTACHED AGREENlENT HAS BEEN REVIE WED
AND APPROVED AS TO FORNI BY THE CITY
ATTORi'ffiY'S OFFICE AJID \-VILL BE
FORMALLY SIGNED UPON APPROVAL BY
THE CITY COUNCIL
~L/?~tL ~(k;b i~
Bart C. Miesfeld
Interim City Attorney
Dated:
7/1'< (o;g
Agreement between City of Chula Vista
Parks & Recreation Department (Open Space) and.
County of San Diego Probation Depart,ment for Work Crews
9-13
I Attachment C
AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
City ofChula Vista, Public Works Department (Open Space)
A1'1i1)
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO PROBATION DEPARTiYlENT
This agreement, is made and entered into this 14th day of May, 2008, by and between,
City of Chula Vista. Public Works - Open Space Division, hereinafter referred to as
CVPW-OS and the County Of San Diego Probation Department, hereinafter referred to
as "COUNTY".
Whereas, the COUNTY is authorized to require inmates/wards, and Public
Service Workers to perform work under sections 1203.1,4017, and 4024.2 of the Penal
Code, Sections 25359 and 36904 of the Government Code, and Sections 730,731,731.5,
and 883 of the Welfare and Institutions Code; and
Whereas, CVPW-OS has responsibility for the operation of CVPW-OS owned
and leased facilities, and desires to contract with the COUNTY for the supplying of
certain services.
A. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE COUNTY:
J
1. Upon request of CVPW-OS, and at times that are mutually agreeable to
both parties, the COUNTY shall supply the hereinafter described work
crews to perform work for CVPW-OS.
2. COUNTY shall provide labor from the Probation Department's Public
Service Program. Probation Department staff shall be responsible for the
actual and direct supervision and security of public service workers in
carrying out the work instructions,
3. In providing such work crews, COUNTY shall provide and be responsible
for the following:
a. Provide the proper number of staff to accompany and supervise
the work crew.
b. Have full responsibility for the custody and supervision of the
work crew.
c. Provide necessary transportation.
4. COUNTY shall invoice CVPW-OS on a monthly basis for any
reimbursement due under the terms of this agreement.
9-14
B. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE City of Chub Vista. Public Works - Open
Space Division:
1. CVPW-OS will notify COUNTY at least two weeks in advance when
work crews are needed, and COUNTY will schedule work crews on an as
available basis.
2. All work to be performed will be of such nature as to not supplant work
performed by regular employees of the CVPW-OS.
3. CVPW-OS agrees to reimburse COUNTY for administrative costs
incurred in the amount of up to $414.00 a day for each full crew. A full
crew is defined as 8 or more persons for a minimum of 5 hours including
travel time. The payment to the COUNTY shall be made upon receipt of
each monthly invoice.
4. CVPW -OS shall provide a lead person to designate work sites, give
directions as to work performance and provide assistance and entry to the
grounds, where necessary, for the work crew, and crew supervisors.
C. DEFENSE and INDEMNITY:
,I
1. Claims Arising From Sole Acts or Omission of County
The County hereby agrees to defend and indemnify the CVPW-OS. its
agents, officers and employees (hereinafter collectively referred to in this
paragraph No.3 as 'CVPW-OS'), from any claim, action or proceedings
against CVPW-OS, arising solely out of the acts or omissions of County
in the performance of this Agreement. At its sole discretion, CVPW-OS
may participate at its ov"u expense in the defense of any claim, action or
proceedings, but such participation shall not relieve County of any
obligation imposed by this Agreement. CVPW-OS shall notify County
promptly of any claim, action or proceedings and cooperate fully in the
defense.
2. Claims Arising From Sole Acts or Omissions of City of Chula Vista.
Public Works - Opeu Space Division
The CVPW-OS hereby agrees to defend and indemnify the County of San
Diego Probation Department, its agents, officers and employees, (hereafter
collectively referred to in this paragraph No.2 as 'County') from any
claim, action or proceedings against County, arising solely out of the acts
or omissions ofCVPW-OS in the performance ofthis Agreement. At its
9-15
sole discretion, County may participate at its own expense in the defense
of any such claim, action or proceeding, but such participation shall not
relieve CVPW-OS of any obligation imposed by this Agreement. County
shall notify CVPW-OS promptly of any claim, action or proceeding and
cooperate fully in the defense. .
3. Claims Arising From Concurrent Acts or Omissions
County hereby agrees to defend itself, and CVPW -OS hereby agrees to
defend itself, from any claim, action or proceedings arising out of the
concurrent acts or omissions of County and CVPW-OS. In such cases,
County and CVPW-OS agree to retain their own legal counsel, bear their
own defense costs, and waive their right to seek reimbursement of such
costs, except as provided in paragraph 5 below.
4. Joint Defense
Notwithstanding paragraph 3 above, in cases where County and CVPW-
OS agree in writing to a joint defense counsel to defend the claim, action
or proceeding arising out of the concurrent acts or omission of CVPW-OS
and County. Joint defense counsel shall be selected by mutual agreement
of County and CVPW-OS. County anq CVPW-OS agree to share the
costs of such joint defense and any agreed settlement in equal amounts,
except as provided in paragraph 5 below. County and CVPW-OS further
agree that neither party may bind the other to a settlement agreement
without the written consent of both County and CVPW-OS.
5. Reimbursement and/or Reallocation
Where a trial verdict or arbitration award allocates or determines the
comparative fault of the parties, County and CVPW-OS may seek
reimbursement and/or reallocation of defense costs, settlement payments,
judgments and awards, consistent with such comparative fault.
D. TERLvI:
This agreement shall become effective on or after the date entered above, and
shall remain in effect until amended by mutual consent of the parties hereto or
terminated by either of the parties by giving fifteen (15) days notice in
writing.
9-16
In witness whereof, the duty authorized officials of the parties hereunto have, in their
representative capacities, set their hands as of the date hereinabove written.
COUNTY OF SAt'\! DIEGO
PROBA nON DEP AR n,;IENT
9444 BALBOA A VENUE
SAN DIEGO, CA 92123
City of Chula Vista, Public Works - Open
Space Division
PO Box 1087
Chula Vista, CA 91912
By:
By:
VINCENT J. IARl.4.
Chief Probation Officer
Cheryl Cox
Mayor
Date:
Date:
I
I
9-17
CITY COUNCIL &
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AGENDA STATEMENT
~\\f'
~. <-- C1lY OF
~ CHUlA ViSTA
JULY 22, 2008 Item 10
ITEM TITLE:
A. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA WAIVING THE FORL\iIAL
CONSULTANT SELECTION PROCESS FOR AN
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND THE URBAN LAND
INSTITUTE
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
B. RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN
AGREEMENT BETVv'EEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND THE URBA.l'J LAND
INSTITUTE IN THE AMOUNT OF $120,000, A-ND
APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF RE. DEVELOPlV. Nl 'tt(D HOUSING :Y
CITY MANAGER/EXECUTIYE DIRECTOR &\J~~ QY
4/5THS VOTE: YES 0 NO D
SUIVIMARY
In the coming years. Chula Vista' s vaca.'1t bayfront may soon transform into a world class
destination. The H Street corridor provides an opportunity to connect the bayfront and the Chula
Vista community and revitalize it along the way. Staff is recommending that the Redevelopment
Agency (Agency) enter into a contract with the Urban Land Institute (ULI) Five-Day Advisory
Services Program (Program) to provide an unbiased implementation program for redevelopment of
the H Street Corridor between Interstate 5 and Third A venue (Corridor).
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the activity is not a
"Project" as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to
Section l5060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no
further environmental review is necessary.
10-1
July 22, 2008, Item 10
Page 2 of 4
RECOMMENDA nON
Council/Agency adopt the resolutions.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
On January 24, 2008, the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation directed staff to consider
using the expertise of the ULI Advisory Council to advise the Redevelopment Agency in its
redevelopment efforts. On July 10,2008 City Council approved the Climate Change Working
Group Measures Draft Implementation Plan. Measure #6 of this Plan, "Smart Growth" at
Trolley Stations, identified a work program that included the ULI Program.
DISCUSSION
Background
Recent demographic changes and population growth in California have brought about renewed
interest and need for revitalization and redevelopment of cities' urban centers. Recognizing the
need for revitalization of its own urban area several years ago, Chula Vista embarked upon a
visionary framework for revitalization through the adoption of the updated General Plan
(December 2005) and Urban Core Specific Plan ("UCSP", April 2007). While the real estate
market has since cooled, Chula Vista continues its efforts to revitalize the older western portion
of the city with the progress of the Bayfront Master Plan a.,'1d development of a major
hotel/convention center.
The Bayfront represents the largest oppommity in th'l city for future development. With
sweeping views of the San Diego Bay, large parcels of undeveloped land and recent steps to
secure the Gaylord Entertainment hotel-convention center, the BayTIont may provide the needed
"catalyst" for redevelopment. As the Bayfront Master Plan and the cornerstone hotel/convention
center move closer to reality, renewed private investment "ill seek to capitalize on the
oppommities to compliment uses and serve the visitors and residents of the Bayfront.
With the Bayfront's from door at H Street, the Corridor is quickly emerging as a potential
"backbone" for redevelopment. H Street is ideally situated as a major gateway to the city's
commercial and financial centers and a direct link: of the Bayfront and the city's historic heart of
the community, the Third Avenue commercial district (see Attachment I). Large land owners
located along the Corridor include the South COlmty Court House, Scripps Hospital, and the
Chula Vista Center, a regional shopping mall. All are interested in expansion and redevelopment
opportunities. Recent development activity such as the development of the Gateway Center,
with Class A office space, and the opening of coffee shops, restaurants and professional offices
along the Corridor demonstrates the demand and interest for the area that can only grow with the
potential of the Bavfront.
Urban Land Institute Advisory Services Program
\lihile recent discussions with land owners and development actIVIty in the Corridor has
provided renewed hope for revitalization, it is imperative that the City is poised to take
advantage of its opportunities when the market returns and plans for the BayTIont solidify. A
cohesive strategy to address market potential, planning and design or financing and development
10-2
July 22,2008, Iteml
Page 3 of 4
is needed to take the visionary framework of the UCSP to concrete implementable actions that
can facilitate appropriate and quality redevelopment along the Corridor.
Staff is proposing to contract with the ULI for the Program to prepare such a strategy (contract
included as Attachment 2). ULI is a well established international non-profit research and
education organization, which provides leadership in the responsible use of land and in creating
sustainable communities. As the preeminent, multidisciplinary real estate forum, with a
membership of over 35,000 members and associates from 90 countries, ULI has access to experts
representing the entire spectrum of land use and development disciplines.
Through ULI's unique program, an interdisciplinary team of its member experts help sponsors
find creative, practical solutions for issues such as downtown redevelopment, land management
strategies, evaluation of development potential, growth management, community revitalization,
and bro\Ynfield redevelopment. The unique team-based approach .to bring city, business,
development, and community interests together with ULI niche experts provides an opportunity
that is unparalleled. The Program has assembled weU over 500 ULI-member teams to help
sponsors find solutions and build consensus around land use and development challenges.
For Chula Vista, the program is specificaUy designed to help answer questions related to the land
use and development issues we face along the Corridor and will:
.:. Bring recognized real estate expertise from across the United States to provide an assessment
of the market feasibility and economic potential of the Corridor as a connection between the
Bayfront and Third A venue commercial district; . i
.:. Gather data on the many quality-of-life objectives of the community and the ongoing
business and economic operations; and
.:. Fulfill General Plan and other city objectives to forge an integrated, action-oriented
implementation plan for the Corridor.
The interdisciplinary team will consist of eight to nine members; typicaUy several developers, a
landscape architect, a planner, a market analyst, a finance expert, and others with the niche
expertise needed to address the issues/chaUenges most relevant to the Corridor. To complete the
assignment, the team takes on an intensive agenda which includes:
.:. An in-depth briefing day composed of a tour of the site and meetings \Yith City
representatives;
.:. Hour-long interviews oftypicaUy 80 to 100 key community representatives; and
.:. A day and a half of formulating recommendations. The final days are dedicated to the panel
prep~ring [mdings and conclusions, which are presented to the sponsor on the final day
through an oral presentation. After the panel is completed, a wrirten report (sample included
as Attachment 3) \YiU serve as an implementation plan for redevelopment of the Corridor.
Additionally, the City has the opportunity to build upon the ULI Program. In early 2008, the H
Street Corridor, as a smart growth and transit focus area, was one of three project areas selected
by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) for a Smart Growth 3-D Visual
10-3
Julv 22,2008, Item ID
. -
Page40f4
Simulation grant. Through the grant, the City will be able to provide a three-dimensional,
conceptual visualization of the implementation plan developed by ULI. Being able to visualize a
plan helps one to better understand building massing assumptions, the integration of frontage
property appearance, and pedestrian access along the Corridor.
Bidding Process Waiver
Chula Vista Municipal Code section 2.56.070 requires that contracts for all supplies, equipment
and services when the estimated cost exceeds $100,000 shall be awarded by the City Council to
the lowest responsive bidding process. Exceptions to this requirement may be granted where
there is a commodity or service available from only one known source as the result of unique
performance capabilities, compatibility requirements or market conditions. The competitive
bidding requirements may be waived by the City Council when they are impractical, impossible
or the city interests would be materially better served by a different procurement process.
Staff is recommending that the formal bidding process be waived for the ULI Program. This
recommendation is based on the following capabilities that are uniquely being offered to the
Agency by ULI:
.:. ULI is uniquely qualified with capabilities to draw from over 35,000 members located in 90
countries who represent the entire spectrum of land use and development disciplines; and
.:. The Program is the only one of its kind and has the unique experience of completing more
than 500 Advisory Service panels, in 47 states, 12 countries, and 4 continents.
"
ULI has demonstrated their breadth of expertise and experience through their Program and
numerous panel completions. These service capabilities were found to be necessary in order to
meet the goals of the General Plan.
DECISION MAKER CO.Nt'LICT
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the Redevelopment Agency Board and City Council
members and has found no property holdings within SOO-feet of the boundaries of the Corridor
which is the subject of this action.
FISCAL IMP ACT
There is no fiscal impact to the City's General Fund as a result of adopting this resolution. This
action will appropriate $120,000 of the Redevelopment Agency's existing Fund Balance to the
services and supplies budget of the Redevelopment Agency Merged Project Area Fund.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Map of H Street Corridor
2. Two Party Agreement
3. Sanlple Report
Prepared by:
Stacey Kur=. Senior Project Coordinator, Redevelopment & Housing
10-4
-
~
i3
g
o
.5
-<
,.. .-N:~
-->......,..."
.
I
J
'I
-,
.....".-:''''.
<...
l
<3 '""'
] v
;..
<3 '" ~
U V"
. "
v < ('1""j
v 0
1:: >-. -
'V or.
C/J .::: ,
:r:: ~
(/) ~
<
;.,
,
,
"
?
f
."....,:-;,.:":"11
.1 .-;.~H<J
~
"'~.,.l'T..
.."";....,..,,.0
e
,..~ '. !'-' ~..,'
."
; f7 ,.,~".
~ .;:
;11;; ,
; 'I ;
h~' 1 Ji~
,;;o-:,J;j ~['i! :
,. "-- ~.s ::.
1 'J
"';'--:;1'"
1
.....-.:.:,;;.,
,
"
.~
,
~ ~
""'"
~:'< "-~';~.t
".-.1
<<;:-.."
,,:> ., ~
,~"..""....-
~', ..,"',':;.
1;>',.;.7<6'
,
., 1.:>_.
'.
~
,
"
~
~~. ".~-:..';,.:
~
~
,
,
',,'-'
II
"~-f, I;
"~"=TI1' ~
AH-~,J.I.!;_ 1- i
.....,..~ " .1. ~ -.\f;;'
.~
.,=,
.~ I
1
"
'i=:-
'j
.'
,......
10-5
1fr7~/l7vJ7 /
o
I
~ !
i!!Im
;:
!Ii
.
10;
.~ .~
'" ~
~ ..
:>
U .E
c:
.0 ~
~ \i
::> .,
,. n
,
- '.'
.~
> "
- ~
::: "
V ':',
'~'
. ....
- "
'l \.:i
"
Attccnme!'lt 3
10-6
.. J
,',
"
'"_,,
,i;; ~ii":~;,)
if': .;;:'~ftt
;M
L'"
c'
! T'fiJ;;iU'
Sememoer 22-27. 2002
.~i Adviso.:; Ser:kes Panel Report
CLl..:.the Urban Land Institute
10'25 Thomas Jefferson Street, :K. "V.
Suite 500 West
"Nashing:o~ D.C. 20007-5201
10-7
". t , q'~;
';,)
,:\'".' ",
;1
%
i;~"
LI-the Urban Land Institute is a non-
proSt research and edu<:ation organiza-
tion that promotes responsible leade:rship
in the use of land in order to en..iJ.anee
the total envirorunent.
The Institute maintains a membership represent-
ing a broad spectrum of interests and sponsors a
wide variety of e-ctuC'dtiOffi'lJ programs and fmllms
to enej)urdge an open exchange of ideas and shar-
ing of e:\.yerience. ULI initiates re$eareh that
anticipates emerging la.'1.d use trends and issues
and proposes crt'atlve solutions based on that
research; provides achisory ser.-ices; ami pub-
lishes a ~ide variet.... of mate.rials to disseminate
information on land' use ?~T1d development.
Established in 1936. the Institute tooav has more
tha.n 17,000 members and associates frem 50 COlln-
cries. reDresentl.."lg the em:rre spe{:tru.Ll of the Ia..d
use and developm~nt cEscipIines. Professionals r'~y-
2
10-8
resented include developers, builders~ propeny
owners, ll"i"estOr5, architects. public officials. plan-
ners, real estate brokers, apprdisers, attorneys.
engineers~ financiers, aeademies~ students, and
librarians. UL I relies nea"ilv on the exoelienee of
lw members. It is througb ~emb€r involvement
and information resources: that ULI has been able
to set standards of excellence in development .
practice. The Institute has long been recognized
as one of r\...nle!1Ca'S most respected and ~idely
quoted sources of objective information on urban
pla:n.ni,1g, growth, and developmer..t.
This Advisory Services Dane! report is intended
to further the objectives of the Institute and to
make authoritath-'€ infonnation generJJly avail-
able to those seeking knowledge 1.i1 the field of
,11Tban land use.
,
Richa.rd M. Rcs3..'l
Presiden;
@2003 by CLI-the U r!-.an Land institute
1025 Thomaq Jt<;'fer.:;on St.-eet, :-i. W:
Suite~\yest
Wa."hingtoll. D.C. 2OQlJj~'i--?(jl
fiJ! light.." r<.<:ter:ed. Repr:xlue'"Jon or use of the who]., or :IIlY
pa..-t oi the content..'" ,vithoui .PrittJ~n ~rlJ'issitm of ;.he ::opy-
right holder is prohibitoo..
ULI Cat.2ltlg Number: ASS05;.l
Co\'€'r phew by Leslie ,I\.. S1'n.i6.
All AiMslJry Smi... ?llIlel Re;ltlll
he goal of ULI's Advisory Services ProgrJm
is to bri'1g the finest a"Xpertise in the real
estate field to bear on complex land use plan-
ning and deyelopment projects, programs.
and policies. Since 194i, this program has assem-
bled w€:ll over 400 ULI-member teams to help
sponsors find creative, practical solutions for
issues such as downto'WTI. redevelopment. land
management strategies, evaluation of d€veiop-
ment potential. grcv.ih managemen~ community
revitalization. bro":'\we!ds redevelopment, military
b~ reuse, orovision oflo-w-cr;st and affordable
housing, and asset mallabrement strategies. among
other matterS. A \\ide variety of public, private.
and nonprofit organizations have contracted for
ULI's Ad'\isory Serl'"l.ces.
Each panel tea:71 is compcsed of hig~J}' qualL'ied
professionals who',-"olun.teer L1eir thue ::'0 ULl.
Tnev are cho5€n for their knowledg-e of the Danel
topi~ and screened to ensure their 'Obje<.'tiv-i(y.
ELI panel teLTT1S are interdisdplii1ary and typf.
caLiy include severa! developers. ~-l landSC2p€
architect, a planner. a market 2.:1a1YSt, a finance
expen1-and others wlth the niche expertise
needed to address a g:ven project.. ULl teams
provide a holistic look at cie'/elopment probjeIT'~~.
Each panel is chaired by a' n~speeted ELI mem-
ber with. previous panel experien~.
The agenda for a nve-day pan.el assignrnent is in~
tens-iv€:. It i.."lcludes an In..aept.l1 briefL'1g day com-
posed of a tour of t..'1€ site a..7J.d meetings ~vit...'1 spon-
sor representatives: a day and a haif of hour-long
intervi.ews of typically 80 to 100 key commurity
representatives: a.~d a day and a. half of formuiat-
ing. recommendations. &'1V long r.itrhts oi discus~
si~n precede L'1e panel's eo~clusiOns~On thefin21
day on site, the panel makes a1J. oral presentation
of its fin.dings and conclusions to- the SOOf,sor. At
the requestof the sponsor, a writtcm r'eport is
prepared and published.
Becau..~ the sponsoring entities are responsible
ror significant prepa.."'<ltiQD. before th.€- panel's visit,
b""1ciuding sending extensive brieiL"ig materials to
eae..~ member and-a.':TIU1ging for the panel to m.eet
San Pedro, Cafifomia,. September 22-27, 2002
i\ith key local community members and sta.1:.e-
holders in the project under consideration, pa.rtie-
ipants in ULI's. five-day panel assigT'.ul1ents are
able to make accurate assessment,~ of a SPOf.l."Or'S
issues and to provid€ reeomme.'1dations in a com-
pressed a.mount or time.
A major strength or the program is ULI's unique
ability to draw on L1)e kno'.\,"ledge and exr'~rti~€ of
its members, lndudLr1g land developers and Q\'''n~
ers, public officials) academicians. representatives'
of finandal institutions, and others. In fulfillment
of the rrJssion of the Urban Land Inst.iut-e. this
Advisory Services panel reoort is intended to' pro.
vide obj~ctiye adviCe that iill promote the re-~
sponsible use of hti"1d to enhance the en ...ironment.
Rachelie L. Levitt
Senior VIce President. Policy a.l1d mctice
~la;: Beth Carriga.'
vIce President, Ad\isory Services
Nancy Zivitz Sussman
Senior Associate, .:uJ:'dsory Services
M€frnan Welsch
Ass.ociate. Addsory Senices
Jason Ben
Panel Coordb1at-or, Advisory Serdees
Nancy H. Stewart
Director~ Book Program
David James Rose
Manuscript Editor
Betsy VanBuskirk
..A.rt frllectQr
Ma.rl..r12. Lootflis
Desktop Publis..lllng Specialist/Graphics
Kim Rusch
Grapliies
Dian..'1 Stanley-Austin
Director, Publishing Operations
3
10-9
he ULI .\dvisory Services program staff
and panel members \yould like to take this
opportunity to extend special thanks 1:.0 all
GfIhe following persons a.i1d groups.
The foUo\\i...'1g elected officials: the Honorable
Ja..'1les K. Hal-ill, Mayort and staff members Troy
Edwa.-ds, Abigail Zimmennant and \~,rendy Wa.'1g:
the Honorable Janice Hahn, Councihvoman, 15th
District, and stJlr members Mi.~e Molina. Glieg
Asher, and Elise Swanson; the Honorable Jane
Harman, Congresswoma.'l, 36th District, and
sta...Ffmember Evelyn Fierro; and the Honorable
..;]an Lowenthai, State Assembi:---man, 54th Dis-
tricr.t and staff members Helene ",-Ll.."el. NOl:ma.."1
Fassler-Katz, fuid Brae Coward.
The t:1r'e:e panel cosponsors: be City of Los Ange..
l€~ Corr.murjt}' Redevelopment Agenc)'. the City
of Los .\.."lgeies Har'bor Department, and the San
Pedro Peninsula Chamber of COIlli"TIerte.
The dry commissione.""S a.Tld staff members from
the COIP....-nunity Redevelopment Agency, the 'Har-
boy Department, and the Plal1mng DepartmenL
From the Community Redevelopment Agency:
comrr.lssioners David Farrar, chairman: john
Schafer, Shu h.wan Woo. Douglas R. RiIlg, John..~
Ornelas, lVlar..a S1T.iw~ Battle-Bey, a..f1d lVladeline
Janis-Apa...ricio and staff members .JohnMeCoy,
Ed Don:,rlelly, P.~-;que Khan, SllSaI! Totaro, Betty
Pace, and Marj }J:ice Crowe.
From the Harber Department: com.-nissicne....s
?'-rieholas G. Tons1ch, president; Eiwood Lui,
Thomas A. ;,Varren, James E. Acevedo, and
Camilla Townsend KOt.'Ol and staff members La..."TY
.Keller. Bruce Seaton, Julia Nagano, Staeey G.
Jones, Da;id Mathe,-'rson, 10.."'13' Gioielio, tLlld Kanya
T. Dorland. From the Planning Department:
Mitchell B. Menzer, president of the cOID.Tlssion,
am:! Shana Murphy a11d jeffPool, staff.
4
10-10
The San Pedro Pep insula Chamber of Commerce:
Jayroe Wl1sDTI, Jim Cross. al"ld Leslie. Smith as v.-ell
as tbe chamber's individual supporters: Jerico De-
velopment, Crail-Johnson Foundation, the 'littory
Group, Cross A.n1enca Inc., San. Pedro Fish Mar-
ket and Restaurant. Spi.l'it Cruises, Tri-Marine
International. the Vlhale & .4Je. Little Company
ofMary.'-S.a..."J Pedro Hospital, Harbor Insl1!'anee
Agency, C&S Insurance, Sherdton Los AngelE::s
Harbor Hotel. Bm:teliield Communications, Mary-
lyn Ginsburg, Greer/DaiiyfMinter, the Katherman
Compal'!)'. Tom McCain, DDS. H;:;.rbor Brake Ser~
v1ee, Harbor-Pront Properties, Harbor\lew Office
Building. Hussey Insu.'"3!l('e Agency, Park \Vest~
ern Estates, PliOlityOne Printing, \'ia Cabrillo
Ma...-ina 2500, "\\'Illiams' Bookstore, and Linda
,/ Honey, eFP, EA.
The staff or the Sheraton Hotel San Pedro, espe-
cially Stephen Robbins and Kim Patalano.
The pa.l1el aL:;o would Jil{e to thank the Los .;"'lg'e-
ies Harbor \Vatts EconorrJc De\'eioprnent Corpo-
ration. cochaired by Dennis C. Lord and John
P2pudzkis. for coordin~th'1g the project.
The panel would especially like to recognize the
efforts or the foI1ov.-i:-:g people during t.he panel's
on-site \isit: ,j o.h...'l Papada..1ds, J ayme wIlson, and
Da"id Fan-al'.
The panel is particularly indebted to t1e more th&.i
100 commurity residents, neighborhood council
representatiyes, government and business lead~
ers, a..rKl property o''1TIlers who prm.ided unique
N""1d valuable insights during interviews and L.le
community forum. The inruyidual perspectives
gained from these inten~i€'ws were cr'llclrJ to the
proc~ss. These stakeholders are a major a..<;set in
advancbg the intereS'"1.S of Sa''l Pedro.
An ~ SeniC$ P.ool Rfllll!l
ULI P,me! and Project Staff
Foreword.: The Panel's Assignment
Oveniew :md Su.,rnrnary of Recommendations
Market Potential
Planning and Design
Development Strategies ~d L-nplementation
Conclusion
About the Panel
6
7
10
13
13
26
33
34
San ?edrn, Califomia. Sep1ember 22-27, 2002
5
10-11
"
i~
"'
,:~ir~ L:tiY'
J. Ke\in La\"ler
Managi....:g Partner
N-K ......entures, LC
West Palm Beach.. Florida
~-;~Hd::t M5}:1~[itt I
Ed Freer, ASLA
PriTIcpal Designer
SmJthGroup JJR
.Madison! \\1sCanSLT1
Diana Gonzalez
Founder
Dr\!G Consulti.:.lg Ser,.-icc-.-s. [n~.
MiaITi Florida
EdV;-Lll R. (Ray) Kimsey, Jr.
\'lCf President and Pri..ne:ipaJ
Niles BottOn .,L<;sociates
Atlanta, Georgia
Charles A, Long
Founder
Charles .J... Long Associ..1.tes
Reno. Nevada
Lisa Mitchelson
Portfolio Manager
SSR Realty Advisors
Bostor... Massachusetts
6
Jennifer Meoii Stanton
Director of Market Planning <k'1d
Ad \,fisorj Servlces
Faison
Chariotte. i\orth CaroliJ1.a
t\ ~ f, r' j
'C~,LH
Leslie Eolst
Senior ~~sociate
Policy <l..T1d Practice
~ru Un.~::tr~ CrJ
! '~~ ~ r: :
,Jason Bell
Panel Coordinator
1 Ad\'isory Services
A.~ Advis:lrt S.m= PJll1ll1 R.pur!
10-12
i,,"
;.""
'1',
,,"
"
:\1
'i ~
'G~: p~ ~1ake only bold pla.'1S" has been the batt.le
cry of many \isiona.ry planners. Over the
past decade, t,,'le San Pedro. California. \va-
terfront and dowmown have been the sub-
ject of numerous p1a1L~me bold, some less SQ.
Collectively, these plans do not "connect," and m&i.Y
of them are in direct (,.'t)nilic:t. 'P\ith each other. The
challenge for San Pedro-~he eorr:.munity. i~ wa-
terfront, a..."1d the city or Los ~-\.ngele&-is to con-
solida~ and eonnect L'1ese plans into a rnunework
for u..'lifled development of the \\,,;\terfront and
d01;\llLo"\,;ll.
S,ID Pedro has a rich and robust b,istory as the
port commurdty of Los A..ngeles. p._:~.er years of
planning for t.b.e indiyid:;:.a.! segments of t.he CDm-
mmJity, the ULI panel's mission w.as straightfor-
\~'a.rd: to forge an integrated. action-oriented plan
to fl:CQrmect the cammurity with its waterfront.
while meeting the rr.any quality-of-life objeC"'"Ll.1,'es
of t...l€ eommlLrllt)" a..l'la the ongoing busines:::: and
economic operJ.tions of its longstanding partl'"1€T
i.'1 the cornmunity's economic destiny-the Port
of Los A..J.1.geles.
Part of the city of Lo::: ..i..nge!es. the waterfront
community of San Pedro is home to one of the
world's busiest harbors, the Port of Las A..l'lge1es.
Increasing intemationa! trade has sustained :0ip-
ping yoll.Lile at the por.... while indust:i.zl acti".;ities
such as oil refilling benefit from long-estabiished
in..i'TastruCture, a skilled workforce, and access to
national and regional markets.
E \Ten though the port has €).-panded significantly
over fhe past three, decades, San Pedrds aO\\"7l-
town com.rne.rcial district and nearby residential
areas ha....e not.. They have been affetted by the
same economic and soc'.a1 chmges shapi.llg central
urban areas tirrOUghouI the country. Currently,
the ("'entral business district is in continui.ig tral."1-
San Pedro, Caiffomia, September 22.-27.2002
r~:~,
~ "~"
'S;.::;~fj
.{-'.
'~,j
Sac.-amc::nt<l...
~,
i.'~
San Fr3r:ciecc . .Oakland
. San Jose
r~r'.o.
..L::s..:..r~le5
Sa:; Pedro.. Long 5eac:,
10-13
.5an'Oie.30
"
'~
\
,
(
(
S
7
''''~-.'....
-',
'::><"- -\',:~. - . (
~::~\ ~.
~ ""-
YS\ '" .f ~~_.
\l\ i
e ~ '-'" J
";~ll .~=~ .
I~,
\ '~...- .~~~\~
~~~f~>;'" ~ ~
/ ''';:'::'~
-~-,>~ ", " ~-.
"""~
L"".._...".~,
~~';':""'''z
'",~
~ition witb a surrounding neighborhood or \-erj
low- to moderate-income residents and nearby
mod€rate~ to high-L:'1comeresidemia1 areas.
Through its Community Redevelopment Agency
(eRA). the city of Lils .~...'lgeles e;;:tabiished two re-
,itaiization areas: th.e Beacon Street Project Area
in 1969 and th.e Paci5.c Corridor R€development
Area in 2002. The tight urban fabric of the Beacon
SL-eet area. II longstancling cit), district along Har-
bor Bouievard. was cleared for redeveiopment. dur-
ing the 1970s. This deaJ"m1ce, together I,\;th the
expansion of the pen facilities, replaced a long-
standing urban district along Harbor Boulevard
with a latge \'ara.'1t area that discofi..Tl.€cted the
dO~'I1tov;nfrorn the 'waterfront.
Office and retail vacancies in the Beacon Street
area remain high, 30 yea.'"S after clearance. A cen-
trally located, multb-tory office Dwlrling, k,'10\\1l as
the old Logicon Building or the Pacific Tl-ade Cen-
8
10-14
ter, has been vac.ant for the past ten years. More-
over. a rjghly "."iEilile dowlltowl1 parcel, H-2~ has
been vacant sL.'1ce the 19iOs.
In the central business district, local retail estab-
lisiunems gradually closed and were fl.l"5t replaced
by tP-l1.ti. shops and other budget stores. Pioneel'~
ing coffee shops, restaurants, art gal1eIies, and
professional offiees are nO\1t replacing them. A LO$
A.ngeles COlL.'1ty Courthouse. the Harbor Depart-
ment He<tdqum'ters, and ather m'.lrJcipa! and pri-
yate offices now lli"1CnOr the downto\\"1l, creating
an import.ant component ofwee..li:day business ac-
thity. Private developers have re~tol-ed a number
of attractive historic huildings and many ofL1ese
rio!f\'11tmm sites, including t.he restored landmark
W:u-ner Grand Theater. are frequently used for
mo\;e and telerision location shoot::.
~acific Avenue, the commercial core of the Pacii1c
Corridor area. has local services :::uch as mechan-
ics, barbershops. locksmiths, appliance stores. and
banks. These comrnercial entities extend for 20
./ blocks in a business corridor that is distinct from
L1e central do,..-ntowil district.
r~n~ t\f/Js~fn1.fi{
Stretching four rTJles from the vincent Thoffi2S
Bridge :0 tr,e Cabrilio Beach ore:1k"..,ater, the San
Pedro waterfront is adjacent to the dOwlltown and
r€sidenti2J a.'r€2.5. Under the jurisdiction oi the
Los Angeles Harbor Depa..'"tment, the waterfront
contains a valiety of active maritime-related uses,
two museums, seye!"'dl marJla5. and a heavUy lised
public beach and boat launch. The fishing fleet and
related support activities remain an Lupor"..an;:
fe3ture, although much iess so than duri.ng t..1eir
pe2...~ almost 50 yea.'"S ago. In addkon, there are
isolated areas of successful visitor-oriented com-
mercial enterprise~ indusbial sites, a."1d aban-
doned, vacant, or Ulldenitilized sites~
Other importa!1t features include a very bus=,
Cruise Center, th,-e Ports 01 Call Village commer.
cial development, and a modern marina.. Plans for
expansjon oi the mmir.a as pa...'"!. or Cabrilia Phase
II :ll"e now under consideration. The Ports 0' Call
properties are operated b::r a li."T'J.!ted number of
leasehoiders under a master lease ,vitrin a long-
A., iIlIvisofY Servicos p""", BolllKl
ter.n agreement. The harbor Department con-
trols the southern segment of PortS 0' Call,
As San Pedro was slo,.... to experierl.ce the urban
renaissance that took root in many central cities
and \l...aterD'onts dl4-1...'1g the 19905. chI: port. and L1e
eRA punued more intense planring and deyelop-
ment initiatives ~dependent of one ~:.otheY. These
efforts. resulted in a series of unrealized plans and
failed public/private ventures. In i999, a memo-
randum of understanding between the Harbor De-
partment and the eRA W~ signed to coorJinate
do'''\-nto\\''TI. a.."ld .....aterfront development. However,
the relations~ip envisioned by this agreement has
not been achieved, as the rWQ agencies were un-
able to establish an enective working relationship.
:c~:;i;~_'\":ir~t t:i~!'~:~1~;I'
in June 2001, Mayor James K. Hahn and Council-
woma.r.jJa.:lice H.a.1r<: both residen:s of San Pedro,
entered office. creating a renewed ::;ense of opti-
mism. c-ooperation, a.'1d Oppol"tunity. Currently,
local elected officials a."1d corr>...ffiunity stakeholders
:share a strong m::.eresi. in creating a bro2.d COI'::-
Se!15US for transforming the downtown a.'10 the
waterfront,
San Pedro has three active neighborhood eounciis.
ill of which ate interested in downtown and water-
front redevelopment effor..s. These eouncils pro-
vide a,-'1 opportunity ror local community pa.'"ticipa-
tion in the decisions of the city of Los ~i..!lgeles. In
San Pedro, California. September 22-27, 2002
addition, the POrt Community Advisory Conurjt-
tee, representing a range of business, labor, and
COnli1mnity groups, ser'-e5 <U: an advi~ory body to
t.ie Harbor DeparJnent Board of Commi'isioner;j.
The CR..-\.'s de<:isions concerning dO\\l1tO\\'n Sfu"1
Pedro are guided by input provided by the Port
Community Advisory COI11Il1jttee.
A peLlel or COInl!lmllty s.t~lteholde!"S de\--elaped plan."
ror a waterfront Grand Bromenade. In June ~OO2.
the Harbor Conunission approl,'ed the concept of
the promenade. This promenade plan is set forth
in the Waterfront .-1.ccess Task Force for L~e Cern..
mmlityand Harbor (WATCH) plan addres.s~d
h~er in this report.
9
10-15
", ~''''''''H'l' .",~,
'''I: .0'1..""'-' ,... D'~ 1'>'~
it.:,..I~""-t or:. !U:l",!it
:i'4!id
1I.'l':~~~
~~~~l-~;~:':'~
",_"..ti,,~;JiJ~:t~
un
if"ll ~
~:;'
he panel's approach focuses on providing
prescriptive solutions that are Li1tended to
enduie long aiter this report i:; published.
To d€'termine potential workable solutions,
the panel has addressed not only the questions
pos'ed by the sponsors, but also. and perhaps more
important, con.sciously has chosen to address what
it c{'UC\-CS is a realistic ar:d actionable O:l~ on
which to proceed. .
"',,-
i~.
~ ,
it"
;:;'''; "it;
~"....: '-
The panel is keenly aware that both passion and
politics have been in the forefront in reeent month..'>,
The pa.:.'1elist.3 ?.re deeply impre:5sed wi!..:l L~e 1e";e1 .
of coITlrmmity invoive::lem and COn.3ef;.SUS d'.a: be'
V'lATCE piChi has engendered. It is a ':I.edit to the
San Pedro commuritr that w"lere i."i a.'1 actiw~. hea...-i:-
felt irjtiative to reconnect t.he COII'u"TI:mity to itE
wa.terfront.
However, the panel is equally evgriza.'1: of the fad
that the waterfront is not the sole issue afiecting
the San Pedro t'ommu.nity. Other issues of concern
include the followi."1g:
maintaining the COIP.JTIunitis c.1ar:lcter;
bcreasL'lg public safety;
. achiey"ing iongs-wndi'1g efforts w re\italize the
dowm;o\\"TI.;
. finding acceptable housing 501utioTIS1 both for
the existing stock and for tile introduction of
nev,. bousing: and
. fostering €'..:onomic prospelity by attral.>ting
empio}lTlem opportunities <L'1d pn?sef1iing the
corruTI.unitr's stand<L~ of living.
All these issues and more are ones that have bee.!"l
often repeated tn the various planning documents
the panel has, re\'iewed as wen as du.-ri....'!g the more
10
10-16
...'"'1.
-' ~
~ ;.:
~P"1~~
.,f..
't..~ ll>
than 75 interviews the panel conducted while
on site.
In the pa..iel's opinion, singu!ariy focusiIlg on the
\\.aterfront and the Gra.nd Promenade is extraor-
dinariiy risk')'_ The concept of the Grand Prome-
nade itself is powerful. &1.d undeniable in its basic
me:rit. A singular or myopic focus on the Grand'
PromeI'.ade as "the solution" for S2.li Pedro, ho\\"-
e...er, is far too narrow in the panel's view. The
panel strongly endorses the concept of the Grand
Promer:.3.de-extending from bridge to break-ca-
ter. On the other hand, the pa.lel has serious res-
ervatior..s concerning the specific pIa... presented
in the ,"VATeH plan as it incorporJ.tes much, of the
exi::.ting land uses a.1'lG the arrangement of u~es
/ along San Pedro's community waterfront.
Shni1:rtly, the ex-pressed belief that the Port of Los
Angeles is the singular problem of the comrnu-
rdty strikes the panel as too facile. To the pane!, it
seerr.s Ul1d,:;:-..iabie L1a! LI}.E port and the San Ped.-o
community in fact haxe been IOngstandi.T!g pari.-
ners in eac.1. other's destiny and economic welfare.
The notion that the porll'owes" the San Pedro
community economic ":-ep<u-ations" for its alleged
ills over the past iOOyears seem5 strd1ge :In.d
misplaced to L'Ie pa.1"JeL
Neither endorsL.-lg nor condemning the portl the
pa"le! starts its \\"ork with the understarld1'!g that
the San Pedro community aIlrl the port haye been
&.1.0 ~iil continue to be linked in a. cormncn destiny.
Despite t.~e strong iinkages between the port and
L"Je SarI Pedro cotn.'7lunity, L1ere has been a. gTDW-
bg gap in their respective e'~onomic conditions
over the past 30 years. The loss or the shipbuild-
ing industrj, aIld the demise of the southern Cali-
fornia fishing fleet and the c:rnneries th.at both were
once an iritep-al par: of the San Pedro \\-aterfront,
are cftencited as reasons. At the same time, the
port has responded to e\'olvmg global market con~
ditions and opportunities ,vith steadily inC'rea...~d
An AIlYisory Sem"". Panel RIlllIl!I
conbinerization and the continuing growth and
popuhrity of the ITlJise ship industry. .~n of this is,
or CQllOSe, old nev."'S to the San Pedl"O community,
Equally old ne~'S is the deterioration of ~1e cen-
L-al core ott.he dmvntown <L"'1d the once-tbiving
local senice retail est.'l.blishments along Si:rth and
Seventh streets and Pacific Ayenue. Similar de-
clines LI1 retail occupancies have oC:1..'Urred along
the waterfront on port-o\\--ned property, specifi-
cally at the Ports 0' Call \image.
The panel has eXaIT'ined the market issues-which
....ill be addressed in more detail later in tIlls report
-and concluded that ma!'ket and development op-
portunities indeed exist, They do not, ho'\:rever, in-
volve the restoration of the old, nor do they entail
the introduction of a major base of national chain
retailers.r:'1e size of the market base limit:: u'te
scope of the retail that is realistically suppor..able
in the cornmunitj",
In cont~t. opportunities abound in the housing
sector. It is ci-=ar that San Pedro is being discov-
erect for it.::: stock of entry-level housing (o!' south.
ern C2lifornia ma!"ket standards! and itS unique
commmut)' character ~J.d scale. The pane! was
stL1"J)rised::.o discover that, in a truidng, 81ppiy.
deficient metropolitan market, so little new hous-
ing has been deveiolJed in to,;:e community and that
the CR).!g development plans (such as the Beacon
Street Redevelopment Projed) do not capitalize
on tris strong and readily a\'ailabie opportunity.
The commu.-ut}-"s underdeveloped tou..rism and .
recreational case also my"'Sti.fi-es tbe panel. Cruise
ship passenger tr-affic is steadily bcreasi.Tig at the
pan a.!1d ma.l'!Y weekend "'day-trippers" a..-e at-
u""3.cted to the reS"'..aurants at tJ"te wateIT-ont. yet
there appear to be no strong effort..'i ;;0 e:xpand on
this opportn....1ity. Signage pointing L.'le 'NaY to the
waterfront a..,d other local attractions is poor or
nonexistent. F-e-w new facilities have been added
and no attempts at "bra.TJding" the San Pedro t."Om-
mUi'lity were evident dur.ngthe panel's vizit.
A..'l obsr.acie to 1nc:'easing to~~m is the funited ac-
cess to and the generally uIioe!'1llaintained charac-
ter of the waterfront. That visitors find their way
the..'"'e in the ~ of COrL.'Using access, poorly mai,1.-
tained physical :mructur~s sueh as the Po~..s 0' CaLl
San Pedro, California. Seplemoer 22-27, 2002
village, a.IlO vLrtuaUy no attention to grounds
mm..'1tenance is a testament to the powerful drJ.W
or the waterfront.
,
h1 the pa..,el's view. it is dot a question of market
potentia] or development opportun.ities. Though
certainly not urJi-rnited. c!eariy discenuble oppor-
tli..:.1ities are readIly at hand. The pane! believes th.e
essential rnarket-driven issues are the follo'wing:
. the need to improve access to and circulation
'lo1thin t.he eom...""nwjty, including "gateway" en..
tries at the northern and sout.hern ends of the
dO"Wiltown area:
. the need to "unlock" ro....al estate sites for devel-
opment.:
. the:::.eed for the adoption of high-quality devei-
opment standard~ and
the need to i..'l\r€st-and to invest significa..Jtly-
in public improvements u-...at raise the quality
and character of San Pedrds public areas in its
downtov.'1lCDre and 'Ilo'ate.rfront.
D0~.{:'~Uil!lje:.n~ j~S.UiSS and Gi1Pun~nti~i;:S
Though the isSUE- of "gatewa.y's" into the downtoWil
lli,jd waterfront areas is not within the panel's
charge or stud}' area, the panel strongly urges
11
10-17
community leaders to address it. If access and
circulation are difficult, it will imp€de the develop-
ment of key sites. An area of immediate need, it
requires attention n01J{, before new public and
private development initiatives advance and then
a.te const:rainc-d.
fhf. 1. ~ ?t~e! S!!~) (;TI-;_-~H:t; ~!i!;.:
How to forge 3. cohesive, well-integrated fra..'11e-
work for the successful den;lopment oi the water~
front and the core dmrntowTI area is the challenge.
At present. the City of Los Angeles Harbor De-
partment controls the waterfront. The city's Com-
murjty Redevelopment Agency has the mandate
for t.,\.o redevelopment areas: the original Bea~
con area and the more recently adopted Pacific
COI1idor area. The boundaries of these areas ad-
join in some places, but they do not overlap.. The
combination of the bOlL'1dary jurisdictional issues
and the basic differences in org-ol.n!zaticnal mission
and sty!.e makes it undenf....andable why a panel
was :requested. \Vhen the Harbor Watts Economic
Deveiopment Corporation. ti'1e Porr. Community
.-\&:isG!'Y COIT'_Ti<:tce, the Sa."l Per1JO Dmrntown
arid \v.atem'ont Task Force, neighborhood coun-
cils, ~he chamber of commerce. and business and
labor ll..njons are addec r.c the mi.y~ eYi:.n r:J.or~ lay-
ers a.'ld interes~s emerge.
it would be easy co suggest yet another overarch-
ing organization or even. an. entity ';\"it.h specifically
focused "joint po>vers" to address these issues. Yetl
in ;:he pa.'1e!)s opi..l1ion, what the COffi.r.lllL'1Ity needs
is to 5"'"WA...am..iine aD.a sL-rnplif:i.
12
10-18
This report pl'o\ides two very speci..fk recommen-
dations regarding ho\v to organizationally mobilize
to impiemem t.he pa.nel's key findings. These are:
the creation of a new liJTIjted-purpose entity-
the San Pedro Communily Waterrronl Tl1Jst-
a nonprofit aS$ociation wnose .so!e purpose is
to hold, improve, and maintain dedicated public
lands on the .waterfront, inciuding a promenade
for the use of all citizer..s: and
. :.he tl'''J.p...:;fom...ation of t..ije Sa.l1 Pedro Do\"\'!!to\\.'TI
and "\oVatemont Task Force into a permanent
org'"d..nization to C'Oordinate the imple.mentation
of 'K:itel'rront and dowl1tmrn development in
Sa.""i Pedro.
These recommendations are de~(."rib6d in more de-
tail b subsequent parts of this report. Adr.Jtiona!
suggestions include sharpening tne focus, the
rriethods of operation, and timetable oi the two
largest exi~ting or~...nization~he Port of Los
Angeles and. the CRA-reiarding directed devel-
opment initiatives in the waterfront area and li1e
I c;re dOwTltO,-",11.
There is an entrenched mosaic or orga.'1izations
'>\ith dire(.t responsibility for or ta.,gibie interE;i:~
i..."'1 the future direc'"Jon of a.."'1d development a~j'd-
ties along the waterfront and i.."1 the adjoining core
community "llrlands.l~ The panel's approach is
simple: to build on the strengths of the existing
orga.'1i:a:ions a.fld to suppiement only where there
is a logical or lli~ed need that is not likely to be
well satisfied by existL."'lg institutions.
All Adviscl'l Seni= Panel Rl>lJ1lrt
t.
"
t
an Pedrols riliitory a.'~ a port hub, a fishing
village. and lacer ~ a livel\\'ork town domi-
nated by the port is stiil in e\"'irience as it
has transfor.ned tnto a multifaceted resi-
dential bedroom communir;.-. San Pedro's identity
is still closely tied w the port,
In the context of w1e greater Los Angeles area,
the port makes a tremendous econorrdc impact
throughout the region. Int.ernational u'ade reja-
tier:.:; L1.."Ough the port are a .\ehic1e for jobs, a
source of direct revenue for wle city of Los Ange-
les., ana a.'1 important component of the Califorrja
and U.S. economie5.. It ~ a symbiotic reiaticl"...srip
in which both the port and the cOIfu'11unity of
San Pedro dra-natically o.~nefit. or suffer at each
other.s ha..'lds,
Sa."l Pedro is also connected. to greate: Los ~~1}g€-
les. Yet, San Ped:o has not. shared in the dynamic
g;owth of the overall met.-opolitar, area. Wlth a
population oi 9.7 million.. Los A..rlgeles is now tne
largest city in the United States. Tne city has an
unemployment- rate of lesE than 5 percent. which
fuels 3...."l ongoing demand for quality- nousi..\1.g L."Om
an eVer-r.;5llg tide of nev.-residents flocking to a
relatively healthy job base. San Pedro, however,
has not o:.aptw""ed its share of new residents or
businesses. San Ped...""O commuters d..:.-h'e to mili-
tar:- bases; office workers drive t.o aOW!1to",,'11 Los
Angeles, Long Beac.h.. Torrance, and other south-
ern California business centers; and seITice work-
ers d...-ive t.D the aL.---por!. San Pedro is wen located,
providL,g residents '.\-1th convenient access to the
rr.ajor employment cente...'"S .in grea-ce!' Los ,-\...?lge-
les, but it is not positioned to (:<J.pture the residen.
tial. retail, or office market o<;re!'!iow~
San Pedro's strengths are clear and marketable,
aIld should be built upon. Tne t.oW!l has interesting
arehiteetll..~ and beamL.-uny restored buildings,
such as the Wa.rner Gr-an.d Theater. a 1930sart
deeD mO\o"'1e theater that ~ often used as a set in
the produc.tion of films. The museums, the 'Korean
San Pedro, Califomi2.. September 22-27, 2002
Bell-given to Los .,i....:1gele~ in 1976 by South Korea
to symboHze the friendship between the two
COWltrle:;-the sbps. the fascinating "-1sual show
of a working port.. th.e dis~inctiv.e restauran.:s, and
the flourishing arts community are assets that
enhance the quality of life and define the character
of this plate. Most Unporta..~t, San Pedro has per-
sonality.
To recognize SarI. Pedro~s market potential is to
ernbl"ace the fact that approximately 40 pen.-ent of
San Pedro's residents are Hispa..'lic and that this
segment of the community is as integral to San
Pedro as the Port of Los Angeles. Greater Las
A.ngeles has nearly double t.he number of Hispanic
residents of any other city in the nation-4.5 mil-
lior.. TJili; dern~grappjc' r~"ant)" is reflected LTl t.he
San Pedro tommuniQ-. Wlthi.n walking distance of
downto,,""!l. 68.5 per:ent of residents are F..i<;pa.r1ic.
T'he preS'en~e Qf this ethnic group contL'rm€s San
Pedro's rich history as the home of hardworking
i..'TImigrant fu.-nines_ Ift..'le t.OI,\"T!'S foumiing farnilies
and cOIrununity leaders reg;u:d the Hi"pail.!c com-
munity as an obstacle, or regard it as irrelevant.
then San Pedro vdH not realize its captive 01]}-'-
L'1g po\ver.
San PedrO'5 downtown was once th.:.-iving, v.itb
family-mvned businesses and destination retail at
PortS 0' Call 'tlillage at the harbor. .~ th~ eompo-
sition of residents u" irl.g in San Pedro chaI1.ged. a
radical transformation of the retail industry \\a.s
happening simultaneou:::ly. San P-=d.ro's history as
a fishi.~g \.illage and a company town dominated
by harbor worke..~ gave \'ray as immigrants moved
in and low-income housing was built. and affluent
second- and third-generation residents, seeking a
suburban lifestyle, C!'ossed 'V~5tern A-venue.,
DOwntO\\llS in eV!?!"'i city ac.."'LJSS G1.e eoun~,r iest
customers to malls as the population shifted to
10-19
13
,
suburbs_ Now-adays, as American lifestyles con-
tinue to change, malls arc feeli.'1g w.i.e squeeze from
big-box retail, with Wal-Nlart leading the cha.rge.
San Pedro's average household inrome is below
the natiol'..al avet"'dg€. :';onetheless, approximately
half or all residents within walki.ng distance of
downtown ha\-re household incomes more than
$50,OQD and 41 percent are \\hitE-Coilar workers.
Also, upscale city sbgles behveen 25 to 35 yea.~ .
of agf: have discovered San Pec'J'o, 5nding it ar,
attractive ami fun place to Iive.
San ?ed.-o is grou,ing at less L1an 1 j..'e:!'cent a rear.
It is not declining, nor is it snl'Toll.:l.ded by omw4l.7d
gromh away from tD>rn.. High-income gTo\\"th is
creeping ever slowly ar'Otmd the edges of Western
Avenue, along the coast, and in. ward..
Exist1."lg retailers in dO~uwwn San Pelli!) ca.'} pro-
vide a base upon which to reestablish the business
districr.asa p:edesL"';.an destination. Fortltis to r.ap-
pen,L'1e area nEeds to be repositioned .as a bou-
tique shopping.uye:::., "With. specialty tena..1.!.s cater.
ing to tourists and local residents beyond Gaffey
Street. CUITently..foot traffic from L'1e \'\:aterfront
.to dov;;-nto,;\ll is nO( si!;-n:ifica,lt. San Pedro's. dOWTI-
tC~l1 can be tied to its vraterIrom. provided that
waterfront ~tail uses are cQmplement<4..y <L."'ld en~
han~ the o;;erall San Pedro retail expe..rience.
Downto'wn lies outside San Pedro'snwtr-a.:.-SC
eorridors-Gaifey Street and PacUit AVEnue. Its
restalli-ants and stores are visited as destinations
14
10-20
or because of the cross-tlOw of pedestrian tra.ffie.
Major retailers that serve moderate-income pa-
trons c.an capture this the market more effec.tively
on Gaffey Street than on Seventh Street. TOur1St-
oriented retail can. c2pture cruise ship traveler::
most effectively at the waterJont, especially if
it is located iIt a pleasant, open departure area.
Therefore. if dO'\\uto\vn ls going to be revitalize-d
into a vibrant, active desti.'1ation. the chamber of
commerce must cDordinate plam-ring. marketing,
and management efforts \viL~ the port.
San Pedro's restalL.''tIJlts are core ret:ril anchors.
The unique and friendly gatheringp!aces that fea-
ture ethnic foods constitute an advantage for Sa.."l
Pedro in the competition v;ith predictable chain
restaurants. With their diverse atmospheres and
elienteles, restaurants such as Papada..Lds Taverna.
the Fish M?,J'ket, '\'hale & .Ale, Ante's Croatian
Restaurant, and Sacred Grotmds coffee shcp could
not be re-created elsewhere.
Successful restaUr."'aIl:s in Sa.>: Pedro add to ::he
aut!.1enticity, c..~cter, depth.~ a..'ld allure of the re-
tail en'-'1ronment. They are also pivotal to attract-
ing customers from t..~e :;nrise ships. from the other
side of Western Avenue. and from throughout the
gre~lte!" Los A..11geles area. Parts 01 Call Vil.L'lge is
obsolete.. yet 72 percent of San P,=d!o~s residents
say it has good restaurants_ No trendy themed
chain restaurlli"1.! is better ror San Pedro's ret2il
market position than its lcng-term~ fa."'TIily-owned
and --operated gathering places. San Pedro can
build upon this traditional iegacy. indeed. the
see.mingly strong s.ales volumes or the existiItg
restaurants are the most credible marketing
tooi availabie for attracting significant upscale
ret.::wers.
B~usethe 6t,y L-.:. blessed v.-ith a vibrant 3l';'c.3 com.
munity, San Ped.ro's galleries also are ieading the
way to ereatLl1g a un.ique retail destination. The
area across from the Los ~~'lgeles County Court-
house shows what f:;:-sr. needs to happen lor the
d(l~~utoi.rn to rebuild. btQ a pedestrian-mendly
n~tail corridor. DO'W1ltoWD merchants that sen-e
niche lifestyie interests. such as the local ,...-me snop,
{:aTJ draw from both area residents and tour..sts.
JIll AllIIism'J SmlteS !'allol Repllt!
lurJ1g th.emfrom the concentration of enter'"~-
ment uses <Lid restaurants at the pmi.
Upscale retailers seek locations \vnere they ca.1 hit
the bull's-eye of m.a.'\.-lmum density of high-income
residents. These retailers view Sa.11 Pedro from
the conte:.."! of covering the Los A..ngeles market.
San Pedro's residential market is not yet strong
enough to justi."'y a retailer tiJ open a separate ID-
eation on tlris peninsula. and the tourIst market
has not been estabLished to effectively compete
-Ili'ith the destination offeri"lgs in Long Beach. F"or
e."i:ample. when a Border's Books & Music or a
Bames & Noble e\'<i1uates the greater Los &'1ge-
les market, it zeroes in on hC'.\' to locate clDsest to
the greatest volume of college-educatcd, higb-in~
come households 'With high purd:a<:;e rates.
In the absence QfideallocatioDi: '",ithin the strong-
est residential base. retailers locate where other
retailers are already achievbg high sale:; volu.i'nes.
Sa."'1 Pedro does not :ret have the residential or :he
tourist base to support retail as the lead eeonomie
re\it:lii~::>tiCln tooL HO"'''ever, population ai1d In-
comegrmvth :5ignal~ to retailers L",at an opportu-
nity to locate ,in an up-and-coITling !"esidential a.nd
tou..',oist marke~ e..."tists. By ;:"e'.italizing i~ housing
st.ock and welcoming new residents. San Pedro
\\-111 b€ ta.\ring powerful steps toward effecting re.
tail econOIi'jc development.
Retail re",itaJ.:ization trom t.he inside out 15 more
likely to be successful in &in Pedro because it is
already slowly happening. Business incentive pre,..
gr-'d.InS to eneourag'i: startu[Js suould be in place tD
foster entrepreneu.."Ship and to stimulate demand
arnong potential tef'.ants for vacant space do-WTI-
town a.'1d at the waterfront. 'Vacant buildings
around clo\A-,nto\\'TI a.TJ.Q in \-<1ew or the coru'Jedion
between the waterfront a.f'J<l do?-'11to"W"TI may be
pri....ne- retaillaea:ions one day _ Funds to pUl.\:..r....a..~e
and pro>-ide buildour. expenses and fum..1Ong for
key locations to connect Qmvnto"\TIl to the water-
front should be considered_
.-G j : ~,
C1l1"b appeal is diffiC".llt to maintain in a retail envi-
ronment filled v.ith public streets a.'1d independent
San ?e-aro, California, September 22-27, 2002
owners. To the extent that retail in Sim Pedro can
be treated as though it were im-estment propenYr
managed, maintai..'1ed, and operated as a cohesive
shopping center, the prospects for attracting and
retaining quality reta:lers wJI improve. Safety,
cleanliness, consistent signag~, frontage wndi-
tions, parking availability! and marketing cannot
make a retail mstlici successful, but their absence
can c.1.u-se it to fail.
Professional management would need to include
waLi.:.ing safety patrols and the prov':.sion of fre-
quently cleaned public restrOo.i11S. Training and
quality audits for senice, display, merchandising,
and coordinated marketing programs VtlJuld help
to unify ret.1.ileI"'5. ff the waterfront, Joe-a! cultural
attractions, and the downtown ;u:e marketed i:n
urjson, they will all benefit from the increased
perception of critical mass and from eross L?"3iEc,
Furthermore. the dowmown district should be
dearly demarcated at both of its entr)' pDims,
There are no postcards, T-shirts, or coffee mugs
emblazaned\1'ith irnages of San Pedro: it is nOi:
otn'iou~ how to beSt s~n1 a day and a dollar 1.'1
San Pedr-o. '
ROUSL')-g Starts are an alternative tool rEtailers
llse to assess arr.arker. when sales volumes or de-
mographics do not match spending power, The
Los Angeles hotb--m.g market is SlJ unde..vsupplied
that nationai housing reportS currently list the va-
cmcy rate as '"Virtually nOlle." Studies completed
in 2002 for San Pedro e~Jmate that the housing
demand could support over 3.000 new u..--nts, yet
15
10-21
t.i'tere may have been fewer than 8.50 net new unit::;
a.dded in the past ten years. Orjy 27 perrnits were
is:::ued in 2001, with the first ~i.'{ ~onths 0[2002 on
pm' with this pace.
Housing gro\\'th stimulates commercial gTo\\?th.
Silll Pedro's housirlg market is out of ::;Y<1eh ,..it!:
the greater Los A..I'lgeles market. The residential
buying power necessary to attract and support
viable retail do..vntown and at the \\.atern-ont lies
on t:1E ot:.~er side of\Vest,ern Avenue.. The deyel-
opment Ofrnil.2.ket-rate lr'!fill hCU5L.'1g lTJ. quamitie...;;
large enough to counter the disproportionate share
of lo\v-income &;'"ld special needs housL.'1g' that has
been a!located to San Pedro can happ.:m only if
L.~ere are parcels large enough t.o create an im-
pact. A,a in.fusion of fa.TJlies to counter the nega-
tin: perception oT gangs and trlli1.Siems is possible
orJy UtJ1e housing stoc.~ and the COIT'_r:l'.:iPJty are
attractive and well maint.ai..1'J..ed and there are ade-
quate e-ducational oppormnities.
'i,vltn a 4.0 percem \.",c-.ancy idLe ir, the Sa...:. Pedro
oEice and indusL":..a! marketa.-ea office develop-
ment,is not recommended as a stratE:g:i" for eco-
norric de\'elopmem. at t.his time. Thougn nor. <l
priority. new office de-veloprnen: constitu.tes a
PQten~ial option if cer..a.in conditions are met.. Re--
spor...sible oruce de....elopment in today\~ economy
in....olves preleasing ar pres~lling to stable, credit~
worthy busin~::e5 with t.he potential to provide
li':able-wage jobs for io-:aJ residents.
Economic developme;J.t teenllters could use ta.,-:
ince:r:.tves and GL1er l'esources to attr11.ct large-
f{)otpl'int temmt5 who nrould gain some advantage
by locating near the port. Potentia! te..1ants ir:-
elude ver;.dors.: suppiie-s. investors, lenciers~ ser.
...;ces pl'o\iders, and compa:.l.ies that al.:-eady do
busL.'i.ess wi~h the pan.. Relatively proxiIr:ate ta
LosA!1geles Intermu.:ional and Long Beach air-
por..s. San Pedro is a eommuUl.oie dis~T\ce to
other major employment centers in Los Angele:::,
pro\iding a..i additional ad....antage.to prospee:.:ive
ornce tenants.
16
10-22
;i:!..L,
;;:t"".
; ';. f~! , : ~ t';! I :'
:Ui}
Sat;. Pedro's \vaterfrunt can rilld ~hould be the cat-
alyst for t.he community. There are numerous ex-
am.ples of sueces::;ful waterfront projects all along
the \Ve~t CQ~t. indeed all Q\-er the world. :MOSL
of the succe52ful uses a..re a combination or parks~
public {acUities, and cornznercial ser"llces.
An acti\-e container port does not preclude the po-
tentia! fur active recreational areas. Charleston,
South Carolina, for example, is the second-hu.gest
contair'.er port on the East Coas~; it aLc:o has oo:ome
one or !..1€ nation1s most upsc.c'ue tourist desti.fJ.ationsl
c.-elebrating its IT'ilita.7, industriaL sociaL and ar-
chitectural hIstory. The most appropriate u~es for
Sa.."'! Pedrds \vaterr.ront are those that preserve
tbe al.lth.Entic:Ly oftrus eOljlJl1urjty, provide active
recl"eational opportunities for re~id€nts, and offer
retail uses arld ...-:sua.! entertainment for crui~e
ship tourists.
Ll1 the paner.::; '\;ew. this iE a ';mrking waterfront
/ that. ;::an celebrat.e :he harbo: and i:s heritag~.
The waterfront should nm. become a st.erile envi~
fO.r.Ine;;.t... It also shoulc not be dominated by t...~n
retaiiE..'"S ~}12t can he replicated at Long Beach or
aIi;'where eJ:-~.
The waterfront CGT; be ar, economic engii"le ITi mill:.....
W2;.'S. Becaw::e erildren constitute 25 percent of
Sa..TJ Pedro's popular.ior,~ the 'T."J.:errront needs ;;0
be a pla~e where thi'1~-S can be touched and climbed
OL and this fact should be, reflected in any devel-
opment plans. The foilo~"":J.;.:g is a partial list of po-
temial ac:h.-e and passive recreationaL l'etail: and
eme.:-:.a1il..!!lent uses for development on part I.ami:
parks and trails:
musell...Tfl.$ and aqua.!."iu:ns;
public- an ~-aneries:
interpretive historical and educational opporw-
nities;
boati-:.g, wi:,dstJ.!1i.'l~, and hang gliding:
. wildlife \iew:ng;
. festivalJst.aging;
An Ali'JIsllry Semces P""el Heplll!
. touri"sI1-oI1ented retail and re~talU-ants \\;th
outdoor seating;
. athletic facilities;
. fishir.g/fishing tharters:
. retired naval ships, '.\leeks, and submarines;
. bota.:.-ucal gardens;
. a cooking school;
. carriage rides;
San Pedro. CaJrtcmia. September 22-27, 2002
a chapel;
. a band sheJ1lamphitheater;
. markets-fish. produce, flowers. ca.'1dy;
. a resort hcte~
, shipbuilding; and
. a mal"lnaJr.aucical shopfoass pro shop.
J
,
17
10-23
;~, '!";'. ~
.~ I(~ i
."i
H
lan'ning a."'ld design are central to marlY of
the issues confronting the community of
San Pedro~ and they also pro\ide potential
solutions. The hist01ica! physical plar~i!1g
grid was an effective link to the oceanfront envi-
ronment for early businesses and residents. Over
cLue. indust.-ial. port, and trar.1spor;..ation u..~s have
disconnected the waterfront from the historical
downtown of San Pedro. Reclaiming the physical
relationship between the San Pedro community
a.nd t.he waterfront is essential to physic-a! P?\ita.!-
ization, in the par1el's OpLi1.ion.
Numerous studies haye beer. conducted oyer re-
cent years. The Pacific Corridor Redevelopment
Project. Report; the Beat"OTI Street Redevelop-
ment Project and even the San Pedro General
Plar. are all examples. The Pacmc Corridor Rede-
yelopmem Projet't RepoIi.: adOPLed in. 113y 200"2,
€:5tabIished a clear mission and comprehensive
goals for most of the traditional downtown San
Pedro cOlT.muJlity, Calling for neighborhood pres-
erY.:lUOD and rehabilitation. it identifies the:natic
elements to tie the dG'...-m.owll to the harbor. ThesE
pians r.aye been thoughtful. and many of the con-
clusions reac..~ed al'e similar to t.1c-se of the paneL
However. the plannii1g process has been discon-
nected, wi.th. une,,'en implementation.
Recent \isioning exercises through commu.llit:,"
'workshops. and ad\r1sO!:Y groups bve made signif-
icant progTESS in breaking 00\\71 ba..rners among
t.l-te "HriOUS stakeholders. These efforts also have
identified divergent opinions. It is ti.'fJle to build on
the subst3.ntial consensllS reached t.hrough studies
like the WATCH plan and to continue to resolve
points of contention. As the panellea..."'Ued during
its ,'isit, the "alignment" or political interests and
L'>-J.e desire or community members to trust one aT.:-
oth.e!:', (,'ity institutior.s, and eiected leaders ha....e
never been better.
Immediate p!an.."jng initiatives should lay t..':1e foun-
dation ror the S1aJ. implementation of the follcl'\ving:
13
10-24
'.i
.. eormect the dD\\11town grid directjy to the wa-
tel;::'ont;
imroduce- clec:.r gat.€w:1)rs to the ,:ommunity "'li1:
way-fmding -signage while establishing a strong
entry along Harbor Boulevard;
.. est.ablish distinctive subdistricts along the prom.
enade, L"!.c!uding a cruise terminal. a rna.!irime
museum and civic center, a festival park. a fish-
ing \"illage, 2.J.....d a maliTIa;
.. c:rea!.e a new Crescent traditional neighborhood
de..'elopment;
d~4.Ile the dO"",lllOWTl corrunercial area, 'i\lth Si.\"ili
S'C.reer a.~ the "main street." ?aciEc A',,-enue as
t.he '"'market street," and Seventh St.r8et as the
"ar;:isti\\--alk";
t~~aD1i~h "addressesl' for re.si::i.ential neighbor-
hooes and preEef\~e anc strengtnen communi\:y
cormeetior.s;
cO!'Jlect ClutUr"d. a..-ne!'lti.::s wi~h open sp3ce and
re-=eanon resources:
de-;:eiop p<c~l B-2 a.;; mi.'\:;:c-use do~to\m hOlL'-
ing with ground-uoor ret.ail:.and
encourage residential i....ri'ill.
Clemiy, L"Ie powerful concept of the promenade,
e!lgende-red by t..>-te \VATCH pian.ring proc~ss. ~.
established an effective symbol for opening access
for thE Sa.I1. Pedro ccrnrmmi;:y to the sea. The prom-
enade t'oncepr a:lm':s for tne i..'1.troduction of a mi.\:
of eompatible. nonindustrial uses~ both public
a.nd pri\'ate. aiong the waterfront. induciing
recreation, re!.ail, a..1d resc.alL."'ants as n-ell.as an
e.\.-pa.~ded cruise terminal facility, a maritime mu-
se!.Iffi.. public m"t., and the commercial lisPing \.;1-
iage. To be sllcr..-essful. ~his C",Jncept can be impl.;:-
mentec. v.iLi1 consideration gi,...en. to the folio,,-i...n.g:
priorities:
An AdviSnIY Serriclls p""", Re;Jflrt
) 0 '4@t? 0 (~:;~:";~~
JU DO D:~,~"",,-",",~,
O oo,;nr'l ~ r
I . . I,\! Li I
~",,~;O' ~~J '..~"", I '_ I:::: 1;<:1 i
tk,;~~"""'''C;l L,~....~~ . ".' L.'" j"Ct__JL __ L-.......
'.....IN'I !t"'Oli"":I"U'''''~' I tn. fD' .0' ID~u"'",,~:.r\\Lln, l'U-'-::u:'"'~""I"'-~'
, , . !" 13 , ti ,! ,~ : I ~I \ 'L L u
'----' ~ L.:::::-J ---' _ _ _ --! -""rJ:J...u...~~
~; 0 Ot;J,O,O,O:O 0 0 nj~ngilo p ~ ~ I:~E~;,:._
%itJkii'iO!:...~" ~""l'Y'R"~L'- ,-.-.; =~=-:S:~:;:L~'ro -,' ~ ,
';;'::'..';"~~~:~D ~~~;;;fZl~,~
~-, .')~~- -Lr'~:""_'-'''~~~::"~/ c:-//~
v~.,:_,) '~"""~,- .~,.. ".~-',~".,:, ,'/~! '
M '.111 ~ :~"~"C ! J ~"'" ,/
!.;;.J .. ) J
/ ....::') "-J
, - ;<~"II~
~ (;. 5,",,,,,
F,!>c,~~.~,=
'sr>;"f~.i~
;:~
h~
~,
:~,.....,;~", ,~'"'~."
'~I.:c,,':I '-"., '\
'oy.
>:;:~"_-:';3!
.",,,~.;m, ,;:,-:-;,...;11 !;,,$;":sc..; ;:..':..~;c~, wi;:~ ~"""~e:J Mox:d 'J"'~
~
,:"""".,,,.,,::yWa,:.e..-f,,,rr.:""''',
i::"-,.'."~'-..J ,,,,!!;:::.::.:e,......i :r. ".~~~ ~;;li..i.,~~
~ 'Ow"';;;w~ :;:vcla;>"'~"'"t. $J:~
!'~D,lc ,"cc~~~
Agree on the desi.'"<lbility ai1d validity of the
prornenade--e..\.tending from bri.dge to break-
water-to be implemented in a series of phases
O\.-er the next decade.
Begin detailed design of a specific section of the
promenade immediately.
. Identi.':"! the light eonst..."'Uctior. "starti.ng poi.nt. fl
The portion of the promenade between tile V....orld
Cruise Center and the Los AngeJes 1Ia..""itime
Museum wouJd proTIde significant ~)-nergy
aznong the activities at the ter!ni.."lall the mu~
seum., and the restaurants and shops dO~'TItown.
San Pedro. California September 22-27. 2002
. Execute the B...."St SEEmen! with skill a..,l.d kee::.
at:entiorl to detaiL The quality of design and
:materials used will be w."'i~ic:1L
Ensure Lu-t t:lli initi2..! pr.2S€ is contenw.-ated
and focused. E\-en L~ough work might start on
remediation, demolitior.... and cor..su-uction at dis-
cennected points along :"'1e promenade., the :'L-s
new phase must deliver a dear. coherent
seheme that sumds on its own.
. Make the btial section work 'Aith L":1prov~
ments on SL-xth ~jd Seventh 3i:!'eets al'ld Patine
19
10-25
=:' ~"'""',.., jo..,,~
I ,1 "'~;"c~.t;..1 N,,~~;,:,~c:q
Ii IU' ,"
~LI ULJ
-'nO'OOI J'ee",,;! ,.,',
j I ! ~=-~:,;J.. r:;;;.J;O"~'
-'- '--~"._., ~_. '- <~,:<"
::.:..:.J~~~ c::J c:=J~~J~'J[:~,;:.
l c~rGr':'7]"'-=/;
~, i Il,c ?:~':;:;,?) t;~
~,~'~"'(l -:J0
.,~~~,p<S;j (lj'
.<:~ /
''''-'c'-'
=..'ft.--".j(.'~~~''''i
'^
~
-,
V!C'"..cr'Ju.~", \
"AC~S1\~"
""',"'""'Wi!r
tY'~'i-1:
Jlf7J
jjJ
1h)~.."_' _ I
',:J::*_i6.L~,(,\':) (vvayr''''O-I'''a ,,'
~"":1'o;;;.;,;~,~ -
o '(8) 0 I Pad," ""
o []] 0:-0
I O[lOiDO 0 l
DO · Cl[
]00 ~]J~,
.' '~~~\"'.<:I"'um
.: tlliJ~. ffaa,,""""
~c ~~~
L_':". Mari~im~ M:":s~l.!m Di~~d~ ;:~.
S't.<l-:icl":
2!J
10-26
AY0nUe to deliver a series of visual experiences
that "tell the stlJry" of San Pedro.
. .Ma.ke tbe design t1~xible to ove!"tome tec.'uucai
and operational impedii'nents; :;lle:h as ac:ce~s to
s}1jp~.
. Deliver recognizable "districts" such as the sug-
gested DO\\"Iltown, MU.5€um, and Cre~enr. dis-
tncts. adding \'anety to and unique signatures
for each segment.
. Program the promenade to lli'1k e.tisiing reSOlU'ces
such as the ma.ritime museum, the aquariU!l1,
the fishing fleet, the beach, and the pier. These
existing elements should be simult..1..i1eou~ly -im-
proyed and expanded.
. Maintain an appropliate el'.ic character while
deliyering the tmique, au::hentic experience of
an active seaport \\ith a 3ignilicant hllii.oriea1
iegacy.
. Use the promenade and A..ngels Gate as icon~ to
heip es~blisn a "San Pedro brand idemity. ~
J;' ...~,. .n'
1i. adch-essbg the de...eiopment or 6e \vate!"fron::.,
G1€ pa..."1e! has cieli:nea~ed tne followlilg de\'ein~-
ment districts: DistricllA. District IB, we Mu-
seLlm Di..<;L'icr., 2.:."1d the Crescent Di5trict. For lne
panel's purposes. the central busine.'is distl'lCt
rLulS fr(L.11 Harbor B011Ie\':J.;G to PaciJic Avenue.
The North Opportunities Diagrams (on page::: 19,
2{), and 21) de!ine3~e these di5~riC:5 and pro\'jde
a.il overall view of the panel's recommendations..
Separated iTom t...1.e dov:ntown by HarDor Boul~
\"ard. Dist::ict lA stretches from approximately
Third Street tv the c::-'Jise terminaL Pm' Disw:iet
Lt\..: the panel recommends:
. redeveloping HarDor Boulevard as a strong
emry so that it does not C"J.: off the QOV.'ilWWT:
from tJ.~e wateffi-on:;
. deyeloping a rrixed-use I::'Oject i..n. tb.e a..rea
south of the cruise terminal;
. internalizing the parking structures for tn~
mi'CeC-use develo9m.ent and the eruis~ te..T)T1..!::121,
An Advis...~ Se."'fices Panel Report
liPlng the structures \',ith commercial a.nd retail
uses to sc:-een parking; and
. designing public aeeeS:5 to the promenade and
L1.e wate1.Tront that is sensitive to the security
n~s of the cnrise ter.ninaL
The Museum Distdct encompasses the area sur-
rounding the Los Angeles .Maritime Museum be-
tween appro:dmate!y Third aJ'I.d ~Enth streets.
F or the .Museum Distr1ctl the pa.11el suggests:
. lor:ating loc::!.l mU$euIT'-S in one a:ea. giVl.'1g them
an. identity;
alio~ing the Los .-\.ngel~s :M~'"ithne Museul'l1. to
expand its collection into a n.ew building along
tbe promenade;
. consideri:.:.g vpening ",he old ferry terminal that
is currently a part of the Los A_'1geles y~time
1'fusel..L."'!1, if the museum n<l.S the opporr:;.:..,"}.ity:o
expand; and
. wea\i.'r1.g pedestrian wate....rf.ront access along arId
around the existing Los A..'lgeles Ma...riti"!'.e Mu-
seu.m buildi"lg. prov~ding a waterfront prome-
nade where-ver possible.
District IB e.\"tends from the edge of the :Nlusellill
District at approximately Ni..:":i.h St.reet to the
edge of the mahJ. ehalll1.el. including Ports 0' Call.
District 13 reiriort'€:s the entry to the por"", The
panel recommends:
. developing a port museum or other public build-
ings;
displaying an entry seulptu~ that \\iil prc>"l,ide
a 3ignature statement and all opponurjty :for
new artj
. c.reating a waterfront park where people e-Ml
watch the boats-and where cruise smp passen-
gers mIl watch the people in the park~ a.'1.d
. erecting a collection of public L.'1terpretation
pavilions in the park to showca....~ information on
the port. loea! history, or the fishing industry.
The Crescent District folio\vs Crescent Avenue
to the Caorillo MarIna. The panel has based its
reeummendations for the Crescent District on the
as5ll.:'T:ption that the porrs plans for the Cabrillo II
San Pedro, California. September 22-2i, 2002
Jl
i Ii: i~'""U~f"<'l'~TU" .' n~u~
LJ L-i ,~ ~:. L-~ -~
'JODi ,0,00,01
,,>:S~'liJ.S'?~'7~~~r:i;~
c.<~<~ ...~;;;~'v/"'..~"s.
:;L~~";,:~ v ~~ '.
.1F~' :PJ;;Y~. ~q.ti.~~
/j~~
jfl{'" ~M'~",.
~ ~Z;< ".,,~ //
"'-":+"..1 .~.>Vi...~,,1
"'~'''~~='~''C~ ;.,~,..~""
marina ~iil proceed in the near terrrt Howe"'e!.~
the pa.1.el believes that tills land. is toO ..-aluabie ior
la."1d .based boat sales a:..~cJ would be better used for
re~idential development. The SOUL1 Oppon'J.!1i.;:ies
Diagram (on page 22) shows the p&.'1el':: contir:-
ued promotion or tne pro.rne:n.ad€: a...1.d waterfront
ac-:€ss where pcssibie alor:g t.he east:/w'est cha.:.1.ne~.
It also contaiI15 the panel's ~et'om.-nendation5 fo;
developing housing below the bluff in a :r.a.'1ner
that creates a waterfront suooi.-:mcL Residemial
development shOUld L'l.c!ucie the folio",i"1~
. a street plaza:
. a public gree..!l;
linkages to the ~aterirom and park:
tie.:: into exzsti:n.g cr'~u.iation patte!'!:;
. building mass de:::ig:n.ed v.ith se::siti'-.ity to
nev.-s; and
. a pede!':trian-mencl1y layout.
T.~e pa.nel suggests that be ful-ill:g fleet be TII2.ln-
tained, v-ith the addition of a retail 5srti.'"'l.g st.ore
to cOffi;:>iement the commercial 5sh market. The
pane! did not specifically adaress Warenouse L
Howeyer. the panel believes that the fua.11CiaI
merii:.3 of the adaptive use of this buikiing should
21
10-27
-, r ~ '~;EJ""'---' r-,
.\\~ ' ~ ~ t.
\~dQ=Dn ,f '~
'~~~.w~uD~DDnh..
\r~~~\JDuLJDD_
~ .m"" .~~~ ~CJL :::JDu.,,,,,~__
~ "..- ~Q'~":'<)&e ;'O'>~;---, '-- 'Q.~~~ '.,~,.-,..
"\1,'1\~" ,- , '"
~ '1;1" -""<:';"4 ..0;:' -"
~ ;I,\;~ $7:i~. \. c-<'V~c;. '" ...-n-'"c='''
~ !.\ \-2, ~&dOCD =re- "~",.r<:B"0-
\~'Y,!'.' I>P)W~ /~~.:;...."
~ ,~.~/j lY'v' '.,"'
_______ ' , :::d 0,1"
. \' ;.,y~-; ~v r
. ---':;"-' //;> "
--- rv- ::%Y" / /,
_....~~C1 I ~ t;.:.:.l
/ ~ ~/.. ~~ ,.~>~.".,
~~~ ~.".--i~---
.....-: .. -"'~"
\~
be eyaluated: if reuse is not costwbeneficial: the
st!1.lc:,ure should be temo\-ed to permit a complete
redeyeiopment of the a..-e...~ ru."ld the waterfront..
,I
F or the 5-2 site, the pa."1el recommends the devel- I
opm~m of a :r...;-~e~ to fOur-StaT;''" IT'i..-;:t-d-us~ oGild-
lng ",ith 5W'eet-level commercial spacE topped by
!'esidential uni:s. In the i1lu:;t,~tiorlS on !Jage za.
:h::: p<l;.H:~1 suggest::: a design tha: fotL:sE:s on an
e:,~'r cou....::rard, \\i!h coye..:.-ed a.---:-.;!ri~s lining :he
commercial :--:pace on three sides: of L~e stl"Ucture
v.ith ar. architectural style and roof lines L".at re-
flect those or the 10C'J..i a..-ea. A th..ree- w four-story
builci.ing or this r}rpe cr..!'. pro\ide a tr2...1.sition from
the current stocJ.: ofhisto:ic t-,,\,0-story ~tmctur~s
to th~ large commercial buildiIlgs Emm the 19705.
In terms of the sequencing oi physical de'teiop-
ment, the pane! recoITI.."1lenas focus1ng first on ~he
prom~nade and faeaae ilT.prO\'emen~ in ::nE: cer..
::rai Dusines3 diE:ric:. :\ ew cornmercia.! nses in Dis-
triCl U\,'should be developed nex:, cor1..T.!ec+ing G.1E:
t:n~i;:;e terminal to the bottom of SLV:b. StreeL De-
velopment in Dist..;ct 13 should upgrade existi;i:g
,es:::aurant~ a.lJ.d shops and L'1t:'"oduce new one;;: at
PO:rt.3 0' Call Village. Then the development of
chic buildi,'l2'S. suc:: as 2..:, a!Ine:o: for t.:1€ T.a...-ii::ne
musetGn 2nd a waterfront pC'.rk. should foUo......-.
22
10-28
'<r.
;>,C'?,~~,; .".l~d.l".i
:Z~e!t'J~,..~'a!
:::"~"y!GJl~",,~
c.. ~ .' ' " ;"i
It is difficult for V!SI'tors: to iocate dO.,uiown San
Pe0,ro and the \l,.aterfront.. As depicted iT: the !eft-
hanc. illust..'""ation on page 2.i1 the 8!1trance to the
historic centr?J ~usiness dis'-;....>1cr. and the water-
t-oIJ.: lies well outside these areas. Opportunities
exist clang the primary verJc:!€ circulation routes
-Harbor Freeway, Gaffey S'wS€t, a.nd Harbor
Boulevc:o--to u~e signage tc. create "gateways"
leadbg visitors to the dOVi1lto,,'1l and the water-
front.
Vel-ojcie access along Pacific Ave!:!ue is not we!coI:l-
ing. There are few. if any, signs directing motor-
ists to- the waterfront and its a...nenities. hnprove-
ment;:; in access and wa::wding can make Sa..i
Pe~Q easter to visit. Consideration shenld be
given t.o the quality a'1d Ioc<l'tion of signs to
achieve the greatest impact.
~ -.. . ,- ...
DOW pr:..r."Tla!''}' aIlU seconaar:.,: gateways prO\lO!Ilg
ver..ieula:- a.J.d pecie::-'trian ,K~..:ess to the SaIl Ped"ro
dO'O\;'TIto....ll and v.""atemont are identified in the
righi:~hafid Wustra;:ion on page 24. Signa.ge should
be 'Jsed at these Li1tersedions to direct yisitors to
the aOvYTItOWll.. w.1E watertrDnt, and parking 21."eas,
giving cor.sideration to pedestria.rl circulation
roU\;25. The themes fcr the area shouid be noted
on the signage.
An Advism'I Sel1i= Par..1 Re;lorl
Public L.-rrrastrucr:uri? improvements designed to
tiIl....\.:; the dOm1to'\l.Jl and the waterfront should ir:-
cbde pedestrian crosswalks. sign:.11i7-<ltion irn-
nro\-e:ments, clem: si!Z!l~e fO!' directions, way-
Endi:.g and branding: p';king npgTudes, facade
irnDr{wements alonE' Si.\.-J;. and Seventh s:.:.-eets:
op~n spate develop~e41t, and tree piantL.'l.g, The.
panel's ':ision for these improvements as they
relar:E to Harbor Boulevard is deDicted in :i1€-
illustration on page 25,
Clusten"1g improvements along the main roads i.:.
the cent:-al business disL"ct ::hat lead to the >\'d.ter-
from can pro\,ide gT'i::ater yisual LTUpact. and ::he
use of sigT.:.age can CJ1a:racter.ze San Pedro as a
place with an identity, Facade improvements,
storeiron: awnings. a..'"1d o~he:- elements tha~ ::ar.
tie togethe~ t.he resta\l.."2J1ts and the shops C2..'1.
create a welcoming awnosphe!"e. GuidelL'1es pro-
mot.ing good design 3houid be set using the many
exa.:-nples of building facade and s~reetsca?E: i.rn-
provement::: that exist in downtov.'!l San Pedrc as
benc1unarks to evaluate proposals..
.: ,t~~:~'f~ '.;'":::' ~-r'i.'
rJj~ ':';U H~~
~, ,
Residential developmenL especiailj-' new rn.<u>ket-
ratE: housing. is an e-cective to.oJ to stimulate exist-
fig com.-nerci.al a.lJ.d residential are2S fu'1d act as a
San Pedro, California, Seotember '22.-27.2002
.ll~
I~
cata.!yst fOl' new retaiL office> and tOlli-lsm uses:.
The statuto-i)- prohinition on housing a::. a..'1 ele-
ment of the California State Tideland T:rJ..5t is a se-
rious obstade w the inclusion of hOuF.Jlg along t..r.~e
waterfront. However, the planning benefits of thit:
inclusion. espe-::iaJly in the suggested Crescent
District, are sigrii:5cant. Detivering a new inwv;n
neighborhood --nith traditional neighborhood char-
acter and at a seale appropriate for a t.'"Ue pedes....
trian emi!'t.'!lInent. linked to the adjacent recre-
ational a..'1C ma..":.ne uses, woula be a significant
s,ymbolic step for....'<ll'd in San Pedro';s rebirth.
A: the same rime, deve!opL.;.g both f!!.2.rkei:-rate
rental and for--sale housing in the dO\;.Jlto\\'j, dis-
trict. especially as a component oi a rr.i.xed-use de-
23
10-29
'~~
)~, \"
'/,,-" '''''
".. <,('\:::-, , "._)~ 11"
"'~ ~3-:-----:~=-
Vf?~r-/" r'
\11/1 I
'\I! (
, I
'-J~~~ I , '
'--;'11 I=r!~
Jell \~
rlrJ,\~ \)
Ii 4-\\ )
JL f\V
1,- \\\''''''''v
I __;/'
~~\I
11 ~~-.' I'
,~,\
'I
;;:, II\-
,_._- //7~ I}}
I'! 11-
,,,.-----.... / I . ,.'
~~ (j / I Ii /
~ ./ ii
! I'
I,...., 'I
~~I.:_~
.~ .,,~
i!
'''~ .,,."""..,.;""'..,,.,.,,.
...,.,...-,..,.".,.....-
\'elopment on the H.2 site., and ~ new iliscr'?te m-
fill eiemem:s 2...'1G on :he up!--er !loors of renovated
com.."!le~cial buildi.'l~, ean :ill activate ground-floor
retail uses th..."Oughout :he downto\\'1l a:-ea.
TrJs proposed new urba..'"l. iPiili and expansion.
both .It ~he waterfront and in the dO\\l1towu corn.
. .." . .. ., ..
merC!2.l mst:cct. must mamt.:.m-: ~ne au:nent.1C:l';}"
af the San Pearo ext"ierience to excite visiro:-5
ami comfort residents. ,,1~ strong design recogniz~
abie- to San ?'?m'o'2 longtime populace :an !ncor-
porai:e L1ese new elemem:s jmo tile exisi:ing faD-
ric ;L'"l.dintensi.:."::1 rather than destroy. th.e area:s
'lr.tique ambience.
The panel stronglY reeommencs: that tired for.
mnlas forpn:--dicraoie generic ...~-aterfront cleveloy.-
me!:':t ~houiri be 2:.cicied,. I: feels t.hat a fresh. vet
cias.siC' look ca..... greatly enh.<L:.ce L"le atmosphei~
24
10-30
'--~. ~lnLtlJke~....J~
II JilL
II i I
--l L' U
".'1:.. 'n'n.n:L ~
. , , I
' I I
J L-I -,i'~~...J L:.$
'.'-1111 JOrr-
'''=Irni
_..,J U L.J L
'li'l'\\
i Ii \\
~ '---' L......-) _
-.-..... ID! II
-.-"----, ,--....--J I
~~_.,'.,
--.._.~. ~r-'~'~
~
~
._--',"~-"-..,-..
c:.'..",....,.,..
"-...,..."",.."',;..-,,,-
<.~,...~.,-...-,--",_.,,~-
a.'1d cr.a;-dct~r of a new development ..yr.il~ reZ1-
ing i:h~ histOrical roOt5 of the community.
p"~,,--i7:.;1;~tion otthe aO\1-ntOW'11 business district.
foC'..1SeC. prirr.a..";Jy on the link between tn.e v;"<!.ter.
n~nt a..,d improvements to Si.xt.h a.'1d Seventh
streets and Pa\:'i.fic Axenue. must be supported by
s::::-ong and pU1jJosefJ.l des;gr. g-uidelines. Some el-
ements of ~he ne{'ESS<lry g-JideHnes are already in
place, but responsibility for integrating elements
L'1i;O a dear, concise docU:."'D.€!!t wittin an app!"Q-
prlat:ely defined d:is:nct.. including both the exist-
ing comme!.cial are;2,S and be ;\'aterh-cnt, should
oe piaced b the hands of a single coo!'dinatin.g
agency. Appropr..at.e reyisions co zoning specifi-
cations as well as the new design guidelines need
::0 be impiememed ::h:rough ::n€: creation of an,
ave.day distnct.
An Ao.islJr/ Sorlie"" Par",J Hegnrt
\
~
~y;;!;.'f",~::,.. ,;,it:~= ':.t::.:$-
S'.:r.Ci
P'dest:"i<3t1
f- Harbor
Walkway
Finaily, the execution of the proposed oper. :3pace
and new development of the watetfront \\ill pro-
\ide clear e':idence tr.a: a new culture oi ;:r:lst and
open commucication has be.come a.."1 iiltegi"Rl part
of tne COf!l...'11unity;~ char-deter.
San ?eoro, California, September 22-27,2002
~i~
~ [
;;f6r i~: .~~~<f!:;;;'t..
5~ult:',i3rd -1-
I
.t
10-31
(7~1 ,1;m
V\~t J(JfJ1
\ 1
~1 Ii
! )
I) H
I: ~
,~ t1 ~
~I: ~
;l"hU:,
r-
rr"
1 f{./ ~ ll<"~-..L;:;..,
,:)M!'ttr'i\;:'_i-""-;'!~!"o'
Ccmbir.ed
Pede.striar:JRecrl':'aticr1
P:Eh
25
ij
~
';;
.~~
",\
"-f~
~~J .~.
.
;
1>
~"(. I,.
';:;:Jl
::!-..~ "
~-~
~ ~
l1cce:3S in de\"eloping t.he San Pedro \vater~
I!"',mt and re';1'ializing the do....-ntO\\l1 ,"ill
depend more on institution:.1.1 strategies
1;."1d attitud.in.?J alignznem than en real es-
tate per se. in the panel's opinion. San Pedro has
been character'..zed as the ;'b~-r. soutnern. Calif or-
:ria beach COlT'~'TIUI'jty to revitalize.)l According to
many of the organizations and indidduals inter-
\-1ewed by the pa..'1el, institutional ba..rriers have
impeded rede\"elopmer.t. Although these barriers
r..a...e 5ta!ted to fall, i:Pis portior. orthe report ad-
dresses a 5w-ateg)' and implementation bluepri...'1t
to reconnect the waterfront 'with t.he comr.m:uty.
At the core of a.l'lY publicly sponsm"ed de\,elopment
ini'Cl;;.tive :s a commo~ \"isian and a uriTIeci f..-ame- .
work fm" achievemenL The panelenaorses the
cc:mmu.njtfs vision 0: reconnecting the Sar.1. Pedro
COTIurltuIity to L'1e waterfront. In L'US section on
ae;;elopmem s;:z-c1teg1es and implemem:ation, the
panel pr~sents an ou~iL"le of a frmnework for t.i'}e
(.."Cmmunit)' to at:hieye tris ',isior...
'; :~;[, t.~:
~,'" , ,"
~:>-_!c ~~:S:.
Du.:.-mg tIle panel'~ visit. co::r.1TIu..:l:Y leaci~""S a:"!d
stakeholders repeatedly expressed frJstration
regardlng prior failed development efforts a.s
'r.eU as instiwtion.ally imbedded ~onilicts that
Ll~'\'.an progress fnr uni:ied de'..elQpment. Based
on tne panelists' proiessional experience and Db-
sen'atioi:s. the foilo-wing a.:.-e orre!'ed ~ gu..icielines
for succ~ss:
. Estaousn a tn.t.,:;;:; to ensure public access to the
"vateifJ'onr...
. Eli!TI.i.'1ate ~of'i'...rsior. a.rnong $:akebolders.
. Redu-ce the nlLuoeI' of committees v.itn Qver-
iappmg a..id missions and mem::;ers.
25
10-32
;.~
t1.,,,
".f
-"'~,
E"i
'"':~
j~S ~:"~
. Focus more on speeillc actionabie steps and less
on process.
. Integnte all planning and development to spe-
cifically addre~3 the connection ben....ee!l the
waterfront and the community.
. Build on the eomrnunity's strengLiJ:s, using the
pori: as an educational opponunity-mmine his-
tory, a.rts. and cultural resoun:es---and promot-
ing e:-:isting tou.,-jsm as well as the availabili:y
of reasonably priced real estate.
Tnese general guideli.."!es can serye as the mortar
that holds together the building blocks of a sus-
t2i'1a.ble de\'e!opment strategy, At L'he mast basic:
le\'eL the panel recoI!L'11ends a de...eJopment strat-
i
J egy that includes the follov.ing four a.l1chors.
"t;"r ,\;'""
L" :,;,: _ ~ ;; t' i5"
:::-,.",
~. '
"i i:' ';~' .
.."
SucC'?SsIUl busiJ.'1~s n::::ture5 rely on strong pa.rt-
nerships of mutual benefit and respect.. Real estate
development on the '..:atemom ;an create ne\""
building:s a.l1d heaJd'Jer busiIlesses-but these eco-
nomic effor:s \\ill fail if they are not based on a
relationship of trust and respect between the port
and the community. The port and the c.ommu.
nityneed to commit to a pror-ess that is open and.
pa.!-jcipa::Iye. Suc.,.J, t..""'an.sp2.rency is 'dta] to bui1rj-
ing trust.
The paneLl'eeo!!'.ffie:nds. as the first step to found-
ing this relatio!'_o;hip, the est2.blishmem or the Sa.7J.
Pech'o Cornrnunity Waterfront Trust to hold the
public a.;eas of the wate.:-tront for the beneEt of
the public at large. The process for capturing eco-
nomic \'alue at t.r.i.e waterfront '...ill succeed or fail
depending on the underJ:rii1g strength and sus-
taL."1ability of Li-te partnership between the poI"':
a.nd the community.
The port's m,uldar.e for these ia.l'Jds, to be held in
t.rust for the public, is essentially part develop-
ment oriented. T~js i'":"l&'1date serves the port well
An Alivlsary Sem,"" Panel R"llllrt
when it f()cu~e::i on it~ basic mission of cargo, trar.s-
shipment, and customer service to the interna-
tional trMiing community. On the other hand, it is
the panel's opiillon that the port is inexpel"ienced
and not weil equipped to focus on public re-devel-
opment of land that is more appropriately used for
open space a.'ld r'eCl'eatior:. as \'-ell ~ for cultural,
commercial, and residential uses.
Tne panel believes that the revitam:ation and the
long-tenn economic health of San Pedro rely on
early and aggressive deveiopmem of market -rate
housing adjacent to :he \'tate!iront aZld dO\'\'TIto1\l1.
C-u.."Tently. housing land "alues substantia!!y ex-
ceed land values for retail or other eommert:ial
u!:es.
By promoting the development <:of housing. ~he
cOIT'.munity will capture substantial eC"Qnomic
value tha: towd be used to fund O~!1er adi...it.ies.
in addition, an ini1u..'\ of re-::;idems VIiI! create de-
G!and for good;:: and senices! conL-ibutir,g to L.1e
economic viability of rer..w€.r5 both on pOll. prep-
ere:" a..'1d LY1 dOv."'"TIto\IT ,San Pedro.
The panel beliE:1res that the port's corn,:.,ucme!1: i;O
cease ca:-go ha.."ldling a.lC :3tcrag:; ope::-a:.ions or.
the west side or the cnaru"'lel goe::: beyond a desire
to repair its reiationship Y>i:.lt the cornrr.uniry or
San Pedro. TPis is a good business d-ecislon as
welL ~cauH:: a vio!""c...'lt v:<i.tereont. and ciO\"\"71tn\\T,
\\--ill enhance the port's economic s:.rengthby ::..~-
ating significazrr rea! est.a:.: valne, L.'1.creasing r:ne
..-:iability ofbusinesSE:5 operatiTlg on the ~ater-
from., 2nd improving rhe porfs cmnrrmriry image.
Tnese are legitirmm: business objectives that COD-
L..-ibute tv the por./s bottom line_ This econorrje rf::--
a.lcy v..-a.:.-:-a.n:5 :'1e prc';ision of par: furH:ii'lg for the
promenade and :he waterfront recreation area..
Upt-ont. in;;estnem. from th.<: par: is partieuia:iy
importdnt, as this is the foundatior: upon wrucn all
further in r-es;:ment DY oth~!" parties ;\iH ae;>enc...
Itk; bey.ond the oanefs 3COD€ of work to QU<l.:'"!Th;'
- . .'
the level of upfrom. llveS""wnent ~h;lt may be :"e-
quired. The p<iJ.'1el suggests that tfie port's ::OiElT'-jt-
ment. at a rrir:i..num.. should eompl'ise the foHo$-
San Pedro. Gaiitamia. SeDtemoer 22-27,2002
inl:,-: the public lands it ran trois on the west ~ide of
the channel for the bridge-to-breabl,:-ater prome-
nade; and at lea~t 7.5 percent of the canital fundi."TH~:
for the L.-titjal improvements for the fl~t phase of'-'
the prome!1ade and thl? lands for major deH.lcf--
me!1t sites in the Crescent .-\rea.
The panel's impres:::ion is that SaIl Pe-4...IO h~ been
stuck in a Kafkaesque ;,.\'"orld of endless planning.
JIlli,y things have contributed to this scenario: a
lack of cooperation bet\,,'een the port and the com-
mu.r.--Jty: fear that deveiopmem .,1,.m contribute to
the notion that San Pedro is <I social durnomg-
ground; and concem that development ~11 fur.
ther de$troy the ehara,del" or the dO\\'TIto~71.
CL.-C'lrmttan~e5, however, have changed: the rela-
tionship with t.he port has the potential to gro\\-:
there is (:Qr'..sensus on the need to preserve the
('ha.t~lcter of the downtown: a.rl.d the pa.<rJ.el belieyes
that market forces can be h<.uil€SSea to produce
L"1\:estment that C1aintrins ctov:nto\\"!l's authentic~
i:y. The development a.."1t1 implementation strate-
gies arc designed '-0 ca'pikiize on these eha..'1geri
cir:umstanct~ a..""lC to illO\'e. as quic.\cly as practka-
bie w capture b".:estmen: and value.
The implement.a:ion of these four :::;trategic initia-
tiy€s \\ill requi.r2 COOD€l'atior, arnonr tho? :>or:.. thE:
cnaIuber of ('ummer~, t~e eRA, <md the ~~u-
ni,;y. ThE continued leade!'Smp of Councilwomar,
HahIL repreSent1Jlg the 15th District. and the
rr.avor ......i11 be cri:lC'".J. TI-.i~ leaciershiv v.ill be oar.
tic~ar!\' impon.z.nt in tne ei,rriv st~s tD ensri:-o;
. . .
tna.-: susr.ainable rebtioi.sh.iP5 and cooperation a..-e
firmly established..
C::" ~Fr, '01;
The San hdro community has an advamage in
ha......;:.t."1g an organizatj'1n already in place- that is
charged with the coordina:ion of existing plans for
the ,~<U.erfrontt da-"\''ill.O\YTl redev-elopment. and in.
r.egration of the paneJ1s findings a"ld :recorr-",,-nenda-
tin!"'..;:. This entity--tne S&.i. Pedro \.Vat~:.ront a.i.d
Downtown Task Foree-would be tnt appropr..ate
orga;:..izao.on. in the pfu"ler:s OpllTIOr:. !;O over-see a
coordinated developmem process for the .,,-ater-
from and :nE: do....-mo...-r:l. T"nis orga.."lizat1on C'd!i
se.rve as th.e public fO!"U..1I1 wne:e u-ansparency ean
2J
10-33
be incorporated into the implementation process
to build trust and accountability. The charter or
this group audits members}ljp v.ill need to be ad-
jUS!M to reflect this expanded oversjght role.
The panel suggests that, a.s a r...rst step. the port.
the city, and the eRA formally ratify ~hi5 new role
for the t.ask force. This u'lsk force ha~ c.een insm.1-
mental L'1 promoting the integration of a..:"1.y eohe-
siVE: waterfront and do-.vnto\\"'71 de\'elopmem pla..'1.
Originally, the task force WaS a.,1tic:pated to last
=:;ix to eight months. Ho\'t;'ever. the panel recom-
mends the exten.sian or it3. me and the 02xpansion
of the spom:or base \\itb the arlditjon ofl'epresen-
taticn from the Lo~ Angeles 'Visitor and Con';en~
tion Bureau and the Department of Cultural Ai-
faL>-s. The three irJtial goal!: already deIi.'1ed by the
:ask force should be broaden~ to include ongoing
coordL.'lation oi city and counctl re.3otU"ces related
to the deve!op!7ient and,mmmenance of :he \"2ter.
front a.110 dawntov:n projects.
".',';" ;i,f'f
The organizational coroUal"}- to ~he task ferce is
a ;"Jew ?€r:nanent o:-Eanj:;:.atiQn-~he San Pedro
Commur-dt)' Waterrrom 'IT"\ZSt. T:'1E' panel strongly
recommends that ;:hj~ new. entity be formed as
a privat.e~ nonprofit organization \...i:h ilducia::;
l"eSpOnEibility for tne development and the ongo-
ing operation of !he promenade and pUDlic opeE-
S u;lce areas.
The trust would create a new fra.TTlewo~k for ;:h€
ma."12.gemerri. and dev-?lopm€m ar :.n€: ;x:.biic m'~
of the viaterfront. This new c'ar:lework is essen-
tial fOi sucr:ess to he acpjeved iT: the p:-i\'at-: de-vel-
cpmer.t of the \\':-iterL.-cm a.l1C in the revltali;atlo!:
of thl? downtov"..
Ha....iilg a trust will foster feelings oi eertc.in:y abcu~
the future. whic:t is iinpcr:ant when 9lidting m-
':es:men: from the reall.:state t.'Omrr.uTIi:y. It also
would ereate the conditions :1€ce;:;sary fa! maxi.
mizing (,'QIIUnunity support and outside funding
fer c..1e promenade and t.i-t.e rec:em;ior: are,,,"
The trust '.,"culd be dil"ected. by a beard composed
of seven me:noer-s whc represem the po:"t. the
28
10-34
city. and cOffiffiUnity intere5ts. The bom"cJ is ex-
pected to consist" oi:he follo\\1ng:
the purr.-t.,,'o members;
the city (mayor or appointed mayoral represen-
tative, or councilmember from the 15th D15-
~..rict }-t-.;\-O members;
. the maritime museuInlaqUarlUm---0ne member;
and
the community-two members.
In addition to the governing eatu'd. the day-to-day
operations of the trust \vill bt: 5uper:-Lsed by three
senior .:::t2...."1 tonsh:ting of a thief executl';e offieer, a
chief financi<1.! 0 ficer, and- a chief operating ofneer.
ThE: senior staff would be hired by the bOi.u"d mem-
bers and would serve at thei: di:::cretioTI_
The panel suggests that the port lease those areas
out-lined ill the recorr,mended waterfront cleve].
opme...'1t are:!, consi~ti!1g of w1e right-of-way for
t.he promenade [fiG the putllic ope:. spaces, on a
/ lcng-,-er:r.. nm:-jnal 02..,;i5: u[ 50 yell'S or more ,,-ith
r::::newal$. Tne port "ill :~tEJn control of all its
lands outside oi the public rights-of. way for the
promenade ac."'!d L'le ...,:ate......sae uses a!'ld physi;;:a1
structures sueh as the bulkheads and :he exist.-
ing ma.:-rna.
The panel encotll'"ag<;:s the p('.rt:ie.s to let the mu-
seum and aqua.!'1ili"T, foundi.1.:ior.s p;:..-ticipate in the
trJst.. .\3 the p~u.'1ership e'.'oh"es. op.portuni:ies
fo:, synergy ';i.ith w'Je ::;ust and the fOU.'1d~tion~
Till be great.
Ir is re('ommended t.1at the t.-<lst st:ill" c:ontrdc1
the design or rhe h--nprovemems for the ''\-ate!"-
front prmr.enadE' a.:""'!a signillcam public a:-eas. In
addi\:ion. the tT'..lSt ",auld oversee th~ iiay-tc-d.ay
opEnitions and maintenance 2'espOilsibilities w
outside veneors.
The ~.anel .::r;',-isions tne 00:<': to be 2. !oziea! soun::e
. . -
of sta,!"'tUD fu.:,dins- rDr the cl,:lst, witn tl~:Ist staff
. -
i:.-nmediately corr.me.'1cLT!g private fu.."1ding mor...s
<L'"lC itien~ille2.t.ion of athe!'" funrii.'lg SClJ..,"tes. The ac"
tivities of the trust would be funded L~'ough part
c>.nd corrllIllli1i~.y cont..-ibutions and assigned de:vel-
c-pment reV~!me~_ A tOSl-5na."';...'"lg agreement c-e-
An AdYisnI"l Seni""s Panei Rneurt
t\\"een the port and the tru..'",t will need to be ai1
early part of the implementation process. This
ag!:eement would create inc.entives for the trust
r.o seek outside funding for the deveiopment and
mainten:.mce of the prornerade and recreation area.
The trJst wil! direct subsequent private fnndrais-
ing enorts for capital to extend the promenade,
and the port will match all raised funds.
Outside rl1nding potentially ean come from the fed-
21-a.l and state level::, such as lhe California State
Coastal Conser.-a.i1C'I. Other foundation support
ma.y provide significant grJIit and fundraising o~-
portunlties. especially if tied to pro~rning at
t.he mal-;tir.1e muse':.L'TI an.d the aquariu.l!1.
:F'11nding ma~- be available tP.rough the folJo\\ing
public ilIld priyate sources:
. the Public Improvement .4..I."ts PrograJ.'1l, or Per..
C€nt for _~i5 pl"ogya.'"TI., Whi~1 requires 1 pen:e;~t
or the capital improyernent cost of all constrJC-
don, improvement, or remodelbg uZldertak:en
DY the city to be aliCC<lteO for public art;
. existing capita! i:nprovemem band issues:
the Los Angeles Convention a.."ld Tourism Blli-eac::
exta.'1t econo-r.jc deyelopment tesources for
business development:
private in vestment:
&"'!. €:\.-panded business improvement district;
<L'1d
. public and pnyate grants.
The L':lSt ca."] also be the vehicle ror barnessi.'1g
community financial participation. The recently
cornple!;ed Fisherman's MemO!-:a1 .....~ funded o~'
over $200.000 of community aona!;ions. San Pean,
has deep roots. It is a t:ommtIPjty that, given the
opporcUJll:Y, cuuld strongiy embrace th.e cn.a."lC€ tc
f,.nanciaily suppor.. the revitalization of its w'ater-
front. Tbis can h1Vol..e sponsorship of selected seg-
ments of the promenade b}' bdividual comr.1U.:"'1.ity
orgar..izatiOTIS a.'1d entail na,'ned parr..s, benches. or
other landscape features as: has been pm"Sued in
ChriestoIl.. Somh Ca.-olina..
San Pedro. California, Septemher 22-27, 2002.
The port. needs to mm:e quickly to establish a eapl-
tal line item for the construction of Phase i~ con-
sisting of the promenade and tuTival piaza. This
upfrom c-ommitment of the Phase I right~r-\"'-ay
and fu.nding ror the promenade :LT1d the recr~at.ioll
area south of the maritime museum is neeessnry
to create \'alue for both the retail and housing de-
velopments. \ViG10l:t LtUs commitment. establish-
ing t.he momentum of on.l.;.-oing plivate real estate
de\'elopment at the waterfront will he a challenge.
Early funding of District L:\., which extends from
the cruise ship tE-!-minai to the maritime museum,
indudw..g the a..rrival plaza, is a \ital prerequisite
:.0 capitalizing on re2! estate development oppor-
tunIties.
This in.itial port bvestment must consider how to
add..-e5s the ongoing funding comrnitme!1t nece~
sary w maintain and develop the land comrolled
by the L-ust. ThE paTIel1"':'~omme:lds that the port
as;sign de\'elopment reyenu€'s from the retail and
housing development areas to the trust, thus suO-
s:amially lov\"-e~ig i:~.T!qt obligation.. hOU2.u'1g de-
vciopm:n!, in pani:::ular, IS likely i.O prQ\-ide both
subs~.a.'1tial value a."T"J.d .sigr.mcanl funding.
Yunriing fOI-r.J.ulas should also include L.'1cemives
for rr..ax:irnizing om:s.id~ resour:::es 50 that tn.e T.:s:
~Jl agg:-essiycly pursue federal. Stalk, foundation,
and c:omr:;lUniry support. furthennore, l:..."fJ.€ Iu..rJo-
ir.g agreement must recogniz~ L"rJ.e n~ed to create
i'Jng..ta.""m, ongoL.-:g, a.'1d sus~ababiE- fundi.ig ror
tne :rust.
,":. "1!C' '" ::l:!f."~: ~
"
'<""'
Tbe process fo!' prccee--Ji.'g "i\;th pri-:;a:e dcve!o!>,
me..'1.: of the re.tail <,u1d housing sH:es needs 2. credi-
ble fr.unework in the panel's opinion. Thi:3 devel-
opment. .process must bE predictable-to t.n.e
development com:nuni:y a.nd to the Sar: ?erlZ"o
c.ommunity, The panel suggests t.hat the San
Pedro Downtowr: a-'1d Waterfront Task Fo!"ee
?.5sume pr.u'TIary r-esponsibEity for coordinating
&.is pruc;:s~.
Tne panel recoIT1:'Il.ends new p::i:vate development
in threE principal <.Teas: a new retail, commercial.
ami restau..-,mt e~'lt.er proximate to the c:11i..~ ship
!.2!1TIi.."la~: neW" housing in the Crescent Area: and
2!i
10-35
3D
housing 3ijd adjacent dev'eiopmf.nI if! tnedO\i'TI-
to"""!l. The panel envisions th~ r'2spor::s-ibwt}' for
pub.lic ::;pon,5or~hip of ~e ,Prh-ate d.eyelopme?t ..
projects ;:.0 De ~".e port".:;, tn.e .:''-ater!ron~ task!orce.-s: J
and the eRA's. The panel speciTIcaIiy does not ree-
oamena the Sa.,"! Peci.ro Commu:li.ty Waterfront
Tr'.lst to engagr: in aT sponsor pr1\'ate :-ea] esta:e
developmem.: in:-:tearl. trJ.s ne\;; entl~y ,;ill focus
solely on public i.r.1prove!!1ent~ aIld oyE':J.tior.:S of
public lands, and should not get ruS-W'J.ctfXl by pri-
vate iand development.
To <:'oordinate pri..:ate development projer..'ts~ the
pa.'1el retommend~ takiIlg f!','e actions..
'.,:~",' t C!<:::, I ': '""; \. t. ~ : ~
~..;.;
:;:i! ,/,:;:'., :',:
l
As the paIle!'~ design recommend.:.:.tions ii1uicate,
a key t"Oilrn.ou:.o.r to the success of \\'aterfront. de-
velopment ",ill be its physical cna..'<lcter :L.1G "eon~
nectior." to the dO'.\"7ltow::, Befol'e !'Eubing de..,":::]~
opers. the port and L'Je :.::ommunity Inns"! adopt
.~ .. .. ~. . .
Unlrom aeslgrr stanca:ds ror tn.; wat2~'trOn: anc
the dO',l,l1tO\Vn. These sta.l1cards need to cumple-
ment on<2 another. They also should addres:;; issue::
such as functional connections of priv<ltit propeny
to tne pubEc use a!'e~ dthe v.":::.temom as weE as
ar~~itecD.1ral vemacuiar. building feat1.1.:es. par'\.:-
h"'lg, ouilding n:assi:ng, and open spa~e. T.~ese Q2-
. '" d' . . d
Slg:i. all.G GeVelOpment ~tc.n ,a:'~ are mtenae . to
10-36
create a compatible look and add.ress an overall
design dlaraeter, l'a:h~r th:m uni.formity.
:i,l. p.
..
."."
~. :.;,L
!.;
Before any de...eiopIT!€!:lt proposals are made
public, the panel recommends the creation of a
common framework for ev:uuadon and seiection
of de\'etopme:1t proposals and negotiation of
agreements. This ",ill e-liIT'inat.e unc.ertairlty as to
how the process work3 and L'1e end result.
iJ;
l:
D'o."
,_I'
Shortly after adOpdD.g design :3ta.'1dards, the re-
sponsible organization.s~the port, the task force.
a.:,d tne CR.'\-snould issue reque:=,-;:s for qllalir1c.:l.
tons (RFQs) for private development of their r€-
5pf:etive areas of res?Qr:.sibili.y. The RFQ process
allows de'>"elopers to Qe. eYa!uated b.a..~ed on the~'
e.\'}>enen>::e: abHi:y to artract telUln!S~ fmanciai
capacity, design cap<Ibility~ and ability to \"\turk \"dth
tni? commu,,ity. This avoids a de';eloper '<beauty
tontest..~~ it. also is <.l iO\l'"e!'~ost Pl'(l(';':':ss for de...-eiop-
el'$ and is more lil"-~}J, as :-1 (,OI'.5eq'Jence~ [c elici. a
g:'eater :respor.:se :TOD ~he devejop!:l-::n: eoo.."Uuni!y.
."-.r:er a r.mrspa.rent selectioTI process !-.as been
compieted. :ne cnosen developers should be a.~ked
to prepare sp.e:::if1C Sit2 development pl.?.r.s. Based
on agr~ed-li.pon terms and guid.eiines adopted
prior to the selection process, these pl3..'lS wouki
ne corrsisr:e.rlt "it.n weil-:5t.U"r:ed ?~D[ie objectives
and baseli:'1e financial tel"!!ls.
]1
'.i;.
~i
i..'.
,.::
This will fuL.l.ll the objective of a ~seam1ess inter.
face ne!.\\'eer: the v;a;:e~:': om. a..,d fne dO','O'TItov,-:;"
and vril1 capture the tax. increment. \-:iiuE: of ne",,'
priva~~ de..-elopmem neceSS2..;--:i to ensure long.
tern fi!lanci.'1g a.T1C sust.ainability.
Rou:;;:ing will bE: a pri...'lcipai economic engine- of
waterfront ce\'elcpmem and aOv..1ito....ll re....itaii-
zar.1oi:.. Tne pa.YJ.el calls specific attention to the
housing sector in ordtr to ma:drnize iu. eeonomic
contlibution to the waterfront l'e\.'itaEzauon :ill.d
An Artv!s..~ Services Panel RetIDrt
reconJ;tection process. It recommends that the fo!.
lo'.ving four steps be taken.
:'
The Crescent Area housing development on the
'xaterfront property has the potential to pro',ide
::ubstamiai l'e1lenUe for use in developing the
public a....nenities of the promenade and recreation
area:;. Other California pOtts have found ways to
address t.he L.l1pedir.1e1':.t cited by the Port of Los
An:geles that the California St2te Tidelands Trust
..i_ct. passed in 1911. prevents the residential de-
velopment of tidelands property. Because the de-
ve!opment ofhousbg is so impor:'-<'1nt to the over.
:.ill economic v"iability of L~e waterfront, the pane!
recomrnends that the port immediately pur;iue all
pr.lctica.l efforts to remove this burden.
<'.
';',,'
:::-:.,:;-,:"
1.,.-'
Tnese bclude the follov.-=.ng: a re-I,toh'ing fU..-"xl to
pU!'c.~ase under'J.tilized ii1dust:lia! a..Tld commercia!
si;;es in and around the- dO'WTIWWTI a,id reconvey
them ror market-rat,€, residential dt'velopmem:
a revoi-dng fund tv preSel"Ve singie-family mar-
ket.:-d.te housing :..i:.roughout th~ Pacific CoricO!'
Redeveloprne-r.t )''''!-ep.: and :lSsemoiing sites for
the deyelop~ent of ma:-ke'C-:-ate: hou.~g in :'1'::
GOVI''"Tltov,T..
Tnese [hre~ prograll'.5 rocus on producing and pre-
, . h' "
se::'.'1.1'J.g ma1'ket-r'<lte .ousmg ana. tnus. may netes-
sita1:,e. the use of nonhousing :.edevelopment f.md~.
Market-rate hOUSL1'J.g in :..'n.e dOWTItoi.il'l ~ ....ita! t('.
increase t.he spending power and rnU5 spur addi-
tional com..>nerci21 deveiopmem in 'Che dOWTI.tov'n.
\<:;.;" :':" : :'.~' ,'"' r ;::: '':' hr.," >,,c." .~,
,~h ".
Development ofr-he E-2 site as a marKet~rate.
mid-riser and rrJ.."\.ed-use residential property ean
be an im~..a.'1t early step toward !"?populating
the downtDv.'!!..
,.,.,<
~I" . .
h'
'f
".".
"..."
'.
."'>' "
T:ne market evaluation se-ction of this repon: gives
ii::tle support to tile notion that a,'1 cffice use is
likely in the old Logicon buiJding. The eRA should
acquirE 2.Ile demolish tr.js structur:: so t.hat the
San Pedro" Califomia, September 22-27, 2002
site could be used for development of housing :.:im-
ilar to that recommended for the H -2 ;;ite.
i,'
Conststem. thoughtful de$ign guidelines are an
iII!porr.af;\. de,"elopr.1t:m pre:requisEe for the down.
to\\ll. Tne pa.:.'1el strang!:-" recQIlli"TIends that the:::e
be adopted as a zoning-01erlay to erS<.l:-e the pre~
en-atlon of dO\\'TItov:n's cha.racter as new pri,'a!.e
in\'es~iI1em vC=:Ur3.
The ::ity c.f L05 _:\".1geles a.Tld t.1.E: SP.fi Pedro Char.;"
her of Commerce atE: Cll.'Tem.ry working togethe!.
to :re\i';e the fUfIT1.er Business bnprovemem D1&-
::..-ic'C (BID)" which has been w,c".1ve ror several
years. 1'1"'.1S BID can be a potent vepjde for the
San Pedro revimiizaton s:-c-:lteg-y, its main r,mc--
tion 1X"'3.S to ensure. frequeni. tra.:::h pickup in the
d.o,\-::towr~. :\0....., t..""2.SD. pid:up and public salet:>-"
should be only a Sw-r.L"'lg point.
Current efforts shouidrevitaiize a..'1d e..xpand the
bounca.'.y of the BID a..'1d the scope of the SaT'f.
Pedro Old To,,,';1 Business Improvement District
te. include be wateri.-ont aeveloprnent area and a
marketi.:'lg pro~TaI:l to Oa.'1dle- the branding of Sar:
Peai"O. TM B ill should also perform traditional
task:-:-'1:reet ciea.-tir.g, :rasn removaL lighting,
enhanced public saiecy"signage, and physical
mair,tenance..
The pan.el re<::OlT'.ti!lends re.tring 'the BID 'With a,.,
urgent need to expand it~ SCO!-'€. and to include an
S-..2~Li:e..~oiders a:: t:1~ taoif:-. T:.'l~ encrt to reestablish
31
10-37
the BID should moye quickly ahead and compri5c
the follo''''-!:lg:
promotional €\'er.t5, m~u'keting, signage: a..'1G
branding ought to be undertaker.;
the service area shouid be expanded to indude
P:J.cL.;c Avenue;
l'et.:,u!ers Or! the waterfront should be required
to pa.,.ticipat€';
. the c.haiTIber of cOImnerce, the eRA, and the
BID should \>\"ork together to gel: an access pian
impleme!1ted by CALTP.ANS a.i-:d the city; and
the museum and aquarium ought to be in-
cluded in the B LD to coordinate promotion
and m21'ketir',g.
32
10-38
CUlTently, businesses in San Pedro's dOi\-nto\'i'1l
lack the economic resources to support a BID \\ith
a.:1. expa.'1ded 5cope. The par:el recornmcnds that
the chamber pursue a three-year grdnt from the
city to fund the startup costs of the rejuvenated
BID "",-jth the com.!uitmer.t that it be self-support-
ing tnere<'ifter. The addition to the BID or the re-
tail businesses de\"elopeq at the \vaterfront (":.m
contribute significantly to it.::; long-term viability"
Ad(E.::g the prescribed \.vat(-!front rek1il. thE: inU-
se!lr.'i. and th€ aquarium to wle BID will ill<lke it
more eifi:etive at bra.'1ding and promoting the
attraction~ of S<,n Pedro.
,
I
An AliltisorJ Services Panei ROllort
t~ ~.:)
he waterfront has ahl,'"ays been central tD
San Pedro's economic \itality: Now, San
Pedro has a ur~que opportunity to capitalize
on powerfui market forces to creaL: do new,
publicly oliented waterfront and new private de-
velopment. The ability to take advantage of this
opporr:u:nity ;\;il depend initially upon the removal
of the institutional cOflSi.raims that have thwarted
redevekpment efforts in the past. The panel \va.~
impressed "\1ith the apparent coIDrr>.itment among
all the par:ies to carr.lrnon goals.
It is aC'r.ltely ciear to the panel that the time for ac~
tion is omv. It is also apparent that there is a driv.
lI1E urg-encv in the ccmrnunitv at larg-e a:"lct in the
el~cted an(i ci,-ic leade!'Ship t~ get d~velopment
ll.TJ.derw.ay. The p~mel heard the sa.1'"J1e thing from
\~t:aliy all qua..'-i:.ers: cease :he planning and get
on v:!tb. d.eveiopment. Tn€ pa.'"lel .",as also rep€a:-
ed!:{ iriormed by citizens a"c! civic ieade...rs that
"the sta..-s are alig-ned" for acboD to oc:.=ur.
l!:the real es~te development md,rs:..-y, "g''J!.::.g
\\;tn the :5o~_n gener<illy begets success. Those
\vho develop, finance. alld invest in pri"':J.te devel-
opment p::oje~..s. howeve:-. r.ave iea..-rned :.~at ti,..,"l}-
1.'"ls ~ only part. Qf equa::iun, Equal!)' i:npor....m: in
the ~:1lc.iDle of SUi..'tess 1.." iaying the proper foun.da-
tior: for amon-and la}ing such a foundation re-
quires c;a.'"eful planrillIg, aligning of r~sourees to
execute.. and properly assessing risks.
San Pedro. Caiifomia. September 22-27. 2002
The panel coautions: focus:i.i.g on completing a proj-
ect far tne sak.e at' timing opportuaity or e:-.-pedi-
ency could und€'l'mhle a long-term su~tainabj€
rein\'estment. The history of hastily executed
projects is gE"nerally a tale of long-term trouble.
The _panel is equally concerned that the initial
projects-be t.he)' public. prh-ate. or publidpri-
,;~ate joint ventureS-5E! t.he standard.. This stan.-
dard would inclucle:
. highRquality design;
. integration \l.ith the existing fabric or the com-
munity; an.d
high ".;sibiEty l;'l order to chaIlge tb.e C'lL-rent
in \'e~tment climate..
,
. ,
Successful execution of early project3 y.-ill cha."'1ge
"hE:: i.:v~$tI!1er,t ciin1ate in Sa.:l P02a.'V and attract
even more rr,yesi.me.,.'1L
Tlmugh tbe pane! COI1Clli-:3 that the time for action
is now, it. cautions that there rerI11i:! significarit
orga.."li;:ation.al) regulatory, aIld nr.2.ncial details to
refine, as wen x:; project-ie\'el detail pianning yet
W occur. The panel is cor.iident. however, that \,ith
the O!"Qoe:r laade:-sruo. the titv of Los Angeles. the
CRi the port. a..TJd t.he S<lIi. Pedro com.'TI~ty <can
[jOW rllUy engage the development process,
33
10-39
,;." i;- ';"'"", _,..'.'.-;,',: '.'" ~ '.,t.~ '.....~.. '~,,:.' ",;,., ,.,ot'..,,':',". ... -., "".,...
!: ~ -. ,... =,) ~.~;'.' ~'~.- ;-,,"..'.:...: :,~
!;'r.!~.:; G ~,",' -:. =.... .
Pa lief Chair
lVest Palm Beach. Florida
Lmder is the rnanagingpartnet of N-K Ventures.
LCl a d€\'elopment company founded in 2001 that
specializes in urb=Li. rri'\ed-use!residential develo!=-
mem projects. Located h1 We::;\: P".111 Beach, the
firm focuses on projects in southeast F10lida.
P;;cr to forming N-K Ventures.. Lawler 'Was a
par..ne:r L"l the W~hington, D.C.. and :tiiarrJ offices
or a national fin.ancial ~€!"\ices fl..rm. Wbel"e he was
responsible for real estate transactional advl..c:;ory
services for private. corporate) and public cHents.
Lawler h2.5 over ~ yea..rs of e:>..-perience in advis-
ing priva:e and public clients or: hrrge-scaJe com-. J
mercia] and residential development pmjects; pon-
rolio t..-ar.sactiDns: and ft.,"'m..."tJ.cmg a..'1d cOIT'J..:.llercirJ
le:~ing matters th.""oughout L~e U nired States a..:J.G
o~'e."'Seas. Ir: t0tal, he_has been <L."1 ad\":~e!' in more
than ~5 billion of real estate development, nna'lce,
and imrestrneni transactions over ri::. consulting
career. Lawler currently ""'arks fOT the citieS of
Daytona Beach and MiI"'dl!l2.l": ~er.'ing as a real es-
tate tlr.a;-;.cial adviser on severa! large-seale pUDuer
private developmem projects.
Lawier i::: an active member of L"l.L In addition to
S€r>l.ng in the Institute's ;9.eadership gr'Oup:' he
se...,..,,'€s on :he pelicy ..DC pracbce c'JI:lIruuee .2I1d is
a member of the Multifa.,nily Cou.il.cil (Gold flight).
Lawler ha.~ served on ten Ad-visor:{ Services pan-
els and several project <L1.alysis teams, and has
been a \'ice ,=hair of ULrs Sout.heast. Florida Dis-
tric: COUlicil. L1 October 20001 ULI recognized his
se!"vice witD. ::.he Robert O'Donnell A\va..:-d.
He has lectured on real es"...1.te development a..T]d fi-
nance at George Wa~hingtor:. Unive!'Slty 3usi....less
Sc.hool. the \Vha.-tor:..SeilOo1. Ha.......ard Business
School. Georgetown University. and the Ur-jver.
sity of 1Iia.'!"fIi Lawler is a graduate of Michigan
34
10-40
State University and received an MCP degree-
from the Kennedy School of Government at Har-
vard University,
::~1 Hr.
;'- ~~ l..ii
Madison, Wi.~consin
Free~. the principal designer \dth Sr:1ithGroupJ..fR:
has expertise in urban designl community pian-
ning. and waterf.ront red.evelopment. Residing in
and practicing out of Smith Group J-i R's water-
?ont studio in Madison, 'Wisconsirl, he offers a
substantial portfolio dealing with wat~tiront com~
munities ~"1 the upper l\:lid\\'est, \\ith a focus on the
Great La.\.;:es.
Freer has ~orked on projects from conceptu2liza~
tion th.:-ough constJuct.ion, \'d~h exter.:Sive involve.
ment dming ..111 phases. He has also generated
e:ommmlity support ior design LTIitiatives so tr...at
e.arly enttu..:;;a..sm m:rimai.....>.S momemum :1:'10 ulti-
mateiy achieves public endorsement.
As prL"1dpal designer. Fre~r is current):: working
on the follo;,ring: waterfront de....elopmem projects
in L7te metropoiitan St. Paul Minnesota. area: dO\1,-:1-
to\\TL Slmfoni, Florida: t.\ew RochellE:, New York:
Racine, VYI5COnshi; and a number of small cities on
the Mississippi River.
..\..s a result: of his profes;;ional expene:lce, Freer
has been invited to lecttlr'e at a nUi-nner of uni-
,'ersities; has become a resource member of the
Mayor's Institute on City Desigu: has participated
in the U.S. Department. of Cornrnerce '5 Sympo-
shun on Economic Development of TClLrism a."ld
Destination Resorts, Athens., Greece; a:1d has
taken pali. in the 27th Internation.:l.l Maki'1g Cities
Livable Conference. vlenn~ .-\ustria.
He received degrees i.'1-env1ronmental design and
landscape arwlitecture from the State University
of New )"ork and S:1"3.cnse University.
An AlIYisnrv SeniCl!S Panei Report
'.
Miami. Florida
In 199:), Gonzalez starterl DMG Consulting Ser-
\iees~ Inc... a management con...~ultL'1g firm spec:al-
izing in economic clevelopDent and project L..npie~
mentation. Since 1996. DMG has ::erved as the
in-house consultant for the Beacon Council,
~iiami-Dade County's official economic develop-
ment orga.-ill:ation. Projects managed by DMG for
tJ.1€ Beacon Cound bc!ude the Homestead Reuse
Plan. the South Miami-Dade Marketing rrogT:lln,
and the development and coordination of the
fifiarni-Dade DefeIl5e Allia.'1ce.
Prior to enterulg the pri..-<lte sector, Gonzalez \\-<1$
employed by Miami-Dade County as the director
of the Department of Development and Facilities
Ma.,agemen:. T;....~ agency prO\;ded cer.tr"d sup-
port se:-viees in the areas of real estate acquisi-
tion and le&."ing, fa::..'ility management, and build-
ing construction.
Gom:.alez received her bachelor of arts deg:-ee from
!..i.'1l? U rjversi::y of Fioric.a.. She be!pIl'. her eare:e;
with Miami-Dane C01.mt:; 1.-nmedimely J.l"ter :e~
ceivl.:g her rr...aster'::; degree from Nor..:heastern
Cnj-,er-sic:y iL 1979. Ii. 1989. she attendeci the
Ser:icr Executive hogTC-ffi in S:::ate a:1ci Locai
Government. a~ :he John F. S.ennedy School of
Government.
3e~J.nring as a management inte!1l1 Gonzalez
worked ior mos;: of her county ca...--eer in the capi-
tal improvement and development fields, COwlty
land acquisitions. architect and engineer selec~
tlon, and capital budget expenditure ov'ersight
we:-e some of her responsibilities in the Capital
Improvements Division. In 1989, the divisirJn was
merged v.itt the countfs facflities and construc-
tion management divisions and she was named
di.-ecr.or of the.tiev; Department of De\-elopme?J.:
and Facilities: Ma.~.2.ger.1er:.t.
'z/[!'\
A.tlanu:.. Georgia
Kimsey is vice Dl'esident. a.-::d a orL.'1cinai of Niles
Bolton" A.ssoda~es n'iBA), a p!'D'iessi~nal design
fu-m provic.lr'"1g a..-chite:ture, inte!io:' design. land-
San ?earo, CaIitomia. September 22-2i. 2.002
3cape arcf1itedure, and urban planring 3enices.
A licensed architect in ~even states, K..i,l1~ey re-
ceived a bachelor oi a..""t5 degree and a mane!' or
architecture degree (rom Yale University and has
been \\-'1th XBA for 22 years.
NBA developed a national reputation for work in
mixed-use developments, muitifamily housing.
transportation architecture, departrnem stores,
uniye!"$ities. clubhouses, hotels. and resorts. With
exposure to div€!"Se project types and g€'ogT'Jpric
locations, K.!mse).' has had exten.;:;;ive experience in
worki."lg ""ith both private and public organiza-
tions_ He i~ currently pr',ncipal-in-charg~ or ::he
Sa:."l Jose State University Campus Village. a 3171
million rr...i.:xed-us€ project.
Kimsey h..'tS been acti.....e in numerous business and
civic a.::;soe:iations, including the U :-0&.1. Lal1d Insti-
"Cute, tilE- _..\.ITIe~'"ican institute of Architects. a."fJ.d the
Atlanta Pannership of Edue:ation. As president of
the Budillead Business Association. he was the
lead facilitttor for a comImm..ity visioring c.h2I"~
~t,te for },_tla:.lt2.'S pre!llipr DUSL."'l€S5 a!ld retail
neignbo:-hood.. Iillr,sey sen-ed on be l'Ll_~..d\i-
sm:1 Senice5 pa.'1E;j for the California st.ate capital
in Sa<:r.-lmemo and has been a ,-ice chair of"ULTs
:resjden~ a.n..d m.u!tifamily counds_
: ~,.~} ;~
Rrcno.NevaM
Long specializes in public!priYClte par;:nership~,
e~onornir development. and real estate finance.
His eonsulta."1t pr.!ctiee sene:: public and pr!\"ate
clients in Nevada and Caliiornia.
Long W2S city IT'..a.~er of Fairfield, California.
where he negotiated the first municipal pa.-tici-
pation agreement "'-rth a regional shopping mall_
Since lea vi.ng the public sector in 1996, Long has
worked on a "idE' r'dllgo:! oi issues, including rose
reuse, developer negotiations, project fe<isfoility
analysis.. marketing, redevelopment str2.tegic
planning, ft.'1d public rillance.
Long !l4lS lec!:ured for the Sc..~ooi of Public Admin-
istration at Golcien Gate UnivefS.1iy and has taught
econorrjc de-yeloprnent and organizatiomll chai1ge
i:r:.sa--uationally.. HE also has se..-ved on ULI Ad"i-
35
10-41
SOl] Services panel~ and is a faculty member ror
the Urba.'1 Lar.d institute, teachin.g the advanced
fe:ll e::tate development proeess course. Long has
an MPA degree from the School of Public Policy at
the University of California ai:. Berkeley and a bach-
elor's dE'gree in economics !rom Brown University.
::,d
Boston, Ma:5.'-;'Gchni)(!tts
}litchelson rn:U1ages approximately $800 million in
real estate porrfolios on behalf of three pension-
fund client;:. She serves as ne~ clients: primary
contact a..r:d participates in all f1.Jatters pertaining
to their portfolios, including the de':elopment and
implementation of investment strategies, and the
monitoring or perio!T.1a..:1ce relative to client objec.
tives. rre\iously, JiEtehelson held th€' position of
:':J3..i1ag-:.:..o."1g- direc!or of por...fclio ma..r..,agement for
GE Capital InvEstment Advisors (GECIAl.
Mitchelson has 17 yea..'=i of real estate experience.
At GECIA s....he also served as a vice president in
L1:e asset mar::~gernent ~up, a position i..r: which:
she overS2.;.r more t.han s.~OO million in commercia.!
?...I"'"!d rm..iltuaI:"'jjy assets. He!' re$pomibilities in-
cluded developLlg strateglc property Dusiness
pIa.::::::, re\iec1.i.."'lg' 2.;1d approving p.:oper:y cpera~-
Llg budgets, negotiatiTlg ieases, periorming hold/
~eIl a.wyses, ar;d mar.aging as.'3et di:3posiricr.5.
lVlitchelsQn joined d pred.ec.es;::or emit.)" of GECL~
in 1987, rz\.i..,g beg'J.:.; her real estate :areer as a
rrna.l1.cial ar.ll1ys: for Claremont Corpo~rion in lJfr.:A.
The!'"E. sne per!ormed fina.."'lciaJ 2..lia!ysis relating to
acquisicions. cii,positions, asset management, prop-
E1\:Y rr..anagement. fu"1d real €s~te syndications.
Mitchelson is a ~ed.5eci p..1'Qperty manager a.."1.d a
member of t..'I:: bsj:ute for Real Estate Map.age-
menL She ooids a bachelor's degree in business
adr...j,nist!"ation~ ~it.1 a concentration iT: TIrumce,
rrcnn Nonnea..<;tern University.
Charlotte. JVariJl Carolina
Stanton is the dire-ctiJr of rLarket pla1..."ri...'1g: a.nd. ad~
;:ism'y seniees fOI F aiSOf:. idei1tif::,ing acquisi1:ion
and development oppor:unH:ies hr invest.C!"S, D....e-
35
10-42
ating business plan. .strategies for challenging real
estate project:: a.'1d portfolios, preparing store
rollout pbns for retailers, and doing due diligence
on real estate decisions ror retail a.'1d corporate-
real estate clie-nts.
From 1998 to March 20021 Stanton was vice pre~i~
dent of .Research and Market Planning Services
at TrarrJ..:l1eIl Grow Compa;.!.y. She operated the
fu111'S Re~earch and Market Phmning Senices
unit, pro\iding stra:egic pianning, site 5€'lection,
real estate portfolio aru11ysis, m2.l'Keri!1g pl"e:::en~
tations, and merchandising plans for imenw.l and
external fee clients, induding dE'velopE'fS, retail-
ers. C3pital inve::;tors, property ma.:.iagers, and
b!"Okers.
Stanton was director of research.at Faison from
1995 to 1998. and served on Faison',:; Capita! Con-
trol Beard re\iewing l.."'lv€stment opportl.mities.
She o:.1so product-d Faison.s .Harket Foc1J.J, report,
a detailed re\1e\Y of eco!lorrJc, demographic, :md
real e::;tat€: market perfonnanee and opporcunt:ies
J in ten major U.S. cities.
!
From 1987 to 1993, Stanton was associate profes-
sor at Elizabe:htown Coilege and l:illia.r:..a U!'1jver~
::iry of ?e!l.l1s}'iva':lia. teaching 1IBA- a..'1.d senior.
Jevei cour::.eSOTI CQr-_~er behavior, rnarketir:.g.
advertising ma:::ag~ment. and retafi :"tiateg:.'.
She was project man.agel' ior BusiD.es;: Resources
Group: 2. consortiu.m of academic and bdustT)' pro-
fessionals that pro\-ides reseal'ch projeC"....~, busi-
ness pja."';~. semina.-s, workshops, a.'1d training ser.
"ices to business and government clients.
Sta,tcn received a ?hD 2..:1.d a.T!. MS m CanSllil1er be-
r..a\ior ~"'1d l'et.ai.l management from PUl'due Ulli.
versity h"119Si.. and a bac.....ejor.~ degree in psych.ol-
ogy. s.xiology, and communications from thi? State
Upive~i:y of New York at CJrtlanc. G'! 198-3.
An AdYisnry SaMceS Panel Report
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA WAIVING THE FORt\1AL CONSULTANT
SELECTION PROCESS FOR AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Al'lD THE URBAN LAND INSTITUTE
WHEREAS, the H Street Corridor is a critical component of the revitalization of the City
of Chula Vista; and
WHEREAS, General Plan LUT Policy 2.6 identifies the need to conduct a special study
to examine the potential for higher land use intensities and taller buildings along the H Street Transit
Focus Corridor between Interstate 5 and Fourth Avenue, and to address compatibility issues with adjacent
stable neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS, the Urban Land Institute (ULI) has an established Advisory Services
Program and is uniquely qualified to bring real estate experts from around the country to provide an
unbiased implementation program for redevelopment of the H Street Corridor; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends the City Council waive the formal consultant selection
process of Municipal Code Section 2.56.110 because of the Urban Land Institute's unique experience and
expertise; and _)
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed activity
for compliance with the California Environmental Quality.' i~ct (CEQA) and has determined that the
activity is not a "Project" as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines; therefore,
pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus,
no further environmental review' is necessary; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends the Redevelopment Agency enter into an agreement with
the Urban Land Institute for Advisory Services.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED based on the findings above, the City Council
of the City of Chula Vista does hereby waive the formal consultant selection process for an agreement
with the Urban Land Institute for Advisory Services.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Eric Crockett
Assistant Director of Redevelopment & Housing
~)tart Miesfeld
Interim City Attorn
10-43
REDEVELOPMENTAGENCY RESOLUTION NO. 2008-_
RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING A.N
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND THE URBAN LAND
INSTITUTE IN THE fuv[OUNT OF $120,000, A.;\fD
APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR
WHEREAS, the H Street Corridor is a critical component of the revitalization of the City
of Chula Vista; and
WHEREAS, General Plan LUT Policy 2.6 identifies the need to conduct a special study
to examine the potential for higher land use intensities and taller buildings along the H Street Transit
Focus Corridor between Interstate 5 and Fourth Avenue, and to address compatibility issues with adjacent
stable neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS, the Urban Land Institute (UU) has an established Advisory Services
Program and is uniquely qualitied to bring real estate experts from around the country to provide an
unbiased implementation program for redevelopment of the H Street Corridor; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends the City Council waive the formal consultant selection
process of Municipal Code Section 2.56.110 because of the Urban Land Institute's unique experience and
expertise; and
W'HEREAS, the Environmental Review Coor'finator has reviewed the proposed activity
for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the
activity is not a "Project" as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines; therefore,
pursuant to Sectioil15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus,
no ti.lrther environmental review is necessary; and
W'HEREAS, staff recommends the Redevelopment Agency enter into an agreement with
the Urban Land Institute for Advisory Services; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends $120,000 of funds be appropriated to the FY 2009
services and supplies budget of the Redevelopment Agency Merged Project Area Fund.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Redevelopment Agency hereby
authorizes the Chair of the Redevelopment Agency to enter into an agreement with the Urban Land
Institute for Advisory Services, and appropriates $120,000 of available fund balance to the FY 2009
services and supplies budget of the Redevelopment Agency Merged Project Area Fund.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Eric Crockett
Assistant Director of Redevelopment & Housing
10-44
THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT HAS BEEN REVIEWED
AND APPROVED AS TO FORNI BY THE CITY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND WTLL BE
FOR.MALL Y SIGNED UPON APPROVAL BY
THE CITY COUNCIL
Dated:
Agreement between the City of Chula Vista and
lJLI - The Urban Land Institute for
Advisory Services
. j
10-45
Attachment 2
Parties and Recital Page(s)
Agreement bet\Veen
City of Chula Vista
and
ULI - tne Urban Land Institute
for
Advisory Services
Tpjs agreement ("Agreement"), dated for the purposes of reference
ouly, and effective as of the date last executed unless another date is othern.ise specified in
Exhibit A, Paragraph I, is between the City-related entir-y as is indicated 00 Exhibit A,
Paragraph 2, as such ("Cir-y"), whose business form is set forth on Exhibit A, Paragraph 3, and
the entity indicated on the attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 4, as Consultant, whose business form
is set forth on Exhibit A, Paragr2.ph 5, and whose place of business and telephone numbers are
set forth on Exhibit A, Paragraph 6 ("Consultant"), and is made with Teference to the folloWLilg
facts:
Recitals
Vvnereas1 the H Street Corridor is a critical component of L.1e revitalization of the City of
Chula Vista; and
Whereas, General Plan LT...JT Policy 2.6 identifies the need to conduct a special study to
eXfu-nine u~e potential for higher land use intensities and, tailer buildings along the H Street
Transit Focus Corridor betw"een Interstate 5 and Fourtr~ Avenue, and to address compatibility
issues wit,'-l adjacent stable neighborhoods; and
W-.bereas, the Urban Land Institute (l.TLI) has extensive k..T1owledge of compLicated land
use and plaru.Mg matters CJ.J.d has conducted Advisory Services Seminars for a munber of other
agencies which u..1.iquely qualifies ULI to provide advisory services through tJ.'1eir 5-day Advisory
Services SerPinar; fu'1d
vVhereas, waiving the consultant selection process is in the best interest of the CIty
because lJLI has prior experience workiTlg with a number of other agencies in conducting
Advisory Services Seminars and has extensive knowledge of complicated land use and pia.TlJ.""1ing
matters and has the specific professional resources uniquely qualified and suited to conduct the
Advisory Services Seminar; a~d
Whereas, ULI warrants lli""1d represents that they are experienced and staffed in a manner
such that they are and can prepare and deliver w~e services required of UIJ to City within L'1e
time frames herein prGvided all in accordance wilD. the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
(End of Recitals. Next Page starts Obligatory Provisions.)
Page 1
10-46
Obligatory Provisions Pages
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED for valuable consideration the City and
Consultant do hereby mutually agree as follows:
l. Consultant's Duties
A. General Duties
Consultant shall perform all of the services described on the attached Ex..f,ibit A, Paragraph 7,
entitled llOeneral Duties!!; and,
B. Scope of Work and Schedule
In the process of performing and delivering said "Genera! Dutiesl\ Consultant shall also
perform all of the services described in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, entitled "Scope of Work and
Schedule", not inconsistent with the General Duties, according to, and within the time Erames set
forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, and deliver to City such Deliverables as are identified in Exhibit
A, Paragraph 8, within the time Erames set forth therein, time being of the essence of this
agreement. The General Duties and the work and deliverables required in the Scope of Work and
Schedule shall be herein referred to as the "Defined Services". Failure to complete the Defined
Services by the times indicated does nOt, except at the option of the City, operate to terminate
this Agreement.
C. Reductions in Scope of Work
I
I
Citj may independently, or upon request from Consultant, from time to time reduce the
Defi.".,ed Services to be performed by the Consultant under this Agreement. Upon doing so, City
and Consultant agree to meet in good faith and confer for the purpose or negotiating a
corresponding reduction in Lt-te compensation associated with said reduction.
D. Additional Services
In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set forth, City may require Consultant
to perform additional consulting services related to the Defined Services ("Additional Services"),
and upon doing so in \"Titing, if they are witml1. the scope of services offered by Consuitant,
Consultant shall perform S<L'TIe on a time and materials basis at the rates set forth in the "Rate
Schedule" in Exhibit A, Paragraph lO(C), unless a separate fixed fee is otherwise agreed upon.
All compensation for Additional Services shall be paid monthly as billed.
E. Standard of Care
Consultan~ in performing any Servoices under tb-is agreement, whether Defined Services or
Additional Services, shall perform in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill
ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicL.l1g under similar conditions
and L'1 siIPjlar locations.
Page 2
10-47
F. Insurance
Consultant must procure insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to
property that may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work under the
contrnct and the results of that work by the Consultant, pjs agents, representatives, employees or
subcontractors and provide documentation of same prior to commencement of work. The
insurance must be maintained for the duration 0 f the contract
Minimum Scope of Insurance
Coverage must be at least as broad as:
(l) Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence Form
CGOOOI).
(2) Insurance Services Office Form Number CA 0001 covenng Automobile Liability,
Code I (any auto).
(3) Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and
Employer's Liability Insurance.
(4) Professional Liability or Errors & Omissions Liability insura..'1ce appropriate to the
CODsultane s profession.
Minimum Limits ofInsura11ce
Contractor must maintain limits no iess than:
,
,
1. General Liabilit'j:
CInduding operations,
products and completed
operations, as applicable)
2. Automobile Liability:
3 . Workers ~ Compensation
Employer's Liability:
4. Professional Liabilirj or
Errors & Omissions
Liability:
$1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal h'ljurj and
properry damage. If COIT1J.l1erciar General Liability LT1surcmce
with 2. general aggregate limit is used, either the general
aggregate lif[1it must apply separately to this project/location or
Ll}e general aggregate 1irr...it mUSE be twice Lhe required occurrence
limit.
$1,000,000 per accident for bodily inju~,", and property da:.--nage.
Statutory
$ I,OOO,OOO each accident
5! ,000,000 disease-policy limit
51,000,000 disease-each employee
$1,000,000 each occurrence
Page 3
10-48
Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions
Any deductibles orself-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At
the option of the City, either the insurer will reduce or eli..'Ilinate such deductibles or self-insured
retentions as they pertain to the ,City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; Of tb.e
Consulta.nt will provide a financial guarantee satisfactory to the City guaranteeing payment of
losses and related mvestigations, claim administration, and defeuse expenses.
Ot.'1er Insurance Provisions
The general liability, and where applicable, ll:1e automobile liability policies are to contain, or
be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
(I) The City of Chula Vista, its officers, officials; employees, agents, and volul1teers are
to be named as additional insureds with respect to liability arising out of automobiles
owned, leased., hired or borrowed by or on behalf of the Consultant, where applicable,
and., with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on
behalf of the Consultant, including providing materials, parts or equipment furnished
iT) connection with such work or operations. The general liability additional insured
coverage must be provided in the form of an endorsement to the contractor's
insurance using ISO CG 20 I 0 (11/85) or its equivalent. Specifically, the endorsement
must not exclude Products/Completed Operations coverage.
(2) The Consultant's General Liability insurance coverage must be primary insurance as
it pertains to the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents) and volllilteers. .lA..ny
insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees,
or volunteers is wholly separate from L~e insurance of the contractor and in no way
relieves t.f}e contractor from its responsibility to provide insurance.
(3) Coverage shall not extend to any inderm1ity coverage for the active negligence oft.'1e
additional insured in any case where an agreement to iIldemniry the additional insured
would be invalid uIlder Subdivision (b) of Section 2782 of the Civii Code.
-t47 Consuitanfs insurer \viJl provide a Waiver of Subrogation in favor of the City ror the
required generalliabilitj policy.
If General Liability, Pollution and/or Asbestos Pollution Liabil[t"y 8.l"ldior Errors & Omissions
coverage are written on a claims-made form:
(1) The ."Retro Date" must be shown, and must be before the date of L'!-}e contract or t.'1e
beginni.Tlg of the contract work.
(2) A copy of the c1aiills reporting requirements must be submitted to the City for revlevl.
Page 4
10-49
Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with licensed insurers admitted to transact business Ll1 the Stace of
Califomia with a cutrent A.M. Best's rating of no less than A V. If L11surance is placed with a
surplus lines insurer, insurer must be listed on the State of California List of Eligible Surplus
Lines Insurers ("LESLl") with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A X. Exception may
be made for G'1e State Compensation Fund when not specifically rated.
Verification of Coverage
Consultant shall furnish the City with 6rigL'lal certificates and amendatory endorsements
effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements should be on. insurance industry
forms, provided tJ.'1ose endorsements or policies conform to the contract requirements. All
certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work
commences. The City reserves the right to require, at any tirpe, complete, certified copies of all
required insurance policies, i.n.eluding endorsements evidencL.1l.g the coverage required by tf:1ese
specifications.
Consultant will provide City 30 days advance \vritten notice of intent to cancel subject
insurance or advise the City in writing immediately upon knowledge of insurer's, intent to canceL
Subcontractors
Consul cants must include all subconsultants as insureds under its policies or PJrrllsh separate
certificates and endorsements for each subconsulLa:.i.t. All c<1verage for subconsultants are subject
to all of the requirements included in these specifications: J
G. Security for Performance
(I) Performance Bond
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 18, indicates the need for Consultant to provide
a Perform2nce Bond (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space t.rT.cIl1ediately
preceding the subparagraph entitled "Performance Bond"), then Consultant shall provide to the
City a performance bond in the form prescribed by the City and by such sureties which are
authorized to transact such business in the State of California, listed as approved by G'1e United
States Department of Treasury Circular 570, htto://www.fins.treas.zov/c570, and whose
undenvriting limitation is sufficient to issue bonds in the amount required by the agreement, and
which also satisfY the requirements stated in Section 995.660 of the Code of Civil Procedure,
except as provided otherwise by laws or regulations. All bonds signed by an agent must be
accompanied by a certified copy of such agent's authority'to act. Surety companies must be duly
licensed or, authorized in the jurisdiction in which the Project is located to issue bonds for the
limits so required. Form must be sarisfactorj to the Risk Manager or City Attorney which
amount is indicated in the space adjacent to the term, "Performance Bond", in said Exhibit A,
Paragraph 18.
Page 5
10-50
(2) Letter of Credit
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 18, indicates the need for Consultant to provide
a Letter of Credit (indicated by a check mark iIl the parenthetical space inunediately preceding
the subparagraph entitled "Letter of Credit"), then Consultant shall provide to the City an
irrevocable letter of credit callable by the City at their unfettered discretion by submitting to t.loe
bank a letter, signed by h'1e City Manager, stating that the Consultant is in breach of the terms of
this Agreement. The letter of credit shall be issued by a bank, and be in a form and amount
satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney which amount is L11dicated'in the space
adjacent to the term, "Letter of Credit", i.n said Exhibit A, Paragraph 18,
(3) Other Security
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 18, indicates the need for Consultant to provide
security other than a Performance Bond or a Letter of Credit (Llldicated by a check mark i.n the
parenthetical space immediately preceding the subparagraph entitled "Other Security"), then
Consultant shall provide to tf,e City such other security therein listed L'l a. form and alnount
satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney.
H. Busi.ness License
Consultant agrees to obtain a business license from the City and to omenvlse comply with
Title 5 of the Chula Visra Municipal Code.
2. Duties of the City
A. Consultation aild Cooperation
City shall regularly consult th.e Copsultant for the purpose of reviewing L~e progress of the
Defined Ser'lices and Schedule Lherein containedt a..T1d to provide direction and guidance to
achieve t.~e objectives of this agreement. The City shall permit access to its office facilities, files'
and records by Consultant throughout L~e term of the agreement. In addition thereto, City agrees
to provide the information, data, items and materials set forth 00 Exhibit A, Paragraph 9, and
with the. further understanding that delay i.n the provision of tf,ese materials beyond thi:,y (30)
days after authorization to proceed, sball constitute a basis for the justifiable delay i.n the
Consultm.,tls performance Oft..1is agreement.
B. Compensation
Upon receipt of a properly prepared billing from Consultant submitted to the City
periodically as indicated in Ex.l1ibit .~ Paragraph 17, but L'1. no event more frequently t.~an
monthly, on the day of the period indicated in Exhibit A, Paragrapb 17, City shall compensate
Consult~nt for all services rendered by Co.nsultant according to the terms and conditions set forth
L'1 Exhibit A, Paragraph 10, adjacent to the governing compensation relationship indicated by a
I1checkrnark" next to the appropriate arrar'1gement, subject to the requirements for retention set
Page 6
10-51
forth in Paragraph 18 of Exhibit A, and shall compensate Consultant for out of pocket expenses
as provided in Exh-ibit A, Paragraph 11.
All billings submitted by Consultant shall contain sufficient information as to the propriety of
the biEing to permit the City to evaluate that the amount due and payable thereunder is proper,
and shall specifically contain the City's account number indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph l7(C)
to be charged upon making such payment.
3. Administration of Contract
Each party designates the individuals ("Contract AdIT'jnistrators") indicated on Exhibit A,
Paragraph 12, as said party's contract administrator who is authorized by said party to represent
th.em in the routine administration of this agreement. .
4. Term
This Agreement shall terminate when u'1e Parties have complied with all executory provisions
hereof
5. Liquidated Damages
The provisions of this section apply if a Liquidated Damages Rate is provided iIl Exhibit A,
Paragraph 13.
It is acknowledged by both parties ulat time is of tl;te essence in the completion of this
Agreement It is difficult to estimate the amount or damages resulting from delay m
performance. The parties have used L.;eir judgment to arrive at a reasonable arnOul1t to
compensate for delay.
Failure to complete the Defmed Services within the allotted time period specified in tllis
Agreement shall result iTl the following penalty: For each consecutive calendar day in excess of
the time specified for t.~e completion of the respective work assignment or Deliverable, the
Consultan[ shall pay to the City, or have wilh..held from !llonies due, t.~e sum of Liquidated
Damages Rate provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 13 ("Liquidated Damages Rate").
Time extensions for delays beyond the Consultant's control, oLher than delays caused by the
City, shall be requested in writing to the City's Contract Administrator, or designee, prior to the
expiration of the specified tLrne. Extensions of time, when granted, will be based upon the effect
of deiays to the work a..'1d will not be granted for delays to miIlor portions of work unless it can
be shown that such delays did or will delay the progress of the work.
6. Force ?vlajeU!"e
The performance of tl>is Agreement by either party is subject to acts of God, war or threat of
W2.!, goveITLfTIent regulation, acts or threats of terrorism, disaster; fIre, strikes, civil disorder,
public health crises, cur.ailment of transportation facilities or other circumstances beyond the
Page 7
10-52
control of the parties uIlfeasooably delaYL'1g or making it inadvisable, illegal or impossible for
either party to perform its obligations hereunder. This Agreement may be terminated without
penalty for anyone (I) or more of such reasons by written notice from one party to the other;
provided that the party delayed or unable to perform shall promptly advise the other party of
such delay or impossibility of performance, and provided further that the party so delayed or
unable to perform shall take reasonable steps to mitigate the effects of any such delay or
nonperformance.
7. Financial Interests of Consultant
A. Consultant is Designated as an FPPC Filer
If Consultant is designated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 14, as an "FPPC fiier", Consultant is
deemed to be a "Consultant" for the ptuposes of the Political Reform Act conflict of interest and
disclosure provisions, and shall report economic interests to the City Clerk on the required
Statement of Economic Interests in such reporting categories as are specified in Paragraph 14 of
Exhibit A, or if none are specified., then as determined by the City Attorney.
B. Decline to Participate
Regardless of whe!.her Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consulrant shall not make,
or participate in making or 111 any way attempt to use Consultant's position to inrluence a
governmental decision in which Consultant knows or has reason to mow Consultant has a
financial interest ot.'1er Lhan the compensation promised by this Agreement.
C. Search to Determine Economic Interests
I
I
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Fiier, Consultant warrants aIld
represents that Consultant has diligently conducted a search and inventory of Consultant's
economic LT1terests, as the term is used in the regulations promulgated by the Fair Political
Practices Commission, and has determined lhat Consultant does nOl to the best of Consultan~s
knowledge, have an economic interest which would conflict with Consultant's duties under this
agreement.
D. Promise Not to Acquire Conflicting Interests
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Fiier, Consultant further warrants
and represents that ConsultaIlt wiI! not acquire, obtai..Tl~ or assume an economic interest during the
term of this Agreement which would constitute a conflict of interest as prohibited by the Fair
Political Practices Act.
E. Duty to Advise of Conflicting Interests
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant further warrants
and represents that Consultant will immediately advise the City Attorney of City if Consultant
Page 8 .
10-53
learns of an econowic interest of Consnltant's that may result in a conflict of interest for the
purpose of the Fair Political Practices Ac~ and regulations promulgated thereunder.
F. Specific Warranties Against Economic Interests
Consultant warrants and represents that neither Consultant, nor Consultant's immediate
family members, nor Consultant's employees or agents ("Consultant Associates") presently have
any interest, directly or indirectly, whatsoever in any property which may be the subject matter
of the Defined Services, or in any property within 2 radial miles from the exterior boundaries of
any property which may be the subject matter of the Defined Services, ("Prohibited Interest"),
other than as listed in Exhibit A, Parngraph 14.
Consultant further warrants and represents that no promise of future employment,
remuneration, considera'tion, gr-atuiry or other reward or gain has been made to Consultant or
Consultant Associates in connection with ConsUltant's performance of tbs Agreement.'
. Consultant promises to advise City of any such promise that may be made during t.he Term of
[Pis Agreement, or for tweive months thereafter.
Consultant agrees that Consultant Associates shall not acquire any such Prohibited Interest
within the Term of this Agreement, or for twelve montls after the expiration of this Agreement,
except with the wrinen permission of City.
Consultant may not conduct or solicit any business for any party to this Agreement, or for
any third party that may be in conflict wit:1. Consultanes responsibilities under tlUs Agreement,
except v.ith the written permission of Ci~f.
8. Hold Harmless
Consultant shall defend: mdeiT1J."lIIY, protect and hoid harmless the City, its elected and
appointed officers and empioyees, from and against all claims for damages, liability, cost and
expense (including wichout limitation attorneys fees) arising out of or alleged by third parties to
be the result of the negligent acts, errors or omissions or. the willful misconduct of the
Consultant, and Consultant's employees, subcontractors or oL~er persons, agencies or fums for
whom Consultant is legally responsible in connection with the execution of tle wor.k covered by
this Agreement, except to the extent that those claims, dlli-nages, liability, costs and expenses
(including without limitations~ attorneys fees) arise from t.l-)e sole negligence or sole willful
misconduct of lhe City, its officers, employees. Also covered is liability ariSi..l"1g from, connected
with, caused by or claimed to be caused by the active or passive negligent acts or omissions of
the CitY, its agents, office~s~ or employees which may be in combination with the active or
passive negligent acts or omlssions of w.1.e Consultant, its employees, agents or officers, or a.TJ.Y
third party.
\-Vith respect to losses arisLT1g from Consultanfs professional errors or orrJssions, Consultant
shall defend, indemnify, pcmect and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officers
and employees, froill a.nd aga~!st all claims for damages, Iiability,.cost and expense (i....T1.c1uding
Page 9
10-54
without lirnitation attorneys fees) exceptto the extent that those claims arise from the negligence
or willful misconduct of City, its officers or employees.
Consultant's indemnification shall include any and all costs, expenses, attorneys fees and
liability incurred by the City~ its officers, agents or employees in defending against such claims,
whether the same proceed to judgment or not. Consultant's obligations under this Section shall
not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the Consultant. Consultant's obligations
under this Section shall survive the termination of this Agreement.
9. Termination of Agreement for Cause
If, through any cause, Consultant shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper manner
Consultant's obligations under tlus Agreement, or if Consultant shall violate any of the
covenants, agreements or stipulations of this Agreement, City shall have the right to terminate
this Agreement by giving written notice to Consultant of such termina.tion and specifying the
effective date thereof at least five (5) days before tbe effective date of such termination. In the
evem of City's t;:rmination of this Agreement, all finished or lll1finished documents, data,
studies, surveys, drawings, maps, report-s and other materials prepared by Consultant shall, at the
option of Ll:te City, become the property' of the City, provided that City shall first pay Consultant
just and equitable compensation for any work satisfactorily completed on such documents and
other materials up to the effective date of Notice of Termination, not to exceed the amounts
payable hereunder, and less any damages caused City by Consultant's breach.
10. Errors and Omissions
I
In the event that the City AdmL-J.istrator determines that the Consultants' negligence, errors,
or omissions in the perfonTIauce of work U:Dder this Agreement has resulted in expense to City
greater than would have resulted if there were no such negligence, errors, omissions, Consultant
shall reimburse Ci[y for any additional expenses incurred by the City. Not.'1.ing herein is intended
to limit Ciryis rights t!...T1der other provisions of this agreement.
11. Tennination of Agreement ror Convenience of City
City may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any reason, by giving specific written
notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof, at least thirty
(30) days before tbe effective date of such terminatioIl. In tJ.~at event, all finished an.d unfinished
dOClL'l1ents and other mareriais described hereinabove shall, at the option of the City, become
City's sole and exclusive property, provided that City has first paid just and equitable
compensation for any satisfactory work completed on such documents and other materials to the
effective. date of such termination. Consultant hereby expressly waives any and all claims for
damages or compensation arising under this Agreement except as set forth herein.
Page 10
10-55
12. Assignability
The services of Consultant are personal to the City, and Consultant shall not assign any
interest in this Agreement, and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by assignment
or notation), without prior written consent 0 f City.
City hereby consents to the assignnlent of the portions of the Defined Services identified in
Exhibit A, Paragraph 16 to the subconsu1ta.'1ts identified thereat as "Permitted Subconsultants".
13. Ownership, Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material
AIl reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms, designs, plans, procedures, systej::ns
and any other materials or properties (collectively "materials or properties") produced under this
Agreement shall be the sole and exclusive property of City, provided that City has paid
Consultant just and reasonable compensation for the services rendered in producing such
materials or properties. No such materials or properties produced in whole or in part under this
Agreement shall be subject to private use, copyrights or patent rights by Consultant in Ll,e United
States or in any other country without the express written consent of City. City shall have
unrestricted authority to publish, disclose (except as may be limited by the provisions of the
Public Records Act), distribute, and otherwise use, copyright or patent, in whole or in part, any
such materials or properties produced under this Agreement. Consultant shall retain a perpetual,
royalty-free lic"ense to use any such reports, studies, data, statistics, forms, or other materials or
properties for educational, non-cornmercial purposes.
14. Independent Contractor
J
J
City is interested only in the results obtained and Consultant shall perform as an h,dependent
contractor with sole control oE-the ma..:m.er and means of perfon::ping the sef\rices required under
t.hjs Agreement. Cit}, maintains t.~e right only to reject or accept Consultant's work products.
Consultant and any of the Consultant's agents, employees or representatives are, for all purposes
under this Agreement, an independent contractor and shall not be deemed to be an employee of
City, and none of them shall be entitled to any benefits to which City employees are entitled
including but not limited to,. overtime, retirement benefits, workers compen~ation benefits,
injury leave or other leave benefits. Therefore, City will not withhold state or federal income (ax,
social security tax or any other payroll tax, and Consul(ant shall be solely responsible for ll,e
payment of same and shan hold the Ci~j harmless with regard thereto.
15. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures
No suit or arbitration shall be brougbt arising out of this agreement, against the City unless a
claim has first been presented L'1 writi.ng and filed with the City and acted upon by the City in
accordance will, the procedures set fact.;' in Chap(er 1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, as
same may from time to time be amended, the provisions of which are incorporated by this
reference as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and procedures used by the City in the
implementation of sa.'Ile.
Page 11
10-56
Upon request by City, Consnltant shail meet and confer in good faith with City for the
purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement.
16. Attorney's Fees
Should a dispute ansmg out of this Agreement result in litigation, it is agreed that the
prevailing party shall be entitled to a judgment against the other for an amount equal to
reasonable attorney's fees and court costs incurred. The "prevailing party" shall be deemed to be
the party who is awarded substantially the relief sought.
17. Statement of Costs
[n ul.e event ul.at Consultant prepares a report or document, or participates in the preparation
of a report or document in performing the Defined Services, Consultant shall include, or cause
the inclusion of, in said report or document, a statement of the munbers and cost in dollar
amounts of all contracts and subcontracts relating to ul.e preparation of the report or documenL
18. Miscellaneous
A. Consultant not authorized to Represent City
Unless specifically authorized in writing by City, Consultant shall have no authority to act as
City's agent to bind City to any contractual agreements whatsoever.
B. Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman ,
,
If the box on Exhibit A, Paragraph 15 is marked, the Consultant and/or their principals is/are
licensed with Lhe State of California or some other state as a licensed real estate .broker or
salesperson. Other",ise, Consultant represents that neither Consultant, nor their principals are
licensed real estate brokers or salespersons.
C. Notices
All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to be given pursuant to this
Agreement must be in writing. All notices, demands a,.,d requests to be sent to any party shall be
deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served or deposited in the United
States mail, addressed to such party, postage prepaid, registered or certified, with return receipt
requested, at the addresses identified herein as the places of business for each of the designated
parties.
D. Entire Agreement
This Agreement, together with any other written document referred to or contemplated
herein, embody the entire Agreement and understanding between the parties relating to the
subject matter hereof Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof may be amended,
Page 12
10-57
modified, waived or discharged except by an instrument in writing executed by the party against
which enforcement of slich amendment, waiver or discharge is sought.
E. Capacity ofPames
Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants. and represents to the other party that it has
legal authority and capacity and direction from its principal to enter inco litis Agreemenl and that
all resolutions or other actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter into this Agreement.
F. Govemii1g LawNenue
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State
of California. Any action arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought only in the
federal or state courts located in San Diego County, State of California, and if applicable, the
City of Chula Vista, or as close thereto as possible. Venue forthis Agreement, and performance
hereunder, shall be l"e City of Chula Vista.
(End of page. Next page is signature page.)
Page 13
10-58
Signature Page
to
Agreement between
City of Chula Vista
and
ULI - the Urban Land Institute
for
Advisory Services
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this Agreement thereby
indicating that they have read and understood same, and indicate their full and complete consent
to its terms: ~
Dated:
Redevelopment Agency of the City of
Chula Vista
By:
Cheryl Cox, Chair
Attest:
Donna Noms, Interi.m City Clerk
Approved as to form:
)
,
Bart Miesfeld, Interim City Attorney
~
~:banLC.[ns~ 7/z/ur
Cheryl Cummins
President, The .Au-nericas
By ~~~.J2 711ft
Mana Gol~th
Seni.or Vice President. Communit)/"J
By: ~ :?//
Thomas W. Eitler :?
Director, Advisory Services
Dated:
Exhibit List to Agreement
(X) Exhibit A.
Page 14
10-59
Exhibit A
to
Agreement between
Citj of Chula Vista
. and
ULI - the Urban Land Institute
for
Advisory Services
1. Effective Date of Agreement:
2. City,Related Entity:
( ) City ofChula Vista, a municipal chartered corporation of the State of California
(X) Redevelopment Agency of the City of ChuJa Vista, a political subdivision of the State of
California.
( ) Industrial Development Authority of the City of Chula Vista, a
( ) Other:
, a [insert business form]
("City")
,
)
3. Place of Business for City:
City of Chula Vista .
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
4. Consultant:
ULI - the Urban Land Institute
5. Business Form of Consultant
( ) Sole Proprietorship
( ) Partnership
( ) Corporation
(X) Non-Profit Corporation
6. Place of Business, Telephone and Fax Number of Consultanc:
1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, N.W.
Page 15
10-'-60
Suite 500 West
Washington, D.C. 20007-5201
Phone: (202) 624-7000
Fax: (202) 624-7140
7. General Duties:
VLI shall conduct a 5-day Advisory Services Panel Seminar and provide a fmal report
of recommendations to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista.
8. Scope of Work and Schedule:
A. Detailed Scope of Work:
VLI shall provide a volunteer panel that collectively has a varied and broad experience
and knowledge applicable to the issues of the H Street Corridor study area (west of
Third Avenue). Once the contract has been execnted, VLI and the City will work
together to frame the assignment and identify the particular issues to be addressed by
the panel, which may include but not be limited to assessment of the Corridor's
economic potential and urban design, and development of an implementation strategy.
VLI shall arrange for the panel members to visit the location upon which its
recommendations are sought for a period of not less than five days (the "panel
session"), starting on panel start date, to be determined by ULI and the City.
During the panel session, VLI shall directly and thr9ugh its staff:
. study the designated area: .
. consult with public and private officials, representatives of other relevant
organizations, and other individuals familiar with the issues involved; and
. prepare its conclusions and recommendations which wiII be presented to the
City and its invited guests in oral form at the close of the on-site assignment.
ULI snail provide the City with a written summary of its conclusions and
recommendations. The City will be provided 200 copies of tne report.
ULI shall absorb the travel and living expenses of its panel and staff while on site.
B. Date for Commencement of Consultant Services:
(X) Same as Effective Date of Agreement
( ) Ou'1er:
c. Dates or Time Limits for Delivery of Deliverables:
Deliverable No. I: N/A
Page i 6
10-61
Deliverable No.2: Nt A
Deliverable No.3: NtA
D. Date for completion of all Consultant services:
December 31, 2008
9. Materials Required to be Supplied by City to Consultant:
The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista shall supply, at its expense, the
following items to UL1:
. Furnish to each panel member, uot less than 10 days in advance of the panel session,
such pertinent background data in the form of reports, plans, charts, etc., as may be
presently available or readily developed for the preliminary study of the panel,
prior to its inspection on site. Two copies are to be sent to the ULI Project
I\tlanager.
. Arrange, insofar as possible, to have appropriate persons, including public officials
and private individuals, representatives of relevant organizations, and others,
available for the purpose of consulting with and furnishing information to the panel
on specific matters relevant to the assignment as may be necessary and advisable
during the period of the panel's visit.
10. Compensation:
A. ( ) Single Fixed Fee Arrangement.
.1
.1
For performance of all of the Defined Services by Consultant as herein required. City shall
pay a single fixed fee en the amounts a.'1d at t.he times or milestones or for the Deliverables set
forth below:
Single Fixed Fee Amount:
, payable as follows:
Milestone or Event or Deliverable
Amount or Percent afFixed Fee
( ) 1. Interim Monthly Advances. The City shall make interim monthly advances
against the compensation due for each phase on a percentage of completion basis for
each given phase such that. at the end of each phase only the compensation for that
phase has been paid. Any payments made hereunder shall be considered as interest
free loans that must be returned to the City if the Phase is not satisfactorily
completed. If the Phase is satisfactorily completed, the City shall receive credit
against the compensation due for that phase. The rerenhon amount or percentage set
forth in Paragraph 19 is to be applied to each interim payment such that, at the end of
the phase, the full retention has been held back from the compensation due for that
phase. Percentage of completion of a phase. shall be assessed in the sole and
unfettered discretion by the Contracts Administrator designated herein by the City, or
such ou'ler person as u'le Cit'f Manager shall designate, but only upon such proof
Page 17
10-62
demanded by the City t'1at has been provided, but in no event shall such interim
advance payment be made unless the Contractor shall have represented in writing that
said percentage of completion of the phase has been performed by the Contractor.
The practice of making interim monthly advances shall not convert this agreement to
a time and materials basis of payment.
B. (X) Phased Fixed Fee Arrangement.
For the performance of each phase or portion of the Defmed Services by Consultant as are
separately identified below, City shall pay the fixed fee associated with each phase of Services,
in the amounts and at the times or milestones or Deliverables set forth. Consultant shall not
commence Services under any Phase, and shall not be entitled to t.l-je compensation for a Phase,
unless City shall have issued a notice to proceed to Consultant as to said Phase.
Phase
1.
Fee for Said Phase
2.
Upon signing of contract
Presentation of panel's recommendations
Upon City receiving final report
$ 57,500
$ 57,500
$ 5,000
3.
( ) I. Interim Monthly AdvarlCes. The City shall make interim mont.lUy advances
against the compensation due for each phase on a percentage of completion basis for
each given phase such that, at the end of each phase only the compensation for that
phase has been paid. Any payments made hertunder shall be considered as interest
free loans that must be returned to the City if the Phase is not satisfactorily
completed. If the Phase is satisfactorily completed, the City shall receive credit
against the compensation due for that phase. The retention amount or percentage set
forth in Paragraph 19 is to be applied to each interim payment such that, at the end of
the phase, the full retention has been held back from the compensation due for that
phase. Percentage of completion of a phase shall be assessed in the soie and
unfettered discretion by the Contracts Administrator designated herein by t.f:1e Cir-j, or
such other person as the City Manager shall designate, but only upon such proof
demanded by t.l:1e City that has been provided, but in no event shall sllch interim
advance payment be made unless the Contractor shall have represented in writing that
said percentage of completion of the phase has been performed by the Contractor.
The practice of making interi.lTl monthly advances shall not conven this agreement to
a time and materials basis of payment.
C. ( ) Hourly Rate lurangement
For performance of the DefIned Services by Consultant as herein required, City shall pay
Consultant for the productive hours of time spent by Consultant in the performance of said
Services, at t..~e rates or arnOtl:.l.ts set forLh in the Rate Schedule herein below according to the
following terms and conditions:
Page 18
10-63
(1) ( ) Not-to-Exceed Limitation on Time and Materials Arrangement
Notwithstanding the expenditure by Consultant of time and materials in excess of said
Maximum Compensation amount, Consultant agrees l~at Consulta.'1t will perform all of
the Defined Services herein required of Consultant for $
including all Materials, and other "reimbursables" ("Maximum Compensation").
(2) ( ) Limitation without Further Authorization on Time and Materials Arrangement
At such time as ConsultaIlt shall have incurred ti.,11e and materials equal to
(" Authorization Lirr>jt"), Consultant shall not be entitled
to any additional compensation without further authorization issued in \vritiIlg and
approved by the City. Nothing herein shall preclude Consultant from providing additional
Services at Consultant's own cost and expense.
Rate Schedule
Category of Employee
Name of Consultant
Hourly Rate
$
$
$
$
$
( ) Hourly rates may increase by 6% for services rendered after [month], 20__ if delay
in providing services is caused by City.
1 1. Materials Reimbursement Arrangement
For L.1e cost of out of pocket expenses incurred by Consultant in the performance of services
herein required, Cirj shall pay Consultant at the rates or amounts set forth below:
(X) None, the compensation includes all costs.
Cost or Rate
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
() Reports, not to exceed $
() Copies, not to exceed $
() Travel, not to exceed $
() Printing, not to exceed $
() Postage, not to exceed S
() Delivery, not to exceed S .
() Long Distallce Telephone Charges, not to exceed $
() Other Actual Identifiable Direct Costs:
Page 19
10-64
, nor to exceed $
, not to exceed $
$
$
[2. Contract Administrators:
City: Stacey Kurz, Senior Project Coordinator, Redevelopment and Housing
Consultant:
Matthew Rader, Senior Associate, Advisory Services Program
13. Liquidated Damages Rate:
( ) $
( ) Other:
per day.
14. Statement of Economic Interests, Consultant Reporting Categories, per Conflict of Interest
Code:
(X) Not Applicable. Not an FPPC Filer.'
( ) FPPC Filer
( ) Category No. I. Investments and sources of income.
) Category NO.2. Interests in real property.
,
,
) Category No, 3. investments, it-,terest in real property and sources of income subject
to the regularory, permit or licensing authority of me department.
) Category No.4. Investments LTl business entities and sources of income that engage in
land development, construotion or the acquisition or sale of real property.
( ) Category No.5. Investments in business entities and souroes of income of the type
whioh, within the past two years, have contraoted with the City of ChuIa Vista
(Redevelopment Agency) to provide services, suppiies, materials, machinery or
equipment
1. If Consultant, in the performance of its services u.llder this agreement: (1) conduc[S research
and arrives at conclusions with respect to its rendition of inforrnation~ advice,
reoormnendations or counsel independent of the control and direction of the City or of any
City official, other t.~an normal contract monitoring; and (2) possesses no authority wiTh
respect to any City' decision beyond L~e rendition of information, advice, recommendations or
counsel, Consultant should not be designated as at! FPPC Filer.
Page 20
10-65
( ) Category No.6. Investments in business entities and sources of income of the type
which. within the past two years, have contracted with the designated employee's
department to provide services, supplies, materials, machinery or equipment.
( ) Category No.7. Business positions.
( ) List "Consultant Associates" interests in real property within 2 radial miles of Project
Property, if any:
15. ( ) Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman
16. Permitted Subconsultants:
~
17. Bill Processing:
A_ Consultant's Billing to be submitted for L~e following period of time:
( ) Monthly
( ) Quarterly
( ) Other:
B. Day of the Period for submission of Consultant's Billing:
( ) First of the Month
( ) 15Lf:t Day of each Month
( ) End of the Month
( ) Other:
C. City's ACCOUI'lt Nu,nber:
65140-630 I
18. Security for Performance
Page 21
10-66
( ) Performance Bond, $.
( ) Letter of Credi~ $
( ) Other Security:
Type:
Amount: $
(X) Retention. If this space is checked, then notwithstanding other provisions to the contrary
requiring the payment of compensation to ULI sooner, the City shall be entitled to retain,
at their option~ either the folloWLTlg "Retention PercentageTT or "Retention Amounttl until
the City determines that the Retention Release Event, listed below, has occurred:
( ) Retention Percentage:
(X) Retention l\1nount: $5,000
%
Retention Release Event:
(X) Completion of All Advisory Services
( ) Other:
,
,
Page 22
10-67
CITY COUNCIL &
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AGENDA STATEMENT
~\I.t.- em OF
~CHULA VISTA
.'-jtily22, 266g1tem1T'-
ITEM TITLE:
JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO THE LETTER OF INTENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, THE REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, THE SAN DIEGO
UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT, AND GAYLORD ENTERTAINMENT
COMPANY EXTENDING THE TERiVl OF THE LETTER OF INTENT
THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2008, AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT
NO.3 TO THE LETTER OF INTENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY AND
THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGERIEXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO APPROVE AND EXECUTE
AN ADDITIONAL SIX MONTH EXTENSION OF THE TERM OF THE
LETTER OF INTENT THROUGH JUNE 30, 2009 ON BEHALF OF THE
. CITY AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, IF NEEDED .\ c-;;:X' -
DENNY STONE, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OFFICEROt \cl.Y'::>
CITYMANAGER;:f.VLV,. ,.. .
/
4/5THS VOTE: YES
NO
x
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
SUMMARY
In July 2006 a Letter of Intent (LOI) was entered into between the City of Chula Vista, the
Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista, the San Diego Unified Port District and Gaylord
Entertainment Company relative to a major hotel and convention center, and associated public
improvements, that would serve as an economic catalyst for the development of the Chula Vista
Bayfront. The term of the LOI was extended via the First Amendment, approved by the City Council in
May 2007, and the Second Amendment approved by the City Council in February 2008, which is set to
expire July 30, 2008. The parties to the LOI still agree on the fundamental goals and objectives set
forth, however, they require additional time to finalize the formal agreements. Adoption of the
resolution extends the LOI through the end of December 2008 and authorizes a six month extension
through June 2009, if needed.
ENVIRONMENT AL REVIEW
The Environmental Review Co'ordinator has previously reviewed the proposed amendment to the LOI
for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the
activity is not a "Project" as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines; therefore,
pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA.
Thus, no environmental review is necessary. .
11 ~1
, ,
July 22, 2008 ltem-.L..L
Page 2 of3
RECOMMEND A nON
Council/Agency adopt the resolution.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDA nON
Not applicable.
DISCUSSION
The general concepts outlined in the original July 2006 LOI include the following:
. Gaylord will develop a 1,500 to 2,000 room hotel and convention center, and adjacent parcels as
mutually determined by the parties defined as the "Project."
. Gaylord will pay its pro-rata share of the cost of the environmental reVIew and entitlement
process.
. Approximately $178 million toward the first phase infrastructure/public improvement costs and
$130 million toward convention center development costs will be publicly financed by the
CitylRDA and the Port as financial partners.
. Part of the $130 million toward convention center costs may be funded over time as new
revenues are realized from the project.
. Debt service will be provided proportionate to new net revenues generated by the project to the
City, RDA and the Port District. I
,
o Debt service for the infrastructure and convention center financings will be provided only from
new (net) revenues generated by the project. The City's General Fund will not be put at risk.
New net revenues are defined to include transient occupancy tax (TOT), property tax increment
and Port lease revenues. Sales tax is specifically excluded from new net revenues.
The parties are still in agreement that the above represent the goals and objectives of the parties.
Since July 2006, the Port District has been involved in confidential negotiations with Gaylord relative to
the terms and conditions of an Option to Lease with Gaylord. If the conditions precedent described in
the Option to Lease are timely satisfied, then Gaylord could exercise its option and enter into a long-
term lease for development of a 1,500 - 2,000 room hotel and convention center. There are very few
unresolved business issues relative to the option and lease. It is anticipated that the formal Option and
Lease documents will be ready for consideration by the Port Board soon.
Recently Gaylord has expressed its position that prior to entering into the Option Agreement with the
Port District; all parties agree to the fundamentals of a finance structure relative to funding the
infrastructure required to support the Gaylord hotel/convention center and ilie public agencies' $130
million contribution to the cost of the convention center. It is anticipated that the four parties will enter
into a more detailed supplement to the LOI that will describe a financing scenario. The document
currently under discussion would describe the revenue streams, generated by the Gaylord project that
each agency (City, RDA, and Port) would make available to support bond financing for the public
agencies' portions of the project's costs. It would also describe the structure of the bond financing
11-2
July 22, 2008
r
Item.
Page 3 of3
contemplated by the parties, and general parameters of the funding mechanisms. Gaylord has recently
provided a preliminary update of its development proforma and revenue projections (last provided in
2006) and the Port District's consultant is updating the infrastructure cost estimate. The City has
retained a consultant to review Gaylord's revenue projections and provide a report that analyzes
Gaylord's Chula Vista projections relative to the regional hospitality market and to Gaylord's other
developments. Completion of these updates will be a prerequisite to finalizing a recommendation for the
supplement to the LOI pertaining to a financing structure.
Staff recommends that the existing LOI be extended for an additional five months, through the end of
December 31, 2008 to allow time to complete the cost and revenue updates and finalize
recommendations on the formal agreements. Staff also recommends that another six month extension
by agreement of the parties (executable by the City Manager) be authorized at this time, through June
30, 2009, in case there are unforeseen delays.
The LOI is not a binding agreement, but guides the negotiations between the parties until definitive
agreements and detailed financing structures can be put in place. Under the LOI,' all laws are reserved
and protected, including those pertaining to environmental review.
DECISION MAKER CONFLICT
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council and Redevelopment Agency Board
Members and has found a conflict, in that Council! Agency Board Member Castaneda has property
holdings within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property, which is the subject of this action.
FISCAL IMPACT
The LOI establishes broad parameters for continuing negotiatibns between the City of Chula Vista, the
Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista, the San Diego Unified Port District and Gaylord
Entertainment. There are no direct fiscal impacts to the City or the Redevelopment Agency as a result
of this Amendment to the LOI.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Letter oflntent approved July 25,2006
2. Letter of Intent Amendment No. I approved May 15,2007
3. Letter ofIntent Amendment No.2 approved February 19,2008
Prepared by: Denny Slone, Economic Development Officer, City l\Janager's Office
11-3
Attachment 1
San Diego Unified Port District
Document No. SO 937
Filed AUG 0 3 ?OD6-
Office 01 the District Clerk
LETTER OF INTENT
BY AND AMONG SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT,
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
AND GAYLORD ENTERTAINMENT COMPANY CONCERNING
BAYFRONT HOTEL, CONVENTION CENTER AND ANCILLARY DEVELOPMENT
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the San Diego Unified Port District ("Port District") and the City of
Chula Vista, California ("City"), since 2003 have been engaged in a joint
planning process for the redevelopment of the Chula Vista Bayfront, resulting
in the Chula Vista Bayfront Master Plan, and;
WHEREAS, the three-year joint planning process included broad stakeholder
and community involvement in many forms including numerous public
outreach meetings and the formation of a Citizen's Advisory Committee, and;
,
,
WHEREAS, the joint planning process concluded that the early presence of a
significant "anchor" project is desirable and will serve as a catalyst for future
public and private development, and;
WHEREAS, the concept proposed by Gaylord Entertainment Company
("Gaylord"), and outlined in this letter of Intent has the necessary features of
such an anchor project and is consistent with the Chula Vista Bayfront Master
Plan and the general direction of the Citizens' Advisory Committee, and;
WHEREAS, Gaylord's financial, managerial, and development qualifications
were validated in an open competitive Request for Qualifications process, and;
WHEREAS, the Project contemplated by this letter of Intent will generate
substantial benefits to the local and regional community in the form of
increased tax and lease revenues, permanent jobs, and by providing the
people of California and local community with significant public amenities,
such as more than 200 acres of open space, parks and public access,
increased recreational and entertainment opportunities and environmental
enhancements, and;
TRIPLICATE-ORIGINAL
Page 1
11-4
,cPA-
"
WHEREAS, the Project contemplated by this Letter of Intent will generate
substantial direct and indirect statewide benefits including permanent and
temporary jobs, increased tax revenues, public facilities, and;
WHEREAS, the Port District, the City and the Redevelopment Agency of the
City of Chula Vista ("RDA") have agreed to form a partnership to achieve the
aforementioned benefits;
Now, Therefore:
1. Parties: This Letter of Intent (the "LDI") dated as of
JUt 2 5 , 2006, is by and among the Port District, the City, the
RDA, and Gaylord, (collectively "Parties"). The Port District, the City and the
RDA are referred to collectively herein as the "Governmental Entities."
2. Term of Letter of Intent: This LOI shall be for a term expiring on
the earliest of: (i) May 31, 2007, (ii) the date any Option Agreement or Lease
is executed between the Port District and Gaylord and the basic structure of
the Public Financial Commitment described below is finalized to the
satisfaction of the Parties, or (Hi) the date any Party elects to end negotiations
as described in paragraph 12 below.
3. Subject Matter - Development of the Project: The purpose of the
LOI is to provide a broad outline of the basis on which the Parties will work
with each other during the term of the La! to determine whether mutually
acceptable agreements can be reached relating to the development of the
private improvements and public infrastructure for Parcel H-3, which will not
be less than 32.23 acres in size (the "H-3 Site"). and the adjacent sites as
mutually determined by the Parties to be sufficient in scope to generate
revenues necessary to support the financing contemplated herein (collectively,
the "Project"). known collectively as the "Phase I Chula Vista Bayfront,"
located within the Port District and within the City and the RDA's Bayfront
Redevelopment Project. The Parties contemplate that Gaylord will act as the
developer of the Project.
4. Gaylord Development Obligation: Gaylord will be responsible for
the design, development, construction and operation of the Project in a
manner satisfactory to the Governmental Entities which, with respect to the
proposed hotel and convention center on the H-3 Site, will be similar to and
typical in type and quality to Gaylord's existing operations in Grapevine, Texas
and Orlando, Florida. Except to the extent of the Public Financial
Commitment described in paragraph 6 below and the other obligations of the
Port District, the. City and the RDA described herein, Gaylord will be
Page 2
11-5
.'
responsible for all costs and activities of every sort associated with the
devalopment, operation and ownership of the Project. Gaylord shall invest, or
shall cause others to invest, the funds necessary to complete the Project. The
design, scope, timing, branding, theme, appearance and conditions of
operation of the Project shall be negotiated by the Parties during the term of
this LOI. The Parties expect the Project development to be substantially in
accordance with the Chula Vista Bayfront Master Plan. Gaylord will
participate with the Port District, the City and the RDA in a public outreach
process as agreed to by the Governmental Entities and Gaylord. Among other
material terms, a condition precedent to the obligation of the Governmental
Entities relative to the Public Financial Commitment will include evidence
satisfactory to each of them, that Gaylord will meet its development
obligations and financial obligations, with respect to the Project, including
with respect to the Public Financial Commitment.
5. Monetary Contribution to Cost of Entitlements: Subsequent to
execution of the LOI, the Parties will negotiate a mutually acceptable sharing
arrangement for' costs associated with preparing the Environmental Impact
Report ("EIR") and processing the entitlements on a pro rata basis based on
the acreage of the Project related to the acreage of the overall Chula Vista
Bayfront Master Plan. It is currently estimated that these costs will not
exceed Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) in total
"
,
6. Public Financial Commitment: In exchange for the Gaylord
Development Obligation described in paragraph 4 above, the Port District, City
and RDA will provide a public financial commitment described in this
paragraph 6 ("Public Financial Commitment"). subject to delivery by Gaylord
of additional financial and other data to the satisfaction of the Governmental
Entities. In every case, the Public Financial Commitment shall be payable in'
amounts to be negotiated by the Parties exclusively from the following
sources (or, as to the City, from other legally available amounts not to exceed
the amount described below):
(a) as to the Port District, all or a portion of lease revenues
derived by the Port District from any lease or other disposition of the Project
to private, non-governmental users.
(b) as to the City, from lawfully available funds of the City
which the City determines most appropriate, an amount equivalent to all or a
portion of transient occupancy taxes received by the City that are generated
by hotel occupancy on the Project.
Page 3
11-6
(c) as to the RDA, all or a portion of tax increment revenues
received by the RDA within existing plan limitations pursuant to the
Community Redevelopment Law, California Health and Safety Code Section
33000 et seq., attributable to taxes levied with respect to property located on
the Project, net of amounts payable to other taxing entities (other than the
City), amounts required to be deposited in the RDA's low and moderate
income housing fund, county administrative charges and any other mandatory
amounts payable to third parties from such tax increment funds. Any RDA
commitment of these dollars will also be subject in every respect to prior
pledges of tax increment from the RDA's merged Bayfront/Town Centre
Redevelopment Project.
In all cases, as to each Governmental Entity, the revenue sources
described in (a), (b) and (c) above, referred to herein as "New Net Revenues',
will be calculated net of costs, including operation and maintenance costs,
incurred by the Governmental Entities in providing services to the Project.
The Governmental Entities' obligations to provide the Public Financial
Commitment described in this paragraph 6 shall be limited to, and shall never
exceed, the New Net Revenues.
The Governmental Entities shall evaluate an additional charge, to
be measured by hotel occupancy, representing the equivalent of a two percent
(2%) increase in the transient occupancy tax applicable to the all or a portion
of the Bayfront Redevelopment Project area, provided such increase shall in no
event require voter approval, other than of Gaylord, the other affected
property tenants in the Bayfront Redevelopment Project area, and the
Governmental Entities. The Parties acknowledge that such an increase may
not be legally or practically feasible.
The Port District, on the one hand, and the City and RDA, on the
other, will contribute to the total Public Financial Commitment described
below, pro rata, in accordance with the total New Net Revenues derived from
the Project, as determined by the Governmental Entities.
The Public Financial
elements: the Infrastructure
Commitment.
Commitment will consist of two primary
Financing and the Convention Center
The Parties recognize that implementation of the Infrastructure
Financing and Convention Center Commitment are subject to further
legislative action of the Governmental Entities, compliance with applicable
legal restrictions, reasonable credit, timing and other public policy
considerations of the Government Entities, and the outcome is not assured. If
Page 4
11-7
. .
the Infrastructure Financing and/or the Convention Center Commitment are
not provided, the Parties may agree to evaluate other mutually acceptable and
legally available means to develop the infrastructure component of the Project.
(i) Infrastructure Financing: The Governmental Entities will
apply New Net Revenues to the cost of the necessary infrastructure required
for development of the Project in the current estimated amount not to exceed
One Hundred Seventy-Eight Million Dollars ($178,OOO,OOOl (in 2006 dollars),
net of financing costs. The parties intend to evaluate the feasibility of
financing an amount not to exceed One Hundred Seventy-Eight Million Dollars
($178,000,000) in infrastructure costs through the Infrastructure Financing
described in paragraph 7 below. The Infrastructure Financing is intended to
finance the cost of designing and constructing all necessary wet and dry
utilities, roads, open spaces, landscaped areas, parks and promenades and
other public improvements associated with the development of the Project.
The Infrastructure Financing amount is based on preliminary cost estimates.
To the extent that future estimates differ from the current estimate, the
Parties will negotiate an adjustment to the Infrastructure Financing. The
Parties shall agree on the scope, design, and cost of the landscaped areas,
parks, and promenades associated with development of the Project. The
infrastructure improvements currently to be financed are detailed on the
attached Exhibit "A," but may be revised as a result of the requirements of
the California Environmental Quality Act (~GEQA") or a change to the
infrastructure requirements for the Project that occurs during the entitlement
process.
(ii) Convention Center Commitment: The Convention Center
Commitment of One Hundred Thirty Million Dollars ($130,000,000) (in 2008
dollers) will be provided to the extent available from New Net Revenues, plus
a credit equal to the amount of all City development impact fees that the
Project would otherwise have paid (collectively, the "Convention Center
Commitment"). The Parties agree to investigate feasible ways to finance the
Convention Center Commitment by means of the Convention Center Financing
described in paragraph 7 below. Any remainder of the Convention Center
Commitment not provided by the Convention Center Financing will be funded
from New Net Revenues as they are earned over time, on a .pay-as-you-go"
basis, on terms to be negotiated by the Parties, and will be paid or credited to
Gaylord from annual surpluses after payment of debt service and other
mutually agreed costs of the Infrastructure Financing and the Convention
Center Financing. Any portion of the Convention Center Commitment that is
funded on a "pay-as-you-go" basis shall be subject to a discount rate of 12%
(the "Pay-As-You-Go Amount") until the unfunded portion is fully funded from
New Net Revenues or until such other time as the Parties may agree, (the
Page 5
11-8
, '
"Pay-As-You-Go Term"}. Receipt of the Pay-As-You-Go Amount will be
subject to certain minimum performance standards for Gaylord and the
Project, to be negotiated by the Parties. In the event that New Net Revenues
received during the Pay-As-You-Go Term are not sufficient in an amount to
fund the Pay-As-You-Go Amount, then the Governmental Entities shall have
no further obligation to pay such amount from any source.
7, Structure of Convention Center Financing and Infrastructure
Financing; In no event will the Governmental Entities be responsible for
payments with respect to the Convention Center Commitment or the
Infrastructure Financing except from the sources and in the manner described
in paragraph 6.
The Parties will evaluate the feasibility of issuing two series of
bonds, Series A (the "Infrastructure Financing") will be in an approximate
amount not to exceed One Hundred Seventy-Eight Million Dollars
($178,000,000) net construction proceeds to finance the infrastructure more
fully described in Exhibit" A," Series B represents a to-be-negotiated portion
of the One Hundred Thirty Million Dollar ($130,000,000) Convention Center
Commitment (the "Convention Center Financing"), the net proceeds of which
are to be used to finance a convention center. Gaylord will be responsible for
all costs associated with the Project not financed by the Infrastructure
Financing, the Convention Center Financing; and the balance of the
Convention Center Commitment paid from New Net Revenues.
The feasibility and structure of the two bond series is yet to be
determined, and is subject to further analysis and negotiation by the Parties.
The obligation of the Governmental Entities, and each of them, to
pursue the Infrastructure Financing and Convention Center Financing shall be
subject in all respects to the requirements of applicable state and federal laws,
including state and federal securities laws, the application of sound credit,
underwriting and public debt standards and requirements of the Government
Entities and applicable underwriters.
8. Acquired land: The City and Port District shall cooperate with
Gaylord in the purchase, subdivision, zoning and other actions required in
order for Gaylord to incorporate any acquired land into the Project. This may
include the Port District taking ownership of the acquired land.
9. Compliance with Additional laws; No Limitation of legislative
Discretion. Approval of the Project is subject to full compliance with CEQA,
including the certification of an EIR, and ultimate approval by the California
Coastal Commission.
Page 6
11-9
No .provision of this LOI shall be construed to require or compel
the Governmental Entities to grant any approval with respect to the Project or
to limit the discretion of the governing bodies of the Governmental Entities to
approve, deny or condition the Project, including the imposition of mitigation
measures as required by CEQA.
The Parties agree that nothing in this LOI in any respect does or
shall be construed to affect or prejudge the exercise of discretion by the
Governmental Entities.
Moreover, nothing contemplated herein to be done by the
Governmental Entities will be inconsistent with the duties of the Governmental
Entities, including fiduciary duties of the Port District to its Tidelands Trust
and any constitutional and statutory requirement of the Governmental Entities
related to the use of public funds and activity related to the Project.
10. Permits: City, RDA, and Port District shall agree to give
expedited status to all applications for approvals or permits for the Project.
11. Negotiation of Additional Documents: After execution of this
LOI, if the Parties have determined that it is ,feasible to proceed with the
development of the Project as outlined in this LOI, the Parties shall negotiate
and produce any documents the Parties deem appropriate.
12. Letter of Intent Not a Bindin~ Agreement: The Parties agree that
this LOI is not intended to nor shall it be interpreted to create a binding
agreement between the Parties. Any agreement regarding the Project, or any
element of the Project, including methods of financing the Project, will be the
subject of other written agreements which must be approved by the governing
bodies of the Governmental Entities following appropriate public . processes.
and is not embodied in this LOI. The Parties agree further that, while this LOI
is intended to guide the Parties in their negotiations relative to the Project, it
does not bind the Parties to continue negotiations if, in the judgment of any
such Party, such continued discussions do not serve the interests of that
. Party. Moreover, each Party agrees that, to the extent it expends funds or
devotes resources to discussions relative to the feasibility of implementing the
Project, it does so of its own initiative and not in reliance on this LOI or any
representations of the other Parties. Except as set forth in paragraph 5
above, in no event will a Party be responsible for the costs or other losses,
real or imagined, of any other Party in pursuing the Project in the absence of a
definitive agreement entered into subsequent to this LOI relative to such cost
Page 7
11-10
. .
sharing. No Party shall be entitled to sue to enforce the terms of this LOI or
to recover monetary damages for an alleged breach of this LO!.
Approved as to form:
By
~
Ellen Corey Bo
Assistant Po Attorney
San Diego Unified Port District
Approved as to form:
BY~~
Ann Moore
City Attorney
City of Chula Vista
Approved as to form:
By ~n~
Ann Moore /cZfl<-
Agency General Counsel
Redevelopment Agency of
the City of Chula Vista
Document #191489v2
By
NIFIED P RT DISTRICT
U-
Dan E. Wilkens
Executive Vice President
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
~~
By. /~
. Jim Thomson
. Interim City Manager
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE
CITY OF ,CHULA VISTA
A~
By /L
Jim Thomson ------
Interim Executive Director
By
Ignature
PRINT NAME: hv..",J-+- W..tsH,..-ooL
PRINT TITLE: S V P - tMAfv;eJ-j D+ c...
Page 8
11-11
Co(1~Netlan
Llneltom#
1
2
J
.
5
5
7
,
9
10
11
12
"
"
15
17
"
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
27
2B
29
31
32
33
"
2B
"
37
2B
29
'"
41
<<
4S
5'
"
54
"
56
"
60
"
53
65
66
07
66
59
70
11
72
73
74
75
75
75
79
'"
84
65
"
"
89
90
"
93
84
96
"
98
'"
102
10'
la7
la'
Cat""lJf}'
P!lridn $2,.9M
OBllloUtlc1n
($27.0M)
Gradlnt; i!I'I:d Ondnl!lge
($33.3M)
Road ~ '3rldglll$
{$18.0Ml
UtIl1tloll
($13.o4M)
Pubilc;i>ll.rk
Impro....m4IIMll
(:)lJec;fn)
{$1'2..3M}
l1a
111
Mol":
($30.eM)
112
113
114
121
115
1L8
128
san. C4sts for PUblic
Ctlnctruct!on
($40.3M)
:'$QltCCSU
1$18K\
. Tncse lo\.81>; Il\dude a 20% <;OI'\d"ll"r,,;y
. ~ ..
Infrastructure Cost Estimates
Gaylord Only Scenario
2006 DoUllrs
c~ctlonft.m
PIIMc:!n Soace Surfacslo
Ro3mowvenfclJlar llvi
Removlt an viI'
RlImovecurtJll
Cl3<ll'al'lQ IIlnd5caoin. MijOl'l
Ramove traM
Rernow ellllC. and C3~" nOel!
Remove !I1~
Remove [peg lells than 12"
RefOOvel e e 12" 1048
Ramo...eve : >4a"
RI!mOVeSfl'llf'<< llm !Itallon
RemoYG WllIIs &. feol;es
R6/'fl<Ml:buildln
MlIlC.1i8moIitIOn
Rouah dl _OnslteGn!ldf
Rou radl -1m Ex rt
HllZ8rdClJ~ matelillls Rtml6d1etion of BfG $Ilq
AUowanC8 fer Other Hal: M.a.l ~ts
RemovG--an ad neW" !loll lIl11M1t3
RomovQ-.ana-recom nalive soli ob
Tern Dewatlltl
Oulentioobasln$
4-Une Ma or . A. C. Pi'MllMnt
Cfa611f-A.C.~t
ClIl5I1II_A..c.PlWlffi6nt
Cla:llS 111- A.C. pavemml
Road Grad! . OnsitG Gladln
RoadGradln _1m lC
Cum G
MDdtanCurb
SldawBlk
MedianLznd$Cll orPllvln
Curo""m
$tn:>et ~
Trofi'Ic nllls
SIreotTrees
VflhiaJtarbrid u.
H 51 Ram
H St, 1-610 Broaow
ESt.S80lfrpm
S"Walrll;lnl!
16"Walarllne
20"W.lllle11ioe
FA """
Watoc$etVk:8OlJmntlc
'" S..-.tea
16" OffsitltWatatMafn !
1S"RCP
24"RCP
36'RCP
ClJwlnliM
Clnnout
Storm-Ceotor
Rio""
H811dwall
ConIWJC(IOEJCI~
S- mPstatlon
Sewar Servic$ Doma!ltJc
...,-
a.s.-Una
10"5GW'IIrLlne
15"S_rUne
s~forolImsln
Coonoctkl1 to Mew ~fIW9r
4S"Sox '""
6C"BoltTl'8M
Pllirns 15' 6TH
Tori
O.G.Surfaelll
PllvedWalil:s
Par!d lDt$
ShrubJGr. Cavvr
Wetland Restorllllon
Totl~
Drln Fountalnll
,
_~Room BI 5.
AllCflional d ntfofGa on!
Mant.lmorrl a "I_dl 8f'l
"""" .-
Relacatk(,J1BM'e t fur RV ;u\<
Fn5tat!cn
Clmst. r1cd stormwll'ter IJSWWP
Tnlnsilshettero. tJtad
~F__,lyjm~slnltlv$ 45lcol1tleCtlun
066 (_lIt11.6%ofcon"t~t
pmm anchvckal4.a afcoosL
Con$\ructlon~Adm!n. al 4.11% of <;<.111M.
S;;w8r F_. Pli tIo!\ Fee ~20MlMGD
Rusource n 11Iln9
S_1Wa1ar Auth. /'-Ion-&"II. Watef" CilDa
SD Ccur'l Wawr AiJth. flieS
E:::aW121\"
Un'"
,-
SF
SF
IF
SF
EA
IF
IF
lF
lF
lF
EA
IF
SF
U;
CY
CY
U;
es
CY
CY
lS
EA
SF
SF
SF
SF
""'
CY
IF
IF
SF
SF
EA
EA
EA
EA
SF
EA
EA
EA
IF
lF
IF
EA
EA
EA
IF
IF
IF
IF
EA
EA
EA
""'
EA
EA
EA
EA
EA
lF
LF
IF
lF
EA
EA
EA
EA
SF
SF
SF
SF
SF
SF
es
U;
LS
LS
'"
EA
U;
LS
~~
UroitCoet
2.<100
5
5
,
'"
'"0
la
la
15
'"
'"
16000
10
1
15
"
2.500000
1.000
15
15
,
20000
,-'"
~'"
'2'
8
"
'"
3a
25
,.",
la
'500
5000
'7~
<I~
'''''
582000
100
200
27a
3800
1.""
'.000
J.4
125
''''
27
'.000
200
20.000
100
2400
l00Q
'000
GOO
'.500
100
120
,,,,
100
2.500
1500
'500
2.
,.25
5.00
,.'"
7.50
'.00
10.00
''''.
3500
<000
275000
3611.000
"
<00.0001
10000
12000 000
LS
EA
EA
EOU
es,
lS
lS
T....
QU;2ntltv
1000
3.41-4,649
77965
43.771
1,105,500
,0)
36,000
3a.
<<.500
32.700
'.800
.
16.199
2'n.a2()
65,000
36,200
3S3.ll.50
1
1
134.483
709.529
100000
2
132423
"!'2.61"
6.27466
6010
31,925
.70
28,47
3,815
1:35.565
31.022
15
00
3.00
."
"'"
1
1
1
3..161
T. _
1.641
32
,
.
6.300
1.\130
74G
230
12
7
2
9
1
.
1
7
,
1,480
",.,
402
4,820
1
'"
''''
7a
52'2
65700
39,700
127""
254462
136,523
1
5
7a
2
8
2
,
1
1
o
,
2
o
o
a
459525
1
1,.500
'3,802
12,000
45
2a
,,,,,,,a
1
1
Puhllo I
Cod.-
2880.
20 487,ll94
-4.67190
'21l
198m
174000
.65800
:noi!.OO
~01,OOO
1,111,200
288000
78.
194.388
17"~'20
10'
'51
121:>1.400
3.36<l.
1,200.
2,420,694
12771.523
120
48,000
1 sa.71~
<135326
1:1,211,913
578
514.550
16.920
10251
116250
1,057563
3n.2S4
45000
360000
.'"
729000
1329 00
5115.70
2340,000
69ll,400
379.32
1585,520
531,1)84
2:1:'00
259
124,
75,000
"'00
"I"
48.
1
298a
4.000
'000.
25200
18
1TT,600
1533
~~~
~
54
598000
188.
115448
394 oa
,OO.
1145664
1.lJ32,12l3
1.83941
180,000
21
""000
800.000
3.542.400
80.000
""
120011
144<:0
3897.2
7m
1 970~
5.541,561
65415<37
11.031000
18O.0eo
1,$)0
16.58
Total Coaw: $ 177,9~9.1l9~
,
Attacnment2
AMENDMENT NO.1 TO
LETTER OF INTENT
BY AND AMONG SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT,
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, REDEVelOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
AND GAYLORD ENTERTAiNMENT COMPANY CONCERNING
BAYFRONT HOTEl. CONVENTION CENTER AND ANCILLARY
DEVELOPMENT
San Diego Unified Ps 2eS5
Document No.
Filed JUN 1 3 ?007
Office oj the District Clerk
RECIT ALS
WHEREAS, the San Diego Unified Port District ("Port District"). the City of
Chula Vista, California ("City"), and the Redevelopment Agency of the City
of Chula Vista (RDA). (collectively, the "Governmental Entities"), and
Gaylord Entertainment Company ("Gaylord") have entered into a Letter Of
Intent dated July 25, 2006, and;
WHEREAS, the Letter Of Intent was also authorized by a Resolution of the
Board of Port Commissioners and was also authorized by a Resolution of the
Chula Vista City Council and the Redevelopftient Agency Board, at public
meetings held on July 25, 2006, and;
WHEREAS, the Port District, the City, the RDA, and Gaylord desire to
amended said Letter of Intent;
NOW THEREFORE, the parties agree to amend the Term of The Letter Of
Intent in the following respect:
The Term of Letter of Intent shall be extended from May 31, 2007, to
November 30, 2007, and may be extended for an additional gO-day period
after November 30, 2007 by mutual written agreement of the parties. The
Term of the Letter of Intent may end earlier jf allY Option Agreement or
Lease is executed between the Port District and Gaylord and the basic
structure of the Public Financial Commitment finalized to the satisfaction of
the parties, or if any party elects to end negotiations as described in
paragraph 12 of the Letter of Intent.
(Signatures to Follow)
TR!PUCATE~ORIGINAL
11-13
iZ-?O07 - ~
(
ADDENDUM TO LETTER OF INTENT PAGE 2
Approved as to form:
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PbRT DISTRICT
By
~
By
~tJ~~a0
Ran a J. Co~lio (f
Acting Director, Real Estate
Approved as to form:
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
By~lA~k
Ann Moore
City Attorney
City of Chula Vista
By IK j ~
(/ Jim Thomson
Interim City Manager
Approved as to form:
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
"
,
ByJ~~~ ,/~BY
Ann Moore
Agency General Counsel
Redevelopment Agency of
the City of Chula Vista
~
/L
Jim Thomson
Interim Executive Director
GAYLORD ENTERTAINMENT OMPANY
BY~
PRINT NAME: ~~ ~trlJOk,
"7JP
PRINT TITLE:
Document No, 194068 V3
11-14
.'
"
Attachment 3
AMENDMENT NO, 2 TO
LETTER OF INTENT
BY AND AMONG SAN DiEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT,
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AND GAYLORD ENTERTAINMENT COMPANY
CONCERNING SA YFRONT HOTEl, CONVENTION CENTER
AND ANCILLARY DEVELOPMENT
San Diego Unifted Port Dlstrfct
52990
Document No. '. .
MAR 1 0 2008
Oftice of the District CierI<
Filec
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the San Diego Unified Port District ("Port District"), the City of Chula
Vista, California ("City"), and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista
(RDA). (collectively, the "Governmental Entities"). and Gaylord Entertainment
Company ("Gaylord") have entered into. a Letter Of Intent dated July 25, 2006,
and;
WHEREAS, the Letter Of Intent was also authorized by a Resolution of the Board
of Port Commissioners and was also authorized by a Resolution of the Chula Vista
City Council and the Redevelopment Agency Bo,ard, at public meetings held on
July 25, 2006, and; ,
WHEREAS, the Port District, the City, the RDA, and Gaylord amended said Letter
Of Intent to extend the term to February 28, 2008, and;
WEREAS, the Port District, the City, the RDA and Gaylord desire to enter into the
second amendment to said Letter Of Intent;
NOW THEREFORE, the parties agree to amend the Term of The Letter Of Intent in
the following respect:
The Term of Letter Of Intent shall be extended from February 28, 2008, to
May 31, 2008, and may be extended for an additional 50-day period after
May 31, 2008, by mutual written agreement of the parties. The Term of the
Letter Of Intent may end earlier if any Option Agreement or Lease is executed
between the Port District and Gaylord and the basic structure of the Public
Financial Commitment finalized to the satisfaction of the parties, or if any party
elects to end negotiations as described in paragraph 12 of the Letter Of Intent.
(Signatures to Follow)
11-15
tfL49 c;;2a:;; - /97
OOADRUPUCATE-ORiGINAl
dto&-06"
~ 'l
. .
. .
AMENDMENT NO.2 TO LETTER OF INTENT
PAGE 2
By E~~ ~
Assistant Port Attorney
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT
I )
/-B~~' C lk-<~. "\'l--.oc.---~
.. ".)
~ren Weymann
Acting Director, Real Estate
Approved as to form:
Approved as to form:
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
By
Q~
Ann Moore
City Attorney
City of Chula Vista
B~&.,-i;2 U
City Manager
Approved as to form:
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
By
U.r- ~
By~g-/;iJJ
Executive Director
Ann Moore
Agency General Counsel
Redevelopment Agency of
the City of Chula Vista
By
PRINT TITLE:
PeJH1€-ff jA/tsff,rooK
"SliP
PRINT NAME:
DM5#194068.v4 Amendment No 2 to Letter Of Intent By and Among SOUPO City of Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency
City of Owla Vista and Gaylord Entertainment Company
11-16
RESOLUTION NO.
JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING A1\1ENDMENT NO. 3 TO THE LETTER OF
INTENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
THE SAl'l DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT, AND GAYLORD
ENTERTAINMENT COMPAl'lY EXTENDING THE TERM OF
THE LETTER OF INTENT THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2008,
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
TO EXECUTE Al\1ENDMENT NO. 3 TO THE LETTER OF
INTENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY AND THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGERJEXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO APPROVE AND
EXECUTE AN ADDITIONAL SIX-MONTH EXTENSION OF
THE TERM OF THE LETTER OF INTENT THROUGH JUNE 30,
2009 ON BEHALF OF THE CITY AND THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, IF NEEDED
WHEREAS, the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista
approved a Letter of Intent (Lor) between the City of Chula Vista, the Redevelopment Agency of
the City of Chula Vista, the San Diego Unified Port Disthct (Port), and Gaylord Entertainment
Company (Gaylord) concerning Bayfront hotel, convention center, and ancillary development on
July 25, 2006, pursuant to RDA Resolution No. 2006-1953 and City Council Resolution No.
2006-232; and
WHEREAS, the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista
approved an Addendum. and reconsidered that approval to the Addendum, to the Lor on October
10,2006, pursuant to RDA Resolution No. 2006-1958 and City Council Resolution No. 2006-
307 and on November 7, 2006, pursuant to RDA Resolution No. 2006-1964 and City Council
Resolution No. 2006-332, respectively; and
WHEREAS, on May 15, 2007, the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency of the
City of Chula Vista approved Amendment No. 1 to the Letter of Intent which allowed for the
extension of the term of the Lor to November 30, 2007, pursuant to RDA resolution No. 2007-
1974 and City Council Resolution No. 2007-115; and
WHEREAS, approval of Amendment No. I of the LOI also contemplated the possibility
of an additional 90-day extension beyond November 30, 2007, if mutually agreed to by the
parties; and
11-17
WHEREAS, on December 4,2007, the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency of the
City of Chula Vista approved a 90-day extension to the LOI extending the term of the Lor to
February 28, 2008, pUrSUaJlt to RDA resolution No. 2007-1985 and City Council Resolution No.
2007-286; and
WHEREAS, the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista
approved Amendment No.2 to the Letter of Intent which allowed for the extension of the term of
the LOI to February 28, 2008 pursuant to RDA resolution No. 2008-1991 and City Council
Resolution No. 2008-062; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to that Resolution, the City Council and the Redevelopment
Agency authorized the City Manager/Executive Director to approve and execute an additional
60-day extension of the term of the Letter of Intent through July 30, 2008 on behalf of the City
and the Redevelopment Agency; and
WHEREAS, the City ManagerlExecutive Director executed an Agreement to Extend the
Term of the July 25, 2006 Four-Party Letter of Intent Until July 30, 2008, extending the term of
the Letter of Intent to July 30, 2008; and
WHEREAS, the parties to the LOI still agree on the fundamental goals and objectives set
forth in the LOI, however, the parties require additional time to finalize the formal agreements
contemplated in the LOI: and
, ,I
\\'HEREAS, staff is recommending that the term of the LOI be extended until December 31,
2008; and
WHEREAS, staff is also recommending that the City Manager/Executive Director be
authorized to approve and execute an additional six-month extension of the term of the LOI
until June 30, 2009.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the CityofChula Vista and
the Redevelopment Agency of the City ofChula Vista as follows:
I. That it approves Amendment No.3 to the Letter of Intent between the City of Chula Vista,
the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista, the San Diego Unified Port District,
and Gaylord Entertainment Company extending the term of the Letter of Intent through
December 31, 2008.
2. That it authorizes the City Manager/Executive Director to execute Amendment No.3 to the
Letter of Intent on behalf of the City and the Redevelopment Agency.
3. That it authorizes the City Manager/Executive Director to approve and execute an additional
six-month extension of the term of the Letter ofIntent through June 30, 2009, on behalf of
the City and the Redevelopment Agency, ifneeded.
11-18
Presented by
Denny Stone
Economic Development Officer
Approved as to form by
,--ti~(~,-, /1 h~ in--
Bart Miesfeld v
Interim City Attorney
11-19
THE A TT ACHED AGREEMENT HAS BEEN REVIEWED
AND APPROVED AS TO FORM BY THE CITY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND WILL BE.
FORi\1ALL Y SIGNED UPON APPROVAL BY
THE CITY COUNCIL
t.J ~.0 ,..
"0 ~." ,{ M--C'-.:::t:) fr---
Bart C. Miesfeld ~.
Interim City Attorney
Dated:
7/ n /11:Z
, (
Letter of Intent by and Among San Diego Unified Port District,
City ofChula Vista, Redevelopment Agency of the City ofChula Vista, and
Gaylord Entertainment CompalllY Concerning
Bayfront Hotel, Convention Center and Ancillary Development
11-20
AMENDMENT NO.3 TO
LETTER OF INTENT
BY AND AMONG SAN DIEGO UNIFlEfll'ORT DISTRICT,
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VrST A, AND GAYLORD ENTERTAINMENT COMPANY
CONCERNING BA YFRONT HOTEL, CONVENTION CENTER
AND ANCILLARY DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the San Diego Unified Port District (""Port DistriCl~), the City of
Chu!a Vism ("City"), and the Redevelopment Agency of the City "C Chula Vis1a
C'RDA"), (collectively, the '"Governmental Entities"), and Gayl(}rd Entertainment
Company r'Gaylord") (the "Panies") have entered into a Letter of Intent daled July 25,
2006 (Leuer of 1me,,!"); and
WHEREAS, the Letter offntent was tor a tenn expiring on May3J, 2007; and
WHEREAS, that Letter of Intent was amended by Amendment No, 1 to Letter of
Intent dated June 13, 2007. which extended the term of the Letter of Intent until
Novemher 30, 2007, wilh an additional 90-day J"'l'iod after November 30, 2007, by
mutual written agreement of the Parties~ and J
WHEREAS, that Letter of Intent was further amended by Amendment No.2 to
Letter of lInent daled March 10, 2008, which extended the term of the Letter of Intent
until May 31, 2008, with an additional 6O-day period after May 31,2008, by mutual
written agreem.;:nt ohlle Pmiie~ and
WHEREAS, thetem1 oflhe LeIter of Intent will expire on July 30, 2008; and
WHEREAS, ti,e Governmental Agencies and Gaylord are >till ia agreement
regarding the goals and objectives of the Letter of Intent and are continuing to work
toward thos-e goals and objectives~ and
WHEREAS, the Governmental Agencies and Gaylord wish to further extend the
1<1711 oFlhe Letter of Intent,
NOW THEREFORE, the ?,rties agree to further amend the Tenn of the Letter of
Iment as follows:
Effective July 31, 2008, the Term of the Leller of Intent shall be extended to
December J L 2008~ and may be extended for an additional si:.<-month period until June
30, 2009, by mutual written agreement of the Parties. The Te:rnl of Letter of lnt:ent may
end earlier if any Option Agreement O~ Lease is executed betw-een the Port District and
Gaylord and the basic structure of the Public Financial Commitment is finalized to the
11-21
......,. ...... ."'T .......<'>'7" T r ,'"
AMENDMENT NO.3 TO LETTER OF INTENT
PAGE 2
!iati.s(action of the Parties.. or if any Party elects to end llegotiations and described in
j)aJ1\gmph 12 of the LetteroflntenL
Approved as to form by:
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT
DISTRICT
By:
By:
Randa Coniglio
Director, Real Estate
Ellen Corey Born
Assistant Port Attorney
Approved as "to form by:
ClTY OF CHULA VISTA
By:
By:
D''fid Garci.
City Manager
Bart Miesfeld
Interim City Attorney
City ofChula Vista
Appl'Oved as to fonn by:
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OFTHE
CITY OF CHULA VIsr A
By:
By:
David Garcia
Executive Director
Bart Mies{eld
Interim Agency Counsel
Redevelopment Agency cftne
City 0 f Chuia Vista
GAYLORDE~~ERTA~ENT
:IlMP
Senior Vi~e President
11-22
James S. Geering
Interim Fire Chief
Michael Reeves
Admin Battalion
Chief
(619) 409-5854
Pablo Quilantan
Admin. Svcs. Mgr.
(619) 585.5693
Alicia Hernandez
Admin. Secretary
(619) 409.5837
Vanessa Giuliano
Sr. Office Specialist
(619) 691.5195
Administration
Date:
July 15, 2008
To:
The Honorable Mayor . _/ f' /
Do.id Gm"o. City MO"09~~
James S. Geering, Interim Fire Chi~~
Via:
From:
RE: Regional Fire Protection Committee
As requested by you after our meeting with the Regional Fire Protection Committee that
took place last Friday July 11, 2008, I have identified the Fire Department priorities that
can be funded with the new tax revenues from the proposed county ballot measure for
the Fire Protection Parcel Tax (FPPT).. Under this proposal, the City's share of revenue
enhancement would be approximately $1.5 million per year. This additional revenue
stream would allow the City to provide increased resources and services to our own
community and the region by expanding the following critical needs within the Fire
Department:
1. Additional Fire Engines, Trucks and Other Equipment - The Fire Department's
fleet frontline service fire engines, trucks and fleet reserve are showing signs of age.
A steady stream of significant investment is needed in order to begin replacing this
equipment on a timely basis. The timely replacement of this equipment will help
avoid a potential large capital outlay that may be otherwise needed if larger
quantities of such equipment require purchase at one time. The FPPT new revenue
stream could be used as follows:
. Purchase equipment for additional staff
. Add an additional brush engine (brush rig)
. Augment existing fleet replacement allocations in order to purchase new fire
engines and trucks thereby maintaining the existing fleet
. Augment existing equipment replacement allocations in order to purchase
major equipment items such as defibrillators
2. Offer Community Education and Readiness Programs - Due to budget
reductions, the Fire Department does not have the staffing resources to offer fire
safety/prevention education opportunities to the community. These education
opportunities are a necessary investment that pays dividends in the form of greater
safety when the community is empowered with knowledge. I would recommend the
hiring of additional fire prevention staff that would offer regular fire safety/prevention
classes to our schools, civic organizations, mobile home residents, seniors, and the
business community.
447 "F" Street
Chula Vis/a, CA 91910
12-1
Administrative Services
July 16, 2008
Page 2
3. Vegetation Management - The City has an increased level of high severity hazard
zones that pose a hire fire danger risk to the community. These zones include the
various open spaces and canyons that are interspersed within the populated areas
of the city. These areas are in need of significant brush management in order to
reduce the current fire risk. It is recommended that the City begin to address
reducing the fire risks contained within these areas as soon as possible.
4. Restoration of Disaster Preparedness Capability - Due to budget reductions
taken in the FY 2008-09 budget process, the City eliminated the Disaster
Preparedness Manager position. The new FPPT revenue would possibly allow the
restoration of this position and allow for the City to have a dedicated person to
manage and coordinate the following vacant critical functions:
. Emergency Operations Center
. Citizens Emergency Response Team (CERT)
. Citywide Emergency Preparedness Training
. Coordination of Emergency Preparedness Communications
. Maintenance of written plans and documents
As your Interim Fire Chief, I am very pleased and hopeful that this proposal will be
placed on the November 2008 ballot. If approved, this measure will provide a much
needed revenue enhancement to the County and the City of Chula Vista that will serve
all well. I am available to assist you in any way that I can to make sure that we are
successful in getting this measure approved. Thank you for your leadership in this
matter.
12-2
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
j~-
~(~ CIIT OF
~
--- (HULA VISTA
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
JUL Y 22, 2008, Item I':::
RECONSIDERATION FOR CHARGING XR PROMOTIONS,
LLC FOR CHAMPIONSHIP OFF-ROAD R.."'-CING FULL
COST RECOVERY FOR THE CHAivjPIONSHIP OFF ROAD
RACING (CORR) RACE EVENTS
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COlJNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
WAIVE THE FULL COST RECOVERY RATE FOR POLICE
SERVICES FOR THE CHAivlPIONSHIP OFF ROAD
RACING (CORR) RACE EVENTS, AUTHORIZING AN
ALTERNATIVE R.."'-TE OF COST RECOVERY OF
OVERTIME PLUS 20%, AJ'ID APPROPRIATING $27,859
TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT FISCAL YEAR 2008/2009
PERSON'NEL SERVICES BUDGET FOR OVERTIME
COSTS (4/5THS VOTE RE<flUIRED)
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
WAIVE THE FULL COST RECOVERY R..i\TE FOR FIRE
AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES FOR THE
CHAJYIPIONSHIP OFF ROAD RACING (CORR) RACE
EVENTS, AUTHORIZING AN ALTERNATIVE RATE OF
COST RECOVERY OF OVERTIME PLUS 20%, AND
APPROPRIATING $33,567 TO THE FIRE DEPARTi\tlENT
FISCAL YEAR 2008/2009 PERSONNEL SERVICES
BUDGET FOR OVERTIME COSTS (4/5THS VOTE
REQUIRED) /l ~
INTERIM FIRE~~-
POLICE CHIEF ~
CITY tvli\NAGE t
4/5THS VOTE: YES ~ NO D
13-1
it")
July 22, 2008, ltem~
Page 2 of3
SUMMARY
At the July 8, 2008 City Council meeting, XR Promotions, LLC for Championship Off-
Road Racing (CORR) applied for and Council approved a two-year temporary
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for three off-road race events scheduled for 2008 and
three similar race events in 2009. Council also approved a Mitigated Negative
Declaration. Resolutions B and C proposed by the Police and Fire Departments,
recommending approval of an "overtime plus 20-percent" charge for public safety
services rather than Full Cost Recovery and appropriating $27,859 and $33,567
respectively, to offset the costs were not approved. Due to his absence from the July 8,
2008 Council meeting, Councilmember Castaneda has requested these resolutions be
brought back for discussion. .
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed activIty for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined
that the activity is not a "Project" as defined under Section 15378 (b)(4) of the State
CEQA Guidelines because it involves an intention to levy and collect assessments for
existing activities in the Community Facilities Districts and does not involve any new
activities, therefore, pursuant to Section 15060 (c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the
activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no environmental review is necessary.
RECOMMENDATION
That either Council confirm the decision made July 8, 2008 to charge full cost recovery,
or consider adoption of the resolutions.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Not applicable.
,
,
DISCUSSION
Charges for Public Service:
Current policy is to charge entitIes that wish to utilize non-City sponsored services,
including Police and Fire services, the Full Cost Recovery (FCR) rate delineated in the
FCR Schedule. Throughout the years, these fees were either reduced or waived for a
variety of events. However, since the current fiscal crisis has put discretionary
expenditures on hold, staff has been directed to charge FCR for all events, and to take any
exceptions to Council for approval.
Since the first CORR race was held in Chula Vista in 2005, the City has waived the FCR
rate and agreed to charge the same rate for Police services that are currently contracted
with Cricket Wireless Amphitheatre for the eight previous CORR events. This reduced
rate is calculated at actual overtime costs plus an additional 20-percent to cover basic
overhead costs such as vehicles, supervision, etc. The table below outlines the difference
in revenues per day based upon the FCR rate and the reduced "overtime plus 20-percent
rate. It
Because of the significant exposure that the CORR events bring to Chula Vista (this
year's race events will be broadcast live on NBC), and the desire to keep these races
located in Chula Vista, staff recommended waiving the FCR rate for this event and
authorizing the "overtime plus 20-percent" calculation for Police and Fire Prevention and
Emergency Medical Services. Council, however. at the July 8. 2008 meetinQ. with
Councilmember Castaneda absent, did not approve the requested waivers. --
13-2
../l
July 22, 2008, Item~
Page 3 of 3
DECISION M.~R CO~'FLICT
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council and has found no property
holdings within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property that is subject to this action.
FISCAL IMPACT
Approval of resolutions will amend the General fund budget for fiscal year 2008/2009,
appropriating an additional $61,426 in overtime expenditures to the Police and Fire
Department budgets ($27,859 and $33,567 respectively). These additional appropriations
would be offset by reimbursement from the Applicant, resulting in no net impact to the
General fund.
Approval of the resolutions will also waive the Council's full cost recovery policy for a
total of SIX CORR events, occurring over a period of two fiscal years (three events per
year). The Applicant would instead reimburse the City at "overtime plus 20-percent".
Waiver of full cost recovery results in a net reduction in overhead reimbursement of
$55,336 in the current fiscal year, for a total impact of approximately $110,672 over the
two fiscal years. Calculation of the General fund impact of wai ving full cost recovery for
the three events in fiscal year 2008/2009 is detailed below.
Fiscal Year 2008/2009 Impact Calculatioll
Police Department
Fire Department
TOTAL
Full Cost
Recovery
$ 75,665
$ 53.382
$129,047
OT + 20%
$33,43 i
$40.280
$73,711
Waiver Impact
($42,234)
($13.102)
($55,336)
The Applicant will also reimburse the City, via deposit account, for all costs incurred
preparing the reports and resolutions for these discretionary applications.
ATTACHMENTS
None.
13-3
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COu'NCIL OF THE CITY
OF CHULA 'lIST A AUTHORIZING THE CHY
J'vL'\NAGER TO WANE THE FULL COST RECOVERY
~A.. TE FOR POLICE SERVICES FOR THE
CHA..MPIONSHIP OFF ROAD RA.CING (CORR) RACE
EVENTS, AUTHORIZING Ac'l ALTERNATIVE RATE OF
COST RECOVERY OF OVERTIlvrE PLUS 20%, AND
APPROPRl.A. TING $27,859 TO THE POLICE
DEPAR.Tj\;fENi FISCAL YEAR 2008/2009 PERSON'NEL
SERVICES BUDGET FOR OVERTIME COSTS
WHEREAS, the Police Department received a request from representatives of
Championship Off Road Racing (CORR) to reduce the fee for fire and emergency medical
services for the racing cup season that includes tbree racing \veekends per year from 2008
tbrough 2009; and
\v1{EREAS, since 2005, the City has historically lowered the fees for public safety
related services from the "Full Cost Recovery Rate" to "Overtime plus 20%"; and
\v'HEREAS, police services are required for the purpose of ensuring the safety of
participants and those in who will be attending these events; and
,
,
WHEREAS, the CORR events bring signifIcant positive publicity to the City of
Chula Vista; and
WHEREAS, the "Overtime plus 20%" rate will completdy offset rhe direct costs to
provide police services for the race event; and
WHEREAS, an appropriation of $27,859 will need to be made to the fiscal year
2009 Police Department Personnel Services budget for overtime costs which will be
completely offset by the event fees.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL YED by the Cief Council of the City of Chub
Vista as follows:
1. That it authorizes the City Manager to waive the full cost recovery rate
for police services for the Championship Off Road Racing (CORR)
season from 2008 through 2009 for three racing weekends per year.
2. That it authorizes an alternative rate of cost recovery of overtime plus
20%.
13-4
Page 2, Item:
Meeting Date:
3. That it appropriates $27,859 to the Police Department Fiscal Year
2008/2009 Personnel Services budget for overtime costs.
jjE:
Rlchard P. Emerson
Police Chief
Approved as to form by:
~
, /]
'--f! J ,L/'..'....!-"
~( / G'-'~~c~ ;f--r--'
Bart Miesfeld t./
Interim City Attorney
J:\Attomey\ELiSA\RESOS\CORR 2008 police cost reO:;Qvery.doc
13-5
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-
RESOLUTION Of THE C1TY COuNCIL Of THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA AiJTHORIZING THE CITY
M.A..1~AGER TO WAIVE THE FULL COST RECOVERY
R.."'.. TE FOR FIRE MID ENlERGENCY MEDICAL
SERVICES FOR THE CHA..:.v{P10NSh'IP OFF ROAD
R.."'..CING (CORR) R..A.CE EVENTS, AUTHORIZING AN
ALTEfu'\[ATIVE RATE OF COST RECOVERY OF
OVERTIivlE PLUS 20%, A1'.m APPROPRIATING $33,567
TO THE FIRE DEPARTME~l FISCAL YEAR 2008/2009
PERSONNEL SERVICES BUDGET FOR OVERTINIE
COSTS
WHEREAS, the Fire Department received a request from representatives of
Championship Off Road Racing (CORR) to reduce the fee for tire and emergency medical
services for the racirig cup season that includes three racing weekends per year from 2008
through 2009; and
WHEREAS, since 2005, the City has historically lowered the fees for public safety
related services from the "full Cost Recovery Rate" to "Overtime pillS 20%"; and
WHEREAS, fire and emergency medical services are required for the purpose of
ensuring the safety of participants and those in who will be attending these events; and
,
,
WHEREAS, the CORR events bring significant positive publicity to the City of
Chula Vista; and
WHEREAS, the "Overtime plus 20%" rate will completely offset the direct costs to
provide tIre and emergency medical services for the race event; and
WHEREAS, art appropriation of $33,567 will need to be made to the fiscal year
2008/2009 Fire Department Personnel Services bi.tdget for overtime costs which will be
completely offset by the event fees.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City ofChula
Vista as follows:
1. That it authorizes the City Manager to waive the full cost recovery rate
for fire and emergency medical services for the Championship Off Road
Racing (CORR) season from 2008 through 2009 for three racing
weekends per year.
2. That it authorizes an alternative rate of cost recovery of overtime plus
20?;~.
13-6
3. That it appropriates $33,567 to the Fire Department Fiscal Year 2008/2009
Personnel Services budget for overtime costs.
Presented by: Approved as to form by:
~/~
rames S. Geerfng
Interim Fire Chief
\--(J~vl2 /f: ~ ~'--
Bart Miesfeld. rf .
Interim City Attorney
,
,
J:\Anomey\ELISA\RESOS\CORR 2008 tire cast recovery.doc
13-7
~!~
~
;....,..:;~'""'"--
"'=:.- -- -
- - - -
Mayor and City Council
City Of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, Ca 91910
619.691.5044 - 619.476.5379 Fax
MEMO
CllY OF
(HULA VISTA
.)~;ltill~~;~l!llli{!t~i1i!lliifolf>!:f.\lIlia~'~!}ii\_!!l!li\r&\1lI_'IlIiii!!l!~~lrill*fllf;m!tll\'ffi!~liw'~lX~~~~~i!lY.
July 16, 2008
RE:
Office of the Mayor & City Council
Lori Peoples, Senior Deputy City Clerk
Lorraine Bennett, Deputy City Clerk
Mayor Cheryl co~
Jennifer Quijano, Constituent Services Manag@
Housing Advisory Commission and Human Relations Commission
appointments
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
H:11, ;.;,:~. ,jf".e,,:(-; !;?~..,:o'l'c.:_ 'f,: "'~' , .' ."'~, t'. f \~ gr -:!,fi'!.~_ ;, -t-,,"oo'~~t:~
_ /, '_'11,,-, ,..:",; lj~ 1#,.
The following candidates have been recommended for appointment to the Housing
Advisory Commission and the Human Relations Commission. The ratification of these
candidates has been placed on the July 22, 2008 Council agenda.
Housinq Advisory Commission:
Mauricio Torre has been a resident of Chula Vista for the past 8 years. Mauricio has
worked for South Bay Community Services for the past 11 years and is the Director of
Youth Support Services. Mauricio has experience working with low income families.
Mauricio resides in western Chula Vista with his wife.
Human Relations Commission:
Ed Herrera has been a resident of Chula Vista for the past 20 years and graduated
from Chula Vista High School. Ed will be working for Teri Training and Educational
Research Institute as a childcare specialist. Ed is a recent graduate of the City's
Citizen's Leadership Academy, is the V.P. of Southwest Chula Vista Civic Association, a
member of Northwest Civic Association, a member of Crossroads II and a member of
the Filipino American Community Empowerment.
/G-/