HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009/06/16 Agenda PacketI declare under penalty of perjury that I am
_ employed by the City of Chula Vista in the
~.. Y Office of the City Clerk and that I posted this
document on the bulletin board accord~ny pt ~/
M Brown Act requirements. \\
zed ~12'0~l Signed
~.+~~
Cf1Y OF
/~ CHULA VISTA
Cheryl Cox, Mayor
// Rudy Ramirez, Councilmember James D. Sandoval, City Manager
~/`/'fJJ(~ John McCann, Councilmember Bart Miesfeld, City Attorney
Pamela Bensoussan, Councilmember Donna Norris, City Clerk
Steve Castaneda, Councilmember
JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
June 16, 2009
6:00 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER
Council Chambers
City Hall -Building 100
276 Fourth Avenue
ROLL CALL: CounciUAgency Members: Bensoussan, Castaneda, McCann, Ramirez, and
Mayor Cox
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG AND MOMENT OF SILENCE
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items I-5)
The Council will enact the Consent Calendar staff recommendations by one motion,
without discussion, unless a Councilmember, 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, please
fill out a "Request to Speak" form (available in the lobby) and submit it to the Ciry Clerk
prior to the meeting. Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be discussed
immediately following the Consent Calendar.
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of the Regular and Special Meetings of February 17,
February 19, and March 3, 2009.
Staff recommendation: Council approve the minutes.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING CHULA VISTA
MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 2.05.010 RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF
UNCLASSIFIED POSITIONS TO ELIMINATE THE FOLLOWING TITLES -
ANIMAL CONTROL MANAGER, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF BUDGET AND
ANALYSIS, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND HOUSING, ASSISTANT
DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF PLANNING,
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF RECREATION, ASSISTANT FHtE CHIEF,
ASSISTANT LIBRARY DIRECTOR, CBAG BUDGET MANAGER, CBAG LEAD
PROGRAMMER ANALYST, CHIEF OF STAFF, COASTAL/ ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY CONSULTANT, DIRECTOR OF BUDGET AND ANALYSIS, DIRECTOR
OF COMMUNICATIONS, EXECUTNE ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER,
GOVERNMENT RELATIONS LIAISON, PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MANAGER,
SPECIAL PROJECTS MANAGER; AND TO ADD THE FOLLOWING TITLES -
ANIMAL CARE FACILITY MANAGER, BUDGET AND ANALYSIS MANAGER,
COMMUNICATIONS COORDINATOR, DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF, AND FIltE
DNISION CHIEF (4/STHS VOTE REQUIRED -- SECOND READING AND
ADOPTION)
Adoption of the ordinance amends Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 2.05.010 to
update the list of titles of unclassified positions. This ordinance was introduced on June
9, 2009. (Director of Finance)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the ordinance.
3. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ESTABLISHING THE APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009/2010
Article XIIIB of the California Constitution approved by the voters in 1979 and
commonly referred to as the Gann Initiative, requires each local government to establish
an Appropriations Limit by resolution each year at a regularly scheduled meeting or
noticed special meeting. The purpose of the limit is to restrict spending of certain types
of revenues to a level predicated on a base yeaz amount increased annually by an inflation
factor. (Director of Finance)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
4. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING CHANGE ORDERS FOR OTAY PROJECT, L.P. FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF LA MEDIA ROAD
Otay Project, L.P. has constructed La Media Road from Santa Venetia Street to Birch
Road, in conjunction with the development of Otay Ranch Village 6. This roadway is
within the Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDIF) program, and therefore,
eligible construction costs aze credited against the payment of TDIF fees required for the
development. Cumulative change orders totaling $50,000 or more aze subject to Council
approval. (Deputy City Manager/Development Services Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
Page 2 -Council Agenda ) tt~://www.chulavistaca.gov June 16, 2009
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING THE SUBDNISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE
COMPLETION OF THE IMPROVEMENTS FOR SAN MIGUEL RANCH
PLANNING AREA K WITH ORA BONTERRA 52, LLC
On January 24, 2006 by Resolution No. 2006-026, the Council approved San Miguel
Ranch Phase 3 "B" Map for Planning Area K and the associated subdivision
improvement agreement. The subdivision improvement agreement has since expired and
anew developer has acquired Planning Area K. Adoption of the resolution approves a
subdivision improvement agreement with the new owner, ORA Bonterra 52, LLC.
(Deputy City Manager/Development Services Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Persons speaking during Public Comments may address the Council on any subject
matter within the Council's jurisdiction that is not listed as an item on the agenda. State
law generally prohibits the Council from discussing or taking action on any issue not
included on the agenda, but, if appropriate, the Council may schedule the topic for future
discussion or refer the matter to staff. Comments are limited to three minutes.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
The following item(s) have been advertised as public hearing(s) as required by law. If
you wish to speak on any item, please fill out a "Request to Speak" form (available in the
lobby) and submit it to the Ciry Clerk prior to the meeting.
6. CONSIDERATION OF MODIFICATION OF THE POGGI CANYON SEWER BASIN
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
The Poggi Canyon Gravity Sewer Basin Development Impact Fee was established on
November 25, 1997 to facilitate construction of the Poggi Canyon trunk sewer, which
was needed to serve properties within the Poggi Canyon Basin. Adoption of the
ordinance approves the first update to the fee, reducing the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin
Development Impact Fee from $400 to $265 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit. (Director of
Public Works)
Staff recommendation: Council conduct the public hearing, adopt the following
resolution and place the ordinance on first reading:
A. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ACCEPTING THE "POGGI CANYON BASIN GRAVITY SEWER
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE UPDATE" REPORT
B. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING ORDINANCE
2716 TO UPDATE THE POGGI CANYON SEWER BASIN DEVELOPMENT
IMPACT FEE TO PAY FOR SEWER IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE
POGGI CANYON SEWER BASIN AS A CONDITION OF ISSUANCE OF
BUILDING PERMITS (FIIiST READING)
Page 3 -Council Agenda htto:/lwww.chulavistaca.eov June 16, 2009
ACTION ITEMS
The Item(s) listed in this section of the agenda will be considered individually by the
Council 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.
7. CONSIDERATION OF ENTERING INTO A PROPERTY USE LICENSE
AGREEMENT WITH PIMA MEDICAL INSTITUTE
PIMA Medical Institute (PIMA) is seeking to partner with the City of Chula Vista to
expand and improve the Animal Caze Facility. Adoption of the resolution approves
entering into a property use license agreement with PIMA. The agreement requires
improvements be made to the City-owned, vacant lot next to the Animal Caze Facility,
and allows PIMA to provide its veterinary training program at the Animal Caze Facility.
If approved, PIMA would provide animal care services and equipment for the Animal
Caze Facility. (Public Works Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the following resolution:
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ENTERING INTO A PROPERTY USE LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH
VOCATIONAL TRAINING INSTITUTE DBA PIMA MEDICAL INSTITUTE,
INC.
8. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL BY THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF AN
AMENDMENT TO THE GATEWAY CHULA VISTA DISPOSITION AND
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
The Gateway Chula Vista Disposition and Development Agreement was approved June
6, 2000, for the development and operation of a phased First Class, First Quality mixed-
use commerciaUoffice project. The first and second phases have been realized, however,
the third and final phase will not meet the construction deadline of June 3Q 2009. The
seventh amendment to the agreement provides for changes to reflect the current
anticipated construction timeframe for Phase III, and recommends the Phase III
completion date be extended to December 31, 2014. (Deputy City Manager/Development
Services Director)
Staff recommendation: Redevelopment Agency adopt the following resolution:
RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ADOPTING THE SEVENTH AMENDMENT TO THE
GATEWAY CHULA VISTA DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT(DDA)
Page 4 -Council Agenda htto://www.chulavisbca.eov June 16, 2009
OTHER BUSINESS
9. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS
10. MAYOR'S REPORTS
Update from Port Commissioner William Hall
11. COUNCILMEMBERS' COMMENTS
Deputy Mayor McCann:
A. Motion to cut the Mayor's and Councilmembers' pay by 10%, and return
savings to the General Fund, to be used to save core services (Police, Fire,
Libraries, Public Works and Pazks).
B. Motion to have the Mayor's and Councilmembers' pay their individual
shaze of the California Public Employee Retirement System (CalPers)
retirement contribution, and return savings to the General Fund, to be used
to save core services (Police, Fire, Libraries, Public Works and Pazks).
C. Motion to eliminate the Mayor's and Councilmembers' funding for travel
and conferences, and return savings to the General Fund, to be used to
save core services (Police, Fire, Libraries, Public Works and Parks).
D. Motion to cut the City's Executive, Senior, and Mid-level managers' pay
by 10%, and return 50% of the savings to the General Fund to be used to
save core services (Police, Fire, Libraries, Public Works, and Parks), and
return 50% of the savings to the City's reserves.
CLOSED SESSION
Announcements of actions taken in Closed Session shall be made available by noon on
Wednesday following the Council Meeting at the City Attorney's office in accordance
with the Ralph M. Brown Act (Government Code 54957.7).
12. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT
CODE SECTION 54957.6
Agency designated representatives: Jim Sandoval, Scott Tulloch, Kelley Bacon,
Bart Miesfeld, Maria Kachadoorian, Rod Betts
Employee organization: IAFF
13. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT
CODE SECTION 54957.6
Agency designated representatives: Jim Sandoval, Bart Miesfeld, Kelley Bacon,
Maria Kachadoorian
Unrepresented employee: Assistant City Manager
Page 5 -Council Agenda httu://www.chulavistaca.eov June 16, 2009
14. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING SIGNIFICANT EXPOSURE
TO LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(b)
• One case
ADJOURNMENT to the Regular City Council Meeting of June 23, 2009 in the City Council
Chambers.
Materials provided to the City Council 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) 691-5041 at least forty-eight hours in advance of the meeting.
Page 6 -Council Agenda http://www.chulavistaca.eov June 16, 2009
~-
DRAFT
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
February 17, 2009
6:00 P.M.
A Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista was called to order at 6:02
p.m. in the Council Chambers, located in City Hall, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, Califomia.
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: Councilmembers Bensoussan, Castaneda, McCann, Ramirez, and
Mayor Cox
ABSENT: None
ALSO PRESENT: City Manager Sandoval, City Attorney Miesfeld, City Clerk
Norris, and Deputy City Clerk Bennett
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG AND MOMENT OF SILENCE
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
PRESENTATION BY MAYOR COX OF A PROCLAMATION TO BRAD REMP,
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & BUILDING/BUILDING OFFICIAL,
FOR HIS RETIREMENT AFTER 19 YEARS OF DEDICATED SERVICE TO THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
City Manager Sandoval recognized and commended Mr. Remp on his 18 years of service to the
City. Mayor Cox then read the proclamation and City Manager Sandoval presented it to Brad.
Mr. Remp thanked the many dedicated staff he had worked with, and also thanked the City
Manager and Council, both current and prior, for giving him the opportunity to participate in
many regional and State activities.
Mayor Cox announced that the following presentation would be added to the agcnda:
. PRESENTATION BY TANYA ROV1RA-OSTERWALDER, PROJECT MANAGER
FOR HEALTHY EATING ACTIVE COMMUNITIES (HEAC), OF A COMMUNITY
LEADERSHIP AWARD FROM "WALK SAN DlEGO" TO CASTLE PARK HIGH
STUDENTS, GERRY GARCIA AND RUDY GUTIERREZ, AND SOUTHWESTERN
COLLEGE STUDENT, DANIEL RIOS
Tanya Rovira Osterwalder. Project Manager with HEAC, introduced and congratulated Gerry
Garcia, Rudy Gutierrez and Daniel Rios for receiving the leadership award from "Walk San
Diego", for their work on an assessment for park improvements in Lauderbach Park. She then
presented the students with the award.
Page] - Council Minutes
February 17, 2009
III ../
DRAFT
.
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY (Continued)
PRESENTAT]ON BY JOHN TESSITORE, CHAIRPERSON, AND KATE GOOGINS,
VICE CHAIRPERSON. OF THE YOUTH ACTION COUNCIL ON ITS "THEATRE
SLAM" EVENT, SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2009 FROM 6:00 P.M. TO 9:00 P.M.
AT THE CIVIC CENTER LIBRARY
Youth Action Council Members Tessitore and Googins spoke about the work of the Youth
Action Council, and provided inforn1ation regarding the Theatre Slam event, scheduled for
Saturday, February 28, 2009, from 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., at the Civic Center Library the event.
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items] -6)
I. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
LeUer of resignation from Susan O'Shaughnessy, member of the Cultural Arts
Commission.
Staff recommendation: Council accept the resignations and direct the City Clerk to post
the vacancies in accordance with Maddy Act requirements.
2. ORDINANCE NO. 3]25, ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADDING
CHAPTER 5.05 TO THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE, ESTABLISHING THE
CHULA VISTA AUTO PARK BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT PURSUANT
TO THE PARKING AND BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT AREA LAW OF ]989 AND
LEVYING AN ASSESSMENT AND CHARGE THEREIN FOR UPGRADING AND
PROMOTING THE AREA (SECOND READING AND ADOPTION)
Adoption of the ordinance establishes the Chula Vista Auto Park Business Improvement
District, which will provide a self-funding mechanism to allow for the promotion and
marketing of the automobile dealers within the auto park. This ordinance was introduced
on February] 0, 2009. (Deputy City Manager/Development Services Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the ordinance.
3. A. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-033, RESOLUT]ON OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE EXISTING CITY INVESTMENT
POLICY AND GUIDELINES
B. INVESTMENT REPORT FOR THE QUARTER ENDED DECEMBER 31,2008
Per California Government Code Section 53646, the City Treasurer may annually present
the City's Investment Policy to the City Council to reaffirm or make any changes to the
existing policy. The Investment Policy provides guidelines to ensure management of idle
cash, and state law requires that it be adopted by resolution on an annual basis. The
Quarterly Investment Report provides information on various cash balances, investment
transactions and the status of the pooled investment portfolio in accordance with the
Government Code and the Council Investment Policy (Finance Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution and accept the report.
Page 2 - Council Minmcs
February t7. 2009
IA ;~
.
DRAFT
CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
4. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-034, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING THE CONTRACT
FOR THE "GLENHA VEN WAY IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN FIRST A VENUE
AND AMY STREET IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA (CIP NO. STL-304)"
PROJECT TO HILLCREST CONTRACTING IN THE AMOUNT OF $516,812.25,
AND APPROVING A BUDGET TRANSFER FROM EXISTING SOUTHWESTERN
CHULA VISTA STREET IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT (STL-306) TO CIP NO. STL-
304 FOR SAID PURPOSE AND AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF ALL
A V AILABLE FUNDS IN THE PROJECT
On January 21, 2009, the Director of Public Works received sealed bids for the project.
The work to be done consists of the sidewalk improvements and related street work along
Glenhaven Way between First Avenue and Amy Street. The work also includes alllaboL
material, equipment, transportation, protection and restoration of existing improvements
and traffic control necessary for the project. (Public Works Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
5A RESOLUTION NO. 2009-035, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING ADMINISTERING AGENCY - STATE
MASTER AGREEMENT FOR FEDERAL AID PROJECTS, NO. I 1-5203R BETWEEN
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA; AND
AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO EXECUTE THE
AGREEMENT, THE PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT AND ALL FUTURE PROGRAM
SUPPLEMENTS TO SAID AGREEMENT
B. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-036, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING ADMINISTERING AGENCY - STATE
MASTER AGREEMENT FOR STATE AID PROJECTS, NO. 00223S BETWEEN THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA; AND
AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO EXECUTE THE
AGREEMENT
Prior to the receipt of Federal or State funds for any local Federal or State Aid project, the
City and the State are required to enter into master agreements relative to prosecution of
said projects and maintenance of the completed facilities. The previous master
agreement for Federal Aid Projects and State Aid Projects were approved in 1978 and
2003 respectively. (Public Works Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolutions.
Page 3 - Council Minutes
February 17,2009
/1}--3
DRAFT
CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
6. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-037, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR
THE "STREET LIGHT INSTALLATION ALONG FOURTH AVENUE BETWEEN L
STREET TO ORANGE AVENUE (TF-307)" PROJECT TO 3D ENTERPRISES, INe.
IN THE AMOUNT OF $ I 09,000
On January 2 I, 2009, the Director of Public Works received 15 sealed bids for the project
that is part of the Undergrounding Utility District Program and will install 15 new street
light poles and relocate one existing street light pole in order to have a more uniform
street light pattern along the roadways. (Public Works Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
ACTION:
Councilmember Castaneda moved to approve staffs recommendations and
offered Consent Calendar Items] -6, headings read, text waived. Councilmember
Bensoussan seconded the motion, and it carried 5-0.
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
There were none.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Steve Molski, Chula Vista resident, stated that he had filed a claim with the City to replace his
eyeglasses that were broken as a result of a fall at the South County Library. He stated that the
claim was rejected since he filed it after the six-month statute of limitations. He requested
reimbursement for the cost of replacing his glasses.
Ed Herrera, Chula Vista resident, spoke in opposition to the local sales tax measure, Proposition
A.
Ariana Nava, Chula Vista resident spoke in support of the Library's DASH Program.
Theresa Acerro, Chula Vista resident, representing the Southwest Chula Vista Civic Association,
stated that the majority of association members voted against the sales tax measure as \vritten.
She stated that there was a need for clearer understanding of the City's use of its reserves. She
suggested that any extra money be used to assist local businesses, and to lower fees for low-
income residents. She suggested public discussion about the sales tax measure prior to the
ballots being mailed out
Guillermo Lopez, Chula Vista resident, stated that the community should have a say in the
proposed sales tax increase and in the duration of the proposed sales tax increase. He then spoke
in opposition to the MMC peaker power plant.
Page 4 - Council Minutes
February 17,2009
/11 --'I
"
DRAFT
PUBLIC COMMENTS (Continued)
Patricia Aguilar, Chula Vista residcnt, representing Crossroads II, stated that the Board was in
support of Proposition A. She requested that the Council direct the City Clerk to prepare a ballot
measure for the Junc 2010 e1cctionto have the voters votc on a measure to have Proposition A, if
it passes, go back to the voters for ratification or repeal in 2014.
Councilmember Castaneda requested, with Council consensus, that the City Attorney look at the
possibility of preparing a resolution to be placed on the next agenda for Council consideration to
place an item on the June 2010 General Election that would allow the voters to detennine in
2014, should the tax measure pass, whether or not to continue or eliminate the tax.
OTHER BUSINESS
7. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS
City Manager Sandoval spoke about a recent meeting between staff and two local water districts
that included discussion about the likelihood of mandatory water conservation measures in the
summcr that would affect local ratepayers. To that end, he stated that staff would be scheduling
a presentation by the districts for a future Council meeting.
8. MAYOR'S REPORTS
Therc were none.
9. COUNCILMEMBERS' COMMENTS
Councilmember Ramirez invited the community to attend the tree dedication to commemorate
former President Eisenhower's visit to the City on October 21, 1960. The event was scheduled
for Thursday, February 19, 2009, at 11 :00 a.m., in the Civic Center courtyard. He spoke
regarding a recent Animal Care Facility Subcommittee meeting. He stated that staff had
provided a report outlining issues at the Animal Care Facility that had bcen addressed, and those
that were still bcing worked on. He also stated that he would hold regular meetings to address
and resolve the issues and implement best practices for the facility. He requested staff to
expedite the recruitment process to fill the vacant manager position for the Animal Care Facility.
Councilmember Bensoussan spoke in support of the comments by Councilmember Ramirez
regarding the Animal Care Facility. She stated there was a need for the future for services such
as animal spaying and neutering, and public awareness programs. She also invited the
community to attend the Energy Subcommittee meeting on February 18, 2009, at 1 :00 p.m. in
conference room C-101, located in City Hall. She announced the recent opening of a coffee and
pastry shop on the comer of Third A venue, and she encouraged the community to support local
businesses.
Mayor Cox recessed the meeting to convene in Closed Session at 6:54 p.m.
Page 5 - Council Minutes
February 17,2009
1/1-- 5'
DRAFT
CLOSED SESSION
10. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT
CODE 54957.6
. Agency designated representatives: Jim Sandoval, Scott Tulloch, Marcia Raskin,
Bart Miesfeld, Rod Betts, Maria Kachadoorian, Leah Browder
Employee organizations: CVEA, IAFF, POA, WCE, Mid-Management,
Professional and Unrepresented Groups
This item was not discussed.
11. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING INITIA TION OF
LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(C)
One Case
ACTION:
Councilmember Castaneda moved to authorize the City Attorney to enter into a
tolling agreement with the County of San Diego. Councilmember Ramirez
seconded the motion and it carried 5-0.
ADJOURJ'\!MENT
At 7:05 p.m., Mayor Cox adjourned the meeting to February 19, 2009 at 6:00 p.m. in the
Executive Conference Room for Planning Commission Interviews, and thence to the Regular
Meeting on March 3, 2009 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
~
Lorraine Bennett, CMC, Deputy City Clerk
/
~
Page 6 - Council Minutes
/~~~
February 17, 2009
DRAFT
MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
February 17,2009
5:00 P.M.
A Special Meeting of the City Council of the City ofChula Vista was called to order at 5:00 p.m.
in the Council Chambers, located in City HaiL 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT:
Council members Bensoussan, Castaneda. McCann, Ramirez, and
Mayor Cox
ABSENT:
None
ALSO PRESENT:
City Manager Sandoval, Assistant City Manager Tulloch, Finance
Director Kachadoorian, and City Attorney Miesfeld
CLOSED SESSION
I. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT
CODE 54957.6
. Agency designated representatives: Jim Sandoval, Scott Tulloch, Marcia Raskin,
Bart Miesfeld, Rod Betts, Maria Kachadoorian, Leah Browder
. Employee organizations: CVEA, IAFF, POA, WCE, Mid-Management,
Professional and Unrepresented Groups
No reportable action was taken on this item.
ADJOURNMENT
At 5:40 p.m., Mayor Cox adjourned the meeting to the next Regular Meeting of the City Council,
February] 7, 2009 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
~ett, CMC, Deputy City Clerk
/6-/
DRAFT
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA V1STA
February 19,2009
6:00 P.M.
An Adjourned Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista was called to
order at 6:05 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located in City Hall, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula
Vista, California.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT:
Councilmembers Bensoussan, Castaneda, McCann, Ramirez
(arrived at 6: 1 0 p.m.), and Mayor Cox
ABSENT: None
ALSO PRESENT: City Attorney Miesfeld
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were none.
1. INTERVIEWS AND APPOINTMENT TO FILL 1 VACANCY ON THE PLANNING
COMM1SSlON
ACTION:
Deputy Mayor McCann moved to appoint Mitchell Thompson to the Planning
Commission. Councilmember Bensoussan seconded the motion and it carried
5-0.
ADJOURNMENT
At 7:50 p.m., Mayor Cox adjourned the meeting to the Regular Meeting of March 3, 2009 at
4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
~
Lorraine Bennett, CMC, Deputy City Clerk
Ie -/
DRAFT
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
March 3, 2009
4:00 P.M.
A Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista was called to order at 4:05 .
p.m. in the Council Chambers, located in City Hall, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Council members Bensoussan, Castaneda, Ramirez, and Mayor Cox
ABSENT: McCann (excused)
ALSO PRESENT: City Manager Sandoval, City Attorney Miesfeld, City Clerk Norris,
and Deputy City Clerk Bennett
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG AND MOMENT OF SILENCE
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DA Y
.
INTRODUCTION BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR RICK HOPKINS OF THE
EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH, JUAN LLAMAS JR., SENIOR MAINTENANCE
WORKER
Public Works Director Hopkins introduced employee of the month, Juan Llamas Jr. Mayor Cox
read the proclamation and Councilmember Ramirez presented it to Juan.
OA TH OF OFFICE: Mitchell Thompson - Planning Commission
City Clerk Norris administered the oath of office to Mitchell Thompson, and Councilmember
Bensoussan presented him with a certificate of appointment.
.
PRESENTATION BY MAYOR COX OF A PROCLAMATION TO MARCIA
RASKIN, HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR FOR HER RETIREMENT AFTER
NINE PLUS YEARS OF DEDICATED SERVICE TO THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Mayor Cox read the proclamation and City Manager Sandoval presented it to Marcia.
. RECOGNITION BY MAYOR COX AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF MR. OLAF
MJELDE FOR HIS GENEROUS DONATION OF AQUAST AR POOL DRAIN
COVERS AND THEIR INSTALLATION AT THE CITY'S SWIMMING POOLS,
WHICH INSURED THE POOLS WERE FULLY OPERATIONAL AND IN
COMPLIANCE WITH NEW LAWS THUS AVOIDING DISPLACEMENT OF
NUMEROUS GROUPS THAT UTILIZE THE CITY'S POOLS
Recreation Director Martin introduced and thanked Mr. Mjelde for his donation. Mayor Cox
read a letter of thanks on behalf of the City to Mr. Mjelde. Mr. Martin then presented the letter
of thanks to Mr. Mjelde.
Page 1 ~ Council Minutes
March 3, 2009
1/)-1
DRAFT
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items 1 - ] 0)
Items 5 and 9 were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion by members of the public.
Item] OA was pulled from the agenda and continued to March 24, 2009 at the request of the City
Attorney, and was not discussed. Councilmember Castaneda stated that he would be abstaining
from voting on Item JOB, due to the location of property he owns.
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of December 4, 2008.
Staff recommendation: Council approve the minutes.
2. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
Letter of resignation from Steve Palma, member of the Growth Management Oversight
Commission.
Staff recommendation: Council accept the resignation and direct the City Clerk to post
the vacancy in accordance with Maddy Act requirements.
3. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-038, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING SUBMITTAL OF A GRANT APPLICATION
TO THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE PROTECTION
TO EXPAND THE CHULA VISTA NATURESCAPE PROGRAM AND
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE ALL DOCUMENTS IN
CONJUNCTION WITH IMPLEMENTING THE GRANT AGREEMENT
The California Department of Forestry & Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) has requested that
the City submit a full grant proposal for its NatureScape Program to the CAL FIRE
Urban Greening Grant Program. The program is a community-based initiative to help
property owners create wildlife-friendly, water-smart yards and gardens. The City's
$53,000 grant proposal would provide funds to organize 6 free community workshops to
educate the public about sustainable landscape designs and to distribute 300
NatureScape-In-A-Box kits to program participants. (Conservation & Environmental
Services Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
4. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-039, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT
SOLUTIONS GOVERNMENTAL MONEY PURCHASE PLAN AND TRUST (40](A)
PLAN)
City Council approved a deferred compensation plan pursuant to Internal Revenue Code
section 401(a) in December, 2001. Per Council direction on January 13,2009, staff is
amending the Plan to suspend the City's contribution for certain employees. (Finance
Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
Page 2 - Council Minutes
Mach 3. 2009
/D-~
DRAFT
CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
5. This item was removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion.
6. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-040, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING AND APPROPRIATING $302,579 IN
REIMBURSEMENTS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF
EMERGENCY SERVICES, THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO AND THE CALIFORNIA
FIREFIGHTER JOINT APPRENTICESHIP COMMITTEE TO OFFSET OVERTIME
AND SUPPORT COSTS IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED)
The Fire Department has received reimbursements in the amount of $302,579 from the
State Office of Emergency Services, the City of San Diego and the California Firefighter
Joint Apprenticeship Committee. Reimbursements were made for staff time related to
Chula Vista Fire Department strike teams that were sent as part of mutual aid agreements
to assist in statewide firefighting efforts during the 2008 fire season and the rescue teams
that were deployed for Hurricane emergencies Gustav and Ike. The department is
requesting to appropriate these funds to offset overtime and operating support costs.
(Fire Chief)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
7. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-04], RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING $226,569 FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT
OF HOMELAND SECURJTY AND APPROPRJATING SAID FUNDS TO THE
FEDERAL GRANTS FUND FOR THE STATE HOMELAND SECURITY PROGRAM
(4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED)
The San Diego County Office of Emergency Services, who administers the State
Homeland Security Program (SHSP), has notified the City of the Fiscal Year 2008 SHSP
award in the amount of $226,569. The State Homeland Security Program is designed to
improve domestic terrorism preparedness of state and local governments by addressing
equipment, training, exercises and planning needs. (Police Chief)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
8.A. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-042, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE AMENDMENT TO THE FISCAL
YEAR 2008/2009 THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 2012/2013 SAN DIEGO
ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS (SANDAG) REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (RTIP) FOR SUBMITTAL TO CALTRANS AS PART
OF THE FEDERAL ECONOMIC RECOVERY (STIMULUS) PROGRAM
B. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-043, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE MODI FICA TION OF THE CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGETS FOR STL345, TF330, AND TF33] TO
REMOVE EXISTING TRANSNET AND TRAFFIC SIGNAL FUNDS CONTINGENT
UPON FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION APPROVAL (4/5THS VOTE
REQUIRED)
Page 3 - Council Minutes
/ t> ~~ .
March 3. 2009
DRAFT
CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
State and Federal regulations require the San Diego Association of Governments
(SANDAG) to develop and adopt a Regional Transportation Improvement Program every
two years in order to continue receiving Federal and State funding. In order to obtain
Federal funds for several City highway projects as part of 'The American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act" (Stimulus) Progranl, it is proposed that the project budgets be revised
in order to submit for construction expenses. (Public Works Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolutions.
9. This item was removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion.
10. A. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE FUNDING APPROVAL
AGREEMENT WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT AND OTHER RELATED DOCUMENTS; AND AUTHORIZING
APPROPRIATIONS OF $2,830,072 TO FUND THE AMENDED 2008/2009 ANNUAL
ACTION PLAN FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD
STABILIZATION PROGRAM (NSP) (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED)
Item lOA was continued to the meeting of March 24, 2009.
] O. B. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-044, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE
THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND
COMMUNITY HOUSINGWORKS FOR UNDERWRITING SERVICES FOR A FIRST
TIME HOMEBUYER DOWNPA YMENT AND CLOSING COST ASSISTANCE
PROGRAM
In January 2009, the Department of Housing and Urban Development approved the
City's Draft 2008-2009 Amended Annual Action Plan that proposed three activities to be
funded with the Neighborhood Stabilization Program funds in the amount of $2,830,072.
This item appropriates the funds to specific activities as well as amends the contract with
Community Housingworks, extending its contract to continue underwriting the City's
homebuyer assistance loans. (Deputy City Manager/Development Services Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolutions.
ACTION:
Mayor Cox moved to approve staffs recommendations and offered the balance of
the Consent Calendar (ltcms ] -4, 6-8, and lOB). Councilmember Ramirez
seconded the motion and it carried 4-0, except Item 108, which carried 3-0-1 with
Councilmember Castaneda abstaining, due to the location of his property.
Page 4 - Council Minutes
//)-1/
Mach 3, 2009
DRAFT
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
5. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE QUARTER ENDED DECEMBER 31,
2008
Charter Section 504(1) requires staff to submit a quarterly financial report to the City
Council. (Finance Director)
Staff recommendation: Council accept the report.
Theresa Acerro, Chula Vista resident, suggested that the Councilmembers eliminate their car
allowances and consider paying a portion of their health benefits and pension costs.
ACTION:
Councilmember Castaneda moved to approve staffs recommendation to accept
the report. Councilmember Ramirez seconded the motion and it carried 4-0.
9. HOUSING ELEMENT 2008 ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT
The City of Chula Vista is required to prepare an Annual Progress report on the
implementation of the City's Housing Element. California Government Code Section
65400 requires the report include the following: (1) progress in meeting the Regional
Housing Need; (2) the effectiveness of the Housing Element in the attainment of the
community's housing goals and objectives; and (3) progress toward mitigating
governmental constraints identitied in the Housing Element. This report provides
detailed information regarding the housing activities of the City of Chula Vista from
January l, 2008 through December 31, 2008. (Deputy City Manager/Development
Services Director)
Staff recommendation: Council accept the report.
Theresa Acerro, Chula Vista resident, asked if the Homebuyer Program materials were available
in bilingual format.
Redevelopment and Housing Manager Mills responded that all current programs and manuals
were available in bilingual format.
ACTION:
Councilmember Castaneda moved to accept the report. Councilmember Ramirez
seconded the motion and it carried 4-0.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Robert Solomon. Chula Vista resident. congratulated and thanked Councilmembers Ramirez and
Castaneda on forgoing their car allowances. He then requested clarification on other Council
benefits. He stated that Police Officers should not be paid less than personnel in administrative
positions. He spoke favorably of a recent newspaper article that stated the Council needed to
explore all possible ways of closing the spending gap.
Mayor Cox offered that Mr. Solomon could contact the Mayor's office to discuss his questions
about the Mayor and Council benefits.
Page 5 - Council Minutes
March 3, 2009
/D-5
DRAFT
PUBLIC COMMENTS (continued)
Steve Molski, Chula Vista resident, requested Council consideration of payment for a claim he
liled with the City for eyeglasses that were broken as a result of a fall at the South County
Library.
Councilmember Castaneda requested that the matter be referred to the City Attorney to address
the matter with Mr. Molski.
Miguel Reza, San Diego resident, representing Grid Alternatives, provided information about
Grid Alternatives, and explained that the organization worked with communities in need to
provide renewable energy, energy efficiency and training. He asked that the City provide the
organization with a list of eligible homeowners, and in turn, Grid Alternatives would providc
outreach, project management, and installation services in partnership with Housing and Urban
Development.
Mayor Cox suggested Mr. Reza contact Conservation and Environmental Services Director
Meacham to discuss the program.
Councilmember Castaneda invited Mr. Reza to make a formal presentation at the next Council
Energy Subcommittee Meeting.
Linda De Santis, Luis Sainz, and Connie Ferte, Chula Vista residents, spoke about potential
closure of the Boys and Girls Club on the west side of the City, due to a lack of funding. She
requested Council assistance with keeping this Boys and Girls Club open.
Riley Twiss, Chula Vista resident, suggested that the Council members forgo their car
allowances, and that the City Manager. City Attorney and City Clerk forgo their 40](a) benelit
plan.
Tiffany Vinson, Chula Vista resident, addressed the City's current financial situation. She
encouraged the Council to continue to work on the budget and to move the City forward. She
thanked Mayor Cox for her encouraging words, and wished her good luck on the upcoming State
of the City address.
Reiner Leal, Chula Vista resident, representing the Chula Vista Civic Association, referenccd a
recent article by Gaylord Entertainment that provided the reasons they had backed out of the
bayfront development project. He stated that lessons should be learned from that, and if the City
and residents had been more open, the current budget discussions wouldn't be necessary. He
thanked Mayor Cox for her leadership.
Theresa Acerro, Chula Vista resident, suggested that Council consider adopting a resolution to
encourage the County to negotiate a salary increase from $9.25 per hour to $]] .50 for its Home
Health Aides, stating that it would result in a positive economic effect countywide.
Page 6 - Council Minutes
Mach 3, 2009
ID-t:.
DRA.FT
PUBLIC COMMENTS (Continued)
Mitch Thompson spoke about a local citizen group, Chula Vistans for Responsible Government,
formed for the purpose of educating the community about the value of City-provided services.
He thanked the Council for placing Proposition A on the ballot.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
I I. CONSIDERA TION OF APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (PCC-08-020)
OPERATION OF A REPLANET RECYCLING REDEMPTION CENTER AT 1315
THIRD A VENUE
The applicant is appealing the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation decision denying
a Conditional Use Permit for a small recycling redemption center located at the Save-A-
Lot parking lot, 13] 5 Third A venue. This item was continued from the meeting of
January 27, 2009.
On February 9, 2009 staff received a letter from TOMRA Pacific Inc., proposing changes
to its proposed Conditional Use Permit for the rePlanet Recycling Center. Staff is
requesting a continuance to the March 17,2009 City Council meeting to allow sufficient
time to review the proposed changes and the effect on the previous staff analysis and
recommendation. (Deputy City Manager/Development Services Director)
Notice of the hearing was given in accordance with legal requirements, and the hearing was
continued to March] 7,2009.
ACTION ITEMS
12. CONSIDERATION FOR ACCEPTANCE OF THE SIX-MONTH PROGRESS
REPORT ON CLIMATE PROTECTION MEASURES IMPLEMENTATION
In July 2008, the Council adopted implementation plans for seven new measures focused
on lowering energy and water consumption, installing renewable energy systems,
promoting alternative fuel vehicle use and designing pedestrian and transit-friendly
communities. The report outlines staffs progress in implementing the measures and
pursuing the Council-approved financing strategy. Generally, most measures are being
partially implemented based on current available funding levels and are meeting the
milestones outlined in their original implementation plans. (Conservation &
Environmental Services Director)
Director of Conservation and Environmental Services Meacham, Environmental Resource
Manager Reed, Administrative Services Manager Beamon, Advanced Planning Manager
Batchelder, and Deputy Building Omcial EI-Khazen provided the status of implementation of
each climate protection measure.
Councilmember Ramirez asked if there were plans to reconvene the Climate Change Working
Group, and asked about the possibility of returning to Council with the status of energy
assessments for local businesses.
Page 7 - Council Minutes
March 3. 2009
ID-7
DRAFT
ACTION ITEMS (Continued)
Director of Environmental and Conservation Meacham responded that staff would considcr re-
constituting the Committee as plans progressed, and may also consider adding commercial and
development representatives to the group. With respect to the energy assessments, Director
Meacham stated that staff would report back to the Council in June on the results of the
voluntary assessments.
Councilmember Bensoussan stated that she was pleased that the mitigation in-lieu fee option for
the Green Building Standard would not be implemented. For the green building and energy
efficiency standards, she requested that staff provide a memorandum on cost per square-foot
versus the added value in terms of environmental benefits and benefits to building occupants.
She also requested that staff look at the Third A venue Streetscape Master Plan to see how it
could incorporate water conservation measures. She suggested that implementing mandates for
solar power on warehouses may provide an opportunity to attract solar industries to the City.
ACTION:
Mayor Cox moved to adopt the following Resolution No. 2009-045, heading read,
text waived:
RESOLUTION NO. 2009-045, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING THE SIX-MONTH PROGRESS
REPORT ON CLIMATE PROTECTION MEASURES IMPLEMENTATION,
AND DIRECTING STAFF TO RETURN WITHIN ]80 DAYS WITH
ANOTHER IMPLEMENTATION UPDATE
CounciImember Bensoussan seconded the motion and it carried 4-0.
OTHER BUSINESS
13. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS
City Manager Sandoval announced that approximately I 12 additional staff positions were slated
to be cut prior to June 30th, and that staff would be bringing a plan back to the Council on how
the City would be providing public service to the community with reduced staffing levels.
]4. MAYOR'S REPORTS
Mayor Cox thanked Councilmember Castaneda for his comments regarding the potential effects
on the community of reduced funding associated with Public Works services. She also stated
that without additional revenue, the City would be unable to continue its partnership with the
Boys and Girls Club. She added that she and City Manager Sandoval had recently met with the
Chula Vista Elementary School District Superintendent to discuss opportunities to maintain the
after school programming that the school district counted on. She announced an upcoming
meeting on March] 9, 2009 at 7:00 p.m. at Southwestern College, with Assembly Member Marty
Block regarding proposed Assembly Bill 24, legislation for a local university. She also
announced the upcoming "Sunset Safari" fundraiser event on March 28. 2009 at 5:00 p.m., at the
Chula Vista Nature Center. She stated that on April 7, 2009, the Nature Center Task Force
would be presenting a report to the Council on creation of a sustainable Chula Vista Nature
Center. Mayor Cox alerted the Council on the proposed Senate Bill] 39 regarding the shift of
Page 8 - Council Minutes
Mach 3. 2009
/D-8
DRAFT
MA YOR'S REPORTS (Continued)
jobs at the Tenth Avenue marine ternlina] in to a way that was of major concern to the Port
District and Port tenants. She then polled the Council on its interest to invite former Coronado
Mayor, Tom Smisek, to give a presentation entitled, "Destination Lindbergh". It was the
consensus of the Council to place the presentation on a future agenda.
15. COUNCILMEMBERS' COMMENTS
Councilmember Castaneda commented on his participation in "Read Across America Week,"
which highlighted the importance of reading and library services to citizens. He stated that he
read to a first grade class at Olympic View E]ementary Schoo] as part of this program.
Councilmember Ramirez spoke about the success of his recent Public Office Hours meeting that
was conducted entirely in Spanish with English translation. He thanked City Manager Sandoval,
Captain Wedge, and Agent Martin for their participation. He then announced that his next
Public Office Hours meeting would be conducted in Eastem Chula Vista. and that specific
meeting information was available on the City's website.
Councilmember Bensoussan commented that she had attended Councilmember Ramirez's Public
Office Hours meeting, and applauded him for conducting the meeting in Spanish. She
announced that Councilmember Ramirez would be conducting a Public Forum regarding
Proposition A on March 9, 2009, at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers. She referenced a
memorandum dated March 3, 2009, that she placed on the dais regarding a proposed outline for
establishment of an independent advisory board named Prop A Advisory Committee or (P AAC).
She requested Council support of the outline. It was the consensus of the Council to place the
matter on the March 17, 2009 Council agenda. Councilmember Bensoussan then announced the
upcoming March 10,2009 State of the City address.
Mayor Cox recessed the meeting to convene in Closed Session at 6:54 p.m.
CLOSED SESSION
]6. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING EXISTING LITIGATION
PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(a)
Justin Thomas Ladou v. City of Chula Vista, et a!., San Diego Superior Court, Case No.
37-2008-00074919-CU-PT-SC.
No reportable action was taken on this item.
]7. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT
CODE 54957.6
. Agency designated representatives: Jim Sandoval, Scott Tulloch, Marcia Raskin,
Bart Miesfeld, Rod Betts, Maria Kachadoorian, Leah Browder
Employee organizations: CVEA, ]AFF, POA, WCE, Mid-Management,
Professional and unrepresented groups
This item was not discussed and no action was taken.
Page 9 - Council Minutes
!D - Cj
March 3, 2009
DRAFT
ADJOURNMENT
At 7:11 p.m., Mayor Cox adjourned the meeting to a Joint Workshop Meeting with the GMOC
and Planning Commission, March 5, 2009 at 6:00 p.m., in the Chula Vista Police Headquarters,
Community Meeting Room, 315 Fourth A venue, and thence to the Regular Meeting for the State
of the City Address on March 10,2009 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
~
Lorraine Bennett, CMC, Deputy City Clerk
~
Page 10 - Council Minutes
Mach 3, 2009
/D-IO
~\o~
~\JO<:(
~~\J
<;)\~0
ORDINA.NCE NO.- _ Q<(:.~
~v'
....C'P
ORDINAt"iCE OF THE COW OF CHULA VISTA
ALYffiNDING CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE
SECTION 2.05.010 RELATING TO THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF UNCLASSIFIED POSITIONS
TO ELIi'vIINATE THE FOLLOWING TITLES -
ANlMAL CONTROL MAL"IAGER, ASSISTANT
DIRECTOR OF BUDGET AL"ITI AL"IAL YSIS,
ASSISTAt"lT DIRECTOR OF BUILDING At"ID
HOUSING, ASSISTAL"IT DIRECTOR OF HUMAN
RESOURCES, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF
PLAL"INING, ASSISTAt"iT DIRECTOR OF
RECREATION, ASSISTANT FIRE CHIEF, ASSISTANT
LIBRARY DIRECTOR, CBAG BUDGET MANAGER,
CBAG LEAD PROGRA1YfMER At"iAL YST, CHIEF OF
STAFF, COASTAL/ ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY
CONSULTAt"lT, DIRECTOR OF BUDGET At"l"D
A1"1AL YSIS, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS,
EXECUTIVE ASSISTAL"iT TO THE CITY MA.NAGER;
GOVERt"IMENT RELATIONS LIAISON, PARKS AND
OPEN SPACE MAL"IAGER, AL"ID SPECL<U PROJECTS
MAL"IAGER; A.1\fD TO ADD THE FOLLOWING TITLES
- ANIMAL CARE FACILITY MAt"lAGER, BlJDGET
At"ID At"lAL YSrS M.A.NAGER, COMMUNICATIONS
COORDINATOR, DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF, AL"ID FIRE
DIVISION CHIEF
WHEREAS, the Human Resources Department has created new classifications to
bener reflect the needs of the City's workforce; and
WHEREAS, Chula Vista City Charter Section 500(a) requires that all new
unclassified management level positions be adopted by ordinance and a four-fifths vote of
the Council; and
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the Ciry of Chula Vista does ordain as
follows:
SECTION I: That Section 2.05.010 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is hereby
amended as follows:
2.05.10
Unclassified positions established.
In addition to those unclassified positions specifically delineated in Section 500 f
the Charter of the Ciry, there are established the unclassified positions entitled
Adminisrra;ive Services Manager, Advanced Planning Manager, Animal Care
Facility Mana~er. .'\nimal (satrsl ~.1afla;ar, Assistant Chief of poli:e, ,^.ssistant
~g~::~
2-1
DireetE:lr fJf Bud.~zt ana .^..nal::sis, ..^...ssistant Dir~cter sf Buildia; ana IIe~sia;,
Assistant Director of Engineering, Assistant Director of Finance, f.ssisent
Dires:er of H:.!ffiaB Rase1H'ees, :\.3sistant DireEter 0f Plaaaiag, Assistant Director
of Public Works, ,'\.ssistant Dire.tor sf Recrsati0R, Assistant Director of
Redevelopment and Housing, .^;ssis:aat Fire .Chief, .".5sistaat LiBrary Director,
California Border Alliance Group (CBAG) Deputy Executive Director, CBAG
Director - SO LECC, CBAG Administrative Analyst I, CBAG Administrative
Analyst II, CBAG Analyst, CB.'\G Bud;;et ~.1ana;;er, CBAG Executive Assistant,
CBAG Executive Director, CBAG Graphics DesignerlWebmaster, CBf.G Leaa
Pre;;rammer .^,!lalrst, CBAG Management Assistant, CBAG Microcomputer
Specialist, CBAG Network Administrator I, CBAG Network Administrator II,
CBAG Network Manager, CBAG Program Analyst, CBAG Program Manager,
CBAG Regional Computer Forensic Laboratory Network Engineer, Chief sf Staff,
City Engineer, C0a5taliE!r:irenmenlal Pelis)' CSRsultant, Communications
Coordinator. Constituent Services Manager, Deputy Building Official, Deputy
City Manager, Deputv Fire Chief. Development Planning Manager, Direstor ef
Bud;;et and f.naI)'sis, Director ef CommuaicatisRS, Director of Conservation and
Environmental Services, Economic Development Officer, EJ(esOltiye f.ssistaat te
the Cito; ~1ana;;er, Fire Division Chief. Fiscal Operations Manager, Goyernmallt
Relations Liais0R, Human Resources Operations Manager, Office Specialist
(Mayor's Office), Parl:s ana OpeE! lipase Mar.ager, Police Captain, Purchasing
Agent, Real Property Manager, Redevelopment and Housing Manager, Risk
Manager, Senior Council Assistant, Spesial Prej ests ~.1ar.ager, Traffic Engineer,
Transit Coordinator, Transit Manager, Treasury Manager.
SECTION II: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force thirty days from its
adoption.
Presented by
hpl.':oved as to form by /'
.., ! J
", '
. .~ \ I '
i -'l .i /.-1) .
~~,,~,-,",,/kJ, I tr.L~-~ (C//.' )
. 'art ~x Miesfeh \_ ,_.. -- ''--'C....-/
. L0tr'Attomey
Maria Kachadoorian
Director of Financerrreasurer
-~-~~~
~2-2
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
.$} (If::.. ClIT OF
...~ (HULA VISTA
JUNE 16,2009, Item 2:>
ITEM TITLE:
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ESTABLISHING THE APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT
FOR THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009-
2010
SUBMITTED BY:
DIRECTOR OF rSURER'I/k..
CITY MANAGE
ASSISTANT CITY NAGER >---J
REVIEWED BY:
4/5THS VOTE: YES D NO 0
SUMMARY
Article XIIIB of the California Constitution approved by the voters in 1979 and commonly
referred to as the Gann Initiative, requires each local government to establish an Appropriations
Limit by resolution each year at a regularly scheduled meeting or noticed special meeting. The
purpose of the limit is to restrict spending of certain types of revenues to a level predicated on a
base year amount increased annually by an inflation factor.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that establishing the
appropriations limit is not a "Project" as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA
Guidelines because it will not result in a physical change to the environment; therefore, pursuant
to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the actions proposed are not subject 'to
CEQA.
RECOMMENDATION
Council adopts the resolution.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Not Applicable.
3-1
JUNE 16, 2009, Item~
Page 2 of 4
DISCUSSION
Article XlIIB of the California Constitution, approved by the voters in 1979, imposed the
concept of spending limits on local governments. This Constitutional provision and related
implementing legislation specifies that annual increases in appropriations financed from
"Proceeds of Taxes" are limited to a base year (1978-79) amount increased annually by an
inflation factor comprised of the change in population of the City combined with the greater of
the change in new non-residential construction or the change in the California per capita personal
income. By definition, "Proceeds of Taxes" includes such revenues as property taxes, sales and
use taxes, utility users taxes, transient occupancy taxes, and state subventions. Revenues from
other sources like fees/charges and federal grants are considered "Non-Proceeds of Taxes" and
are not subject to the annual spending limit. This calculation has always been perfunctory for the
City of Chula Vista, since the proceeds of taxes for the City are far less than the statutory
appropriation limit.
The State Department of Finance and the San Diego County Assessor's Office are charged with
providing the data necessary for local jurisdictions to establish their appropriation limit.
According to these sources, for purposes of the fiscal year 2009-2010 calculation, the population
increased 1.2% and California per capita personal income increased by 0.62%. New non-
residential construction decreased by -3.5% consequently California per capita personal income
was used in the formula to compute the limit since this increase was higher than the decrease in
new non-residential construction.
The fiscal year 2009-10 Appropriation Limit has been calculated as follows:
Fiscal Year 2008-09 Appropriation Limit
$607,303,566
Increased by an inflation factor composed
of the increases in population and CA
per capita personal income
X 1.0183
Fiscal Year 2009-10 Appropriations Limit
$618.401.675
The "Proceeds of Taxes" as included in the fiscal year 2009-10 Proposed Budget that are subject
to the appropriations limit are estimated to be $84,016,291 (see attachment). Therefore the City
has what is referred to as an appropriation "gap" of$534,385,384 ($618,401,675 - $84,016,291).
Simply stated, this means that the City could collect and spend up to $534,385,384 more in taxes
during Fiscal Year 2009-2010 without exceeding the Constitutional limit.
DECISION MAKER CONFLICT
Staff has reviewed the decision contemplated by this action and has determined that it is not site
specific and consequently the 500 foot rule found in California Code of Regulations section
1 8704.2(a)(I) is not applicable to this decision.
3-2
JUNE 16,2009, lteml
Page 3 of 4
CURRENT YEAR FISCAL IMP ACT
This action will enable the City to appropriate and spend tax revenues estimated at $84,016,291
included in the proposed budget for fiscal year 2009-2010.
ON-GOING FISCAL IMPACT
None.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A - Appropriations Gap Calculation
Prepared by: Phillip Davis, Assistant Director of Finance, Finance Department
3-3
JUNE 16,2009, Iteml
Page 4 of 4
ATTACHMENT A
APPROPRIATION (GANN) LIMIT GAP CALCULATION
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009-010
Proceeds of Taxes
Property Taxes
Sales and Use Taxes
Transient Ocupancy Taxes
Utility Taxes
Other Local Taxes
Real Property Transfer Tax
Business License
State Motor Vehicle Licenses
State Homeowners Property Taxes
Total Proceeds of Taxes
Appropriation Limit
FY 2009-10
Proposed Budget
27,199,440
25,545,500
2,552,514
8,169,144
841,402
1,150,000
18,286,803
271,488
84,016,291
618,401,675
GAP (Under Limit)
(534,385,384)
PI oreeds ci Taxes Cooplred to Legal Spending Unit
",$70)
c
0
~:;ro:J
:a;
:;ro:J
.
$<100
$n:J
$:ill
$11XJ
ro
FY C503
e
_______ e
e
.
FY=
FY07-Q3
FYreal
FYIIl-10
1_ R1:x:e3::EdTaxe; -PwtPiOOO1 Unit I
3-4
RESOLUTION NO. 2009-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ESTABLISHING THE APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT
FOR THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009-
2010
WHEREAS, Article XIIIB of the California Constitution, approved by the voters in 1979,
imposed the concept of spending limits on local governments; and
WHEREAS, this Constitutional provision and related iinplementing legislation specifies that
annual increases in appropriations financed from "Proceeds of Taxes" are limited to a base year
(1978-1979) amount increased annually by an inflation factor comprised of the change in population
of the City combined with the greater of the change in new non-residential construction or the
change in the California per capita personal income; and
WHEREAS, by definition, "Proceeds of Taxes" includes such revenues as property taxes,
sales and use taxes, utility users taxes,. transient occupancy taxes, and state subventions; and
WHEREAS, revenues from other sources like fees/charges and federal grants are considered
"Non-Proceeds of Taxes" and are not subject to the annual spending limit; and
WHEREAS, this calculation has always been perfunctory for the City ofChula Vista, since
the proceeds of taxes for the City are far less than the statutory appropriation limit; and
WHEREAS, the State Department of Finance and the San Diego County Assessor's Office
are charged with providing the data necessary for local jurisdictions to establish their appropriation
limit; and
WHEREAS, according to these sources, for purposes of the Fiscal Year 2009/2010
calculation, the population increased 1.2 percent and California per capita personal income increased
by 0.62 percent; and
WHEREAS, new non-residential construction decreased by -3.5 percent consequently
California per capita personal income was used in the formula to compute the limit since this
increase was higher than the decrease in new non-residential construction; and
WHEREAS, the Fiscal Year 2009/2010 Appropriation Limit has been calculated to be
$618,401,675; and
WHEREAS, the "Proceeds of Taxes" as included in the Fiscal Year 2009/2010 Proposed
Budget that are subject to the appropriations limit are estimated to be $84,016,291; and
WHEREAS, the City has what is referred to as an appropriation "gap" of $534,385,384
($618,401,675 - $84,016,291); and
3-5
Resolution No. 2008-
Page 2
WHEREAS, this means that the City could collect and spend up to $534,385,384 more in
taxes during Fiscal Year 2009/2010 without exceeding the Constitutional limit.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City ofChula Vista
does hereby establish an appropriations limit of $618,401,675 for Fiscal Year 2009/2010.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
~~.._ /1
,// ,'" ~~!. (I, ~I'
\ -t 't J, !
. I ,I i ~
; .j, '(1" I
~'II
. "'\)J("
Bart Mie~fel .'J ,',' '
City ~mey
Maria Kachadoorian
Director of Finance
];l.AttomeyiRESOLUTIONSIFINANCE\AppropriWon Limit for FY 2009-2010_0520 09.do{3 - 6
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
:$\Ift... CITY OF
~ CHUlA VISTA
6/16/09, Iteml
REVIEWED BY:
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING CHANGE ORDERS FOR OTAY
PROJECT, L.P. FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF LA l\1EDIA
ROAD.
DEPUTY CITY MANAGERlDEVELOPl\1ENT SERVICES
DIRECTO~ .
CITYMANAG~
-T 4/STHS VOTE: YES 0 NO [gj
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
SUMMARY
Otay Project, L.P. has constructed La Media Road from Santa Venetia Street to Birch Road, in
conjunction with the development of Otay Ranch Village 6. They have submitted their request for
reimbursement for the construction of La Media Road from Santa Venetia Street to Birch Road.
The request includes Transportation Development Impact Fee ("TDIF") eligible change orders for
landscaping, construction, miscellaneous costs and their associated soft costs. This roadway is
within the Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDIF) program and, therefore, eligible
constmction costs are credited against the payment of TDIF fees for the development. Cumulative
change orders totaling above $50,000 are subject to Council approval.
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 proposed project was
adequately covered in previously certified Otay Ranch Village Six SPA Plan Final Second Tier
EIR-98-01. Thus, no further environmental review or documentation is necessary.
RECOMMENDATION
Council approves the Resolution.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Not applicable.
DISCUSSION
On December 11, 2008, Otay Project, L.P. submitted their request for reimbursement for the
construction of La Media Road from Santa Venetia Street to Birch Road. The request includes
Transportation Development Impact Fee ("TDIF") eligible change orders for landscaping,
construction, miscellaneous costs and their associated soft costs. The change orders can be
attributed to structural section changes and design adjustments to the plans. The current TDIF
4-1
6/I6/09,IteDl~
Page 2 of2
program identifies this portion of La Media Road as Facility No. 51b (See Attachment 2). The
TDIF program is the method used to spread the cost of constructing new circulation element
roadways over the developments that benefit from them. Developers either pay the fee or build new
roadways in a like amount. The City benefits by having usable full width roads constructed instead
of the traditional half-width constructed streets that can occur while waiting for the developer across
the street to develop.
The overall costs of La Media Road (Facility No. 5Ib)
Overall, the total costs for this facility were comparable to the TDIF cost estimate as shown in
Table I below. The total actual costs were slightly higher due to unforeseen field conditions
resulting in street section adjustments and changes in design of La Media Road.
La Media Road Facility No. 51b Actual Cost Cost Estimate % Change
Previously audited components $2,392,453.48
Change Orders $152,668.07
Total $2,545,121.55 $2,335,669.00 8.2%
Table 1. CODlparison of budget to Actuals
Once approved, eligible TDIF costs are deposited as credits in favor of the developer. These credits
can be used in lieu of paying TDIF fees at the issuance of building permit. Approval of tonight's
action will result in the deposit of $152,668.07 credits in favor of Otay Project L.P. Staff
recommends approval of the change orders.
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 IMP ACT
There will be no direct fiscal impact to the City. Costs associated with the processing of this item
will be borne by the developer.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1. Location Map of La Media Road from Santa Venetia Street to Birch Road
Attachment 2. TDIF Estimate for La Media (Facility 51 b)
Exhibit A. Cost breakdown for the construction change associated with the grading of La Media
Road (Facility No. 51 b).
Prepared by: Chester Bautista, Associate Civil Engineer, Engineering Dept.
J :\Engineer\AGENDA\CAS2009\06-16-09\Development Services\La Media Road Change Order Reimbursement 2.doc
4-2
>
ri-
ri-
I--'
.,LJ IT Ii-U1 M E JJ T L
<e"
~
FACILITY 518
La Media Rd /
Santa Venetia to Birch Rd
New 6 Lane Prime Arterial
Length (U): 1,500
J.'.L:!12~Jl..=:-"l"';II:jillL!f~I}.,ll'f.~~~~;:.t~"~lllfI(~UillI
1 Earthwork Linear It 1500 $ 250.00 $ 375,000
2 Drainage Items Linear It 1500 $ 130.00 $ 195,000
3 Surface Improvements Linear It 1 ,500 $ 425.00 $ 637,500
4 Dry Utilities Linear It 1 ,500 $ 60.00 $ 90,000
5 Landscape & Irrigation Linear It 1 ,500 $ 250.00 $ 375,000
6 Misc. Construction Logistics Linear. It 1 ,500 $ 1 0.00 $ 15,000
TOTAL HARD COSTS
SOFT COSTS
Contingency (15% 01 total hard costs inclUding right-aI-way)
Civil Engineering (7.5% 01 hard costs, excludes right-aI-way)
Soils Engineering (15% 01 earthwork costs)
Landscape Architecture (10% 01 landscaping costs)
Surveying (2% of hard costs, excludes right-ol-way)
Utility Engineering/Coordination (3% 01 dry utilities costs)
Inspection/Administration (6% 01 total hard costs including right-aI-way)
Developer Administration (1.75% 01 total hard costs including right-aI-way)
City Project Administration (2% 01 total hard costs including right-aI-way)
TOTAL SOFT COSTS
PROJECT COST
4-4
$
1,687,500
$ 253,125
$ 126,563
$ 56,250
$ 37,500
$ 7,500
$ 2,700
$ 101,250
$ 29,531
$ 33,750
$ 648,169
$ 2,335,669
.
lange r er ar osts
Description Invoice Requested Eligible Change Order
Amount Amount Amount Amount
Park IWl'st LaIlJscajle 111/10;ce 3446 C03 nIY S/Ullit Unit
Concrete J\fedian Strio 406 $ 6.03 SF $ 2,448.18 $ 2,448.18 $ 2448.18 $ 2,448.18
Park IWest Landscape 11moia 3476 C01, CO2 nn' S/Ullit Unit
Condition" 1 $ 1.00 LS $ (2,420.001 $ (2,420.00) $ (2,420.00 $ (2,420.00
Total $ 28.18 $ 28.18 $ 28.18 $ 28.18
Jim 1 Hanis II/floia 66172 on' S/Ullit U"it
Add onc so. ft. inch of AC Pavement CO2 55800 $ 0.25 SFI $ 13,950.00 $ 12555.00 $ 12,555.00 $ 12,555.00
r\C Lcveling to Compcnsate [or Grade
C1"nge CO2 40 $ 84.94 TN $ 3)97.60 $ 3,057.84 $ 3,057.84 $ 3,057.84
CO#3 Rc-LocMe Poles 1 $ 426.36 LS $ 426.36 $ 383.72 $ 383.72 $ 287.79
CO#3 Grind 4345 SF to Tie in lntersetion
Gr;\de Chanp-e Alw Header Tie Cuts, Sween 1 $ 5,174.49 LS $ 5,174.49 $ 4,657.04 $ 4,657.04 $ 3492.78
Total Invoice 66172 $ 20,556.63 $ 18,261.79 $ 18,261.79 $ 19,393.41
.rim T I-Janis TfI/'oite 10074 OTY $/Ullit Unit
Add one Sq. [t. inch of AC Pavement CO2 72000 $ 0.25 SFI $ 18,000.00 $ 16,200.00 $ 16,200.00 $ 12,150.00
Total Invoice 10074 $ 18,000.00 $ 16,200.00 $ 16,200.00 $ 12,150.00
S;'J/ T Harris Tmm;ce 10152 . on' S/Ullit U'tit
cas 1 $ 1,170.00 LS $ 1,170.00 $ 1,053.00 $ 1,053.00 $ 789.75
T ataI Invoice 10152 $ 1,'170.00 $ 1,053.00 $ 1,053.00 $ 789.75
S;,n l Hains Tllf!oi{(! 10301 01Y S/Ullit Unit
:;treet Surface lmorovmenls CO? 1 $ 18,639.40 LS $ 18,639.40 $ 16,775.46 $ 16,775.46 $ 12,581.60
Total Invoice 10301 $ 18,639.40 $ 16,775.46 $ 16,775.46 $ 12 581.60
Sim T Ham.'s Tm'oice 10480 OIT S/Ulli! Ultit
100 Series Poles C08 0.39 $ 67,829.30 LS $ 26,453.43 $ 23,808.08 $ 23,808.08 $ 17,856.06
Total Invoice 10480 $ 26,453.43 $ 23,808.08 $ 23,808.08 $ 17,856.06
Jiml Hams T!1/'oice 10458 -on' a/ullit Unit
Electric C09 I $ 11,500.00 LS $ 11,500.00 $ 10,350.00 $ 10 350.00 $ 7762.50
Total Invoice 10458 $ 11,500.00 $ 10.350.00 $ 10,350.00 $ 7,762.50
5i", J I-lam',! Im'O!(e 10554 -nn' ,F/UIlit LTlIIl
Constrcntiol1 Turn Pocket at La Media C011 I $ 10,443.27 EA $ 10,443.27 $ 9,398.94 $ 9,398.94 $ 7,049.21
ClOd H d C
L!'l
I
q-
Total Invoice 10554 $ 10,443.27 $ 9,398.94 $ 9,398.94 $ 7,049.21
Jim r I-Iani.r [,1/!(}i(e 10676 0"11' S/U,,;t Unit
Additional St,iping COl5 1 $ 5,796.59 EA $ 5,796.59 $ 5,216.93 $ 5,216.93 $ 3,912.70
Total Invoice 10676 $ 5,796.59 $ 5,216.93 $ 5,216.93 $ 3,912.70
Jim [ [-[al1is Im'Ot'ce 10686 DTI' S/U,,;t Unit
C0l6 1 $ 460.00 LS $ 460.00 $ 414.00 $ 414.00 $ 310.50
Coordination of Revised Striping Report #4
C018 j $ 920.00 LS $ 92000 $ 828.00 $ 828.00 $ 621.00
Adiust Pole. D to Grade C021 1 $ 525.00 !}; $ 525.00 $ 472.50 $ 472.50 $ 354.38
Total Invoice 10686 $ 1,905.00 $ 1,714.50 $ 1,714.50 $ 1,285.88
Jim r Hams Im'oice 10703 on' $fU,,;t Unit
100 Setie, Poles C08 0.61 $ 67,82930 LS $ 41,375.87 $ 37,238.29 $ 37,238.29 $ 27,928.71
Total Invoice 10703 $ 41.375.87 $ 37,238.29 $ 37,238.29 $ 27,928.71
5im1 Harris lliltOia 10705 on' S/U,,;t Unit
Reloc:lte Si,rn:ll Controller dud Service C022 1 $ 20,855.48 LS $ 20,855.48 $ 20,855.48 $ 20,855.48 $ 15641.61
Install Pdco S' Extended Mount Traficon
C;lll1meral with Bell BoxC023 1 $ 2,175.00 $ 2,175.00 $ 2,175.00 $ 2175.00 $ 1,631.25
Total Invoice 10705 $ 23,030.48 $ 23,030.48 $ 23,030.48 $ 17,272.86
Jim I H,u77S lJwohe 10720 on- S/U,,;t Unit
!\dd one sq. ft.'inch of AC P;lvement CO2 16337 $ 0.25 LS $ 4,084.25 $ 3,675.83 $ 3,675.83 $ 3,675.83
Eliminllte Item #9 fa C08 C025 -1 $ 5,060.00 LS $ (5,060.0m $ (4,554.0m $ (4,554.00 $ (4,554.00
Final OU:lntitv Adjustment C020 -1 $ 23,138.59 LS $ (23,138.59 $ 120,824.73) $ 120,824.73 $ 120,824.73
Traffic SiRI1:l1 Controller Clultlges C022 0.0099004 $ 22,117.23 LS $ 218.97 $ 197.07 $ 197.07 $ 147.80
T atal Invoice 10720 $ (23,895.37 $ (21,505.83\ $ (21,505.83) $ (21,555.10
5im T I-f,1m:r Im'oia 1072 r on' S/U"iI Ulfi/
Retention fot invoice 10074 1 $ 7,171.32 LS $ 7,171.32 $ 7171.32 $ 1,800.00 $ 1,800.00
Retention for invoice 10152 1 $ 597.00 LS $ 597.00 $ 117.00 $ 117.00 $ 117.00
Retention rot invoice 10:'.01 1 $ 3,693.18 LS $ 3,693.18 $ 1,863.94 $ 1,863.94 $ 1,863.94
Retention for invoice 10480 1 $ 5,881.07 LS $ 5,881.07 $ 5,881.07 $ 2,645.34 $ 1,984.01
Retention for invoice 10676 1 $ 736.37 I.S $ 736.37 $ 579.66 $ 579.66 $ 579.66
Retention fOt invoice 10686 1 $ 6,528.88 LS $ 6528.88 $ 5,83716 $ 190.50 $ 190.50
Itctention for invoice 10458 1 $ 1,685.10 LS $ 1,685.10 $ 1,685.10 $ 1,150.00 $ 862.50
.Retcntion for invoicc 10554 1 $ 1 044.33 LS $ 1,044.33 $ 1,044.33 $ 1,044.33 $ 1,044.33
Retention for invoice 10703 1 $ 5,907.66 LS $ 5,907.66 $ 5,907.66 $ 4,137.59 $ 3,103.19
Retentlon for inv:oice 101720 1 $ 1476.59 LS $ 1476.59 $ 1476.59 $ (2,389.54\ $ (2,395.01
Total Invoice 10721 $ 32,768.32 . $ 29,610.65 $ 11138.82 $ 9,150.11
<D
I
'<t
Hwfro-P/aIlt II/Mice 0030435-JN OTI' $/Ullil Unit
"f\,lulch & GUilr 209600 $ 0.02 SF $ 4,611.20 $ 4,611.20 $ 4,611.20 $ 4,611.20
Total Invoice 0030435-IN $ 4,611.20 $ 4,611.20 $ 4,611.20 $ 4,611.20
/-hdm-Pldlllllllwi" OOJ04J5-1N DTI' S/Unit Ullit
Ivfulch & Guar 157200 $ 0.02 SF $ 3,458.40 $ 3,458.40 $ 3,458.40 $ 3,458.40
Total Invoice 0030435-IN $ 3,458.40 $ 3 458.40 $ 3,458.40 $ 3,458.40
Lw;iadISttipiIU!.. JJ11'()hY? 4340 OTI- $IUllit Unit
I\tedia and Sant\1 VCIlf'.tia 6 $ 200.00 SF $ 1,200.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 1200.0n $ 1,200.00
Total Invoice 4340 $ 1,200.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 1 200.00 $ 1,200.00
I_final'/) Sfribil1_p.. J,f!loke 4479 OD" $/Ullit Ulli!
Delineators for La i\.{edia Road 1 $ 6,453.00 SF $ 6,453.00 $ 6,453.00 $ 6,453.00 $ 6,453.00
Total Invoice 4479 $ 6,453.00 $ 6,453.00 $ 6,453.00 $ 6,453.00
Pacifit'.Ero.rioll CrJltlro! life f1woice 02-545 on- I/Ullit Unit
Slraw \'V'attle 900 $ 2.45 SF $ 2,205.00 $ 2,205.00 $ 2,205.00 $ 2,205.00
Straw \\lilttle 900 $ 2.45 SF $ 2,205.00 $ 2,205.00 $ 2,205.00 $ 2,205.00
Straw \\latt]e 2775 $ 2.45 SF $ 6,798.75 $ 6,798.75 $ 6,79875 $ 6,798.75
StrawW;:tttle 200 $ 2.45 SF $ 490.00 $ 490.00 $ 490.00 $ 490.00
Total Invoice 02-545 $ 11,698.75 $ 11,698.75 $ 11,698.75 $ 11,698.75
l-
I
<:t
Total Hard Costs
$143,027.22
lan!te Or er oft osts
Requested Audited Maximum Eligible Traffic Signal TOIl'
Description Amount Invoices Soft Cost Amount Eligible Change Order
Submitted Eligible
City of Clmb Vista $ 196,966.43 $ 95,950.37 n/a $ 95,950.37 $ 10,75165 $ -
Civil Engineering (7.5% of Construction Hard
Costs) $ 23,308.48 $ 23.308.48 $ 33,52962 $ 23,308.48 $ 452.24 $ 6,281.17
Development Supervision (1.75% of
r:onstruction & Gradirw $ 8,808.30 $ 8,808.30 $ 170.90 $ 2,373.66
St<lking (2% of Constmctjon & Grading) $ 3.659.00 $ 3_659.00 $ 9,579.89 $ 3,65900 $ 70.99 $ 986.03
La I\-'ledia Road Totals $ 223,933.91 $ 122,917.85 $ 51,917.82 $ 131,726.16 $ 11,445.79 $ 9,640.85
Cl
d S
C
Charw:c Order Soft Co~t Ra.tio
26.95%
Hard Costs
Soft Costs
Change OrdcrTotal
$143,027.22
$ 9,640.85
$ 152,668.07
~
Eastern
U~~enrl
eeU
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.
~I(;::.
~
La Media Road Reimbursement
'.lfYf."
oniT^ VI\iV~
A
NORTH
RESOLUTION NO. 2009-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING CHANGE ORDERS FOR OTAY
PROJECT, L.P. FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF LA MEDIA
ROAD.
WHEREAS, Otay Project L.P., the master developer for a portion of Otay Ranch Village 6,
constructed certain facilities associated with the City's Transportation Development Impact Fee,
namely La Media Road, and;
WHEREAS, Otay Project, L.P. has completed construction of La Media Road from Santa
Venetia Street to Birch Road, and;
WHEREAS, Otay Project, L.P. has requested a credit for the construction costs associated
with the construction of La Media Road to be applied against future Transportation Development
Impact Fees (TDIF) for the proj ect; and
WHEREAS, City staff has performed an audit to verify the construction costs of the project
and further verified that La Media Road has been completed in accordance with the approved plans;
and
WHEREAS, based on the audit, City staff has determined that the amount of $152,668.07,
associated with the construction of La Media Road, is eligible for TDIF credit.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City ofChula Vista
approves the change orders for Otay Project, L.P. for the construction of La Media Road, between
Santa Venetia Street and Birch Road.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Gary Halbert
Deputy City Manager
,../
4-9
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
~\~ CITYOF
~CHUIA VISTA
6/16/09, Item 5
REVIEWED BY:
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE SUBDIVISION
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE COMPLETION OF
THE IMPROVEMENTS FOR SAN MIGUEL RANCH PLANNING
AREA K WITH ORA BONTERRA 52, LLC.
DEPUTY ,<;:n.y... MANAGERlDEVELOPMENT SERVICES
DIRECTOP4~
CITY MANAGER JfE5--
I 4/STHS VOTE: YES 0 NO [g]
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
SUMMARY
On January 24, 2006 by Resolution No. 2006-026, Council approved San Miguel Ranch Phase 3
"B" Map for Planning Area K and the associated Subdivision Improvement Agreement. The
Subdivision Improvement Agreement has since expired and a new developer has acquired Planning
Area K. Tonight, Council will consider the approval of a Subdivision Improvement Agreement
with the new owner ORA Bonterra 52, LLC.
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 proposed project was
adequately covered in previously certified San Miguel Ranch SPA and Tentative Maps Final
Subsequent EIR-97-02. Thus, no further environmental review or documentation is necessary.
RECOM1\1ENDA TION
Council approves the Resolutions.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Not applicable.
DISCUSSION
The area is generally located north east of Proctor Valley Road, west ofSR-125, within the area of
San Miguel Ranch Phase 3. Planning Area K consists of 73 numbered lots and two lettered lots
with a total area of 42.127 acres.
On January 24, 2006, Council approved the final map, submitted by the original developers, Proctor
Valley West Partners, LLC. Along with the map, Council also approved a subdivision
improvement agreement associated with Planning Area K. The subdivision improvement
agreement outlines the developer's requirements to construct the internal subdivision
5-1
6/16/09, Item '::>
Page 2 of2
improvements, including public streets, sewer, subdivision survey monumentation and landscaping
for the project.
The original subdivision improvement agreement has passed it's two year term and Planning Area
K has been acquired by ORA Bonterra 52, LLC. ORA Bonterra 52 has provided the City with
replacement bonds to secure the completion of public improvements.
Staff recommends approval of the Agreement The City Attorney has reviewed and approved the
proposed Agreement as to form.
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 IMP ACT
There will be no direct fiscal impact to the City. Costs associated with the processing of this item
will be borne by the developer.
Attachments:
Attachment I. Subdivision Improvement Agreement with ORA Bonterra 52
Prepared by: Chester Bautista, Associate Civil Engineer, Development Services Department
J:\Engineer\AGENDA\CAS2009\06-16~09\I?evelopment ServiceMestatement for San Miguel Ranch 3 .doc
5-2
RESOLUTION NO. 2009-_
/
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE SUBDIVISION
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE COMPLETION OF
THE IMPROVEMENTS FOR SAN MIGUEL RANCH
PLANNING AREA K WITH ORA BONTERRA 52, LLC.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista approved a Final Subdivision
Map and a Subdivision Improvement Agreement for San Miguel Ranch Planning Area K, (CVT
99-04) with Resolution 2006-26 on January 24, 2006; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Area K Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") and the
associated security was for the purpose of insuring the installation of improvements and/or land
development work as required by the Title 18 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code for the
subdivision pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act; and,
. WHEREAS, the SIA required the Developer to complete all Improvement Work, as
defined in the SIA, on or before the second anniversary date of Council approval of the SIA; and,
WHEREAS, the Developer has installed some improvements for Planning Area K, but
has not completed all of the Improvement Work,
WHEREAS, the SIA has expired and ORA Bonterra, LLC has acquired Planning Area K
from the previous developer Proctor Valley West Partners, LLC,
WHEREAS, the ORA Bonterra has provided the City Of Chula Vista with replacement
bonds and has executed a new Subdivision Improvement Agreement for Planning Area K.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does
hereby approve the Subdivision Improvement Agreement between the City of Chula Vista and
ORA Bonterra, LLC, a copy of which shall be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of Chula Vista is hereby
authorized to execute said Agreement. '!~
Presented by A;p/4d as t~ .
; "U?}vW/1
aft Miesfel';V'
City Attorney
Gary Halbert
Director of Development Services
K:\ENGINEER\RESOS\Rt:sos2009\06-09-09\Development Servcies Resos\Reso for Planning;\rea K SIA .doc
5-3
THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT HAS BEEN REVIEWED
AND APPROVED AS TO FORM BY THE CITY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND WILL BE
FORMALLY SIGNED UPON APPROVAL BY
11 CIT~ CO~C~~>//
/,' ! ;.'
~/J1O( ij
! Barte. esfeld
i
City Attorney
Dated: CD ,-,.
SUBDIVISION I R MENT AGREEMENT
BY AND BETWEEN
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND
ORA BONTERRA 52, LLC
FOR THE COMPLETION OF THE
~ROVEMENTSFORSANMUGUELRANCH
PLANNING AREA K
5-4
Recording Requested by:
CITY CLERK
When Recorded, Mail to:
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
No transfer tax is due as this is a conveyance
to a public agency ofless than a fee interest
for which no cash consideration has been paid or
received.
Declarant
SUBDIVISION LWPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, dated , 2009, for reference only and executed on the date
on which the last Party signs this Agreement, by and between THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a
municipal corporation, hereinafter called "City", ORA Bonterra 52, LLC, 10880 Wilshire,
Boulevard, Suite 1420, Los Angeles, CA 90024, hereinafter called "Subdivider" with reference
to the facts set forth below, which Recitals constitute a part of this Agreement. Individually, the
City or Subdivider may be referred to herein as "Party" and collectively as "Parties".
RECITALS:
WHEREAS, Trimark Pacific-San Miguel, LLC submitted a Tentative Subdivision Map
("TM 99-04") to the City OfChula Vista on November 12,1999; and
WHEREAS, on the 29th day of February, 2000, the City Council of the City Of Chula
Vista approved by Resolution No. 2000-068 TM 99-04 subject to certain terms and conditions
listed in Exhibit A, attached ('TM Conditions"); and
WHEREAS, Complete Plans and Specifications for the construction, installation, and
completion of all public improvements and land development work ("Improvement Work")
associated with TM 99-04 ("Deferred Improvements") were 'prepared and submitted to and
approved by the City Engineer as shown in Drawing Set 03-117, Inclusive, and on file in the
office of the City Engineer ("Plans"); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to provisions of the Subdivision Map Act of the State of California
and Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 18.16.210 (together "Code"), Proctor Valley West,
LLC, entered into an Agreement with the City on February 1, 2006 to defer the construction of
Deferred Improvements for a period of two (2) years following the recordation of Final Map No.
15260 and
-1-
5-5
WHEREAS, on January 24, 2006 with Resolution 2006-026, City Council of the City of
Chula Vista approved Final Map 15260; and
WHEREAS, Proctor Valley West, LLC did not complete all of the Deferred
Improvements within the timeframe allotted by the deferral agreement and would like to assign
its obligations to construct, install, and complete the Deferred Improvements to Subdivider and
Subdivider desires to assume such obligations as the new owner of the property known as San
Miguel Ranch, Planning Area "K", (CVT 99-04) ("Subdivision") in order to obtain permits to
further develop the Subdivision;.and
WHEREAS, an estimate of the cost of constructing the Deferred Improvements
according to the aforementioned plans and specifications has been submitted to and approved by
the City in the amount of FIVE HUNDRED FORTY THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED
THIRTY DOLLARS Al'W NO CENTS ($540,430. 00); and
WHEREAS, the City is willing to allow the Assignment and Assumption of the
obligations, provided Subdivider enters into an agreement with City, secured by approved
improvement securities to insure the performance of the Deferred Improvements associated with
the Subdivision pursuant to the requirements of Title 18 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, to
construct, install, and complete, free of liens, at Subdivider's own expense, all of the Deferred
Improvements within two years of the execution of this Subdivision Improvement Agreement
("Agreement"); and
WHEREAS, in consideration of the ability to further develop the subdivision, Subdivider
desires to enter to enter into this Agreement subject to the terms and conditions herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED
AS FOLLOWS:
1. Installation, Construction and Completion:
a. Materials and Improvement Work: Subdivider shall furnish or cause to be furnished all
necessary materials and work required to complete the Deferred Improvements to the
satisfaction and approval of the City Engineer.
b. Monumentation: Subdivider shall install all monuments within thirty (30) days after the
completion and acceptance of the Deferred Improvements.
1. Street Signs: Subdivider has installed or shall install temporary street name signs, if
permanent street name signs have not been installed prior to delivery of combustible
materials on any construction site within Planning Area K..
c. Standards: Subdivider shall perform all Improvement Work in good and workmanlike
manner and in strict conformance with and according to the approved Plans under the
-2-
5-6
direction, to the satisfaction, and subject to the approval of the City Engineer.
d. Time for Completion: Subdivider shall complete all Improvement Work within 2 years
from the date of execution of this Agreement.
e. Compliance with Laws: In the installation, constuction, and completion of the Deferred
Improvements, Subdivider shall comply with all local, City, County, State, and Federal
laws, codes, regulations, ordinances, and policies..
2. Costs:
~{':ijImprovement Work: Subdivider shall be obligated to pay for all costs associated with the
Improvement Work. In no case shall the City of Chula Vista, or any department, board
or officer thereof, be liable for any portion of the costs and expenses of the Improvement
Work, nor shall any officer, his sureties or bondsmen, be liable for the payment of any
sum or sums for aforementioned Improvement Work or any materials furnished therefore,
except to the limits established by the approved improvement security in accordance with
the requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act and the provisions of Title 18 of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code.
b. Processing and Other Expenses: Subdivider shall be obligated and pay for any associated
engineering costs (including plan checking, inspection, materials furnished and other
incidental expenses) incurred by City in connection with the approval of the
Improvement Work and the cost of street signs and street trees as required by City and
approved by the City Engineer. Prior to the recordation of this Agreement, and prior to
the issuance of any permits related to the Subdivision, Subdivider shall deposit with City
a sum of money sufficient to cover said cost, as determined by the City.
3. Care and Maintenance: Until such time as all Improvement Work is fully completed and
accepted by City, Subdivider shall be responsible for the care, maintenance of, and repair of
any damage to, the streets, alleys, easements, water and sewer lines within the Subdivision.
4. Runs With The Land: This Agreement shall burden, encumber, and run with the land and be
binding on the Subdivider and successors in interest regardless of method of transfer,
including devise, sale, gift, and assignment.
5. Security:
a. Performance Bond: Subdivider shall furnish and deliver to the City, simultaneously with
the execution of this Agreement, a Performance Bond in the sum of TWO HUNDRED
SEVENTY THOUSAt'lD TWO HUNDRED FIFTEEN DOLLARS AND NO CENTS
($270,215.00), which security shall guarantee the faithful performance of this Agreement
and the completion of the Deferred Improvements by Subdivider and is attached hereto as
Exhibit nAn.
b. Payment Bond. Subdivider shall furnish and deliver to the City of Chula Vista,
-3-
5-7
simultaneously with the execution of this Agreement, a Payment (material and labor)
Bond in favor of City in the sum TWO HUNDRED SEVENTY THOUSAND TWO
HUNDRED FIFTEEN DOLLARS Ai~D NO CENTS (5270,215.00), to secure the
payment of material and labor in connection with the installation of the Deferred
Improvements, which security is attached hereto as Exhibit "B".
c. Monumentation Bond. Subdivider shall furnish and deliver to the City of Chula Vista,
simultaneously with the execution of this agreement, a Monumentation Bond in the sum
of EIGHT THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS AND NO CENTS ($8,500.00)
to secure the installation of monuments, which security is attached hereto as Exhibit "C".
d. Landscape Bond. Subdivider shall furnish and deliver to the City of Chula Vista,
simultaneously with the execution of this agreement, a Landscape Bond in the sum of
EIGHTY FIVE THOUSAND FORTY SIX DOLLARS AND NO CENTS
($85,046.00) to secure the installation of monuments, which security is attached hereto as
Exhibit "D".
e. Bond Term. The Payment Bond shall remain in full force and effect at least until
completion and acceptance by the City of the Deferred Improvements and all claims for
materials and labor are paid, for a minimum of thirty-five (35) Calendar Days after the
filing of the Notice of Completion, except as otherwise provided by law or regulation.
f. Certificate of Agency. All bonds signed by an agent must be accompanied by a certified
copy of such agent's authority to act.
g. Licensing and Rating. The Performance Bond shall be duly executed by responsible
surety companies admitted to do business in the State of California, licensed or
authorized in the jurisdiction in which the Deferred Improvements are located to issue
bonds for the limits required by this Agreement, secured through an authorized agent
with an office in California, and have a minimum AM Best rating of "A-" to an amount
not to exceed ten percent (10%) of its capital and surplus.
h. Insolvency or Bankruptcy. If the surety on any bond furnished by Subdivider is declared
bankrupt or becomes insolvent or its right to do business is terminated in any state where
any part of the Improvements are located, Subdivider shall within seven (7) Calendar
Days thereafter substitute or require the substitution of another bond and surety,
acceptable to the City.
1. Increase in Amount of Bonds. If, at any time, following the execution of this Agreement,
the estimated costs of the Deferred Improvements exceed, or are anticipated to exceed,
the estimated costs for the Improvement Work, Subdivider shall, within thirty (30)
Calendar Days, increase the amount of the Performance, Payment, and Monumentation
Bonds by the change in the estimated cost.
6. Warranty: Subdivider shall guarantee all Deferred Improvements for a period of one (I) year
from the date of [mal acceptance by the City and shall correct any and all defects or
-4-
5-8
deficiencies arising during such Warranty term. The City may at its discretion require a ten
(10) percent Warranty Bond, prior to releasing the Performance Bond, during the Warranty
term.
7. Withholding of Certificates: No certificate of clearance for utility connections or Certificate
of Occupancy shall issue for any buildings or structures in Subdivision unless or until
Subdivider has completed all Improvement Work, or that portion of said Improvement Work,
as set forth hereinabove serving any buildings or structures ready for occupancy in said
subdivision, and such certificate shall not be issued until the City Engineer has certified in
writing the completion of Improvement Work, or the portion thereof serving, said building or
structures.
8. Indemnity: The Subdivider agrees to and shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its
officers, employee, agents, or volunteers harmless for any injury to person, including death
or dismemberment, or to property occasioned by reason of the acts or omissions of
Subdivider, its agents, or employees, arising out of or related to this Agreement. Subdivider
further agrees to protect and hold the City, its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers
harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, liability, expenses, or loss of
any sort, because of, arising out of, or related to any acts or omissions of Subdivider, its
agents, or employees related to Improvement Work performed under this Agreement;
provided, however, that the approved improvement security shall not be required to cover the
provisions of this paragraph. Such indemnification and agreement to hold harmless shall
extend to damages to adjacent or downstream properties or the taking of property from
owners of such adjacent or downstream properties as a result of the construction of said
-subdivision and the Improvement Work. It shall also extend to damages resulting from
diversion of waters, change in the volume of flow, modification of the velocity of the water,
erosion or siltation, or the modification of the point of discharge as the result of the
construction and maintenance of drainage systems. The approval of plans providing for any
or all of these conditions shall not constitute the assumption by City of any responsibility for
such damage or taking, nor shall City, by said approval, be an insurer or surety for the
construction of the subdivision pursuant to said approved improvement plans. The
provisions of this paragraph shall become effective upon the execution of this agreement and
shall remain in full force and effect for ten (10) years following the acceptance by the City of
the improvements.
Subdivider agrees to and shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City or its agents,
officers, employees, agents, and volunteers from any claim, action, or proceeding against the
City or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul, an approval of
the City, advisory agency, appeal board, or legislative body concerning a subdivision, which
action is brought within the time period provided for in Section 66499.37 of the Government
Code of the State of California.
9. Transfer to City: Upon acceptance of the Deferred Improvements, Subdivider shall grant to
the City, by appropriate conveyance, the Deferred Improvements free and clear of any liens
or encumbrances. Acceptance of any Deferred Improvement shall not constitute a waiver of
any defects or deficiencies.
-5-
5-9
10. Breach or Failure to Perform: In addition to other remedies the City may have under law or
in equity, if the Subdivider fails to complete the Improvement Work to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer within the Time for Completion identified in Section I (d), above, the sums
provided by improvement securities required under Section 5 may be used by City for the
completion of the Improvement Work within and adjacent to said subdivision in accordance
with such specifications herein contained or referred, or at the option of the City, as are
approved by the City Council at the time of engaging the work to be performed. Upon
certification of completion by the City Engineer and acceptance of said work by City, and
after certification by the Director of Finance that all costs hereof are fully paid, the whole
amount, or any part thereof not required for payment thereof, may be released to Subdivider
or its successors in interest, pursuant to the terms of the improvement security. Subdivider
agrees to and shall pay to the City any difference between the total costs incurred to perform
the work, including design and administration of construction (including a reasonable
allocation of overhead), and any proceeds from the improvement security.
II. Miscellaneous:
a. Headings: All article headings are for convemence only and shall not affect the
interpretation of this Agreement.
b. Gender & Number: Whenever the context requires, the use herein of (i) the neuter
gender includes the masculine and the feminine genders and (ii) the singular number
includes the plural number.
c. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures: No suit or arbitration shall be
brought arising out of this Agreement, against the City unless a claim has first been
presented in writing and filed with the City and acted upon by the City in accordance
with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, as same
may from time to time be amended, the provisions of which are incorporated by this
reference as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and procedures used by the City in
the implementation of same. Upon request by City, Subdivider shall meet and confer in
good faith with City for the purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this
Agreement.
d. Reference to Paragraphs: Each reference in this Agreement to a section refers, unless
otherwise stated, to a section this Agreement.
e. Incorporation: All recitals herein and exhibits attached are hereby incorporated into this
Agreement and are made a part hereof.
f. Integration: This Agreement and the Exhibits and references incorporated into this
Agreement fully express all understandings of the Parties concerning the matters covered
in this Agreement. No change, alteration, or modification of the terms or conditions of
this Agreement, and no verbal understanding of the Parties, their officers, agents, or
employees shall be valid unless made in the form of a written change agreed to in writing
-6-
5-10
by both Parties or an amendment to this Agreement agreed to by both Parties. All prior
negotiations and agreements are merged into this Agreement.
g. Severability: The unenforceability, invalidity, or illegality of any prOVlSlon of this
Agreement shall not render any other provision of this Agreement unenforceable, invalid,
or illegal.
h. Drafting Ambiguities: 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 the decision of whether or not to seek advice of counsel with respect to
this Agreement is a decision that is the sole responsibility of each Party. 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.
1. Conflicts Between Terms: If an apparent conflict or inconsistency exists between the
main body of this Agreement and the Exhibits, the main body of this Agreement shall
control. If a conflict exists between an applicable federal, state, or local law, rule,
regulation, order, or code and this Agreement, the law, rule, regulation, order, or code
shall control. Varying degrees of stringency among the main body of this Agreement, the
Exhibits, and laws, rules, regulations, orders, or codes are not deemed conflicts, and the
most stringent requirement shall control. Each Party shall notify the other immediately
upon the identification of any apparent conflict or inconsistency concerning this
Agreement.
J. Assignability: Upon request of the Subdivider, any or all on-site duties and obligations
set forth herein may be assigned to Subdivider's successor in interest if the City Manager
in hislher sole discretion determines that such an assignment will not adversely affect the
City's interest. The City Manager in hislher sole discretion may, if such assignment is
requested, permit a substitution of securities by the successor in interest in place and
stead of the original securities described herein so long as such substituted securities meet
the criteria for security as set forth elsewhere in this Agreement. Such assignment and
approval thereof shall be in writing and in a form approved by the City Attorney.
k. Compliance with Controlling Law: The Subdivider shall comply with all laws,
ordinances, regulations, and policies of the federal, state, and local governments
applicable to this Agreement. In addition, the Subdivider shall comply immediately with
all directives issued by the City or its authorized representatives under authority of any
laws, statutes, ordinances, rules, or regulations. The laws of the State of California shall
govern and control the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
I. Jurisdiction, Venue, and Attorney Fees: The venue for any suit or proceeding concerning
this Agreement, the interpretation or application of any of its terms, or any related
disputes shall be in the County of San Diego, State of California. The prevailing Party in
any such suit or proceeding shall be entitled to a reasonable award of attorney fees in
addition to any other award made in such suit or proceeding.
-7-
5-11
m. Municipal Powers: Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as a
limitation upon the powers of the City as a chartered city of the State of California.
n. Successors in Interest: This Agreement and all rights and obligations created by this
Agreement shall be in force and effect whether or not any Parties to the Agreement have
been succeeded by another entity, and all rights and obligations created by this
Agreement shall be vested and binding on any Party's success'or in interest.
o. No Waiver: No failure of either the City to insist upon the strict performance by
Subdivider of any covenant, term or condition of this Agreement, nor any faiiure to
exercise any right or remedy consequent upon a breach of any covenant, term, or
condition of this Agreement, shall constitute a waiver of any such breach of such
covenant, term or condition. No waiver of any breach shall affect or alter this Agreement,
and each and every covenant, condition, and term hereof shall continue in full force and
effect to any existing or subsequent breach.
p. Signing Authority: The representative for each Party signing on behalf of a corporation,
partnership, joint venture or governmental entity hereby declares that authority has been
obtained to sign on behalf of the corporation, partnership; joint venture, or entity and
agrees to hold the other Party or Parties hereto harmless if it is later determined that such
authority does not exist.
-8-
5-12
SIGNATURE PAGE TWO OF TWO
SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
SAN MIGUEL RA1'oTCH, PLA1~G AREA "K"
(CVT 99-04)
ORA BONTERRA 52, LLC, A Delaware limited Liability Company,
By:
Title:
Jv6
I
By:
Title:
(Attach Notary Acknowledgment)
-7-
5-13
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
State of California
County of Los AnQeles
On May 26, 2009
before me, Veda D. Adams, Notary Public
(insert name and title of the officer)
personally appeared Ira R. Pianko
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be'the pers on~ whose name~) is/~
subscribed to the within instrument and'acknowiedged to me that he/si'le/li,,,,y executed the same in
his/her/tRek" authorized capacity(lest, and that by his/herRI,,,;, signature(ji'j on the instrument the
person(~, or the entity upon behalf of which the pers on(~ acted. executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of Cali fomia that the foregoing
paragraph is true and correct.
J ,- - - - - - - - - -
G. VEDA D. ADAMS
Commlulon II i 788 702' f
! ....0; . Notary Public.. California I
J '. Lo. Ang..'''' County -
I) . . MvComr;' ~res.m2!'2?~2J
5-14
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit "A"
Improvement Security - Faithful Performance
Form: Bond
Amount:
$270,215.00
Exhibit "B"
Improvement Security - Material and Labor:
Form: Bond
Amount:
$270,215.00
Exhibit "C"
Improvement Security - Monuments:
Form: Bond
Amount:
$8,500.00
Exhibit "0"
Improvement Security - Landscape:
Form: Bond
Amount: .
$85,046.00
Securities approved as to form and amount by
City Attorney
Improvement Completion Date: Two (2) years from date of City Council approval of the
Subdivision Improvement Agreement.
J:\Engineer\Landdev\Projects\San Miguel Ranch\';'>l'eighborhood K\SlA - San Miguel Ranch K rev 3.docJ:\Engineer\L
-11-
5-15
......""" ~"..._.-
~~~.. \\\
~-=- J "l, ,\
lj ~rrn lfh: \ ~~ .=- _ ~E~ ~
-----'NI\fr- I..'. \ \ II . II )) - - -
t~8{lf~ (::,rh) ':-- \ "I .1JJc__ ~ ---\-----
~~ y~~tii v~~~tm~,-) _____~
'J11JEi . i-c~=1 ~ v';-' ~. \ ~~" ,-, ~~L'i5.fJ}lEtfJJ ~, / r:
'?Ji~E~>- ~~ ~~ ~ [('i.'.;,'.-,', .... }pm~:".,;,.:.,...,.t---I;7-l. ~. "'/?..,,;{ ~//z,'-lUlLJ.lJ!-l;,
" 1):::: - , '''''-''-''''IT.''T.J "".J I)" h nll
y .--- ___ __ ,i';'M '.. ,C'L.1'"'' 'I:l~~ \..lr" "{", c:::::':"
l~ 7D ~ ~ /"& ~~ ~~fl. ,I, ," , ~"" ~ l:/:;$ifiii/ ~r/t->~~, ~
R~~.' '< ~ -_ .;::::. . /~ ~------- ~\' ", . "'""~ \l M.g el ''''' u, ~~ , ; ~ ';;
r-J{ffk' -t-~F-::H{f - Ji. \", ~ ~: ,,.anch ~ ~ ~I~ '
\\ ff7i0 -:= ~~('27"-:.~_:-;!it;: - "_1- ml~Il_I:
:>~ ~ ~ IJ" 1~f!JA '~. ,~/./ I( ~~ '0- ~y ~~ -
, (;\ \(:X ./111 \ \ V /}A '0-.. wdl ___,..,,;:c:;--) , ~
,1,{' \:\\::: ~0 'V ~ ~II / ~-:
~M,?~" '~ i-~ y ~ ~. ~ ~.~ ,__ " 'Jiq
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City
. 3!i'k {:~==-.:::.\ V A'\:: . ~"JT.-TTI Council and has found no property holdings within
_ ~ =-' ::\'lff\'l:1.\t::- ~c,:_LLLJ-LL?JJ2 ~ 500 feet of the boundaries of the property that is
( __ _, ~. '_ F=~'n-::>)J'~---r7~<,(A: (<;QPIJ Ln-- ~-.....t \ \lr~ subject to this action.
~tf~
~ San Miguel Ranch Area
C1IUIA ViStA
.~ y
~""" .. :7
I I
____L___
I--
..-
A
NORTH
CITY COU NCI L
AGENDA STATEMENT
`~t~i clTr of
CHULAVISTA
6/16/09, Item ~o
ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING THE "POGGI CANYON BASIN
GRAVITY SEWER DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE UPDATE"
REPORT
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE MODIFICATION OF
THE POGGI CANYON BASIN GRAVITY SEWER
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING
ORDINANCE 2716 TO UPDATE THE POGGI CANYON BASIN
GRAVITY SEWER DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE TO PAY FOR
SEWER IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE POGGI CANYON
SEWER BASIN AS A CONDITION OF ISSUANCE OF BUILDING
PERMITS.
SUBMITTED BY: DIltECTOR OF P C
REVIEWED BY: CITY MANAG
ASSISTANT CITY ANAGER ~j~
4/STHS VOTE: YES ® NO ^
SUMMARY
The Poggi Canyon Gravity Sewer Basin Development Impact Fee (DIF) was established on
November 25, 1997 to facilitate construction of the Poggi Canyon trunk sewer, which was
needed to serve properties within the Poggi Canyon Basin. Council will consider the approval of
the first update to the Poggi DIF since its inception, which recommends that the Poggi Canyon
Sewer Basin DIF be reduced from $400 to $265 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU). The
public hearing has been duly noticed.
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) [Creation of government funding mechanisms]
of the State CEQA Guidelines because it does not involve a physical change to the environment.
Any future proposed facility construction will require appropriate environmental review and
determination. Therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines this
activity is not subject to CEQA, thus, no environmental review is necessary.
6-1
6/16/09, Item
Page 2 of 8
RECOMMENDATION
1. Adopt the resolution accepting the Poggi Canyon Basin Gravity Sewer DIF update
report.
2. Conduct the public hearing.
3. Adopt the ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2716.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Not applicable.
DISCUSSION
Background
This discussion represents a brief summary of more detailed information contained in the
attached report titled "Poggi Canyon Basin Gravity Sewer Development Impact Fee Update"
dated Apri12009 (Attachment 1).
On November 25, 1997, Council adopted the Poggi Canyon Gravity Sewer Basin Plan by
Resolution 18824. The basin plan, prepared by Wilson Engineering, accomplished the
following: a) defined the benefit area (see Exhibit A); b) identified the alignment and sizes of
the pipeline that would be needed to serve the benefited properties; c) developed an estimate for
the construction of the required facilities; and d) developed an estimate of the fee that would be
charged, based on the fair share apportionment of costs, for each benefited dwelling unit. At
that same meeting, Council adopted Ordinance No. 2716 establishing the Poggi Canyon Sewer
Basin Development Impact Fee at $400 per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) to fund the
construction of the Poggi Canyon Trunk Sewer.
In the original 1997 basin plan, the proposed Poggi Canyon trunk sewer was broken into reaches
numbered 201 - 221. The reaches delineated areas with significant inflows into the system
from major projects, changes in pipe diameter, or significant changes in grade. As certain
adjacent tributary properties had been developed prior to the imposition of the Poggi
Development Impact Fees, their fair share was not collected; thus, the deficiency would be
considered a City obligation as new development cannot be required to pay for existing
deficiencies. Reaches 201 - 204, 206, and 207 were considered City obligations for this reason.
Reaches 205 and 208 - 221 were considered DIF obligations since they were needed to serve
new development.
Since establishing the Poggi DIF, all reaches of the Poggi Canyon trunk sewer as defined in the
original basin plan have been constructed. However, through additional studies completed since
1997, other facilities have been identified that will be needed to facilitate future development
within the basin. Therefore, it is now necessary to update the DIF to include these additional
improvements in the list of D1F eligible facilities. The update will also ensure that a) fees are
fairly and equitably distributed among the remaining properties within the benefit area; b)
sufficient finding is available to complete the required improvements; and c) updated fund
balance and land use projections are reflected in the program.
6-2
6/16/09, Item
Page 3 of 8
To accomplish these tasks, the City retained Pacific Municipal Consultants (PMC) to prepare all
necessary analysis and documentation in support of an impact fee program meeting the
requirements of Government Code §§66000 et seq. See Attachment 1 for the DIF Update Report.
Current Fee
The 1997 cost estimate for constructing the Poggi Canyon trunk sewer (including soft costs for
design, inspection, DIF administration, and contingencies) was expected to total approximately
56.1 million. The portion of the costs that were considered City obligations was estimated to
total approximately $1.7 million. The remaining estimated construction cost of approximately
$4.4 million for reaches 205 and 208 - 221 was spread among the 10,917 benefited EDUs within
the basin resulting in a fee of $400/EDU. Therefore, on November 25, 1997 Council adopted
Ordinance 2716, establishing the Poggi Canyon Gravity Sewer Basin DIF at $400 per EDU.
Fortunately, the actual cost of the Poggi Canyon trunk sewer segments (including soft costs)
included in the original DIF was significantly less than what had been anticipated in 1997. The
savings were primarily the result of designing and constructing the sewer concurrent with the
above-ground surface improvements. These savings are summarized below in Table 1.
Table 1
Summary of Cost Savings for Originally Anticipated Facilities
Description DIF Obligation City Obligation Total
1997 "Wilson Study" Construction Cost Estimate $ 3,048,000 $ 1,230,000 $ 4,278,000
1997 "Wilson Study" Soft Costs $ 1,328,544 $ 526,440 $ 1,854,984
Subtotal $ 4,376,544 $ 1,756,440 $ 6,132,984
Actual Total Cost of Facilities $ 2,905,999 $ 1,046,032 $ 3,952,031
Savings $ 1,470,545 $ 710,408 $ 2,180,953
Current Proiect Status
Since 1997, all reaches of the Poggi Canyon trunk sewer inchided in the original basin plan have
been constructed. The last of the original DIF facilities, Reach 205, was constructed by the City
in 2005.
In addition to the facilities specifically identified in the Wilson Study, the report contemplated
additional improvements (referred to as the Poggi Canyon Extension) that would be needed to
serve the eastern edge of the basin located east of what is now SR-125. At the time, the
alignment of SR-125 was unknown. Therefore, the Wilson Study recommended Chula Vista
complete an alignment study in the future, identifying the exact location of the Poggi Canyon
Extension, but did not account for the cost of this extension when determining the DIF fee.
Once the ultimate alignment of the SR-125 was known, plans for the development of the land
adjacent to the toll-road were developed, as was a plan to extend the Poggi Canyon trunk sewer.
The sewer extension was to serve two functions: 1) the extension would provide a gravity sewer
system to portions of the Eastlake Greens that were being served by a pump station and force-
main diverting flows into the Telegraph Canyon sewer basin until the Poggi extension could be
6-3
6/16/09, Item ~!J
Page 4 of 8
constructed and 2) the extension would provide sewer service to the Eastlake Land Swap
subdivision located east of SR-125.
The alignment of the extension to serve these projects is generally described as consisting of
three segments. Starting from the SR-125, the extension heads easterly along Olympic Parkway
and is commonly referred to as the "Poggi Extension in Olympic Parkway." From there, the
extension turns to the northeast, splitting the Eastlake Land Swap commercial parcels, and is
commonly referred to as `'Reach 2." Once the extension reaches Eastlake Parkway, it turns north
to connect to existing facilities serving the Eastlake Greens subdivision. This final segment of
the extension is commonly referred to as "Reach 1." (See Exhibit B for the location of each
segment)
Since the Wilson Study was completed, the Poggi Canyon Extension has been constructed in
order to accommodate development within the basin. The Poggi DIF Update proposes to add
two of the three facilities that make up the extension into the Poggi DIF program as described in
more detail below.
Po~¢i Canvon Extension Reach 1:
Construction of Reach I, and the resulting decommissioning of a pump station, was completed in
2008. As previously approved by Council on April 27, 2004 via Resolution 2004-130, the cost
associated with the construction of Reach I was to be funded by Community Facilities District
(CFD) 06-I. As a result, this reach is no[ recommended for inclusion in the Poggi DIF program
even though it is a part of the Poggi Canyon trunk sewer system.
Poeei Canvon Extension Reach 2:
When the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin DIF was established in 1997, the Poggi Canyon Extension
was expected to be a regional facility, serving a number of development projects including
Eastlake Greens and Eastlake Land Swap parcels. After a thorough review of alignment
alternatives, it was decided the best alignment was to construct Reach 2 of the extension through
the Land Swap project. Due to the topography of the area, Reach 2 was constructed as a deep
sewer facility, with portions of the pipe located up to 60' below ground. Due to its extremely
deep alignment, and in an effort to coordinate its construction with that of the Land Swap parcel
above it, the City entered into an agreement with The Eastlake Company that allowed them to
construct the sewer segment and be reimbursed for construction costs. As approved by Council
on April 27, 2004, via Resolution 2004-129, the reimbursement was to be funded by the Trunk
Sewer Capital Reserve Fund. However, as a regional facility serving multiple properties within
the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin, the 2009 Poggi DIF Update proposes adding Reach 2 into the
DIF program, and that the Poggi DIF reimburse the Trunk Sewer Fund for the cost of
construction of the facility. If included, the total amount that would be reimbursed to the Trunk
Sewer Fund would be $1,094,707.
Poggi Canvon Extension in Olympic Parkwav:
In addition to Reach 2, and as identified in the Eastlake/City reimbursement agreement, a short
reach of sewer connecting the system in Olympic Parkway at SR-125 to Reach 2 was constructed
by The Eastlake Company and financed via CFD 06-I. Located downstream of Reach 2, the
Poggi Canyon Extension in Olympic Parkway also serves multiple properties within the Poggi
Canyon Basin, and is therefore considered a regional facility. As such, the 2009 Poggi DIF
Update recommends adding this facility to the Poggi DIF program. With the inclusion of this
6-4
6/16/09, Item
Page 5 of 8
reach as a DIF eligible improvement, the City shall reimburse the CFD in the form of a reduction
in the annual tax levy for the CFD using DIF funds in an amount equal to the construction costs
for the facility which total $24,000. The Eastlake Company has already been reimbursed for the
construction of this reach through CFD 06-I.
In addition to the Poggi Canyon Extension Improvements, the DIF Update report recommends
adding two additional improvements to the DIF program to serve the projected buildout of the
basin. These improvements are briefly described below:
Improvements 1 and 2 (as identified in the DIF Update Report)
Based on updated land use information and current development strategies, approximately 1,400
feet of trunk sewer in Olympic Parkway, located immediately east and west of Brandywine
Avenue, may require upsizing from 18-inch to 21-inch diameter pipe. The cost related to these
two projects is estimated to be $916,300, and is proposed to be added to the DIF program as both
improvements are considered regional facilities serving multiple properties within the benefit
area.
A summary of the proposed Poggi DIF facility costs is shown below in Table 2.
Table 2
Summary of Proposed Poggi Canyon DIF Facility Costs
Description DIF Obligation City Obligation Total
Original Facilities (Actual Cost) $ 2,905,999 $ 1,046,032 $ 3,952,031
Poggi Canyon Extension (Actual Cost) $ 1,118,707 $ - $ 1,118,707
Additional Improvements 1 and 2 (Estimated $ 816,300 $ - $ 916,300
Cost)
Total Cost of Facilities $ 4,941,006 $ 1,046,032 $ 5,987,038
Reimbursements
As the Otay Ranch area developed, the developers of Otay Ranch Village 1, Village 1 West, and
Village 5 constructed portions of the Poggi Canyon trunk sewer concurrently with the
construction of Olympic Parkway, a key transportation link for Otay Ranch. According to
Ordinance 2716, the City, at its option, may reimburse the developer from the DIF fund either in
cash over time as fees are collected, or give a credit against the impact fee for the construction of
eligible improvements. The developers, Otay Ranch Company and McMillin Company, were
ultimately reimbursed for the cost of these facilities through CFD 99-1 and CFD 97-3,
respectively. In addition, many of the merchant builders of these projects within the Poggi basin
also paid DIF fees at the time of building permit issuance. Since the master developers (and
subsequently the CFDs) originally financed the construction of the improvements and DIF fees
were paid at time of building permit issuance, double payment for the construction of these
facilities were made. It is recommended that the City recognize this overpayment and
appropriately plan to reimburse current home owners, as required by Government Code Section
66001(e), for the excess payment to the extent that funds are available following the completion
of all remaining improvements.
6-5
6/16/09, Item~l~
Page 6 of 8
In consideration of projects constructed by developers or other City funds, the Poggi DIF Update
also proposes several other reimbursements be made.
Construction of the originally anticipated facilities considered to be City obligations (reaches
201-204 and 206-207) was funded by the Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund. $1.7M was
transferred from the Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund into the Poggi Canyon Sewer Fund. The
actual cost of the City obligations was less than the dollar amount transferred from the Trunk
Sewer Capital Reserve Fund. The remaining balance of $710,408 was transferred back to the
Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund; however, the interest earned on the full $1.7M while in the
Poggi Canyon Sewer Fund has not yet been reimbursed to the reserve fund. The Poggi DIF
Update recommends transferring the interest back to the Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve fund. As
of June 30, 2008, the total amount of interest earned was $470,556. The amount of interest
earned and returned to the reserve fund will depend upon the date the transfer is made.
With the inclusion of Poggi Canyon Extension Reach 2 ($1,094,707) and the Poggi Canyon
Extension in Olympic Parkway ($24,000) as eligible DIF facilities, reimbursements to the Trunk
Sewer Capital Reserve Fund and to CFD 06-I respectively should be made for advancing the
funds for construction of these reaches.
Reimbursements would only be made once enough DIF fees are collected to fund the cost of the
remaining improvements, or construction of the improvements has been guaranteed through
developer exactions.
Based on permit records the following refunds will need to be made:
Table 3
Summary of Refunds
Developer /Fund Development Refund Amount
Otay Ranch Co Otay Ranch Village 1 $ 443,567
Otay Ranch Co Otay Ranch Village 5 $ 197,200
Otay Ranch Co Otay Ranch Village 1 West $ 204,000
McMillin McMillin Villages 1 and 5 $ 157,408
CFD 99-I $ 19,738
CFD 97-3 $ 283,858
CFD 06-I $ 24,000
Trunk Sewer Capital $ 470,556
Reserve Fund
Tmnk Sewer Capital $ 1,094,707
Reserve Fund
Total $2,895,034
With the exception of those amounts related to the CFDs, the final amounts shall be determined
by the City upon written request for the refunds and submittal of documentation of payment by
the merchant builder or current homeowner, as determined by the City Attorney. The City
Attorney may also request a hold harmless agreement be entered into to protect the City from
disputes arising from the refunds.
6-6
6/16/09, Item ~p
Page 7 of 8
Fee Determination
When the DIF was originally established the total cost of DIF program was spread amongst
10,917 benefited EDUs within the basin. The revised analysis provided in the DIF Update
Report indicates that there will now be a total of 16,443 benefited EDUs at buildout. Of these,
11,433 have been permitted and/or constructed and 5,010 EDUs remain to pay the fee.
As with most programs, there is a cost to administer, prepaze annual reports, oversee, and update
the DIF program, as well as costs to monitor the facilities for the timing of improvements. The
2009 DIF Update, as was the case with the 1997 Wilson Study, includes a DIF administration
component to cover these costs. The DIF Update includes $120,000 for future administration of
the program and recommends the cost be added to the overall DIF program cost.
The proposed fee assumes that collection of approximately $244,160 in DIF fees will not be
realized as building permits for several parcels were issued without collecting the fee. These
parcels include public facilities such as schools, parks and fire stations, as well as some
residential parcels within Sunbow II. These uncollected fees, by law, may not be passed on to
others. When capital improvement projects are created to construct the remaining DIF facilities,
City staff will appropriate the necessary funding using appropriate sewer fund revenues to
account for the $244,160 as needed.
Accounting for the cost of future improvements needed within the basin, refunds,
reimbursements, DIF administrative costs, etc., the Poggi DIF as proposed in this update needs to
account for approximately $3,687,174 worth of expenditures. There are currently $2,361,786
available in the DIF fund, meaning the Poggi DIF must still collect $1,325,388. Spreading these
expenditures across the remaining EDUs within the basin results in a new fee of $265/EDU
($135 less than the current fee). The reduction is primarily due to the following:
a. A significant increase in the number of units within the basin to share the cost of the
facilities.
b. Cost savings realized through the coordinated construction of sewer improvements with
above-ground improvements.
Table 3, shown below, summarizes the calculation resulting in the proposed Poggi DIF Impact
Fee of $265/EDU.
Table 4
Poaai DIF Calculation
Remaining Costs
Remaining Improvements $ 916,300
Reimbursements $ 2,895,034
Administration $ 120,000
Subtotal $ 3,931,334
Less Unrealized Fees $ (244,160)
Total Remaining Costs for Poggi DIF $ 3,687,174
Existing Poggi DIF Fund Balance $ 2,361,786
Total Funds Required $ 1,325,388
Number of EDU's Remaining 5,010
DIF Rate per EDU 6_~ $ 265
6/16/09, Item_(~
Page 8 of 8
Coordination with the Development Communit
Historically, when updating development impact fees, City staff has met with the major
developers affected by the change to review the methodology and findings of the report. In an
effort to reduce the consultant and staff time involved in this process, City staff notified the
major developers of the proposed Poggi D1F Update via e-mail and conventional mail. In the
letter sent to each developer on May 11, 2009, staff directed developers to the City Wastewater
Engineering website where the entire draft Poggi DIF Update could be viewed and/or
downloaded, and asked them to submit comments or questions (if any) to staff electronically.
No comments or questions were received.
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.
CURRENT FISCAL IMPACT
There will be no impact to the General Fund as a result of this Poggi DIF update. The costs
associated with this Poggi DIF update have been funded utilizing the balance of funds in the
Poggi Canyon Trunk Sewer Improvement Project (Reach 205 Upgrades - SW226). That project
was funded with Poggi Canyon Basin DIF funds and it was the last remaining facility to be
constructed based on the original basin plan; consequently, this update was begun as an
extension of staff effort to closeout the project and update the basin plan.
ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT
Although the approval will result in a reduction of the fee, it is projected that at this new fee
level, the remaining EDUs in the Basin will meet the outstanding DIF obligations. When capital
improvement projects are created to construct the remaining DIF facilities, City staff will
appropriate the necessary funding using appropriate sewer fund revenues to account for the
uncollected $244,160 as needed. In addition, the proposed fee accounts for $120,000 for
administration of the DIF program. As a result, there should be no ongoing impact to the general
fund.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1) DIF Update Report ("Poggi Canyon Gravity Sewer DIF Update" dated April
2009)
Exhibit A) Poggi Basin Benefit Area
Exhibit B) Poggi Canyon Sewer Extension
Prepared by: Jim Newton, Senior Civif Engineer, Public Works Department
1:\Engineer\AGENDA\CAS2009\06-16-09\Poggi DIF Update.doc
6-8
ATTACHMENT 1
POGGI
CANYON
BASIN
GRAVITY SEWER
DEVELOPMENT
IMPACT FEE UPDATE
April 2009
PMC'
POGGI CANYON BASIN
GRAVITY SEWER DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE UPDATE
Prepared by:
PMC
6020 CORNERSTONE COURT WEST, SUITE 350
SAN DIEGO, CA 92121
Reviewed By:
JIM NEWTON, SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
WASTEWATER ENGINEERING
APRIL 2009
6-10
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1 Background ...................................................................................... ................................................ i-i
1.2 Purpose .............................................................................................. ................................................1-1
1.3 Recommended DIF Rate ............................................................... ................................................ 1-1
1.4 Mitigation Fee Act ........................................................................... ................................................ 1-5
CHAPTER 2 INTRODUCTION
2.1 Infroduction ...................................................................................... ................................................ 2-1
CHAPTER 3 BASIN DESCRIPTION
3.1 Basin Area ......................................................................................... ................................................ 3-1
3.2 Sewerage Facilities .......................................................................... ................................................3-1
3.3 EDU Projections ................................................................................ ................................................ 3-3
3.4 Diverted Flow EDUs .......................................................................... ................................................ 3-5
CHAPTER 4 FUTURE FACILITIES
4.1 Design Criteria .................................................................................. ................................................4-1
4.2 .Facilities for Future Development ................................................ .................................................4-2
CHAPTER 5 DIF ANALYSIS
5.1 Program Costs ................................................................................. .................................................5-1
5.2 Revised DIF Rate ............................................................................. ................................................. 5-5
CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSIONS
6.1 Recommendations ......................................................................... ................................................. b-1
6.2 Environmental Review ................................................................... ................................................. 6-1
6.3 Annual Adjustment Factor ............................................................ ................................................. 6-1
6.4 Study Limitations .............................................................................. ................................................. 6-2
City of Chula Vsta
April 2009
Poggi Basin Gravity Sewer
Deve/opment lmpad Fee
6-1'1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
D Permit Data for Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin (July 2007)
E Sunbow II (Ayres) payments
F Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin Plan, November 1997
G Detailed Basin Maps and EDU Summary
H Poggi Canyon Model Map, Wastewater Master Plan
Capacity Analyses
J Future Revenues -Estimate
City of Chula Vsta Poggi Basin Gravity Sewer
April 2009 Development lmpad Fee
6 - ii'2
CHAPTER 1 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1 BACKGROUND
The Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin is located in eastern Chula Vista and extends from west of I-805
to the western portions of the Eastlake Development. The Basin includes a signifcant portion of
the O#ay Ranch general planning area situated north of the Wolf Canyon and Salt Creek Basins
and south of the Telegraph Canyon Basin. Approximately 70% of the basin is built out. Figure 1
shows the general location of the basin.
In 1997, Wilson Engineering prepared the Poggi Canyon Basin Gravify Sewer Basin Plan for the
City of Chula Vista (attached as Appendix F). The 1997 Basin Plan detailed the trunk sewer
improvements needed to increase the capacity of the trunk line and to facilitate buildout of the
Poggi Canyon Basin. Based on the findings of the Basin Plan, Council adopted Ordinance No.
2716 (Appendix A) establishing the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin Development Impact Fee (DIF) to
finance the construction of trunk sewer improvements from Main Street, northeasterly to Olympic
Parkway and easterly to SR 125 (Poggi Canyon Sewer InterceptorJ. All improvements that were
included in the original study have been constructed.
1.2 PURPOSE
The purpose of this report is to update the Development Impact Fee (DIF) established in 1997
pursuant to the provisions of California Government Code §§66000 et seq.
The Update of the DIF is recommended for the following reasons:
• To reflect the final construction cost of the Poggi Canyon Sewer Interceptor;
• To add the upstream reach of trunk sewer main between SR 125 and Eastlake Parkway
to the DIF program (Poggi Canyon Interceptor Extension (Reach 2);
To update the Poggi Canyon Basin Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDUs) based on updated
development projections and proposed diversions;
To identify additional Poggi Canyon Interceptor improvements that may be needed to
accommodate additional EDUs to the basin; and
To adjust the fee based on the evaluation of the actual cost of facilities, future
improvement costs, available revenues and number of remaining dwelling units.
1.3 RECOMMENDED DIF RATE
The DIF rate is calculated based on the remaining cost of construction of the recommended
improvements less the available funds and allocated to the remaining number of Equivalent
Dwelling Units (EDUs) within the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin benefiting from the facilities (Area of
Benefit). Spreading the costs on an EDU basis allows for assigning the share of costs in an
equitable manner to all land uses within the Area of Benefit.
Based on final construction costs for the Poggi Canyon Sewer Interceptor, including the reach
from SR 125 to Eastlake Parkway (not included in the 1997 Basin Plan) and future needs for build-
out of the basin, the revenues remaining to be collected from future building permits equal
$1,325,388. Based on updated cost information, additional improvements and fees previously
collected (excluding potential refunds for overpayment of fees) and an increase in participating
City of Chula Vsia
April 2009
Poggi Basin Gravity Sewer
Developmenf lmpad Fee
61-t14
CHAPTER 1 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
EDUs, the DIF rate is recommended to be lowered to $265 per EDU. The estimated revised rate is
shown in Table 1-1.
TABLE 1-1
DIF CALCULATION
Remaining Costs
Construction pending $916,300
Potential Refunds due 7,329,771
Reimburse Trunk Sewer for Interest 470,556
Reimburse Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund' 1,094,707
Future Admin. expenditures 120,000
Subtotal $3,931,334
Less estimated fund balance (2,361,786)
Less future payments/contributions' (244,760)
TOTAL $1,325,3 88
Estimated EDUs remaining 5,010
DIF rate per EDU $265
1 For Poggi Canyon Interceptor Extension -Reach 2 costs.
2 Future payments/contributions related to Sunbow, parks and/or scfiool projects
The fee is proposed to be decreased based on the following changes:
• Construction cost savings due to the sewer being constructed concurrently with the
roadway improvements;
Interest earnings on the fund balance; and
• Increase in the number of participating EDUs based on updated development strategies.
The reduction in fees is partially offset by the need for additional improvements to serve the
additional EDUs projected to be included in the basin based on updated development
proposals.
Poggi Basin Gravity Sewer
Development Impact Fee
City of Chula t.sta
April 2009
615
os a os n y~
® L! Vicinityy MTa~pv
MRE$ ~ Pyyyv
~/
CHAPTER 1 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.4 MITIGATION FEE ACi
As a result of widespread imposition of public facilities fees, the State Legislature passed the
Mitigation Fee Act, starting with Assembly Bill 1600 in 1988. The Act, contained in California
Government Code Sections 66000 et seq., establishes ground rules for the imposition and
ongoing administration of impact fee programs. The Act became law in January 1989 and
requires local governments to document the following when adopting an impact fee:
1) Identify the purpose of the fee;
2) Identify the use of fee revenues;
3) Determine a reasonable relationship between the fee's use and the type of
development paying the fee;
4) Determine a reasonable relationship between the need for the fee and the type of
development paying the fee; and
5) Determine a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the
facility attributable to development paying the fee.
In general, the fee cannot be more than the cost of the public facility needed to
accommodate the development paying the fee, and fee revenues can only be used for their
intended purposes. The Acf also has specific accounting and reporting requirements annually
and every five years for the use of fee revenues.
During the 2006 legislative session, the legislature passed and the Governor signed a measure
that further defines the restrictions that a fee shall not include the costs attributable to "existing
deficiencies."
City of Chula Vsta
Apri12009
61=~ 7
Poggi Basin Grevity Sewer
Developmerrt Impact Fee
CHAPTER 2 -INTRODUCTION
2.7 INTRODUCTION
Wastewater generated within the Poggi Canyon basin is conveyed to the City of San Diego's
Metropolitan Wastewater Department (Metro) sewerage system via the Poggi Canyon
Interceptor, which generally follows Olympic Parkway to Brandywine Avenue and then extends
southwesterly through open space easements and local roads connecting to the Salt Creek
Interceptor in Main Street just west of Melrose Avenue. Flow from the Poggi Canyon and Salt
Creek Sewer Basins continue westward in the Salt Creek Interceptor to a new metered
connection to the South Metro Interceptor west of Interstate 5.
Design criteria, including minimum pipe diameters and slopes, for the Poggi Canyon Interceptor
was provided in the Poggi Canyon Basin Gravity Sewer Basin Plan (Wilson Engineering, 1997)
(Basin Plan). The planning basis for that study included land use information from Tentative Maps
for Otay Ranch Villages 1 and 5, the Otay Ranch SPA 1 Plan, the site utilization plan for Sunbow II
and the General Development Plans for Otay Ranch and Eastlake. The Basin Plan estimated
the total number of projected equivalent dwelling units (EDUs) within the Basin at buildout and
identifed the sewer improvements required to serve future development. The Basin Plan utilized
two different design criteria to size the facilities. Sizing of new or replacement sewer was based
on 280 gallons per day (gpd) per EDU while analysis of the hydraulic capacity of existing sewer
facilities was based on a generation rate of 265 gpd per EDU as specified in the City's current
Subdivision Manual. The analysis in this study is based on a sewage generation rate of 265 gpd
per single-family home.
This study updates the number of equivalent dwelling units (EDUs) within the Poggi Canyon
Sewer Basin based on information provided in the City's Major Project Development Status
report dated July 2, 2007, City's Permit Plus database, Chula Vista Geographic Information
System (GIS), Tentative Maps, Technical Sewer Studies and Final Maps.
The 1997 Basin Plan provided a basis for the establishment of a Poggi Canyon Gravity Sewer DIF
to fund construction of the Poggi Canyon Interceptor. The Interceptor was completed in three
general phases:
1) Construction of a new sewer in easements behind Oleander and Melrose Avenues and
in Otay Valley Road and Palm Avenue from the Sunbow II Development westward to a
connection to the Date-Faivre Trunk Sewer near Otay River Valley. The sewer was
subsequently connected to the Salt Creek Sewer in Main Street, just west of Melrose
Drive;
2) Construction of a new sewer in Olympic Parkway from Brandywine Avenue easterly to SR
125; and
3) Improvement of the existing sewer beneath I-805 (Reach 205) just east of Talus Street.
A fourth phase from SR 125 to Eastlake Parkway (not included in the 1997 Basin Plan) completed
by Eastlake Company is recommended to be added to the DIF program. The construction was
pre-funded by the Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund pursuant to an agreement between
Eastlake Company and the City. In addition, a portion of the sewer in Olympic Parkway, west of
Brandywine was upsized to 21-inch diameter pipe in conjunction with aroad-widening project
that relocated a segment of the sewer. This latter improvement was not funded by Poggi
Canyon Basin Sewer Impact Fees.
City of Chula testa
Apri12009
rogg~ iras~n c.raviry newer
Development lmpad Fee
6z=~I 9
CHAPTER 2 -INTRODUCTION
This report identifies reaches of sewer within Sunbow II and downstream of the Sunbow II project
that may require upsizing to accommodate the flows based on updated land use information.
The 1997 Basin Plan calculated a Development Impact Fee (DIF) based on the total estimated
cost of construction of the recommended improvements spread over the total number of future
EDUs within the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin (with the City funding reaches 201 through 204 and
reaches 206 through 207 for existing EDUs). In 1997, by Ordinance No. 2716, the fee was
established at $400 per EDU based on the recommendations of the 1997 Basin Plan. Table 2-1
presents the DIF calculation for the existing fee of $400 per EDU.
TABLE 2-1
1997 PROGRAM COST AND FEE
Basin EDUs 13,505
Less existing EDUs in western area of basin' Z (1,795)
Less existing EDUs within Eastlake Greens'~~ (794)
Participating EDUs 10,917
Total Project Cost $6,132,984
City Contribution
Reach 201 $378,000
Reach 202 -
Reach 203' 600,000
Reach 204 -
Reach 206 196,000
Reach 207 56,000
Subtotal $1,230,000
Other (soft costs, contingency, administration) 526,440
Total Ciry Contribution $1,756,440
Total DIF Cost $4,376,544
Participating EDUs 10,917
Cost per EDU in 1997 $401
Noes
1 t 997 Existing EDUs near 1-805 - 1,794.5 and 7997 Existing ED Us in Eastlake - 793.8
(based on 1 EDU - 280 gprl).
2 Ciry funded existing EDUs share of improvements to Poggi Canyon sewer.
3 The City's contribution for reaches 20Z, 203 and 204 was limited to $600, 000.
Poggi Basin Gravity Sewer
Development Impact Fee
~22~
City of Chula testa
April 2009
6-21
CHAPTER 3 -BASIN DESCRIPTION
3.1 BASIN AREA
The Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin extends southwesterly from the Eastlake Greens subdivision to
the just north of the Otay River Valley, west of Interstate 805. The basin lies between the
Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin to the north and the Wolf Canyon and Salt Creek Sewer Basins to
the south. The westernmost portion of the basin, generally to the west of Brandywine Avenue,
includes residential development that existed prior to establishment of the fee program. To the
east of Brandywine Avenue, the basin encompasses existing and planned development within
the Sunbow II Sectional Planning Area, the Otay Ranch General Development Plan, and the
Eastlake GDP. Figure 2 shows the sewer basin and development boundaries.
Several major project developments, south of Olympic Parkway, are naturally tributary to one of
three sewer basins, Poggi Canyon, Wolf Canyon and Salt Creek. Although both the Poggi
Canyon and Satt Creek Tunk sewers have been constructed, Rock Mountain Road Sewer, which
is required to serve the projects within the Wolf Canyon, Basin, has not been constructed.
Consequently, some of the projects that are tributary to that basin (i.e. Village 7 and the Eastern
Urban Center - EUC) have designed portions of their projects to sewer to either Poggi Canyon
Basin or Salt Creek Basin on a temporary or permanent basis. Figure 2 identifies these areas.
As a development condition to permanently divert flows into the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin, the
developer should be required to pay the Poggi Development Impact Fee for any diverted EDUs.
One concern to be addressed when diverting flows is the capacity of the sewer accepting
additional flows. This is addressed in Chapter 4.
3.2 SEWERAGE FACILITIES
Major facilities that serve the Poggi Canyon Basin include the Poggi Canyon Interceptor
identified in the 1997 Basin Plan and the reach of sewer from SR 125 to Eastlake Parkway (Poggi
Canyon Interceptor Extension -Reach 2) as shown in Fgure 2.
The 1997 Basin Plan included all of the reaches of the Poggi Canyon Interceptor (from the
connection to the Dafe-Faivre Trunk Sewer eastward to SR-125.) Funding for construction of
these reaches was included in the current Poggi Canyon Gravity sewer DIF. The Poggi Canyon
Interceptor Extension -Reach 2, east of SR 125, was not addressed in the 1997 Basin Plan other
than to indicate that there were design constraints for providing gravity sewer and eliminating
the pump station. Eastlake Company (Eastlake) has completed the construction of the Poggi
Canyon Interceptor Extension -Reach 2 under an agreement with the City. The agreement
allowed pre-funding of that project with funds from the Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund. The
City has completed the audit for the project and reimbursed Eastlake for the costs incurred.
POGGI CANYON INTERCEPTOR
The Poggi Canyon Interceptor is an 18-inch to 21-inch diameter Tunk sewer (except for under 1-
805 which is a 27-inch diameter reach) that conveys all wastewater generated within the Poggi
Canyon Basin. Construction of the Interceptor from a connection to the Date-Faivre Trunk Sewer
to SR-125 was completed in 2002. The entire length of the Interceptor, except the reach under 1-
805 (Reach 205J, was constructed by private developers and financed through the existing
Poggi Canyon Gravity Sewer DIF either through cash reimbursement or credit of future DIF
payments. The construction of approximately 660 feet of 27-inch reach of the Interceptor under
I-805 (Reach 205) was completed in 2005 by City contract and funded from DIF funds.
City of Chi
Aprif 2009
61-ti12
Poggi Basin Gravity Sewer
Development Impact Fee
CHAPTER 3 -BASIN DESCRIPTION
With completion of the Salt Creek Sewer in 2005, the city connected the Poggi Canyon Sewer
interceptor to the Salt Creek Sewer in Main Street.
Eastlake Company completed construction of the Poggi Canyon Interceptor Extension -Reach
2 in 2005. In March of 2008, the City reimbursed Eastlake Company for construction of this
improvement pursuant to an agreement between Eastlake Company and the City.
POGGI CANYON INTERCEPTOR EXTENSION
Portions of Eastlake Greens, including the high school, are within the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin
but initially used a pump station to pump its sewer flows to Telegraph Canyon Basin. Pumped
flows were necessary to accommodate the Eastlake Greens development ahead of the
construction of the Poggi Canyon Interceptor in Olympic Parkway. Based on approved
development plans for Eastlake Parkway and the Eastlake Land Swap subdivision, and
selection of a preferred alignment after thorough study, the Poggi Canyon Interceptor was
extended from SR 125 to serve the eastern portions of the basin. The final design included deep
reaches of sewer in the Land Swap Subdivision and a portion cf Eastlake Parkway that range
from 20 to 60 feet deep. These reaches were constructed as dual, concrete-encased sewers
with access provided by cast-in-place reinforced concrete vaults. Slide gates were provided in
the vaults to control flow between the dual sewers to facilitate maintenance of the deep
reaches. This deep sewer enabled the City to prcvide gravity sewer to portions of Eastlake,
consistent with Council Policy No. 570-03, a policy that discourages approval of permanent
sewer pump stations in lieu of viable gravity alternatives. After substantial negotiation, the final
segment, located within the County Water Authority easement was completed in 2008. The City
has since decommissioned the pump station and the previously diverted flows are now flowing
by gravity to Poggi Canyon Basin. These flows were considered in the 1997 Basin Plan.
The Poggi Canyon Interceptor Extension consists of two reaches, Reaches 1 and 2. Reach 1
extends the sewer from the Land Swap commercial parcels, northerly in Eastlake Parkway to the
pump station. Reach 1, excluding the decommissioning of the pump station, will be funded
utilizing CFD 06-I bond proceeds as previously approved by Council. Reach 1 is not
recommended to be a DIF eligible improvement. Reach 2 is serving the southern portion of the
Land Swap subdivision and begins at the Poggi Canyon Interceptor just east of SR-125,
extending northeastward through the Eastlake Land Swap Commercial parcels to Eastlake
Parkway. Pursuant to a Reimbursement Agreement approved by Council in April 2004
(attached as Appendix B), the City reimbursed Eastlake Company for its eligible costs for
constructing Reach 2 from Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Funds. As Reach 2 is serving the same
function as the Poggi Canyon Interceptor identified in the 1997 Basin Plan, it is now
recommended that Reach 2 be included in the 2009 Update as an eligible DIF facility and be
funded with Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin DIF funds instead of Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Funds.
This recommendation is based on:
• Poggi Canyon Interceptor Extension -Reach 2 is a trunk sewer and is an extension of the
sewer that was included in the 1997 Basin Plan (Reach 221). Construction of Reach 2 has
been completed.
• Eastlake Land Swap parcels were required to participate in the DIF program. Reach 2
serves these parcels.
• Upon build out of the basin, there will be sufficient funds to reimburse the Trunk Sewer
Capital Reserve Fund $1,094,707. After setting aside $1.3 million for potential
overpayments, reimbursing the Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund $470,556 for interest
Poggi Basin Gravity Sewer City of Chula trsfa
Development /mpad Fee April 2009
p-713
CHAPTER 3 -BASIN DESCRIPTION
earned, and setting aside $120,000 for future administrative costs for the program (see
Table 5-4), there is an estimated $441,000 (of the $1,094,707) currently available to
reimburse the Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve fund. The requirement to consfruct the future
improvements should be placed as a condition to development whereby the developer
receives credit for construction of Poggi trunk sewer improvements in-lieu of paying the
impact fee.
Inclusion of Reach 2 and its costs in the DIF program will not increase the fee.
CONNECTION FROM REACH 2 TO SR 125
In addition to Reach 2 as identifed in the Eastlake/City agreement, a short reach of sewer
connecting the sewer in Olympic Pkwy at SR 125 to Reach 2 was constructed by Eastlake
Company and financed via CFD 061. By now identifying this segment of sewer as a DIF project,
the CFD shall be reimbursed the cost of construction for that segment.
EASTLAKE PARKWAY PUMP STATION
The Eastlake Parkway Pump Station is located adjacent to Eastlake Parkway just north of the
San Diego County Water Authority easement. The station was constructed in 1990 to temporarily
pump flows generated in the Eastlake Greens subdivision, which is located in the eastern
portion of the Poggi Canyon Basin, to the Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer. Upon completion of
the remaining reach of the Poggi Canyon Trunk Sewer (i.e. the portion under the San Diego
County Water Authority Aqueduct), the City decommissioned the pump station, directing flows
to the Poggi Canyon Interceptor via the Poggi Canyon Extension. The cost to decommission the
Eastlake Parkway pump station will be borne by the City, with funds from Sewer Service
Revenues consistent with Council Policy 570-03.
Fgure 2 shows the location of the improvements.
FUTURE FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS
Based on updated land use information and potential diversion of flows, both interim and
permanent, several constructed segments of Poggi Canyon Interceptor may need to be
replaced with larger diameter pipe or parallel reaches constructed. See discussion in Chapters
4 and 5.
3.3 EDU PROJECTIONS
For financial analysis, the land uses for each property are converted to Equivalent Dwelling Units
(EDUs), where one EDU represents the estimated sewage generation rate of asingle-family
residence. EDUs for various land uses are established by comparing the sewage generation rate
for a given land use to that of asingle-family residence. Table 3-1 summarizes the sewage
generation rates and EDU equivalency factors for various land uses. The EDU conversion factors
are based on a single family dwelling unit sewage generation rate of 265 gallons per day, as
established in the City's Subdivision Manual.
April 2009
Poggi Basin Gravity Sewer
Development Impact Fee
-32 4
CHAPTER 3 -BASIN DESCRIPTION
TABLE 3-7
EDU CONVERSION FACTORS
BASED ON THE 265 GPD/EDU
CarttiU`se ~!~_ ~-& t„ Se+agewFCa+~~Bate1 w`"~ ~ w ~LTET+.Fsetnr
Residential -SFD 265 gpd/DU 1.00/DU
Residential -MFD 199 gpd/DU 0.75/DU
Commercial/Industrial 2,500 gpd/acre 9.43/acre
Multi-Story Commercial 0.072gpd/sf 0.272/1,000 sf
High School 20 gpd/student 0.08/student
Junior High School 20 gpd/student 0.08/student
Elementary 15 gpd/student 0.06/student
Park 500 gpd/acre 1.89/acre
CPF 2,500 gpd/acre 9.43/acre
gpd: gallon per day
DU: dwelling unit
CPF: community-purpose facility
SFD: single-family dwelling
MFD: multi-family dwelling
Multi-Story Commercial: based on EUC Technical Sewer Study for high-rise non-residential land uses assuming a
floor area ratio of 0.8 (2,500 gpd per acre - (0.8 x 43,160 sf/acre) - 0.072 gpd/sf).
The above EDU conversion factors for non-residential land uses are slightly different than shown
in the 1997 Basin Plan because that study was based on 2B0 gpd per EDU, not 265 gpd per EDU.
LAND USE PROJECTIONS
Land use and population projections for ultimate buildout of the basin were estimated from City
permits and GIS data, SPA plans, Tentative Maps, and available improvement plans. Existing
(permitted) parcel information was obtained from City records and development projections
provided by Basin developers where necessary. Table 3-2 shows development projections on an
EDU basis.
The industrial parcels for Sunbow II, the community purpose facility parcel in Otay Ranch Village
5, portions of Otay Ranch Villages 6 and 12 (Freeway Commercial), Otay Ranch Villages 2 and
7, the Eastern Urban Center (EUC) and Eastlake Land Swap project have remaining EDUs to
develop within the basin. Table 3-2 provides a summary, by project, of the remaining EDUs. For
additional project detail refer to Appendix G for maps and land use information.
Poggi Basin Gravity Sewer City of Chula Vista
Development Impact Fee Apri12009
6'~2 5
CHAPTER 3 -BASIN DESCRIPTION
TABLE 3-2
EDU BALANCE FOR FEE
Existing Development' 875 875 - 875 -
Existing Development ~ 963 963 963 -
Sunbowll' 1,944 1,428 1,944 516
Miscellaneous" 366 45 366 327
Village 1 West 520 520 520 -
Village 2 2,780 242 2,780 2,538
OR Village 1 1,164 1,164 1.164 -
OR Village Ss 580 538 SSO -
MM Village 1/5 323 323 323 -
OR/MM Village 6 2,321 2,166 2,321 155
Village 76 833 354 833 479
Village 12 (Fq 1,137 648 1,137 489
EL Landswap 2,208 2,125 2,208 83
EUC' 189 - 240 429 429
Total 16,203 11,391 240 16,443 5,010
Notes:
1 Basin west of I-805
2 This area was called "Sunbow 1" in the Village 7 Conceptual Sewer Study and the Overview of Sewer Service for Village 2, 3 & 4,
but is actually the area east of I-805 and west of Sunbow II.
3 Remaining EDUs is for the industrial site.
4 Includes Medical parcels north of Sunbow II (109 EDUs) and OWD parcel in Village 5 (257 ED Us).
5 OR Village 5 CPF site (42 EDUs) is assumed to be in CFD 99-1 and to use credit in lieu of paying fee at time of building permit.
6 Village 7 interim EDUs are not shown as paying DIF.
7 EUC is based on [he preferred alternative of 529 ED Us at 215 gpd/EDU converted to 265 gpd/EDU basis or 429 EDUs.
The Total Remaining EDUs reflects permits that have not been issued as of July 1, 2007.
3.4 DIVERTED F~ow EDUS
As mentioned previously, the Eastern Urban Center development proposes to permanently
divert sewage flows from Salt Creek/Wolf Canyon Basins to the Poggi Canyon Basin based on
the most current grading proposal. Asa condition of development for this project, the
developer should be required to pay into the Poggi Sewer DIF and the DIF program would be
City of Chula testa Poggi Basin Gravity Sewer
April 2009 Development Impact Fee
6~=~16
CHAPTER 3 -BASIN DESCRIPTION
updated to reflect the costs related to the additional improvements needed to serve the basin
at build-out based on these additional flows. Table 3-2 identifies the proposed tributary EDUs,
including the diverted EDUs. Based on the development plans for the Eastern Urban Center,
there will be 240 "diverted" EDUs, or a total of 429 EDUs from EUC. The developer of Otay
Ranch Village 7 proposes to divert 464 EDUs to Poggi Basin on a temporary basis, until such time
as the extension of the Rock Mountain Trunk Sewer (Wolf Canyon basin) is constructed
connecting to the Salt Creek Interceptor.
~ The PBS&J Study for EUC, dated January 2008, shows a maximum of 580 EDUs to Poggi Sewer
Basin; the preferred alternative limits this to 529 EDUs based on 215 gpd per EDU. The EDU figures
for EUC in Table 3-2 are adjusted to the DIF basis of 265 gpd per EDU. For actual diverted areas
refer to PBS&J Study for EUC.
Poggi Basin Gravity Sewer
Development /mpad fee
City of Chula testa
Apri12009
6~~t 7
Sewer Pump Station
Village 13
Easlem UNan
Cenly
VM ;
Y.......
...../
Legend
O cM mcrvma viola
L__I PopBl Lanyan eeeM
Q oeaelapmem axu~.rv
Pmpeaee mlenm nawaaa
Aloe Flowa to Two Basins
ma Sexar Maln
~ Nola PeX OI POpeI OIF
~ NMaPatlol POB91 Uff-Undertomlrvdlon
je$ ReeN Number
pj] Nola NUmLer per NMTAP
iO Eelenslm ~ ReeN NumUer
xnln' EIIL Flows LIm11eE to a38 EONS
1 LPo 0 I.B'.%1
® Poggi Canyon Basin
FEa " PMG
-~~
CHAPTER 4 -FUTURE FACILITIES
4.1 DESIGN CRITERIA
The design criteria used for the sizing of the proposed improvements for the Poggi Canyon Sewer
Basin are in accordance with the City's Subdivision Manual. New sewers shall be designed so
that the estimated flow depth does not exceed 75% of the pipe diameter (for pipes sizes of 12-
inch in diameter or greaten. While this is the criteria for new construction, the .trigger for
construction of replacement or parallel sewer pipe is when the depth of flow exceeds 85%. This
latter criterion has been used in recent City sewer basin studies as well as to identify projects for
the Capital Improvement Program. The design criteria used far determining the size of new
facilities is shown in Table 4.1.
TABLE 4-1
GRAVITY SEWER DESIGN CRITERIA
s
~.,
m Manning's n .012
Pipe Diameters greater than 12"
Peaking Factor
d/D - .75 new construction
CVD-$W01
Sewage generation factors are critical for the appropriate sizing of ultimate sewer facilities.
Table 4-2 summarizes the sewage generation factors used in this report for different land uses
within the Poggi Canyon basin.
TABLE 4-2
SEWAGE GENERATION FACTORS
~' ~ ' i r ~allrl. ~ti~ -~~ ~ ~ ^ ~ z`c ., y A,aerage. Da,1)y ~rp.~x
tact ., ~r siR?h`F a' nz q, ~ ur _ -a.~a"~~ `~a ^. .. a ~ _._
Single-Family and Condominium Detached 265 gpd/dwelling unit
Single-Family Attached 199 gpd/dwelling unit
Multi-Family 199 gpd/dwelling unit
Commercial/Industrial 2,500 gpd/acre
Medical 2,500 gpd/acre
Multi-Story Commercial 0.072 gpd/sf
Elementary School 15 gpd/studeni
Junior High School 20 gpd/student
High School 20 gpd/student
Community Purpose Facility 2,500 gpd/acre
Parks 500 gpd/acre
Multi-Story Commercial based on Eastern Urban Center flours outlined in the report titled °Eastern Urban
Center Technical Sewer Study, January 2008, Update 3." It reflects a generation rare of 2,500 gpd/acre
converted to 0.072 gpolsf.
Elementary school capacity estimated at 800 students.
Junior High school capacity estimated at 1,400 students.
High schoo! capacity estimated at 2,400 students, except for Otay Ranch High School with a current
enrollment of 3,000 students.
City of Chula Wsta
April 2009
Poggi Basin Gravity Sewer
Development /mpacY Fee
-~30
CHAPTER 4 -FUTURE FACILITIES
4.2 FACILITIES FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
In 1997, the City had its consultant, Wilson Engineering, prepare the Poggi Canyon Basin Gravity
Sewer Basin Plan that identified the trunk sewer improvements that would be needed to
accommodate build-out of the Poggi sewer basin. That study provided the basis for the initial
impact fee progrdm. The City has since prepared a more comprehensive plan, the Wastewater
Master Plan (May 2005). The plan provides a detailed model of the sewage flows in Poggi basin
demonstrating adequate capacity of the Poggi basin sewer system based on calibrated flow
data (and assuming the improvements identified in the 1997 Basin Plan are constructed)2.
Recent technical sewer studies indicate that Reach P270 is the first critical reach to analyze for
capacity constraints and that upgrading this reach from an 16-inch diameter pipe to a 21-inch
diameter pipe may be needed. The City presently monitors this reach of pipe through its on-
going Infrastructure Flow Monitoring Program which involves the installation of portable flow
meters at various critical locations citywide ensuring that the City has current and adequate
information on the impacts of existing and new development on the City's wastewater
collection system.
There is a need to re-evaluate the adequacy of other reaches of the Poggi trunk sewer based
on current development proposals reflected in the following approved documents:
• Overview of Sewer Service for Otay Ranch Village 2, 3 and a portion of 4 (Dexter Wilson
Engineering, February 2006);
Village 2 Substantial Conformance Tentative Map (Hunsaker and Associates, dated
February 12, 2007) reflecting updated land use information;
• Eastern Urban Center Technical Sewer Study (PBS&J, January 2008, Update #3);
Village 7 Conceptual Sewer Study (PBS&J, April 14, 2004).
Table 4.3 identifies the development project and estimated EDUs based on Table 4.2 and on
final map and/or approved tentative map information and the above-listed documents. The
EDUs were then used to estimate whether the Poggi trunk sewer system could accommodate
the ultimate, build-out flows.
z Refer to Chula Vista Wastewater Master Plan (May 2005), page 4-34.
Poggi Basin Gravity Sewer City of Chufa t rsta
Development Impact Fee April 2009
~~
CHAPTER 4 -FUTURE FACILITIES
Existing Development'~~ 875 875 875 -
Existing Development z,3 963 963 963
Sunbow II° 1,944 1,428 1,944 516
Medical Center area° 109 45 109 64
OR Village 1 West° 520 520 520 -
OR Village 245 2,780 242 2,780 2,538
OR Village 1° 1,164 1,164 1,164 -
ORVillage 5° 580 538 580 42
OWD parcels 257 _ 257 257
MM OR Villages 1/5° 323 323 323 -
OR/MM Village 6° 2,321 2,166 2,321 155
OR Village 7° 833 354 833 479
OR Village 7lnterim 210 464 464 254
OR Village 12 (FC)° 1,137 648 1,137 489
EL Greens and landswap° 2,208 2,125 2,208 83
EUC°~6 189 - 281 470 470
Subtotal 16,203 17,601 745 16,948 5,347
Less Interim EDUS (464) (254)
Total 16,484 5,093
1 Basin west of 1-805. Based on 1997 Basin Plan (pg A21 and 622) at 265 gpd per EDU.
2 Basin east of 1-805. This area was called 'Sunbow I" in the Village 7 Conceptual Sewer Study and the Overview of Sewer Service
for Village 2, 3 & 4, but is attually the area east of 1-805 and west of Sunbow 11. EDUS based on units identified in 1997 Basin Plan
(pg A21 and 822) at 265 gpd per EDU.
3 Refer to 1997 Basin Plan for Ciry contribution of 1,765 ED Us for Existing Development and for 794 EDUS for Eastlake Greens.
4 Figures based on Appendix and 1 EDU - 265 gpd.
5 OR Village 2 units based on TM Substantial Conformance.
6 EUC based on maximum of 580 ED Us shown in Table 5 of EUC Technical Sewer Study PBS&l, 1/2008, converted to 265 gpd/EDU
basis or 470 ED Us.
7 Based on Major Project Development Status dated July 2, 2007.
The following reaches of Poggi Canyon Trunk Sewer Interceptor were considered in varying
detail (node locations are shown on Fgures 2 and 3):
Reaches from Main Street to south of Olympic Parkway (between nodes P102 and P240);
• Reaches in Olympic Parkway beginning at Brandywine Classics and west of Brandywine
Avenue (between nodes P240 and P270); and
City of Chula Vista
April 2009
64=33 2
Poggi nasin Gravity Jewer
Development Impact Fee
TABLE 4-3
EDUS FOR CAPACITY ANALYSIS
CHAPTER 4 -FUTURE FACILITIES
Reaches in Olympic Parkway east of Brandywine Avenue (upstream of node P270).
Using Manning's equation to determine depth of flows, the flow in two reaches of pipe may
exceed 85% of the pipe diameter (or d/D of .85) at build-out of the basin. The following reaches
should be monitored to determine the need for replacement and/or for construction of parallel
sewer lines. Refer to Pigure 3 for improvement location.
• Reaches in Olympic Parkway at Brandywine between nodes P253R3 and P2704; and
• Reaches in Olympic Parkway within Sunbow east of Brandywine Avenue between nodes
P270 and P305s.
Table 4-4 shows the project flows and corresponding capacity measured as the percentage of
d/D for the reach of sewer between Nodes P253R and P270. The design capacity of the pipe at
0.5% slope and 85% full pipe flow, is 12,175 EDUs. To accommodate the flows reflected in Table
4-4, the reach will need to be improved before permits are issued for an additional 2,457 EDUs.
TABLE 44
CAPACITY ANALYSIS NODES P253R TO P270
Exceeds
Maximum P253R-P270 18" Diameter 15,110 6.65 10.3 100%
Exceeds
Permanent P253R-P270 18" Diameter 14,646 6.44 10.0 100%
Exceeds
Committed P253R-P270 18" Diameter 14,365 6.32 g.g 100%
Permitted/Built P253R-P270 18" Diameter 9,763 4.29 6.6 691
See Table 4-3 and Appendix I for EDU summary at specific nodes.
Permanent based on Maximum ED Us less 464 interim Village 7 EDUs.
Committed based on Maximum EDUs less 464 interim Village 7 EDUs and less 281 EUC EDUs yet to be approved.
Remaining capacity at d/D of .85 is approximately 2, 457 EDUs (12,175 EDUs less 9,718 EDUs).
Analysis is based on 1 EDL/ - 265 gpd.
For DIF purposes, capacity based on n-0.01?, peak factor of 1.66 and slope of 0.5%. Slopes range between 0.5 % and 1.8 %
Table 4-5 shows the project flows and corresponding capacity measured as the percentage of
d/D for the reach of sewer between Nodes P270 and P305. The design capacity of the pipe at
0.5% slope and 85% full pipe flow is 12,175 EDUs and at 0.6% slope and 85% full pipe flow is 13,339.
To accommodate the flows reflected in Table 4-5, the reach will need to be improved before
permits are issued for 3,588 EDUs.
3 Manhole 3, Station 35+95.63 per drawing 001 10-04.
^ Manhole 33A, Station 223+71.50 per drawing 97-344.
s Manhole 6, Station 65+75.00 per drawing 99-385.
Poggi Basin Gravity Sewer City of Chula ~sfa
Development /mpad Fee Apri12009
64-~ 3
CHAPTER 4 -FUTURE FACILITIES
Maximum P270. P305 16" Diameter 13,869 6.10 g.q Exceeds
100% 94%
Exceeds
Permanent P274 P305 18" Diameter 13,406 5.90
- 9.1
100% 88°/
Exceeds
Committed P276~ P305 18" Diameter 13,125 5.77 8.9 100% 83%
Permitted/Built P270. P306 18" Diameter 8,587 3.76 5.8 63% 59%
See Table 4-3 and Appendix I for EDU summary at specific nodes.
Permanent based on Maximum EDUs less 464 interim Village 7 EDUs.
Committed based on Maximum EDUs less 464 interim Village 7 EDUs and less 397 EUC EDUs yet to be approved.
Remaining capacity at d/D of .85 is approximately 3,588 EDUs (12,175 EDUs less 8,587 EDUs).
Analysis is based on 1 EDU - 265 gpd.
For DIF purposes, capacity calculated based on n-0.012, peak factor - 1.66 and slope - 0.5%. Slopes range between 0.5% and
2.98%.
Several other reaches, where flow is between 75% and 85% of full pipe flow, should be
monitored as well. The status of each reach is summarized in Table 4-b. Node numbers are
keyed to Figures 2 and 3. Calculations are included in Appendix I.
TABLE 4-6
CAPACITY SUMMARY OF POGGI CANYON INTERCEPTOR
P102-P740 21" Diameter
P740.P175R 21" Diameter
P175R-P195 27" Diameter
P195-P230 21" Diameter
P230-P240 21" Diameter
P240-P253R 21" Diameter
P253R-P270 18" Diameter
P270-P305 18" Diameter
P305-P310 18" Diameter
P310-P345 18" Diameter
P348-P365 18" Diameter
P365-P405 18" Diameter
P405-P410 18" Diameter
Upstream of P410 18" Diameter
3.'t"w yiQ zor'~'~ a , ! .Redammend;tttart, ~.. ,.~
. w _.
75%-85% Monitor
75% or less NA
75 % or less NA
75 % or less NA
75%-85% Monitor
75 %-85% Monito r
Exceeds 85% Upgrade, monitor for timing of improvements
Exceeds 85% Upgrade, monitor for timing of improvements
75% or less NA
75% or less NA
75 °!°-85 % Monitor
75°/° or less ~ NA
75%-85 % NA -Permanent EDU flow is less than 75 % .
75% or less NA
Only the 18° diameter trunk sewer was analyzed upstream of P410.
City of Chula Vsla
April 2009
b`~53 4
Pogg~ uasm Gravity Sewer
Development Impact Fee
TABLE 45
CAPACITY ANALYSIS NODES P270 TO P305
CHAPTER 4 -FUTURE FACILITIES
Improvements that are recommended for inclusion in this update to the DIF program are based
on the City's criteria to upgrade reaches of sewer with depths of flow exceeding 85%. The
improvements are discussed below.
IMPROVEMENT 1 -BETWEEN NODES P253RAND P27O
The existing sewer in Olympic Parkway downstream of Brandywine Avenue is an 18" diameter
pipe as shown on drawings 97-344 and 00110. Anew 21-inch diameter pipe for this reach at'/.
full would accommodate approximately 16,254 EDUs. Comparing to the Maximum Project EDUs
of 15,110 shown in Table 4-4, the 21-inch diameter pipe would accommodate the maximum,
permanent and committed flows projected within the basin. The cost to increase the size of the
sewer pipe in this reach is proposed to be added to the DIF program. The cost estimate assumes
replacement of the sewer between nodes P253R and P270.
It is recommended that additional sewer modeling and monitoring be undertaken to determine
if refinements to the study data would demonstrate adequate capacity for the existing 18-inch
pipe. The most critical reach of pipe is between nodes P265 and P270.
IMPROVEMENT 2 -BETWEEN NODES 270 AND 305
The existing sewer in Olympic Parkway upstream of Brandywine Avenue is an 18" diameter pipe
as showr~ on drawings 99-386 through 99-373. Anew 21-inch diameter pipe for a portion of this
reach at'/, full would accommodate 16,254 EDUs. Comparing to the Maximum Project EDUs of
13,869 shown in Tables 4-5, the 21-inch diameter pipe would accommodate the maximum,
permanent and committed flows projected within the basin. The cost estimate assumes
replacement of the sewer between nodes P270 and P305.
It is recommended that additional sewer modeling and monitoring be undertaken to determine
if refinements to the study data would demonstrate adequate capacity for the existing 18-inch
pipe. The most critical reaches of pipe are between nodes P270 and P275 (0.5% slope)and
between nodes P295 and P305 (0.6% slope).
Poggi Basin Gravity Sewer City of Chula Vista
Development /mpad Fee Apri121N19
6t.4 5
RancM1
1 -Weal
Sunbow II
Dlay RancM1 VIIIaBe 2
Legend
L._I Pygi Gnyan 9e.ln
oeeel.omem enone.w
P~.Poaee Imenm Rnw Mea
® Polemiel oi.enee Fl.w Are.
Mee FMwa b Two Baelns
5¢wBr Mal.
~ Imp.vemanlr-UPgratle la ]1'
® Inlpovemenl2-UpgratleW21'
]a5 Rea`h Number
2] Notle N~m~br perWWMP
iO Ealenaim-ReaM NUmaer
'oo o ao Q
f~ N
figure 3
Poggi Canyon Basin Detail
Y1VIC
-~.~
CHAPTER 5 -DIF ANALYSIS
5.1 PROGRAM COSTS
5.1.1 CURRENT DIF PROGRAM
The 1997 Basin Plan established the projects that are eligible for DIF funding. These projects
include construction of approximately 29,200 feet of sewer main (Reaches 201 through 221) that
constitute the Poggi Canyon Interceptor. The 2009 Update to the DIF program adds Poggi
Canyon Interceptor Extension -Reach 2 (the reach of sewer across the Eastlake land swap
commercial parcels) to the program and identifies additional improvements needed to serve
forecast development in Poggi basin. The entire Interceptor as identifed in the 1997 Basin Plan
and extension, except Reach 205 and a portion of Extension -Reach 1, has been constructed
by developers. (Figure 2 identifies the reaches.) Chapter 4 discusses additional improvements
that may be needed to serve build-out of the basin if the City allows the Eastern Urban Center
and Village 7 to divert project flows to Poggi. Table 5-1 identifies the estimated cost for the
additional improvements and Table 5-2 provides construction costs for all projects.
5.1.2 PROJECT COSTS AND OUTSTANDING CREDITS
All known necessary improvements identified as regional sewer facilities in the 1997 Basin Plan
within the Poggi Canyon Basin have been completed, including Reach 205. Non-regional sewer
improvements recently constructed within the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin include a remaining
portion of the Poggi Canyon Interceptor Extension -Reach 1, within the San Diego County Water
Authority Right of Way, and the decommissioning of the Eastlake Parkway Pump Station. The
construction of the remaining portion of the Poggi Canyon Interceptor Extension -Reach 1 is
eligible to be financed utilizing CFD 06-I bond proceeds (not DIF eligible) and the
decommissioning of the Eastlake Parkway Pump Station will be funded utilizing Sewer Service
Revenue Funds in accordance with City of Chula Vista Policy No. 570-03.
Based on the provisions of Sections 15 and 16, of Ordinance No. 2716, a developer who agrees,
or is required as a condition of approval of a development permit, to construct a segment of the
facilities would be entitled to receive a reimbursement or credit at the City's option.
Poggi Canyon Interceptor Reach 201-207
Reaches 201 through 204 and 206 through 207 were constructed by Ayres Land Company in
2001 and the developer was fully reimbursed for these costs. The final construction cost
amounted to $1,046,032.
Poggi Canyon Interceptor Reach 208-213
Ayres Land Company constructed reaches 208 to 213, which are eligible for DIF credits. Based
on the information provided by the developer, it was determined that the credit for Ayres Land
Company for constructing Reaches 208 to 213 amounted to $136,205. All of this credit has been
applied to Sunbow II building permits. (Note that the City upsized a portion of this reach of
sewer in connection with CIP STM 344, Drawing 00-110, but apparently was not funded from
Poggi Sewer DIF funds.)
City of Chula ~sfa
April 2009
Poggi Basin Gravity Sewer
Development Impact fee
65-~38
CHAPTER 5 -DIF ANALYSIS
Poggi Canyon Interceptor Reach 205
The City constructed reach 205 in 2005 and the final construction cost for the project amounted
to $1,041,283. In addition, $393,635 was expended for staff time for a total project cost of
$1,434,918. The Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin DIF funded Reach 205.
Poggi Canyon Interceptor Reach 214-217
Reaches 214 to 217 were constructed by the Otay Ranch Company and costs reimbursed from
CFD 99-1 funds. Based on the construction cost audit, the cost for these reaches is $638,748.
Poggi Canyon Interceptor Reach 218-219
Reaches 218 to 219 were constructed by the McMillin Companies and costs reimbursed from
CFD 97-3 funds. Based on the construction cost audit, the cost for these reaches is $412,938.
Poggi Canyon Interceptor Reach 219-221
Reaches 219 to 221 were constructed by the Otay Ranch Company and costs reimbursed from
CFD 99-1 funds. Based on the construction cost audit, the cost for these reaches Is $283,190.
Poggi Canyon Interceptor Extension
The Extension -Reach 2 (across the Eastlake Land Swap commercial parcels) was constructed
by Eastlake Company. Based on the construction cost audit, the cost for this reach is
$1,094,707. Reimbursement to Eastlake Company from the Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund
was made in March 2008 pursuant to an agreement between Eastlake Company and the City.
It is recommended that the DIF reimburse the Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund for pre-funding
of the improvements.
In addition, a short segment of sewer in Olympic Parkway from SR 125 to the Interceptor
Extension -Reach 2 was constructed by Eastlake Company and financed via CFD 061. Based
on the bid for this segment, the cost of this reach is $24,000. Reimbursement of these costs has
been paid from the CFD to Eastlake Company. With the inclusion of this reach as a DIF eligible
improvement, the City shall reimburse the CFD from the DIF funds for this cost.
Capacity Enhancement Improvements
Based on currently approved land uses, the 18-inch diameter sewer pipe in Olympic Parkway
east and west of Brandywine Avenue, will exceed the pipe capacity of 85% full pipe flow. The
costs to upsize the reaches to 21-inch diameter sewer pipes are included in the update to the
DIF program.
Table 5-1 summarizes the future cost of improvements and Table 5.2 summarizes the overall costs
of the program.
Poggi Basin Gravity Sewer City of Chula testa
Development Impact Fee April 2009
tb-~3 9
CHAPTER 5 -DIF ANALYSIS
TABLES-1
FUTURE CONSTRUCTION COSTS
n , ,,,' , Naffe e'~,", ~~ x1" y" ftnprevementt~ °F ~ :.i?,r~"" '~rx :Eclfatton ~ 1 ~u~~ ~1,~ 4~+•r~ ~~lengtf[~41? gz~ OaSfsn aP '~'
- , ~: ;
~~ , . .. .
P253R-P270 ~ Upsize 18" to 21" Olympic Pkwy west of Brandywine Ave 680 $434,500
P270-P305 Upsize 18" to 21 " Olympic Pkwy east of Brandwine Ave 754 $481,800
Total $916,300
Unit cost of $639 based on unit cost of $365 per linear foot for 18" ro 24' diameter pipe plus 15 % for design and inspection, 2S%
contingency and 35 % premium for job size.
TABLE $-2
PROGRAM COSTS
DeveTaper ~ its,;
t4n frYterceptor •, "~ " " ':? arc ~
i
` `; '
' Pa
p
i Eara ~ v ""' u~x Cast ':
, ~
u .~
g
r
t ,
Constructed Project Costs
Reaches 207-204, 206-20T Ayres/City $1,046,032
Reach 205 City/DIF 1,434,918
Reaches 208-213' Ayres 736,205
Reach 214 to 277 O[ay Ranch Co. 638,748
Reach 218 to 219 McMillin 412,938
Reach 219 to 221 Otay Ranch Co. 283,190
Poggi Extension in Olympic Pkwy' Eastlake 24,000
Poggi Extension" Eastlake ~ 1,094,707
Subtotal $5,070,738
Future Construction Costs
P253R-P270 Olympic Parkway west of Brandywine Ave. $434,500
P270 - P305 Olympic Parkway east of Brandywine Ave. $481,800
Subtotal $ 97 6,300
Miscellaneous Cost
Updates/staff administration' $306,200
Project Total $6,293,238
Less City contribution (Reaches 201-204, 206-207)6 $(1,046,032)
DIF Tatal $5,247,206
1 Ayres payments dated 12/16/98, 1/25/00, 12/18/00, and 3/8/01 - $1,042,120. The $1,046,032 is based on $1,756,440 transfer in
from Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund less $710,408 transferred back.
2 Fina! audit completed for $111,632. Audit is pending for CO 99 for $12,756. Includes 9.S% estimated soft costs on total of
$124,388.
3 This segment is from SR 125 [o Station 246+35 as shown on Owg 0202404. The cosu are based on the change order information
and were initially funded by CFD 061. Reimbursement [o CFD 061 is due.
4 Eastlake reimbursed from Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund in March 2008. Portion (in Olympic Parkway from 9ft 125 to the land
swap) funded in CFD 061 in the amount of $24,000. Portion in Eastlake Parkway is not DIF eligible and is eligible to be funded
via CFD 061.
5 Administration costs include future costs of $120,000.
6 Represents cost of reaches 201-204 and 206-207. In 1997, it was estimated to be $7,756,440.
City of Chula Ysfa Poggi Basin Gravity Sewer
Apri12009 Development Impact Fee
6~-340
CHAPTER S - D1F ANALYSIS
5.1.3 OTHER DIF OBLIGATIONS
As identified in the 1997 Basin Plan, the City was to contribute to the cost of construction for
Reaches 201 through 204 and Reaches 20o through 207 because these reaches, located west of
Oleander Avenue, would serve existing development as well as future development within the
basin and required upsizing at the time the DIF was established. Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve
Funds, from revenue generated from development connection charges, were used to pay for
these reaches. 8y Resolution No. 18823, Council appropriated and transferred $1,756,440 to the
Poggi Canyon Sewer Fund to finance this portion of the Poggi Canyon trunk sewer. The final
construction cost for Reaches 201 through 204 and Reaches 206 through 207, paid to Ayers Land
Company, amounted to $1,042,520.76 (not including $3,511 assumed reimbursed to City for its
related costs). The balance of $710,408 was transferred back to the Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve
Fund. However, interest earnings from the $1,756,440 still remain in the DIF fund. Based on
information provided by the City's Finance Department, through June 30, 2008, $470,556 shall be
transferred from the DIF program to the Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund. This transfer is
reflected in the updated fee rate. The documentation for payments to Ayres is included in
Appendix E.
In several Otay Ranch neighborhoods, both Otay Ranch Company and McMillin Company
constructed the improvements as well as the builder/developer paying the fee. As such, refunds
estimated in the amount of $1,329,771 should be made to account for this overpayment of fees.
Table 5-4 reflects the amounts. Appendix D contains a summary of the building permit data
regarding payments. Costs associated with preparation and administration of the DIF, are
included in the Poggi Basin DIF.
5.1.4 AVAILABLE REVENUES
Through June 30, 2008 the City has collected $2,988,700 in DIF fees for the construction of the
required facilities. In addition, the fund has earned an additional $937,171 in interest both on the
fees collected and the transfers made to the Fund from the Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund.
Table 5-3 shows the amount collected since the inception of the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin DIF.
TABLE $-3
REVENUES AND ESTIMATED FUND BALANCE
1998
1999 $- $3,200 $128,370 $131,570 $583,901 $1,756,440 $1,304,109
2000 1,304,109 18,800 75,141 93,941 115,895 1,282,155
2001 1,282,155 503,953 84,511 588,464 389,573 1,155 1,482,201
2002 1,482,201 515,142 136,667 651,809 98,286 (18,697) 2,017,027
2003 2,017,027 298,886 102,926 401,812 139,640 14,570 2,293,769
2004 2,293,769 709,879 29,553 739,432 135,955 37,747 2,934,993
2005 2,934,993 266,430 86,011 352,441 159,377 (201,638) 2,926,419
2006 2,926,419 436,715 76,486 513,201 941,103 201,638 2,700,155
2007 2,700,154 235,695 64,589 300,284 41,334 (710,408) 2,284,696
2008 2,284,696 0 117,143 117,143 3828 0 2,361,786
TOTAL $2,988,700 $937,171 $3,925,871 $2,644,892 $1,080,807
Poggi Basin Gravity Sewer City of Chula Vsta
Development Impact Fee Apri12009
~~41
CHAPTER 5 -DIF ANALYSIS
Revenues of $48,986 (approximately 122 EDUs at $400/EDU) are not included in the 2008 data
because the permit data is only to July 1, 2007.
REMAINING PROGRAM COSTS
Table 5-4 presents the remaining costs to the program. Approximately $1.6 million is required to
complete the funding of the program.
TABLE $-4
REMAINING PROGRAM COSTS
H ~ k' 3`w a t ~,~ ~~rseY, r _ ~ ,' e~S ~~ "?.-~ I # ~ ~gi fEr' "~""''
`~Y .`~' rc~,*m. ~srx,3s ?'; :T,'. ° ~ ~r.~t u~_,~ °r„R$.~~',,+F~*am'rva,'Y.;'~saz Fels iNOi45L'u t~w,^'y, a,i.°,
Potential Refunds due' $443,567 ORC Village 1
797,200 ORC Village 5
204,000 ORC Village 1 West
19,738 CFD 99-1
757,408 Mclvlillin Villages 1/5
283,858 To CFD 97-3
2000 To CFD 061
Subtotal $7,329,771
Poggi Extension -Reach 2 $1,094,707 Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund
Future interest payment to Trunk Sewer Fund' 470,556 Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund
Future construction costs 976,300
Future costs (administratioN $720,000
Total $3,931,334
Revenues available $2,361,786
Revenues needed $1,569,548
1 See Appendix C for summary of refunds.
2 Estimated through Lune 30, 2008. Actual amount will depend on date of repayment.
3 Funds available to reimburse Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund for Poggi Extension -Reach Z: $2,361,786 - $1,329,771 -
$470,556-$120, 000- $441, 459 of the $1, 094,707.
The above table includes costs of improvements not previously identified as being needed to
serve the forecast build-out of the basin. See Chapter 4 for a discussion of the capacity
enhancements.
5.2 REVISED DIF RATE
Based on Table 5-4, approximately $1,329,771 needs to be reimbursed to specific developments
and CFDs as well as $1,565,263 to the Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund.
The fee per EDU may be calculated by dividing the total remaining program costs by the
estimated number df future EDUs in the Basin. Table 5-5 presents this calculation. The revised
Development Impact Fee is $265 per EDU.
City of Chula testa
April 2009
Poggi Basin Gravity Sewer
Development Impact Fee
6~=54 2
CHAPTER S -DIF ANALYSIS
TABLE 5-5
DIF CALCULATION
`- t~ 6yi+y+r rcln ~~ ' ~ ci ~.M a x t~ "*., t°ti,~~ ,"-7 r",=p ~` ~~M.'x~'e~'' ~ e-e, yu ,:
Remaining Costs
Canstrudion pending $916,300
Potential Refunds due 1,329,771
Reimburse Trunk Sewer for Interest 470,556
Reimburse Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund' 1,094,707
Future Admin, expenditures 120,000
Subtotal $3,931,334
Less estimated fund balance (2,361,786)
Less future payments/contributions' (244,160)
TOTAL $1,325,388
Estimated EDUs remaining 5,010
DIF rate per EDU $265
1 For Poggi Canyon Interceptor Extension -Reach 2 costs.
2 Future payments/contributions related to Sunbow, tifedical Center, and/or school projects
The fee is recommended to be reduced to $265 per EDU. This is mainly due to the following
reasons:
• Construction cost savings due to the sewer being constructed concurrently with the
roadway improvements;
• Interest earnings on the fund balance; and
• Increase in the number of participating EDUs based on updated development strategies.
These reductions are partially offset by the addition of improvements to the, program to
accommodate the additional EDUs due to intensification of land uses and potential diversion of
flows.
Table 5-6 provides a summary of the proposed and current Development Impact Fee
calculated on a per EDU basis for the various land uses within the Poggi Canyon Basin based on
Table 5-5.
Poggi Basin Gravity Sewer
Development Impact Fee
City of Chula Ysta
April 2009
6~~ 3
CHAPTER 5 -D1F ANALYSIS
Single-Family Residential 1 EDU/DU $265/DU $400/DU
Multi-Family Residential 0.75 EDU/DU' $199/DU $300/DU
Commercial/Industrial/Medical 9.43 EDU/acre $2,500/acre $3,572/acre
Community Purpose Facility 9.43 EDU/acre $2,500/acre $3,572/acre
Multi-Story Commercial 0.272EDU/ksf $72.08/ksf na
Hotel 0.33 EDU/room $88/room na
Parks/Recreation 1.89 EDU/acre $500/acre $716/acre
High School 181.13 EDU/site $48,000/site $68,544/site
Junior High School 105.66 EDU/site $28,000/site $39,984isite
Elementary School 45.28 EDU/site $12,000/site $17,152/site
7 Single-Family Residential includes detached condominium projects.
2 High-rise office based on 0.072gpd/sf.as identified in the EUC T echnical Sewer Study, (lanuary
2008, Update #3).
3 Refer to Table 4.2 for sewage generation rates.
The EDU rates for high schools is based on 2,400 students per high school multiplied by 20 gpd
per student, for junior high/middle schools it is based on 1,400 students per school multiplied by
20 gpd per student and for elementary schools it is based on 800 students multiplied by 15 gpd
per student.
City of Chula Vsfa
April 2009
Poggi Basin Gravity Sewer
Development Impact Fee
6~-~44
TABLE 5-6
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE PER LAND USE CATEGORY
CHAPTER 5 - DIF ANALYSIS
For comparison purposes, Table 5-7 outlines the 1997 Costs and the Updated 2009 Costs.
TABLE 5-7
COMPARISON OF CO5T5 1997 TO 2009
u ~.~,_.'' }y, ~ ,,,, a.. ~ 's .,"~';., -t ,w{ ~~ 4~. ~ '- ~'$s, ;=<B9~,t v~'~r'!~'EO(A~i
Basin EDUs 13,505 16,443
Less existing EDUs in western area of basin (1,795) (1,828)
Less existing EDUs within Eastlake Greens (794) (794)
Participating EDUs 10,917 13,821
Total Project Cost
City Contribution
Total DIF Cost
Fees needed to complete program'
Remaining EDUs
Cost per EDU
$6,732,984 $6,293,238
($1,756,440) ($1,046,032)
$4,376,544 $5,247,206
$4,376,544 $1,325,388
10,977 5010
$401 $265
' Does not reflect an estimated $244,160 as identified in Appendix J for 2009 program.
Poggi Basin Gravity Sewer
Development Impact Fee
City of Chula testa
Apri12009
~5
CHAPTER 6 -CONCLUSIONS
6.1 RECOMMENDATIONS
To provide adequate funding for construction of facilities through the Poggi Canyon Gravity
Sewer DIF, the following measures are recommended:
1) Update the costs based on construction cost information, building permit data, and
credit summaries as identified in this report.
2) Add Poggi Canyon Sewer Interceptor Extension -Reach 2 (through the Eastlake land
swap commercial parcels, east of SR 125) to the list of eligible improvements including
the reach in Olympic Pkwy from SR 125 to Reach 2.
3) Add the costs of Improvements 1 and 2 to the program. The City should monitor the
critical sewer reaches to determine when the improvements will be needed.
4) Monitor other critical reaches of sewer, those where depth of flows are estimated to be
between 75% and 85% of the pipe diameter, as identified in Table 4-6.
5) Based on updated information, reduce the fee to $265/EDU reflecting a) the updated
cost information, b) additional improvements, c) available revenue after reimbursements
are made, and d) updated EDU projections. Note that there is a change per EDU for the
non-residential rates.
6) Transfer interest related to the $1.7 million Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund back to the
Fund. The amount of interest will depend on the date the transfer is made. Based on City
finance records the interest accrued through June 30, 2008 is $470,556.
7) When the City determines suffcient funds are available, transfer funds from the Poggi
Canyon DIF to reimburse the Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund for consfruction of
improvements associated with Poggi Canyon Sewer Interceptor Extension -Reach 2 in
the amount of $1,094,707.
8) When the City determines sufficient funds are available, appropriate $1,329,771 in Poggi
Canyon Trunk Sewer DIF funds to refund the appropriate developments/CFDs of OTay
Ranch Village 1 West, Otay Ranch Villages 1 and 5, McMillin's Otay Ranch Villages 1 and
5, and CFD 061 for overpayment of fees as outlined in Chapter 5 and the Appendix. The
provisions for such refund shall be determined by the City Attorney..
6.2 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The future facilities identified in this report are intended to provide increased sewer capacity to
mitigate the impacts of future development. No facilities will actually be constructed until all
necessary environmental reviews have been conducted. Further studies, including
environmental review, may show superior alternative projects that also satisfy the increased
capacity need.
6.3 ANNUAL ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
It is recommended that the fee be adopted with provisions for an annual adjustment factor. The
recommended index is the Engineering News Record - Consruction Cost Index for the Los
Angeles area. To be consistent with other City fee increases, it is recommended that the July to
July index be used, to be effective in October of each year beginning in the year 2009.
City of Chula Vsta Poggi Basin Gravity Sewer
Apri120o9 Development ImpacT Fee
~~~
CHAPTER 6 -CONCLUSIONS
In addition, the City should comply with the annual and five-year reporting requirements of
Government Code §366000 et seq.
6.4 STUDY LIMITATIONS
Note that this study has been prepared specifically for the purpose of updating the Poggi
Canyon Basin Sewer Development Impact Fee. Timing and ultimate needs for additional
facilities should be determined independently by the City in conjunction with its Infrastructure
Flow Monitoring Program.
Poggi Basin Gravity Sewer
Development Impact t=ee
City of Chula testa
April 2009
~'~ 8
ORDINANCE N0. 2716
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ESTABLISHING THE POGGI CANYON SEWER
BASIN DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE TO PAY FOR SEWER
IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE POGGI CANYON SEWER BASIN
AS A CONDITION OF ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS
WHEREAS, the City's General Plan Land Use and Public Facilities Elements require that
adequate public facilities be available to accommodate increased population created by new
development, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that new development within certain areas
within the City of Chula Vista as identified in this ordinance, will create adverse impacts on
certain existing public facilities which must be mitigated by the financing and construction of
those facilities identified in this ordinance, and
WHEREAS, developers of land within the City are required to mitigate the burden
created by their development by the construction or improvement of those facilities needed
to provide service to their respective developments or by the payment of a fee to finance their
portion of the total cost of such facilities; and
WHEREAS, development within the City contributes to the cumulative burden on
various sewer facilities in direct relationship to the amount of population generated by the
development or the gross acreage of the commercial or industrial land in the development; and
WHEREAS, the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin ("Basin") is that area of land within the City
of Chula Vista and the County of San Diego from which wastewater will flow by gravity from
Poggi Canyon into the Otay River Valley. This area is shown on the map marked Exhibit "A",
on file in the City Clerk's Office and known as Document No. C097-189, and included as an
attachment to the Poggi Canyon Gravity Sewer Basin Plan, dated July 31 , 1 997, on file in the
Office of the City Engineer; and
WHEREAS, Wilson Engineering has prepared the Poggi Canyon Basin Gravity Sewer
Plan ("Plan") dated November 19, 1997; and
WHEREAS, said Plan includes an estimate of ultimate sewer flows anticipated from the
Poggi Canyon Basin, recommends sewer facilities needed to transport these flows, and
establishes a fee payable by persons obtaining building permits for developments within these
basins benefiting from the construction of these facilities; and
WHEREAS, on October 29, 1997 a public meeting was held with the owners and
developers of properties located within the Basin to discuss the Plan and city staff
recommendations for establishing the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin Development Impact Fee
("Impact Fee"); and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator conducted an Initial Study, IS-98-
06, of potential environmental impact associated with the proposed "Project" and has
concluded that there would be no significant environmental impacts, and recommends
adoption of the Negative Declaration issued on IS-98-06; and
6-51
Ordinance 2716
Page 2
WHEREAS, on November 25, 1997 a Public Hearing was held before the City Council
to provide an opportunity for interested persons to be heard on the approval of the Plan and
establishment of the Impact Fee; and
WHEREAS, the City Council determined, based upon the evidence presented at the
Public Hearing, including, but not limited to, the Plan and other information received by the
City Council in the course of its business, that imposition of the Impact Fee on all
developments within the Poggi Canyon Basin in the City of Chula Vista for which building
permits have not yet been issued is necessary in order to protect the public safety and welfare
and to ensure effective implementation of the City's General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the amount of the Impact Fee levied
by this ordinance does not exceed the estimated cost of providing the public facilities
identified by the Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DGES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Environmental Review
That the adoption of the Impact Fee ordinance will have no significant environmental impacts,
and the Ciiy Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby adopts the Negative Declaration issued
on IS-98-06.
SECTION 2. Approval of Plan
The City Council has independently reviewed the proposed Plan and has adopted the same,
by Resolution No. 1 8824, in the form on file in the Office of the City Engineer.
SECTION 3. "Facilities".
The facilities to be financed by the Impact Fee are fully described in Table 4-5 of the Plan at
page 42, Attached as Exhibit 1 ,and incorporated herein by this reference, ("Facilities"), all
of which Facilities may be modified by the City Council from time to time by resolution. The
locations at which the Facilities will be constructed are shown on Exhibit "A", Poggi Canyon
Basin Sewer Study Map, on file in the City Clerk's Office and known as Document No. C097-
189, which is included in the Plan. The City Council may modify or amend the list of projects
herein considered to be part of the Facilities by written resolution in order to maintain
compliance with the City's Capital Improvement Program or to reflect changes in land
development and estimated and actual wastewater flow.
6-52
Ordinance 2716
Page 3
SECTION 4. Territory to Which Fee Is Applicable.
The area of the City of Chula Vista to which the Impact Fee herein established shall be
applicable is set forth on Exhibit "A" of the Plan, on file in the City Clerk's Office and known
as Document No. CO97-189 and is generally described herein as the "Territory."
SECTION 5. Purpose.
The purpose of this ordinance is to establish the Impact Fee in order to provide the necessary
financing to construct the Facilities within the areas shown in Exhibit "A" of the Plan, in
accordance with the City's General Plan.
SECTION 6. Establishment of Fee.
The Impact Fee, to be expressed on a per Equivalent Dwelling Unit l"EDU") basis, and payable
prior to the issuance of building permits for development projects within the Territory, is
hereby established to pay for the Facilities.
SECTION 7. Due on Issuance of Building Permit.
The Impact Fee shall be paid in cash upon the issuance of a building permit. Early payment
is not permitted. No building permit shall be issued for development projects within the
Territory unless the developer has paid the Impact Fee imposed by this Ordinance.
SECTION 8. Determination of Equivalent Dwelling Units.
Each single family detached- dwelling or single family attached dwelling shall be considered
one EDU for purposes of this Impact Fee. Each unit within amulti-family dwelling shall be
considered 0.75 EDU. Every other commercial, industrial, non-profit, public or quasi-public,
or other usage shall be charged at a rate calculated in accordance with the method for
estimating EDUs set forth in Exhibit "B", Sewer Benefit Area Fees Based on land Use
Categories.
SECTION 9. Time to Determine Amount Due; Advance Payment Prohibited.
The Impact Fee for each development shall be calculated at the time of building permit
issuance and shall be the amount as indicated at that lime and not when the tentative map
or final map was granted or applied for, or when the building permit plan check was
conducted, or when application was made for the building permit.
SECTION 10. Purpose and Use of Fee.
The purpose of the Impact Fee is to pay for the planning, design, construction andlor financing
(including the cost of interest and other financing costs as appropriate) of the Facilities, or
reimbursement to the City or, at the discretion of the City i4 approved in advance in writing,
to other third parties for advancing costs actually incurred for planning, designing, construct-
ing, or financing the Facilities. Any use of the Impact Fee shall receive the advance consent
of the City Council and be used in a manner consistent with the purpose of the Impact Fee.
6-53
Ordinance 2716
Page 4
SECTION 1 1. Amount of Fee; Amendment to the Master Fee Schedule
The Impact Fee shall be calculated at the rate of 5400 per EDU. Chapter XVI, Other Fees,
of the Master Fee Schedule is hereby amended to add Section D, which shall read as follows:
"D. Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin Development Impact Fee.
This section is intended to memorialize the key provisions of Ordinance Nc.
2716, but said Ordinance governs over the provisions of the Master Fee
Schedule. For example, in the event of a conflict in interpretation between the
Master Fee Schedule and the Ordinance, or in the event that there are
additional rules applicable to the imposition of the Impact Fee, the language of
the Ordinance governs.
a. Territory to which Fee Applicable.
The area of the City of Chula Vista to which the Impact Fee herein established
shall be applicable is set forth in Exhibit "A" of the Poggi Canyon Basin Gravity
Sewer Plan dated July 31, 1997, and is generally described as the Poggi
Canyon Basin.
b. Rate per EDU.
The Impact Fee shall be calculated at the rate of 5400 per EDU, which rate
shall be adjusted from time to time by the City Council.
c. EDU Calculation.
Each single family detached dwelling or single family attached dwelling shall be
considered one EDU for purposes of this Impact Fee. Each unit within a multi-
family dwelling shall be considered 0.75 EDU. Every other commercial,
industrial, non-profit, public or quasi-public, or other usage shall be charged at
a rate calculated in accordance with the method for estimating EDUS set forth
in Exhibit "B" to Ordinance No. 2716, "Sewer Benefit Area Fees Based on Land
Use Categories".
d. When Payable.
The Impact Fee shall be paid in cash not later than immediately prior to the
issuance of a building permit."
The City Council shall review the amount of the Impact Fee annually or from
time to time. The City Council may, at such reviews, adjust the amount of this
Impact Fee as necessary±o assure construction and operation of the Facilities.
The reasons for which adjustments may be made include, but are not limited
to, the following: changes in the costs of the Facilities as may be reflected by ~,
such index as the Council deems appropriate, such as the Engineering-News
Record Construction Cost Index (ENR-CCI1; changes in the type, size, location
or cost of the Facilities to be financed by the Impact Fee; changes in land use
in the City's General Plan; other sound engineering, financing and planning
6-54
Ordinance 2716
Page 5
information. Adjustments to the above Impact Fee maybe made by resolution
amending the Master Fee Schedule.
SECTION 12. Authority far Accounting and Expenditures.
The proceeds collected from the imposition of the Impact Fee shall be deposited into a public
facility financing fund ("Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin Benefit Area Fee Fund", or alternatively
herein "Fund") which is hereby created and shall be expended only for the purposes set forth
in this ordinance.
The Director of Finance is authorized to establish various accounts within the Fund for the
Facilities identified in this ordinance and to periodically make expenditures from the Fund for
the. purposes set forth herein in accordance with the facilities phasing plan or capital
improvement plan adopted by the City Council.
SECTION 13. Findings.
The City Council hereby finds the following:
A. The establishment of the Impact Fee is necessary to protect the public safety and
welfare and to ensure the effective implementation of the City's General Plan.
B. The Impact Fee is necessary to ensure that funds will be available for the
construction of the Facilities concurrent with the need for these Facilities and to ensure
certainty in the capital facilities budgeting for growth impacted public facilities.
C. The amount of the fee levied by this ordinance does not exceed the estimated cost
of providing the Facilities for which the fee is collected.
D. New development projects within the Territory will generate a significant amount
of wastewater that current sewer facilities can not service, therefore construction of the
Facilities will be needed to service new development projects.
SECTION 14. Impact Fee Additional to other Fees and Charges.
The Impact Fee established by this section is in addition to the requirements imposed by other
City laws, policies or regulations relating to the construction or the financing of the
construction of public improvements within subdivisions or developments.
SECTION 15. Mandatory Construction of a Portion of the Facilities; Duty to Tender
Reimbursement Offer.
Whenever a developer is required as a condition of approval of a development permit to
construct or cause the construction of the Facilities or a portion thereof, the City may require
the developer to install the Facilities according to design specifications approved by the City
and in the size or capacity necessary to accommodate estimated ultimate flow as indicated
in the Plan and subsequent amendments. If such a requirement is imposed, the City shall
offer, at the City's option, to reimburse the developer from the Fund either in cash or over
time as Fees are collected, or give a credit against the Impact Fee levied by this Ordinance or
some combination thereof, in the amount of the costs incurred by the developer that exceeds
6-55
Ordinance 2716
Page 6
their contribution to such Facilities as required by this Ordinance, for the design and
construction of the Facility not to exceed the estimated cost of that particular Facility as
included in the calculation and updating of the Impact Fee. The City may update the Impact
Fee calculation as City deems appropriate prior to making such offer. This duty to offer to
give credit or reimbursement shall be independent of the developer's obligation to pay the
Impact Fee.
SECTION 16. Voluntary Construction of a Portion of the Facilities; Duty of City to
Tender Reimbursement Offer.
If a developer is willing and agrees in writing to design and construct a portion of the Facilities
in conjunction with the prosecution of a development project within the Territory, the City
may, as part of a written agreement, reimburse the developer from the Fund either in cash or
over time as Fees are collected, or give a credit against the Impact Fee levied by this
Ordinance or some combination thereof, in the amount of the costs incurred by the developer
that exceeds their contribution to such Facilities as required by this Ordinance, for the design
and construction of the Facility not to exceed the estimated cost of that particular Facility as
included in the calculation and updating of the Impact Fee and in an amount agreed to in
advance of their expenditure in writing by the City. The City may update the Impact Fee
calculation as City deems appropriate prior to making such offer. This duty to extend credits
or offer reimbursement shall be independent of the developer's obligation to pay the Impact
Fee.
SECTION 17. Procedure for Entitlement to Reimbursement Offer.
The City's duty to extend a reimbursement offer to a developer pursuant to Section 15 or 16
above shall be conditioned on the developer complying with the terms and conditions of this
section:
a. Written authorization shall be requested by the developer from the City and
issued by the City Council by written resolution before developer may incur any
costs eligible for reimbursement relating to the construction of the Facilities,
excluding any work attributable to a specific subdivision project.
b. The request for authorization shall contain the following information, and such
other information as may from time to time be requested by the City:
(1 } Detailed descriptions of the work to be conducted by the developer with
the preliminary cost estimate.
c. If the Council grants authorization, it shall be by written agreement with the
Developer, and on the following conditions among such other conditions as the
Council may from time to time impose:
(1) Developer shall prepare all plans and specifications and submit same to
the City for approval;
(2} Developer shall secure and dedicate any right-of-way required for the
improvement work;
6-56
Ordinance 2716
Page 7
(3) Developer shall secure ali required permits and environmental clearances
necessary for construction of the improvements;
(4) Developer shall provide performance bonds in a form and amount, and
with a surety satisfactory to the City;
(5) Developer shall pay all City fees and costs.
16) The City shall be held harmless and indemnified, and upon demand by
the City, defended by the developer for any of the costs and liabilities
associated with the improvements.
(7) The developer shall advance all necessary funds for the improvements,
including design and construction, The City will not be responsible for
any of the costs of constructing the facilities.
(8) The developer shall secure at least three (3} qualified bids for work to
be done. The construction contract shall be granted to the lowest
qualified bidder. Any claims for additional payment for extra work or
charges during construction shall be justified and shall be documented
to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
(9) The developer shall provide a detailed cost estimate which itemizes
those costs of the construction attributable to the improvements. The
estimate is preliminary and subject to final determination by the Director
of Public Works upon completion of the Public Facility Project.
(10) The agreement may provide that upon determination of satisfactory
incremental completion of the public facility project, as approved and
certified by the Director of Public Works, the City may pay the developer
progress payments in an amount not to exceed 75 percent of the
estimated cost of the construction completed to the time of the progress
payment but shall provide in such case for the retention of 25°h of such
costs until issuance by the City of a Notice of Completion.
(11) The agreement may provide that any funds owed to the developer as
reimbursements may be applied to the developer's obligations to pay the
Impact Fee for building permits to be applied for in the future.
(12) When all work has been completed to the satisfaction of the City, the
developer shall submit verification of payments made for the
construction of the project to the City. The Director of Public Works
shall make the final determination on expenditures which are eligible for
reimbursement.
(13! After final determination of expenditures eligible for reimbursement has
been made by the Public Works Director, the parties may agree to offset
the developer's duty to pay Impact Fees required by this ordinance
against the City's duty to reimburse the developer.
6-57
Ordinance 2716
Page 8
(14) If, after offset if any, funds are due the developer under this section, the
City may at its option, reimburse the developer from the Fund either in
cash or over time as Fees are collected, or give a credit against the
Impact Fee levied by this Ordinance or some combination thereof, in the
amount of the costs incurred by the developer that exceeds their
required contribution to such Facilities as required by this Ordinance, for
the design and construction of the Facility not to exceed the estimated
cost of that particular Facility as included in the calculation and updating
of the Impact Fee and in an amount agreed to in advance of their
expenditure in writing by the City.
SECTION 18. Procedure for Fee Modification.
Any developer who, because of the nature or type of uses proposed for a development
project, contends that application of the Impact Fee imposed by this ordinance is
unconstitutional or unrelated to mitigation of the burdens of the development, may apply to
the City Council far a waiver or modification of the Impact Fee or the manner in which it is
calculated. The application shall be made in writing and filed with the City Clerk not later than
ten {101 days after notice is given of the public hearing on the development permit application
for the project, or if no development permit is required, at the time of the filing of the building
permit application. The application shall state in detail the factual basis for the claim of
waiver or modification, and shall provide an engineering and accounting report showing the
overall impact on the DIF and the ability of the City to complete construction of the Facilities
by making the modification requested by the applicant. The City Council shall make
reasonable efforts to consider the application within sixty (60) days after its filing.. The
decision of the City Council shall be final. The procedure provided by this section is additional
to any other procedure authorized bylaw for protection or challenging the Impact Fee imposed
by this ordinance.
SECTION 19. Fee Applicable to Public Agencies.
Development projects by public agencies, including schools, shall not be exempt from the
provisions of the Impact Fee.
SECTION 20. Assessment District.
If any assessment or special taxing district is established to design, construct and pay for any
or all of the Facilities ("Work Alternatively Financed"), the owner or developer of a project may
apply to the City Council for reimbursement from the Fund or a credit in an amount equal to
that portion of the cost included in the calculation of the Impact Fee attributable to the Work
Alternatively Financed. In this regard, the amount of the reimbursement shall be based on the
costs included in the Basin Plan, as amended from time to time, and therefore, will not include
any portion of the financing costs associated with the formation of the assessment or other
special taxing district.
SECTION 21. Expiration of this Ordinance.
This ordinance shall be of no further force and effect when the City Council determines that
the amount of Impact Fees which have been collected reaches an amount equal to the cost
of the Facilities.
6-58
Ordinance 2716
Page 9
SECTION 22. Time limit for Judicial Action.
Any judicial action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void or annul this ordinance shall
be brought within the time period as established by Government Code Section 66022 after
the effective date of this ordinance.
SECTION 23. Other Not Previously Defined Terms.
For the purposes of this ordinance, the following words or phrases shall be construed as
defined in this Section, unless from the context it appears that a different meaning is
intended.
(a) "Building Permit" means a permit required by and issued pursuant to the
Uniform Building Code as adopted by reference by this City.
(h) "Developer" means the owner or developer of a development.
(c) "Development Permit" means any discretionary permit, entitlement or approval
for a development project issued under any zoning or subdivision ordinance of
the City.
(d) "Development Project" or "Development" means any activity described in
Section 66000 of the State Government Code.
(e) "Single Family Attached Dwelling" means a single family dwelling attached to
another single family dwelling, with each dwelling on its own lot.
SECTION 24. Effective Date.
This ordinance shall become effective sixty (60) days after its second reading and adoption.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
~.e. ~ ~,-
_f
ohn P. Lippitt J M. Kaheny
Public Works Director ty Attorney
6-59
Ordinance 2716
Page 10
exxlatr 1
TABLE 3-S
Poggl Caoyoa Basin Sesvef Inlerceptur Improvements
Eatimaic of Construction Cost
Reach Na. ~ :~ Leagth, fL 4 ~ SHq Riches ~a IIait Cott, Sltt .Tool Coat, dollan
201 2,700 2] 140 378,000
202 600 21 Lump Sum ---'
207 1,600 21 Lump Sum 600,000
204 200 21 Lump Sum -'
205 800 21 800 640,000
206 1,400 2I 140 !96,000
207 400 2I 140 56,000
208 600 2l Existing 0
209 280 21 Existing 0
Z10 190 2l Existing 0
211 220 18 Existing 0
212 600 18 !30 78,000
2I3 500 18 130 65,000
214 2.200 18 1 I S 253,000
ZIS 1,900 l8 115 218,500
216 800 I8 I16 ~ 92,000
217 2,000 I8 Il6 230,000
218 2,100 IS Il6 241,500
219 6,000 IS 115 690,000
220 2,700 IS 100 270,000
22I 2,700 15 100 270,000
Sublotil - - ~. 4,278,000 :-.
IS•/. Eagiacetiag, Inspection, Survrying 641,700
26Y. Contingeary 1,069,500
TOTAL - ':.:.: ~ ... ':.Sy89,200 '..~...
2Y. City Admiaisttslion 119,784
Poggi Ca¢yo¢ Basin Pla¢ Rcvisio¢ 6 Rcvisio¢s Q 54,000 tech 24,000
GRAND TOTAL'-~ -- '
-- - 6,132y84
l Reaches 202 Uvough 204 ere capped et 5600,000.
6-60
Ordinance 2716
Page 11
EXHIBIT B
Sewer Benefit Area Fees Based on Land Use Categories
Land Use Sewage Flow Rate EDU Factor
Residential - SFD 280 gpd/DU 1 .OOEDU/Unit
Residential -Multi-Family 210 gpd/DU 0.75EDU/Unit
Commercial 2,500 gpd/acre 8.93 EDU/Acre
High School " 20 gpd/student .0714 EDUlstudent
Junior High School " 20 gpd/student .0714 EDU/student
Elementary School 15 gpd/student .0536 EDUlstudent
Park 500 gpd/acre 1.79/acre
CPF 2,500 gpd/acre 8.93/acre
CPF -Community Purpose Facilities
"If the number of students is not available, use 1000gpd/acre or 3.6 EDU/ acre
6-61
Ordinance 2716
Page 12
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista,
California, this 9th day of December, 1997, by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers: Mooi, Padilla, Rindone, Salas, and Horton
NAYS: Councilmembers: None
ABSENT: Councilmembers: None
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: None
1J~i,~hllrf~ fi-
Shirley Ho on, Mayor
ATTEST:
Beverly .Authelet, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) ss.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA 1
I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Ordinance No. 2716 had its first reading at a regular meeting held on the 25th
day of November, 1 997 and its second reading and adoption at a regular meeting of said City
Council held on the 9th day of December, 1997.
Executed this 9th day of December, 1997.
Beverly A. uthelet, City Clerk
6-62
Poggi Canyon Trunk Sewer Extension
Reimbursement Agreement
This P_o igi Canyon Trunk Sewer Extension Reimbursement Agreement ("Agreement"} is made
as of s 20 0 `/, by and between The Eastlake Company, LLC ("Eastlake") and
the City f C mla Vista, a California municipal corporation ("City") to facilitate the design and
construction of required improvements to the Poggi Canyon Trunk Sewer.
RECTTALS
Whereas, Eastlake has petitioned the city to consider authorizing The Eastlake Company to
design and construct the improvements required by the Poggi Canyon Trunk Sewer (herein after referred
to as "Poggi Canyon Trunk Sewer Extension") and be reimbursed for the project; and
Whereas, the construction of said improvements involves the installation of approximately 3,100
lineal feet of PVC sewer lines within the Poggi Trlmk Sewer system as shown in City of Chula Vista
drawings etttitled "Improvement Plans for Eastlake Pazkway" numbered 02046-01 through 02046-27 and
"Improvement Plans for Olympic Pazkway" numbered 02024-01 through 02024-41 ("improvements");
and
Whereas, as part of the approval for the Eastlake Land Swap and thorough consideration of
several alternatives, Eastlake Company was required to construct the deep gravity sewer from the existing
pump station adjacent to Eastlake Pazkway and provide a connection to the existing sewer in Olympic
Parkway at a cost of approximately $2.4 million; and
Whereas, the Poggi Canyon Trunk sewer Extension was constructed along Eastlake Parkway, and
across the Eastlake commercial land swap pazcel; and
Whereas, the reach of sewer within Eastlake Parkway "Eastlake Parkway portion", estimated at
$1.2 million, is an eligible facility to be funded by Community Facilities District 061 (Eastlake -Woods,
Vista and Land Swap), (CFD 06I), while the other reach of sewer from Eastlake Parkway across the land
swap parcel to Olympic Pazkway, "Poggi Trunk portion" also estimated at $1.2 Million is proposed to
come from the Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund; and
Whereas, it is the intention of the City with this Agreement to lay out the tetins under which
Eastlake shall be reimbursed for the costs incurred in the design and construction of the required
Improvements for Poggi Canyon Trunk Sewer utilizing funds from the Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve
Funds.
NOW, THEREFORE, TT IS MUTUALLY AGREED between the respective parties as follows:
Section 1. Recitals. That the above recitals aze all true and correct.
Section 2. Construction of Improvements. Eastlake covenants and agrees that all
Improvements will be constructed by Eastlake in a good and workmanlike manner by well-trained
adequately supervised workers and in strict compliance with all government and quasi-governmental
Page 1 of 4
C L~'~JME I~n~ \LOCALS-1\TertmNa~i Cmvon Tnmk Sewn Reimbunemrnt
s lril/~- / 1Pi
rules, regulations, laws, building codes and all requirements of EastLake's insurers and lenders, and free
of any design flaws and defects.
Section 3. Inspection and Acceptance of the Improvements. The construction activities
relating to the Improvements will be inspected and subject to acceptance by City.
Section 4. Code Compliance. Eastlake hereby agrees to comply with all provisions of
Chula Vista Ordinance No. 2716.
Section 5, Payments to Eastlake. Payments shall be made to Eastlake, for the poggi trunk
portion, upon submittal of the appropriate project documentation and completion of the audit by the Ciry.
Eastlake shall not be reimbursed prior to the end of the fiscal yeaz on June 30, 2004 Within 60 days of
EastLake's request after June 30, 2004,. City will make goad faith effort to reimburse Eastlake upon
submittal of all pertinent doctiments/infotntation necessary to facilitate such request for payment and
demonstrate compliance with the terms of this agreement. Furthermore, Eastlake shall not receive
reimbursement from the Tnmk Sewet Fund if Eastlake has or will receive compensation for the
applicable costs of the improvement from any other source.
Section 6. Indemnification by Eastlake. Eastlake shall defend, indemnify and hold
harmless City, its officers, directors, employees and agents, from and against any and all claims, losses,
liabilities, damages, includmg'court costs and reasonable attorneys fees, by reason of, or resulting from;
or arising out of the design, engineering and construction of the Improvements. Nothing in this Section 6
shall limit in any manner City's rights against any of the architects, engineers, contractors or other
consultants employed by Eastlake or EastLake's predecessors in interest which has performed work in
connection with construction or financing of the Improvements.
Section 7. Conflict with CKher Aereenxnts. Nothing contained herein shall be constructed
as releasing Eastlake from any condition of development or requirement imposed by any other agreement
with City. Tn the event of a conflicting provision, such other agreement shall prevail unless such
conflicting provision is specifically waived or modified in writing by City.
Section 8. General Standard of Reasonableness. Any provision of this Agreement which
requires the consent, approval, discretion or acceptance of any party hereto or any of their respective
employees, officers or agents shall be deemed to require that such consent, approval or acceptance not be
unreasonably withheld or delayed, unless such provision expressly incorporates a different standazd.
Section 9. Entire Agreement: Amendment. This Agreement contains the entire agreement
between the parties relating to the transaction contemplated hereby and all prior or contemporaneous
agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, are merged herein. No
amendment, modification, waiver or discharge of this Agreement will be valid unless the same is in
writing and signed by the parties to this Agreement.
Section 10. tices. All notices, detnands ar requests provided for or permitted to be given
pursuant to this Agreement must be in writing. Al] notices, detnands or requests to be sent to any party
shall be deemed to have been properly given of 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.
Page 2 of 4
ro\L. .A 1 \Po en Trunk ei rs nt
Aereemrnt.ac.doc
Cam:
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Attn: City Engineer
Property Owner:
The Eastlake Company
9001ane Avenue, Suite 100
Chula Vista, CA 91914
Attn: Guy Asazo, Vice President
A party may change, its address by giving notice in writing to the other party. Thereafter, notices,
demands and requests shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address.
Section 11. Successors and Assi¢ns. All terms of this Agreement will be binding upon and
inure to the benefit of the parties and their respective administrators or executors, successors and assigns.
Secton 12. Govemine Law. 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.
Section 13. Cavacities 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.
Section 14. Cotmterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts,
each of which will be deemed to be an original, but all of which together will constitute one instrument.
[NEXT PAGE IS SIGNATURE PAGE]
Page 3 of 4
('~Lnnr'1m1E-l~nsaml.OCAL-S-~I\Temo\Poe¢i Canyon Tmnk Sewer Reimbu_nemrnt
Agreement.ac.doe : _ _ _ _ _
SIGNATURE PAGE TO
POGGI CANYON TURNK SEWER EXTENSION
REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Stephen C. adilla
Mayor, City of Chula Vista
Attest:
-®Sf ,l.L i Y l4~
Susan Bigeiow; Ci Clerk
Approved as to form:
re, City Attorney
Page 4 of 4
THE EASTLAKE COMPANY, LLC
y Asaro, Vice President
~ ~
~~`~~\tra~ UICB~~~r,~dOvk
:\pp . -1 \ \T \P an n Tnntk u t
.d
COUNCII. AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
Meeting Date 4/27/04
ITEM TITLE: Resolution approving a Reimbursement Agreement with the
Eastlake Company for construction of a portion of the Poggi Canyon
Trunk Sewer Extension and appropriating funds therefor
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
Resolution approving a Second Amendment to the
Acquisition/Financing Agreement for Community Facilities District 06-I
Director of General Services/City Engineer .~[
City Manager
(4/Sths Vote: Yes X No _~
As part of the Eastlake Land Swap project development, the Eastlake Company constructed the
Poggi Canyon Trunk Sewer Extension, a $2.4 million deep gravity sewer extending from the
Eastlake Pazkway Pump Station to the Poggi Canyon Trunk Sewer at Olympic Parkway. The
proposed resolutions will enable the City to reimburse the Eastlake Company for the cost of the
sewer from CFD proceeds and City funds; and make certain other changes to the CFD 06-I
Acquisition/Financing Agreement, some of which relate to the Poggi Canyon Trunk Sewer
Extension.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolutions.
BOARDS/COMMISSION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
At the request of the City, the Eastlake Company analyzed several alternatives to determine the
best method for providing a gravity sewer line for the southerly portion of the Eastlake Greens
project (currently being pumped up to the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Trunk). Based on limitations
imposed by existing improvements and topography, the best alternative required construction of
the Poggi Canyon Trunk Sewer Extension, a deep gravity sewer line ranging in depth from 20' to
60'. The sewer line follows Eastlake Parkway south (Reach 1), and then crosses the commercial
land swap parcel (Reach 2) where it connects to the Poggi Canyon Trunk Sewer at Olympic
Pazkway (see Attachment 1). -After thorough consideration of the alternatives, Eastlake
Company proceeded with and completed construction of the Poggi Canyon Trunk Sewer
Extension.
Reimbursement Agreement
Reach 2, costing approximately $1.2 million, shall be considered first. This reach extends from
Eastlake Parkway, approximately 1600 feet westerly to the existing sewer located in Olympic
Parkway. The City was interested in having this trunk line constructed because it is a required
6 9 ~
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 4/27!04
regional facility and its construction would allow the Eastlake Parkway Pump Station to be
decommissioned. The decommissioning is necessary for the following reasons:
1. Lack of safety features: The Eastlake Pazkway Pump Station was originally constructed
as a temporary pump station in conjunction with the Eastlake Greens 'development,
without provisions for various safety features that are now typically incorporated into
permanent pump stations (e.g., an external storage basin providing at least 6 hours
storage for spill control, dual farce mains for re-routing flows, and other necessary
redundant features). The station would have needed a prohibitively expensive retrofitting
to convert it to a permanent pump station.
2. Siting criteria: The Eastlake Pazkway Pump Station is unsuitably located adjacent to an
Elementary school and other residential facilities.
3. Lone term cost of maintenance: The City has been obligated to maintain the pump
station at a cost to the Sewer Service Revenue Fund of approximately $25,000/yeaz. With
the wastewater now being conveyed by means of gravity down to the Poggi Canyon
sewer trunk line, there is no further need to pump wastewater up to the Telegraph Canyon
sewer trunk line.
For constructing Reach 2 of the Poggi Canyon Trunk Sewer Extension, staff recommends that
the Eastlake Company be reimbursed for their costs subject to conditions set forth in a
Reimbursement Agreement (Exhibit A}. Moreover, since the construction of this major trunk
line is consistent with the purpose for establishing the Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund, staff
recommends that those funds be used to reimburse the Eastlake Company. Revenue collected in
this fund is used to build new trunk sewer systems and to enlazge the capacity of the wastewater
collection and treatment system (see Attachment 2). It is appropriate to fund the proposed
reimbursement from the Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund since the City had a vested interest
in constructing this segment of the Poggi Canyon Trunk Sewer Extension.
The Reimbursement Agreement will enable the City to reimburse the Eastlake Company for
costs not to exceed $1,200,000 subject to certain conditions. This amount does not include an
additional estimated $10,000 in future City staff costs to ensure compliance with the
reimbursement agreement, and $20,000 in City staff time already incurred for design activities
related to this project. The reimbursement will be made no sooner than July 1, 2004 to ensure
that sufficient Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve funds are available.
Second Amendment to the Acquisition/Financing Agreement
The Eastlake Company has requested that the City consider amending the Acquisition/Financing
Agreement for CFD 06-I to incorporate procedural changes regarding the payment process, to
identify Poggi Canyon Trunk Sewer Extension Reach 1 Improvements as distinct and separate
from Eastlake Parkway roadway Improvements, to make each traffic signal Improvement a
distinct and separate one, and to update cost estimates to reflect current information
(Attachments 3 and 4). The procedural changes are consistent with other recent
AcquisitiotilFinancing Agreements approved by Council.
6-7~
Page 3, Item r
Meeting Date 4127!04
The construction costs for Reach 1, which aze eligible for CFD 06-I financing, aze substantially
higher than estimated in the original Acquisition/Financing Agreement. The revised estimate is
approximately $1.2 million. Bond counsel therefore recommends that Council approve a Second
Amendment to the Acquisition(Financing Agreement to reflect the higher costs.
Approval of the second resolution approves the form of the Second Amendment to the
Acquisition/Financing Agreement. Sotne of the changes relate to the Poggi Canyon Sewer Trunk
Extension and some do not. The amendment will accomplish the following:
Allow the Developer to request the Base Increment payment for any authorized
improvement without setting the final Purchase Price. The Base Increment will equal
75% of the eligible audited costs to construct the improvement. Prior to requesting the
Base Increment, the improvement and a1I its components must still be substantially
completed. .
2. Defer determination of the final Purchase Price of the Improvement to the time at which
the final payment is approved.
Increase the cost estimate for the Poggi Canyon Trunk Sewer Extension Reach 1 and
idenfify it as a sepazate Improvement from the Eastlake Pazkway roadway Improvement,
and allow for a sepazate reimbursement.
4. Identify each traffic signal as a separate and distinct Improvement as illustrated in the
revised Exhibit A of the amended Acquisition/Financing Agreement. Additional traffic
signals have been included in the updated list.
5. Update the Cost Estimates for those Improvements identified in Exhibit A.
FISCAL IMPACT: There is no impact to the General Fund. Council approval of the resolution
approving the Reimbursement Agreement with the Eastlake Company appropriates $1,230,000
from the Trunk Sewer Capital Reserve Fund to a new CIP for Reach 2 of the Poggi Canyon
Trunk Sewer Extension. The revised costs of approximately 51,200,000 for Reach 1 will be
funded from CFD 06-I bond proceeds. Al] costs related to creating the second amendment to the
Acquisition/Financing Agreement for CFD 06-I will be borne by the developer.
Attachments:
1. Plat of sewer reaches 1 and 2
2. Chula Vista Municipal Code 3.14.01 OC
3. Summary of Changes to the Second Amendment to the Acquisition/Financing Agreement
4. CFD 06-I AcquisitionJFinancing Agreement and 1St Amendment
Exhibits:
A. Reimbursement Agreement
B. Proposed Z"d Amendment
I1EngineerUGENDA~CFD 06-I AF Agrccment AM 2 Council Report-revised Lcb.doc
42?l2004 9:59:07 AM
~-3
6-71
Poggi Canyon Sewer
r+..'.~i' SF DR
~j' ~CLUENOD .
V ~,l(""'J4 IAYNRCRD*
PE~by~OR ~ 'r~
,PE1lA PP'tliKDR T W~ S ~ N ~fl 6~ Y RD ~ ~ ~
S 1: I D , O ~'
t ~ ~~yt
Os K ~ ~tj~ OREENR~RDI[ t~~"' ~~~~'~
°~ QP ~f
~ ' 6 Reach 1 'op s ~ a ~
~ 1 ~ ~ ~~ ~aF~ ~ ~
i
x RNIIE S ~dL~ _N.
GEYSE Reach 2 ~-~ ~
P~AGO t1Y - ,~, g'
S 9s
R
i~4{,t~ ~ a `,yx POlPYNMiSbR
W
O $
~P4Y~ Pb~N SLANG DR L
*s' ~~£~rDL fl1478ft
a~
~'
ATCACHMEfVT
3.12.010
Chapter 3.12
GAS TAX STREET IMPROVEMENT FUND*
Sections:
3.12.010 Created.
3.12.020 Moneys payable into fund.
3.12.030 Expenditures.
• For statutory provisions concerning the appointment
of moneys to cities having a special gas tax street
improvement fund, see Streets and Highways Code
§ 2113; for provisions regarding highway user's
funds genetallg see Streets and Highways Code
§ 2100, et seq.
3.12.010 Created.
To comply with the provisions of Article 5 of
Chapter 1 of Division I of the Streets and High-
ways Code, with particulaz reference to the amend-
ments made thereto by Chapter 642, statutes of
1935, there is hereby created in the treasury of the
city a special fund to be known as the "special gas
tax street improvement fund." (Prior code § 2.34).
3.12.020 Moneys payable into fund.
All moneys received by the city from the state
under the provisions of the Streets and Highways
Code for the acquisition of real property or inter-
ests therein for, or the construction, maintenance or
improvement of, streets or highways other than
state highways shall be paid into such fund. (Prior
code § 2.35).
3.12.030 Expenditures.
All moneys in such fund shall be expended
exclusively for the purposes authorized by, and
subject to, all the provisions of Article 5, Chapter
1, Division I of the Streets and Highways Code.
(Prior code § 2.36).
Chapter 3.14
TRUNK SEWER CAPTTAL RESERVE FUND
Sections:
3.14.010 Establishment of trunk sewer capital
reserve fund -Uses.
3.14.010 Establishment of trunk sewer
capital reserve fund -Uses.
A. There is established a fund designated as the
"trunk sewer capital reserve fund."
B. All revenue derived from the sewer capacity
chazges (formerly "sewerage facility participation
chazges") pursuant to CVMC 13.14.090 shall be
deposited into such trunk sewer capital reserve
fund.
C. The trunk sewer capital reserve fund shall be
used solely for the following purposes, unless the
city council shall by four-fifrhs vote appropriate
such funds for another purpose; provided, such
other purpose shall be for the planning, design, or
construction of sewage collection or treatment or
water reclamation purposes or incidental thereto:
1. Paying all or any part of the cost and
expense to enlarge sewer facilities of the city so as
to enhance efficiency of utilization and/or ade-
quacy of capacity in order to effectively serve the
needs of the city;
2. Paying all or any part of the cost and
expense to plan and/or evaluate any future propos-
als for area-wide sewage treatment and/or water
reclamation systems or facilities. (Ord. 2466 § 2,
1991}.
3-4
6-~- s
ATTACHMENT 3
SUI~IMARY OF CHANGES TO ACQUISITION AGREEMENT'
Staff has begun implementing the Acquisition Agreement and recommends, together with
the Developer and bond counsel, the following changes to the Acquisition Agreement:
1: Purchase Price
Staff recommends a change in the timing of the determination of the Purchase
Price of an Improvement consistent with the latest Acquisition Agreement
approved by Council for another developer. The current Acquisition Agreement
provides that reimbursement for eligible costs of an Improvement may be made in
two increments, the Base Increment (75% of the Purchase Price) and the Retained
Increment (25% of the Purchase Price). The Purchase Price, the amount the
developer may be ultimafely reimbursed, is set at the time the Base Increment
payment is made for an Improvement. This is problematic because at the time the
developer is eligible to receive the Base Increment (the Improvement is deemed
substantially complete by the City) not all minor costs may be known and audited.
Under the current Acquisition Agreement, the developer would have two options
for addressing this: (1) delay the request for the Base Increment by several
months until all fmal costs aze known and losing several months interest on that
reimbursement or (2) do not include all eligible costs in the CFD.
In lieu of these options, Eastlake Company has requested that the Purchase Price
be set instead at the time the Retained Increment reimbursement is made when
every final invoice has been paid, punch list items addressed, and "as-builts"
processed among other items. This change would enable Eastlake Company to
request reimbursement in two increments as follows: (1) the Base Increment
which would be limited to 75% of the eligible, audited costs of the Improvement
not to exceed 75% of the estimated cost outlined in the AF Agreement, and (2) the
Retained Increment which would include the 25% of the eligible, audited cost
retained with the Base Increment payment, together with any additional eligible,
audited costs submitted for reimbursement. The Base and Retained Increments
combined would represent the Purchase Price. Substantial completion of the
Improvement would still be required prior to making the Base Increment
reimbursement as well as feral completion and acceptance by the City of the
Improvement prior to making the Retained Increment payment.
According to Eastlake Company, this payment schedule will better support its
cash flow management for constructing the CFD roadway improvements such as
Olympic Pazkway, Eastlake Pazkway, and Otay Lakes Road in accordance with
the aggressive timeline for completing these key transportation facilities
benefiting the community. This is consistent with the latest Acquisition
Agreement approved for other developments.
6-~ `'°
2. Sewer Improvement and Cost -Eastlake Pazkway
The cost estimate for Eastlake Parkway under the current Acquisition Agreement
does not include the entire cost of the deep sewer line constructed by Eastlake
Company because the sewer alignment was not determined at the time the
Acquisition Agreement was executed. Due to the significant cost of this facility
(estimated at $1.2 million for the reach proposed for acquisition), Best Best and
Krieger, bond counsel for the CFD, recommends amending the AF Agreement to
reflect the additional costs of this improvement. The sewer line that will be
included for acquisition in CFD 06I follows the Eastlake Pazkway alignment for
approximately 1500 feet (Reach 1 on Attachment I).
In addition, staff recommends the sewer component of the Eastlake Pazkway
Improvement be identified as a separate Improvement. The current Acquisition
Agreement provides that for a Base Increment reimbursement for a roadway
Improvement to be made, all of the roadway components such as (i) grading,
including site preparation and mobilization, (ii) wet and dry utilities within the
right-of--way, (iii} storm drain facilities, (iv) paving, (v) curb, gutter, sidewalk,
medians, (vi) traffc signals, (vii) lighting, and (viii) all other appurtenant
improvements must be substantially complete. By making the sewer a separate
Improvement, reimbursement for this major sewer line will not be delayed until
substantial completion of the roadway Improvement. Or if there aze any issues
related to the sewer outside of the Eastlake Parkway right-of--way, the Eastlake
Pazkway reimbursement will not be delayed.
3. Traffic Sienals
As defined in the Acquisition Agreement for CFD 06I, the Traffic Signal
Improvement includes all traffic signals. For a Base Increment reimbursement for
traffic signals to be made, every traffic signal would need to be substantially
completed. Eastlake Company has requested that each traffic signal be listed as a
separate Improvement to enable reimbursement as each traffic signal is
completed. The Acquisition Agreement also adds additional traffic signals to the
eligible list of improvements.
4. Costs
Eastlake Company has requested that the cost estimates in Exhibit A of the
amended Acquisition Agreement be revised due to more recent and accurate cost
analysis and to identify the estimated costs for each Improvement as amended by
the Second Amendment.
J:\Engineer~AGENDA\CFD 06I Attachment 4.doc 5
6-75
. ''•.
,,!~
,.•. ,
Execution Cop~•
ATTACHMENT _ `~
ACQtl15ITION/FINANCiNG AGREEMENT
~, '
THIS AGREEMENT, dated as of ~_ /,~. / ~, 200Z, is made and entered into by and
bet«'een the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a charter city duly organized and validly existing under
the Constitution and laws of the State of California, (the "City"), COMMUNITY FACILITIES
DISTRICT N0. O6-I (EASTLAKE -WOODS, VISTAS AND LAND SWAP), a community
facilities district formed and existing pursuant to the laws of the State of California (the "CFD
No. U6-I") and THE EASTLAKE COMPANY, LLC, a California limited liability company (the
"Developer'").
WHEREAS, the Developer is the master developer of certain property known as the
Woods, Vistas and Land Swap (the "Development Project") within Yhat master planned
community located within the City known as Eastlake and Developer has obtained certain land
use entitlements from the City which permit the development of the Development Project; and
WHEREAS, the development of the Development Project pursuant to such land use
entitlements is subject to certain conditions, including but not limited'to, the requirement that the
Developer construct certain public improvements to serve the Development Project including the
improvements identified as Improvements Nos. 2 through 8 in Exhibit A attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference (the "Development Project Improvements' • and
WHEREAS, such land use entitlements also describe the threshold of building permits
that may be issued for the Development Project as the result of traffic impacts on roadways
within the City; and
WHEREAS, the City's Growth Management Oversight Committee, in its annual
threshold compliance report, noted that development in the eastern portion of the City which
includes the Development Project was starting to strain the capacity of existing roadways
resulting in added congestion and traffic delays; and
WHEREAS, the City has determined that it is necessary to expedite the construction of
certain traffic enhancement projects, including the Telegraph Canyon Roadway Improvetneuts
defined below (individually, a "Traffic Enhancement Improvement" and collectively, the
"Traffic Enhancement Improvements"), located in the eastern part of the City in order to
maintain the City's threshold standard and quality of Iife until the completion of more of the
overall transportation network in the eastern part of the City; and
WHEREAS, in ordez for the Developer and the master developers of other properties
located in the City east of the I-805 freeway to continue to receive building permits beyond the
current thresholds identified in the existing land use entitlements for the Development Project
and other developments in the eastern portion of the City, such developers must contribute to the
financing of the construction of the Traffic Enhancement Improvements; and
WHEREAS, in order to provide for the financing of one of the Traffic Enhancement
Improvements, the Developer, together with certain other master developers (the "Other Master
s-~ s 5` ~
+. Tributary Units/Acrea ge
Tributary
ORC Vllla e 1 Acrea a SFD MFD EDU factor EDUs EDUs Paidl Source for EDUs
Neighborhood
115
1
115.0
115.0
Major Project Development Status/Assessor Map
PRJ00-O10 Rl6
Ol 1 R172
00 98 1 98.0 91.0 Major.Projecf Development Siafus/Assessor Map
PRJ
- 73 1 73.0 73.0 ~ Major Project Development Status/Assessor Map
PRJ00-012 R18 95 1 95.0 95.0 Assessor Map
PRJ00-013 R48 75
422 0 316.5 316.5 Major Project Development Status
PRJOI-016 R15 .
75
271 0 203.3 217.0 Major Project Development Status
PRJOI-062 R47 .
75
204 0 153.0 154.0 Major Project Development Status
PRJ97-042 R19 139 .
1 - - Major Project Development Status
PRJ97-037 R14 88 1 - - Major Project Development Status
PRJ97-036 R13
Subtotal 608 897 1,053.8 1,061.5
Non-residential
APN 642-560-16 0.127 8.93 1.1 Assessor Map
APN 642-560-17 0297 8.93 2J Assessor Map
APN 642-560-21 1.05 8.93 9.4 Assessor Map
OAPN 642-560-22 0.91 8.93 B.1 Assessor Map
~PN 642-560-^ 1.57 0 - Assessor Map/M14314/Parking
rpAPN 642-560-O1 4.67 8.93 41.7 Assessor Map
APN 642-560-15 4.6 8.93 41.1 Assessor Map
Subtotal 104.1 47.4
Miscellaneous ~
Park 0 1.79 No facilities
iOiAL
1,157.8 1,108.9
~ Based on building permit data through 6/2007. All residential and non-residential permits issued.
~ Generation rate based on 1997 Basin Plan.
' Assumed no sewer facilities of park site.
" Non-residential payments not identified by project.
Appx C EDUs Village 1 ORC
Yigage 1 Obligation to date: Notes:
1041 EDUs Non-residenital
1,157.8 EDUs
x 400
$ 463,120 Obligation Excludes park
$ 463,120 Credit via CFD 99-1 for OR Village 1 (ORCJ
$ 443,567 Cash Payments through 6/2007 Residential and Commercial payments.
$ 906,687 Total paid
$ 443.567 Refund cash payments.
' CFD 99-1 credit for Poggi Sewer Basin DIF = $921,938.
' R-17 - One permit used credit, not cash payment.
rn
O
Appx C EDUs Village 1 ORC
", Tributgrv Units/Acrea ge
Tributary
ORG Village 5 Acreage SfD MFD EDU factor EDUs EDUs Paidt ' Source for EDUs
Neighborhood
PRJOI-021 R30A 141 0.75 105.8 106.5 M14602
PR101-005 R31 Ipodion) 14 I 14.0 Assessor Maps
PRJ00-O15 R29 83 1 83.0 83.0 Assessor Maps
PRJ97-058 R35 ~ 0 1 - 1.0 Major Project Development Status
PRJ04-016 R3083 73 0.75 54.8 54.8 Major Project Development Status
PRJ04-015 R30B2 84 0.75 63.0 63.0 Major Project Development Status
PRJOI-008 R281portion) 33 1 33.0 Assessor Maps
PRJOI-024 R39 121 1 121.0 121.0 Assessor Maps
PRJ02-015 R30B 84 0.75 63.0 63.0 Major Project Development Status
Subtotal 537.5 492.3
Non-residential ~
CPF site -Not Constructed
Misc
S~¢,total
pIo
rvy,~ellaneous ~
Park
TOTAL
4.52 8.93 40.4 Assessor Map
0.8 0.8
41.2 0.8
1.79 To Telegraph basin/No facilities
578.7 493.0
~ Based on building permit data through 6/2007. All residential and non-residential permits issued.
z Generation rate based on 1997 Basin Plan.
~ Assumed no sewer facilities in R30 park site.
Appx C EDUs Village 5 ORC
Vlllaee 5 Oblleetlon to date: Notes:
41.2 EDUs
578.7 EDUs
x $ 400
$ 231,480 Obligation
Non-residenital
Excludes park
$ 458,818 Credit via CFD 99-1 for OR Village 5 ~ORC)
$ 197,200 Cash Payments Through 6/2007 Residential and Commercial payments.
$ 656,018 Total paid
$ 197,200 Refund cash payments.
~ CFD 99-I credit for Poggi Sewer Basin DIF = $921,938.
rn
N
Appx C EDUs Village 5 ORC
Tributary Units/Acreage
Tributary
Village 1 West Acreage SFD MFD fDU factor EDUs- EDUs Paid' Source for EDUs
Neighborhood
PRJ00-009 R53 36 0 - 3.0 Assessor Maps
PRJOI-034 R59 106 1 106.0 104.0 Assessor Maps
PRJOI-029 R54 37 1 37.0 38.0 Assessor Maps
PRJ02-086 R60 49 I 49.0 49.0 Assessor Maps
PRJOI-031 R56 74 1 74.0 74.0 Assessor Maps
PRJOI-032 R57 94 1 94.0 94.0 Assessor Maps
PRJOI-030 R55 87 1 87.0 87.0 Assessor Maps
PRJOI-033 R58 62 1 62.0 61.0 Assessor Maps
Subtotal
545 0
509.0 510.0
Miscellaneous
Park 5.6 1.79 10.0 - Assessor Map 641-07 Sheet 2
TOTAL 579.0 510.0
~ Based on building permit data through 6/2007. All residential and miscellaneous permits issued.
Generation rate based on 1997 Basin Plan.
~53 is located north of Easf Palomar Street and is not tributary to Poggi Basin.
Appx C EDUs Village 1 West
~Vllla~e 7'Weit S?bUg4tion to dater Notes:
509:0 EDUs Residential only
10.0 EDUs Park
519.0 EDUs
x 400
$ 207,600 Obligation Includes park
$ 227,338 Credit via CFD 99-1 for OR Village 1 (ORC)
204,000 Cash Payments through 6/2007 Residential and Commercial payments.
$ 431,338 Total paid
$ 204,000 Refund cash payments.
~ CFD 99-1 credit for Poggi Sewer Basin DIF = $921,938.
$ 921,938 Credit -beginning balance
$ (463,120( Less credit used for OR Village 1 (ORC(
$ (231,480( Less credit used for OR Village 5 (ORC(
$ 227,338 Credit -beginning balance
~ $ (207,600( Less credit used for OR Village 5 (ORC)
Oo $ 19,738 New credit balance
+' (Due to CFD 99-1 J
q.,.,,, r EDU^ .rn~ge 1 ~.~,....
"' Tributa rv Units/Acreaoe
Tributary
OR MM Vllla e 1 5 Acrea a SFD MFD EpU factor EDUs' EDUs Paid' Source for EDUs
Neighborhood 74 1 74.0 74.0 Assessor Maps
PRJ00-005 R42
90 I
90.0
90.0
Assessor Maps
PRJ97-064 R41 240 0.75 - 31.5 Major Project Development Staius
PRJ97-065 R43 198 0.75 148.5 198.0 Assessor Maps
PRJ97-063 R40
312.5 393.5
Subtotal
Miscellaneous s 1 79 10 2 - Assessor Map, Dwg 98-717 ihru 98-718
Park 5.68
322.7 393.5
TOTAL
~ Based on building permit data through 6/2007. All residential permits issued.
' Generation rate based on 1997 Basin Plan.
Appx C EDUs Village 1-5 MM
OR MM Villeoel / 5 Obliaatlon to date: Notes:
10.2 EDUs Non-residenital
322,7 EDUs
x $ 400
$ 129,080 Obligation
$ 129,080 Credit availablevia CFD 97-3 for OR Village 1/5 ~MM~
$ 157,408 Cash Payments through 6/2007
$ 286,488 Total paid
$ 157,408 Refund cash payments.
CFD 97-3 credit for Poggi Sewer Basin DIF = $412.938.
$ 412,938 Credit -beginning balance
$ X129,080) Less Credii used For CFD 97-3 properties
p~ $ 283,858 Balance of credit due to CFD 97-3. McMillin received payment For $412,938.
ao
rn
Appx C EDUs Village 1-5 MM
Tributary Units/Acreage
Tribtatary
Sunhnw Summdrv Acreaee SFD - MFD ` EDU factor EDUS" EDUsPald° Source for EDUS
Area
13 112 1 112.0 - Assessor Maps
15 93 I 93.0 54.0 Major Project Development Status/Assessor Maps
12 44 1 44.0 25.0 CV Dwgs 97-297 thru 313
74 110 1 110.0 66.0 Major Project Development Status/Assessor Maps
16/16A 144 1 144.0 144.0 Major Project Development Slafus/Assessor Maps
19 712 1 112.0 112.0 Major Project Development Status/Assessor Maps
17 702 1 102.0 102.0 Assessor Maps
7 156 0.75 117.0 Major Project Development Status'
70 336 0.75 252.0 252.0 Major Project Development Stalus~
l0A 117 0,75 87.8 117.0 Assessor Maps
Subtotal
717 609
7,773.8 872.0
Commercial lots
Parcel 1 5.48 19,574.56 8.93 48.9 48.9 Assessor Maps
Parcel2 1.70 6.072.40 8.93 75.2 15.2 Assessor Maps
Parcel 3 1.81 6,465.32 8.93 16.2 16.2 Assessor Maps
Parcel 4 0.74 2,643.28 8.93 6.6 6.6 Assessor Maps
Parcel 5 0.76 2,714.72 8.93 6.8 6.8 Assessor Maps
?sParcel 6 0.64 2,286.08 8.93 5.7 5.7 Assessor Maps
oaParcel 7 1.27 4,536.44 8.93 11.3 11.3 Assessor Maps
~lfivoli Pool Bldg PA l0A 0.2 8.93 1.8 1.8 800008386 BO1-2152
Apt Rec Building ~ 1.0 1.0 Trust acct. B99-5016
Subtotal 12.60 173.5 173.5
Industrial lots (not constructed) 54.60 8.93 487.6 Acreage based on City W W MP; Not Constructed.
(Role to Change wish this update.)
Miscellaneous
ParkZ 10.03 1.79 18.0 Assessor Maps
Elementary School3 10.61 32.1 32.1 Assessor Maps
Fire Station" 1.53 8.93 13.7 Assessor Maps
Subtotal 22.17 63.7 No record of payment.
TOTAL 1,838.6
° Based on building permit data through 6/2007. All residential and commercial permits issued.
' Units per Appendix.
~ Generation rate based on 1997 Basin Plan.
' Generation rate based on 1997 Basin Plan (9,000 gpdj.
° Generation rate based on 2500 gpd/acre; site was not identified in 1997 Basin Plan.
s In Planning Area 12, 56 EDUS may flow to 2 different basins. Capacity based on maximum of 100 EDUS.
EDUS paid includes cash/check payments of $287,006, credit of $107,200, and from unknown source of $49,600.
Appx C EDUS Sunbow
Sunbow Obligation to date Notes:
7,173.8 EDUs Residential only
113.5 EDUs Commercial, rec and pool buildings
1,287.3 EDUs
x $ 400
$ 514,907 Obligation Excludes fire station, parks and school and industrial
$ 736,205 Credit -potentially available. Only $107,200 available in trust accounting.
$ 287,006 Cash Payments through 6/2007 Residential and Commercial payments.
$ 423,211 Total paid
$ 91,696 Amount Due PA 7 = $46,800 - No Record of Payment.
rn
00
Appx C EDUs Sunbow
Paid EDUs
Developer No. - Project No. Development Built/Issued Type - Cash/Cred0 .Subtotal Total Total Pald EDUs
Residential
DEV00-0Ol PRJ00-009 Ofay Ranch Village I West 3.00 $L200.00 $204.000.00 510.00
DEV00-001 PRJ01-029 38.00 $15,200.00
DEV00-001 PRJOI-030 87.00 $34,800.00
DEV00-001 PRJOI-031 74.00 $29,600.00
DEV00-001 PRJOI-032 94.00 $37,600.00
DEV00-0Ol PRJ01-033 61.00 $24,400.00
DEV00-001 PRJOI-034 104.00 $41.600.00
DEV00-001 PRJ02-086 49'00 $19.600'00
DEV00-002 PRJ00-010 Otay Ranch Village 1 115.00 $46,000.00 $425,000.88 1,062.50
DEV00-002 PRJ00-Olt 92.00 $36.800.00
DEV00-002 PRJ00-012 73.00 $29,200.00
DEV00-002 PRJ00-013 95.00 $38.000.00
DEV00-002 PRJOI-016 MF 316.50 $126,600.00
DEV00-002 PRJOI-062 MF 217.00 $86,800.88
DEV00-002 PRJ97-042 MF 154.00 $61.600.00
DEV02-001 PRJ02-002 Ofay Ranch Village R 2a 92.00 $36.800.00 $425,700.00 1,064.25
DEV02-001 PRJ02-003 b IORCI R 2b 106.00 $42,400.00
DEV02-Wl PRJ02-006 RSa 51.00 $20,400.00
~DEV02-0Ol PRJ02-008 R 7a MF 67.50 $27,000.00
cnDEV02-001 PRJ02-009 R 7b MF 150.75 $60,300.00
~DEV02-001 PRJ02-010 RB MF 219.75 $87.900.00
DEV02-001 PRJ02-0I t R 9a 139.00 $55,600.00
DEV02-001 PRJ02-012 R 96 MF 20.25 $8,100.00
DEV02-001 PRJ03-028 R Sb . 55.00 $22,000.00
DEV02-001 - PRJ03-029 R 9c ~ MF 126.00 $50.400.00
DEV02-0Ol PRJ03-030 R9d MF 37.00 $14,800.00
DEV03-001 PRJ02-001 Ofay Ranch Village R 1 101.00 $40,400.00 $256,400.00 641.00
DEV03-0Ol PRJ02-004 6 IMM~ R 3 163.00 $65,200.00
DEV03-001 PRJ02-005 R 4 92.00 $36,800.00 _
DEV03-001 PRJ02-007 R 6 126.00 $50.400.00
DEV03-001 PRJ02-013 R 10 MF 159.00 $63,600.00
DEV04-001 PRJ04-027 Otay Ranch Village R la 54.00 $21,600.00 $137,400.00 343.50
DEV04-001 PRJ04-028 7 (ORC/MMI R 2a 27.00 $10.800.00
DEV04-0Ol PRJ04-031 R 5 34.00 $13,600.00
DEV04-001 PRJOS-027 R 2b 3.00 $1.200'00
DEV04-001 PRJOS-028 R 2c 71.00 $28,400.00
DEV04-001 PRJOS-029 R 2d 85.00 $34.000.00
DEV04-0Ol PRJOS-043 R lb 29.00 $I 1,600.00
_
DEV04-001 PRJOS-046 R bb -Interim MF 7.50 $3,000.00
DEV04-0Ol PRJOS-043 Rlb 14.00 $5,600.00
RRJg71J0~ R2b2 - 19.00 $7,600.00
3/24/2009
Pald EDUz
Develpoer No. Proled No. Development <. Bulll/Issued ,Type Cdsh/Credit Subtotal Total Total PaldEDUs
DEV94-004 PRJ98-019 Rancho del Rey SPA 2 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00
DEV94-0OS PRJ98-020 Rancho Del Rey SPA 3 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00
DEV95-001 PRJOI-052 Eastlake R 9F RV opts MF 11250 $45,000.00 $318.400.00 796.00
DEV95-001 PRJ04-009 Greens/LandSwap R 9A Firenze 76.00 $30,400.00
DEV95-0Ol PRJ04-010 R 9B Andona 135.00 $54,000.00
DEV954J01 PRJ04-0I I R 9C Veranza MF 13.50 $5,400.00
DEV95-001 PRJ04-012 R9D Cortina MF 94.50 $37,800.00
DEV95-0Ol PRJ04-013 R 9E Capria MF 100.50 $40.200.00
DEV95-001 PRJ95-020 R 6 Ridgewood I 12.00 $4.800.00
DEV95-0Ol PRJ99-007 R26 Antigua MF 252.00 $100.800.00
DEV97-000 PRJ97-010 Rolling Hills Ranch 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00
DEV97-000 PRJ97-016 0.00 $0.00
DEV97-001 PRJ00-015 Otay Ranch Village 5 (ORC~ 83.00 $33,200.00 $196,900.00 492.25
DEV97-001 PRJOI-021 MF 106.50 $42,600.00
DEV97-0Ol PRJOI-024 121.00 $48,400.00
DEV97-0Ol PRJ02-015 MF 63.00 $25,200.00
DEV97-0Ol PRJ04-0IS MF 63.00 $25.200.00
DEV97-001 PRJ04-016 MF 54.75 $21,900.00
pgEV97-0Ol. PRJ97-058 1.1;0 $400.00
i
EV97-002
PR100-005
Ofay Ronch Village 1/5 ~MM)
74.00
$29.600.00
$157.409.16
393.52
~
EV97-002 PRJOI-063 0.00 $0.00
DEV97-002 PRJOI-064 MF 0.00 $0.00
DEV97-002 PRJ97-045 0.00 ~~~
DEV97-002 PRJ97-047 0.00 $0.00
DEV97-002 PRJ97-063 MF 198.00 $79,200.00
DEV974]02 PRJ97-064 90.00 $36.000.00
DEV97-002 PRJ97-065 MF 31.52 $12.609,16
DEV98-002 PRJ00-007 Sunbow2 PAl6 61.00 $24.400.00 $399,114.40 997.79
DEV98-002 PRJ00-008 PAl7 102.00 $40,800.00
DEV98-002 PRJ01 -009 PAID MF 252.00 $100,800.00
DEV98-002 PRl01-017 PAIOA MF 118.79 $47.514.40
DEV98-002 PRJOI-058 PA19 112.00 $44,800.00
DEV98-002 PRJ98-007 PAl2 37.00 $14,800.00
DEV98-002 PRJ98-008 PAl3 112.00 $44,800.OD
DEV98-002 PRJ98-009 PA14 66.00 $26,400.00
DEV98-002 PRJ98-010 PA15 54.00 $21,600.00
DEV98-002 PRJ98-017 PAI6A 83.00 $33,200.00
DEV98-002 PRJ98-018
DEV99-001 PRJ00-001 Eastlake Trails 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0.00
DEV99-001 PRJ00-002 O.W $0.00
DEV99-001 PRJ00-004 0.00 $0.00
3/24/2009
Paid EDUz
Developer No, ', Protect No: Development Built/Issued Type , Cash/Credit Subtotal Total ' Total Paid EDUs
Commercial/Miscellaneous
$44,692.80
Sunbow Non-residential $300.00
OR Village SNon-Residential 967.32
18
OR Village 1Non-Residential (see PRJOI-062J ,
EL Greens Non-residentia! $25,796.92
EL Tenaces Non-residential 150,452.64
$260.005.88
Otay Town Confer $110.660.56
Motor Dei Church $10716
MM OR Village 7 Clubhouse R6 & R7 $4,036.36
MM OR Village 7 Swim Club R1B $400.00
1509 Oleander $400.00
MM OR Village 7 R 1 A -
OR Village 6 Unit 1 - ORC MU 1874 View Park #83. 1884 View Park, #91, 1425 Rhone Volley #7F $9,600.00
1905 E Palomar St # 1
$625,419.64
Subtotal
Residential Subtotal $2.520.324.44
TOTAL Permit Payments (Cash/check/credos) $3,745,744.08
Payments:
trust Amount Usec
Cash/Check Payments
RD payment -Assumed as credit.
$107.200.00
287.007.2
$49 600.00 Checking
Total $443,807.20 $443,807.2(
Revenues per Permit Data $3,145,744
Less Trust Account used (Sunbow; ($156.800)
Calculated Cash Received $2.988.944
Finance Records -Table 5-3 $2.9~•7~
3124/2009
6-94
~
~ i
~ ~
~
t
~
t
:~
~ r. i
..
~
~~ ~ > ,
~ .
..
i
1'
>: ').
~
t0'
.
, ~
~
:. .
.
iD r
Appendix E
Sunbow Summary Descrlptlon
Reaches 201-207, excl. 205
Payment 1 Construction $ 558,718.00
Payment 2 Construction 113,915.60
Payment 3 Construction 224,211.30 309,411.59
Payment 3 Soft Costs 85,200.29
Payment 4 ROW 60,475.27
Subtotal 1,042,520.46 Reimbursed Ayres
Reaches 208-213
Credit
Credit
Credit
Subtotal
rn
TCITAL
-m--
Construction
Construction CO 99
Soft Costs at 9.5%
$ 111,632.00
$ 12,756.00
1 1,817.00
$ 136,205
Not audited
Estimated
1,178,725
6-98
~~ ~ ~~~
0790 - ~5
CITY OF CIiLTLA VISTA
POGGI CANYON BASIN
GRAVITY SEWER BASIN FLAN
November 19, 1997
Prepared for: City of Chula Vista
Engineering Division
27b Fou~~th Avcnue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Prepared by: Wilson Engineering
703 Palomar Airport Road
Suite 300
Carlsbad, CA 92009
Job Number: 120-001
6-100
` POGGI~ .CA[~YQN 51`M
=-- ~
~ `~ ~ ~ `;:. ~ s ~
SEWER ~ INTE~C~t? ,~
R--~.~ t
.
_
~..-, r Lone
Verde - ~ ~ , :
' "~ ~t ;.
_
O
Clty
tt
F ~. ,
~ n.k s r
i - , ^RANGE i ~
, ~ ~;
i
x~':' ~V~ ~
i
{ =,
~ a
}
i
a
`-,
_ - ~ } ~ 1 ~ >.
+~ -~
sa" .E J
, x
~• _ ,
1.
r -~
__
'~ _ I
=?c~d~
~ ~y
f ~>F r
.
y ~
otCy
sta
. .Fs
~
Gam. P~ c
- ~
_ ~ 2~ ~
ST GTAY. r 1. i
__
..
FUTURE ~~tEACH 9 _
~ ~~ ` ~ ' _ -:..: ~ _
_ .
__ .
(REGIONAL INTERCEPTOR'S _" _
~ ,-
• ~ _ 202 '~
.s.. ~ ,.;
2ffi
7 i ai l
l ~
1
f/ ~'V~
..
`
'
,"1'
~
~ 11 ,~
i \
~..
l 1 `
._`
- j
,
1
f
j! _
~ ` 200
~~ ~~ I
~w
~ AA
y
.. - - ..~. .. .. [i
-1~~A
:Stl
J #a ~.:n~r ~. `uT {`i•Ae~~y~a^'XA ~_ .~ 1.'+.. ] _. - C ~ F"±:.~pa+R 1~'.iC ~~~' '~ ~i~
~ / i
'.,.. - 1. ~~". C„~ ~ ~, - ~~-.`y .. ~: `C~1 ~ ~ ~ r ti~~
` ,t / ;
t ~ ~ f t ,
r ./ ~ / ` j
~., r
~S° r ice- 7.~
:,
.~• L ~ .,•
.~ i x ~4 . ~ `~ ` f ~. ~ ' .. ~sar`ri ~aGi~a-tft~ ~ ~t .,..~ . t ~ ~r -' '~ "'
~~_~~ ~ ;
:.
r , ti '
,.
_ ,`„ -
,,; ~;'
,~ ~ - ..:.
,:~ ~ ,lam > ~ -
,..
_.
~ ~
r i .\. i ` l
2
'~1 r ~ - ~ ~ i ~ -
,;;:~
vas. /~ ~ 1 i ,
~ ~, , ~ - c - BAStN - -B+QU.Nff~cF~Y '
~ ' `-~`~.
6-102 I
r r / )
-t , ~/r Y'e`a + - t /~ '.....-.~ i ~ a~ ~:// \ ` J\ -
' + ,
J i~. -~ / ~ \ _ - ~ //.~ - Wit(
i. ~ ; ~ -
1 / "\
,/ ~ - - -- _ I~ ~~ _
'~ ~_ _ ~.:- - _ .--- ; LEGEND'-~' ~~ ~, , ~ -
F ~~
_ - ! ~ ~ °k
r -
'S7 ~ ~ / e i ~ ~ a-i ~ ^ r ~' PROPOSES- C ON BR$1N SEkrc
l
-~ ~ SI
r ~ ,.
4 - --
,.
~/-.1 ~•.. ~- ~. .k.. , '\ ~y y{ ~~ .r a., the ~
! j ~ -- i
_ ~, ~`-. - _ PROPE~tiY BOUNDARX ',
". r`~
~ ~~
~`
;~ ~ - '
-
'
" ,
i
- + ' ~ s-z,
~_ . - : , ,
~
- '
~ ._.
.. __
l,
~ - -- ~ `; '~" --' =~ ^- WILSON I
-.... ~ ~ - .
~ -.- ,
703 PALO-Wt .
_~ -... ~ _, _.-__~ -__ - 120-097
1
6-103
` `1
~ti
~ T.
•
•~ ~
. ~ ~~~
:~~~~~ CANYON ., _
-Bk~CN BOUND~A~RY ~ ; .
_.
`;' ~ ~ , `, ~ ~; t
';
--
'; ~, ,~,
'
' ~:
,
~,
~,
~
.'~ ~;
~
.
_
i ~y, `
1
+'
~. ~ ~y
,
~~~ , ~~
I
"~CEPT~., : _ ,, t r __ y
~.__.,
~
!
. ~ ~~ J ~~. _
~ ~
~# ~ ~ ~ 1',~~: Ali ~ i. `~ ,.~,, ~~' '~` ~ ".
I ~ Y.9:; rick ~ ~ J_i; ttn 1' \ -i r ~.' [ t u` ~ ~. ~'.`:
_ i
i
_ ~
/•, .. ., -
~i. .
i' ~_' ,~
:•
i , ~;
w
~:'
EXHIBIT A
-~-___
POGGi CANYON BASIN SEWER STUDY
NEERING
~, ~,~ MANHOLE NUMBER AND REACH DIAGRAM
6-104
1
L t ` ~
~, .i I, ~.
~. .- t .r '- ,-..
~ (r
/ a` " \
~ r i
~``~~ -J \
~ t
./ 1
~ CIty~Rnrk`.
\'- _ -•
l 1 ~
1 - 1 ~'{ !
J., _ ~ ~.. ~ , . ~r t~ ~J ^--S ';`~ ~ ~ :.fir ,'
~ i ) _ `
.~ r
•. •'w
~ ~ .u~--.~__..\_ _ "-_~ 200', ,~ ~^, :. ~~~EG ~_:
~,~•~` ~
.. ~~ / `~ 1
,' i I I
S'(
_ F
~ J 1 j ..._~ ,t
_, .^..- S
k
~~ ~ ~ ~ _
u, \{ l~,_,\ ~ t
./__
- f r . ~ \
~ 1 ice- _ ~~ f~iw ~ /l ~ ~ r ~~ r/ l ~ ~ ~ ~. ' \ J'~ J f
.- -.
,~ ;. _ ~," .,/-•~'~, j ,gip
~ \ f ~ r ~ _
'8
- - ~ ~
.:-Y
i -_ ~ i~.
_ ~
~CHA~Rt~S :H. - GER#~,ARD~a,. _ _ - , ~~:_, ~~
C4~rQ _
N
~,
- - - ~ -. -
\~ - , .~:
v,:.
c~~rtcy , --- ~ ~'
ire6 Hosplftt ` .. , _ ~ t r;
Qty ~ r ~ ', ~: ~~ ~ ~ :,, ~ ~ ~` i ~
~ C.a'.. ~ r ~~'::,
~,..;,- ~ ~ r ~,
_. -
.. -e ,, -
_ ~ ../ .. ~~. LACE ~ ...' _~
>~
,, ~. ,
_ ~ ~.
1. `,
.. ` `a /~ /7 "~1 ;~ ~ X5..0 _ -`\~ 1. ~ ~
4 ~ `_
So}xkh tern, \~ <~ ~\> >^
r . ~ ~' ~ `....
~~ r - - -----~. ;: .:
CANYON ~ ~, ; ~~,; --t 7 -~ .,
N ~ ' ~ ~..
".,\ C (,~ ~ rte.
..y'
\ .~ • f ~:
-
i ~
1
,~ ~ mar/
. ' G/-
i
~`., ,
~'
i ~.. ~ f
' s
i , ; L
,~,(~" ~
~~ r
~ ; `` i
:`'
' ,'
. `.r;, ,; ~'y ,
~ ;,~ ; ~ \ ~```r-
,+ ~ ', `V,
1~
_..i 1~ ~\. ~=~
-~ ~
I', 1
;~.. ,,.
\ ~ ~ ' ' .;
~~ ~:/
~ i 1 ---
_ -;
i ~ 1
~
`
f
...
~ ~~~r!
I ,1
,
4
I.
1,
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE NO.
CHAPTER 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................... 1
Chapter 2 -Background ................................................ 1
Chapter 3 - Daia ....................................................... 1
Chapter 4 -Analysis .................................................... 2
Chapters -Financing .................................................. 2
CHAPTER 2 BACKGROUND ............................................... 3
Introduction .......................................................... 3
The Purpose and Need for a Sewer Basin Pian ............................ 4
Description of Study Area .............................................. 5
Properties within the Study Area ........................................ 6
Number of EDUs in the Study Area ...................................... 6
Design Criteria ....................................................... 18
Sewage Generation Factors ............................................ 19
CHAPTER 3 DATA ........................................................ 21
Existing Sewage Flows within the Poggi Canyon Basin .................... 21
Projected Sewage Flows by Property ................................... 23
Existing Flows Currently Being Diverted to Othet Basins ................. 24
Alignment of Future Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer ......................... 25
Existing Gravity Sewer Facilities .................................... 26
Discussion of Alternative Alignments ................................ 26
Replacement Alternative ........................................ 27
Parallel Alignment ..............................................27
i
6-109
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Coned)
PAGE NO.
Storm Drain Easement Alternative ............................... 27
Proposed Alignment Alternative .................................29
CHAPTER 4 ANALYSIS ................................................... 30
Computer Analysis of Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer Interceptor ................. 30
Summary of Analysis ..................................................... 36
New Pipe Sizing Analysis .............................................. 36
Existing Pipe Adequacy Analysis ....................................... 39
Existing 18-inch Under Interstate 805 .................................... 39
Estimated Costs of Recommended Improvements ............................ 40
Phasing of Recommended Improvements ................:.................. 43
CHAPTER 5 FINANCING ................................................. 45
Financing Through Sewer Benefit Area Fee ................................. 45
City Panicipation ........................................................45
Development Impact Fee Calculation ...................................... 46
n
6-~~0
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd)
APPENDIX A Land Use Planning Data for the Major Development
Projects Within the Poggi Canyon Basin
APPENDIX B Clarification to Verify the Peaking Factor Equation for
Computer Model Correlates with the City of Chula Vista
Peaking Curve in CVDS 13
APPENDIX C Results of Flow Monitoring Performed by City of Chula Vista
in Existing 8-inch Sewer in Oleander Avenue East of Interstate 805
APPENDIX D Calculation for Flow per EDU within Existing Developed Area of
Pvggi Canyon Basin Based on Flow Metering Information
APPENDIX E Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer System Computer Modei Printouts
APPENDIX F Calculation to Verify that the Peaking Factor Equation for the
Computer Model Correlates with the City of Chula Vista Peaking
Curve in CVDS 18
APPENDIX G Calulations to Determine Available Capacity is EDUs in Existing 18-
inch Gravity Sewer Maia Under the I-805 Freeway
APPENDIX H Calculations to Determine the Amount of Surcharge in the Existing 18-
inch Gravity Sewer Under I-805 Freeway Uader Ultimate Peak
Flows Based on 265/200 gpd/L7nit
APPENDIX I Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer Phasing Analysis Computer Runs for
Existing System West of Interstate 805
iii
6-111
LIST OF TABLES
PAGE PFO.
TABLE 2-1 Properties and EDUs Within the Poggi Canyon Basin
Study Area .................................................. 8
TABLE 2-2 Gravity Sewer Design Criteria ................................... 18
TABLE 2-3 Sewage Generation Factors ...................................... 20
TABLE 3-1 Summary of Land Uses Within Existing Developed
Portion of Poggi Canyon Basin ............................... 22
TABLE 3-2 Summary of Ultimate Sewage Flows and EDUs for All
Properties within Poggi Canyon Basin ......................... 23
TABLE 3-3 Current Developmeat Levels in Eastlake Project ................... 24
TABLE 4-1 Summary of Sewage Flows for the Poggi Canyon Basin
Sewer Interceptor ...........................................32
TABLE 4-1.A Summary ofEDUs for the Poggi Canyon Basin
Sewer Interceptor ...........................................34
TABLE 4-2 Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer Interceptor Analysis Summary .. • - - . • • • - 38
TABLE 4-3 Available Capacity in Existing 18-inch Gravity Sewer
Under I-805 Freeway ........................................ 40
TABLE 4-4 Unit Construction Costs ........................................ 41
iv
6-112
LIST O'F' TABLES (Con't)
PAGE NO.
TABLE 4-5 Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer Interceptor Improvements
Estimate of Construction Cost ............................... 42
TABLE 4-6 Phasing of Improvements in the Poggi Canyon Basin West
of Interstate 805 ............................................ 44
TABLE 5-1 Total City Contribution ......................................... 46
TABLE 5-2 Sewer Benefit Area Fees Based on Land Use Categories ............ 47
v
6-113
CHAPTER 1
EXECUTIVE SIIMMARY
This chapter provides a general summary of the contents of this study. The detailed
discussions within each chapter and the appendices provide the basis for the final
development impact fee recommendation presented in Chapter 5.
Several large developments anticipated or underway within4he Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin
will generate a significant amount of wastewater. The current sewers are not large or
extensive enough to serve these new developments. The purpose of this report is to
recommend the facilities needed to serve these new developments and to determine the
amount of fees payable by these developments which are needed to finance the expanded
facilities.
The tasks to be addressed in the report are summarized. The report will determine ultimate
development levels and create a computer model to determine the sewer sizes needed for the
buildout of the Poggi Canyon Basin_ The construction costs for the proposed sewer
improvements will be discussed.
The study area is defined geographically and the different property ownerships are identified.
From this information, a summary of estimated Equivalent Dwelling Units {EDUS) for the
buildout of the basin is given. The sewage generation factors and the design criteria used in
the report are presented.
The wastewater loadings determine, to a large degree, the necessary facilities for the
collection, treatment, and disposal of wastewater. Existing sewage flows within the Poggi
6-114
The alignment of a future Poggi Canyon Basin sewer system is discussed. The existing
gravity sewer facilities are descri'oed and a summary of alternatives is given. The three
alternatives given are the replacement in place of the existing sewer; the construction of a
parallel alignment of ultimate sized gravity sewer within existing streets; and the construction
of the ultimate sized gravity sewer within a storm drain easement:
A .summary of the results from the computer models run is shown. The preparation of the
model is discussed and guidelines for the model are given.
The results of the computer model are given and analyzed. The 3E-inch Reach 9 Regional
Interceptor gradsty sewer was found to be adequate for ultimate Poggi Canyon Basin flows.
The 18-inch sewer reach under Interstate 805 was found to be under-capacity for ultimate
Poggi Canyon Basin flows. Recommended improvements to the Iine aze discussed and a cost
summary for the costs is given. Then a possible phasing of improvements in Poggi Canyon
Basin is given.
Chanter 5 - Financins
The development impact fee distributes the cost of the required system upgrades in as
equitable manner. The City of Chula Vista will fund the upgrade of a portion of the existing
system. Using the summary of EDUs in Chapter 3, the total cost of recommended
improvements less what will be funded by the City of Chula Vista is divided among all future
EDUS. For the Poggi Canyon Basin, the resulting development impact fee is 3400 per EDU.
The development impact fees are also shown according to land use.
2
6-115
CHAPTER 2
BACKGROIIND
On September 9, 1996, the City of Chula Vista executed a purchase order contract with
Wilson Engineering to prepare the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin Study. This report is to
provide an evaluation of ultimate sewage flows within the Poggi Canyon Basin and the gravity
sewer facilities needed to convey these flows. The intention of this report is to assimilate the
engineering design data as well as incorporate future planning information along with the
estimated construction and administrative costs associated with the proposed infrastructure
requirements.. With this data, the City of Chula Vista will be able to estabiish a Development
Impact Fee to fund the required improvements within the Poggi Canyon Basin.
A summary of the tasks which will be accomplished within this report are as follows:
1, Determine buildout development levels within the Poggi Canyon
Basin, based on planning information and tentative maps.
2. Create a computer model of the Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer
Interceptor in order to determine the size of the gravity sewer
required to accommodate ultimate buildout conditions.
3. Recommend the size and location of sewer improvements.
4, Provide a map showing the location of the sewer improvements
as well as all the contributing properties within the Poggi
Canyon Basin.
3
6-116
5. Estimate engineering, administrative and cnastruction costs for
the recommended ustprovements within the Poggi Canyon Basin.
6. Establish a sewer Development Impact Fee based on the costs of
the Poggi Canyon Basin improvements and the number of future
dwelling units within the basin that will require these facilities.
The Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer improvements, which are studied in this report, extend from
the upper limits of the Poggi Canyon Sewer Drainage Basin west to the future location of a
Regional Trunk Sewer idemified as Reach 9 of the Salt Creek Basin Interceptor System. The
Reach 9 portion of the Salt Creek Basin Interceptor System was developed as part of the Salt
Creek Basin Gravity Sewer Analysis prepared in November 1994 for the City of Chula Vista.
This report will provide the recammended size of the Reach 9 Interceptor in order that
ultimate capacity from the Poggi Canyon Basin will be accommodated. However, the costs
associated with Reach 9 azea not part of the DIF being established for the Poggi Canyon
Basin. The City has indicated that Reach 9 will be aCity-funded facility because it provides
regional service to the City of Chula Vista. Therefore, the Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer System
recommendations will terminate at the approximate future location of the Reach 9 Regional
Sewer Interceptor.
The Pnrnoae and Need for a Sewer Basin Plan
The City of Chula Vista has recognized that development within the Poggi Canyon Basin east
of Interstate 805 is beginning to gain momentum. Because of the imminent development
within the Poggi Canyon Basin, the City would like to establish the ultimate buildout
infrastructure requirements as well idetttify costs for those future facilities. This will provide
the basis for the City to establish a sewer benefit area fee through which the required ultimate
sewer improvements can be financed.
The purpose of the sewer basin plan is to collect, in one comprehensive document, the most
current land planning information within the Poggi Canyon Sewer Drainage Basin and
determine the sizes of facilities required for ultimate development. A calculation of the
ultimate expected equivalent dwelling units within the basin will allow a sewer basin fee to
4
6-117
be established based upon the remaining number of equivalent dwelling units to be developed
in the Poggi Canyon Basin. The remaining number of equivalent dwelling units is based upon
a research of the properties within the basin and the development potential as of April 1997.
Future development potettial is determined by existing approved tentative maps, submitted
and approved SPA plans, and City of Chula vsia General Plan Land Uses where ao other
information is available.
Because of the inherent changes in future development plans, it is important to recognize the
need for periodic updates to the information presented in this report_ Updates should be
performed at regular intervals of five years duration as a minimum. ]n the case where
substantial development is occurring at one time, and significant portions of the ultimate
sewer infrastructure are being constructed, updates should be performed to ensure that the
facilities being constructed will satisfy the ultimate basin requirements.
The Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer Study Area extends from west of Interstate 805 to the
EastLake Development in the eastern sector of the City of Chula Vista. A portion of the
study azea is already developed. This is the portion that straddles Interstate 805 and extends
from south of Palomar Street to Otay Valley Road. The future extension of the Poggi Canyon
Sewer is expected to follow East Orange Avenue, east of Interstate 805. The eastern
boundary of the Poggi Canyon Study Area extends just ]seyond the future intersection of East
Orange Avenue and State Route 125.
The Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin is located adjacent to and south of the Telegraph Canyon
Basin and is bounded on the south by the Wotf Canyon Basin and the Salt Creek Basin.
Except for the existing development on either side of Interstate 805 and some development
within the EastLake project east of the future State Route 225, the majority of the Poggi
Canyon Basin is currently undeveloped. Exhibit "A°, attached to this report, identifies the
boundary of the Poggi Canyon Basin on 800 scale topography, along with the location of
manholes, reach identification numbers, and flows used for the computer model.
5
6-118
Several different property ownerships have been identified within the Poggi Canyon Basin
Study Area. The following is a list of these ownerships:
1. Existing development on either side of Interstate 805.
2. Sunbow II
3. Charles H. Gerhardt
4. Allen L. Gerhardt, Jr.
5. Otay Ranch
6. Otay Ranch Village 1
7. Otay Ranch Village 5
8'. McMillin
9. Eastlake Development
10. County Landfill
1 I . Otay Water District
The larger of the properties within the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basta include Sunbow II, Otay
Ranch, Otay Ranch Villages 1 and 5, and Eastlake. Two of the ownerships within the Poggi
Canyon Basin (County Landfill and Otay Water District properties) have been identified as
corrtributing no future. sewer flows into the Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer Interceptor. If future
activities within these two ownerships result in the generation of sewer flows, the plan will
require revision.
Table 2-1 on the following pages provides a summary of the detailed laced planning and
sewage generation information for all undeveloped properties within the Poggi Canyon Basin
Study Area. This table excludes information about existing development within the Poggi
Canyon Basin en either side of Interstate 805. Data on existing developmeat and existing
sewage flows will be provided in greater detail in Chapter 3 of this report.
The data included in Table 2-I was compiled using the most current available land planning
6
6-119
information for the various ownerships. Data for the Sunbow II project was obtained from
the Sunbow II Tentative Map and Proposed Site Utilization Plan. Information for the Otay
Ranch was obtained from the Dray Ranch General Development Plan document. Information
for the McMillin property was obtained from the Otay Ranch SPA 1 submittal document.
For Otay Reach Pillages 1 and 5, the Tentative Map {C.V.T. 96-04) was used.
The data for development within the Eastlake project was obtained from two different
sources. First, the development within the Eastlake Greens was obtained from a spreadsheet
compiled by Eastlake Development. The information for the Iand swap area of Eastlake was
obtained from the City of Chula Vista and land uses were based on the City's General Plan.
The land use data for the remaining small properties scattered throughout the basin is also
based on the City of Chula Vista General Plan.
Appendix A includes additional information relative to the source of the land use data for
many of the properties within the Poggi Canyon Basin. Appendix A is consistent with Table
2-I in that sewage generation is based on 280 gpd/EDU. Appendix B duplicates the
information presented in Appendix A except that Appendix B calculates sewage generation
based on 265 gpd/EDU.
7
6-120
TABLE 2-1
PROPERTIES AND EDUa WITHIN THE
POGGI CANYON BASIN STUDY AREA
rn
N
Sunbow II
TABLE 2-1 (Continued)
PROPERTIES AND EDUa WITHIN TIIE
POGGI CANYON DASIN 57'UDY AREA
CI-arlea II. Gerhardt
APN 641-060-02
I.S Acrea wlthln PoeCi Baaln
I
Ittld uae t~Rpdttl~
~ SAwtAiAo A
erage Sewer u(vl<Ibttt
~I ~ver~l~a rawer
.
> ~ ~
k il z~
s~,
f£~
~ , r
t~ene~atton ~'pltat' v
1Ft~w ~
~ ;
Dwo~litr~~I(!(tM _ ~'larw
~Nm
.t3~ F ~
is •.
~~ , ~ ~ ,
' :... `: i. S. _c. ~ ~ ,
...., .~i .. <,
.:~ < v~ :..-
Low Medium 7.5 du 280 gpd/unit 2,100 7.5 l.S
Residential
Aasumea S.0 du/acre.
rn
1
ro Allen L. Gerhardt, Jr.
N
APN 641-060-03
Aasumos S.0 du/sore.
9
'PADLE 2-( (Cm~tlnued)
PROPERTIES AND EDUe WITHIN TIIE
POGGI CANYON BASIN STUDY AREA
Otay Ranch General Development Plen
rn
N
W
10
'FABLE 2-I (Continued)
PROPERTTES AND EDUa WITIITN'fTIE
POGGI CANYON BASIN STUDY AREA
Olav RancL General Development Plan (Continued)
rn
N
11
TABLF. 2-l (Continued)
PROPERTIES AND EDUa WITHIN THE
POGG[ CANYON BASIN STUDY AREA
Olay Ranch General Development Plan (Continued)
rn
N
Punning Area 12 (Waned on General Development Plan)
Lend 1.leii! Qlff-ntity~ ;' Stawa~e ~rera~e Sswc¢ ' $gy(~(Iltglpt ` ~RYt:rRt~4 Sewprt
' h f ~ t~ancwatian Baetur ' ' Flaw glwg(i(
~ frJ
nl ~'bw,~>fpni
,
, -
~~,
Mixed Use 94 acre 2,500 gpd/acre 235,000 839.3 163.2
Vllla`e One West (Based on General Development Plan)
~~d ~3 c-3 ~~3 .Gfi3
1.NRt1 Urr~: ~ f '£s `~Qa14d~~4~"~~ y SY
Sc~R>Rc
A.vE~p~e iS¢w'eC
,k xxy ,t,
~4u1~~ll~i-!~~ t t ~~F-
~~'4ratre sevts4~
,
~ ~
~
`
f~,; ~
F,
S>Zcncration Fartatr Fla>y> ,
~'11'Ipw, fpm
Dwis~litl~
~Ilabt~
;
~ ~
~
~
~
,
~~ ~
f _
Y ' _,
s ,
F
,
'
1~lry~r ,
..,
. is
"' . ~ . i
i . .A. ..:.:en >
~
.-
Single Family 210 du 280 gpd/unit 58,800 210.0 40.8
Olay Ranch General Development Plan
12
TA-ILE 2-I (Continued)
PROPERTIES AND EDUa WITQIN TILE
POGGI CANYON DASIN STUDY AREA
Olay Ranch Village I ([lased on Approved Tentative Map)
R-13 76 du 280 gpd/unit 21,280 76.0 14.8
R-14 (part) 85 du 210 gpd/unit 17,850 63.7 12.4
R-IS 215 du 210 gpolunit 45,150 161.3 31.4
R-16 280 du 210 gpd/unit 58,800 210.0 40.8
R-17 200 du 210 gpd/unit 42,000 150.0 29.2
rn
~
J
R-IH
230 du
210 gpd/unit
48,300
172.5
33.5
rn R-19 204 du 210 gpd/unit 42,840 153.0 29.7
C-l 6,5 acre 2,500 gpd/acre 16,250 58.0 11.3
C-2 S.0 acre 2,500 gpd/acre 12,500 44.6 8,7
CPF-1 10.0 acre 2,500 gpolacre 25,000 89.3 17.4
CPF-2 3.2 acre 2,500 gpd/acre 8,000 28.6 5.5
CPF-3 1.4 acre 2,500 gpd/acre 3,500 12.5 2.4
13
rn
N
J
TABLE 2-I (Continued)
PROPERTIES AND EDUs WITHIN TILE
POGGI CANYON BASIN STUDY AREA
Otay Ranch Village 5 (Based on Approved Tentative Map)
i4
TABLE 2-1 (Continued)
15
'CABLE 2-1 (Continued)
PROPERTIES AND EDUa WITAIN TIIE
POGGI CANYON BASIN STUDY AREA
Eastlake Development
rn
N
cD
EsatLake Land Strap Area
Future Commercial SS acre 2,500 gpd/acre 137,500 491.1 95.5
Future Multi-Family 600 du' 210 gpd/unit 126,000 450.0 87.5
S
btgti[ '
~ ~~
<
~
' ~`K3;~Q0 = ~~>1
# i~3
~
'
tt
, ;,., ~ t... ~ n~ .,.s~;
,,
,~~ ..
' ~.r! ;~ ', . .
, f' ,, „
,
.
:
EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT TOTAL 589,660 2,106.0 409.4
t Aeeed on proposed student body papuletion of 900 (City of Chute Vista)
~ Aeaumes 40 eoros at I S du/acre.
16
TABLE 2-1 (Continued)
PROPERTIES ANA EDUa WITHIN THE
POGGI CANYON BASIN STUDY AREA
County Landfill Area within Poggi Basin
General Plan Designation is Public/Quasi Public - 0 EDUs
Otay Water District Property
General Plan Designation is Public/Quasi Public - 0 EDUs
rn
w
0
17
The design criteria used for analysis of the proposed improvements for the Poggi Canyon
Sewer Basin are in accordance with those used by the City of Chula Vista for previous sewer
planning studies. Table 2-2 provides a summary of the gravity sewer design criteria used
within this study.
Table 2-2
Gravity Sewer Design Criteria
Manning's "n"' O.OI3
Minimum Pipe Size 8 inches
For 8-inch, 10-inch, 12-inch d/D = 0.50
For 15-inch and greater dID = 0.75
Peaking Factor' CVDS 18 in City of Chula Vista
Subdivision Manual
t For the wmputer model, the peaking factor curve is CVDS I8 is approximated by the following
equation: Qq„k = 3. S X Q,,.g tc'~, for Q is gpm.
The value of Meaning's "n" used for the analysis ofthe Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer System
is O.OI3. This value is commonly used for design of new sewer systems. It is not specific to
any pipe material as it is not known what gipe material may be used in any reaches of the
Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer System. Values of "n" in reference materials vary from 0.011 to
0.015 for lined cast iron pipe and vitrified clay pipe. For plastic pipe, values typically range
between 0.011 and 0.015.
The peaking factor used within the computer model is based on an equation that was input
into the computer model. This equation approximates the peaking factor curve in the City
of Chula Vista Subdivision Manual. Several points along the curve were checked to verify
that the peaking factor used in the computer model is equal to or greater than that shown in
18
6-131
the peaking factor curve within the subdivision manual. These calculations are provided in
Appendix F.
The sewage generation factors to be used for this type of planning study are critical for the
appropriate sizing of ultimate sewer facilities. Table 2-3 provides a summary of the sewage
geaeration factors used within this report for different land uses within the Poggi Canyon
Basin Study Area.
Two sets of factors are presented in Table 2-3 and these factors vary only is the average daily
flow generation for residential land use. The higher generation factors, including 280 gpd per
unit for single family and 210 gpd per unit far multi-family residential, are caasistent with the
City of Chula vista Subdivision Manual for new developmem. All computer analyses relating
to sizing of parallel, replacement or new sewer mains will be based on the higher set of
sewage generation factors. The lower set of factors for the residential land uses will be used
when analyzing flows through existing gravity sewer facilities within the Poggi Canyon Basin.
I9
6-132
Table 2-3
Sewage Gensraiiou Factors
Residential
Single-Family 280 gpd/unit 2fi5 gpd/unit
Multi-Family 210 gpd/unit 200 gpd/unit
Commercial/Multi Use I 2,500 gpd/acre I 2,500 gpd/acre
Schools
Elementary 15 gpd/student 15 gpd/student
Junior High School' 20 gpd/student 20 gpd/student
High School' 20 gpd/student 20 gpd/siudent
Community Purpose
Facilities 2,500 gpd/acre 2,500 gpd/aere
(Parks I 500 gpd/acre I 500 gpd/acre
1 For use in anal all flows in llel, re iacemen or tttw
Y~8 P~ P t, gravity sewcn.
Z For use in atulyzing future flows in existing gravity sewer facilities.
Elementary School Capacity is 600 Students.
~ Jnaior High School Capacity is 1,400 Students.
s High School Capacity is 2,400 Studeau.
20
6-133
CHAPTER 3
DATA
As described in Chapter 2, there is a portion of the Poggi Canyon Basin which includes
existing development. This area is on either side of Interstate 805 along Oleander Avenue
and Melrose Avenue. It extends south to Otay Valley Road.
In order to assist in establishing the existing flows within the Poggi Canyon Basin, flow
monitoring was done by the Ciiy of Chula Vista on the existing 8-inch gravity sewer east of
Interstate 805 in Oleander Avenue. The results of the flow metering are included in Appendix
C. This flow metering data was correlated with the existing number of dwelling units within
the basin upstream of the flow metered location. The result was a calculated sewage flow per
EDU quantity which was used for comparison of the calculated flow generated from the
existing development within the Poggi Canyon Basin which is currently sewering down
Oleander Avenue and Melrose Avenue.
Existing EDUs within this area were determined by counting lots from the sewer base maps
obtained from the City of Chula Vista as well as performing field investigations of commercial
and multi-family areas to better establish the actual cumber of dwelling units or other types
of land uses within the basin. Table 3-1 presents a summary of the existing land uses and
dwelling units within the developed portion of the Poggi Canyon Basin. (Note that the
developed portions of the Poggi Canyon Basin exclude any portion of Eastlake which has
been developed. All existing Eastlake development within the Poggi Canyon Basin is
currently being pumped to the Telegraph Canyon Basin Sewer System.)
21
6-134
TABLE 3-1
Summary of Laad Uses within Ezisting Developed Portion of
Poggi Canyon Basin
Area East of Interstate 805
Single Family 658 du 658.0
Multi-Family 28b du 214.5
Commercial 0 0
Elementary School 2 64.3
Area Rest of Interstate 805
Single Family 496 du 496.0
Multi-Family 343 du 257.3
Commercial 8.1 ac 72.3
Elementary School 1 32.1
Appendix D includes a calculation which correlates the flow per EDU for the existing
development within the Poggi Canyon Basin to the metered data. The calculation shows that
the existing flow per EDU is approximately 274 gpd per EDU. For the Poggi Canyon Basin
Sewer System analyses, the existing units in the basin will be multiplied by 280 gpd/EDU for
analysis of new piping, or 265 gpolEDU for analysis of existing pipe. The determination of
the member of EDUs within the basin will be made using the appropriate sewage generation
factors column from Table 2-3.
22
6-135
The land planning informaiion provided by the City of Chula Vista as well as information
provided directly from developers such as Eastlake is the basis for the development of
ultimaie sewage flows generated within the Poggi Canyon Basin. Table 3-2 presents the
ultimate sewage flow estimated for each of the properties within the Poggi Canyon Basin_
This table also includes the equivalent dwelling units for the ultimate flow from each of the
properties.
TABLE 3-2
Summary of Ultimate Sewage Flows and EDUs for All Properties within
Poggi Canyon Basin {Based on 280/210 gpolUnit)
Existing Development 502,460 348.9 1,794.5
Sunbow II 523,530 363.6 1,869.7
Charles H. Gerhardt 2,100 1.5 7.5
Allen L. Gerhardt, Jr. 8,260 5.7 29.5
Otay Ranch General
Development Plan 1,408,340 978.0 5,029.8
Otay Ranch Village 1 341,470 237.1 1,219.5
Otay Ranch Village 5 123,840 86.0 442.5
McMillin 281;770 195.7 1,006.3
Eastlake Development 589,660 409.4 2,106.0
County Landfill 0 0 0
Otay Water District 0 0 0
The properties listed in Table 3-2 encompass all the expected future development within the
Poggi Canyon Basin. The existing development within the Poggi Canyon Basin straddling
Interstate 805 is judged to be built out. There may be a few empty lots scattered throughout
23
6-136
that portion of existing development but nothing significant in terms of additional flow
generation to the Poggi Canyon Sewer. Existing flows within the basin are summarized in
Table 3-1.
As mentioned earlier in this report, Eastlake has some existing development within the
boundary of the Poggi Canyon Basin. Because there is no existing gravity sewer outlet for
this area of Eastlake, a sewage lift station has been constructed along Eastlake Parkway to
pump all sewage flows generated within the Poggi Canyon Basin north to the Telegraph
Canyon Basin. Table 3-3 shows the breakdown between total buildout units and the amount
of development already built.
Table 3-3 also identifies the current level of development within the Eastlake project, which
is being pumped to the Telegraph Canyon Basin. Presently this amounts to 222,260 gpd
(163.2 gpm), which is pumped to the Telegraph Canyon Basin. When the Poggi Canyon
Basin Sewer Interceptor is constructed east to the Eastlake boundary, the Eastlake Parkway
Pump Station will be abandoned in favor of gravity sewering the portion of the Eastlake
Development within the Poggi Canyon Basin.
24
6-137
Eastlakt Parkway Pmm~ Station Abandonment. The Poggi Canyon Basin Study is based
on the assumption that the Eastlake development will ultimately connect to the Poggi Canyon
Basin Sewer System. The basis for the Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer improvement fee
calculated in this study includes the units within the Eastlake development which are within
the Poggi Canyon Basin. l:a order for this study's assumption to remain valid, the Eastlake
Pazkway Pump Station must be abandoned and flows must be re-routed to the future Poggi
Canyon Basin sewer.
The Eastlake Parkway Pump Station is situated within the Poggi Canyon Basin on the west
side of Eastlake Pazkway. It currently provides sewer service to a portion of the Eastlake
development which gravity flows toward Poggi Basin. Since ao facilities exist within Poggi
Canyon Basin that faz east, the pump station diverts the sewage flow to the Telegraph Canyon
Basin.
When the Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer System is constructed in East Orange Avenue to the
eastern edge of Otay Ranch Village S, there will be an opportunity to abandon the Eastlake
Parkway Pump Station in favor of gravity sewering the pump station's service area to the
Poggi Canyon Basin sewer. In order for this io be accomplished, a gravity sewer extension
will have to be constructed from the pump station south and west under the future State
Route 12S right-of--way. In addition to the SR 125 obstacle, there are also two easements
which will have to be crossed: SDG&E, and San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA).
Since the planning and design of the State Route 12S project is currently in progress, it would
be timely for the City of Chula Vista to prepare an alignment study for the proposed sewer
extension. otay Ranch Village 5 is also beginning seal design. Therefore the tie-in point can
be coordinated based on the constraints imposed by the design of SR 125.
This section of the report will describe the existing gravity sewer facilities within the Poggi
Canyon Basin and discuss alternative alignments for the ultimate Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer
Interceptor.
25
6-138
Fzisting ~ravi Sewer Facilities. Currently, the Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer extends from
the DatE-Faivre line at the intersection of Palm Avenue and Rancho Drive north and east to
Orange Avenue east of Interstate 805. The existing pipeline ends a few hundred feet short
of the intersection of Brandywine Avenge and Orange Avenue. The pipeline through this
reach is primarily 8-inch with a few sections of 12-inch, 18-inch and 21-inch pipe. The
portion of gravity sewer south of Dray Valley Road in Melrose Avenue and Rancho Drive up
to the Date-Faivre line is 12-inch diameter. From Otay Valley Road north in Melrose
Avenue, the pipeline is 8-inch diameter. Underneath the Interstate 805 freeway, there is an
existing 18=mch diameter pipeline. In Oleander Avenue on the east side of Interstate 805, the
pipeline is again 8-inch diameter up to approximately Satinwood Way. At this point, it
increases to 21-inch diameter through a condonrinium complex until it reaches Orange
Avenue where there is an existing section of 18-inch pipe.
Disccssion of Alternative Alignments. The proposed alignment for the Poggi Canyon
Basin Sewer Interceptor cast of the existing 18-inch sewer line in Orange Avenue is proposed
to be within the alignment of East Orange Avenue. East Orange Avenue is slated to extend
through Sunbow II, east through Otay Ranch, then through the Otay Ranch Villages I and
5 area and finally past Eastlake. Preliminary road alignment studies show this roadway
following near the bottom ofPoggi Canyon. For this reason, it is the ideal spot for the Poggi
Canyon Basin Sewer Interceptor. In addition, since none of East Orange Avenue has been
constructed beyond the end of the existing I8-inch sewer in East Orange Avenue, the
proposed Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer Interceptor can be constructed along with East Orange
Avenue road improvements.
Alternative alignments for the Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer Interceptor come into
consideration through the existing developed Poggi Canyon Basta area, straddling the
Interstate 805 freeway. Through this area three basic alignments were reviewed. These are
described below:
1. Replacement. Replace the existing 8-inch gravity sewer in Oleander Avenue
and is Melrose Avenue with the ultimate sized gravity sewer required for
ultimate basin flows.
2. Parallel Alignment. Parallel the existing 8-inch gravity sewer in Oleander
26
6-139
Avenue and Melrose Avenue with the ultimate sized gravity sewer for the
Poggi Canyon Basin.
3. Storm Drain Easement. Construct the ultimate size gravity sewer for the
Poggi Canyon Basin within as existing storm drain easement, parallel to
existing Oleander Avenue and Melrose Avenue.
s,placement Alternative. This alternative would involve excavation and removal
of the existing 8-inch gravity sewer line in Oleander Avenue and Mekose Avenue and
replacement of that line with a larger diameter gravity sewer. It would involve asphalt
cutting, removal, and pavement restoration, traffic control within an existing street, as well
as providing temporary sewer service to existing homes on either side of the street while the
construction was in progress. In addition, the existing sewer laterals would have to be tied
to the new gravity sewer.
Working in an existing street with traffic control increases the case of construction. In
additioq removing and replacing the pipeline requires handling sewage flow from the existing
house laterals on a temporary basis. While it can be accomplished, the process is time
consuming as well as disruptive to the neighborhood in terms of noise, construction traffic,
and dirt and debris.
Parallel Aligpment. This alternative proposes to install the ultimate sized gravity
sewer parallel to the existing 8-inch sewer in Oleander Avenue and Melrose Avenue. Under
this alternative, the existing 8-inch sewer in Melrose Avenue sad Oleander Avenue would
stay in place to act as a local collector sewer. All the existing homes would maintain their
sewer lateral connections to the existing 8-inch sewer line. The new larger diameter Poggi
Canyon Basis Sewer Interceptor would be connected to the existing 8-inch at critical points
in order to relieve the 8-inch of ultimate basin flows.
The construction of this parallel line would take place in the existing streets with asphalt
cutting, removal and replacement as well as the similar disruption to the neighborhood from
noise, construction traffic, dirt and debris as discussed under the replacement alternative.
Construction would be simplified in not having to temporarily bypass existing sewer laterals
27
6-140
or reconnect them to the new pipeline. However, construction would be hampered by having
to avoid existing sewer lateral crossings as well as avoiding other existing utilities within the
existing streets.
Generally, there appears to be sufficient room for a parallel gravity sewer within the existing
streets. There maybe special construction required along segments due to clearances between
the gravity sewer line and other wet or dry utilities. These would have to be better defined
during a design level review of this alignment. This alternative may be more desirable than
the replacement alternative. However, there may also be existing conditions within the
existing roadways which may preclude the ability to parallel the existing S-inch sewer in both
Oleander Avenue and Melrose Avenue. A review of these potential obstacles is beyond the
scope of this report.
Storm Drain Easement Alternative. A third alternative is to place the ultimate
sized gravity sewer for the Poggi Canyon Basin within an existing storm drain easement which
runs behind the homes fronting the west side of Oleander Avenue and Melrose Avenue. This
storm drain easement contains a concrete lined storm water channel for storm water flows
collected within the Poggi Canyon Basin. The easement includes a dirt roadway access bench
in which it is possible to construct the ultimate sized gravity sewer for the basin.
There are additional considerations which will have to be addressed with this alignment
alternative. These include providing an enlazged access road for sewer maintenance vehicles
and providing acceptable access points at either end of the alignment to permit City crews to
easily maintain the sewer line. Special construction may also be necessary due to shallow
depth of cover and existing storm drain crossings. Ia additioq construction access and
working space may be limited particularly during the rainy season. These types of issues
could increase the cost of this alternative.
The existing 8-inch gravity sewer in Oleander Avenue and Melrose would be left in place to
serve as a local collector sewer for the ultimate Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer Interceptor.
Connections would be made at the upper end of Oleander Avenue and at Melrose Avenue
near the intersection of Talus Street. This would provide relief to the existing 8-inch gravity
sewers and allow them to continue to be used as a local sewer main.
28
6-141
As part of the Suabow II developmeat project, preliminary improvement plans have been
prepared for this Alternative 3 alignment. These improvement glans demonstrate that it is
feasible to construct the ultimate gravity sewer withir. the storm drain easement along the
backside of the homes fronting the west side of Oleander Avenue and Meh•ose Avenue. The
proposed alignment of the ultimate Poggi Canyon Basin Gravity Sewer Interceptor would
extend south of Otay Valley Road within the storm drain easement to the proposed Reach 9
Regional Interceptor.
Constructing the ultimata gravity sewer for the Poggi Canyon Basin within the storm drain
easement might reduce construction costs due to much reduced traffic control requirements
and reduced asphalt removal and restoration. It would likely be less disruptive to the
neighborhood. However, io meet the.City's design criteria may entail additional costs, and
the special construction constraints may increase the project costs.
proposed AliEnment Alternative. As indicated eaziier in this section of the report, the
Sunbow II project has been processing plans for the construction of the gravity sewer within
the storm drain easement. The City has expressed some reservation that the storm drain
easemeat alignmeat between Otay Valley Road and Melrose Avenue (beiweea Manhole 201
and Manhole 204 oa Exhibit A) is the most cost effective alignment. In order to protect its
interests while allowing the project developer flexibility to exercise judgement as to which
alternatives may be most cost effective, the City has agreed to accept the storm drain
easement alignment, subject to the design being reviewed and approved by the Engineering
Department, with a 5600,000 cap on the construction cost of this segmeat of the Poggi
Canyon Basin Sewer. The project developer will not be reimbursed by either the Dff or the
City for construction costs in excess of 5600,000.
29
6-142
CHAPTER 4
ANALYSIS
A computer model was created for the Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer Interceptor System. This
model extends from the upper portion of the basin at the boundary of Otay Ranch Village 5
and Eastlake Development, wesrand south to the interceptor's ultimate connection to the
Reach 9 Regional Interceptor. The computer model diagram, including manhole numbers and
reach numbers, is presented in Exhibit "A° attached to this report.
In 'the preparation of the computer model, an attempt was made to keep it simple and
minimize the number of gravity sewer reaches. The reaches were divided at points where
there was a slope change and where a significant amount of sewage flow from any of the
contributing properties is expected to be input. The gravity sewer slopes included in the
model were obtained from a review of the Sunbow Tentative Map and tentative map for the
Otay Ranch Village 1 and 5 project. These two sources were used to determine slopes is
future East Orange Avenue. The slopes within the existing developed azea of the Poggi
Canyon Basin were obtained from a review of the preliminary design drawings for the
Sunbow R project offsite sewer system.
]n general, minimum anticipated gravity sewer line slopes were used in the computer model
analysis. Verification of flow capacities for each reach of the Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer
Interceptor should be made during the design phase of any portions of this interceptor. It
may be possible that the final design of the interceptor based on actual scopes that can be
achieved (which'may be greater than the slopes assumed in this study) may incorporate a
decrease in the fine size of some of the reaches.
Flows estimated from the future development prajecis within the Poggi Canyon Basin were
input to the computer model at locations that best approximated their actual connection
points based on the best available data for each of the projects. Existing flows were input
3Q
6-143
into the computer model by counting the actual EDUs which would be discharged into the
Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer Interceptor at the computer modeled manholes. Table 4-i
provides a summary of the average quantity of sewage flow entering each reach of the
proposed Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer Interceptor. 'fhe sewage IIows identified in this table
were input at the upstream point of each sewer reach for the purposes of modeling the system.
3I
6-144
TABLE 4-1
Summery of Sewage Flows for the Poggi Canyon B
~ein Sewer Interceptor
,t
~! s sia < ..x ,yo' AXpMll~c.)RIPII'~gp~~ ~~. ~
zz F s c ':
.
Ite#ch
~
~:
yd
4
~
~
~ ,.
y:~
E>E~ Ftp :~
i. ~1: ,1 y
y
~lll4~9'~1'~f
~,4ilrbe-~t r4r(iarh~rd4' t~t7ta `
-~ ~~ ~S i~a~}^ >stt c
: _ ~~~~~~ r. ~t~y ~t~~'-: M4'1-1<f~flp ~t•~~~#Il~e I
`YpA11IAtIY4:.
~
i
bevsippl~bk~
tl[ ~~ ~(ie1
~g~Rl:
:'k>lach II~Inslt' :,r
r:; g. I?larr
y
„
, ~
.
~ .¢ 1-~wg
; ~ ~ ' z' _
s
n
~
l
mkat' Y41Mga 1 VIIIN~! 3~' ~° ' , ~ .
_ ,
,
.
yr
yy
i
,
~ ~.s
.fit =
~~
'
~
£
.
M
^
.
'
,E..'
_:. < ..
~~i i.:
221
520,836 38,220 589,660 1,146,716
220 172,256 85,670 170,220 1,876,862
219 417,024 111,880 2,105,436
218 152,168 341,470 2,599,074
217 2,100 8,260 142,056 2,751,490
216
2,751,490
215 40,320
2,991,810
214 170,352
2,962,162
213 1,120 312,858
3,276,140
212
3,276, 140
211
3,276,140
210 45,920
3,322,060
209 31,724
3,353,784
208 2,520
3,356,304
207
3,356,304
rn
+~
cn
32
Flow in Resoh 9 of the Salt Creek Baein (lravity Sewer Analysis.
33
TABLE 4-!.A
Summary of EDUa for the Poggi Canyon Baain Sewer Interceptor
~~ ~ A!'lr11~AF~ulrtLp±k ski "sr „ 1 <
~
Reach u r
'
` ~><1~k~M'~ s ~4A,tPN :'~"st~erb~>'dk I~:~~aFhN~rdk "4~k~1~
.Nt~
neh - ldk~Y bk~k>k•~ y1Ke141~iklp '~e
k~
~lie~ ~'p
,
k
tl
4~
.
~
.
)
q
4
o
v
ibexal~~ ~iiik~~ ~ ~~' ~' : ~ y
~*~~~
r~4 ' ~ka,MOk- Xk0lM4kA ~ ~ '~ s s I~bU
" '
n
,
~
: ~ <:
: ~& ~ ,; e~rl~i~~enk~ Ykpa~~ k Vllk
~` '°
f
4
'
~
`
~
3
~
;
!
: ga*
x
~
~ z
'~
:
~
'
~
'
i
pI
t
~
.
:,.
f
_ D :
~ 5 ..
: Sik
w_
t z
.L . '
... .., ...,..: ..,.; ~ ...; .,, r 7x
u~
.. .. ,:.: .. u. ., So :f ,. •,
221 1,860.0 136.5 2,106.0 4,102.5
220 629.5 306.0 608.0 5,646.0
219 1,4(19.4 398.3 7,533.7
21 B 543.6 1,219.5 9,296, 8
217 7,5 29,5 507
3
. 9,841.1
216
9,841.1
21 S 144.1
9,985, 2
214 608.4
10,593.6 .
213 4 1,117.2 ~
11,714.8
212
11,7 ! 4.8
211
11,714.fl
210 164
11,878.8
209 113.3
11,992.1
208 9
12,001.1
207
12,001.1
rn
a
34
a,
Flow in Resoh 9 oPthe 9slt Creek Basln Gravity Sewer Analysis.
35
Appendix E includes a copy of the computer model printouts for the Poggi Canyon. Basin
System Analysis. Exhibit "A", attached to the back of this report, provides a manhole number
and reach diagram corresponding to the computer model.
New Piae Sizing Anxlyie. Two scenarios were modeled with the computer system. The
first scenario was to model the entire system based on a single family dwelling unit sewage
generation rate of 280 gallons ger day per unit and amulti-family generation rate of Z10
gallons per day per unit. This scenario is the basis for the recommended line sizes for the
Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer Interceptor. Table 4-2 provides a summary of the recommended
gravity sewer line sizes for the Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer Interceptor on a reach by reach
basis. Included in this table is a minimum slope estimated for each reach.
This analysis included recalculating the size of the Reach 9 Regional Interceptor. This
interceptor was originally sized in the Salt Creek Basin Gravity Sewer Analysis. The original
sizing of the Reach 9 Regional Interceptor concluded that a 36-inch gravity sewer at a
minimum slope of 0.23 percent is adequate for ultimate Salt Creek Basin flows. The Poggi
Canyon Basin analysis shows that adding ultimate Poggi Canyon Basin flows to the Reach 9
Regional Interceptor will not require an increase in the size of the pipe. Under ultimate peak
flows from both the Salt Creek Basin and the Poggi Canyon Basin, the 36-inch interceptor
will flow out a depth of 0.75 D/d, or 27.0 inches of depth. No increase in pipe size is needed
for the Poggi Canyon Basin flows unless the minimum pipe slope of 013 percent is not
achievable.
A double-check of the Reach 9 Irttaceptor sizing is provided below to assure that the
appropriate peaking factor is being used.
Ultimate average flow
Divide by 280 gpd/EDU
= I 1,569,427 gpd
= 41,319 EDUs
Multiply by 3.5 persons/EDU = 144,617 people
3b
6-149
From CVDS 18, Peaking Factor is 1.62
Then peak flow = .18,742,472 gpd
= 29.0 cfs
29.0 = [k/0.013] (36/12)~"'~ {0.0023)~'m
k = 0.420
From grater and King, Table 7-14 fork = 0.420, D/d = 0.75
37
6-150
TABLE 4-2
PagYi Canyon Basia Sewer Interceptor Analysis Summary
=Reacle ~"safma~~ ~~~x~c=~,~~7ayK;~~ ~~'Ce'~~3pit1~ "1a~x~P~~c.
~ s~ Y~ :S~ y`Y "OY~(6. hy~~~]Ag6y~'~ ~ RLn `•"~<~ Sv.R bf~4 ~§fi~2sxY ~~~v~ ~p~a~`~~ y.~i
1 ~~ ~~ Y` wKi~ n ~ 1 ~ ~ hi 2 l•..W ~WG'~i1 (.IVY
221 0.70 1,148,716 2,145,341 IS
220 0.70 1,576,862 2,Sb4,894 15
219 0.50 2,105,436 3,720,715 18
2I8 0.80 2,599,074 4,501,354 18
217 0.70 2,751,490 4,739,659 18
216 1.00 2,751,490 4,739,659 18
215 0.90 2,791,810 4,802,443 18
214 1.00 2,962,1b2 S,Obb,842 18
213 1.83 3,276,140 5,550,552 18
212 0.85 3,276,140 5,550,552 18
Z11 0.87 3,276,140 5,550,552 18
210 0.93 3,322,060 5,620,910 21
209 0.40 3,353,784 5,669,453 21
208 0.40 3,356,304 5,673,312 21
207 0.61 3,356,304 5,673,312 21
206 0.50 3,356,304 5,673,312 21
205 0.50 3,537,324 5,949,518 21
204 0.73 3,725,680 6,235,517 21
203 0.73 3,725,680 6,235,517 , 21
202 0.65 3,725,680 6,235,517 21
201 0.66 3,777,480 6,313,939 2i
9 0.23 11,569,427 17,395,906 3b
38
6-151
F.aisting Pipe Adeouaty Analvaia, A second scenario was analyzed wish the computer
model in order to check whether existing pipelines within the existing Poggi Canyon Basin
system would be capable of handling ultimate flow based on the single family residential
sewage generation factor of 26i gallons per day per unit and amulti-family generation factor
of 200 gallons per day per unit. The results of this scenario are printed out in Appendix E and
show no change in the results for the required line sizes.
Under both sewage flow generation scenarios, the existing 18-inch and 21-inch gravity sewer
piping in Orange Avenue leading down to Oleander Avenue has sufficient capacity for
ultimate basin flows. However, under both sewage flow generation scenarios, the existing
18-inch gravity sewer under the Interstate 805 freeway is shown to have insufficient capacity
for ultimate basin flows. Therefore, this report recommends a replacement sewer under
Interstate 805 to handle ultimate basin flows.
Existing 18-inch IInder Interstate 805, The existing 18-inch sewer reach under the
Interstate 805 freeway is shown as being under capacity even when using the lower 265/200
gpd/unit sewage generation factors. Even full-pipe capacity is not sufficient for peak ultimate
flows. Appendix G provides calculations identifying the avai]able capacity, in EDUs, within
the 18-inch sewer. Table 4-3 provides a summary of the results for various flow depth
criteria.
The total number of EDUs which are projected to flow through the 18-inch sewer are
12,834.3 EDUs. This number is based on 265 gpd/EDU.
An alternative to replacing or paralleling the existing 18=inch sewer line under the freeway
with a new 21-inch sewer is to allow it to surcharge during peak flows. Appendix H includes
a calculation to estimate the amount of surchazge in the manhole and gravity sewer system
on the upstream end (east end) of the 18-inch sewer reach under ultimate flow conditions.
The results indicate that the backup in the proposed storm drain alignment sewer on the east
side of the freeway would be approximately 80 feat. The backup in the existing 8-inch sewer
would not be as dramatic. However, grease buildup and solids buildup could still occur
resulting in increased maintenance on this reach of sewer line if it was not replaced.
39
6-152
TABLE 4-3
Available Capacity in Ezisting
IS-lath Gravity Sewer Under I-805 Freeway
(based on 265 gpd/EDU}
II~'t~ ~ ' ~fsl'.~~s ~ ~~ ~~ufin~ilx~~ He~pt ~ingt"FD~IIs
a s c <. ~« xv,k zro. -pS kXitd M < '~-s.S~Y xt„3e n.as~~a4 r ~ x
t v. t"~',~'g`°zn~°~'£x s 2"YE~~'; `~ 3 k -a f'-...'h^ Y £~if t° P~l~r`IiJ.'^'~
_.:
,.
0.75 9,708 942 8,766
0.85 11,104 942 10,162
0.93 11,663 942 10,721
1.0 10,779 942 9,837
While the report recommends replacement in order to assure that the D.I.F. includes the
necessary monies, it may be that as the basin approaches buildout, peak flows will be less than
currently estimated. In that event, replacement would not be necessary. Monitoring of flow
in this reach will assist in the final determination of whether or not the sewer should be
replaced. It is not recommended that the sewer be allowed to surcharge regularly and
significantly. Under such a scenario, replacement should be undertaken.
Table 4-4 provides the unit construction costs which were used to prepaze the estimate of
construction cost far the Poggi Canyon Basin improvements. Table 4-5 presents an estimate
of construction costs for the recommeaded improvements for the Poggi Caayoa Basin Sewer
Interceptor. The estimated costs for all reaches requiring improvement is S6,132,984. Note
that four reaches of existing pipeline located in Orange Avenue, east of Oleander Avenue
have sufficient capacity for ultimate design flows. However, Reach 205 which extends under
Interstate 805 freeway has been shown to have insufficiem capacity for ultimate design flows.
This report recommends a replacement 21-inch gravity sewer for this reach.
40
6-153
Revised costs fez the Reach 9 Regional Interceptor have not been calculated. The analysis
within this report has determined that no increase in size of the Reach 9 Regional Interceptor
is needed in order to accommodate u]timate Poggi Canyon Basin flows. Therefore, the costs
for the Reach 9 Regional Interceptor as estimated in the Salt Creek Basin Gravity Sewer
Analysis are still valid.
The estimate of construction costs includes a 15 percent allowance for engineering,
inspection services, and surveying, a 25 percent contingency, and a 2 percent allowance for
City of Chula Ysta administrative costs. The unit costs used in Table 4-5 are estimated for
ductile iron pipe and are based on a review of recent construction costs for similar type
projects. These costs are based on an l:NR-CCI Index for Los Angeles of 6598 (April 1997).
TABLE 4-4
IInit Construction Costs'
Slae.IaoTtss __
~ ~.~a~Y~iyIK~,IDf71 _
C~~SA+~i~; Y
~~ V~4e~gQ'Zi~ ::
8 55 65
10 75 85
12 90 100
15 100 l15
18 115 130
2] 125 140
24 135 160
30 150 180
36 210 240
42 280 320
36' Jacked Steel Casi¢g sad Pipe 800 800
~ Iaalodm odr eo~b Woeiobd wiLL ao.owelio~ of W pipeliaa.
41
6-154
TABLE 4-S
Poggi Caayon Baaia Sewer Infercaptor Improvements
fi c Estimate of~C~fo~n~atractioa~aC±yost ~Y. -.~±* aY
,~Beac3ti'ta.; l+C4~f~.x<s < aiYSaes' air ii..sFIIIL ~Ol~.~f. ~IO'ut C4~tj ~OllaP'F <:.
20] 2,700 21 140 378,000
202 600 2I Lump Sum ---'
203 1,600 21 Lump Sum 600,000
204 200 21 Lump Sum --'
.205 800 21 800 640,000
206 1,400 21 140 196,000
207 400 21 .140 56,000
208 600 21 Existing 0
209 280 Z t Existing 0
210 190 21 Existing 0
211 220 I8 Existing 0
212 600 18 130 78,000
213 500 I8 130 65,000
214 2,200 18 115 253,000
21.5 1,900 IS 115 218,500
216 800 18 115 92,000
217 2,000 18 lI5 230,000
218 2,100 18 115 241,500
219 6,000 18 115 690,000
220 2,700 15 100 270,000
221 2,700 15 100 270,000
^;xaLfatal S: A< ~ Sr. .S ~ R SE
IS% Engineeriag,Iaspection, Surveying .~l~w ~1YYYmP:.
641,700
25f/e Contingency
'FO'1GLL ~ ~ :x tip ~` 'z?". ~ ~ ~~a°: `~~f`~'.,~~r3"~z` n xv~ x~y~,
2% City Administration 1,069,500
~~ s34~A.~i~a~a ~!
119,784
Poggi Canyon Basin Plan Revision 6 Revisions (a3 54,000 each 24,000
GR~ND~'Q'TAL E. " ~ ~ ~6,F37,984
1 Reaches 202 through 204 are capped at 5600,000.
42
6-155
The improvements to the Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer are expected to be completed over
several yeazs as development within the basin progresses. The majority of the recommended
sewer line will be installed in future East Orange Avenue. This is expected to occur
concurrent with the construction of the road.
Many sections of the existing gravity sewer west of Interstate 805 must be upsized for
ultimate flows. There is some potential for these improvements to be constructed in phases.
The following discussion provides the results of the phasing analysis performed for this study.
Appendix I contains computer runs for the existing gravity sewer system west of Interstate
805. An exhibit in Appendix I shows the computer model diagram.
The Sunbow II project is currently proposing to build the new Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer
within the storm drain easement parallel to-and west of dleander Avenue and Melrose
Avenue. A sewer reach over capacity in either of these streets would trigger the parallel
ultimate gravity sewer to be built in the storm drain alignment.
The computer runs in Appendix I provide the backup for the information presented here. The
data is based on replacement of a reach when the existing reach flows full. Ia actual practice,
the City should establish a lower threshold requirement to provide for a margin of safety. The
existing system should not be subjected to surchazging prior to being replaced.
Table 4-6 includes a summary of the number of additional EDUs which can be added to the
existing system before certain reaches flow at full pipe. The analysis is dose based on 265
gpd/EDU.
43
6-156
TABLE 4-6
PLasing of Improvements in the Poggi Canyoa
Basin West of Interstate 805
130 130 202 Construct Reaches 202,
203, and 204 to relieve
sewer in Melrose Avenue.
209 79 201 Construct Reach 201, tie
into existing 12-inch in
Rancho Drive if Reach 9
Regional Interceptor is not
built.
480 271 -- Build improvements to
existing 12-inch in Raacha
Drive between Reach 201
and Rios Avenue.
1,108 628 206 Construct Reaches 206 and
207 to relieve sewer in
Oleander Avenue.
~ Based on 265 gpd/EDU.
44
6-157
CHAPTER 5
FINANCING
Financing Through Sewer Benefit Area Fee
The Developmem Impact Fee is calculated based on the total estimated cast of construction
of the recommended improvements spread over the total number of future EDUs within the
Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin requiring the facilities. Spreading the costs on an equivalent
dwelling unit basis allows for assigning the share of costs in an equitable manner to all the
land uses within the Poggi Canyon Basin Study Area.
In Chapter 3, Table 3-Z provided a summary of ultimate EDUs for all the properties within
the Poggi Canyon Basin Study Area. This summary of EDUs included existing development
in the western portion of the Poggi Canyon Basin as well as some existing development within
the Eastlake project. In order to establish the number of future EDUs within the Poggi
Canyon Basin which will be used for determining the Development Impact Fee, we seed to
subtract the existing EDUs within the basin. The following shows this calculation:
Total EDUs within the Poggi Canyon Basin 13,505.3
Minus Existing EDUs in the Western Portion of the Poggi Canyon Basin -1,794.5
Minus Existing EDUs within the Eastlake Development -793.8
Total Future EDUs within the Poggi Canyon Basin I0,9I7.0
While the majority of the ultimate sewage flow being generated within the Poggi Canyon
Basin is the result of future development, there are 2,588.3 existing EDUs within the basin
which are not obligated to participate in the Poggi Canyon Basin Development Impact fee.
Portions of the existing sewer system serving these EDUs will need to be upgraded to bandit
ultimate flows of the new developments. The cost of improvements have been apportioned
45
6-158
between existing and new development based on their need for the new facilities. The City
of Chula Vista will fund the upgrade of a portion of the existing system {see Table 5-1) with
reserves that ware earmarked for the expansion of existing sewer systems. This will lower
the fee burden on new residents and provide existing residents with a system that has an
extended service life.
TABLE 5-1
Total City Contribution
Resc7t <, Mist (#'rorii ~abIE 4, ~`"~;, . '. <.
201 378,000
X02 ~ pi
203 600,000
204 0'
206 196,000
207 56,000
5'u[itotal 1,T3'ai,~0i}
15% Engineering & Inspection 184,500
25% Contingency 307,500
h`ubtotal :, 1>1,11011.
2% City Administration 34,440
'f'atal nP Mazrniam tarty Coatrcbatzon ,11;7:5G,+~4Q ° j
t Reachn 202 through 204 ere capped at 5600,000.
The development impact fee is based on the cost of required system improvements and the
total future EDUs in the basin. The calculation for the Poggi Canyon Basin takes into
account the City of Chula Vista participation in the cost for the required system upgrades.
46
6-159
A total of 10,917.0 EDUs comprise the future development within the Poggi Canyon Basin.
The foilowing formula is used to determine the recommended improvement costs per EDU:
Total Cost of Recommended Improvements
Development Impact Fee = Total Future EDUs
Total Cost of Recommended Improvements
Needed for Future Development
Development Impact Fee
= 56,132,984 - 51,756,440 = $4,376,544
$4,376,544
_ _ $400.9 per EDU
10,917.0 EDUs
Use $400 per EDU.
This Development Impact Fee will be subject to an annual adjustment based on the
Engineering News Record (ENR) Construction Cost Index for Los Angeles. The ENR-CCI
for Los Angeles stood at 6598 in April 1997. The annual adjustment will also Lake into
consideration actual construction costs, and changes in the type and density of development.
Table 5-2 provides a summary of the Development Impact Fee calculated on a per EDU basis
for the various land uses within the Poggi Canyon Basin. In this manner, the costs will be
apportioned to the new developments proportional to their need for the sewer facilities.
TABLE 5-2
Sewer Benefit Area Fees Based on Land Use Categories
`F;and;>Ose ', EDI7;E~actor' _ 'Fee:;
Single Family Residential 1.00 EDU/unit $400.00/unit
Multi-Family Residential 0.75 EDU/unit 5300.00/unit
Cammercia]/Multi-Use 8.93 EDU/acre $3,572.00/acre
Elementary School 32.14 EDU/site 512,856.00/site
Junior High School 100.00 EDU/site $40,000.00/site
High Schoai 171.43 EDU/site 568,572.00/site
Community Purpose Facilities 8.93 EDU/acre 53,572.00/acre
Parks 1.79 EDU/acre $ 716.00/acre
47
6-160
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Overview of Sewer Service for Specific Planning Area 1 of the pray Ranch Project,
Prepared by Wilson Engineering, June 4, 1996
Gravity Sanitary Sewer Design and Construction, ASCE Manuals and Reports on
Engineering Practice No. 60, WPCF Manual of Practice No. FE-5, Prepazed by a
Joint Task Force of the American Society of Civi] Engineers and the Water Pollution
Control Federation
48
6-161
.~ .. UlU .1.. +
.a
Q
~4
~~i
~~~«~~~~tt~~~R~
a~^~?~~~~~~~~9
~dYF~~~~lgtt~~g
~~~~~
~~
~d~~~~~
R'~dw'Fl ~ e~~ a
~ ~ ~
~ ~~~ ~
~$
~i~ir~i
~t~~Ytg
b
s
/, / ~,t
~~ , 1
.~y~ ~~
1 t .~
~ ~t ~~~
•~r• ~tpf '•1• .r.~~ yam.
~ ~~ ~. _
:~ \ •i
1~
:~~~ ~ ..~
• Q . ,
..~
>,
` y ,
~~ `
`' ` - ~ '••
~.
fr ~ ~' i
~G1'A~FOAAfEl.L ~K'
T1jpA P1~M'IdG 8 OF.Sf~ ~~
Qf RILt A~T~$ ~
~~•l ~W
6-163
TADLE A-1
Sewage Generation for Properties Within the Poggi Canyon Dasin Study Area
Dased on 280/210 gpd/unit
SUNDOW II
I:and UAe; „ Qugrt~ily Sewage Generation Average."Sewer Equival~nf Avel•aPe
Factor Irldw, Dw,tll.~n i:Jnlter Sewes Fldw ;
,gPd ~.,
• EDCts
,,;
'.gPm
_. _ ;
.
Single Family 741 du 280 gpd/unit 207,480 741 0 ,
144 1
Multi-Family S80du 210 gpd/unit 121,800 435.0 84.G
Park/Community 12.2 ac 2,500 gpd/acre 30,500 108.9 21 2
Censer
Commercial 10.0 ac 2,500 gpd/acre 25,000 89.3 17 4
Elementary School 1 9,000 gpd 9,000 32.1 6.2
Business Perk
.. .:: h,u,. .4.R ..Y.
. 51 9 ac
.. 2,500 gpd/acre
-.. 129 750
~ g63,q 90 1
IOW Split
To MH 215: Elementary School and 112 SFbU 28:0 gpm
To MH 214: Business Park and 145 SFDU 118.3 gpm
To MH 213; Remaining 217,3 gpm
v
cD
i
cD
A-3
APPENDIX A
Land Use Planning Data
for the Majar Development
Projects Within the
Poggi Canyon Basin
Based on 280/210 gpd/unit
Project: Charles H. Gerhardt and Allen L. Gerhardt, Tr.
A-3
6-165
TADLE A-1
Sewage Generation for Properties Within the Poggi Canyon Dasin Study Area
Dosed on 2801210 gpolunit
CIIARLES II. CERHARDT
rn
i
rn
rn
I.S Acres within Poggi Rosin
Land bso Quantity Sewage ; ' Average Sewer Equivlslent,: AVtrpge Input Al
Generation factor Flow, Dwt4Ung [rplta, Sewer Manhole
gPd EDUs ~ F(pW, 1Vymber
,.,
8Pm
Low Medium 7.5 dui 2130 gpd/unit 2,100 7,5 1.5 217
Residential
• Assumes S.0 du/acre.
ALLEN L, GERIiARDT, JR,
5.9 Acrea with Poggi Raain
t.and ~#~~ 3''
p ~ ~~ QI!a~t~ty ~. ~. SBWa a
.
g ~: ':
~ .AYera~e SCR'C~ x .~£ a _..
Eq~lyAlt:n" x> ~^' s ~.
t~Y4~1~fiT
e e '-.
t at
l
~
_
s,,~~y~, ' ~ ,
, ¢
Cenergtign F~gtor
i[zlow, r
~el"~in
>~
~~nit#
i ~
~~
'~
` .
t
nP
h
1~
~4
~~~; ~~
.
~:
$ d
'
~ _
p
~
,
~~`~~11T.1~ ~s ~
~' ~FS
s
tlbr~
~' o
1e1
,
I~1~~
u bar
~~.
o ~ Y Y r .
,~ S
~ ~
., ry
~~;~w ~~ , h~~;
..... ~ ~.:a ~._.
~
Low Medium 29.5 du • 2fSO gpd/unit 8
260 29
5 5
7
, . . 217
Residential
• Assumes 3.0 du/acre.
A-$
APPENDIX A
Laad Use Planning Data
for the Major Development
Projects Within the
Poggi Canyon Basin
Based on 280/210 gpd/unit
Project: Otay Ranch General Development Plan
A-6
6-167
WILSON ENGINEERING
-~-- - --
_- s~:. ~ _ - ------ ---= ------- ------ --
-_-.-
_
-
~_- - ----- yr .~-=---- -
MKS Z -' -~~ Il-__ tz . ~sr T
2r~ - o0 98 ~ --- --• ------ ~tJhl~o
7V : - ; 2g.fo
-
--- ~_
i
~ ~~
i _
' J i f
- i
j '~G c
~ j 3 ~ i l i - `~I
i ~ i
2~.~_ ~~~d~__. zis~og' dfrzo .- --
-~~ ---- ----L~~..?~ -------- -- ------ --
- ---- --- --1 b1.c! --~---- -~--- -----
~~~
i7~ z
- ri1.cf
- - ^ _ , ~nt74 ~; ~,.1'! 1 ~ 340
91 .n
6-168 3
.W +o n fYMECi Yii fwE[r i.
L \ ~ 6. ~ ' '1n[ r`ll\/~ Ir tt~ 1' "1'~ ~ ,~ . ,.} ~ ~ ,.., ly{ •
- \~ s..
t 9 '`a ~' ~ ` ~ '~
~~ ~' w "~
I` ~ 0. . j
a ~. , V
i
~ ~
. , ~'-
~': Ap
rl lli' L'. x -. 1PSir ••••f~
[[ 1 ~~. ® ~ + An~[Tj. ~ 111 .. ri
5 ' IT J~ ~. kj~~lf kt S+~f ~r
•.
11,(/`/~Q~1'[ 1,- i 1~~ , ~ `1`~,~ ~.~ap~~~{~yS i~~~•`' Ii• ~ ~((~~f~ ' •~~ ``~.,~tl~ I \~~ ~, ~ ~
.I PPr~'_ ~ .f f
1r1r~~((}}ii;I~K1¢ .~~..` • ' ,•r~ O U I 1 ~. ~ ~ V. ~ ~ ~l}i ' ~ 1•~ ~ : .~.. 1 •'
.. • r ~ i' •~ '•.. -li • ..~ /~ ~ s.' r~i 111•. ~ I.
1 L - f • ~ ~ I / /f , I . \ 7t' 1 '}Iw ~" / [ \ i I~J~/~r t ~ • \ r~ I
1,
~11' r p:,. ~ d111 il.''111~ ~ l.. r '" i• ~ ~ [~ (~' ^.r"~/` !!\s~•~\1 ~`~\~ ., (i rlfl(/Yl, 1\ `v~ ~~1'0l~•III.~ ,,.
..I + ~', r lI, r-1-~1 ~ ' 1 _ ; ~[ ~1 7 ~.~•'. ~~ ~ /+. /~~ : -• /' ~~1.:.; ') ~\.i .>•J /1 (11 ~/.J~~ ~\\ J f ,.IyNM• I~/J.;
~• / \ . , • ~ 1 { ' • •~ '1111 '',~ • , f • r • l1 ~.
(I I,i ~ •' it ~ 'n~ ,, R •. `,~ . 1~' 1 \ r. •7 ` {.
i Ir`. ~ i 'r , ~ . '~: Mt~ • , r .tip `
,. ,
i. ~ A • ~~i • b• J ~• M2Y~. ~1 • 'r
., .. ~ ~ '- ''~ .aT '.~. ~ ..~, ~ 'ter
~":. ,_.~. ..•: : /~ ,'~'~ i yl~ Il ~. /!~I V 6/I ~{~/, .~~'Mpq,~~ y .•,,....~.. ~ ~t}- A .~@ r~ _ /t t:_ji, IRIY ~' w~.. ~ I
• ~ S 1
` •w ' 4 r
~ p{4
:V ( :, . O
/`' ~ t
C 1 ~,p ,
.. .. ~ i-, , _ ~pN
~ ,l, a ~ , f
u..n `; ..i ~ W
I i
\ ~ /
• ~~ ;~ ~ a ~!_ ~~ X54,.
~~~' ~... 1 ; 9 ~iF
:--~~ . .. , ~; ~ ~• .~ ~ . ~ O ,,. ~ GIs '
~.~r. A~ ~,-a ~ !
~.- , !
~.-.. ~'-' - O - (Q7 r
d ~~ ~'S. ~
!
~ .1 }. 3 e
PJ~M-~(~~JII~ 5lJ ~ :~f-~[~
.r • ' I ~ ~ h
1//nll~ll ~f ~. ~ i ~ • ~ tst~. .. ,f'~,..1RR'i. ~. «~ W - a y +
WILSON ENGINEERING
~5 _ .__ - --- - -- --- ----~ --
wit SON ENGINEERING
.-
TADLE A-1
Sewage Centration for Properties Within the Poggi Canyon ilasin Study Area
Rased on 280/210 gpd/unit per EDU
Otay Ranch General Development Plan
rn
J
W
Vlliflge 2 (Dosed on General Aevelopment Plan)
I-rfl11dU9E~ Qnfl11~4~t'~ Sewage ~ ~verageSewer ~r~(i~~glar)1;,
.. 4t#'V~rN~eSrwer
` .
Crener ration Fatter Fiow, ~.
D~~~I~ng 114~tpli . ~t+IoW, ~(i111
Single Family 1,044 du 280 gpd/unit 292,320 1,044.0 203.0
Park 20 acre 500 gpd/acre 10,000 35.7 6.9
Elementary School 1 9,000 gpd 9,000 32. I 6.3
Mixed Use 10 acre 2,500 gpd/acre 25,000 89.3 17.4
30% to MH No. 217 70.1 gpm
40% to MH No. 218 93.4 gpm
30% to MH No. 219 70.1 gpm
A-7
TAB1.C A-1 (Continued)
SewAge Generation for Properties Within the Poggi Canyon Basin Study AreA
BASCd on 280/210 gpd/unit per EDU
OtAy ftAnCll GenerAl DCVelopment PIAn
rn
J
Planning Area 12 (Based on General Development Plan)
Lgnd Use y Qupitti4y Sewage Average Sewer ~ fvq,aivalp€~t Av4rsi~,t Sewer
Gener`ptlon F'gctar Flow ;
x Flow
lfgiltg~
Dwelli~ig
~ptri'
~ ,
~ , ~
t
<
i ' gPd~ `;;1~111J`s ~3
Mixed Use 94 acre 2,500 gpd/acre 235,000 839,3 163.2
:::
lit Data
U+low S
. x
.' ,:
-
~'
; s s
~ '~4' y
p i ~ `+'
All to MH No. 221
Village One West (Based on General Development Plan)
Land 1145
~ QuArtity Sewpge '; ~YerpBg Sewer ,~gulv~ler(( ~`~ ' ~ Av~ra~e Sewer .
kk
,; t3~ e rt3 }'.c `
~ x , ,< T'.k
Ganerauon Factar .x
171ow ~t~r Fs~y<~~ a xC~
1?we ti
~lnits,
Q7 2~ ~~~&.
s f~ ii~•low~
gpm
~
...: a
r k
~
` '
'
:
_ gPd'~
? p s
~ fib ~K
~
~ ... ~;
..
_H ,<~
;
. ,~" -... , , ,..
. .,
: ;
. .,.
r..
Single Family 2l0 du 280 gpd/unit 58,800 210.0 40.8
~r<
ltlowSplit ~t
y
~lt ~
}
h #F
. ~ ~
„ _~ ~ ~ .
~ ,~ caw
70% to MH No. 218 12.2 gpm
70% to MH No. 217 28:6 gpm
A-10
TABLE A-1 (Continued)
Sewage Generation far Properties Within the Poggi Canyon Basin Stndy Area
Based on 280/210 gpd/unit per EDU
Otay Ranch General Development Plan
rn
i
J
J
cn
Otay Ranch General Development Plan
4and Use ~ z '
<Qyat~f~t~
'
<Sewage is
Average Se-wor
t
Equ~vltlept
`
; Aver~go Sewer
.
+, ~
Genarntlan ~Il4t4r
>Jtetti-. ,
,
~ nwel~ltig ~!n(tes=
.,Flow, gRm
OTAY RANCII GE~N OPMEIYT pI,AN TQTAIt: ~
~1tA1~ 1f~V$i ' ' 1
408,340 5;024
$
'~ ' ^ 978
11
, , ,
, t ,
.
.
$]IMMAI~
M11 NQ.
217
216
219
220
221
Total. end
142,056 Total, gRm
98.7
152,168 105.6
417,024 289.6
176,256 122.4
520,836 361.7
1,408,340 978.0
A-11
APPENDIX A
Land IIse Planning Dsta
for the Major Development
Projects Within the
Poggi Canyon Basin
Based on 280/210 gpd/unit
Project: McMillin
(Based on Otay Ranch SPA L Document)
A-26
6-176
SPA 1 Sewage Generation Data
Flows to Poggi Canyon Basin
Neigtr Sewage Total
borhoad Duty Flow To
Area Units Acreage Fadar EDUs (GPD) Node
R-39 175 210 131.3 36750 3i5
R-29 90 280 90.0 25200 315
~-28 82 280 82.0 22960 315
R-30 145 280 145.0 40600 315
~$ 10.6 500 18.9 5300 315
~-11 0.6 500 1.2 300 315
CPF 5 3.7 2500 33.0 9250 315
2-40 204 210 153.0 42840 313
R~1 127 210 95.3 28670 313
4-42 241 210 180.8 50610 313
:~3 175 210 131.3 36750 313
rt-44 261 210 195.8 54810 313
R-45 165 210 123.8 34650 313
-7 5.2 500 9.3 2800 313
~-8 1.7 500 3.0 850 313
C-3 1.6 2500 14.3 4000 313
' ~4 2 2500 17.9 5000 313
~,?F~& 32 2500 28.8 8000 313
CPF-7 2.3 2500 20.5 5750 313
l 13 109 Z80 109.0 30520 311
R-14 129 280 129.0 36120 311
•" 15 215 210 181.3 45150 311
16 280 210 210.0 58800 311
2-17 200 210 150.0 42000 311
? 18 230 210 172.5 48300 311
19 204 210 153.0 42840 311
;NF-1 8.5 2500 75.9 21250 311
.'°F-2 4.7 2500 420 11750 311
'F3 1.4 2500 125 3500 311
~1 8.3 2500 58.3 15750 311
~? 4.8 2500 42.9 12000 311
`oral 3032 56.6 2788.8 780870
Summary of flow fA each node
Node EDUs Flow Ffaw
(GPD) (GPII,>)
315 501.3 140360.0 97.5
313 973.3 272530.0 189.3
311 1314.2 367980.0 255.5
Total 2788.8 780870.0 542.3
6-177
(~,a, y ~Q a.c c~
SPA 1
ES N~•
~Y1cM~'~lin ~ ~'~~,tr.~-Q1a GA~~ OYAYUx
13Y~'S 1 N ~~0~' 0~
~ ''
RANCNEO V~~ WAY NYON ,./~''\
r,. ( a~ ~ O ~ ~ l'J
6 • / ~ ~, ti•
__ • . •
~ ~~
E A~10 •• ~, a•~ - r~ ^~
a.ig i
~ a-ta M ~~
~~SI IJ 09.10 ~ .- ~ Gp R-11 i ` ~
r a•1 ~ a•15 ~y ~,fl1 ~~~i ~L 1 h
o _ ,.. 1, based oh
~~Q~ ~ VE.
UIMEOIARO. O (R•fN~
~c~G1G~ 1 C~ CAA S 1 ~ ((
sP9 r
docM ~.e ~,
(}~ ~~; It ~'K
• OTAY lA~s ~.
QS 11
AQ4 /1
Al
I~
AVE GA,17+~a•.1~
Q~~~
~ ~~ ST. ~E bR
r R~
R•2~
'~~st r•~
~~(D14iiY
J Ff•?2
fl6-tL _
A-48 S-2
~ CPP-4
i
t ~
t l~
c o ~ ~~ 's
~ CAF
OS,24 j , P~7 R•d0
~ i ~R•~J ~ R-41
~ R-~2 ~r
aGz'i li
R•26
~ -I(Y R~7
~~ R~G~':
~~tr
QTAY
b~sr.
EASTLAKc
~~'1 t G4,•,~Yc~•1
u r~ou Rb. ~ ", •
P~~~ (b~lp~ an o~ R.t~
6-179 SPA f ~~ kt,ytt~•~
DEC. -18' 46fw'ED) 1030
EASTLAKE
TEL~614 4?1 1830 ' '- P. 001
6-180
ALTERNA77VE AA PHASE BOUNDARIES
~,
0 Poggl Canyon Sewer Study ~ EASttirld>/ G~i~FM ONut~ 1y17108
0
°'
land Uss Oescdplion
Lots with Permlt Dsysloped Acres Lots wlo pem11U Acns wle Permlls
o; t Lob
T
Clwrdr Unil30138 l
22
Na
FNgh Scholl Eastlake FIIOh 45.55 Na
Elementary School Ulymplo Vbw 0 Na
WalarTanlw 30MII.OeI 14 ~
Single Fsmlly Deladred UnN b ~ 61
Singb Family De1ad-ed Un113 Nodh 51 114
Single FamNy Detadred Unit 4 77 B4
Sirple Family Oelechad UnN 16' ®4 7a
Single Famly Apached UnN 2b 7e 7B
9krgle Famly Dstadred UnD 8 37 109
SinDle Family Dstsahed UnN 20 1D9 51
o, Sirpb Family pgaahed UnN 26 51 105
6kple Famly Detached Unll 6 11 200
--~ MuNI Family iJnll 28 280 ~
~ fi~mre F~mtIV l]etadred UnN 14 _- 68 _
Plolas:
Nlsslrp landswap data
n~....6...~.1 A....wnfr~
V.. A...v
Land Use
Dela
Total
church Sum of Lcls tlt Permlt 0
gum q Deveb Ades D
Elementary 9choo Sun d LolswNh PermN 0
Bun of [)ev Aaes 8
High Schad sum of Lals wMh Pemll 0
gum of Devalo Aces 46.58
MuNI Fam0y Bum of ills sAlh Permlt 0
Sum of Der ell Acres 0
Single Family Oeledrod Bum o[ Lots wNh Pennll 557
Sum of pevelo Acres 0
Water Tanks Sum o/ Lds with Permlt D
Bun a[ Dev Aces 14
Single Family Allardtad Sum o[ Lqs wMh NermN 78
Sum o[ Davel Acres 0
Total Sum of Lols lh PerrnN 835
Total Sum o(Devab Aaes 88.58
tlndevelneed Stamrnarv
Land Uas Dqs Total
Church Sum o[Aaes Mdo Parmlle 22
8umolLdsw/o urmlla D
Elementary Schoo sum o[ Aces w/o pemiNe 0
sum o[ Lds eAo imps 0
High Scholl 9urn a[Aaras w/o Permhs 0
sum aI Lda eyo Na 0
MuNI Family Bum of Acres wlo PennNs 0
Sum of Lop w/a a 28D
single Family Del Sum of Aces w/o PmmOs 0
sum o[ Lqa w/o 0
Water Tanks Sum o[ Aces w/o PemYls 0
Sum of Lots wM rrnlla 0
Single Famiy Alla Sum of Acres w/o Pamils 0
Sum W Lop wlo Ms 0
Tgat Bum of Acroa w/a PetmNs 22
Total Sum of Late w/o Ip 280
cxnrr~fwuu
TABLE A-1
Sewage Generation for Properties Within the Poggi Canyon Basin Study Area
Based on 280/210 gpdh~nit
EastLakc Development
rn
ao
N
EaslLake Greens
Gand [Jse gt-uut~ty ;Strwage Generation Average Sewet ~lluivnl~t-1 At+arppb Itipat af'
Facfor Fibw, ; Dwelling IIaItA, ~xwsr 11'~anholt
EPd '~P~s FIoW;~gpm Ntimtier
Single Family 556 du 280 gpd/unit 155,680 556.0 IOB,I 221
Multi-Family 338 du 210 gpd/unit 70,980 253.5 49.3 221
Public/Quasi-Public ]5.8 acre 2,500 gpd/acre 39,500 141.1 27.4 221
Nigh School 1 48,000 gpd 48,000 171.4 33.3 221
Elementary School 1 12,000 gpd 12,000 42 9 8 3 221
SubfaiAl s~ _ > 32ti
160, 1 Lr:4 9~ 2~~
4
..~ ,, ..... r , t,.: .
... ., ,.,....
EaslLake Land Swap Area
Future Commercial 55 acre 2,500 gpd/acre 137,500 491.1 95,5 221
Future Multi-Family 600 du' 210 gpd/unit 126,000 450.0 87.5 221
i ;i Y=
fN"SY
8n11sQla1
' 5
f A
~~
~~r YG 5
t a y
50Q.~
263
5 pp t~ 4 d q
~~
i <
~
~ r.
ra.q. S 2
~
,
s •
~ ,~
1 kir . s
~ ,
. {
i
a x
s
~s PY~~ ~ , $
wwf
EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT TOTAL 589,660 2,106 409.4 ---
A-19
APPENDIX A
Land Use Planning Data
for the Ezisting Development
Within the
Poggi Canyon Basin
Based on 280/210 gpd/unit
Project: Existing Development
6-`~$~
TADI,E A-t
Sewage Generatiuu fnr Properties Within the Paggi Canyon Ilasin Study Area
Rased on 280/210 gpd/unit
Summary of Laud Uses within Cxisting Developed Portion of
Poggi Canyon Ilasin
rn
a
Aron East of Interstate 805
i.and Use `Quantity Sewage Average Er~uivalent; Averaga )Input at
Generation Fiow Sewer Flow, - Dwelling Units Sewer Floy?, Meghole
gpd ~EDU9 e `:; gptt-, ; Number'
Single Family 658 d^ 280 gpd/unit 184,240. 658.0 127.9
Multi-Family 286 du 210 gpd/unit 60,060 214.5 41.7
Commercial 0 2,500 gpd/acre 0 0 0
Elementary School 2 9,000 gpd 18,000 64.3 12.5
SuhtotNl 262,300 93b,8 , ' 182 1 !'
Area West of Interstate 805
Land Use ` Quantity Sewage Average Equivalent; ¢vsrpge= Input At
Generation Flow
Sewer Fiow; ',
~IlwGlling TJmita, < Y c
Sey~r ~lg~~Y
e
Mt+gholo-'
gpd _
';~DUa ~_;~~_ ~,,
~` ~ItPI lYunber .
,
,
Single Family 496 du 280 gpd/unit 138,880 496.0 96.4
Multi-Family 343 du 210 gpd/unit 72,030 257.3 50.0
Commercial 8.1 ac 2,500 gpd/acre 20,250 72.3 14.1
Elementary School 1 9,000 gpd 9,000 32.1 6.3
A-21
TABLE A-1
Eiisting Units Within Poggi Basin Assigned to Computer Model Manhole Numbers for
Ultimate Model Based on 280/210 gpd/unit
NodC
'
. ~ .:S~nglrFamit}~
Units
..~. ¢ ~
:: ~' •-1Ku1tIFa'in~ip
Units
~I ; "~icreSd'f~`
Gommercisl ~
~.
. .
:. T~`~Cr1O0i~?~a~~
w ~.s r t
~ a ~,~ ~,_ any
k
. i
/4
n. ~xED~Ttr"~Ig,
~~'°~~~M28U
bTi:
mW'IItJ/~ tee!
. ^LwllL'
201 98 116 185
202
203
204 398 227 8.1 1 672.7
205 490 123 2 646.5
206
207
208 12 9
209 151 113.3
210 164 164
211
212
2I3 4 4
TOTAL ~ ~ 1154: 629: 8.1 3 ~ 379a 5 , •!
School = 32.1 EDUs
MF x 0.75 = EDUs
Acres x 8.93 = EDUs
A-22
6-185
APPENDIX 8
Land IIse Planning Data
for the Ezisting Development
Within the
Poggi Canyon Basin
Based on 265/200 gpd/unit
B-1
6-186
APPENDIX B
Land Use Planning Data
for the Ezistiag Development
R'ithin the
Poggi Canyon Basin
Based an 265/200 gpd/nnit
Project: Sunbow II
g_~
6-187
TABLE B-1
Sewage Generation for Properties Within the Poggi Canyon Basin Sludy Area
Based on 265/200 gpd/unit per EDU
SUNBOW II
rn
ao
00
Land Uoo Qpentity Sewage;Qenei ation Avergpe Sewei EqulY~lent Average
F>tctor
FIOw~ !!
,Dwelling Unityr k
SkwCr Flowt
slid.. ,
EI)Us ,
Cp+~ ' ",.
Single Family 741 du 265 gpd/unit 196,365 741.0 136.4
Multi-Family 580 du 200 gpd/unit 116,000 437.7 80.6
Park/Community 12.2 ac 2,500 gpd/acre 30,500 115.1 21.2
Center
Commercial 10.0 ac 2,500 gpd/acre 25,000 94.3 17.4
Elementary School 1 9,000 gpd 9,000 34.0 6.2
Business Park 51.9 ac 2,500 gpd/acre 129,750 489,6 90.1
Flow Split
To MH 215: Elementary School and 112 SFDU 26.9 gpm
To MH 214: Business Park and 145 SFDU 116.8 gpm
To MH 213: Remaining 208,2 gpm
B-3
APPENDIX B
Land Use Planning Data
for the Ezisting Development
Within the
Poggi Canyon Basin
Based on 265/200 gpd/unit
Project: Charles H. Gerhardt and Allen L. Gerhardt,lr.
B-4
6-189
•rAALE A-t
Sewage Generation for Properties Wilhin the Poggi Canyon Basin Stndy Area
Aased on 265/200 gpd/unit per EDiI
CHARLES Ii. GERIiARDT
t.S Acres within Poggi Basin
attd Use
T ~ Quitntity: Sewage • AvetagaSe~yer ~EgI~~Yalent '. AYeppga. 'ltipat at
a ,
~ene~~ati0n FACtQ1' Flow, DwelilH~ Up~t~~:: ~6t'!'!ww l~anhola'
'
gpd ~ :
'lbUs ass:.
lt~a~V~
Numl/ert
r,. ~
~. & xs>
~ ~S
i:pm
~ .
Low Medium 7.5 dui 265 gpd/unit 4,987.5 7.5 1.4 2l7
Residential
rn
~ • Assumca 5.0 du/acre.
~i
ALLEN L. GERIIARI)T, Jr.
• Ass~mea 5.0 du/sore.
A-S
APPENDIX B
Land Use Planning Data
for the Ezisting Development
Within the
Poggi Canyon Basin
Based on 265/200 gpolunit
Project: Otay Ranch Genecal Development Plan
B-6
6-191
TADLE B-1
Sewage Generation for Properties Within the Poggi Canyon basin Study Area
Based on 265/200 gpd/unit per EDU
Otay Ranclt General Development Plan
rn
i
ca
N
Village 2 (based on General Development Plan)
Land Yls! Quy~tHt~ Sewage Ay~rq~~ Sewer .'. givdlen{ ~
~~ Average Sewer
', ,~ Generation raetor Flow, }
Dv~liitl~ U :Its, ~ l+iovy, gpm.:•
'` gh~ El]tJN r
Single gamily 1,044 du 265 gpd/unit 276,660 1,044.0 192.1
Park 20 acre 500 gpd/acre 10,000 37.7 6.9
Elementary School I 9,000 gpd 9,000 34.0 6.3
Mixed Use 10 acre 2,500 gpd/acre 25,000 94.3 17.4
30% to MH No. 217 66.8 gpm
40% to MH No. 218 89.1 gpm
30% to MH No. 219 66.8 gpm
B-7
TABLE B-1 (Continued)
Sewage Generation for Properties Within the Poggi Canyon Basin Study Area
Based on 265!200 gpd/snit per EDU
Olay Ranch General Development Plan
rn
cD
w
Village 6 (Based on General Development Plan)
Lpntl Use Quadtiiy . ! Sewage Averp~e Sewer ~gpivplent, ?~yerpgp ~twer ,
Generatiod Fa~toi' Flow, IyrYelling Unite, ? Flow, ~ptn
: ~~
gPd ': ELlUltr >;
Single Family 990 du 265 gpolunit 262,350 990.0 182.2
Multi-Family 1,242 du 200 gpd/unit 248,400 937,4 172.5
Fark 10 acre 500 gpd/acre 5,000 18.9 3.5
Elementary School 1 9,000 gpd 9,000 34.0 6.3
Mixed Use 13.4 acre 2,500 gpolacre 35,500 134.0 24.6
Sub(Otltl
~~ ` , `
~ n
' ~
2S0
-~ StiiF
x,t143~~t'~s ~' x
z t= ' "~$~(1
. , „
F n 3 :z~E kF.3 S zlfy n :. > < ` R ~',~ c
,.,
40% to MH No. 219 155.7 gpm
30% to MH No. 220 116.7 gpm
30% to MH No. 221 116.7 gpm
B-8
TABLE B-1 (Continued)
Sewage Generation for Properties Within the Poggi Canyon Dasin Study Area
Boxed on 265!200 gpd/unit per EDU
Otay Ranch General Development Plan
rn
i
Village 7 (Based on General Development Plan)
..
.
land l)ae Qi0nti(y Sewage Average Sewer'I, 1Kgu(valeat .
.
average Sewer
Generation~l?actdr Flows Pyvellin~ Untl~ Flow, gp~u
,gpd s'~' EAtlp. ''
Single Family 204 du 265 gpd/unit 54,060 204.0 37.5
Nigh School 0.5 48,000 gpd 24,000 90.6 16.G
suhtotfll ', ~7so6o. 29a,a; ' Saa..~
L::uS
Flow Split 1)11ta • ` ':._ ':. ~ 5 ;
All to MH No. 219
Village I1 (Based on General Development Plan)
uq'
~
`(
' T
`
l $owaga rag~ Sewer
~v klw4p~vpleq~ AvFrag$ Sewer"
r
ti
*r
~
~
TyanA>ep~~ ~
#E ~
;a
€ ~
~
' c
~" ~1 ~~a
(~
`) tt~~
>
~
'
~
t:pm
~Mb
~°
E
~ 9
s ~e n
nerfl((4
aCt91 0 4k
WI i
k r
!
!
l
4!
s
!
~ t
~E s (¢ %t a L a 5.
:
;,t,, ,, a , . , s
-.
z~
Multi-Family 498 du 200 gpd/unit 99,600 375.8 69.2
Park 10 acre 500 gpd/acre 5,000 18.9 3.5
/~ ~ s
5
4
$ a
l
t
S
"
f AX L
f~5r5 sl(~Att;04 1 ~
4
£i ~~%~k~yaa~;fr}* S #§f
y »y ~t s
~2 Sl1Y/3
a
3~
N
£ i.$Lf5
S.Ubtp
k.. i F .'~.y S
: ~ s¢
3 ~Yi f 5 L
"K'R.~ Eg ~1
3 S l . -
k L~ t ~\ Z' E
~~ ~'~ R <¢.4
'
p{ 2' 2 ~~
S ~SU ~~~ '( A
~
3
F:~„F
,~/ y
...
1.5 L' 9
ll~`~11111 z?.
~^'f
~
~IQ
~{
S
L y ^.
.C .F S 5( .
kL d
.
~
~~3 f
5n''.:,.
~.w' < h~.
i
S,
,
R
I
» .4
L
s
I ~Q ~ .
All to MH No. 221
B-9
TABLE B-1 (Continued)
Sewage Generation for Properties Within the Poggi Canyon Basin Study Area
Based on 2651200 gpd/unit per EDU
Otay Ranch General Development Plan
rn
cn
Planning Area 12 (Based on General Development Plan)
_
Land
'Uat<
~ .,. ~ T 3 F. -
Quantity . t
Sewage
'
Average Sewer
'::
4guigaloltc 5 ..
Avera&e Sewer
M
:
~
` F ) ,
Generation [taetor ,
Flow; Drreldng'f~ntiet ,
a= blow, gpm
, ' , n
.. :
Mined Use 94 acre 2,500 gpd/acre 235,000 886.8 163.2
$
l(i D
ta
It `
` "
p
iow
A
. ~„ ~ ,. : ~ -
L All to MH No. 221
8-10
TABLE B-1 (Continued)
Sewage Generation for ['roperlies Within the Poggi Canyon Ilasin Study Area
Based on 265/200 gpd/unit per GDU
Otay Ranci~ General Development Plan
rn
rn
$~1MMARY
Mii No•
TQI~I~EUSi
T9ta1,
Enm
217 135,153
93.8
21 B 144,959
100.7
219 398,358
276.6
220 168,075
116.7
221 507,675
352.6
1,354,220 940.4
II-11
APPENDIX B
Land IIse Planning Data
for the Ezisting Development
Within the
PoggiCanyon Basin
Based on 265/200 gpd/unit
Project: Otay Ranch Village 1
~=~s7
TABLE B-1
Sewage Generation for Properties Within the Poggi Canyon Basin Shady Area
Rased on 2b5/200 gpdhinit per EBU
Otay Ranch Village 1
rn
00
Lngd Use QUAOtity SeWAge Genergtign
Factor'. Average Sewer '<
Flow; gpd ' ~qulval4nt ,`
Dwelling tin11~,
';1/DUq AJeragil
ESgwer ~
p'luw, gpm; Input at
Manhole
;Nu~riber
R-13 76 du 265 gpd/unit 20,140 7G.0 14.0 218
R-l4 (part) 85 du 200 gpd/unit 17,000 64.2 I1,8 218
R-15 215 du 200 gpd/unit 43,000 162.3 29,9 218
R-16 280 du 200 gpd/unit 56,000 21 l,3 38.9 218
R-17 200 du 200 gpd/unit 40,000 150.9 27.8 218
R-1 R 230 du 200 gpolunit 46,000 173.6 31.9 218
R-19 204 du 200 gpd/unit 40,800 154.0 26.3 218
C-1 6.5 acre 2,500 gpd/acre 16,250 61.3 1L.3 218
C-2 5.0 acre 2,500 gpd/acre 12,500 47.2 8.7 218
CPF-1 10.0 acre 2,500 gpd/acre 25,000 94.3 17.4 218
CPF-2 3.2 acre 2,500 gpd/acre 8,000 30.2 S.S 218
CPF-3 1.4 acrd 2,300 gpd/acre 3,500 13.2 2.4 218
II-13
APPENDIX B
Land Use Planning Data
for the Ezisting Development
Within the
Poggi Canyon Basin
Based on 265/200 gpd/unit
Project: Otay Ranch Village 5
~-~`~ s
TABLE B-1
Sewage Cenernlion for Properties Within the Poggi Cauyou Basin Study Area
Based on 265/200 gpd/unit
Otay Ranch Village 5
rn
i
N
O
0
Land [7ae Qugntity Sewage Geperttinri Awerag8 Sewer Equ~Ypitq# Ayer~ge ;Input et
v~ ;Factory '' '. Elaw, &pd Awellpg 1~(I-)t~ ,~EWe~' Manhole'
$PM
R-28 (part) 50 du 263 gpd/unit 13,230 50.0 9.2 220
R_29 83 du 200 gpdhmit 16,600 62,6 1 LS 220
R-30 119 du 263 gpd/unit 31,533 119.0 21.9 220
Ii-31 (part) 14 du 265 gpolunit 3,710 14.0 2.6 220
R-39 182 du 200 gpd/unit 36,400 137.4 253 221
P-6 2.6 acre 2,300 gpd/acre 6,500 24.5 4.5 220
p_ 1 I 0.6 acre 2,300 gpd/acre 1,300 5.7 I.0 220
CPF-S 3.6 acre 2,300 gpd/acre 9,000 34.0 6.3 220
OtayRpnsll'lj~i~tlp aS~ •~ `I1Rtd95 447,2 ~ `;$2,~
~
B-1 S
APPEI~'DIX B
Land IIse Planning Data
for the Ezisting Development
Within the
Poggi Canyon Basin
Based on 265/200 gpd/unit
Project: McMillin
~='~ i
TABLE B-1
Sewage Generation fnr 1'roperlies Within the Poggi Canyen basin Study Area
Based en 2G5/200 gpd/unit per EDU
McMillin
rn
N
0
N
Land Uae ': Qpeptty 5ewnge AVer~go Sower -~quivaltrnt Average; Input'at
Generatop Faetar'
FIgN%,'gpd ,,
DNrelling.pr~[ts,
Sewtr'
:Manhole
,' EbC1A ! '1+low, Number'
i'gpm
R-13 (30%) 33 du 265 gpd/unit 8,745 33.0 6.l 219
R.qO 204 du 200 gpd/unit 40,R00 154.0 28.3 220
R-41 127 du 200 gpd/unit 25,400 95.8 17.6 220
R-42 241 du 200 gpd/unit 48,200 181.9 33.5 220
R-43 l7S du 200 gpd/unit 35,000 132.1 24.3 220
R-44 261 du 200 gpd/unit 52,200 197.0 36.3 219
R-AS 165 du 200 gpdJunit 33,000 12q.5 22;9 219
P-7 5.2 acre 500 gpd/acre 2,600 9.8 1.8 220
p_g 1.7 acre 500 gpd/acre 850 3.2 0.6 219
C_3 1.6 acre 2,500 gpd/acre 4,000 15.1 2.8 Z19
C_q 2.0 acre 2,500 gpd/acre 5,000 18.9 3.5 220
CPF-G 3.2 acre 2,500 gpd/acre 8,000 30.2 5.5 219
CPF-7 2.3 acre 2,500 gpd/acre 5,750 21.7 q.0 220
L --: xv L fro t x <¢
1~t:111(I~l~
~
' ~ ~
e >i-:ws s i
+c a
~- z
An <~ F• <t ~
i ''r#~r x s `fin ~ r>;
~ ~
# o
l+Y
~
~ 2f w'€ y x d3y~•~"4 a
m~ ti ,41
~ z r
S~
^4
£ 'H
r E
~~~~~
}
£ ~e
a
^!
rf
L'~
`xx
~j,y,E ~~ L
'S r,~
~R xA ry L~'~
.
' ~
R
L~
n"
£ 3. YSL2 ;iL Y
~7~
Y
..( ,&h
)i ~i YA K 3,
Y; 4 ,~.
~ b y~x' SAS:
-
F
.
:
.~V 1AL.~} ~ ~
~ "
f
~
" fi ~
.
"'~J
' f x: 3 . .< ':
,£ x ~..: {
,~ x...:>K
.. b)
x.Si i. :Y. ~ S. Sn.: .y
,,
.
:. ~
R :,
...
...
.
e'. ..:
. ,
~ ,
.
D-17
APPENDIX B
Land Use Planning Data
for the Ezisting Development
Within the
Poggi Caayon Basin
Based on 265/200 gpd/unit
Project: Eastlake Development
b8=~13
TABLE B-1
Sewage Generation for Properties Within the Poggi Canyon Basin Study Area
Based on 265/200 gpd/unit per EDU
Eastlake Development
rn
1
N
O
EastLalse Greens
Land Uso ;gaentify ' ~> SewagF (:t'teraUan ~ Average Sealer ~qu~vN~a~it Av~wdge' Iftipyt ~t
~ Facto( Floyva -welliq~Unlt3t ' S~tvAC Mpdholc`;.
..,
•,, Ep~t E11C~e;,`
' FfoW
gjlth N1VuMbet'
t
.
Single Family . 556 du 265 gpd/unit 147,340 556.0 102.3 221
Multi-Family 338 du 200 gpd/unit 67,600 255.1 46.9 221
Public/Quasi-Public 1S.Sacre 2,SOOgpd/acre 39,500 149.1 27.4 221
High School 1 48,000 gpd 48,000 181.1 33.3 221
Elementary Scltoolt l 12,000 gpd 12,000 45,3 6.3 221
SubtotAl " `3Va4;A4p" " ' 1
18ti~ 218
2::x' `
:,
, ,
. .t-, .
Eastlake Land Swap Area
Future Commercial 55 acre 2,500 gpd/acre 137,500 491.1 95.5 221
Future Multi-Family 600 du' 200 gpd/unit 120,000 452.8. 83.3 221
;. }
Subtotills: ' rs~~'~'~
,~~_~ ~
~
~~s
y`
z~~
504
!
<~ 99~r9~
17
F
..>..... ~ ,
,
..., .,.4 .:.. ;
,
„ ,, 8,~;~~
.
.:. ..
EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT TOTAL 571,940 2,(30.5 397.0 __.
t nosed on proposed student body population of 800 (City of Cbula Visle).
' Asaumea 40 acres et IS dulacre.
B-19
County Landfill Area within Poggi Basin
General flan Designation is Public/Quasi Public -
Otay Water District Property
0 EDUs
General Plan Designation is Public/Quasi Public - 0 EDUs
rn
N
O
Ul
B-2(]
APPENIDIX B
Land IIse Planning Data
for the Ezisting Development
Within the
Poggi Canyon Basin
Based oa 265/200 gpd/unit
Project: Ezisting Development
~=~Z'o s
TABLE B-I
Sewage Generation far Properties Within the Poggi Canyon Basin Study Area
Based on 265/200 gpd/unit per EDU
Summary of Land Uses within Existing Developed Portion of
Poggi Canyon Basin
Area East of Interstate 805
-.-r~
f and Ust ~ ;
' :~
` Quant~f;
:
r
Single Family 658 du
Multi-Fsmily 286 du
Commercial 0
Q, Elementary School 2
i
o
Subtotal
Area West of Interstate 805
Land UBe
~,
: , (~uaefit
~<
~
,
s
~~
•Y k
~'
hl x
9~. ~ {Y~
5 f
Single Family 496 du
Multi-Family 343 du
Commercial 8.1 ac
Elementary School 1
B-22
TABLE B-1
Existing Units Within Poggi Basin Assigned to Computer Model Manhole Numbers for
Ultimate Model Based oa 265/200 gpoluait
Node S~agle.Fam~Iy Multr>~am~ty Acres:ot ~SChoo)w-~` E]fllx`Based^P
< Vn~ts Ilntfs Commeixaak „
'
f ~~ a trtisZ6~'.~
!
a _ ~
s ,
f y 9 NY X
a i ~dJ~il~i. ne
.,
201 98 116 185.5
202
203
204 398 227 8.1 1 679.7
205 490 123 2 650.7
206
207
208 12 9.1
209 151 114
210 164 164
211
212
213 4 4
TOTAL, 1254 629 8.1> 3 :..:! I,SD7 II, <<
School = 34.0 EDUs
MF x 200(265 = EDUs
Acres x 9.43 = EDUs
B-23
6-208
APPENDIX C
Results of Fiow Monitoring
Performed by City of CLula Vista
in Ezisting 8-inch Sewer in Oleander Avenge
East of Interstate 805
C-1
6-209
yid
v
to
w
a
w
H
Z
u
i v ,
r
C
6 -210 r7 fo-. X ;I
-1,
1
10S
a
7
N
CAiLY Sl1MMR~" Si _[ =" OEANDER 50/ORANG Thu 31 Oet 1996
Dart A Le.cl
Average Lr:eL• ^u.22 fL
Minlaxm Le~~el: 0.13 tt 0 23:00
MaxiAxm Levll: 1.86 fi 3 04:35
Hourly Average LevN
00:00-01:00: 12:00-13:00:
07:00-02:00: 13:00-14:00:
02:00-03:00: 14:00-15:00:
03:00-04:00: 15:00.16:00:
04:00-05:0:: 0.51 ft 16:00-17:D0:
05:00-06:00: 0-2c ft 17:00-18:00:
06:00-07:00: 0.23 ft 78:00-19:00:
07:00-08:00: 0.23 ft 19:00-20:00:
08:00-09:00: 0.23 ft 20:00-21:OD:
09:00-1o:oe: D.zz fL z1:oo-zz:oD:
10:00-11:OC: O.Z2 f[ 22:00-23:00:
11:00-12:00: O.Z3 f: 23:D0-00:00:
0.00 0.40 0.80 1.20
~ • - ~ ~- • N
00:00-01:00
01:00-02:00
02:00-03:00
03:00-04:00
04:00-05:00 ==__=______
05:00-06:00 ~___
06:00-07:00 =u===
07:OD-08:00 =_
08:00-09:00 =___=-
09:00-10:0^ _=__=_
10:00-11:De =R===
11:00-12:OG ~_=
12:00-13:60 =__~_
73:00-14:0^_ ___-=
14:00-15:D0 = -__
75:00-16:00 =___=_
16:00-1 T:00 =_____
17:00-78:0.^. ___==
18:00-19:00 =____
19:00-20:00 =____
20:00-21:00 -___
21:00-22:00 ==__
22:00-23:00 =____
23;00-00:00 =_ ==
].00 0.40 0.80 7.20
(ft)
_1_
O.Z4 ft
0.23 ft
O.Z2 ft
0.23 ft
0.24 f t
0.22 ft
0.19 ft
0.18 ft
0.18 ft
o.1e ft
0.11 ft
D. 18 ft
1.60 2.00
r-.-~_.-.a.._-~
t-60 2.00
6-211
DAILY SUMNA-v Size =' OEANOER SO /ORANG Fri 01 Noy 1996
Par: A Le,e
Average LeveL:
0.22 f:
Minimm Level:
0.15 ft 2
19:50
Maximm Level:
0.29 ft 0
02:10,
Hourly Average
LeveL
00:00 - 01:00:
0.20 ft
12:00 - 13:00:
0.23 ft
01:00 - 02:00:
0.26 ft
13:00- 14 :00:
0.24 ft
02:00-03 :00:
0.27 ft
1400- 15:00:
9.24 ft
03:00 - 04:00:
0.25 ft
15:00- 16:00:
0.23 ft
04:00- 05 :00:
0.25 ft
16 :00-17:00:
0.22 ft
05:00-06 :00:
0.24 ft
17:00-18 :00:
0.22 ft
06 :00- 07 :00:
0.24 ft
18:00 - 19:00:
0.20 ft
07:00-08:00:
023 ft
19:00- 20:00:
0.17 ft
08:00 - 09:00:
0.23 ft
20:00. 21:00:
0.16 ft
09:00 - 10:00:
0.23 ft
21:00- 22 :00:
0.18 ft
10 :00- 11:00:
0.24 ft
22:00-23 :00:
0.18 ft
11:00- 12:00:
0.23 ft
23:00- 00:00:
0.18 ft
0.00
0.10
0.20 0.30
0.40 0.50
♦ �. ♦ i f ♦ . N .. ♦.....
01:00 -02:00
02:00 -03:00
03:00 -04:00
04:00 -05:00
05:00 -06:00
06:00 -07:00
07:00 - 08:00
08:00 -09:00
09:00 -10:00
10:00 -11:00
11:00 -12 :00 =_-
12:00 -13:00
13:00 -14:00
14 :00 -15:00
15:00 -16:00 = = =a
16:00 -17:00
17 :00 -18:00 =__
18:00 - 19:00
19:00 - 20:00
20:00 -21:00
21:00 -22:00
22 :00 -23:00
23:00 -00:00
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50
(ft)
.2-
6 -212
DAILY SUMMA -! Size d, OEANDER 50 /ORANG Sat 02 Nov 1996
Part A Lev_:.
Average Level:
0.23 it
Minim m Level:
0.',5 it
a 19:50
- Maii" Levei:
0.31 it
a D4:35
NGurty Average
Level
00:00- 01 :00:
0.18 it
12:00-13:00:
0.24
ft
01:00- 02:00:
0.20 ft
13:00- 14 :00:
0.24
ft
02 :00- 03:00:
0.23 ft
14:00 - 15:00:
0.24
ft
03:00 - 04:00:
0.25 ft
15:00- 16 :00:
0.24
ft
04:00- 05:00:
0 -29 ft
16:00 - 17:00:
0.22
ft
05:00- 06 :00:
0 -29 it
17 :00. 18:00:
O.ZZ
ft
06 :00- 07:00:
0.26 it
18:00- 19 :00:
0.20
ft
07:00 - 08:00:
0.25 ft
19:00-20:00:
0.18
ft
08:00- 09 :00:
0.25 it
20:00- 21 :D0:
0.18
ft
09:00- 10:00:
0.24 it
21:00-22:00:
0.18
ft
10:00- 11:00:
0.24 ft
22:00- 23:00:
0.18
ft
11:00- 12:00:
0.24 it
23:00. 00:00:
0.18
it
0.00
0.10
0.20 0.30
0.40 0.50
................... M...-F------_--?---------------
00:00-01:00 = =__=
01 :00 -02 :00 =___ --
02:00-03:00
03 :00-04:00
04:00 -05 :00
05:00 -06 :00
06 :00- 07:00
07:00 -08 :00
08:00-09:00
09:00-10:00
=_
09:00-10:00 = - __- ___>•-�_
10:00 -11:00
11:00.12 :00 = =u ==
12:00 -13:00
13:00 -14:00
14 :00 -15:00 --
15:00 -16:00 = _______ = == =tea
16:00 -17 :00
17:00 -18:00 = ___-- --- =x-
18:00 -19:00
19:00 -20:00 =_ --
20:00 -21:00
21:00 -22:00
22:00 -23:00
23:00 -00:00
♦ .♦- -i 4 ......... - - i -# f
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50
(ft)
.3-
6 -213
DAILY SUMMARY Site C1 OEANDER SD /ORANG Sun 03 Nov 1996
:art A Leve:
Average Levei:
0.23
ft
Minim Level:
0.14
ft a
21:05
M"imm Level:
0.31
ft ®
05:20
Nourty Average
Level
00:00- 01:00:
0.19
;'t
12:00 - 13:00:
0.25 ft
01:00 - 02:00:
0.18
it
13:00- 14:00:
0.25 ft
02:00- 03:00:
0.22
ft
14:00 - 15:00:
0.26 ft
03:00- 04:00:
0.26
ft
15:00- 16:00:
0.25 ft
04:00- 05:00:
0.28
ft
16:00- 17:00:
0.24 ft
05:00- 06:00:
0.29
ft
17:00- 18:00:
0.22 ft
06:00 - 07:00:
0.28
ft
18:00- 19 :00:
0.19 ft
07:00- 08 :00:
0.26
ft
19:00- 20 :00:
0.18 ft
08:00- 09:00;
- 0.25
ft
20:00 - 21:00:
0.18 ft
09:00- 10:00:
0.25
ft
21:00- 22:00:
0.18 ft
10:00- 11 :00:
0.24
ft
22:00- 23:00:
0.18 ft
11 :00- 12:00:
0.24
ft
23:00-00:00:
0.18 ft
0.00
0.10
0.20 0.30
0.40 0.50
♦ ♦ ♦ i -- -i T T i _♦ T
02 :00'03 :00
03:00 -04 :00 = ____-- ---
04.00- 05:00
05:00 -06:00
06:00 -07:00 === =u= ==
07:00 -08.00
08:00 -D9 :00
09:00 -10:00
10:00 -11.00 -
11 :00 -12 :00 --
12:00- 13:00
13:00 -14:00
14:00 -15:00 = = =z ==
15:00 -16:00
16.00 -17:00
17 :00- 18:00
18:00 -19:00
19:00 -20:00 --
20;00-21:OC
21:00 -22:00
22:00 -23:00
23:00 -00:00
T----------------------------- - -------- ♦ 1- T
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50
(ft)
-4-
6 -214
DAILY SUMMARY V -e -'l OEANOER SO /ORANG Mon 04 Nov 1996
Part A Le•:el
Average Level: 0.23 ft
Mini" Level: 0.13 ft
0 22:50
Maxiaaaa Level: 0.32 ft
ai 01:55
Hourly Average Level
00:00- 01:00: 0.20 ft
12:00 - 13:00:
0.24 it
01:00- 02:00: 0.27 ft
13:00-14:00:
025 ft
02:00 - 03:00: 0.28 it
14:00 - 15:00:
0.25 ft
03:00 - 04:00: 0.25 it
15:00-16:00:
0.25 ft
04:00. 05:00: 0.24 it
16:00- 17:00:
0.24 ft
05:00- 06:00: 0.24 it
17:00- 18:00:
0.22 ft
06:00- 07 :00: 0.24 ft
18:00- 19:00:
0.20 ft
07:00- 08:00: 0.23 ft
19:00- 20:00:
0.19 ft
08:00. 09:00: 0.24 ft
20:00- 21:00:
0.18 ft
09:00- 10:00: 0.23 ft
21:00 - 22:00:
0.18 ft
10:00- 11:00: 0.23 ft
22:00- 23:00:
0.17 ft
11:00 - 12:00: 0.24 ft
23:00- 00 :00:
0.18 ft
0.00 0.10
0.20 0.30
0.40 0.50
------------------------
-♦ ♦ - - -
--- ♦- ♦ --
00:00 -01:00
01:00- 02:00
02:00 -03:00
03:00 -04:00
04:00- 05:00
05:00-06:00
06-00-07:00
06:00 -07:00
07:00. 08:00
- --
08 :00. 09:00
09:00 - 10:00
10:00 -11:00
11.00- 12:00
12:00-13:00 =__
13:00-14:00
--
14:00 -15:00
15:00 -16:00 --
16:00- 17:00
17:00 -18 :00 ----- -
18:00 -19:00
19:00 -20:OC
20:00 -21:00
21:00 -22.00
22:00 -23:00
23:00 -00:00
♦ -� ---------------------------------------------
0.00 0.10
0.20 0.30
0.40 0.50
(ft)
-5-
6 -215
GAILY SUMMA° S.e =1 OEANDER SO /ORANG Tue 05 Nev 1996
Par; A Le
Average Level:
0.22 ft
Min yR Level:
0.13 ft
a 22:00
Maxis Level:
0.31 ft
i 02:30
Hourly Average
Level
00:00 - 01:00:
0.21 ft
12:00 - 13:00:
0.23 ft
01:00 - 02:00:
0.27 ft
13:00- 14 :00:
0.24 ft
02:00-03 :00:
0.27 ft
14 :00. 15:00:
-:00-
0.24 ft
03:00 - 04:00:
0.25 ft
15 16:00:
0.25 ft
04:00- 05:00:
0.23 ft
16:00-17:00:
0.24 ft
05 :00- 06:00:
0.73 ft
17:00- 18:00:
0.22 ft
06:00 - 07:00:
0.23 ft
18:00-19 :00:
0.20 ft
07:00- 08 :00:
0.23 ft
19 :00- 20 :00:
0.19 ft
08:00-09:00:
0.23 ft
20:00-21:00:
0.18 ft
09:00- 10:00:
0.22 ft
21:00- 22:00:
0.17 ft
10 :DO- 11:00:
0.22 ft
- 22:00- 23:00:
0.18 ft
11 :00- 12:00:
0.22 ft
23:00-00:00:
0.18 ft
0.00
0.10
0.20 0.30
0.40 0.50
--------------- .-------------- r--------------------
01:00
02:00
03:00
04:00 .......
05:00 == = =a=
06:00
07:00
08 :00
D9:00
10:00
11 :00
12.00 __- --
13:00
14:00 =__=' - __'_ - -�-
15:00 = ===== a= = ===
16:00
17:00
18:00 =
19:00 �-_ --
z0 -o0
20:00 -21:00
21:Oa -22:00
22:ao- 23:00
23:00 -00 :00
--_._..--_-_ _-_- __--- _-- _--- y- ___ +.........
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50
(ft)
-6-
6 -216
DAILY SUMMA-- _. -_ _• OEANDER 50 /ORANG Wed 06 Nov 1996
?art A '_a
Average Lee!: 0.22 It
Mininxm Levet: 0 -1- ft a 23:05
Maxi man Levei: 0.30 It a 02:05
Hourly Average Level
00:00 - 01:00: - 0.20 ft 12:00- 13:00: 0.23 ft
01:00- 02:00: 0.27 ft 13:00- 14:00: 0.24 ft
02:00 - 03:00: 0.29 ft 14:00-15:00: 0.24 ft
03:00 - 04:00: O.Z» ft 15:00. 16:00: 0.25 ft
04:00- 05:00: 0 -24 ft 16.00-17:00: 0.24 ft
05:00- 06:00: 0.Z3 ft 17:00- 18:00: 0.22 ft
06:00- 07:00: 0.22 ft 18:00 - 19:00: 0.20 ft
07:00- 08:00: 0 -22 ft 19:00 - 20:00: 0.19 ft
08 :00- D9:00: 0.22 ft 20:00- 21:00: 0.18 ft
09:00 - 10:00: 0.21 ft 21:00- 22:00: 0.16 ft
10:00- 11 :00: 0.22 It 22:00- 73:00: 0.18 ft
11:00 - 12:00: 0.23 ft 23:00- 00:00: 0.18 ft
0 -00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50
- - - - -- •-- a-- - -- - -- ---- ---- ------ M-------- 1^ - - -+
00:00 -01:00
.. 01:00 -02:00
02:00-03:00
03:00 -04:00
04:00 - 05:00
05:00 -06:00
06:00 -07:00
07:00-08:00 -
08:00 -09:00
09:00 -10:00
10:00 -11:00
11:00 -12:00
12:00 -13:00
13:00 -14:00
14:00 -15:00
15:00 -16:00
16:00 -17:00
17:00 -18:00
18:00 -19:00
19:00 - 20:00
20:00 - 21:00
21:00 -22 :00
22:00 -23:0:
23:00 -00:00
------------------------ ---------------------------
0.00 C.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50
(f t)
-7-
6 -217
DAILY SUMMARY Site el OEANOER SO /ORANG Thu 07 Nov 1996
Part A Le
Average Level: 0.34 f- .
Miriam Level: 0.15 £t 0 00:20
Maximus Level: 0 -31 ft @ 01:45
HmrLy Average LeveL
G0:00- 01:00: 0.20 ft 12:00-13:00:
01:00 - 02:00: 0.27 ft 13:00-14:00:
02:00. 03:00: 0.27 ft 14:00- 15:00:
03:00 - 04:00: 0.25 ft 15:00. 16:00:
04:00.05 :00: 0.24 ft 16:00- 17:00:
05 :00- 06:DD: 0.23 ft 17:00- 18:00:
06:00 - 07:00: 0.23 ft 18 :00-19:00:
07:00- 08:00: 0.23 ft 19:00- 20:00:
08:00- 09:00: 20:00-21:00:
09:00- 10:00: 21:00 -22:00:
10:00. 11:00: 22:00- 23:00:
11:00 - 12:00: 23:00- 00:00:
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50
.♦ - - - -- P f i -4 --------
00:00 - 01:00
01:00-02-00 = __
02:00 -03:00
03:00 -04:00 =___ •�_:: :___'--
D4 :OD -05:00
05:00 -06:00 =__�
•
9661 ~oN SO
1a~-96;90 ~6'a0 -56a~`2 -5~8•i -5E'r~Yi 5E.i0.i
(,/ Y I NAY w d Y u/d t l tii~l .4 Wb~ ~
. _....._ r ............. .......r __..... r.... __. r.._. _.. r...._....
i
~ ~ ~
~ ~
~ i
~
1
~ 11
i ~ f/1_ _ 1~
_ ~JI i
i
i
..r ..____., r.....
~ ~ ~ i ~
i ~ ~
i i i
~ i
i i i
•, ', ',
i
i i
i i
i i i i
~ ~ ~ i
~ ~ ~ i
i i i ~
i ~ ~
i aLFS
ONdtJO~OS t130NFJ30
Q ~1aee~
9661 i~0 1E
nyl gB~~ YO
- 000'0
v
OOS'0
ooz•o
A
N
v
ooe•o
006'0
0090
rn
N
[D
OEANDER SO~ORANG
6.000
4.000
rn ~ 3.000
i
N r•
v
N
O
J
2.000
1.000
0.000 -
18s35 Ned
30 Oct 1996
Site 1
r r r r
t
i r
t
r
r r r r
I
r r r ~ ~
r r
...............~.................;............----•i• -•--._.........~...__.._.__...............------•--i--............_..
r ~ r
r
F r
i i r i
J ~
~ ~ r ~ r r
0 ~ r r r
r r ~ ~ ~ r
r r
......_...___.__~ ......................____._-----._i.._.__...-----...i._......._._____.1.............._._~__._...__........
t ~ t
r
r : r ~ r
r ~ r r r
r
t
r
r r
r r r r r
r
i ~ ~ r
r
pL, AM 1Y AM 11-/lirl ~ ) Avl !7, Anr r~ A„'~ ~ . ~~r^
~8s~26 ~ 1Bs•06 `~ L8r25 ~ 1.8x95 ~ 18s~G- ~lSs.'~5 ~ ~ s~5 Wed
Thu Fri Sat .Sun Mon Tue 06 Nov 1994
Level=~
DEANDER SOiORAND
Site 1
I ^
N
N v.
N v
J
^N'
W
W
J
0.500
;~
.
.
.
0.100 .................~....-----...-----,-...---•-----•--.~..-....,...---•--i•----•-••-----•--.------•-----••---'--.•--.°-...----
.
7
.
.
0.300 .............. ............ ..._......-- ---...... .,................i---.......... .~................
~I i , A l ,f~ A 1 l i I~ 11 ' ~ 1 11~
~Y r' ~ ~
~ . .
a.soo -------- ---- -•-~•--•---....- --:-•------ ----- --~-------
.
.
c ;
o.laa --•-•---------•--~----....----• ....:.................;.......
A
0.000 -fi
Od ~2~-Thu pd,-P9~
31 Oct 1996 Fri
i 1. P~''I I J. PM
06:95. Odi26.
Sat Sun
~ ~ • r ~tt
.
.
. ;
16:35- 06x35 06195- 06t3B Thu
Man Tue Wed 07 Nov 1996
Level=Q
OEANOER SOi0RAN0
0.500
0.900
0.300
~ ^
i
N ~
v
N
N ~
J
0.200
Q.100
4
0.000
!~
Site 1
1 1
1 1
1
1 1
--°-•----~-------•-••------i..•--
t
1
1 1
1
1 1
1
t
1 1
i ~
..I. lv 1
1
1 1 1 1
1 1 , ,
1 1 1
1
qy
01/
1' 1
~•-1
N ~ 7
n~ ; , 1
C
/ ~ ; 1
1 1 1
1
1 ,•
li ~ ~ ~.1 _u5. i ~, aA % ~.
..._....... ~....!_........... J....l...
...x............1....1 ...._.......
1 ~
1 1 • ~ 1 ~
1 1
i i 1 1 i 1
~
1
1 ~ ~
1
1 i
•
1
~ 1 1
....... J.....
1
_J _.
~
.J. ... 1
... J.......... 1
J. 1
.......... J........
1
1
1
1 1
; 1
;
;
1 1
1 j 1 1
~ • 1 1
1 ~ 1
1 1 ~ ~
~ 1
1
1 1
1
1
1 • 1
1
1
1 1 1
1 1 1 1 ~
l7•J!~ 1T AM /1 Air J~_/M JiJINI il'.rnv ~]
t9r39 Thu
MILWlLkr
31 opt lss6
taws. ~te:9~-
Fri Sat
~iB:95- ~1.8:~35 ~NB:~95~ I~1Bt~6~ L8t,3Fa Thu
Sun Mon Tue Wed 07 NoY 1996
Level=~
OERNDER SOfQRRNO
Site 1
rn
i
N
N
w
0.500
.
. ~ .
.
.
~
.
.
.
.900 .
....................~..........
.
-----••-•-.----•
---_....----••;•--------•-----
--_.i•••--°
.
.
.....-•-----•i•-•--...---•--
--...
i ~ a3
~~ ~ i
. ' .
. .
~ P .
.
.
,. •
0.300 .
.................. ~.........
•
..._. .~....
.........----..{............................ .
.............~.._.......---
......
..
.• ;
.,.
v
.
~.
v i . i
.
. 7
.
.
.
•
.
.
.
0.200 ... ..........°---d-•----•-- -----....-:-•--••----...-----•-'-----....----- °....~-----.. _......-----•i•_.._....---- -•--...
.
. .
.
.
. ~
. .
. .
.
0.100
•--...----•-•---• . . ,
. .
. i .
A
.
. i
. .
o.ooo
I ~ Amt
¢ A iH
6 A~'J
l i Pal
q• OM
8 PM i z ,,., - r~.
36 li
18
-1J3r8B Sun 22:35 02:35 06:35 10:35 14:35 :
on
Q3 FJov 1996 09 Nov 1995
~/ ~ /
~' V
Level=A / !
~~/~-/~~
rn
N
N
A
n
w
v
d
a
J
OEfiNOER SOi0RRN0
Site 1
0.50D
t
•
.
. ,~,~,
0.400
-.......----•-----..~...---•--•---- ,
---....,--••-•----••-•----•-i•• .........
.........~_...-•----•-•-
.
~~---~-----...-.__......_.
i
~ ~
i ~ ~ ~ r .
i
:
~ ' ~ fr/
~ J .
~
i ~
~
i 1
/~
i
0.300 ~
................. ............ ~ '
..... ................. .........
............
,' .
.....
i
0.200 ....... .......
0.100 ................
0
0.000 -
~ ~ /~ M
18:35 Sun
03 Nov 1994
Levelm~
i
i
i
i
i
L,,~..
70:35
~ ~ ~
~ .
~ ~ i
~ ~
. ~
._..._....~ ....................~..___..._.._.__._._.~__......__....___.._r.__.......___.......
i ~ ~ i
~ ~ ~
~ . .
~ ~ ~ ~
i .
i ~ ! ~
35 00.35 0 ~ 5 04 35 D6: 36 Mon
04 Nov 1996
APPENDIX D
Calculation for Flow per
EDII within E=icting Developed
Area of Poggi Canyon Basin (Western Portion)
Based oa F7ow Metering Information
D-I
6-225
WILSON ENGINEERING
_ -.
- - - -- -- - ---. - -- - --- --- - -- -L~o - oo, _
----~ov~_r--s~~ da t.~.,-- - -cr3~-._s,'d--~ u.~-L_a1.~..Ys_~.{ ~sf~_
fr~ala
_ i~loN-1----- -------- -
?
-- -- -- ~- --- ------
----
-- ----- - - ~~ -- W~,~.,~s.[ ~,_ .Nay ~---- -- - - - ~-----------
-- -_. .. - ~y~--O~=~ --_ ..------ -- ~~-- --------
-- --- -- ---- -~.2Z------ --- ------ - - N~'"-~-
-- - -- -- .. _ - 11, z3 ------- -- - - - --- N~ K 3 . _- --- - --- --
------- - -- a~----- -- --- - - --- - - -- ~ . ~ ~
-
_
O- 22 --- _
_.Afw. ~ _
_ _
_ ~.rr - O -. _2 2 s _ ~ea-~
---
-- - -
-- -~/L / - - --... ..- - - -
r - - -.
-_ __ X _ _ _ O. I p$9 f ._7S ~o, x 153 - o. tog9)
-g~
WILSON ENGINEERING
_,
---..- ------ -- -- -- -- ----- - - __ ..__. _._.. __~_z~ -. ao~
_ ---- - ---- ---=----- - ----- - ~- ~~ ~1_
- E xis~i~ _-. E~u~-_.- . -- ----------------
--- ------ ----o-~ i s ---~~ -- - ~-- --
_(~._-_. _. 0,._37...---L~1 .------... ---
--- ---
~i:ow .e I I ~{p ~ 7ooe`.- ~al//~ c_ nnM~xR lµ ~'+~~~ Zd i
rf~ fIANDH008 OF HYDHAIILICS
3
m the Formals
lum of R for Circular ~~
V
Table .
7-i a
Q.. j)!laSf
A
~ D ~ depth o[ molar d ~ diusatar d ehanOd
D pp 81 .OZ .m .03 .OS p6 .O7 .O9 89
d - ~
p ISA2 10.39 8.57 7.79 656 886 147 S.OB
129 S1T 4.78
7
96
.1 6l9 436 601 7.99 3.99 333 7.11
83 238 Ia9 1a2 2X
2 .
3.70
.2 288 .
487 2.79 271
09 106 100 1.86 1.91 1$7
8
" 1.91
.. l ~
.4 2.73
1.80 .
.0 211
2
Lib 1.73 1LY i.Y6 1.62 139 339 337 1.50
- 3 lT
l 1.432 1.113 1.702 1 1311 1.480 t
43 1
1
±
~
. e .
1313 3.192 3.17 1.~ 1.126 1.106 1.093 1.004 L0 .
:-
.
y .
.7 1.004 .983 .995 81 .I~l 871
707 .087
A7
r ;~ . _
_ yy 8 821 .
JD4 .787 .77 .7
~ A21 .601 ,568 371 333 318
.4
.9 .~
=. r •' 1.0 .497
f:' ,•x
~ T6hle 7-14
~ . Vaium of k' for Cireulr Channel in th0 Formula
~ ,- ~,,,
~ K' ~sais
Q .
-- • n
_ _ .. _ ~_~...r ~.ra d ~ dyu~a+e of ehes0el
:~c >/
_._ ' ~
J-~
~~
i~^
f
APPENDIX E
Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer System
Computer Modet Printouts
E-I
6-229
Table to Relate Manhole Nambera !o Appendls E and on Ezhibit A to
Manhole Namben ba Appendii I
yet ~gy~
NS ~'A ~ ~ ~ ~ iL F ~ ~"2ti A' " .FSiK~~9i A' Mu L R -+R) C`"~~'C. `~
i 2U y „~ ~ ~_ ` ~ G Y4 t
`k
`#A`
9r
"'
~'
u
-
*
~
^
°~~~
is".' ~~
.t
~FN `
2 ',~
ya, s
&Z~
r
~x
~y,
+
3+ _;o'~i~. zk 3f~
x
r:
Ri ~,, ya ~,,.' as ~ k'Y.' a:
Y~
~
~
Sh~J'
~~.~ .s .
~4 n
R } ~„ ~ ~~ ~~
~'~
'<
l
~
~
Y
~
^
1w.
i
.. '~ RY .1S..R.~ AS:
~ pti .?S ..
..
k .IXf
q3y.'...' ? .. ..ri.... .:
211 End of esis6ng 18' is Orange Ave. 307
210 Last Mfi is Orange Ave. westerly 305
209 Center of condo development 303
208 West end of coodo development 301
207 Oleander, 100 ft. wuth of Satinwood 251
250
206 Storm drain easement, 400 ft. southwest
ofOfeaader
248
246
244
205 )IdH east side of I-805 undererossing 442
204 MFi wpt side of I-805 uadererossiag 240
2D3 Siotm chin easement, 200 ft. southwest
ofMeirose '
238
236
234
202 Storm drain euemrnt, 1,600 R ,
downstream of MFi 203
232
201 Intersection of storm drain eaaemrnt sad
Orgy Vellry Road
230
228
226
224
222
2a0 Intersection of future Poggi Canyon
Sewer and fumrc Salt Creel Interceptor
6-230
zzi
zzo
t
Note that Manhole Numbers 200 through 203 and 206 are located within the proposed storm
drain easement alignment. Therefore, they do not correspond with the manhole numbers in
Appendix I which are located in Oleander Street and Melrose Avenue.
Manhole Numbers 222 through 221 in Appendix E are located on future reaches of the Poggi
Canyon Basin Sewer in future East Orange Avenue.
6-231
APPENDIX E
Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer System
Computer Model
Flows Based on 280/210 gpd/i7nit
E2
6-232
£-fl
i
i
)
'
,. ,. , ... ,., ,,... 1 , ., . ,. ., .. , .., ,.
..
4
. I
J
, I
1 (Y~
a a ~ a I -i
: ~
~ ~
~ I
i I ru
1
'
I i f0
,
.1 ~.
r 1
~
ii
. ~~ ..~ I.. r •. . r I u. R~ I. r 1 I . I
..
...~ ~
.:
.
'
"
'
i
~~
i
.
i
i r
'
, i.
1
. 1'
~
I 1 I'. I' ~ l
I 1 1 1
~• '
~ ~.
i
~'
.
iii I41 ~~ 1 I~i,l . .-._ . ~.
~~
r. " I t'
1. :.
..
r-. ~-.1 n ~...., e-. ., . , c: a-. .. ..) r. , ro ~.,> <a . y n n... }
. - u
i
i
i.
i
,.
I ~ it r II a 1
'i ~ I 1 ri °. ~ ~ ~. ~ 1 4 . 1 . +~. 41 ~ . v'i 'r. ~ 1 ~ ~ .:~.i I-
1
~.
I
_
~
i
i
j ra M
i NS I
. ~ I.
.
I
G'S
6-235
Q~
N T
to l ,1
~1- ill ~Ir
;;
``
;
`i
;
t
I t
< J [..{ n~ f _J la p.
C aYJ fJ C>
a~ lu
~t1 1-~
t'~ ~I .
pJ YJ ~ J EP a, u. 1 nJ J F.
C~
'-I •-'1 '.I r ~1 1-• 1'J ~l.
1 pJ M1r .1•• pD t'.1 1
l rr~ ~. ~1 • pi
G {
S rtJ GS
`J
~
1~1
',
J'~
.'~
I'}
t~V
•1
_, __S_. v. Y ~ __. _.v .._
• _._ •~
.Yl/nL _v ._._.... .
''1~ - _
~ a
' vJ JJ
:- .
bm
!' :.8 ._. $; Y1 .~., rv„ .. __, __ _
_._ _. CCUe
.i .. :a ..._ e
. . r_. . ,...
.
..
J
~
_ : U
.. .. , . _
uV uu tl
. .
~ ~ ~A 4 v.3: v._ •L f R.~iVT
._ a_~ ..v
•L ., v.._ .'J+ •14 .. 4Y .
$ T: .e ; i. ~.. ,.„4 ...
c d.: ...; ..-, .AFC. J r '` _ .
... .ve . _
4i uG Lt .... C.. , u .u F~ l _~i_. .7.
___ .. ...u..c ... . _ .. . . . .... ... .__
aR - .Y. a . ~~{V __
~ y V ~C CJ .iu t... -~ .. .... ~. . tlli _.
.; L',.
G .~ '!G VL.• __e. .._.
__ n . a•. AiJ
,... _. _. ir:_
' ~L __ _.. .._ ... ..u .n _.... , , .,. ,.. ,.L
_.. .
_. ~. .
tiL ......
.. ...
_3-: _.. ..~...u _. .~. -....• _.. . .
_ _ _ _ _ Ts LL ... i S.__
. ... .u_ ::Y J'. M1P r as :...
_., .._ ~
L .. .. ,..+...a 4 ..,.. . ....
' ' . ._. .tl '. .~ ..,
J . . u ., .
v
~ U'13 _ ..~
L
u ... ...: .'.t: ft _ .5~"~ a .3u.
_.. ... .~v~.a .. .a _. ._,.
iY . ... . _.
39 tlY C p
~ 3. Y~'
j~
vU J. 6 .1 ~^GC. ~~YL ~ ... r..
_., .c ..• ,] _.:~,.. . . ...C ..
.
.
V
Y f a
'
J i ~ 4 ~ e ~ f f 1- 1 f p 1 j } Y ~ ! -
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - 4 } ~ .f.C
e C.15
f
6-L`37 ~
APPENDIX E
Poggi Canyou Basin Sewer System
Computer Modd
Flows Based ou 265/200 gpd/Unit
E-8
6-238
SUMMARY OF SEWAGE FLOWS FOR 7'fiE POCCI CANYON INTERCEPTOR BY MANI[OLE (BASED ON 265/200 Epd/uelt)
r ~~
!•t•nhob kaf.gae. swiwR GiNrln811 f~fl1 ~,SNBy ot4 Olj~ otlzs 7'x!7 ~ OI+Y,' a!a'~:1~~~~ xI4fiilA'Itllly Ywdl.•tie To14f~`.
NeM
D
Yel6
)
'
m -
~
~
e
p
IYR.
. [r
.
ArocM Rush p•fith R•nd RrkY :_ Reek )lW
JI R
.
kll~ "RlBa
Number 8p1h •~6 11, BMa 42•Nurit, 4f ,
~
V14•Be XIIyEa VIII.Re A'knalMr Yul•ee,; YW4eK YU41~~ tra711rB 4~8.
~•t BPn1~.1 ,C.'4tA4eJ~ yW^1{411
..
<~ 1M!iy~'1, .tPmWB 6itP~ 7.~M ll.tps .it4~1~11;, 'Oaewd4 ie11~41 a4rRMx ~ ,
.
'
_ ~R.%; ;
r ~: i7B.q .tY~ r q(r::_, BMO ~
r~{, erm.eri: _.~+q.
100 0,00
101 34.14 ]4.11
101 0.00
10l 0.00
1D1 13! 08 113.08
107 119.77 119.73
106 0.~
T07 D'~
108 1.67 L67
209 10.98 10.98
110 J0.18 70.18
211 U.00
111 U.00
117 0.74 108,1 108.94
114 116.8 116.80
113 16.9 16.911
116 0.00
117 1.4 3.4 66.8 27.0 Ifq.60
21 B 89.1 11.6 127.9 728.60
219 66.8 1!!.7 l4.1 74.1 350.80
120 116.7 37.0 117.0 186.70
111 116.7 7].7 163.1 15.3 797.0 774.90
-~T91d ~ :7]154. . ~~a51f <j ~.'~Id ' ~'~~ 5d 1121.7 ';"749,2 511 . 7t'~' ':`'id3.l. a 3A.6°~ :Ai7:~,:j ri.i;w.'. ~ 1U7.1~;°'~ ;.711:~~'~, 4,536.0 `.
GA
~~
I
._
c .1 r r~
~ ru
~
.
i
-
i - c s c r a c [-+ o
.t E ra ra r -- c e c ea c a e J r r re
C E+ E .~ R+
I' J 6J C' r C n> 1 ` - [: C
t .
C ri: ~ J Y.. C'~. C., CJ E r EJ r,u ~ [ ~ CJ .M .i CJ 6, C <~+ II
1
1 1 1' F'a IJ1 ~! t.ll t '
,
1 r'
( i
t IJ ~, [~• 1 I ei, J t 11..E ~ C• , ./a 1 a r I.. f.l f I
I ,i 1
1.
1
t.
I'
1 [
1 ~ r s rs. + + c E. evE o Er m oa ~ ~e .
1.1 , _
a
L
~
:
C
l
i
[i
<
~
.
;I . 1 .1
J
.l
.[ . < .1 .. 1
a ._1
!
J
A J
J <
1 Al ~
c. i ,
n
~,.
t i'~ i ~ :
' :
1
i . , ru ,.l 9.a su (J r tt] ,u OI ~. ~ ~ , n, I
.
, u
x
~'
.
~:
~ - u. 1
.
1
1 a ..1
11 rn s ~ [~ •...: .71 ..li a4. a6 .n rn cu ul n ~ ~. 1 on I :1 ..~, .. 1
1.1 I
i
1 ^-
rI~l J '1 J..h1 J.. ~1 hr1 [n IR - J
'
~
+
M:i il
u r 1 a I~ 1' 1' , r~
[ 1 [IJ
1 '
i
~
~
1~
, • ~! v •1
rJ 1 <
1-. 1
1
.
• ~ t ,
1' dJ e.~ lv J OJ I'l O-- 1-.~ 1 i:, -1 ~ 1`1 r' [i[ I~, , O~ ] "1
h
1.
1 i,
.r tl. 1 a.. ~ u <' ~
,
1 l ~1 J.. Jr E'.+ Y' •~
n+ E+ YaJ ~ f ~1 J>• ~ I.., r 11' ~ 1 J .~1 l „ 1
!~1
t~~
f,1
i.
1~~
(,1
CJ
I,
F- { l
6-241
n~
~~
N
'A' ~~
N
~1~ !1~
I ~ 1 i CS C V% ('
r. ru ~i r~~ 1 r~~ ~.. ~ 1 fv n [~~ .fir 1. • fJ
I
l.a M LJ 41
ew i;'u i,~ r:a a e ec. iv es ti v..,,v o.i c.. r,i w . .
i.
r.-1 I i ~~
c~ F
e~ ii .. as n,. ~a-~ .... ~~~ I ~ ~.' ~s~ a.
r l 1 ,1
•:i alilio r$I
.c:... rse r.. ca ~ _ _ _ :j'.
ru r. .... ew er. cs• c.. .,+ en co u c: ca `e-i. ~.
I~1
~Y'1
?.
r!~
it
WILSON ENGINEERING
-- - --- -- - - - - - 5.- ~! -97
_- ~~-u-oo)._
i_I
-- - --- - ----
._ _ -
---
- -_ - -- -.
--
--- -
_ .. -..
- --
_- --
----- - .. ~~---~ ~--; ft .- ~.v.DS . ~8 __._- __ _ . _ __- --
- -
-- - -
~ -- -- -- -
-- ----
- - ..-.
_. - - i
... _. !
_. - ~
_ .. ... u. ~_ n .'vM .._ 3. __ .i i.] _.._ ... _.._ ___ __l
-YT_i rt _ _ _
.. ..C' a .. _.._ :_ .v .a. _ _ .... .. .._
G-G4 .a. •~14 -v.r r .G _Y ...0 r'~~.a~ . _ Y~_ti'J V _.. _.._~ .
t •_ . ._
. _ ._. .~cou'v :a w ~...
' ~ ~5~ ...
_. __. --uC
.ice ._ .. .d
:1 .V• r.Y . ...
}
~ ~ Y 4v' li _.. .... ._ • L. ~ .iV Y fY~~_~.1 ~_
_..: __a .V _
'J
+ •_ __
. •.i •
qq ' ti ~ .• ._ .... { IYi ~% ..
•_ .OC 4tlLT .a'I T!Y .._ .L
ti .i1L ..
]
__. __. „L.,
.c __ _ ._. ._. ._ _
3 ~ ~ ~ ..a L _. _
_. ___ .v ~ ._ ....._. .~ . _ . .. ._._. ...
u
_ __.. .
L-:. .. .-.
,i•
Q i<i u=.".
J i.- _ i'5~~~+1• __
_~: .d=ie __ u- ~c ._.. J _.. . _ ~...
a
_ _.. u.er __ v. .: .. ..-
] v. ... _.V
._ .J.-
~~ u .-. ~.._ __ ._. _
. .
_ _.. a _. ,E.C. ... ... ..\ .
\
r.
II +L
:+ .Y• •.i C'Y _ _.vC .._. ._. ..
v
_u. _u. .UGi __ r
..
~ 1' ~_
e: l i. .. y i ~ trv _ ..3 .C Y .
_ __
I
_ .._ .+L::..J _. v
r~ ~J
i.] ~y +YL • .
. Y .
E-f3
6-244
APPENDIX F
Calculatioa to Verify that the
Peaking Fsetor Equation for the
Computer Model Correlates
lvith the City of Chula Vista
Peaking Curve in CVDS 18
F-1
6-245
wil_SON ENGINEERING
3
s-2. ~ -_4.-7_..
-- ---- - -
-~ --- --
_-. _._ --
- _ _ P~ - r_ ion- - _ ~3 3 0. zz y~,_- - - _.. --- ---------- ----
- - - - - ~1'
..-._-
-- -__ -
__ _.__ i-3r 3 2 Q -_. - _E~7u _e_~ao ~,.rlEDcc.__ _._
~.T,(L .~~- .;r ...G. 6 ~,.~' -..1.67. -- - -._ _ _. .
_ .. ~ K-- . --- -- - -
APPENDIX G
Calulations to Determine Available
Capacity in EDUs in Existing
18-inch Gravity Sewer Main
Under the I-805 Freeway
G-1
6-247
wit ~nN FNGtNEERiNG
-- - . _ _ -- ~
; ---- i-; - - ~~ ~; ------
~ ~ :-
~
_
.
/ ` ~+^9~
^/
~
~~
; I i
~ f i I I
I ' I I I
~
I I I ~8' S
1 i I
I j! i i i I I j; i I
I
~ , I i
'
~ ~
1
•~ I I ~
~
i I j! j i i I
'
i~ ;~'•~~
j ; k . / ' ilil i`I
'.
i/ olo ' ~ i ! ~ I l l l
' I ~
j l I .I S I~ I ~! l i II i
1 i I j ! I ~ I
' t ~
sr, 1
r
i ~
~
I i ` I
'. I I
I ~ t 1 i
I
' ` ~; i
2 ( i l I
DI
~ i i j
I j ~ I
f
I
' t o
l i l I I I
D ^
~ i
I
i I! ,
I ~ , I i I I I I
' I
~I
' 1 ASS ' u _d~ ,4, ~ I
Q
`
I
'r=~
'
,LL L ~ I ~
' I I ' `. i
'
!
~f ,
1
i I
'~
% I ~ i I~ F i I 1 I
I I 1 i I i i
! i I I
i 1 I I ( I 1 I I ' ~ I
I i
C ~ O: y-i.2 i 1~'
k
i 1 ~ ~' i 1 1 i
~3 '
,
I 1 i i i I
~
I
' i I I OI 013 ` i I
I i
'
'
I I 1 I I I I
I f I
I 'I i, I l
'
f
~ j c 1 ! G ,~
' I I I ~ G.~ 1
i ! ! ~ j ;
I'
'
1
i ! I oI 3; O 3
i I
i i! I i
I
j ~ ;
I
~~ I ~_ I ,Zj I i~ j j I
,
~ I f
i I I I I
1 ~
I I ~ i~ i ~ I I ~ I
i I i
~ 1
~ I
i
1 I I I i ~
i , ~ I I ~ I I I
'
. •, f I I 1 ~ ~ ? i I I ~
~I , i
I I
I
I ~ 1 ~.. 01 ~ 1 ~ i
f C ~ I I
l js I
i 1 I
~ I ~ I~ I ~ 1 i ~ ~ '
.
j
I I 1 i i I
I I I
. t
I
i cVDS
~ I
~ ~ I
l i ~ I ' 1 ~ I~
-
~ i i 1 t
~ T
~
~SD wee/
L~
~
~~~LLLJJJ
~~~~
PO '
• 1-iy 77
u[n ~a.
~~ rrt
A M. R
u-ni en~i >=t~lhIPIFFRING
wit ~nN ENGINEERING
J/; ' ! I I
I~
i '
i I i ~~~~ i
I I
i I i_, 9 3 c s ~ i i t
;I I ~_ ~ ~L - ,L I ~ i I ~ j j I i i
'I I ~ I I i i I f ``j ' 1i i i I i ~ I I'
i ~ I ~
I I ~QI i t i - ~ ~ I
E ~ I I
i _ q~
~V~,_ 2,Q~ ~ EF~~C / Or I 2,
I=-"' ! ! I
~ 1~7
,i ,i 1 ~~ I
' ~ j ; ,
r i ( i I ~
~ I ~ ~ i ~j I i ~ i i i i I
i ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~,
~ i i ~ I
I i i ~ ~ j I j l ~ i l l I
I I ~ ,
i ~ ~ -~
~ 1 I i
i i ~ ~ i
WILSON ENGINEERING
-- - - --- ' --T-
~
t I I
I
I
I
I I i j
1 I i I ~ ~ I
•
i I //~~ ~ I of ~. ~~~[ ~ „ 1 I ~ I i I
T_
t
U/ ~r '
R
. , ~ , I j I
_
Imo/ ~_;, is J~ 6 3~ i I i ~( I j I
~, j ~ I~ ~ I l i j i I l f l
1 i
l i l i i i i j~ l l l l ., i
,
~
I 1
I , ~, j 1 I I I
i i i ~6;3 I I 1 ~~
~
r-~ '
-
. o.co I i I I i
I i~ .'pt3 ~ I I I I 1 I ~ I 4
;
~
i? I i I ~~ i I
~ i i I I i i I
1 I I I
I ~
i j 1 ~ I
, 1 I
, : I I j i
I ~
! I I
I
1 1
I a- j '7. ~f 2S' c~l I I
V
I
~ 1
i I
I
i I
= 1 3 siZ i i I 1 . ~ ' I I I
i I i L i ~ 0
lip
i i I I i
.
..
11
1 I
: j I~ i I
! {II
ii I
~i
I I
~
I
~~, I.cu~,-c Icy i ~~%'! I = Z'
i, .7~- i i
I 3 ~r~d
' ~ l j ~ j ~ j
I I
-
~ •
~ `E7~u ! _: i rt o I i~ I c0 ~ i
~ 6 I ~ p I ~
v,
„
' i 3s ~9~y` ~ I.
I ,, 1 , 1 I I ~ ~I -
' ' I D ~ / 8 j :ai.~lc~,I ' ~i ! ~ ate. %,6 9-
1 yam" I ;I II!ill
1 i
l
i I
I i~ i i I j~ i 4 i
i i; ~! ~, ~~ j I ~'
~ ~ I
I I ' I I
• i l i
j I i i I i 1 I I
j ~ I t I
• I ~ I ! ~ I ' I I I
I I 1 ~
.i I V I j 1 I 1 I i I I i
i
., ~
j! I jij ~I
I ; I
~! i j! i j l l f
i I ~ i
i
' I ! `~ i ; i
!
-- ~ ' i ~
' ' i
I
/J , ' Y-y
~
C
~
~
/~A ~C~
I ~ 47
j/f]'7~
~~R
f~'~ 1{y
A w r/
WIC SON ENGfNEER1NG
---
- -
-
-- ----- - i -- --- ---; -- ; -
_.-_- -
/ ZOO- 001
-
I ~
~ i ! i I i tF ~!/4~ - 97
'
' '
i'f ~ii
~ '
r
liilii ' '
f i! i
;
~;I! ! I ! ~
+ !~I
~
;, ~ , u I a ,~, T~b;lr-; ; I
I ;!
i
I s
~ o
i I ~ ; ; , I ~ I , ~ i ! ! ~ i
,
' i rot EDS.!
s
k ~J i ~.~
i
~~
I i
I
I I ~ ~a G• {
1
( i
F .
I a ti t
G
'
i
i i ~ I I I ~ ~~ i l ~!
!~! ': ' I I
I ! I ~ f I
t
I I i i i i ~ l
{ l I I
j i f f I! I I i I I
1 I
I I ~ ~' i I I ( I i{ { I ~ 1
! a; !S{ F I 7 I ~ i t
~
I I( ( ! I
i f I { i
I
I
I I j
' I l i ~ I I
i l i I I'
I I !
3
io; a 9 l l
I ,
li i i i I ~ ~ 1 j ~ I
i I ~
! I I i i ' f 1 ~ i, ! i
i
~ I
~ O I
e
i ~ f I
~ ~ ~
I ~
i I i I i i I
~
~
I '
i I I ! I
~'. ~ I I
i i ~
~ i 1 t I
1 i ! ~ i I I ~ ' ~ '.. I 1 ! i I I
I I I I
i I I
i i ~
I I f I
I ~ I
'. i 1 _ I I ~ I ~ I ~ 1 I
I ~ I ! ~ I ~ i ~ I i I I i I 1 I ' I I
{
I
1 i ~ ~ I
I I ~ I I I ~
I 1
! I t
I I I !
i
i
I! l i l i l ~( l I F i l I t i t
f I I I i I ~ i I i I I ! ! ! ' {
i 1 ~ I
i
i j i j I
i i {; f l I
l l 1 1 f I I
i I; i i I I :~ i l i l l ~ i t
j I ~ ! i
;
'
:
~ l i
I I f
' i I I
I I
I
,
'
rza-oo
' .
P, c.
~ .~
>.~ v- S
..~...
.n
.~ ,~
~nni cnn~ ENGINEERING
----.----- -
--------- ~l=s4-77
i o • ' •1,i~ ~ t~_ f ~ I
I i ~ i' I l f+ l ~ I I(
I
I ~
l ~ f f
'
~
~I i :~ I i
~
I o ~~ s
i 41! ~ --te SLED u
r I
I ; I i!; I
I I ~,
i l i (
i
I I
f l ~ i
i
i I
,
j j i f~ j l i l!'
i l I
i i i i
,
'; ~ i I
I ! s l I
I ~ '
I i
I I I I
I i I
I I i I i I
~ I I I I j ` f I I i I I-
,
, i ` l i i i l i j i l
= I
. I ! I i I
I
1 I I
I
I a!os j l I" i i l I I
I i!I ! !i il.il i !I
' !I!
,
i ~ j~!I I
I
~ ~I I II
. i_ i
~ 3f I l l l l i i 1
1 i i i i i
I
,
I .`; i
~.
I ~
.
,
I i= I . i i
i - I ~
' I I i j
i~ l i l ;
~ I I
l
'. j ~
I 1 I i ~ i
I I I
.'Z 5'7 21 ?'f'7 1'' ~
I . ,
i I
i
i~ L ~ ~
I
• ± 'T~
1
I S? EG
l i l I
,
i~ i
I I I s-I ~
f Iii 3 I
'
~ I j I I~ 1 1
~ i ~ ~ ( ` l i r
I I ~ ~ i I 1 ~ I I ~ , 1
I i j I I I I I I I I I
i
I I I I I i ~
~ I I [ I I I I ! I I
I I 1 I
t i 1 1 ~ I i j I I I
~
~ i I I I I j
I
~' I
i I ~ I { ~
I I j ~ ~ I I I ~ I
~ ~ 1 i ~ ~ '. I
~ ~
i i ~ i
, , I; I I I G
' I 1-
f ~
i
~ _ ~
(Yp~00( ~ /iufiCi ~-: ~ b
rR wma
Ai i. ~
WILSON ENGINEERING
- --/ ., 1 -- =
- l.~~S aP.~E X41---- ---- --
- •- -~---=-= --- - ---r-
~ ~LO~ool-----
i
---- I ~t-2'3''9?
i ~
i : ~ I
I I ; I I t
. ~ ! ~~s '
T
'
~ i !
. I
i i ! ~ i
I
~
f i ~ ~
'
;
i I
i
~ i I
~ ~~- j i
~
! j i !
i
;~; _! 'o i I r5 ~ i l I I i I ~ I I I
I ~~ ~ I 3 ! ~ i i i i i '
~ i' i i l j l
' `~ I ~ i i i! i i I'
t_ ~~ '~j i i i
I I ~,
i , !
i '
~ ~I 3 33•/! I I ~ ~' I I' i I i i !
l i=, ~3~ i i
i ~ !
j l i l ! I I
' i l f l !li!i
I
i I~~
~
It
j I '~ ~ I
' Ill ii
!
,
~~-,; !
I i i !i III ;II~i!
_
I! ; ~ I I '~ I i i!'
i i ` ~ ! ~ S' .•rroG-. ! tau = ' 3 ~
-, ~ +T I I ~ ; ~ I
l i ~ i i PG G- '~f?C`T'-~-i-
I I i
l i
i i i! I~ i i i I ~' !
~
~ ~ ~ ~ i
1 i
i ! i i
I i I i ~ i i ~ ' i i
i , I
I- I l i i
' I i I ! i i I
I ~ I I I i ~' i
I I I t
i I i i I I ~ ~ I i I I I I I
i I I I i I ! i j ! i I I I ! I I I I I ! I I
~i !i!'l iil !I i~!II
! I' I!! '
i! i f i I! ~! i I! I
~ I!! !~ l
~ i l i ( l l ~ i ' f
i i j; j
_ ~ I i i i
I ~ i i i
T
' ~
I i ~:
'
i~41( ~j~.,
K V n
l.~.r {~i ~]A~T
/~~4 4 ~ ~ 4~
om
rtL sr s.
p K n u[cr
~nni enN FNrWEERING
'
.f~~.9=4~
i
-- ~ :;p.93 I ~ f I
~
; I I i i I
I
~;--~----r----
i 1
i
I !'- p. i i l
I I I ~ ~ 1 i ~ ' p i~ I
l
I I j ' I I I
'o.!~ 9 ! r 1 , ~
~o% i3
i
~ I~ j I I i I I i i
I
9Q63~ I I I ,~ I i I
~I I ; l i~ l f
iI i
I~I
' I l i
i, : _
- ss I '~ ~' I I I i l ~ i i f
I; i~ , I I I
I I
I
I; I I
1
~
i j l~ l I
~
~r I
S
'III III i 6 I
i _
-
~ _ I
I
I I I; I , E i t
i i I _~ I'// ~ L ~6 I? s ~' I I I
', ~iil II! i ~! 1 ~
I L.;- Is ' 3• ~ S i ae.+ i~G ' ~t~~.c
I i ~ j j ~~~ ~ i I I = i ~ 4 0~ I ~-->
i j i ~ ~
j ; i I ' i
! t-LOI i~ ~,~ '~,~ ~r
--~; >¢
mo
~ 1 ~~~x' 1. L I
, 1 i
I
I
;
i i I
I li` Illf I ~~'I
,I
I ji;l jii
~~' ;Ii
j
I I
i ~ I I I I I I
1
f i; ' i t
I
~
j
~ '
t l~( 1;
I !
i
I I I I
i
i i
'
I
' !
` I
j l l l l
I I I i
' i I I i
~ 1 I I I I ;
j~~
' f
, i,, ' i
; I I I! l
I ~ I ~ ~ ~ I ~ i
i
I I i I ~ ~ ~
1 i
1
i
' I ~ I I ~ t 1
i I
1 I I
- q ~~~~
J
2
~1D oDl Po~e~ ~ b~_a
aw+in I i
'sT'
'L_
.~
Yrz~
+} K R
WILSON ENGINEERING
i
/ZS-ooi-.
~--- ~~-Jrd- - - - , --- - , -
__. ~ ~-sq-97 _
1 D _ I -- I I -
a i - .
i ~ I I I!
I I
1 I
1
1
1 I ' 3 I
1 1 V i a l i I
I ~ I j I j' i ~ I
1 I I _ 1
1 j '' ~ 2S' ~ I I 1 ' I ~ i i i I ~ 1
J_= ' ~
i '. I~ j ~ i j l I j l i i i l i i
, i ! i I I i I i I I I I I i I j I i
_ I oG.'v,L~~~_No S ' 1 { EDa( ~ :; i / O ~]~ I Ebrls
I l i ~ i~ i I
1
I I I 33-~ ~~4~r~?ul' = I 3 7 72~_~~~' I
I I
i i ' i I! I
i ~ 1
I ~~Gt%~~ t ,~~s;e..rle~''~`~~---~~'~~~'~/-. .-'s gry~%!eX,._~~~e-~--may+~
! j ~ ; I i I ( I i I ~~
I i i I ~ i I 1 I ~ ~~
i l
I I f ' i I
1; I ~ l i' I I
I I I ~ i i l i i! j i i i{ I I
I
j j i !! I j ~ ~ I ' i i ~ i l{
~ i I '.
, ~ 1
j~ ~ ~ I 11{ i i i j {!
I 1 1 I ~
1 ~ I 1 ' I ~ 1 1 I I I 1 1 I I I i I
_ ~
IW b I A
wii ~nN ENGINEERING
lya -boi
i i j ! ' ~ ` '
i i ;
~ i i
1
,
,
D ~ ~ (iE 0 ~' ~ ~ phi-E~'
,~ ~ i ; -r r ~ i ;
i
' ~ ~ !
j9~ ~ ~1~~3 Z 'o ~7Z1'
'0• ~ ` `.
o~ ~ ~ o .~ 9 y ~ ~,.L837i
,I I I ~ ; ~
I i 1' I 1 i ~'! 1!
~ i ~ ! I I
,
1 i '
1~ ~ I~ i ~ ! i ~ I j ~ I~~
Q1
I
N
~:
bb 4
4b 4bb4b nlb
ee
i~
~ ~ ~
y
~~ r8 ~
56~.1k ~3sc I ~
B66 ,~ ~~~a~ ~ ~
~t~::t 4~~~g k
.7
iJY E ~k~~
w ~,
kk
N~ I
} cc y4yy
N
b !
1
~ a
O
~1 1yy
1V p''7
1 G
x
Eol
R ~
b
b
V bM b
M O
i
M ~~b
y4 l
. s
R~X~~ rr
M
r
r
Y
E6
6
~~ pM
r(~ y
~~pr
a'ttlC C.6
~
~ ~z ~5~
~ ~
5 ~
CC
r
i ~
~'
A~
4 l
rr
r
~
~ i
~I
R'
tr
p
p
C
~~~~~ ~
b ~
1
j 9 MM
L ~~ ~ ~1
1 m
X ~ rt~7
F6ei
L ~•
S bbybb iLb46 Yob
~A O ~
~~~ b
bgb
ee
S ~
~
y
M x
~k
~ 6g
6^
RG
i
j
j p
~.
~1
gb ~' .
6
~'1. 9. .
bb44b i.Mb4b Mlb
~ ~ ~b g
r ~~~~
y
ri
d ~ ~
rr t
RFw
*~ah~ 55CC~ ~
V
..
b a '~
Q
30
~~
Q
Wj
~y
3°~
v~ >
Qj
j
Q
Fem. Q
~ W
W~
~~
~Z
~ ~
O
n 4
~ ;
z `
i
q
• ~
: ry ~
' ti ! W
n ~
N n O
i n o
~ • 4 A b ~
/,000
SP?
Q00
sa
~
b
u Z
zo ~ - "_
~ J
iL ~
/0 C
1
s
9
2
!.J
t ~
RAr/D OF PEAK TO AVERAGE FLOW
R~ris ~d Drswn,T. w.f/. c.e. ~~-~~-~1 CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ApO~a~~d oat• P-/d•78 F!,!$tIC WORKS QEFAttTMENT
CVDS
`Li. (7_ ~,~-~t,+.a% 6-25 PEAK TO AVERAGE E$
SEWAGE FLOW
.°~.:_ ...e.k.
APPENDIX H
Calculations to Determine the
Amount of Surcharge in the E=isting
18-inch Gravity Sewer Under I-805
Freeway Under Ultimate Peak
Flows Based on 265/200 gpd/LTnit
H-1
6-260
WILSON ENGINEERING
~ ~ ~ i
e.~s ~-~g t g '' ;s~ ~,,~ ~~C....~ ~=d os ; aim ~, ~ i
. ,' ; ! ;
~Z6_S ' ~~,xr ~ ~ _ I
~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ T-
,,,f! _~o.~ ~ l~r~ ~ I'P " ~...:e+- ~i i3~ 990. ~'
i
2Jo ~~E2 u-. ' -- --- - . i i
_~~-~n~(~ /6 _ ---
-_ --- ---
- i
~~, 3~b8
i i ~ ~ i i( i i i i i
~~~ ~~
-- 1 ! i i
i
i
WILSON ENGINEERING
--- -- --_ --__ __. _. L?-o - oo i .
-- -- P~ CA., a--Q =, --- ~- _ ----- S- 2d - .q T -
_-
--~ea.f tau ._in._:~ -P.~f"~--d~~'~_~-~l~t~t._ L~..~ ' e
_'~.~--~e~eL~~I~L~~iL'~c.wi a ~~a~w~ _; L ~: L2;o i
- ~- I
~ -
• ;- I ,
~I ,Fr
i- j I
i I i~ i I I E j I' I~
I i i ! i I I I I i I i i j~~r I'
' i. ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ I j i I ~
i !
I ~ f ~~~
S~iwvri¢. ~w'~ a ~_e N.TrsR a.c. i /osS~t !. r K _.~-
I - ~ '.
I
_ ors ~ I
i ~ I ! I ~ j I ! I ' I I I
t b.~t f ~ ~ _ !3i G7' i i
- ~ ~ ~ I s i i i i ~~ I ~~ i l i
~~ ~ i~ ~ I i I i i i
' i i i f ~ I f ~I ~ j ~ ~ ~ I j i
__ i I i ~ ~ j
. I ! I i i _
.w w n - ~rt ~.u* d
uni en~i s=NrINFFRtNG
- + - S-so -92---
Po ~ ~ _• n-.13--43r. -_ ---
u ~ , cls{ ~-~5 i
_ ~ ~--_
i i
_. '
---
(/~ ~- r.
! i I i I '~-
I ~ ~ I -
, ' '
I IJI ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~, 1' i 'i 1 ~' ' I ! '
~ ~ I
-_~a••-!-~O ~ 0~--~/<~ lyr ~ -~inl ~J~'*.e.cN~ I l•roc:
~ i ~ i I I 1
_ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1~
1--- ~ --!_'r--r-j -'-
rs' ' rss. psi' ~ i-t/,: I,-~ s,~~ _ I. 3z i
i i I ~ ! ~~ i i ~ ~-T i t i i
i ~ 0 i 3!2 r '^ il~g1 Ot ~ =1 ~ ~3 ~a ~a r',s' ti res.~-
~ i i ' i ~ ~ i' I f
~ i ! I I 1 ~ ~s~.-zV rN ~+~
i - i I i -
I
--
-.--
- ~o -~- iy-: sir
_ ,tea ,._; ~ :~«: e
_ f "~' y ~~
~'~ ~~ ~ ~ i ~ f,_
,WF I j /r-r.. • 1 i i 171V~sti7t : I ~ ; i
' ~ I I
I fb rK~~~ ~r!Tw:r. tl~ I I ~~ w I,,~ !, r` ~L ~ s W ~ ~.
rar ~- ~ ~ 1 1 ~ ii' ~ y 1 0~-I 7~~'
^' i l I rMl a.rf ?rLS ~~ i I '~ .I ~ i ~ 1 j ,
'_ i i I ~ I l i i
,, I I' I i ~. I i ' I
j ~ ~ ~ --
I
i i i
-- ; I
- --- ~,
/30-00 _~O Po ~ y..~R "?~47 3s~yS
<..a ..
WILSON ENGINEERING
~
~
i ~_
_
-- r/ (
~"~~'"f`'! lur-!'~~c V+-~' r~,L7~^_G_.
i ~~C~ »,-; v • .~-~ ' LC~o_3 3-~
- -•-
l
i ~ i ~ I
j- _ _
0- ~6 0 , ~. 9 - ~ Q. 1 ~ i
7 ~
i
l i w
i
~ ~ ,
~ ~ ~~ f ~ 3
i ,
i
,
' _ Q,;~~I i i i '
' i ~ I
~ ! I
i o,ooQ { ~ I , i
' ~ ~
1 ~ ! i
~
~ ~{ i
~ } ~ ~ i i i i j~ i i{
I
~ n~s1 ~4Sr=.-.~Pd f~~i ~ J~ I
oT ~Z.( ~~fa~
_~i.:-e~~''~F ;~ bar.(cs~~ v; G( ' nom.("'; re~~c~ ~ ,{. iNH'~2
I` )
e ~ {~ ° Gneofe~ ~/ ~~ ff~wa+^! to w.a ~ S~4 '/ PS *e(, ~ f Y .
i
" : I ~ _ I
-
- .
O
i
~!3
~ ' Cc..-. 3esi.
~oi4
M s-s.~71
~
p
O ~ ~~ ~
fuYCR OaK tM[
Beni cn~i CI~1rINFFRING
APPENDYXI
Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer
Phasing Analysis
Computer Runs for Ezistiag System
West of Interstate 805
I-I
6-266
'Sa6k to Yelate ManLok Ntamben io Appeadi= E and ea E:Llblt A to
MaaLok Naslien la Appeadlz I
~, 211 ~ Endof~~stinglg'kOmgeAve. 307
210 Last MS in Osage Ave. wmsteriy 303
209 Curter of condo development 303
208 West end oreottdo 8evelopment 301
20'7 Oleander, 300 R soeffi of Satinwood 251
230
206 Storm drsia. easemea; 400 R aathwert
of Oleander
248
246
244
203 MH cart side ofI-g03 andceroaaiag 442
204 MH v~art side eCI-SOS mdercrossing 240
203 Storm drain encmeat, 200 R wuthwest
of Metmx
238
236
234
202 Storm drain eaaemmt,1,600 R
doevnaneam ofMH 203
Z32
201 Interneetioo of storm drain ~~-^t and
_ Otay valley Bad
230
z2a
226
224
222
200 Interaeetion of future Poggi canyon
Scorer and future Sait Creek lntereeptor
6-267
ui
uo
t
Note that Manhole Numbers 200 through 203 aad 206 are located within the proposed storm
drain easemeat alignment. Therefore, they do not comspond with the manhole numbers in
Appendix I which are located is Oleander Street and Melrose Avenue.
Manhole Numbers 212 through 221 is Appendix E are located on future reaches of the Poggi
Caayon Basin Sewer is future East Orange Avenue.
6-268
:: "~i•.4r.!~:'~~'~..r.'::.i•r.'.i~.~'ii.-.-.r'.:r.'.cr.rr.ir: rr.~.':.r.".'iii.•.r.•.': ri.i'.
~•~'- ~_ ::~::.:... i:•r i•tr.-'.~-"' ::i:'i. -'r:_:-.ir: r:•rirr.it~rr.:_r.{:~.:'~rr.'r~
i
_~~
~\
~/
i*
i
..:: }:r
::•:
.:':.:~ .::•::~:::.:.'.':.~rr'.•.•:.•:.:..:~':::
442- C:{ .:::--'::::.:i}
~- -~.
.( ~ ~
.~ 22a ~
~ ~ 228 p
I D ~ ^
3 221 ~ 228
~ ..~ ,~
....~
~ ~ ~°
~ 6-269 5-22-47
120-007.
-:: ]
~.i_itii{{i
td
D
D Z
~ ~
f'l £
~-+
Z
r~
p~^
O
VALLE
EXISTING POGGI
CANYON BASIN
SEWER SYSTEM COMPUTE
MODEL
+3b
0
3
r ~
,M1 ~
W ~1.)
.U
.,'
1 !J
1 ~
m'i
ft,
1^I
1,1
tli
~'
i r~
fi. )!~
~1
Fl '
1 1:5
i v
+i
~n
iu
ril
:~i
'
>
1.~.
en c
fy'1.
J (.1
>..
J
~~ !
+Y
Lp
ir.
W P~
~1~
y: a.
x. '.J
Y: iAi
:i 1
nt
4l> I,IJ
~ll
II
;1
~,
C11
iL
[q rrl
LJ
I 1 [e T
n! !.1• 1f
•
1, [''A
_`
v
o
i~ ~~
A
.~ ~
D
r... p. 1.-> m M n') +>' +r (V •. r, -O Ir) al W +f R + ~p n•. 1`~ fy M
YY [V n'> y N) f,1. 1•'r +r "r +f' +Y nr nr ..tl +1 +r rt +r M' +f 1~ d] L
i'
i
f. •1 n' C +1' f'~I ry• TJ ~.fl -1 r'. r'- 1-~ CD -'1 qD m m 'd; W> IC> P W
f C i r_'~ i C.1 f^L [p +f' ::I' 1 •. 1-`. I.ll m YV 1.7 t.'1 1,"1 r~ N ~ 1~ ~ GY '1'
. 1 r.. 1' i.) In 1» q +1 pp t r r' cn ila ~ Y' 1 +~
+1, n 1 0- JI [A M7 1~~ Iro M ~~> SD If~ H PO M L -'1 R•1 qp -1'
t
J
i
! u+ ~ uv In .n W m no um+ ra rr> m qa m m n ua 's In a i~
~~ i . r- r. r., 1•+ r~_ n W -. r.. va u> v> r> li. r.. r., r` ~~ a
~:
:C
f.l fa rr r,r a4 rl ryr m m re m al m m rn f» m -.! _.! --! s ~ .x
r.-. ro ro M x'1 M r'> no ro v1 M M M M no re n+ ra M M r.a ro ~`I'r!
.y _ -4 r•1 - n-1 .y -1 .-1 -
eo ~ m nn m n~ r~ eo [o m ev qo m ~ ro '•u nn uu ~v m m qe ~
1
.~.
1
J
c'~1 fV f'~ ~ iA 1 M F'I> Fi 1 ~ ! 1 p Y. •I +r '-0 (O 4O' -'! -. 1: ) f+ i'
P •rr •~ ~ r r ua co o ® o i~
'J fV [' .V f4 .4 V (V N nl V + V N N fV {4 !'Y M M 1") Fl
F
•
m D W ep m tY m L4_ m rA GtpY W A my Qp m p !11 W m m gepp Cmp Y
W N !O qi m m u'1 ~ ummi N +t -D M V'ri m tp m [D CO. [o Yi F`
T`i M M ~f P9 ~•p M1 M1. V> m +J .p b M f V' D. Cv
N W N m M W 1 m t'l ... - m tD m m m 1-
qD qp m N m qD W qD W N tD !4 m W m m W m qD W m .e ;
-1 tlP -_• 1"i nr ..e ~) m .I +>• ..A) m m fy nr -e RI m •. Y n') V> i'
{V +1 [~I C•1 ~I ['~1 ~'1 r'1 n'1 n'f M Y r •~r +r n 4i U'! t0 m ry i~
PI [V :•1 CI .V <•1 nl [4 [•1 N f.+l <V +r CV [Y [4 CI f4 (A N 1'] }
• I O
I~
- ~... SM3:,, ".;L n~1 CA .~I i.T nMLY:: f:~~., a~:~].
DJ 'i.L ~: Y1Yt~ L.: f ~ L..1.'.I1 ~.S '1M15:1
.c. ~'iL~rt'.': as ~~i ni.~{~~
1- /
6-271
~,;
<:
;Y;
~,.
c.
<~
r~l
A:
S.
Srl
~L
'.i
R~
T
I.V
IR
LJ
!rl
1.ri
m
[b
~T~
r~V
i
1.\.
Yrl
.i
~X
i
C
P
'F.
F
[P
}q
1.4
1
x
R
i~
Y
[O
m
~ri
L
I.:f
O;
en ro nle w m [n Ilo rm w' ro ma [n Ma re rn [o m ~.n
.r
4_ P nn 1!n LL m 9 r.O Iln nn 9e 91 9 M p1 S'i W tln N MI
1.1. ")
A
n.
Y
'e h1 w [.1 [r. •+l Q rn [(1 ~ w M' ~P ql r'. P` [V ^!1 In _.r w
is ~~o m +r v~ ~n no r~ n p. w a+~ nl m r. ~~o w P- -.
i-1. ....i ryi 1 ~; C1 u _-a p; ~ w _ ~ [[ • of
[~ N _..r ..a r <s P YI C~1 P ~ N ~
~ti )i W SO N N fr`On 9 m W 9 N rip ~ r9Pi HO Sn ~ m ~tl N r!b
fl G . p OP rn M r[li N in ~ r. ..O SP n[ n0 P ~. r~ b- 1: f [4 _ r
~.. r ~ r~ ..P cP r~ co u [3 In _~~ ~ .
-•1 .o -1 M •-
n.
J ,! ~-1 [.1 ~Y ..O w M <V nr •.P CP [P aC .4' w <O ..+ F9 ul 1'•.
:. [V Ci N C'.+ <J 1.'1 M M M 1'7 'H' _!1. r N ep 1!P
V V IN C4 [v PI CV PI ['a v [J ['.1 SV [v r.+ PI LJ M I'`a M PO
T.
N
N
I ~
..1 i..i
. 1 1 fir' Vn'. al,. L.1
_A.v~
wu
1F
_: :"~
.; 7C?
:333 73-
_ _
n'T?3 t'GM ..=6: n
.np,;_ •,i +?*du'?
- t ~?iK 'iii- aQp(I ii?s~?T ~esL:L'i
': uM :,: :1 kd::7 ~(25iai n?il? .
ii?-LalCe:a+~
E ;a: .aa~la :~ 4a:a•a~ .. Ya .i~ .aa ._u •/6 .;
,ki
CGYticCiiOR iG Si;48"uiY ti
.+_
lc,: -n°
-:e! ,8243a ..sc~3.?4 :0e.aa 3a.?i .82 :..ia la.i4 :.2 .29 BitANEE AYE
3a< 3a2 .aa4aa ~_ 4'a:.=_a .:~.3a za.a5. .aa ::.?; izs.;i i.a .2: c:arrk t;F cs:aa :~: =Cr?fE~i
nw
.2G,jaa
°'.0"a ::'4.23
i.4
.._ ur.•Y ~ •~ nr ant a`~55
ecas u~8 CRn~"e. nr_ Cunv
_:. 25a .aa3aa _i ~??%.34 .aa .aa .aa 53.ba Ez?.a3 i.? .iz
_.~
^; c"
.aibaa
a 3;3. a3
357.20
65.'2
.°sa
ii4a2
20o.i . ~
n•: .;, GLEAB. 4a2• s i;F sAn~r~Gaa
2»a z46 .ai6aa a 343.a~ i5a.a2 2a.a=
.ea'
24e"".2i
'-•z4•zh
;.:i
.;~
GL'cAKilt'.{ A'r'k iAi ~k'aulf;A
~,
';.;
.ai0aa
,. 3d3.a3 a
a3. a ^'
....u
.aa °3.;a
._ 35;.3' ;.;
.-~ is 6 JCcA~1D'=s Saa' E i1F sF6uDIA
_..
4;2 -n=
•aJOis
a Ja2.2~ SO.aa ?.2a .aa _.2.0a 3i2.4i 6.3 .;i "uL=ACHE? 32a' N cF i:IIA
.aa .ea .aa n2.ba 37242 2.a .z3 akHER .-aa5
z4a _!C .a:lOtl lJa.._ vC4.10 li •~. .aa z46.b7 Oii.77 ;.• .75 is a ME~GSC t!a '1 8F I.;L~.'. `1
23a
236
.aira a -.72
._, ia.aa :.a4 .aa 3aa.5i 625.i? S.i .7L is a 1e~kIIaE 3za' ~ CF ru4'i"nllnuirs
_.~
234
.ai;4$ ~
35?.'?
T-.aa
.3.?3
.aa
32;.4?
0;i.0'•
5.? .73 IS "e Mta.kGSc A4'E i'.d' TiikaU'u'i5c
-
;'-' 1-
C •aa
:C. ai
•Oa E
~Ja. S'! p
_7a.7: a
Y.O a
•a, to .s
1< :O y~~pnnr nn - nr .nwyy
..WC .Oa Uf i:itln:.AL:
_._ O
~~Y
.YJC.. _
] ,,4.Oa e$
..
..u
.aa
Jla.b~] G
Cla.?a
S.a .i? i2 _ AAik :,. INi iS-~iL•Src A'dE
4.'S .aa '4a.44 0aa.ca 3.3 .:~? rees_ Ac 23a' s GF ~r;a
_
__.
.. __
.a:la~ _
._ :6;0.~i ~1
DY.LY
.:.2Y
.n6
3J:.4C
a4.a2 ~
h.a ,3, KE!RQs AY: 34'a• $ "uF ivsi:i
--_ zz; .aa4aa __ ,.._. ar:.aa 25.82
.''oa
35i.3a
iii .'di
3.2
.63
~ici.kGSE AY[ IHi kANCNnu Ci
:^_~ ___ .a245a :2 u'a3.4i i3.aa 2.34 .aa 3b4.b? 7;2..2 b•i •37
AiiEY 25a S Cf RAlIG;O :'
___ 2,'i .aa;0a i2 ???. 2;?.a0 27.;2 .aa 3?L ii 7?i.4z 3.2
.6c
kAt:CHa Bk B Crr kA11CkG CI
?a.aa Ez.sa .aa ;a?.?'~ 825.25 Z? .'r5 EAHCHB "vk IN? kcBEkCY »A
:Z$
.0i:30
:- lbi'.30
30.'02
b.02
.02
#Ls:.6r nn,
cv.2c ;.9 .49 R?GS AYE S uF h BEY
++
++}
+=++
+++++}+
++ + .
+ +++
++ t
+EtfHCFAREA ++++ ++r+ ++++++++ +++++++++}±+
6--73
- ~;.,-
d e... ~. :p~~y::r .Y6 :.~ JJ
~..__. r'yJ.e1 ~CiC: ...J::'.~C 1T111L~J.J .._:I'v.....:.A
;can ;u j2 tip r. or = 6;a8 ^!a F;ca `v'21G:
a .aa~2aa 2^: .a_~ :.aa 4.e.4 z.e
~. .aa;aaa ~: .ass .. <.aa 3rs.: 2.4
<z; .aa;aaa z~6 .a~a 12 i.aa :az~.t ?.4
=3 .a.>aaaa :za .a.~ ._ ~.aa 244;.3 a.;
.._ .aa;saa 23a .ai3 !~ :.aa ~ae?.3 ~.:
2Ja .ataisa 232 .a:3 a .43 l;l.: ;.4
2c-.
Ji aie
•f: Jaaa .z.
LJT n.T
•OLJ
t'i ~.43 ?i;.2 ;.?
LJY .aa;aa tJ0 .a~3 '~ .~~. IC4u !.~
~3b :at?;aa 23a .~:: a .43 ?54._ 5..
23a .a.ssaa 2;a .a3 a .43 ?2a.; ;.a
2;a .aasaaa ;;~ .a.3 :a i.aa 3J14.a 4.3
;;2 .a3a~aa 2;; .a23 a .~~ u;;.z ?.s
2;; .a.6aaa 2;5 .a13 a .43 ?L.b ;.'t
245 .a:aaaa 2;a .a.3 a .43 ?37.0 ;.4
i;a .ale
Baa 25a .213 8 .43 ;:
~.~ ;•S
LJa p
aa_'Gaa
. LJ~ .a~J LS S.OC •
~
;;;3.; ;.~
LJ: )
•SBTaaa JC1 •atJ Gt L.aO TJ~C.4 1.7
3ai .aa;aaa 3a3 .a.3 2'. i.aa ;~_a.4 ;.~
3a3 .aa43aa 3as .ai3 =: :.ea a4s..3 b.;
3as .aae7ae 3a7 .a~3 :a i.aa ;;17.2 s.a
++++±E+++++++7+++++++++++±++ t++F Qla uF ~atii ++!++h+++a+!+++k++H~++++++++++++
1--7
6-274
Ex~s~`r.~ syJ~.
~X I S ~/1N ~' ~u Wt olv..j.
D~S;1k /~'~^^~~,
8"~ ~o" ~/~- = aLg3
..v JU~.C1{i
:~n~.. ~1\\.:~~(0.. .
~
3Jv:1 :M~J:iI ~
~r
~
.E~ .A:: 1110 fpl~lLY~i.]
fr: L:i~n^.C:I:A
~13?IlC~2 i~=:ot i.dti!'i+Gic ~7_?~
_a :.~.aa a.s_ .av
<=_ ;~~. as ti. ~i .aa
Z<<"4 ;3.aa 2.39 .aa
2:h sC.aa ;7.ai .aa
?2, ~a.ae f;.a; .aa
.3a s3.aa i.i5 •a"o
rz ;.:a .;a .aa
23; a~.aa ;s.a; .aa
z3o ,s.aa ;3.~a .aa
~3S ;s.aa ;.aa .aa
2,a aa;.;a ;.5.?a .aa
?a~ a3.aa +_s.z? .aa
;~ is,.aa za.se .aa
3a; ~.aa ;.85 .aa
3a3 .?3.3a ~a.as .aa
3as ;aa.aa 3a.Ya .ae
3a; ;.aa .;a .aa
:....-- D:aO:..
275'
I1~.: n.:{nl:3:i Cl~i : (H1f ~~ _.AJ ::t'.''L..'I.'..1':
.• r~]JV : .,..i,l it ~.~}C7. CA:.. LV6 !IIInLy .v .,v+- . A
Hsi Nd Ji30E Uie3 Lad- k =v t6Y YBZRC Avdrdce FFdt 'rei- DeuiB 6i:ddi a;dLa:ii':
Up L~LXR :_ GL =curse ICY .iCw .C: Y Rd21G N:3dC2 ,.e.... Iti',ry tl `:~: dii_R
31 !ec
,aa !.-
.Bcb~D
18 ~ __
i»ir ,., 1 na
,an ~:
.r.'. n~
.tlY
..~
.r.
.i .ai CDNI~t'CTiCN to uNa
C ??
3a5 383 .1a931 ?? 69;.32 16d.a2 31."1 .aa 31.;8 78.19 _._ .a8 CRAHBF AGE
3a3 381 .aaaBa _. 4558.96 .13.31 2x.85 .3a 5;.9# i25.!1 ..3 .il c^R7ER CF
%.^.NDu E'J ;i
'
~.''.;'
J11 G+
1 Ya
a
•a
Y C: #5J0. CC 9.1a 1.66 .al JJ.'iY 4J
1L
4
. l.9 .lL r
L
.
~
NE31 CIiD DM1IfXOL Arc L.iYIW
251 L
LSiC ~
!
l
.
a9JG
a <: #Y1J.lG .Oa .9'C ad
• 4.
I.GY 1
f
q
T. V.1
1L 1.9 •1
.:a ]
L#V p
i
•YiOaV 'J IJI .V4 l.~i .ta iJ.7< 1
.Ya 1
•:T. Si (
•.LiG.#J 4.1 .#J VLLI[1~• 41a~ ] LF ~711N.y1N.4
249 :#~ .81608 737,64 1s7.S
a 29.89 .la 1,9.2: JLi. i'S 4.3 .#S CLEA
N
DE3
':E iNT 'sc'uuDIA
<4C L!'I .a16Va ^J.6Y p
:J.r6C L+.G .3a 1bJ.#V~ .;:4. ~T i.# •JL .
1
!
DLCaNDER 41a~ LI. SED1DlM
2## 442 .83953 9 11#$.:~ ss.aa 9.21 .aa u2.bd 372.#; 6.3 .#1 aLE,,;+DSS aza' N DF tr Ia
442 243 .a353a la 3ra.99 .sa .D3 .a3 17".b8 372.41 3.a .T DNDER I-835
2#8 238 .8;568 8 728.36 c8i.71 125.48 .al X93.67 bi1.77 #.9 .7. MELRDSE !38' S OF iAL4S Si
238 230 .817•#1 8 769.23 1D.30 i.ai ."08 300.51 015.1? 5.i .72 IELRDSE 361' N 8F iL`R"nLk'SIS
G:+6 2J4 .3174#~ a 769.LJ l
%.•a iJ.'•~ •33 J1#.#? 1.a1
O# 5.: NELRD9c AYE lN' P,IRDLD`c St
LJ# LJL •
B3J6a a 71#.~
' )
al .Ya :G,a1 •4~IA. J.:a.Sa y]
~itl.50 #.~ .S# CLIII}V_C L
N
Ca S DF IYYn~ML:
t.. !
GJV ,}
.9:'.I:J ~ .
IY:.O{ ;.33 .1C .aV J4tl.0V 61 a. T
a i.a . T y
y
L
NnIN SI II.1 rtLR~3JL MY
G
l
Od'I J4
1L
L7
13c /
33
aJ
?.•.
•;tl
J7a.';'1 p
VCS. aY
...r
•J'+ .
f
IIGLM1Uvr'C A:`E JY ~ DC fill: 1.
u . . .
GiG G:
L .aJ
9U
l lL ~J4#4.
rY 63.31 .:.a+ •a
V lri.#~
) (aQ.al b.a .J# dELRD9E AfE .~43' S YF 11M 11~
i2C •
L.'~4 t
•
.aalod iL )
laL S.Y ~C.tll 1J. dl~ ]
•09 y
u'J1.3Y !~%.a7 J.1 .Ov nELRDJL A1E LNI RANCHU LI
~; 2.2 .12;51 !2 2536.92 13.18 2.39 .8a 3ti9.64 7#2.22 6.1 .37 ALLEY 158' S CF RANCHD Ci
--. --- .334x8 12 1825.37 149.8 27.,2 .33 ',9'.11 791.92 3.2 .66 RANCHD -R S Q RANCHD ~~
3 x8323 12 416
95 73
33 12
98 80 484.99 815.15 2.9 .75 P.~IiCHC DR INF REGENCY 8AY
.... . . . . .
i
223 1 .11238 12 1797.53 36.18 6.62 .a3 #16.61 az7.a9 4.9 .#9 RIDS A'JE S iN: AL~FY D
t k k k k k k+ k t k t t t+ t t k t++ t k k t t t t t END DF ARES< t F t t t t t t+ F F t F t k t k++++ F t t t+ t t t
6-2~6 _ 9
.. _~, r, _i is e:5'+
_~ci s;sr.~'.`~.. .L.yG'v
-^ ..'. n
;:±E ??;~ --- -esiar~ Crit eria --
YL7ii: ~u9 ~ ~ '.,r L Y:a~ IIiL r't':Y ~el:~
.ai2saa 22a .als i2 1.aB :'4?.s 5.1
z_a .aas2aB ~i .dls 12 :.aa ?ib.? 2.b
2<i .aa;aaa ~.: .ais 12 i.aa iaa5.i 2.?
222 .e2;5aH z2; .ais :_ 1.aB 253b.4 z.2
~; .aa;aaB rb .ais i2 l.as 1a25.! 2.4
~5 .a33aaa 22a .Bi3 12 l.da 24;;.3 a.;
229 .aasaa 238 .a13 !2 i.aa SB9;.3 3.1
2sa .aibl5a 2s2 .ai3 a .4s 1;1.1 ;.?
r2 .ai5aaa 2s; .ais a .43 11;.2 ;.;
2v; .a1i;$a 23b .a13 a .43 ;~?._ :.!
23b .a1148d 233 .a13 a .43 ib?.2 5.1
2sa .ai~bae 2;d .ais 9 .?~ -<a.; ;.a
2;a .aHSdaa ;;2 .a1s is i.ad ~„?.a ;.3
;;: .a3asaa 2;; .a13 a .43 ii;;.? ;..
2;; .aibasa 2;b .ais a .4s ~,;~.b ;.?
2;b .a1bBBa 2;a .ais a .43 ;::1.b ;.?
2;a .81bBBd 25a .B13 a .43 T'•.b ;.4
25a .da38aa 251 .a13 2i l.aa ;;+~.; ;.i
25i .aa;saa 3aF .81~ 2i i.8a ;55a.4 ;.2
sal .aa;aBa sB~ .a1J a i.aa ;SSd.? ;.2
3a3 .8a43aa 3a5 .a13 2t 1.86 b451.3 b.;
. 3a5 .a8a7d'o 3a7 .b:3 id i.aa ;;5i.2 5.b
!4++}{.}p}N{¢{.f+}F gµ!f4a4:44t! 64Cr Or AF.fB t++~+e+++~F+t++++!-!ew++rt!~rrr
T-/O
6-277
Ex~'s~~ Sy t~
f}da( l3o EDus
C~ ~(K 9a7
.S~ 5 ~ 's o ~
/ • ~..... JCi~
.. ... - -..tii ~. _.:
~iiLi. aeL~tiG.. .:Y.i .w'::.....
f.~iuvi c'«Si°~ ~=~[" - to isi i~i~c «~fii.',`ei.~-. utr~5a _.
~f~,di:~iae iC:d %:ir:irC3tlieu' Faia:
gyred Faa Eaur:e
:za a:.sa ~. _ .aa
221 78.x8 .2.EE .88
~.: :-~.aa 27.92 .a~a
229 13.aa 2.39 .aa
225 Es.Ba 15.02 .8a
22o i~.aa ii.a9 .0a
ra 53.aa e.;s .aa
2J' 1.6a .:E .aa
.,; E7.aa 1~.a1 .aa
23b 7~.aa :~.;~ .aa
23E 10.8a S.E9 .88
290 489.78 125.?E .0a
299 5a.aa 9.2a .aa
29o e3.a8 i5.2'• .08
298 157.08 28.8? .aa
Z50 35;.28 5.72 .aa
3a1 ?.aa 1.~a .a8
3a3 113.3a 2a.ES .ae
3a5 caa.aa 3a.s1 .aa
3a- 2a~.aa 3E.9~ .oa
1- ~~
6-278
~. _..-- ~ .. ..1J r~_- -
-.., ,- . oa i _:nc:.: - ~n. ,., ;Si9 nn2Ly„iB .__:?-'CC'~
.... :ii ilaCE uta9 :aJa- Area rt•:M A:tr:i. AverdC? Aee% VFi- Depta lHiEer CapacicY
~~ s;a~n cii;i iao: 5aarcz =low Fiaa ccity Raffia Replace Szliz; ideniiiicatiaa
~d i''t5 a'B 1t , . La4.BB 3a.4b .BB rB .4c Y. ~i 1.3 .11 ., ncl.: tsn
. _
. .. .
.
iB~ 123 .48432 .i 5951.31 189.82 38.91 .88 89.37 152.49 ~2.7 .ii CRid19f AVf
323 321 .08428 .1 4552.86 Si3.32 22.25 .88 98.22 28b.2B 2.2 .15 CniTfR aF CaNSa 9f'r'f1.uAhTi':
321 251 28485 2i 4552.B5 4.80 1.bb .28 41.57 212.14 2.2 .15 BEaT ERC aRAdBf AVf Car`tua'e
.
..: 252 .24382 2i 4443.42 .02 .82 .8a 91.37 212.24 .._ .SS
25n Y+c' .21582 5 7:7.6+ 357.22 55.72 .'eB 157.62 342,2u 4.; .5''o aLfAB. ;a2' a uF SAii(i'zaaD
24c 246 .a1522 B 737.64 157.08 2"t.B4 .a8 i36.4B 349.27 4.5 .54 aLfA?tOfP. A:PC iiiT SfAuaiA
i;b _dd y
SbGB
~ -~
lJ: .b't s
a:.Ya -
_.. u.
.Ba s.
L.:.7C tnr C
~id.1
4•b -
.J! - aLSMxafR 4a2~ 3 aF BCaaafA
.C + ,
i;;
44L
IO JS
B
~
S: TY .i3
J2.a2
4.zB q
•atl
i1B.Ti
1;6.':..
O.J
.75 11 p y
aLCn1,aE'S .118' 11 aF (tLfR
.
.
4;2 242 2a5a2 ~ 3379.42 .aa .aa .aB z1a.95 ;;6.45 3.a .25 uRafR 1-B25
. _
248 233 .2!582 a 72a.35 684.78 125.49 .BA 3',w.94 652.14 4.4 .82 NELRaSf !33' S aF TAL'Ja 8-+
232 235 Si148 a 759
23 Sa.Ba 1.84 .aa ;va.7B 625.7; 5.2 .la li~..,.RaBf 3b0' M aF Tafiaaal5
. .
lib iii BiJ'i2 B 759.13 75.80 i3.fi8 .8B 352,75 111.38 5.2 .3"L MELRaaf A4f inT Tiisnuai~f
.
•4
2' 232 8182 B 714.22 87.02 16.81 .88 359.77 7;2.57 4.7 31.2 la 8 MELRa~f 288' a = TCL.",~Rli
. .
Zia 8181 7;1.84 1.'oB .ia .a0 i5B.4b 742.B8 4.4 .._ tln'lii 'i7 iBT Iit ?a5f A'r"c
..._ .
2B 2 2a45u i2 1287.15 13. d
B 4.75 .a''e it S.71 B.ba
i3 3.3 .52 N
LRaSc AVf 132' B a Mni
i
1f
_.. .
__., 2Z5 .8338s Si 244;.38 )
b2.22 L1.aY .aB ~4.(J n
7(p.5: (.1 .35 .
r
V
efLTia'_C rff Jd2' ~ ar' '1X in
22, 22;28 !2 1525.87 25.20 15.82 .88 425.57 887.19 i.2 .6a MEtRaSf AUf IRT RANu;a C7
___ .
22; B245B i2 2`N'S.92 13. BB 4
•2.3 .a8 4a7.4b .51
811 6.3 .34 ALLfY 15H' S aF RAMCSa CT
.._ .
2 28452 li 1015.9! 144.82 •
L7.4i .aa '135.32 1
258.!6 3.c .72 RABC'1ia CR 8 CF RAhCHa C:
.
~1 222 82328 12 416.35 78.88 12.82 .28 44B.26 BBi.BB 2.9 .BS RARG~a aR iBT RcrafBCY BAY
.
228 ! .21232 Si 1197.53 3b.8B 8.82 ~. .8a 454.88 895.63 5.1 .52 RiaB R.T 8 aF ALLY C
4 k k± ~ k k k k k k k 4 k k k k k k k k k k k k k k flia aF ARfA k k k k k k k t k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k
~Z7J~
. ..... Win.:. . ... P.. _,.. ,.. :4. y-r~~C. f ...: _.
'. ,'xit -,. :i:53 ~aVo' a=?: ~:-i? .,:5: nV?F3~e 'O32 r== ~°~iii uP CEf ~3pdC:!~~
,
~ C2 ,7 ::f4u: ~.:... :_ :a ne :a'iY FCl.'1! h'e ui3i2 Fsl;e ire^i]ritL ii Gl
a y ;;;~
O JBJ iCG Y _. .... ... LY_O.C3 ..u'.6~ .83 J"..:; }J. YL i. .11 L411:i['vl i'J:r 1"J Y:{nJll a
J .
2 323 22?32 °~
a
0
L31
,:, b3.22 ~a.v+
- .22 b4.55 ib3.33 2.r .li DRar~E avE
r . . • .
p il~1o
22;88
: ]
G
^
5JVi1
:id .Y i
L9.vJ p
.YO CO
IV.i~ n
."',\{i.15
LL
.:J R i1 'T
+E.xll~\ ~f ~aIIL~J LY ~.p .. 1
JCJ JII: • . .
.
.
n 82x82 : 3.3C
;
~ ?.BE 1.C9 .20 92.26 <:2.CL ~.~ .15 fYES' LFIY I:M1KI~^.C 1!vE LuA~1a
v
.: LJ: . . _
... L+~ •22.102 L1 '
•
T'TTJ.tI .iY1t .f1G •OU 9Z. 3b L.aJ.'Ji L.1 •i!
t
2;C !~ S
1 C9
~
~n
i
; _ p
J~1.22 _
OJ. G
•YW
1.'%.l?
~i;J.i!
;.;
•J2 + nr n yy
D!E.N. ;22- 3 UT SaI:P11l1aJ
.e 0
.
O ..
.
2.9 ;J d
g
]
i S %..: .0; 1J', .22 13.3Y .09 LAC.3% :~. Y.3J ;.J .S; D!L;RJvR aLE tRl 3E"a'uDia
i .p
py
;
;; 1
2:C20 f7 ~.
,J: .C; 'T ms
OJ.UU '= nT
1J..; y
.22 [ ~ 'J.~.
2:. ;G~.1; ;.6 :i D!CalI4CI5 ;2 ~ U` ~EeuDln
7
L 1 •
~ OJ
3
~ 9 11;;
23 72.22 ?.Li .22 ~: i. i; i;d •31 b.5 .;ll DlEMFSLC:{ JLV M Jf Ill i)f
..T .: .
.
6
• .
;;L 2;2 n
1
22582 IS JJl3.?u .23 .'o$ .'c2 2ii.i; ;;c.32 3.2 .25 uNE~ :-'oe
.
2
O
23C
2
2
3
3b
~
bC;
-
'IS
Ii S.T\l
.Ftl
JJI.iL
CSry.IJ
;.T
•GL q !~ r
IIE1:{GSL iJY' 3 11F ra~us 3'
; 17
. ._
. .
.
233 : 2ii;2 a 'b?.._ 12.2u i.2; .82 332.9e bcc.Io 5.2 .i? OEuiDSE 3b8' 2 CF T'URBDGi
< .
238 23; 217;2 8 ;b9.23 7b.20 13.45 .iii 352.4: 7:1.,'2 5.2 .S2 !IE!8GS'E a.E I;. i'dP.B'JDISE
.
23; 232 0i22 ±1;
22 3'.22 1b.21 .22 3b3.reb i;'v.c3 ;.'• ii.2 :"0 8 MEiRDEE 288' S D~ iD'u'Rl4aLi
. ,, .
28 21b1s 5 04
=1 20 .i3 .0.. 3b9.1; 7;1.21 ;.? .:.2 12 S I4nIn Si I;.i ~!E'~;:DSE atiE
--- . . ..
._
O
"".
On;LV
1Cj
e+ -T .'.
JJ.Ga
9.9..
.[1V A
Ji3.R. ~- ~
fJJ.:J
- J.J n
.O. 1~~L^.UCC nYIG 2JC~ : Df 11M:3\
.. r .. .
22J 2~~22 }'; •i9 52.28 .1.2; .119 Y.QJ
J
O / 3.?; 7•t .3
~ : fY:~
L
!lE! BDSE asE .>;2' 1
... • .
V~; OS LL~7. Cf 3C.GG 1J.CL .6Y C
y
;VJ.Ib DV(.7J J.i ;
1
•GG l
~
tlE!3D?E ar'c l77 1'r all L t}J 1.1
Li • ••
; n•u.
9
d
4 0^
i5J0... p
t
:
J.
i
l _0
l.J.
.C~ +`
;D3..J 811.3, 5.3 .34 ALLEY 152' DF Ra.4iL';iD C.
4 LLL •
LlJ .
22;22 L IYLS.YI y
~
{
p
:"J. YO L1.72 •
2r1 :J J. JC 3bi.2i 3.2 .7°e RAiICiID DR 3 DF ?.aPrCHD i
.._ •.. . .
"":
2 228 88328 :2 9Ic
8` '0
23 i2.33 .22 4;3.;; 33;.13 "c.? .3i RnNCA'u 3P. LyT R o'c`iiLY ra":
_ . . .
'
.3 3b
a 5
62 82
~ ;55
21 89:
95 5.1 .58 RIDS aVE S CF ALLY D
2L2 i .21232 12 1;4
. . . . . . ,
+ k k}+±++ k t k+ t k k++ k k++++++ t k t+ E;iD ~ a3Ea k t k t k++ k k k k+ k t E k t k k k k t 4 h t+ 4+ k
6 ~80 2~
LL w J of 1~ N ny Iu no a. na n} fa na IJ rs na rJ na ha o-a i i
'F d ~ ao Ln aw a. J- a. g m! La LJ .! na to ~a Ln r._~
L
`
ca
!
as m o-' + IAa - eu ..
aa o-• al. n,
cn J 1 !-- m W o-a.. na da
~
n I
~
Y y I
l
w
n'i
~~
J. . • . • • •
a 6] ;IM1~
J ea m ou m
as sl al uu cl m ~. Ir'u ca M m
m~m.. h-Fr a+ h. °a5w~'i~maJ
~ m
u
r
;._ .
i.
m
II +-1 V 4- ax W aw J. Ci nJ W
M W -I] Jn J
w GJ I
l-
.• O•.
W
)
b
i
1 Y
LY 11'1 1. ••
m
y
p
y
~ py
lg
p m
.1~ 1}I m
y y p
T ui Oi ei eL m Ci m ebJ 61 (J [~Si w m m • 111 <n
T m C4 OL 6l YI 41 N m Ci IL' W G:1 O4 d4 iY u m d W N N LJ iu li [
I
l I
~
n
f
1 ~
fil
i W {.J 4J (.J IJ N N na N Y IJ na n
J ~J 1•} IJ 13 FY If
l Cj l
J
Jw
h Jw
J
n
Ya ~.;J
i 1
.
LJ c
.
{
.
YO {nJl all
Y a~
J• Ci 6] N
4 V l11 W n. •. d N U`~ J. nJ }I fh G" J N m 6\ Cn L I.Y 1 « d
t I~
K ~
~
~ ~ I.]
,I 1
S
Y .
F Ol
1
1• • .
'J fJ CV Po C+ m s1 rm m w m m m m eq e-I d Yi
uJ R W m C :} JC
an
I M
r\' 1.. h. r- I-- n- h. I.. n- h.
n• .
G
L'1 LJ L'I i'I fN LJ GJ 4A W LJ W LJ W W W 4J G'1 L'1 4J W N 4M
al
Y _
~!
{`}
~
f.T [(1
ll
~ 'rl
: ..
a YJ .. 1-.. N 1.. .. .~ t.
.
i~ 1 ~
i 1
} 1.;1 I.} 1•Y I'.]
- ~ - W O] KJ N ILI 4'I 111 [G KI K1 1•J 1•a 1
W
h
y W Irl
\
T IT
n1
t ..
h ::
.h 1.. h. / . h.
q .9 •O •G ..fJ .I] .O
.b `tl
4 Cif CY Oi OY O'J -1] Kl •Ia .- d -'I
~ 1
C
`
1 ry-I LJ J L'1 f.! LJ J {-J CJ 41 GJ LJ 4J
'n O:1 C@ lW Oi1 !V 41 LJ 'J G l] I
T
J` C-I
n 1.
w N Jh aw J. r LJ GJ N h-
1
1
.
1 ^J `•J . yJ lt. o
1 `•J
'- n
`J
•
[
.
• -q tll aw +1 .
"'1
4
~11 VI ill VI J.• GW{ 1J ^J a. •J hJ '.. (l" F. a !.a W G (YJ YI lf'I
1 1`
1 1'] ti-~
J
A 4J `
U
' •. '1
T'
' .
.. 1 l11 . l •l
.
I .h C
] G:: GV " J J
J h-
41
Jj- n] LJ O ..U Jx C. P•• Y'~ na O'1 J. I'.Y Itil IJ I+ J. f.•I a. IJ Jw {F. • G 1']
\ Y
N T 1.•.
~, N •
.
a
W
N ~
VI C« JI. aw L A Y aw '+J b L Ln VI A A L•1 J] 4V ~J W N to 1
h
T C'~ Y IJ N n. .q 4S .O VI GJ C} F- h- •J -G a. 1•• N ti N W fx~ G
fl 1
~ •
^v N
R
~
~
Q " 1 1
Vi
H
.Ii
1.,
~:
::
~:.1
!e
4
11
... ,...ii:.~ ......,.. .::.y.'' .
~~ECt YA~.I ~~^.GaEr. - L.\f.l }~(C Y~iIIL•i .L.:~ r3LG.1::CC1/Ci
~:R Cie iC iui iuli. iuuie~i •r`C[II
rea F;ow Sanrce
ii 30.88 o.b .Bo
zza ;a.=a !z.ea .aa
::; i3.aa :.3i .8a
2Zb ab.a8 i,.az .aa
~a ba,aa ii.a; .aa
Z:~a :x.88 f.75 .88
2~ i.88 .i8 .88
2s; er.aa ib.ai .a2
~JC %O.aa 1J. Ju .OII
232 ia.aa !.3; .aa
.;~ i~,,aa ~a.~? .aa
258 557.."8 b~J: .88
S;it 9.aa i.bb .aa
5=3 ii5.5a :a.a5 .8a
Say iba.a°a Sa.4i .aa
Sal ;aa.aa aa.52 .aa
~ -z3
s-2s2
$c~aE.. =1A1 . :.. t i 7nsY _A AY = ~_. ~.. ~~. :
?~'cdi ....'.d Y $:AE - he i9'?,,"+c ;wnt'(aic F s_c.:'3cci;E:i
~~ ~~! ~i9.2 uen9 %dGe- nr2> F:ar ^].ic'_ AYeriG° r23K ...- 8z;,[~ Under iefldCii/
J(:i Sulif L_
iP
f:uN n_
f:'JN ,:..
^1l. tY
•ld i::+
AbJlo:2 fidi<??
i. 7111.1'+`n
f~tti:
Ui. u~NB ~ .
Jal
Ja:
. a8a'''v
..
?? ..:°
;aa.aG
GC.3i
.aa
CC.SL
2aL.dC
_.~
.ir tip
L
WI~ItED~i'J!t U $41~aG1Y1 :1
aJ 3a ae4aa b9,1.32 iba.aa 3a.• .aa .14.23 28b.2; ~.. .13 G;AasL A!1
S . ~~
q
J
a
aa;aa
.
;JV3f.. $0
113.3a
2a.av
.aa
i;a.aa ~~n n
J~a.a:
i.;
•10 ~ - -fin nn~r' n.' 1
ET {'-i+ G. OYStLY 'L tLL4f .~1:
GJ J
: . •
3ai
251
'aa;ae !
Z_ ~
aJua.aC ]
T.a
a ~
_.QO
.aa f 7fi
1;:. JL:.JY L.; .L~ J
I,~Gs
AL.-.I ~Y GRMIIUC AJE GJV•
.
iJ1 GiY •aaJaa L: ;;;3.;2 y
~
•6Y •Ya .aa 1;:. ~; :11.J~ L.; •~v
~3
L.Y
2;a
.aibaa
~
fJf .~;
a
JJI .u
9r. t
.aa ~!
la/•YG
;J'.:1 .
?•f
•J~ uL'cAra. ;aa~ $ Jf $X:: BI~GUY
^•~~ ;b .aibaa O
} TJ .'l: )
1J(.Y
a 2a.C4 r9a SJC.J+ 'r'1.aT ;•O •33 4LiY~VYL'1{ IIYL :Itl Sc_UG3„
2,c :;; aiaa8 .. '~'.b; 1
a3.a8 i:.2 .aa 2~i.b: 5~:,.7 4.a .b8 GLEAkaEk ;8'n' $ GF S.zcGiA
.
~;;
;;~
a3asa
3
<T
31=+
`sa."n'a -~
4..a
.aa n
2ba.aL -; ~
} i.a, a
b. .sa ,x.E;.:+nE= 32a° H GF rii1A
. .
;; ; aa
a~ la 4a
Ifa
Jr .aa .dY •aa LCa.6L :fii.a~ J.1 .27 4NL:V l-r~J
L L
O •
.! .
.
s alsba a 3b
72a 7a
ba; 4e
us .aa 3ab.aa m.2a ;.4 x.a is a r~aGSE 13a• s aF rAtas s;
2;a ?3 : . . .
23a 23b av;a a 7b4.23 ia.aa i.s; .aa 3aa.b; ?7b.bi s.a :i.a is a G;,G~~cis
XEtAGSE :ba• a GF
.
i ; 7;a
ai a 7::4
23 lb.aa SJ. aJ .aa WL. bJ aai.aa i.i /l.a 1O f
ME~:1U~--'C YY~ :If! (UIfnYGYl]C
JG LJ .
. .
i; _
~aa
a
C _
lfi.^L
O%. 6a
1G. a:
.P9
;Sa.b; f'/l n
.'1JC.11 5.3 ll.a +'JT E V
Brr~r ~ L.NiB E GF IB~JII:~]Si:
G ..a :
.
23C :"?8 3181: a -
a4 ..aa .ia .aa ;ia.a2 "c31.a5 5.3 ...a is $ ' "A.",' $~ 1Yr t!~:.kCsE AVE
. ._.
'
a
.
~ jj
a
: E'J
JO
JJ.aY
....
.Ga
;ta..r/ g
7a.J('.
J.'I .~ ~EL3tG_E AVE 2Ja' ~ GF tfAt
L
: .
6 .OC~J 1. .
.
ida 1 JJ
J:W :l9.aa ..Y! .aa I+i.OL abJ.J; !.1 •J V$~ AYC J
;
Ii
L'
4 LL. •YJ. . r
..
LLfi
•6VfiCd
~
:a0l.;a
ab.aa
_s.a?
.aa
;JJ.;;
Od.O.OS
J•L
.!J {
p 11
ff
D
MLI:ILSL AVL 1,'Ir pMNLlG GT
22; a2;~a iz 2b41
1s 13.aa ~.~? .aa ;s7.a3 4aa.aa b.b .;1 Ai Er Ssa~ s aF eaarxG c~
___ . .
3a;'
"s i= i"oa7.;8 i;":.a'o ..;$ .a8 ;a5.2; 4;4.b"< v.3 .i6 rinirt..1:G uH $ vF nAKCHG Ci
_.. __. u
.
--. _. .aa32a 1: ?.2.8a 7a.aa 12.aa .a2 fi?9.12 47_.;3 2.4 .42 aG C2 IRr RESE'aCY YAY
2o
' 1 ai23a i2 14eb
a3 '38.88 0.02 .a8 Sa;.75 4a;.13 5."L .v3 AiGS AVE S "uF AL:EY D
L . .
if ti 444f dtFf FftF FE~a GF AaEA f 4f a• fftF 4kM!?Fltf i4~fFF~F~f ••4
~~ ~tF ~lFl FFk
6~2 S3z `~
i __. ._aa:ia
~tia: A::Y SEa:^. ~ L+:.~e la 1f ~I!I ~~~.. f.~ifL06.i Gw
~; ;±~ -- ~eaie Crania ---
Duxa Sic,z lla o ar ~ 7:a® d;8 ~:ar 4'ziaa
.8i23o8 2?a .83 .- •?3 iaab.a 5.6
La .aa~2aa i?i .a:~ i2 .~ 472.b ~.a
221
.aa4aaa
.22
.air
::
.~~
iaa?.;
i.2
X22 •az;saa L2; •aIJ L£ .~J Lbai.3 (.T
~.~ #OOa
.
aa LO .aLJ Li .~J l
Iaal .* j•L
C p
~
a,_aaa 21a .a13 SL •~J ii~ v ~S `L
p
s .
.aa;saa 2a .a:r .2 .4a i:s~.; ~.;
2S: 2r# .o.a
L1; 1:!
a:;;aa
iJb .a:: a ~J
• lb~ .~
•L J.
2;;5 .
.ai?;aa 2~a .=i~ a .~~ ?c9.2 S.I
?3a .a2ib8S 2;a .8:; 9 .q; ?23.4 ;.a
24a •aaSaaa ##~ .a.J iy 1.aa JJf~•a #.J
#4L .asasaa 2#; .ai, a .fa ci#4.2 ?.s
24# ,aiSaaa 2#b .a?; 3 .9 ::,i.b 4.9
2;b .afba$8 2#E .ai; a .43 T?.b ;•4
2;a aibaaa 2sa .a_~ a .s~ r~?.b ;.4
^sa .
.aa~aaa .5i .a<~ .. Lw #;;~.; 4.+
^s: aa;aaa ~aI .a:~ a I.aa ;ssa.q 4..
sai .
.as#aaa aaa .air z. i.aa 4ssa.~ 4.2
say .aa4aaa aas .a:; a :.aa best.- b.;
gas .aaa;aa ~a?
.ate
.~
t.aa
;#s?.z
s.b
}tttttt}}}}tti}ttttFktttt}ti} }}t cy''u ')F n~(Cif t}}t}ttt}}ti +tHt}ttaa}} }}}t}}}t
-2e~aS
EX~'S~'~ S~ S!~~
~.da( 4~l E'Dus
ASK 3d7
Re~ 22/-lam/~- 27~f0~ 9-sr
L11
a[
fy
M
Il
rl
j_r.
~.i
>S
l4
1'
[ta
Y.O Icy ~$p ~ y
~r ~ L11 ~.y ril CY 4O N 1O IIP 9 1®N O 1~2 110 9 IIO tY EO !Y R ~ 1~
L. 19 !O !O d _
J O Sl
r 4l
ll
m
rri
ids s r~ iy ~•1 u~ w .r ~n m -, m +r m 114 r. r.« .,r ~ o vl - m
aC ~+ 'rJ -I) 2U ~' n; W Ae r~ .Y a p. LJO cf rY n1 n) I'~ +lf [4 0- u'r
:r JL~ .. . . . . r~
C FL. ••O :.i (•l C.1 IN ~1 P ~4 n~ -~ Irll p ; r'~1 +O L [V M [V
41 Iy
H ~f
i~ir ".
J.
F':
ii ii 'M m via d~q irgn :°em mi"gm ~mAROmmio .e rnnirOemmeg
rt ~ ii <c -•~ n+ r.- n~~ ..u es r'i -. r~ ..n eq +i ~m rm ~^: ~~ a- r~ :o -~
n-- r'r r•• +r cv .y u-1 m r- - -0 ..r r7 - i ti m
'.~ ~ .~
~ri
',i
^i i:4 ~[l n.A -~ CI •r -o Co ro rV r •.o rq IN +tr ..'1 m m - M v r.
z nr. .c <•~ ref n' r•1 i': n' rn r.o in rJ no r r d~ o eri ru ro eo
Ln o r,. r-l ~ o .l ra ra w rv o.1 i.l n1 w ca ra i~l no ra
no
~_
i.~1 vi
ar
i 1i
•/V`~~
fW
Jti.f :.. ~: _. .C~ -
=~~~ AT:ALYSB aANiTHAY :;lnli A(?L iL'ATiC
,;;;8i ?e$+'~ .EFEA Eli 9Ti8 ANnLlaa Fi_:Y85c"i ES
:i.1 ~
u SCnI SiCFe D ni id Cd-
C: C;i A(Eo FSo~ Fal:l2 AY?Fd?e
Ir.~u Sauce Fi CX lC6i: `d?i' D'ep C:i iei~e~ ~nHnCl i'i
Fi1)M QC1tV Ret3~3 R?~iiC? A2L'?'
i~s$Cli dC di
l [R
3d7
:'oa:
nn+p
.3ocro
.n ue~ ..
sc an,:.s4
•e.
+0:.88
n
80.5a
n.
.c2
nn Ca
cc.,0
~;.`~
? t
..
'S
.. yyp 44
l
'~.Li~tvlE.TiJA 1 ''. JpSYn ..
3'd5 383 .a393a _1 6451.32 16a.a8 3a.41 .a8 114.42 2eo.62 i.i ./3 8RAN8E A.'E
38~
331
.8a48a
21 45;;8.96
i13.3'ao
Za.95
.aa
i#a.26
388.46
2.4 ~,~,
.. LE.~ITLl W CGkDD 'nvE Y^ uo'yNJ
301 251
.08428
21 #55a.a6
4.88
1. b8
,aa
1;1.4?
311.76
2.4
.ia
3E8T END DAANBE AVE Ci:NDCS
251 ^25a .8a388 2i 4443.42 .8$ .88 .88 241.42 311.75 2.4 .1a
c 0 2#8 .2i6''e8 8 7T.b4 357.28 6.72 .aa 2a'•.64 ##8.11 #.7 .54 nuL'cAN. 46d' S i:F 5n'TiNNDD"u
24a 246 .21baa 8 7'a7.6# i57,8a 2a.84 .8a 23b.53 445.Y, 4.9 .63 DLEANGEA ;','E in BEuIl4tA
2#6 2## .BSbBd B 737.6# a3.2d 15.27 .aa 251.88 524.12 #.8 .bb OLEANDER 42a' S DF sS"Ea~BiA
244 4#2 .8385a a Si4#.23 58.88 4.2a .aa 261.28 541.4# b.8 .5a BLEANBEh 328' N D'c TiLIA
#42 2#2 .a85a8 18 P78.48 .38 .82 .a8 26i.3a 5#1.4# 3.1 .27 BNDEA I-8d5
240 238 .3i5b8 8 7"n<9,36 6a4.78 125.48 .88 396.44 773.bi 4.4 :1.0 i8 8 NE:JtDBE 13a' S DF TALDfl 8T
23a 236 .di748 B 764.23 18.84 i.a4 .88 3a8.83 7nb.44 5.3 )i.3 1a a NE!RUSE 368' N DF TURGu3i8
230 234 .a174a 8 754,23 76.8d 13.48 .a8 4a2.8i 8a2.22"• 5.1 .i.3 1'0 8 NEi?85c M+7E iNT TUR~C^uiSE
<; _.. .0i58a 8 71#.:. 8'•.88 1b.0i .86 #i8."c2<' 93L''o5 5.3 .1.'o i2 iiELR88E 286' 8 "uF Tuui!ALi
.._ 233 .31_15 a 7#i.a4 1.a0 .__ .88 #i4.0a a3i.38 5.3
i.a
1a "o
NriN "0T inT NEL'!D5E A'r'c
230 ._. .0045a i2 ii53.3o 53.38 4.15 .a2 52a.'•6 8;0.34 3.4 .ba liELRGBE AVE 238' S 8F NAiN
228 226 .a3320 _2 3123.,, 68.83 1i.a4 .3fl 434.88 958.57 7.1 .37 "nELKBSE AV'c 34'3' : 8F NA:N
220 Z24 .00#°v2 12 1287.#0 8b.20 15.82 .8a -055.52 846.44 _._ .73 NELRCSE AVE !NT RANCRC C:
%# .~ .22453 i2 2641.18 13.88 2.34 .aa 458.a1 481.28 b.b .41 ALLEY f5a' S 'uf RANCHO CT
.__
221
.88488
12 1897.#8
44.48 "'
u.42 .28 4a5.#3 94?.44 3.3 .76 AAn"CND DA 5 DF AANCHG C-
_--
220 228
1 .3D328
.8".238 472.08
i2 1486.83 7a.aa
36.aS 12.88
b.b2 ,3a
i
.aa 44a.31
584.43 4:'2.75
484.46 2.8
5.2 ii.8
'
.53 i5 8 RANCND DR iNT nn"'c5c^:{CY `JAY
RiCno AVE 8 DF nLi.i:Y D
- t F! t ~+ !' f 4 f*+ F f 4 F f# k 4~ f f F~ F t h ETtD CF AREA k f+ f f 4 4 4 4 F t f F i t F h F F h M# t t f f 4± 4
~L-~ Il
iJ:~I ~ .-iY•i.-
?~hci ~;~::~ -EiJei: - EIIe; ~~ ~nL'_5= ~I:-:' ce`i'
8E ~; --- vesign Criteria --
9a'ar. 3lcpe iia i ~, - aiaa iii rIar 9elac
i .81238a zza .813 12 .93 =?~.8 '.b
~a
.a8.i88
221
.813
L
.93 ,,.
9JS.5
T.
.aa;SaB 22 .Si3 i2 .43 ia27.; 3.2
.82;Sa8 22; .813 i2 .93 2691."L 7.4
z^; .aa;aaa 2"L6 .a13 Iz .93 i8a7.; 3.z
226 a:~:,aa8 ~9 .al's 12 .93 3123.3 9.1
- .
.aa;~aa 23a .a13 12 .93 11 .; 3.0
z3a .a/61:,a z3z .a13 9 .93 7#=.= ~•'
232 .al~aaa 23# .a13 a :9e 71#."c •7
;
.. z3# .al7ua 23p .a13 a .95 (69.2 p
J.l
230 ai748a "c3a .313 ? .93 769:2 +-I
23s .
.al~aaa 2;a .a:3 a .93 7za.4 #.a
z;a .aa:+iaa ;#z .a13 la l.aa ~~79.a #.3
4#2 .83a58a z#; .a13 a .93 11##.2 7.5
2;; .816888 2;6 .813 9 .93 i37.b ;.9
2;b .81b8a8 2;a .813 9 .93 ;~J.6 ;.9
z;s .al6eaa ~a .a13 s .93 737.6 ;.9
zsa aa
.a
a
3
s zsl .a13 zl I.aB ;;;3.; ;.1
2~: y
~
p
{
~
•LO;YCO Ja! •a:3 L1 l.aa TJ.Ip.9 ;.L
3a1 aa;aaa 3a3 .a13 zl l.aa ;ss.9 ;.z
3a3 .
8843Ba 3a5 .a13 21 l.aa 6951.3 6.#
38:~ .
.889788 3a7 .a13 :9 i.aa ##57.2 5.6
t+fecu Fh4kt~!-FFt¢ kF4k+t4k4atf4f E~~ :iF eP.E6 !-4F1ag4'.-E+hG{4*H•FtMt+k{fF4t+44+
Ex~s~7 Sr s~.,.~
f}dd 1, f o ~ E DGCs
~28~g
~I~
NN
~~
I J CJ tJ CJ N -.i .l .f 1-.i h~ !.i h} h] N h] J hi N N 1.] :'J
m m w W m w o-' s as ui n~-' s: ni 4s ~ F~ JN. i:]a :-i ea is
h-
e- _ .._
o m C`. in ~n [u m y m Ln o-. pp~~ a ~{ c{ -a
nl { .p y J CJ tl! J. Ol P- •J ~ L1 N n` 4J -b m b- Yu O
m m en w iirii u a m as ~ tlmn m m m~ ~ mmn tlmvl m u w :`
hmma (1,, f)
C'1 N pi M to CCI 6 -CI l.M1 F W n" ~6 4. C IJ ~~ L
i La N IJ m. "rl [ P
ti
1~1 -p fYl IT • J (J 11l Ira •G ` tlii 1-~ ~.1 01 [I] hJ J~ W ~F~ Cl ...
-•1 O- %a ~~a '•J m m ~. ni - m Ln J. N ,p ha bi 1•i m ~~
ip
®® p[~ m p4 yt G'+
6~ N OP C4 m m Oi 9m0 Oml tl~S W N N W OmG Om4 00 TJ OmY C q U
N rv
~.
l'J
Ci
(.A
1a
;J
JC
11J
ny
n
11
al`.1
i•i
C
m
IY
1.,.
ui
in
l'1
f'~
f>1
(?
m
ny
~..{
yIl
K
f11
!II
!fl
Y:
f'
[~l
1..
ra
1~
i
:x
Yu
n~.
~:~
.,
;:~;
v=AC:~ Y:11!L ~~i+ SY~i:?YPk LYhY M1f ULiLA'i rM1~
E ~ E"o':
~.C1 ~`S _;1 SGn ". -..AIJi11a ARALY=i3 .~ ;~6 ,
'ii '~~
Y_4' nGN;! ai.a= Jai ~d ~d~
li iV AC2d -i~a ~': Gf:: `n JE(i.2
~C~i G'4Uf ~ C / t'ad'A' t+al- Be9t" ~::+E! ara._.f
.`SGY Jl:~ RLL ~:~ 11 _°'/l1al C+~M1L.~~ .
:~C.: ~:.~[G ~~.'.~4
S~;
JLS p
•aa6?a la e, r
la „J/.:~ l I~f1 p
iwG.OV p
:a~.6, ,py iBv,a:r 4.2 •a3 u.J '~~
...
' LtilY. wiiLl IY Bhs~q 1I
375 373 .aa43a _1 5451.32 16a.a0 30.41 .aa 234.77 ;41.42 3:7 .la aRaas. A4:
~$
3e'i
.$°o;aa
:_ ;517.66
113.37
27.65
.80
211.6,;
531.7
2.7 i. nn nrn
i.'t'7'E v"rr ,r,G.'~nu ucv~ ?M"n:~
371 21i .70400 2i 411a.6o 4.8$ 1.66 .''ea 257.24 134.41
^,a
,?#
ilE1i E?iG GRAn"BE AVE ~~URGGC
251 _`..-3 .~d330 Z. ;443.;? .02 .~9
.9a
21r .Zss
JJ;, 1..'
L.O
.i4
21$ 2;2 .3160"u ? 737.64 317."28 61.i2 .a$ 323.$i 616.77 1.0 .7a GLEi+ii. ;a$' 8 CF 5niiykliGil
z;a .;6 .$169$ a 737.64 i57.aa 27.94 .33 351.?$ 7$4.17 ~.$ ,.. GtaaGEa AVE IY' sGylsa~„
L;6
2;;
•$:337
a 7J L3,
O .Ba
11.:7 w
.a9 .
+Cf ,.7 ~
161 .ES ~,~ „ GLaAaaea 460 J JF SE :=f.iA
2;; ;;2 .73753
114;.23
a
59.09
.2$
.8a
x,6.37
754.36
;.4
.62
C'L;:.4A'CER 32$' 7 CE iiLIA
442 2;$ .$e13$ la 33;9.47 .aa .a$ .a$ 316.37 754.3; 3.4 ... uauER I-aa1
<L"40 238 .71560 a 723.36 684.77 125.49. .87 5$2.35 47?."-1 5.3 :1.$ la 0 MELRCaE U'a' S CF SALUa 9I
237 6 .31'4$ 6 164.23 1"a.$8 1.64 .a$ 104.20 403.10 b.3 :l.a 1$ fi 1ELRG8E 360' N CF TURCUCIB
23e
<~,
.3u4a
a 7L_=.L~
7s.$9
L3.4a
.$$
.,lv..ta
,7$%.aJ
3.4 i7
.a 1
a 9 rI~E n'rc iKT iJRyllCiSc
nE~:c E
... 232 .$15$$ 6 71;.22 07.8
6 10.01 .a0 53;.1° 1030.$0 6.6 11.3 la 2 ~ELn`CaE Za$' 6 GF TGURwALI
:.._ :JO .a :~:5 ~ ,ti.a4 y
t
1.pV ..'. .$9 SJ4.3( lOJO,OL 3.3 ~La :II 8 '.IA::I 3 1~1 *G.aV6C A4C
23''0
nna
__
.33410
.,
i2 ii 13..3
e,
a.,3a
_
?. ~
.$a
elA f~.
+„•+.
A
1313.;,
'
~..:
.__ nnrr AI i~w: nF 1(A it
Ct nuaC nfE L!o J u n:;
_2~
226
.33373 ..
i"< 3123..3
69.0$
11.04
.08
555.16
1372.1'? 7.6 .;i MELRGBE AVE 3;a' "3 6'- ISAiN
226 ~[;
.a'B4ao
1nL 1767.;°9
86.88
11.62
.88
11e.44
1138.46
3.1
ii.$
i.`: a
nE[.RUS'"c AVE iNi RAaCHC Ci
... ..,.. .02450 2641.17 13.88 2.3? .B$ 573.38 117;.63 7.$ .47 ALLEY 150' S CF RA9Ci+C Ci
_._ 221 .53;$0 12 Sa07.;a 1;?.$a 27.;2 .89 6$0.95 1152.37 3.3 %1.$ 15 0 RANCHC GR 9 GF RAR"LriC C'
41 raw
9 p
.77314 4 ^
12 l..6a
f3.aa ,^,Sa
.~ ~ .a8 613.67 1174.14 's.3 :1.°v i1 a RAKCitiC 0R I;aT REcEirCY SLAY
2<$ _ .71233 L 1486.03 36.78 6.62 .$8 627.33 1186.22 5.4 .6$ RIGS AVE a GF ALLEY G
t• f i t} } t 4 4 4 4 t* f f* F f 4 F * F F! F t f k M ENG GF AREA ~ f t F t F F k 4 ~+ t f 4 k t 4 f f t f P* M F 4 t k F
-~-6=P~~
i,r
rF
lr.r
~'i
i ~r
t
ui
~~:
it
r--
!b
..,
.~i
i.~
~n
L
iY:
cP
]C
r~
:':
iai
1
n'
Li
in
ii
iu
Y
fr
.y
~- ~
c ~ .3
_~ N ~
~ ~ ~
~'1 0
v
~~~
~.~ ~ Q
V
1 41
_ 1 w t•1 R S•1 r G.'• r+ ~. y m r't u7 [h P .T _y CJ f4 .t' _n V'
• r ai .r .r oa va .r .n r_ .r .r .r a a' s-,n rn
N
m :a
.r
r
u~ +
:`.' Y
. s m ..o w rv m' r't . ..~ tv rv r~ .r w ry .at .n .n .r o- rr• r~ av ~
~ _n of r~ .-. r. r-i u: _..~ .r .> n..ri a .r n: r. ~ ri ra ve -. ~ i
~
i +.
4 1 ~. n r„, n n. m a.1 .P -r .,n .3r r 1 P•, a• r') rO
y ~Y ~a O M'
-
r. P r..
'
rv
r-
r•
°
r
r~`
°
n
T' 'r
.. .
.
, r.
, r
..
i i.i ~.
.i ni Diu 7.r
~
..r
_-
Ki ~.
+r
t ni
n
y ~
a +
1 lal
rn rn ~'> ro ~+ ~-t r~ ~a r-t r-. ro ro av 1'•. r'. rn r.o m m cu rn
r
° a
+
r ._ m m u. o, a- a- r c•~a~~ n- o- m v, rr m a, m m
dt
m no a
r ~n ~
~ ~ t
..r .. ..r _...
..
a
'i
y
z
t`
.
ir r~ u~l e.1 Cy `-i f-y t-'i w w 1» m m m M w m w- 1 m .2
w
ca
r~
i_
r1 P't Pa oo r'. Fa /a ro r't r9 n't Y~1 r't I•'1 r'1 r0 rn Na r'f M r0 e9
~
. .N -imr IN .9 m .9 m n0 .ri .Si !'o TI RO nC OJ OC l4 t.0 m m tL .N
_ i
•r
i
V
i
~
s' '' y
it !V w ~ i?i i i Pi ri Iii Ot m +rn v r +i `.I- ui a e`p e'o N m
~
f
V F
oa rv w .
c~ nl or or V c•r v o.r .r
V CV N fV f
rn r'I r9 ra a
~:
m m mmmmso m mmmm mmmmcv .wmmmm
~ +
ro mmr tv mrY.os u-s mm mmmmevm ml?o caa mnv
.r +r a !+ u. m m m w ee a~ rs r~
v s s m
m
.-.
a +
+
m
r
~
• r co .~ ~s w m m m n
m
iii ~
e
o
ee .nam iu'tiromev no
ee m go° ~a mM i+d umo b mcv" ci 'm^
{~
F
y_ s
.S _.. m-. r•. -r ..um m r .r wm to fy a _o wm- .r's sry
r•I r~' r. •
c.r r•' c.l i o i. i r~s r~r r: s •n• .r~ .r x . ui eo m ce -i
'
PI b f' V 1.`M1 tJ +r SV V CJ PI fV '.r fV fJ tV [Y t4 r'! M P'l i
~ O
M ~
1 N
I
~~I Y.~
L11
YU
;l~
n..
~j
1~'
f11
in
¢1
~J
`,
i Ii
Iii
1 it
4u
f+
t0>
Cf
r~,
VI
li
Vl
i
J
r
[A
i.:
fp
LU
I
~m
.:o
f.J
rc J 19 CY CD 9 W cD Iii N !Y YO !D R !D N IO rA N 19 W W
. • L. DD Z Rp !D eD m W ®N LO !A nD ee ni m eo na Im B !D
~; I ~J
Y}. C!
4i
'a
n JC fV Itl CV IT [•1 f l[t O] rll 'lf f}I I}O r`• q' [+1 O If .p
'. ~~4 [4 'V' rn Ui q 1~ .y t9 G+ (O IT, r'.1 N IL h W IU [~' !D
~i+ . _
Jr I.L ., l :.i [.l N .y H R • .9 r : .V [`y In ~ ~ rVO +IO ~l N N !N
1 PI
C.i
nl Pil SO D W !G t9 LO !D ® !D CY !Y M !Y G1 <4l OD N W !D
.Irl Ill Y'J !D l•'O CJ N N r1D I1D CP L9 EO h LV Fl !D '.. GD .7 !D L4
In `i ..Ii co r. v. ~ u Iy 1-i -: r- ..ri 9i .r !o ri r+: r- ~- ri ev 9-
l_. ri h +r .-l in -9 u~ m h - :. Ir> m u'i Irrsl .r •9 eo
'y I N .r m n~ rv r ~•o m m n 9 a rD ro m r,
I .~ CV [•! r•1 6~1 CI [4 r'1 '^l F l ( l [•! c i C 1 f1~ C•! M I D rD [0
I
(~
1
~ N
~I ~
li :6i Yi 2_:4t:L! `
~C'.~C1 `Y~Y1'~.lJ JAii: 11~Y tJ!IJ Y1~ ~.4A1IsNs
. ~5ci ~A~iN "sEnE3 - =~:5'iY"^, niiii`?S i'- F~:PGfi6i7fi
,!!? %4 ''Jiua2 `jrldi %70x-
'_'o cYa city
'
Arad
I
F;eY Po:O: a4e(d4E
rput ''scarce FIaY ty ila~e(LdPd_:t7
Pedk Vei- Cep
Y1oY ocitY Ratio Reaidcs Re:ieY
,._ ..
icentis:cat.sr.
387
335
^^-~
.ecc~n
' 'a ~fl4.2'o 284.$6
ix 445:.., 1.
.88
284.86
;a"J.2i
3.5
."L1 .:
CCIi"7ECTIR iii =;iNCCk ~:
JBS '"'
JOJ .x8433 Zi 84: .'a:' 163.00 30.41 .0fl 23x:47 442.27 3.7 .i8 URANB'c AVE
383 321 .88482 21 a55a.66 113.38 28.35 .BB 255.82 531.68 2.T .23
CENTER CF GNC;i cVEi CPdN?
301
251
.20488
21 4556.66
4.88
1.66
.88
257.47 >
SJ4.B0 ~
L.a
.24 dc3' EMC CnAR"cE AVE CCRCCS
251 258 .30332 2i 4443.42 .°e8 .BB .fl8 257.x7 534.x8 Y.a .24
252 24a .81603 a 31.54 357.28 67.72 .8fl 3""<3.2fl 857.12 5.8 .78
uLEAN. 482' S CF .ATINN6ca
24a 243 .41683 a P7.64 157.88 2x.64 .8fl 352.89 718.12 5.fl .a5 C!fANOEa AVE IR? '9ECCCIA
245 2;4 .01683 3 737-. b4 a3.a3 15.27
- .88 367.36 x.47 .
~ 4.7 '
~ ~ >1.8 1fl o CLEANLER 428' 3 'uF 3E]L'CIA
24a
4;'[
.83x58 .
8 1144.23
58.83
4.28
.8B
376.56 '
254.84 ~
7.4 ^
.6L uiiAN6ER 328' N CF Fi! IA
442 248 .88588 la 337x.?8 .2fl .8fl .8fl ~ 6.58 754.84 3.4 .32, L'NCER I-x25
24°0 23a .81568 9 724.36 664.78 125.48 .fl8 582.54 488.23 6.3 )1.8 ifl 8 !SE!aC8'c 138' S CF TALCS 8T
236 236 .81'48 x 764.23 19.38 i.a4 .BB 5fl4.3a 4a3.4a b:3 )i.fl 18 B ~iaBSE 388' N CF T`uiOCCIa_
235 234 .81748 9 764.23 78.84 f3.?a .Bfl 518.36 1088.15 6.4 )i.fl to 9 MEu'tCSE AVE iNi TCR6COISE
23+' ~:.. ,x1502 a 714.22 a?.33 16.31 .88 534.37 1836.32 b.6 31.8 13 a NE!RCSE 2flB" 5 CF TCL'RISA!i
232 2'2 .816:5 ? '41.84 1.38 .16 .Bfl 534.56 !838.65 6.6 ii.8 18 a ;tAiN 5T INT R~.,s.JSE AVE
232 2s3 .884;8 12 1153.36 53.o'v 4.75 .88 544.31 1853.77 3.5 .al.
MEiRG3E AVE 230' S CF tlAIN
_a
2" ~. 4i
•fl3J4V
3L J1L3.1+ 68.88 11.8a .88 555.35 1873.11 7.6 .41
NE1.R66E AVE 348' S CF BAiN
:Zb 224 .'oa°'4u0 1"< 18x7.48 a6.a8 15."02 .88 571.17 1188.76 3.1 )1.8 15 a !!EiR65E AVE L'fi RANCNt', C?
224
._. 222
221 .82x58
.a8a82 12 284!.18
12 ;8x7.48 13.38
. 144.33 2,34
27.42 .88
.8A 573.55
881.48 1184.45
1152.78 7.S
3.3 .a7
)1.8
i5 a
ALLEY 158' 3 CF RANCflC CT
RANCNC'CR 5 ~ nANCRC CT
221 "~3 .3032a i2 472.68 78.88 u,a8 .8fl 613.65 1175.86 3.3 )1.fl 15 8 P.ANCNO DR INT REGENCY YAY
223 1 .01234 12 1488.x3 36.88 5.82 .08 628.49 1106.54 5.4 .88 RICS AVE a CF ALLEY C
t+ tt+ r*ft *Ft~Ftr ttfr ttttr trtt tEWI IIF'AREA *tt~t + tFtt~ ttrftr Ftft+trtf ttft
s-~s2 33
Appendix G: POGGI Basin Development Data and Flow ProjeMion
SUMMARY Of NEIGHBORHOOD EDUS Subtotal
DevNppmem
EDUa T°1a1
Bui4/Peimimtl
EDUe
Remeininp EDUS
MM EDUa Ceimanmt
EDUS
D°mml8etl au9V
patmlttatl
Vlllaga ll O.D DD g.0 0.0 00 0.0 00
Freeway Cpmmemiel 1.138.0 624 489.4 1,13fi8 1,1]fi.8 1136.6 84]4
EUC 10.9.0 0.0 1890 1890 189.0 189.0 00
EUL (eppr°raWnpl approved ° MTE O0) 2Bt 0 0 0 201 0 301 0 281.0 0.0
Eatlleke LSlGrea~u 2.20LB 2,124.5 83.0 2,2!11.8 Z.20L8 220L0 2.126.5
Vi1119e 5 0RC 580.5 53] 9 42.6 580.5 SB0.5 SB0.5 53] 9
OWD pe~cel rear VS 2588 O.D 25fi6 258.8 256.6 258.8 40
~ V111ege 1/S MOMIgn 323.0 323.4 0.0 323.4 323A ]230 ]23A
O
q
C
Vlege]
832]
353.8
Q9.1
BJZ.>
0]2.]
8R.]
353fi
U
m VIIla9a ] (interim) 68] ] 310 6 253 ] 4fiJ.] 210.4
O
R
Vlllaga6
2.320.0
2.1858
155.1
2.320.8
2.320.8
2320.8
2.1fi58
Vllla9e 2 HS 8 FS 262.4 242.0 0.0 242A 242A 242A 242.4
vnllge2 t101U tto1.D 1,to1.o 1,m1.o nD1.D o0
wl.9ezp.apm.d pommllree) tp3io tp3zD 1,a3za ta3].o 163].0 Do
VIIIage10RL 1,181.5 1,164.5 00 1.184.5 1,1fi6.5 1166.5 1,1 W.5
Vlllegat WM! 519.6 519.fi 0.0 519.fi 519.6 519.8 5148
Sunbow 1,9tl.5 tp1.1 8>2.6 1.943.5 1,963.5 1943.5 1.2]1.1
Mee Clr 109q 45J 863 1094 109.4 1044 45J
Ea41 ,N 1805 %3.3 - 9fi].3 O.D 963.3 983.3 %].3 98].3
Weal pt 101]5 8]5.3 8]5.3 0.0 8]5.3 8]5.3 8>5.3 0]5.3
Total 5,31fi.B 1fi,918A 18.684.] 18,203.] 11801.8
i ORC requested 7fi9 additional EDUS, but is not currendy being pursued.
2 P230, astimaletl fi73 EOUs enter at this point based on 1997 Basin Plan, pg 8-23.
3 EUC NTE 580 EDUS on 215 lEDU basis; mtrvertin to 265 d/Dasis, this becomes 670 EDUS max and 429 refereed.
6-294
EAST of 1805 -Existing Development Data and Flow Projection
Lantl Use Unim GF Flpw EDUS BuiIV
Permitted Remaining
EDUS Source
SF 658.0 285.0 1)4,3]0.0 658.0 656.0 0.0 Table At of Appentl'v A (page 21 ~ of 199] Basin Plan antl 1 EDU = 285 gptl.
MF 286.0 199.0 55,916.0 214.8 214.8 0.0 Table A4 of Appentlix A (page 21) of 199) basin Plan and 1 EDU = 2fi5 gpd.
~ Mixed-Uae 0.0 2,500.0 0.0 0.0
O
c
Commercial
0.0
2,500.0
0.0
0.0
N
U
.~
meaamal
Do
zsoo.o
00
g.5
0
n
Padca
o.o
soD.o
9.9
0.0
Elementary School 2.0 12,000.0 24,000 0 90.8 90.6 0.0 Table A-1 of Appentlix A (page 21) of 1999 Sasin Plen antl 1 EDU = 285 gptl.
Mitltlle School 0.0 28,000.0 0.0 0.0
High 5chocl 0.0 48,000.0 0.0 0.0
CPF 0.0 2.500.0 0.0 0.0
Total EDUS 963.3 963.3 0.0
6-295
WEST of It105 Development Data and Flow Projection
Land Use Units GF Fbw EDUS BuiN
PemJ6ed Remaining
EDUS Bpume
SF 696.0 265.0 131,060.0 498.0 698.0 0.0 Table A-1 of Appx A(paga A-21)af 199]Basin Plan (2fi5 gptl=1 EOU)
MF 343.0 199.0 66,25].0 25].6 25].6 0.0 Tada A-1 of Appx A (page A-21) pf 199] Basin Plan (265 gptl =1 EDU)
~ Mua0.Vae 0.0 2,500.0 0.0 0.0
0
c
Cpmmerdal
8.1
2,500.0
20,250.0
Tfi.4
]B.d
0.0
Table A-t N Appx A (page A-21 ~ pf 199] Baein Plan (365 gptl =1 EDU)
N
V
.
Intlustrl¢I
0.0
2.59D.g
0.0
0.0
~
t°
Pa1w
g.D
sgo.a
o.o
g.o
Elementary School 1.0 12,000.0 12,000.0 45.3 05.3 0.0 Table A-1 of Appx A (page A-21(pf 1991 Baein Plan (285 gptl = 1 EDU)
Midtlla Shcopl 28,000.0 0.0 0.0
High School 48.000.0 0.0 0.0
CPF 2,500.0 0.0 0.0
Total EDUe ~ 6]5.3 ~ BT5.! ~ p.p
6-296
Y ~Y ~ °
Q ~~
~ CRESS a t'~ ~~ :i a~~`~~~ °Q.~~ ~ ~'~ Q TELEGRAPH CANYON RD ,-~( -
b `,Lh i T ~)Y ~~
pp i
~ ~. mom, ~,~~YW // `~/ ~~~~.~
~ n / / ~~~CS~/ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~`{' ~ ~ REEX 6T
~ ~. y~ l ~ 11'~.~~,~~,
~/ j, ~ j ~ ~~~~~ .~Y ~
~~
< 9,~ ;' ~'' ~i a ~ ~~
i ,r/ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~\ JO ' ~ BARN OWCOT ~~~~,
~~o 4 ~
IRE LN R `
` ~ sN LN ~ Npo / v
~ '~p P~C ' P.ORi A~ ~i~i1 p~ ~ s;~o
o ~~~VE `KEiQP .,~;., \ ':: m oX~~o my ~ YYY~"'„ i/o
\ ~~
q'4 N:N ~ _~ -MED/CAC C ::: O. T O K ~ ~- of
o , , ., Pry m ~; '~ 4~'T
! ~ ~ V
R`G
~p ~~ PA-10A ~- ` ES MiWNI EY
~ O~MON i e EPpLDMPR RED DRpNIiE RD
OOR PA-t2 C 5 P NRE PL. RD
s a ~,J~'P WISE Si 9mm MERGEORNER
Z .s A
1-EE'DR ~ PA-17 9.
~yR PA-16 OOOPER'RD .
PA-19 SiONEGPiE ~? 'cPS\ERRP DR
PA-13 oe c ~ sP~
LILP ~2 B ~
0 6y,sr a
b ~O
~LEP-ST a i PA-14 °i'
m Q
P % °z PA-16 too 3W
y1 ENERMA NDR G.
OLyMPjO pY
FS
n
>~
RNERP Si _
I
GE pJ
RpN
0
E ~ ~P~
,.. .. .. ~, ~ ... ..:... ...... m~.,:.,. .._.. __,_.....,
® ®Q
i ® J~
~~~~
~~ ~~~
m~~ POINrb1~0L N r/ ~ Le eliCi
9
OpA D I ~~~' ^ e
~ ~ ~ Poggi Canyon Basin
seouo~asr I ~J~ ~Fo ®Area Flows to Two Basins
~1La
oDR ~~ ~`~ ®NeighborhoodBoundary
_.. OG\N. _' ~; POMrARGUELLOOR 3)
~'W~° ~~ Medical Center Parcels
~' 07:PMC, 20W
sao o soo n
F® N
Figure A. i
Sunbow II Detail
PMC
-~~
6-297
SUNBOW 2 Development Data and Flow Projection
Lantl Use Unib GF Flow EDUS BUIM
Parmlttetl Remaining
EOUs 3awca
SF 1]3.0 265.0 204,645.0 T13.0 ]13.0 0.0
Assessor MeP 641-11, Dwg 9]-313
PA 12 100
Asamew MeP 841-12
PA t3 112
Aueeaor Map 611-13
PA 14 110
Assessor MeP 641.13
PA 15 93
Assessor Map 641-14, B4 untta enter MH ]par 99-366
PA 16 144
Assessor Map 641-16, 56 unXa enter MH ]per 93366
PA 1] 102
Aueuor Mep641-20, Enters MN 12 per 93364
PA 19 112
fi09
0 199
0 191.0
121 451.3 65].3 0.0
MF . . ,
Oevebpmant Status Uptlata 1I0]
o PA ] 156
C DavalopmOnl 5letus Uptlate ]N]
U pq 10 336
Assessor Map 641-12, M14290
~ PA tOA-A1l condo 11]
O
1 Maetl-Use 0.0 2,500.0 0.0 0.0
12
4 500
0
2 000.0
31 11]0 11]0 0.0 Asaesaw Map 641-12
Cammarcial . .
, ,
54
6 2
500
0 13fi
500.0 515.1 515.1 Based Pn Sewer MP, Total is 136 acres, Enters at MH 6 per 99-386
IntlusVial . ,
. ,
10
0 500
0 000.0
5 189 18.9 0.0 Assessor Map fi41-12
paw . . ,
Mist
Mee Danter (NAP of 9unbow 2) 1 L6 2,500.0 29,000.0 1096 45.3 64.2 Ee0maletl vibutary ecma9e.
2
B 2fi5
0 ]42.0 2.B 2.B 0.0 Payment rewrtls: Tivoli and Apl Rec bitlg
PMete Rac Awes . .
1
0 0011
12
0 000.0
12 45.3 45.3 0.0 Auesaor Mep fi41-211, En[en MH 12 per 93384
Elementary School . .
. ,
Mitltlla 3Mcal 26.000.0 0.0 0.0
High School 48,000.0 0.0 0.0
1
5 500
0
2 ]50.0
3 14.2 14.2 0.0 Afaeaaor Map 641-12, Fira statlOn wile
CPF . .
, ,
Total EDUS 2,052.9 16]3.] 5]92
i
6-298
\ `<
\ \
{] R-60 {~?
P
R-54
i
REp.~RP
R-65
EROEO R
M
R-66
Sourca: SANDAG GI$, 2007; PMC,
~EY~RD y(E RD ./~
SPPRRDW
R-58
o~
~~
,gip ce1
~QS
0~~
Legend
rLL ...,. ..,. -
Poggi Canyon Basin
® Neighborhood Boundary
aoo o wo n Figure A.2
F® N Otay Ranch Village 1 -West Detail
PMC
-~~
6-299
VILLAGE 1 WEST Development Data and Flow Projection
Land Use Unik GF Flaw EGUS BuIN
Perminea Remaining
E~Ua Source
SF 509.0 265.0 136,865.0 509.0 509.0 0.0
R 54 3] Aaseesor Map 641-24
R 55 B1 Aaceesor Map fi41-25
R 56 ]4 Aasesaor Map fi41-26
R 5] 94 Aasacsor Mep 631-2]
R 5B 82 Assasaw Mep 631-28
R 59A 23 Assessor Mep 641-23
O
T R 590 39 Asaesaor Map fi41-29
V R 59C 03
Asaeasar Map 841-30
a R 60 49 Aeaeasw Map 861-30
O
C
MF
0.0
199.0
0.0
g.0
Mae-uae 9.o z,s6o.9 9.0 6.0
Commemel 0.0 2,5000 0.0 0.0
InduaNal 0.0 2,500.0 0.0 0.0
pa*s 5.6 500.0 2,800.0 10.6 10.8 0.0 Assessor Map 841-0]
~' Elementery6chopl 11,000.0 0.0 0.0
Middle School 28,000.0 0.0 0.0
wan scno0l 4e,ooo.9 0.9 9.0 '
CPF 2,500.0 0.0 0.0
toml EGUS 519.8 519.6 0.0
6-300
~,
L ;.
`q
~L ~, ~ ;
~ \y
?-~
~
a app .~...
dD '~_~~
~ 'c~ ~
~~~
~ 'P, , ~;SSpq
~z
N
yJ
dP ~ . ~'~~' ~ i,
p?~~
~~
~1~///~~R~l
° ~ ~ F
~ r
~~i.-l~1~J~~
> %r1 '
.. ~<~MppY~
-tom fir. a~~~
g i
~~ 9cF,. ....~ ,i .-
-.~ 9Q ,
i~A~~ ~ ~
~ ':
\~ /
v ~~(
C
i
i/ ~
R-19 a R-47
r~ ~5~ i pLLE
yDO. ~ ~ R-18 a eRboK'si•
/, FIELD
' ~ ~ - ':, R-16
R48 9H ®P o~F
c ~ lF m~F
H
f~ dos ~ ALLEy
/~~~ 4F ~ ~~«EYST /DPI
(G~ ~R 999 ~ /p~
i
~~i Legend
Poggi Canyori Basin
L/ .-
®Neighborhood Boundary
aoo o aoo n
® N
F
Figure a.3
Otay Ranch Village 1 -Detail
PMC
-~~
6-301
~~i~/`
~ - J~QS~ SANTq YNF7 ~ ~A~
~~-0P rVI
VILLAGE 1 Development Data and Flow Projection
auie/ Remaining Sparta
Lent Use Unite GF Flaw EDUe permiveE EDUe
SF ]BLO 285.0 100.985.0 361.0 381.0 0.0
Assesor MaP 612-fig
R18 115 -
Pasauw Mep 812E8
R1] 98
Auessor Map fi124i]
Rib ]3
Assessor Map 812-fib
R58 96
B9]
0 199
0 50].0
1]8 6]].B 6]3.8 0.0
MF . . ,
~ Devebpment Sbma Upeete ]/0]
O Rt5-Apls 12?
,
c Devekpmapl scam. upa.fe ]ro]
U R19-Apb 201
. Development Smms Upeaie ]N)
w R4] Apls 2]1
0
G 0
0 500
0
2 D
0 0.0
MueM1USe . .
. .
11) 500
0
2 135.0
29 109.9 109.9 0.0 Assessor Mep 612-s8, M11314
Commercial .
. .
ieausmai o.o zsoD.D D.D o.o
paw D.D soa.D D.D a.D
FJemaptan smopi - 1aooD.o o.D D.o
Miaaia scnooi ze,ooD.D
Ri9n s~nom ae.ooD.D o.o D.D
CPF 2.500.0 0.0 0.0
Total EDUe 1.ifi4.5 1.1646 0.0
6-302
~~~ ~Q~
~0
P~
~4
PQ ' \ <
G~ (~(
SF~ ~. I ~.
ST
R-40
R-02
P
R-01
Legend
Poggi Canyon Basin
® Neighborhood Boundary
Source: SANDAG GIS, 2007; P'nC, 2007
aoa o aoo n r~gure A.4
F® N McMillin Otay Ranch Village 1 /5 -Detail
PMC
--~~
6-303
VILLAGE t & 5 (McMillin) Development Data and Flow Projection
Unit/
GF
Flaw
EDUS ButlO Remainln9 Sauma
Lantl Usa permi6etl EDUS
SF 164.0 266.0 43,480.0 164.0 164.0 0.0
Assessor MeD 642E5
R41 90
Asseupr Map 642E4
R42 ]4
MF 198.0 199.0 39,402.0 148.] 14B.] 0.0
Assessor Map 642-08
O R40 - Att mntlo 19B
T
rt
U
MLaetl-Use
0.0
2,500.0
0.0
0.0
m commamlel o.o zsoo.o a.o o.o
0
a maaamm 6.6 2soo.o ao o.o
s
] 500
0 860.0
2 10.8 10.6 0.0 Dwg 9&]t6 Mm ]19
FsMS . . ,
Elementary $cho01 12,000.0 c.0 0.0
Mitltlle School 28,000.0 0.0 0.0
Hgh 6NOO1 49,000.0 0.0 0.0
CPF 2,500.0 0.0 0.0
Total EDUS 3230 ]23.4 0.0
6-304
u `. / ~ I
;~
6~ ~\ ~u? • ~'p,.amscT ~ $ ~ ~
~ :~~~~~c ~ -( ~~ off'
i 1
~ `f " v ~ C a CDR>m p`~s..~>
m . A P / '~SG~i r"' 2 Il
~ KES RD l A°~~16~1@~ i( ~ i~Cl i~.~ll.~o
~ ~ > OTAY LA ~ ~pN, ~ ~ A ~ ~ i cry ,~, . ~~ _
% A ~. `. t ~ O ~d
0 R
~DRPNGE RD i Q F ~MGOLOtlD T ~~
I
d/i ~ AA /
~ ~~~~y MILL NV A ! PINON"H/ '• ~ ~
< ~~ ~~~ R~L~ ~~ ~~ ERD
t~~ r~cA NA ~ ~~< y/
3 ~~,~'~ AD TS F5~OR ~J~~~~ ~^ w~,
I FEB.S.~~ ~( BpY DR e. ~ETPLUMI, ~~~ ~ 4~ \
V LDRE`Q~{e"~P°(`^...~ \EKSS p DR~v S~ Q o \
Pu ``/_ ® c
D ~\~`'S 1PP LP ~ y
I GE TRE~° ON LP ~ SPN ~~~~~ ~
SP ~ ~ ~~~~ RyN ~ ~ i%
i
i ~ ~S SNEEP EK RD
„ N- LDVEa tPEE~ ~ 1 PALE CpE
c .1 6~
f~ C \:°t ~ OWD
0
e ~RpMe}EY!-rte R28 `. ,.R31 i
N
. 9<T EFN SEE43ryq ~
iVAy y
F
m
R-29 R•30A R-39 <
i
~ ~ OEYSERVILGE ST
Q
C
O
EPALOMAR ST CPP R3OB
ION
N ALL R
o K,S 9
y ~ o <EL~ 5~®
ti~ 7y cow ®c >~
s LL"S ST x
L~ p
~S9 ° CE/OM~a \\\
Ege`~ESra \\
C y Eh'RA'VERDE RD \l
ALLEyEENO"5T
PV
0°
S~EP~D b o
i~ g ~ o rr Legend
i W
~4 o y QP
$ a< Y°, a" wEL Poggi Canyon Basin
L
y<ylE'NPPRKW ~ BR>~sr ®Neighborhood Boundary
m
S urcF: S
wo o aoo n
F® /N
Figure a.s
Otay Ranch Village 5 and OWD Detail
PMC
-~~
6-305
VILLAGE 5 Development Data and Flow Projection
lantl Use
Wih
GF
Flaw
EDUe Built/
peanined Remaining
EDUa 6purm
6F 251.0 265.0 6fi,fi16.0 251.0 261.0 0.0
33 Aaseuor Map 643A6, Dwg 00118
R28
83 Assessor Map 843<2
R29
Awassor Map 643J3, Dwg OORS 8 00006
R31 14
121 Assessor Mep 843-63 and Sa
R39
MF 362.0 199.0 ]fi,016.0 266.9 286.9 0.0 '
O R30A-Condos-Atl 141 M1a602
r
~
Development 6mNa Uptlem T/OT
n
U R300-Dpntlps-Alt 241
w Mixed-Use 0.0 2,600.0 0.0 D.0
0
n
Commemial 2,scc.c D.D D.D
InduaMal 0.0 2.BOO.D 0.0 0.0
OA 500
0 0.0 0.0 Goes not re6M peM sde In R30. Assumed no fealties.
paw .
Misc-OWD parW 2].2 292 2,5000 68,000.0 266.6 256.8 Appmx 3l4s of acreage.
Elemenmry Ba~ool 12,000.0 0.0 0.0
hfltldle 6aiopl 28,0000 0.0 0.0
wen sctlopl afi.D6D.D D.a D.o
a
8 600
0
2 300.0
11 42.8 42.8 Assessor Mep 643-36
DPF . .
. ,
Toml EDUS 837.1 53].9 299.2
Nam:
OW D parcel may or may not develop to resitlen[ial.
c
6-306
_ `C
'~
' Q ~
~
1 ,
t
¢ `J
\
~~
`B
~
~
V/LGELP~'
~~,J' ~.O
_
~ F
N
P R S
o HS ~ U
R-14
' '~
>
i
,r
. ~
<
^~
~
R-25 R•28 ~ m?
-
i
~ 1~
~
BAY NI[L ~RG
° ES R-6 R-g
< R-15
u
S PANISN~BAY RD
~.
~ ~
® R-26 ,~
Y,.
,,•,~
CPF _ „
R-20
R-6
R~
_ll I'~1
R32
C
P
~ ~'> >; /
~ yv
i
,' ~f4o ~' /~ ,: l
RA ~~g ~ ~ ~ ,.~ R RG
~ ~ ~ Boa / ~, `PEATNEfiRIVE /,ts
`~r'. C . r \ ~ ocK.VPLLEY RO
~~/ PEAL ~~ ~,
r~(~15~~'~a
~Y~~A~CPY w \ -SWING ST ~°^E
W Legend
(~~~'T}~y{T-}~~~~ yQ ~ Poggi Canyon Basin
ld- .SKY ST ml
SPRING ~r~p-a ®Neighborhood Boundary
PMC.2 7 ~EYBEE~51 x `.J /~' 1
~o o aoa n
® N
F
Figure a.e
East Lake Greens and Land Swap Detail
PMC
-z~
6-307
cASTLAKE GREENS & LANDSWAP Development Data and flow Projection
its
U
GF
Fbw
EDUa fiuilV Remaining Subtotal
Remaining
Spume
land Usa n pennitletl EDUa EDUs
SF 048.0 285.0 124.190.0 048.0 048.0 0.0 0.0
Assessor Map 64}it, 643-21, Dwg 99-2T1-94
R3 Faldstona 51
Assesur MaD 643-18. Dwg 95J51, 95.458
RO Galena T)
Assesaw Map 595-33. Dwg 90.566. 90.500
RS Maracey 14
Asussor Mep 64}19, Dwg 9}20B and nc plena available a1 LW 21.
RB Ritlgmvootl I 3T
Acsaswr Mep 64}09
RB Falnasy RMge 9fi
Ausaur MaD 585J4, Dwg 9}302, 93-3>9. 933]T
RW Cypreu 58
0 Assessor Mep 643-14
R15 Cobbleslane 6
gsaessw Mep 84113
R20 Vanlanas 109
Aeaessor Map 84310
R25 Classics II-Det mntlD TB
Assessor Mep 643413, M14014
R9A Firen>s -Del cpntlD )fi
Aaussar MaD 643-63, M14014
R88 Andorra -Del condo 1]5
Psussor Map 596-50. M13254, Dwg 90.11015, 90-0092
P2B Palomira - Det rondo 51
MF T9t0 199.0 15).409.0 594.0 03.4
115 03A Psceasor Map fi4J413, M10014
R9C Verenaa-Tdplax 129
94
6 OA Aasassor Me0843E3. M14014
R9D CoNna -Triplex 126 .
100
8 D.0 Assevar Mep 8418], Mi4016
R9E Capna-Pots 134 .
1120 0.0 Development SfaWS Uptlab TN] (Assumed R32 is R9F)
R9F Rcho Vista Ppts 150
109
2 0.0 Asaessw Map EO]-30. M14003. PM 10559
R2fi Mtigua - AX rondo 252 .
Mixetl-UU 0.0 2.500.0 0.0 00
42] 500
0
2 106 fi)i0 402.5 4@.5 0.0 0.0 Assessor Map 643.02
Commemiel .
.
mdasmal 9.p zsoa.9 a.o 9.g
parka 12.5 500.0 8,255.0 23.6 23.0 0.0 0.0
Assessor Map, Dwg 89-0fi0.4T1
SBS-320-02 (Cam Park) 0
Assessor MaP 843-03
64}033-01 11 ]]
Aauuor MeD 04}10
64}100.18 (R25 Rec) 0
Aasesor Map 843-30
fi4J-300-ifi (R28 Rec( O.T4
Dwg 90-11 612
GoV Course 0
Elementary School 1.0 12.000.0 12,000.0 45.3 45.3 0 0 0.0 Assessor Map 643.12
Mitltlle School 0.0 20,000.0
1 0 000
0
40 48
000
0 101 t 181.1 0.0 0.0 Pssessor map 59132. Dwg 09Afi0<T1
Hlgh 6chpol .
. .
,
CPF (CnumX( 12.2 2.500.p ]0.550.0 115.3 115.3 0.0 0.0 Asaesecr Mep 64}t2
Total EDUa I 110/.a I 41e .a 1 mn I ~+~~
6-308
~ EyRO
~ SJN.VpLL
~ ~ v~
COLOMA'RO m0
m CAMjO SSP
t O~~` `QIO,' N
i GEYSERVILLE`' COR1E~ ys~ ~ ~ G
\F~ ~ ~~
~~) N
~ ~ ~ ~
! C.
"' LION"Oq \ ! lP~ z?,,~
d co 'jj~ q 5~ ~ /,~~oa°~
~a lJ ic( ,
~ NV4CCE~O •.$ ,
Fro army v
s ((,y~,~~C,z~~',s,~~S~~ ~~~Tll1l1l1u~~.u~u,....''~~--'',,x V ;
> G~TfN A `~ /
ENTTES'ST
o QPQ~ C"~ OCYM%C pY
,~ljfp4` j
i O
M4R Sl A
F C1
o Y C 2 1' SPRING SKYE 1~~
a P
Ply' ~ mp~EYeEE ST z
p o \~` (~E~~'',I
dP ~fC<f T ESTp P~~ RD \ \
~O~SY ~ ~PEPR-B °SSOM. CT~
5
CRf~ ~O ~ / i
\\\
' \\
eIRCN R° ~`~.. 51
a GWP~K
\o/NON/
\m.P
~i
HR° / s~N
~.
~, ` '~
Fm~ sZ
pE`'1 <~ P°~ . C
\°V1F e5(j \, ~~
0
yjt` SEMp~F ~~ GP./
s ~'
= T m
<ENNNf`"~3 A Legend
Ngef~v `~ i
,, w,. ~ Poggi Canyon Basin
4CKSO
N(~sr ®Potential Interim Flows
WOLF CANYO //('~\`~,,C~~j~~
N~f~Y~Ta~ ®Neighborhood Boundary
~~7>', \
Aoo o wo n
F® N
Figure A.7
Village 12 -Detail
PMC
-~~
6-309
VILLAGE 12 Development Data and Flow Projection
Lantl Usa Units GF Flaw EDUS BuiIV
Parmittetl Remaining
EDUS Source
SF 285.0 0.0 0.0
MF 199.0 0.0 0.0
Mixed-Use 0.0 2.500.0 0.0 0.0
Commercial 120.5 2,500.0 301,250.0 1,136.8 Sewer Stutly daletl Mey 200] llptlate K2
o
>. G1 30.4 28fi.9
U C-2 B.2 ]/.1
p~j C - OUy Rench Tawn Center BL9P 84].4 125.4 Buili EDUS basetl an figure pmvitletl by Lity.
O
a
Intlustrial
0.0
2,500.0
0.0
0.0
Parks 500.0 0.0 0.0
Elementary School 12,000.0 0.0 0.0
it Middle School 28,000.0
High School 48,000.0 0.0 0.0
CPF 2,500.0 0.0 0.0
Total EDUS 1,13aB 64].0 489.4
Notes: C-1 Otay Ranch 30.4 643-02
C-2 Otay Ranch 6.2 643-051-30
C General Growth 7.7
5.66
52.36
9.14
8.96
Total 122.4
-1.9 Unknown Adjustment tD total 120.5 ac per City Sewer Studies.
120.5
6-310
~~~
F E~~J~]~0~0 ~ / / ~ ~,~
0~ \
\\
\~
~:.
BIRON Rol ~~ Kst/ ~,
\\o'~%///~~1
3 ~
~~~~ ~~~~~t\
cN PB 2 4 ~' ~ /~ v~~ ~.~1
BIR ~ i~ / ~,ap %>f
6 5 ~
t _ 11 ~.,~. ss?
~~~fF~H 10 '~~ sg°PO ~~ ~,
SEMP . 9 ~~ . GRAS i ~
r ~ ~~~~ m 6 13 12 ~~~ ~ ~~~A~
FRRitiPC~~3 S ®. 1 14 ~ .,
J'~~S~j' ~ ~ 7 15 yp \ ~V~.
"7 ea ~ ~ ~
FR ey 19
~jj~°NS 16
~T 17 21
y 22 ~
..
e
HP
. : • 29 16 20. 23 \ .
/ 26 27 ~,
.. ~
25
28
::~:. \\\
• ~~~' Legend
:... ~~, ~ Poggi Canyon Basin
• ®Neighborhood Boundary
~ ~ Approximate Original Basin Boundary
c
\ ~ Potential Interim Flows
V
~ i~ Note: EUC Flows limited to 429 EDUs
durce: SANDAG GhS1i0 HSBJ, 2008: PMC, 2008 \ ~
N.T.S Q
Figure A.8
McMillin Eastern Urban Center Detail
PMC
-z~
6-311
EASTERN URBAN CENTER (EUC) Development Data and Flow Projection
land Use Units GF Flow EDUS SuiIV
Pwmittad Remaining
EOUa Source
SF 0.0 2b5.0 0.0 0.0
MF 0.0 199.0 0.0 0.0
~ Mixed-Use O.D 3,500.0 0.0 0.0
0
I c
w
commarnal
o.o
zsoD.o
a.o
o.o
U
.~
mtluaMal
o.0
2soD.o
a.a
D.o
m
a°
Parks
o.D
soD.D
o.D
D.o
Elementary School 0.0 12,000.0 0.0 0.0
Mitldle School 0.0 28.000.0
High School 0.0 68,000.0 0.0 0.0
CPF 0.0 2,500.0 0.0 0.0
- Tolat EDUS 189.0 0.0 189 0 Per Table M2 fooNOfa 9 a( EUC Tech hewer bNdy.
6-312
i
W
w
6
a
g ~
~
Q
Z
IW-
°ti
~
~ i
z ~
w ¢
~0
a h o SS ~
T
Approximate Original Boundary ~ " `a°~FF~
of Poggi Basin (295 units per NlussorsoucNCN Sr• i
3 Wilson Study) ~~ ?
a
~ BIRCH RO R-1A w2° ~'v m `
LL
9
~ ~ ~
RR2 ~
RA< n
^' ;
S
Y
Z N;sT ~gB~Vr H s
S
o JONES ST R-1 B
€
~ 43
`.~ ~C
~ R,pONST
u
i
'
gA0M57 ~ 9
~ NY~NxP
~
y
~
r
9~B
°
N 1
R_ NOVP57 ~ i
0 $ '~bINOLF
~ R-5 y
°~' ~
'`
' °'
u
a ~
i ~c
9
m > i
m
F @ L~ v~ REIGNER
T~ LNEN~Y1~
ep6~FIF7.
D A
O ~ D< <
JG~ /
~ C
G
y<
u
ti FLE/SHBE/
R ST. ~ / R-s
~~ Park
a
j .~
V
\
~ _
~
~ ~
~
i R,7 ~
\
1 ~ ES
Legend ~,
HS ~ ~
Poggi Canyon Basin
\
® Potential Interim Flows ~~ `. ~
® Neighborhood Boundary ~~~
~ `
Source: SANDAG GIS. 200J; PMC. 200J ~
325 0 325
® N
r
Figure A.9
Village 7 Detail
PMC
-~~
JILLAGE 7 Development Data and Flow Projection
Lentl Use
Units
GF
Fbw
EDUS euilV
pmmittetl Remaining
EDUS 6ub1ptal
Remaining
EDUa
Spume
SF 006.0 265.0 213,D6D.0 0040 481.0
R1A/e 311 10].0 206.0 M 15108
R2 381 t0fi.0 1]5.0 Mt52B2 M15203
RS 132 50.D 82.0 M151Di
MF-InteriMAtltll 318.0 199.0 fi2,006.0 23].3 29.J 208.0 200.0
R6IR] 31fi M 15104 shows 31fi but on'wmng' Ipls: R] 212 MF -AX per Major Prpj
c
r
Miacellaneove
C
~
J
Dlubhouse
10 6
10?
Bssetl on pem10 data
~
O Swim Club 0.3 0.3 figetl on pemtX dad
L Mixatl-Uee D.0 2,SD0.0 0.0 00
commamm asSO.D o.D oa
Inaaamal D.o zs6D.o a.D o0
Parka LB 500.0 3,000.0 14.3 16.3 16.3 Asseecar Mep fi6426
Elementary 6cbapl-In1enMAtltll t0 12.000.0 12.000.0 65.3 65.3 453 Assessor Mep 660.26
Mitltlle SCtloal 28,000.0 00 0.0
High 6dwol - InteriMAtltll 1.0 6B,OOO.p 60.000.0 181.1 181.1 D.0 0.0 Assessor Mep 660.20, Built per Cny memo dated 5-a-001KV054)
CPF-ParYS 2.0 500.0 1,000.0 3.0 3.0 3.8 M15134
Tptel EDUS 1.298 5 564.0 132.6 ]]2.4
InteriMAtltlI EDUS 4fi39 210.6 253.3
Pannenenl EDUS 032.] 353.fi 6]9.1
i Village 7 Interim flows of 464 EDUS until Wolf Trunk is construdad.
2 Once R6 is submitted, confirm as attached product.
6-314
SAN SEBASry1
gN'
AV
-_ \~
Q O M/NE
R~REEKLN
GAMM GOLOMA-RO
e N<
~// 0
1
pL4TTE
6
~( ~~ C
ti R/VER~~
GEVSERVILLE'ST
o
F = _
N~ ~ ~~
ERALOMAR ST
I / LION Oq ~
lyt EJL
- ~ o
~ p
e
W
R-9A/9D
a y R
& o R-5 4a y i$ .
° ` ONIPEAK"ST o O 20
FPLO
Q ~ Q,P OQ
~~) ~1'AL'LEY ST y
ti
\y o f\y~
P
O
, m a
~
P
~
i to
~
~Q
tP
\ R-8 ao R-BA °a
,
?E
z Q\
) ~ `P
yW
~~ 3
s
uU RRq OL
~ VEROE RO
~ CPF-1X
MU-Z
O VA[LE
'
t
YBENO
S
o R-7A176 R-96
4
0 a
<
o
mu-i
4
v -~
D
~ c
1 :~
~P
~ZP
o
R-3
~ ° P c~ R-10
W`PL
- i
z c R WY
n m WPP K (e
P
ae RGGr
s
r
m '~/YIE S
m y` mz p4 ES .e
R-8 p" ~
O
i R-1 0 o
~
9 OesLEO ~_,~' op0
R
e
9C
< EfSTS ~0~.
v 57
NENP
TP VE
OgT 0
~GI
SPN
gEE
R4 c
SELMO'st x 0o
~tL HB
PN
sPN o
N'PPSOUPL Bt op/ 9
SP
R-2A/2B m
a
m
CPF a
yt
FFE
O \~GL\
yr SEMPLE ~
C
$ BIRCN RD ~ ~ sT m
y
pE
F RR/
Np
< IRWINST \N-/
WEBBER
Legend
JONE53T
~
Poggi Canyon Basin
~ \
x i ~ ~ s WO~FOP
o ~ Approximate Original Basin Boundary
Z O m~A D~
A
~
<
e ~ Z
y`
®Neighborhood Boundary
<~
\
\ R
Source: SANDAG GIS. 2007 M , 2 7 ~e
aoo o wo n
f® N
Figure A.10
Village 6 Detail
PMC
-~~
6-315
.ILLAGE 6 Development Data and Flow Projection
SuMOtel
Units GF Flow EOUs BuiIV Remainin8 Remaining Source
Lantl Use Permitted EDUS EDUa
BF 925.0 265.0 2a5.12B0 925.0 0.0
101.0 0.0 Assessor Mep 64}54
Ri 101
190
0 0.0 Asaecsor Map 84}5] d 64
R2AI2B 190 .
183
0 0.0 Assessor Map 6a}Sa
ft3 tfi3 .
92
0 0.0 Aasassor Map 64}55
R4 92 .
1060 0.0 Assessor Mep fi43£0
RS 106
126
0 0.0 Assessor Mep 64}56
Rfi 12fi .
139.0 0.0 Assessor Map 64}59880
R9A 139
1
250
0 199
0 342.0
250 9a4.T 86_fi
MF ,
. . .
210.5 0.0 Assessor Mep 84}55. Mt4615
R]MB-Att 291
220
0 0.0 Assessor Mep 64J-05, M149]0
R0 -Att per GIS 29] .
191
5 0.0 M140]t, Permitted based on Bldg Parmil data
R9B/9U Att Condo 255 .
3fi
B 0.0 Assessor Mep 64}80
ft9D-Att Der Major Protect 49 .
159
2 0.0 M14432, Permittetl based an BId9 Permit deb
R10 -Att per GIS 212 .
45.1 Amantlsd TM
MU 1 60
32
0 41.6 Amended TM. M15610, PSIO teas in r0e amount ¢t $9600.
MU 2 90' .
]
3 500
0
2 10
150.0 60.5 68.5 88.5
Miaetl-Use . .
, ,
Amentled TM
MU 1 2.95
Amended TM,M15fi10
MU2 4.31
Commercial zsog.9 9.o 9.0
Indaamal o.g 2sg6.g o.0 9.0
Ts 500
0 ])50.p 14.2 1a.2 0.0 0.0 Asaeswr Map fi43-05
Pads .
1
9' 500
0 935.0 3.5 3.5 0.0 0.0
Miac . .
R -2 Private Rac area 0]
R-3 Private R¢c area 0.6]
R-10 Privets Rec area OS
000
0 45
] 65
3 0.0 0.0 Other studies ehowetl 1600 sNdents. Conswdetl per Ciry ste6.
Elementary Sbh¢ol LO 12.000.0 12.
. . .
Mkdle School 28,000.0
Hi9n 9chocl-Privets 10 40,000.0 a0.000.p 1011 10it 0.0 0.0
14
] 5000
2 700.0
36 138.5 130.5 0.0 40
CPF . . ,
Mt444Q acmage per Assessor map far M15fit0
CPF 1X L$]
Assessor Map
Church 1J 1t
Total EDUS 2,320.9 2,165.6 155.1 155.1
6-316
03
i
W
J
Legend
Poggi Canyon Basin
i
~ ~ Approximate Original Basin Boundary
® Neighborhood Boundary
R-M1
1
j CPFd
I
R49
R-9
P-2
R-Z9 /
R-5
MU-1
P-0
R-9]
R-25 R-ZB
R-24
R-23
R-T6
R-27
Source: S~ ANDA
R-29
R-12 t'
CPF-5 1
I
FS
R-0J
R-39
~1
MU-Z '
C-0
R-15
R-A CPF 3AI3R
R-16
R-06
R49 ~~
CPF-Z
~_,
soo o eoo /~ Figure A.11
® N Otay Ranch Village 2 Detail
FEET
PMC
-~~
LLAGE 2 Development Data and Flow Projection
Unite
GF
Flow
EOU9 BuiIV Remaining Source
LarM Use pemltttetl mUa
SF 505.0 285.0 155,025.0 505.0 5050
g S ubslantial CgMOmianca
R4 ifi
spbamn6al comprmance
~ 13g
5ubatantlal CPMPrtnance
R6 59
Subemntlal canfamlenw
R7 48
suestannel conmimanr.
~ s6
Substantial Conormanca
Rg 101
Substantial Conformance
R15 3]
SF-AOtlNOnel 0.0 265.0 0.0 00 00
Suhslen5al CoMOrmenro
Rt] 119
Substantial Conformance
R10 113
Substantial COeformerlrre
R19 B3
Substantial CoMamunca
~0 03
Subalanbel Confomanca
R21 ~
Per Ciry/Oextar-Wilson, no longer a neighborhoatl
R22
substanlial Conrpmlanm
R23 ]1
- Substantial Conformance 41 units - Par CirylOexbrvWllcon, want sewer Ip Poggi.
f424
Substantial conrormenw
R25 fig
SubstanSal COnfarmanra
R26 ]5
3)4
0
1 199
0 2]3.426.0 t,03i0 1.031.8
MF .
, .
Substantial COnformen®
R10 90
Subslangel COMprmanca
R11 144
Subatantlel COnfortnance
R12 255
substanSal CaMOrmence
R13 149
SubsteMlel Confamlanca
R14 tfi5
substantial Conformance
R16 ]4
SuOatanOal COMprmence
R20 05
9uhalanriel Confornana
P29 1M
spealantial Commmianrn
1 ~g ne
I
Substantial CPnrormance. Assasaor Mep 6<4-31
MU 1J 60
0
0 1990 0
0 00 0.0 Substantal COnfomlanca
MF-AEEleonel . .
R2] 110
Mixatl-Use 6.5 2,$00.0 21,250.0 002 00.2
Substantial Canfpimenu. Assessor Map 644-31
MU 1 1.8
Substan0al Conlormanw. Asaesspr Mep 844-31
MU 2 2 4
Substantial Canfornence, Msesaor Mep 644-31
MU ] 4.3
13] 5004
2 34
250
0 1292 1292 Assessor Map 644-]1
Commetgal Gt . ,
.
59
6 2
500
0 149
000
0 562.3 562.3 Substantial Conformance, I-2 antl I-3 gc tp Wol( Cyn Basin
IMUStNI I-1 . .
. ,
.
15A 500
0 ]
R0
0 29.1 29.1
PaNS . ,
.
M 15350
p 1 1 41
M 15350
P 2 11
M 15350
P-3 fi.9
0
0 0
0 0.0 Cansitler as interim Bow b Poggi Sewep pa Ciry.
parks - AtlOltipnel 0.0 500.0 . .
M tS350
P4 in V4 but tlevebP with V2 50.54
Elementary SChoM 5-1 1.0 12.000.0 12.000.0 45.3 45.3
Mitlble Smpol 26,000.0
Rgn School 1.0 40.000.0 48.000.0 101 t 101.1 0.0
1
0 0
12
000 12
000 0 45.3 45.3 0.0 Current enrollment is 3000
Hlgb School -Atltll aNtlmla . .
. ,
6-318
VILLAGE 2 Development Data and Flow Projection
Lantl Use Unils GF Flow EDDS 9ui9/
Pertniketl Remaini~rg
EDUS Source
CPF B.0 2.500.0 19,900.0 ]5.1
CPFt L2 O.p tt3 Pssesapr Map 644-31
CPF J 4.5 0.0 42.t Assessor Map 844-J1, ecnege is M1yM1 as it inGUtlas streal
CPF 4 1.5 0.0 14.2 Substantial Lonfpmfance
CPF 5 0.6 O.p ].5 aubstanlial Cgnbrmance
Fire Station Bile 1 ] 2.5op 0 4.225.0 15.9 15 9 0 0 Pasesaor Mep 64d-3t
I cPF-AtlOifional 0.0 2,500.0 00 0.0 0.0
CPF2 09 SubalanSal Lpnformance-NG naquesletl by ORC.
Total EDUS 2,]806 262.4 2,99.0
Lesa original EDUS 2.180.4 2424 2,538.0
Perm Divenipn lp Ppggi 0.0 0 0 0 0
Note: 1997 Basin Plan (page 8-7) itlentifed 1201 EDUS (af 265 gpd1EDU) For V2.
Fire Station antl HS estimatetl to be 127 EDUS in Ovewrview of SS for OR V2, V3 and port V4.
Does not refleM additional 132 EDUS for increased tlensiry per PBSJ memo dated 5-3-07.
Assumed ail MF as attached.
6-319
__ _._._ _
_:
CITY OF CHOLA VISTA
SEWER MASTER PLAN r Incn ~eeie tsoa reel .,._
POGGI CANYON MODEL MAP "` ""
EXHIBIT 3
1
A
-i 1
t ,~ ~~,. {, ~I
W'g ,,
,1, a
~ 17 , _:1
1=x-a' "-
4r~ pl I~r , 1 ~ ..
_ .~ _"
}
T 1
.. ,.
1 ~! f 4, J
~~. y ] ~ 4.. ~' 1 ~ ~ ~ .~ r y "'+ 1 r'q ~
Y .. ~~.^ ~ { 4 rt t yy .f+ ~b.e rl ~ ~ '~ ! J
tT .. 1 1 .'1111 t r-- t r ~ xl 1_ kr! 1 .. XW
4 7.:,- ~ r, T ~ .i ~"1 ~ 1 '..} 'q^i' ~G'.'1~ r.. 1 ->-~ ,. ~J ,~11 t Jr'~
1 ` 1 x x} ~ 1~ 1 ~. 1 r 1 a Y rrr ~ l_i,. L- h. k~r l-' (~11 F~~ ~ rF i '.J ' ...I.
q4 ~ y'{ 5 ~Iti. i/ 1:e ,r ~ 1 l rk.'FC,~I k .~y.
l4 1~ 1
4 1
:l f 1 h r LL55''1-1-11 r ~' s J 1 x~ Ih ~i 7; 1 "2' 1 /^ f
` i ~. Y'Y `°5 ti r 1 54 .~ S~f ~~.11 rr 1:~' i y-i 1 ~~~ 1~,n4 k 5s ~ ~~P{~+1 J _ .'...
t r I i 1 rr 5 5 r ti 5~, Y 1 r r ~ J' ) ~,1~ ~ r` Y__
~1'li ,.1 151. r 6 f r°R r 4 ,r r ,~~\ $tr t rl~
.1 ~_ 1. ~ y 1151r ~ I ~ ~. til I 1~ ~5: i5 r- y ~, m ~ « r i~w ~ 1
.. .. 1 51 i 1' ., ~....
'~, 1 S.S., 5 1 :_ , Irl`'.._ ~r !. ~. ~{ err; ~'".d ~ytizT ¢a,n
1 T T .p,'°- 5 a ~. 1 ~~ .k r s1.~l~Ay ~.J~{ t F~' x'~..
/ t dtY
tl.l Y 4 ;r~Jl 1~ , ..
11 i" W_+ lu.._ ~I 1~ ~ ~r ~}~J~
I ~- -~ 1 ~ ~~ ~ ~4r, ,x' ,
_ - - ~~~ ~ , ~,w.. ~-
.~"
' ~ _ f_ ,
Leeewa.w~m Ir.r.r.,-war.e~....-s...l..,.
p.v. n3leu
6-323
Appendix I: POGGI Basin Development Data and Flow Projection TABLE I-1
SUMMARY OF NEIGHBORHOOD EDUS $ubtofal
Dwelapment
EDUS TPm
BuINPermiiba
EDUS
Remaining EDUS
MAX EDUS Pemlanent
EDUS
Commi6ea auiltl
PelmiBatl
Village ll 0.0 OD 00 0.0 0.0 00 0.0
FreamyCommercial 1,1]6.0 824 409A 1,1J6.8 1,1]6.8 1136.0 824
EUC 189.8 0.0 109.0 189.0 169Q 1890 0.0
EUC (appmvaNOM appmyea=4]0) 201.0 0.0 201.0 281.0 201.0 0.0
Eaa6eka L3lGleana 220].0 2,1245 03A 2,20].0 2,20].0 220).0 2,124.5
Village50RC 580.5 531.9 42.8 560.5 5905 580.5 53]9
OWp parcel near V5 258.6 00 258.6 258.8 258.6 256.6 0.0
Village VS McMillin 32J.4 32J0 0.0 J23A J2J.4 J230 ]23.4
VIIla9e] 032.] J53.fi 4]9.1 0]2.7 632] 632.7 3538
Vlllaga](Inlanm) 463.] 210.4 253.3 061] 210A
Village6 2,80.0 2.165.8 155.1 2.320.0 2,]200 2320.0 2,165.6
Village 2H86FS 262.4 242.6 0.0 262.6 262A 262.4 242A
vm.g. z 1,mt o 1151 u tm1 o upvp not o 6.3
vina9ez(aeaam.a mmminaal tp3r.0 La3>.p 1p3].g 1p3T.0 14JZB p.p
Vlllaga x(132 nal apPmvea) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
wlla9ez(aPl appm.aaP 6.o 9.6 e.o 00 0.0
mna9.2(P<7-mleam omy 4p B.6 9.p 9.9 30
Lana Vlllaga 2 anfetlng tlwmalnam ar P 410 -]22.3 -]22.3 -82.3 -722.3 -i22 ] 0 0
$UBIOtaI-UPSbeam Of P410 10.050.5 4805.2 4,045.2 10,850.5 10,1088 9,9050 8,6052
Vlllegel ORC et P410 1,1645 1,1849 00 1.184.5 1,164.5 1164.5 1.164.5
O
N SUBtotal P410 to P405 11,615.0 ],]89.8 4,065.2 11,B1i6 11.3514 110]OJ ],]69.8
c
U
m
Vlllaga 1 W est a1 P405 519.8 519.8 0.0 519.8 5198 5196 519.8
O
1 $UBIOtaI at P405 M P365 12336.8 0,289.3 4.015.2 12.]36.6 11,8]09 11.589.9 6,289.]
Village 2 - Rd and I-1 ai P365 82.3 ]223 ]22.3 ]22.3 ]22.3 0.0
$UBlotal P365IO P345 13,0569 82894 4.)8].5 13ASfi9 12,5912 12,3122 8,269.]
3unbow-PAtB entl ES al PJ45 15].3 19.3 00 15).] 15].3 15].3 15]3
$UBtOtal P346 [0 P310 13,2142 0,666.8 4,]6)5 138142 12.7504 12?89.4 8,446.8
Bunbow-poNana e1 PA 16/1]a1 P310 140.0 160.0 0.0 140.0 146A 146.0 110.0
$UBtOta P310 tO P305 13.354.2 8,5666 476]5 1],354.2 12.0906 12.609.4 B,SB66
aunbaw-IntlusNal Palk a1 P305 515.1 0.0 515.1 515.1 5151 515.1 0.0
$ublOWl P3051o P270 1],0682 0,506.6 5.202.6 1J 069.2 1],405.5 13,iN.5 0.586.6
aunbow al P2T0 1,1]1.1 1,1]1.1 0 0 1,1J1.1 1 131.1 1131.1 1131 1
Mee Ctr al P2]0 109A 453 W2 109E 109.4 1094 45.J
$Ublota P270 b P253R 15,109.0 9.763.0 5,346.6 15,109.8 14,648.1 16,305.1 9,]83.0
Eazc of 1005 at P253 290.p 290.0 0.0 290.0 29(1.0 290.0 290.0
$UblOtal P253R I0 P230 15,J994 f0A510 5.348.8 15.399.0 14,9361 14,6551 10,053.0
Eaat of IBD5 of P230 BT3.J 67].3 0.0 fi73.J fi]3 ] 6]3 ] 6]J.3
$UbtOfal P230 ID P195 16973.1 14]264 5.]48.8 16,0]3.1 15,6096 15.328A 10.]284
WaaIM1805 a1 P195 0]SJ 815.] 0.0 8]5.3 8]53 0]53 0]53
TOfa1 P195 fO P1g2 18,946.6 11.601.6 5.3480
1 ORC requested 769 atlditional EDUS, but is not wrrently being pursued.
2 P230, estimated 673 EDUS enter at this Dint based on 1997 Basin Plan, B-23. 16.946A 16p06] 16.20].] 11,801.8
',
6-325
TABLE I-2
From Ci Pi a Calculator
Peek Flow Minimum Capacity (cfs) EDUS at Remaining
Nodes EDUS MGD CFS Diameter in Sloe Full Flow dID=0.85 d/D=0.75 d/D =.85 Ca acf
P702 [o P740 Max 16,948 746 11.5 21 0.50% 12.1 12.5 11.1
Permanent 16,485 7.25 11.2 12.1 12.5 11.1
Committetl 16,204 7.13 11.0 12.1 12.5 11.1
Permittetl 11,602 5.10 Z9 12.1 12.5 11.7 18,367 6,765
P140-P175R Max 16,948 7.46 11.5 21 0.73% 74.7 15.1 73.4
Permanent 16,485 7.25 11.2 14.7 15.1 13.4
Committed 16,204 7.13 11.0 14.7 15.1 13.4
Permitted 11,602 5.10 7.9 14.7 15.1 13.4 22,192 10,591
P175R-P195 Max 7fi,948 7.46 11.5 27 0.50% 23.7 24.4 21.6
Permanent 16,485 7.25 71.2 23.7 244 21.8
Committed 16,204 7.13 11.0 23.7 24.4 21.6
Permitted 11,602 5.10 7.9 23.7 24.4 21.6 35,898 24,296
P195-P230 Maz 16,073 7.07 10.9 21 0.50% 12.1 12.5 11.1
Permanent 15,fi09 6.87 10.6 12.1 12.5 11.1
Committed 15,328 6.74 104 12.1 12.5 11.1
Permitted 10,726 4.72 7.3 12.1 12.5 11.1 18,367 7,fi40
P230-P2d0 Max 15,400 6.77 70.5 21 0.40% 10.8 11.2 9.9
Permanent 14,936 6.57 10.2 10.8 11.2 9.9
Committed 14,655 6.45 10.0 10.8 112 9.9
Permittetl 10,053 442 6.8 10.8 11.2 9.9 16,427 6,374
P240-P253R Max 15,400 6.77 10.5 21 040% 10.8 11.2 9.9
Permanent 14,936 6.57 10.2 10.8 71.2 9.9
Committed 14,655 6.45 10.0 10.8 11.2 9.9
Permitted 10,053 4.42 6.0 10.8 11.2 9.9 1fi 627 6,374
P253R-P270 Max 15,110 6.65 70.3 18 0.50% 8.0 8.3 7.3
Permanent 14,646 6.44 10.0 B.0 8.3 7.3
Committed 14,3fi5 fi.32 9.8 8.0 8.3 7.3
Permittetl 9,763 4.29 6.6 8.0 8.3 7.3 12,775 2,412
P270-P305 Maz 13,869 6.10 9.4 18 0.50% 8.0 8.3 7.3
Permanent 13,406 5.90 9.1 8.0 8.3 7.3
Committed 13,125 5.77 8.9 8.0 8.3 7.3
Permitted 8,587 3.78 5.8 8.0 8.3 7.3 12,175 3,589
P305-P370 Max 73,354 S.B7 9.1 1B 5.00% 25.4 26.2 23.2
Permanent 72,890 5.fi7 8.8 25.4 26.2 23.2
Committed 12,609 5.55 8.8 25.4 26.2 23.2
Permitted 8,507 3.78 5.8 254 26.2 23.2 38,503 29,916
P310-P345 Max 13,214 5.81 9.0 18 0.98% 11.3 11.6 10.3
Permanent 12,750 5.61 8.7 11.3 17.6 10.3
Committed 72,469 5.49 8.5 17.3 11.6 10.3
Permittetl 8,447 3.72 5.8 11.3 11.6 10.3 17,047 8,600
P345-P365 Max 13,057 5.76 8.9 t8 0.60% 8.8 9.1 8.0
Permanent 12,593 5.54 8.6 8.8 9.1 8.0
Commirietl 12,312 5.42 8.4 8.8 9.7 8.0
Permitted 8,289 3.65 5.6 8.8 9.1 8.0 13,339 5,049
P365-P405 Max 12,335 5.43 B d 18 1.01 % 11.4 11.8 10.4
Permanent 11,871 5.22 8.1 11.4 11.0 10.4
Committed 11,590 5.10 7.9 11.4 11.8 10.4
Permittetl 8,289 3.65 S.fi 11.4 71.8 10.4 17,305 9,01fi
P405-P4t0 Maz 11,815 5.20 8.0 78 0.60% 8.8 9.1 8.0
Permanent 11,351 4.99 7.] 8.8 9.1 8.0
Committetl 11,070 4.87 7.5 B.8 9.1 8.0
Permitted 7,770 3.42 5.3 8.8 9.1 8.0 13,339 5,569
Upstream of P4701o SR 725 Max 10,650 4.69 7.3 18 0.60% 8.8 9.1 8.0
Permanent 10,187 4.48 6.9 8.8 9.1 B.0
Committed 9,906 4.36 6.7 8.8 9.1 0.0
Permitted 6,605 2.91 4.5 8.8 9.1 8.0 13,339 6,733
Notes:
Permanent exdudes 464 Interim EDUS for Village 7
Committed exdudes 464 Interim EDUS for Village 7, 281 EDUS for EUC.
Permitted includes Village Ts interim EDUS.
PF assumetl to 6e 1.66
Rate is estimated at 265 9ptl
Village 2 additional EDUS assumed to enter at Heritage Roatl.
6-326
3124!2009
NODES P102 TO P140 -NORTH OF MAIN STREET
Based on a sewage generation rate of 265 gpd/EDU and the maximum EDUs shown in
Tables I-1 and I-2 of this appendix, the 21-inch diameter pipe from node P102z to P1403 is
sized adequately for the design flows. The pipe slope ranges between 0.5% and 0.54%
according to the plans. The design capacity of the pipe at 0.5% slope and 85% full pipe
flow, using Manning's equation, is 18,367 EDUs. As shown in the table, there are cases
where the flow may exceed 75% and consequently this reach should be monitored
closely during build-out of the basin.
TABLE 1-3
CAPACIN ANALYSIS NODES P102 TO P740
Permanent P102-P140 16,485 7.25 11.2 77%
Diameter
Committed P102-P740 16,204 7.13 11.0 75
Diameter
Built P102-P140 11,602 5.10 7.9 59%
Diameter
Maximum includes interim flows of 464 ED Us for Village 7.
Permanent excludes interim flows of 464 EDUs for Village 7.
Committed excludes 464 interim EDUs for Village 7 and 281 EDUs for EUC that are no[ yet approved..
Remaining capacity at d/D of .85 is approximately 6,765 EDUs (18,367 EDUs less 11,602 EDUs).
Assumes all EDUs west of I-805 enter at node P185 for analysis only.
Analysis is based on 1 EDU = 265 gpd.
For DIF purposes, capacity calculated based on n=0.012, peak factor = 1.66 and slope = 0.5%.
The critical reach to monitor is between nodes P102^ andP105s.
2 Node P102 is north of manhole 47 per drawing 01-028-28.
s Node P140 is manhole 16 per drawing 97-355.
a Node P 102 is north of manhole 47 per drawing 01-028-28.
s Node P105 is manhole 102 per drawing 97-356.
6-327
Maximum P702-P140 Diameter 16'948 7.46 11.5 78 %
NODES P140 TO P1 75R -NORTH OF MAIN STREET TO MELROSE AVENUE
Based on a sewage generation rate of 265 gpd/EDU and the maximum EDUs shown in
Tables I-1 and I-2 of this appendix, the 21-inch diameter pipe from node P1406 to P175~ is
sized adequately for the design flows. The pipe slope ranges between 0.73% and 4.39%
according to the plans. The design capacity of the pipe at 0.73% slope and 85% full pipe
flow, using Manning's equation, is 22,192 EDUs. As shown in the table, this reach of sewer
pipe is adequate for build out of the basin.
TABLE I-4
CAPACITY ANALYSIS NODES P140 TO P775R .
Maximum P140.P775R 16,948 7.46 11.5 67%
Diameter
Permanent P140.P775R 16,485 7.25 11.2 66%
Diameter
Committed P140.P175R 76,204 7.73 11.0 65%
Diameter
Built P140-P775R 11,602 5.70 ~ 7.9 52%
Diameter
Maximum includes interim flows of 464 EDUs for Village 7.
Permanent excludes interim flows of 464 ED Us for Village 7.
Committed excludes 464 interim ED Us for Village 7 and 281 EDUs for EUC that are not yet approved.
Remaining capacity at d/D of .85 is approximately 10, 590 ED Us Q2, 192 EDUs less 11,602 EDUs).
Assumes all EDUs west of I-805 enter at node P 185 for analysis only.
Analysis is based on 1 EDU - 265 gpd.
For DIF purposes, capacity calculated based on n=0.012, peak factors 1.66 and slope a 0.73%.
e Node P140 is manhole 16 per drawing 97-355.
~ Node P175R is manhole 1 per drawing 05022-02.
6-328
NODES P1 75R TO P195 - MELROSE AVENUE EASTERLY UNDER I-805
Based on a sewage generation rate of 265 gpd/EDU and the maximum EDUs shown in
Tables I-1 and I-2 of this appendix, the 27-inch diameter pipe from node P175R8 to P1959 is
sized adequately for the design flows. The pipe slope is 0.5% according to the plans. The
design capacity of the pipe at 0.5% slope and 85%, full pipe flow, using Manning's
equation, is 35,898 EDUs. As shown in the Table, this reach of sewer pipe is adequate for
build out of the basin.
TABLE 1-$
CAPACITY ANALYSIS NODES P175R TO P195
Permitted R175R-P795 27" 16,485 7.25 11.2 49 h
Diameter
Committed P175R-P195 27" 16,204 7.13 11.0 48%
Diameter
Built P175R-P795 27" 11,602 5.10 7.9 40°/
Diameter
Maximum includes interim flows of 464 EDUs for Village 7.
Permanent excludes interim flows of 464 ED Us for Village 7.
Committed excludes 464 interim EDUs for Village 7 and 281 EDUs for EUC Iha[ are not yet approved.
Remaining capacity at d/D of .85 is approximately 24,296 EDUs (35,898 EDUs less 11,602 EDUs).
Assumes all EDUs west of I-805 enter at node P185 for analysis only.
Analysis is based on 1 EDU - 265 gpd.
For DIF purposes, capacity calculated based on n-0.012, peak factor = 1.66 and slope - 0.5%.
a Node P175R is manhole 1 per drawing 05022-02.
9 Node P195 is manhole 6 per drawing 05-022-03.
6-329
27" 16,948 7.46 11.5 49°/
Maximum P175R-P195 Diameter
NODES P195 TO P230- EAST OF I-805 TO OLEANDER AVENUE
Based on a sewage generation rate of 265 gpd/EDU and the maximum EDUs shown in
Tables I-1 and I-2 of this appendix, the 21-inch diameter pipe from node P195~~ to P230~~
is sized adequately for the design flows. The pipe slope ranges between 0.5% and 9.65%
according to the plans. The design capacity of the pipe at 0.5% slope and 85% full pipe
flow, using Manning's equation, is 18,367 EDUs. As shown in the table, this reach of sewer
pipe is adequate for build out of the basin.
TABLE I-6
CAPACITY ANALYSIS NODES P795 TO P230
Maximum P195-P230 16,073 7.07 10.9 75%
Diameter
Permanent- P195-P230 15,609 6.87 10.6 74%
Diameter
Committed P195-P230 21" 15,328 6.74 70.4 721
Diameter
Built P195-P230 21" 10,726 4.72 7.3 56%
Diameter
Maximum includes interim flows of 464 EDUs for Village 7.
Permanent excludes interim flows of 464 EDUs for Village 7.
Committed excludes 464 interim EDUs for Village 7 and 281 EDUs for EUC that are not yet approved.
Remaining capacity a[ d/D of .85 is approximately 7,641 EDUs (18,367 EDUs less 10,726 EDUs).
Assumes all EDUs east of I-805 enter at node P230 for analysis only.
Analysis is based on 7 EDU - 26i gpd.
For DIF purposes, capacity calculated based on n=0.012, peak factor - 1.66 and slope - 0.5%.
~~ Node P195 is manhole 6 per drawing 05022-03.
~~ Node P230 is manhole 30 per drawing 97-348.
6-330
NODES P230 TO P240- EAST OF OLEANDER AVENUE TO SOUTH OF OLYMPIC PKWY
Based on a sewage generation rate of 265 gpolEDU and the maximum EDUs shown in
Tables I-1 and I-2 of this appendix, the 21-inch diameter pipe from node P23012 to P24013
is sized adequately for the design flows. The pipe slope is 0.4% according to the plans.
The design capacity of the pipe at 0.4~ slope and 85% full pipe flow, using Manning's
equation, is 16,427 EDUs. As shown in the table, there are cases where the flow may
exceed 75% and consequently this reach should be monitored closely during build-out of
the basin.
TABLE 1-7
CAPACITY ANALYSIS NODES P230 TO P240
Permanent P230.P240 14,936 6.57 10.2 77%
Diameter
Committed P-230-P240 14,655 6.45 10.0 78 %
Diameter
Built P230.P240 21" 10,053 4.42 6.8 58
Diameter
Maximum includes interim flows of 464 EDUs for Village 7.
Permanent excludes interim flows of 464 EDUs for Village 7.
Committed excludes 464 interim EDUs for Village 7 and 28 7 EDUs for EUC that are not yet approved.
Remaining capacity at d/D of .85 is approximately EDUs 6,374 (76,427 EDUs less 10,053 EDUs).
Assumes 290 EDUs east of 1-805 enter upstream of node P240 for analysis only.
Analysis is based on 1 EDU - 265 gpd.
For DIF purposes, capacity calculated based on n-0.072, peak factor = 1.66 and slope = 0.4%.
is Node P230 is manhole 30 per drawing 97-348.
i3 Node P240 is manhole 16 per drawing 97-355.
6-331
Maximum P230-P240 21~ 15,400 6.77 10.5 79°k
Diameter
P240 TO P253R -OLYMPIC PARKWAY (WEST OF BRANDYWINE AVENUE)
Based on a sewage generation rate of 265 gpd/EDU and the maximum EDUs shown in
Tables I-1 and I-2 of this appendix, the 21-inch diameter pipe from node P240~< to P253~s
is sized adequately for the design flows. The pipe slope ranges between 0.4% and 1.22%
according to the plans. The design capacity of the pipe at 0.4% slope and 85% full pipe
flow, using Manning's equation, is 16,427 EDUs. As shown in the table, there are cases
where the flow may exceed 75% and consequently this reach should be monitored
closely during build-out of the basin.
TABLE I-8
CAPACITY ANALYSIS NODES P240 ro P253R
Maximum P240-P253R 15,400 6.77 10.5 79%
Diameter
Permanent P240.P253R 14,936 6.57 10.2 77%
Diameter
Committed P240.P253R 14,655 6.45 10.0 75%
Diameter
Built P240-P253R 10,053 4.42 6.8 58
Diameter
Maximum includes interim flows of 464 EDUs for Village 7.
Permanent excludes interim flows of 464 EDUs for Village 7.
Committed excludes 464 interim EDUs for Village 7 and 281 EDUs for EUC that are not yet approved.
Remaining capacity at d./D of.85 is approximately ED Us 6,374 (16,427 EDUs less 10,053 EDUs).
Assumes 290 EDUs eazt of 1-805 enter upstream of node P240 for analysis only.
Analysis is based on 1 EDU = 265 gpd.
For DIF purposes, capacity calculated based on n=0.012, peak factor = 1.66 and slope = 0.4%.
The critical reach is between nodes P250R16 and P253R~~.
14 Node P240 is manhole 16 per drawing 97-355.
is Node P253R is manhole 3 per drawing 00110-04.
76 Node P250 is manhole 2 per drawing 00110-04.
~~ Node P253R is manhole 3 per drawing 00110-04.
6-332
P253R TO P305 -OLYMPIC PARKWAY WEST AND EAST Of BRANDYWINE AVENUE
These 18-inch diameter reaches are discussed in the report and indicate a d/D
exceeding 0.85 based on Tables I-i and I-2 of this appendix.
6-333
P305 TO P310 -OLYMPIC PARKWAY (WITHIN $UNBOW II)
Based on a sewage generation rate of 265 gpd/EDU and the maximum EDUs shown in
Tables I-1 and I-2 of this appendix, the 1S-inch diameter pipe from node P30518 to P31019
is sized adequately for the design flows. The pipe slope is 5% according to the plans. The
design capacity of the pipe at 5% slope and 85% full pipe flow, using Manning's
equation, is 38,503 EDUs. As shown in the table, this reach of sewer pipe is adequate for
build out of the basin.
TABLE 1-9
CAPACITY ANALYSIS NODES P30$ TO P310
Maximum P305- P310 78" 13,354 5.87 g.l Less than
Diameter 50%
Permanent P305-P310 78" 12,890 5.67 g.g Less than
Diameter 50%
Committed P305- P370 18" 72,609 5.55 g.6 Less than
Diameter 50%
Built P30S P310 78" 8,587 3.78 5.8 Less than
Diameter 50%
Maximum includes interim flows of 464 EDUs for Village 7.
Permanent excludes interim flows of 464 EDUs for Village 7.
Committed excludes 464 interim EDUs for Village 7 and 28 7 EDUs for EUC that are not ye[ approved.
Remaining capacity at d/D of.85 is approximately 29,976 EDUs (38,503 EDUs less 8,587 EDUs).
Analysis is based on 1 EDU = 265 gpd.
For DIF purposes, capacity calculated based on n=0.072, peak factor = 7.66 and slope - 5%.
la Node P305 is manhole 6 per drawing 99-386.
Is Node P310 is manhole 7 per drawing 99-386.
6-334
P310 TO P345 -OLYMPIC PARKWAY (WITHIN SUNBOW II)
Based on a sewage generation rate of 265 gpd/EDU and the maximum EDUs shown in
Tables I-1 and I-2 of this appendix, the 18-inch diameter pipe from node P31020 to P34521
is sized adequately for the design flows. The pipe slope is ranges between 0.98% and
2.13% according to the plans. The design capacity of the pipe at 0.98% slope and 85%
full pipe flow, using Manning's equation, is 17,047 EDUs. As shown in the table, this reach
of sewer pipe is adequate for build out of the basin.
TABLEI-10
CAPACITY ANALYSIS NODES P310 ro P345
Permanent P310-P345 18~ 12,750 5.61 8.7 67%
Diameter
Committed P310. P345 12,469 5.49 8.6 65%
Diameter
Built P310. P345 18" 8,447 3.72 5.8 61%
Diameter
Maximum includes interim flows of 464 EDUs for Village 7.
Permanent excludes interim flows of 464 EDUs for Village 7.
Committed excludes 464 interim EDUs for Village 7 and 287 EDUs for EUC that are not yet approved.
Remaining capacity at d/D of .85 is approximately 8,600 EDUs (17,047 EDUs less 8,447 EDUs).
Analysis is based on 1 EDU - 265 gpd.
For DIF purposes capacity calculated based on n=0.012 peak factor = 1.66 and slope = 0.98%.
20 Node F310 is manhole 7 per drawing 99-386.
21 Node P345 is manhole 14 per drawing 99-382.
6-335
Maximum P310- P345 18" 13,214 5.81 9.0 68
Diameter
NODES P345 TO P365 -OLYMPIC PKWY (SUNBOW II TO VILLAGE 2 WESTERLY ACCESS
ROAD)
Based on a sewage generation rate of 265 gpd/EDU and the maximum EDUs shown in
Tables I-1 and I-2 of this appendix, the 18-inch diameter pipe from node P345~ to P36523
is sized adequately for the design flows. The pipe slope ranges between 0.6% and 0.83%
according to the plans. The design capacity of the pipe at 0.6% slope and 85% full pipe
flow, using Manning's equation, is 13,339 EDUs. As shown in the table, there are cases
where the flow may exceed 75% and consequently this reach should be monitored
closely during build-out of the basin.
TABLE I-11
CAPACITY ANALYSIS NODES P34$ TO P365
Maximum P345-P365 13,057 5.74 8.9 84
Diameter
Permanent P345-P365 12,593 5.54 8.6 81%
Diameter
Committed P345-P365 12,312 5.42 8.4 78
Diameter
Built P345- P365 8,289 3.65 5.6 58 %
Diameter
Maximum includes interim flows of 464 EDUs for Village 7.
Permanent excludes interim flows of 464 EDUs for Village 7.
Committed excludes 464 interim EDUs for Village 7 and 281 EDUs for EUC [ha[ are not yet approved.
Remaining capacity a[ dID of.85 is approximately 5,050 EDUs (13,339 EDUs less 8,289 EDUs).
Analysis is based on 1 EDU = 265 gpd.
For DIF purposes, capacity calculated based on n=0.012, peak factor = 1.66 and slope = 0.6%.
The critical reach to monitor is between nodes P34524 and P360zs
~ Node P345 is manhole 14 per drawing 99-382.
~ Node P365 is manhole I S per drawing 99-380.
24 Node P345 is manhole 14 per drawing 99-382.
zs Node P360 is manhole 17 per drawing 99-380.
6-336
NODES P365 TO P405 -OLYMPIC PKWY (VILLAGE 2 WESTERLY ACCESS ROAD TO WEST OF
HERITAGE ROAD)
Based on a sewage generation rate of 265 gpd/EDU and the maximum EDUs shown in
Tables I-i and I-2 of this appendix, the 18-inch diameter pipe from node P36526 to P405~r
is sized adequately for the design flows. The pipe slope ranges between 1.01% and 3.36%
according to the plans. The design capacity of the pipe at 1.01% slope cnd 85% full pipe
flow, using Manning's equation, is 17,304 EDUs. As shown in the table, this reach of sewer
pipe is adequate for build out of the basin.
TABLEI.12
CAPACITY ANALYSIS NODES P365 TO P405
12,335 5.43 8.4
Maximum P365-P405 64°/
Diameter
11,871 5.22 8.1
Permanent P365-P405 63
Diameter
Committed P365-P405 18" 11,590 5.10 7.9 61%
Diameter
8,289 3.65 5.6
Built P365- P408 50
Diameter
Maximum includes interim flows of 464 EDUs for Village 7.
Permanent excludes interim flows of 464 EDUs for Village 7.
Committed excludes 464 interim ED Us for Village 7 and 281 EDUs for EUC that are no[ yet approved.
Remaining capacity at d/D of .85 is approximately 9,076 EDUs (17,304 EDUs less 8,289 EDUs).
Analysis is based on 1 EDU = 265 gpd.
For DIF purposes, capacity calculated based on n = 0.01 Z, peak factor = 1.66 and slope a 1.01 %.
zs Node P365 is manhole 18 per drawing 99-380.
27 Node P405 is manhole 26 per drawing 99-374.
6-337
NODES P405 TO P410 -OLYMPIC PARKWAY (AT HERITAGE ROAD)
Based on a sewage generation rate of 265 gpd/EDU and the maximum EDUs shown in
Tables I-1 and I-2 of this appendix, the 21-inch diameter pipe from node P40528 to P410zs
is sized adequately for the design flows. The pipe slope is o.b% according to the plans.
The design capacity of the pipe at 0.6% slope and 85% full pipe flow, using Manning's
equation, is 13,339 EDUs. As shown in the table, only under the Maximum flow scenario,
with temporarily diverted flows (464 EDUs from Village 7), would the flow slightly exceed
75% and consequently this reach is not critical and does not need to be monitored.
TABLET-13
CAPACITY ANALYSIS NODES P405 TO P410
Maximum P405-P410 11,81' 5.20 8.0 76
Diameter
Permitted P405-P410 11,351 4.99 7.7 73
Diameter
Committed P405-P410 11,070 4.87 7.5 77%
Diameter
Built P405- P410 7,770 3.42 5.3 55
Diameter
Maximum includes interim flows of 464 EDUs for Village 7.
Permanent excludes interim flows of 464 EDUs for Village 7.
Committed excludes 464 interim ED Us for Village 7 and 281 EDUs for EUC that are not yet approved.
Remaining capacity at d/D of .85 is approximately 5,569 EDUs (73,339 EDUs less 7,770 EDUs).
Analysis is based on 7 EDU = 265 gpd.
For DIF purposes, capacity calculated based on n=0.072, peak factor = 1.66 and slope = 0.6%.
ze Node P405 is manhole 26 per drawing 99-374.
s9 Node P410 is manhole 27 per drawing 99-374.
6-338
UPSTREAM OF NODE P410 -OLYMPIC PKWY (EAST OF HERITAGE ROAD TO SR 125)
Based on a sewage generation rate of 265 gpd/EDU and the maximum EDUs shown in
Tables I-1 and I-2 of this appendix, the 18-inch diameter pipe upstream of node P410~ is
sized adequately for the design flows. The pipe slope ranges between 0.6% and 6.2%
according to the plans. The design capacity of the pipe at 0.6% slope and 85% full pipe
flow, using Manning's equation, is 13,339 EDUs. As shown in the table, the reach of sewer
pipe upsfream of Heritage Road to SR 125 is adequate for build out of the basin.
TABLET-14
CAPACITY ANALYSIS UPSTREAM OF NODE P410
Maximum P410 10,650 4.69 7.3 70%
Diameter
Permanent P410 10'167 4.46 6.9 67°/
Diameter
Committed P410 9'906 4.36 6.7 65%
Diameter
Built P410 18" 6,605 2.91 4.5 51
Diameter
Maximum includes interim flows of 464 EDUs for Village 7.
Permanent excludes interim flows of 464 EDUs for Village 7.
Committed excludes 464 interim EDUs for Village 7 and 281 EDUs for EUC that are no[ ye[ approved.
Remaining capacity at d/D of .85 is approximately 6,733 ED Us (13,339 EDUs less 6,605 EDUs).
Analysis is based on 1 EDU = Z65 gpd.
For DIF purposes, capacity calculated based on n = 0.012, peak factor = 1.66 and slope = 0.6 %.
~ Node P410 is manhole 27 per drawing 99-374.
6-339
MISCELLANEOUS
In Oleander Avenue and in Melrose Drive, 8-inch diameter sewer mains connect to the
Poggi Canyon Interceptor sewer. There may be a possibility to reconnect these lines to
the Date-Faivre sewer reducing the overall flows going through the Poggi Canyon
Interceptor sewer. This alternative should be explored should actual flow data indicate
that upgrades are needed to the Poggi Canyon Interceptor sewer downstream of node
P230, in Oleander Avenue.
6-340
Appendix J
Fufure Revenues -From Consfrucfed Projects
Prepared 3-ZO-08~
- De lopment EDUS Payment Pending Notes
Sunbow II
Planning Areas 274.3 $ 109,720 No record of payment and/or type (credit v.
cash/check is unknown
- park 18.0 7,200 City fee
Elementary School' 32.1 12.840 School District fee
Fire Station 13.7 5480 City fee
Subtotal 338.1 $ 135,240
Otay Ranch Village 1 West
park $ - Assumed Credit from CFD 99-1.
Otay Ranch Village 1 $ - NA
Otay Ranch Village 5
- CPF $ - Un-built CPF site assumed credit from CFD 99-1.
Otay Ranch Village 1/8 ~MCMillin~
park $ - Assumed Credit from CFD 97-3.
Eastlake Greens/Land Swap
Park APN 643-033-O1 Assumed Existing
Elementary School Assumed Existing
- High School Assumed Existing
- Subtotal 0 $ -
EUC $ - NA
Freeway Commercial $ - NA
Village 7
High School
- Elementary School
Subtotal 0 $ - Interim Flows not required }o pay
Village 6
Elementary School° 42.9 $ 17.160 School District Fee
village 2
High School' 214.2 $ 85,680 School District fee
Fire Station 1~ $ 6.080 City fee
Subtotal 229.4 $ 91,760
TOTAL 610.4 $ 244,160
' EDUS based on 1997 Basin Plan; Ordinance is 3.6 EDUS/acre.
~ EDUS based on 800 students at .0536 EDU/student.
s EDUS based on 3,000 students of .0714 EDU/student.
a Sunbow II figure includes the 45.3 EDUS for medical parcel.
6-343
SBVPeF
~Ib,.,F
E..bxeb.e
Cenb~
~..
Legend
CFF ^ICb4Kb
~ PryPi Canyx 6eeb
o ex.bPe..ee~e-.
R::~:: ~: PryorE HSYn FbwMe
~~~ Ax FbebTw Brie
Sxw MSln
Nd FPV1MPapy qF
IM a Perl G Pappl bF - IAYer fanlnxb~
Wetl~IFUb
Ibde Ninbs ps EO/%1P
Fa1MUk/I. exM IMertm
Nqc EUC ibwe lMAee b e]E Eelle
M
LIm a Llao q
r® N
Poggl Canyon Basin
PMC
-~~
Exhibit A- Pogei Basin Benefit Area
Exhibit B- Poggi Canyon Sewer Extension
a+uu°v~su
~~~~ ~~~~
C `~,
~/ ern- ~ C~~2~~C~~.'~/ ~ C
0~'-~~~~,a~ ~ -~ ~ C
~ ~ ~~ ~J
~-~~~ ~' ~
~ ~o ~
~ ---~ ~
a~~ ~--~~ ~ ~~
~~h~ ~ ~ 2c~ ~ ~~\'
~~ ~
~~ ~'' Sewer Pump Station
,~/ ~- ~ ~ to be Decommissioned ~ n (`
1J
\\ \\~ ~~ I Reach1 O~„O~j /
~ 1 ~~ ~ ~ ~
I~
II I~ ~ \ ~ Reach 2
`~~ Poggi Canyon Extension. `~~
1 ~ ih Olympic Pkwy ~ ~\V'J
~, ~ ~ ~ ~~~
~ `~
~~~ ~~O ~O
~~ o0Q ~ ~%
~o~ ~
~~ ~~~~
~~~~~~
~ = l~ ~
RESOLUTION NO. 2009-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING THE "POGGI CANYON BASIN
GRAVITY SEWER DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE UPDATE"
REPORT
WHEREAS, on November 19, 1997, Wilson Engineering submitted the Poggi Canyon
Basin Gravity Sewer Basin Plan evaluating the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin and recommending
the construction of approximately 5.5 miles of sewer line to convey flows from the upstream
portions of the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin to the Salt Creek Interceptor in Main Street just west
of Melrose Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin Development Impact Fee was established on
December 9, 1997 by Ordinance 2716 to facilitate the construction of the Poggi Canyon Gravity
Sewer Interceptor, which is primarily needed to provide sewer service to properties within the
Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin; and
WHEREAS, the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin Development Impact Fee has not been
updated to reflect new land-use approvals since being established in 1997. A revised
engineering analysis of the basin is required to identify sewer facilities that need to be
constructed to serve future development within the basin; and
WHEREAS, in Apri12009, PMC Consultants finalized the "Poggi Canyon Basin Gravity
Sewer Development Impact Fee Update" (2009 Poggi DIF Update) in order to: a) add new
improvements to the list of DIF eligible facilities; b) ensure fees aze fairly and equitably
distributed among the remaining properties within the benefit azea; c) ensure sufficient funding is
available to complete the required improvements; and d) ensure updated fund balance and land
use projections aze reflected in the Poggi DIF program; and
WHEREAS, staff notified major developers within the Poggi Canyon basin of the
proposed 2009 Poggi DIF Update via e-mail and conventional mail, made the report available to
the general public on the City's Wastewater Engineering webpage, and received no comments or
questions regazding the findings of the report; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby accept the "Poggi Canyon Basin Gravity Sewer Development Impact Fee
Update" Report.
Presented by
Richazd A. Hopkins
Director of Public Works
6-346
Ordinance
Page 1
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AMENDING ORDINANCE 2716 TO UPDATE THE POGGI CANYON SEWER
BASIN DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE TO PAY FOR SEWER IMPROVEMENTS
WITHIN THE POGGI CANYON SEWER BASIN AS A CONDITION OF ISSUANCE
OF BUILDING PERMITS.
WHEREAS, the City's General Plan Land Use and Public Facilities Elements
require that adequate public facilities be available to accommodate increased population
created by new development; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that new development within certain
azeas within the City of Chula Vista as identified in this ordinance, will create adverse
impacts on certain existing public facilities which must be mitigated by the financing and
construction of those facilities identified in this ordinance; and
WHEREAS, developers of land within the City aze required to mitigate the burden
created by their development by the construction or improvement of those facilities
needed to provide service to their respective developments or by the payment of a fee to
finance their fair shaze portion of the total cost of such facilities; and
WHEREAS, development within the City contributes to the cumulative burden on
various sewer facilities in direct relationship to the amount of population generated by the
development or the gross acreage of the commercial or industrial land in the
development; and
WHEREAS, the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin ("Basin") is that area of land within the
City of Chula Vista which wastewater will flow by gravity from Poggi Canyon into the
Main Street Basin; and
WHEREAS, on December 9, 1997, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
adopted Ordinance No. 2716 establishing a Development Impact Fee to pay for sewer
improvements within the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin as a condition of issuance of
building permits; and
WHEREAS, PMC Consultants has prepared the update to the Poggi Canyon
Sewer Basin Plan ("Report") dated Apri12009; and
WHEREAS, said Report includes an estimate of ultimate sewer flows anticipated
from development within the Poggi Canyon Basin, recommends sewer facilities needed
to transport these flows, and establishes a fee payable by persons obtaining building
permits for developments within these basins benefiting from the construction of these
facilities; and
6-347
Ordinance
Page 2
WHEREAS, on May 11, 2009, City staff notified major developers of the proposed
Poggi DIF Update via a-mail and conventional mail, and asked developers to provide
comments on the Report and City staffs recommendations for amending the Poggi
Canyon Sewer Basin Development Impact Fee ("Impact Fee"); and
WHEREAS, the City's Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the
proposed activity for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
and has determined that the activity is not a "Project" as defined under Section 15378 (b)
(4) [Creation of funding mechanisms] 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; and
WHEREAS, on June 16, 2009 a Public Hearing was held before the City Council to
provide an opportunity for interested persons to be heazd on the approval of the Report
and revising of the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin Development Impact Fee; and
WHEREAS, the City Council determined, based upon the evidence presented at the
Public Hearing, including, but not limited to, the Report and other information received
by the City Council in the course of its business, that imposition of the Impact Fee on all
developments within the Poggi Canyon Basin in the City of Chula Vista for which
building permits have not yet been issued is necessary in order to protect the public safety
and welfaze and to ensure effective implementation of the City's General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the amount of the Impact Fee
levied by this ordinance does not exceed the estimated cost of providing the public
facilities identified by the Report.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Ordinance 2716 is hereby amended to read as follows:
SECTION 1. Environmental Review
That the activity will have no significant environmental impacts, and therefore is not
subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
SECTION 2. Approval of Report.
The City Council has independently reviewed and approved the Report herewith
presented, and finds that it is fair, reasonable and equitable to all parties, and herewith
adopts same in the form on file with the City Clerk, known as the update to the Poggi
Canyon Sewer Basin Plan, dated Apri12009, a copy of which is on file in the office of the
City Clerk and the City Engineer.
SECTION 3. "Facilities".
6-348
Ordinance
Page 3
The facilities which aze subject matter of the impact Fee are fully described in Table 5-2
of the Report on page 5-3, attached as Exhibit "A", and incorporated herein by this
reference, ("Facilities"), all of which Facilities may be modified by the City Council from
time to time by resolution. The locations at which the Facilities will be constructed are
shown on Figure 2, which is included in the Report. The City Council may modify or
amend the list of projects herein considered to be part of the Facilities by written
resolution in order to maintain compliance with the City's Capital Improvement Program
or to reflect changes inland development and estimated and actual wastewater flow.
SECTION 4. Territory to Which Fee Is Applicable.
The azea of the City of Chula Vista to which the Impact Fee herein established shall be
applicable is set forth on Figure 2 of the Report, "", and is generally described herein as
the "Territory."
SECTION 5. Purpose.
The purpose of this ordinance is to provide the necessazy financing to construct the
Facilities within the areas shown in Figure 2 of the Report , in accordance with the City's
General Plan.
SECTION 6. Establishment of Fee.
The Impact Fee, to be expressed on a per Equivalent Dwelling Unit ("EDU") basis, and
payable prior to the issuance of building permits for development projects within the
Territory, has been established to pay for the Facilities.
SECTION 7. Due on Issuance of Building Permit.
The Impact Fee shall be paid in cash upon the issuance of a building permit. Eazly
payment is not permitted. No building permit shall be issued for development projects
within the Territory unless the developer has paid the Impact Fee imposed by this
Ordinance.
SECTION 8. Determination of Equivalent Dwelling Units.
Each single family detached dwelling or single family attached dwelling shall be
considered one EDU for purposes of this Impact Fee. Each unit within amulti-family
dwelling shall be considered 0.75 EDU. Every other commercial, industrial, non-profit,
public or quasi-public, or other usage shall be charged at a rate calculated in accordance
with the method for estimating EDUs set forth in Exhibit "B", Sewer Benefit Area Fees
Based on Land Use Categories.
SECTION 9. Time to Determine Amount Due; Advance Payment Prohibited.
6-349
Ordinance
Page 4
The Impact Fee for each development shall be calculated at the time of building permit
issuance and shall be the amount as indicated at that time and not when the tentative map
or final map was granted or applied for, or when the building permit plan check was
conducted, or when application was made for the building permit.
SECTION 10. Purpose and Use of Fee.
The purpose of the Impact Fee is to pay for the planning, design, construction and/or
financing (including the cost of interest and other financing costs as appropriate) of the
Facilities, or reimbursement to the City or, at the discretion of the City if approved in
advance in writing, to other third parties for advancing costs actually incurred for
planning, designing, constructing, or financing the Facilities. Any use of the Impact Fee
shall receive the advance consent of the City Council and be used in a manner consistent
with the purpose of the Impact Fee.
SECTION 11. Amount of Fee; Amendment to the Master Fee Schedule
The Impact Fee shall be calculated at the rate of $265 per EDU. Chapter XVI, Other
Fees, of the Master Fee Schedule is hereby amended to add Section D, which shall read
as follows:
"D. Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin Development Impact Fee
This section is intended to memorialize the key provisions of Ordinance
No. 2716, and any amendments thereto, but said Ordinance govems over
the provisions of the Master Fee Schedule, except with respect to changes
permitted by resolution under Section 11 D(d). For example, in the event
of a conflict in interpretation between the Master Fee Schedule and the
Ordinance, or in the event that there are additional rules applicable to the
imposition of the Impact Fee, the language of the Ordinance govems.
a. Territory to which Fee Applicable.
The area of the City of Chula Vista to which the Impact Fee herein
established shall be applicable is set forth in Figure 2 of the Poggi Canyon
Basin Gravity Sewer Development Impact Fee Update dated April, 2009,
and is generally described as the Poggi Canyon Basin.
b. Rate per EDU.
The Impact Fee shall be calculated at the rate of $265 per EDU, which rate
shall be adjusted from time to time by the City Council.
c. EDU Calculation.
6-350
Ordinance
Page 5
Each single family detached dwelling or single family attached dwelling
shall be considered one EDU for purposes of this Impact Fee. Each unit
within amulti- family dwelling shall be considered 0.75 EDU. Every
other commercial, industrial, non-profit, public or quasi-public, or other
usage shall be charged at a rate calculated in accordance with the method
for estimating EDUs, attached as Exhibit "B", "Sewer Benefit Area Fees
Based on Land Use Categories".
d. When Payable.
The Impact Fee shall be paid in cash not later than immediately prior to
the issuance of a building permit."
The City Council shall review the amount of the impact Fee annually or
from time to time. The City Council may, at such reviews, adjust the
amount of this Impact Fee as necessary to assure construction and
operation of the Facilities. The reasons for which adjustments may be
made include, but aze not limited to, the following: changes in the costs of
the Facilities as may be reflected by such index as the Council deems
appropriate, such as the Engineering-News Record Construction Cost
Index (ENR-CCI); changes in the type, size, location or cost of the
Facilities to be financed by the Impact Fee; changes in land use in the
City's General Plan; other sound engineering, financing and planning
information. Adjustments to the above Impact Fee may be made by
resolution amending the Master Fee Schedule.
SECTION 12. Authority for Accounting and Expenditures
The proceeds collected from the imposition of the Impact Fee shall be deposited into a
public facility financing fund ("Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin Benefit Area Fee Fund", or
alternatively herein "Fund") which is hereby created and shall be expended only for the
purposes set Forth in this ordinance.
The Director of Finance is authorized to establish various accounts within the Fund for
the Facilities identified in this ordinance and to periodically make expenditures from the
Fund for the purposes set forth herein in accordance with the facilities phasing plan or
capital improvement plan adopted by the City Council.
SECTION 13. Findings
Based on all written oral testimony at the hearing on the amendment to the Development
Impact Fee, including the Report, the City Council hereby finds the following:
A. The establishment of the Impact Fee is necessary to protect the public safety and
welfare and to ensure the effective implementation of the City's General Plan.
6-351
Ordinance
Page 6
B. The Impact Fee is necessary to ensure that funds will be available for the
construction of the Facilities concurrent with the need for these Facilities and to ensure
certainty in the capital facilities budgeting for growth impacted public facilities.
C. The amount of the fee levied by this ordinance does not exceed the estimated cost
of providing the Facilities for which the fee is collected.
D. New development projects within the Territory will generate a significant amount
of wastewater that current sewer facilities can not service, therefore construction of the
Facilities will be needed to service new development projects.
E. That there is a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facility
and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed and the amount of the
fee is roughly proportional thereto.
SECTION 14. Impact Fee Additional to other Fees and Charges.
The Impact Fee established by this section is in addition to the requirements imposed by
other City laws, policies or regulations relating to the construction or the financing of the
construction of public improvements within subdivisions or developments.
SECTION I5. Mandatory Construction of a Portion of the Facilities; Duty to Tender
Reimbursement Offer.
Whenever a developer is required as a condition of approval of a development permit to
construct or cause the construction of the Facilities or a portion thereof, the City may
require the developer to install the Facilities according to design specifications approved
by the City and in the size or capacity necessary to accommodate estimated ultimate flow
as indicated in the Plan and subsequent amendments. If such a requirement is imposed,
the City shall offer, at the City's option, to reimburse the developer from the Fund either
in cash or over time as Fees are collected, or give a credit against the Impact Fee levied
by this Ordinance or some combination thereof, in the amount of the costs incurred by the
developer that exceeds their contribution to such Facilities as required by this Ordinance,
for the design and construction of the Facility not to exceed the estimated cost of that
particular Facility as included in the calculation and updating of the Impact Fee. The City
may update the Impact Fee calculation as City deems appropriate prior to making such
offer. This duty to offer to give credit or reimbursement shall be independent of the
developer's obligation to pay the Impact Fee.
SECTION 16. Voluntary Construction of a Portion of the Facilities; Duty of City to
Tender Reimbursement Offer.
If a developer is willing and agrees in writing to design and construct a portion of the
Facilities in conjunction with the prosecution of a development project within the
Territory, the City may, as part of a written agreement, reimburse the developer from the
Fund either in cash or over time as Fees aze collected, or give a credit against the Impact
6-352
Ordinance
Page 7
Fee levied by this Ordinance or some combination thereof, in the amount of the costs
incurred by the developer that exceeds their contribution to such Facilities as required by
this Ordinance, for the design and construction of the Facility not to exceed the estimated
cost of that particular Facility as included in the calculation and updating of the Impact
Fee and in an amount agreed to in advance of their expenditure in writing by the City.
The City may update the impact Fee calculation as City deems appropriate prior to
making such offer. This duty to extend credits or offer reimbursement shall be
independent of the developer's obligation to pay the Impact Fee.
SECTION 17. Procedure for Entitlement to Reimbursement Offer.
The City's duty to extend a reimbursement offer to a developer pursuant to Section I S or
16 above shall be conditioned on the developer complying with the terms and conditions
of this section:
a. Written authorization shall be requested by the developer from the City
and issued by the City Council by written resolution before developer may
incur any costs eligible for reimbursement relating to the construction of
the Facilities, excluding any work .attributable to a specific subdivision
project.
b. The request for authorization shall contain the following information, and
such other information as may from time to time be requested by the City:
(1) Detailed descriptions of the work to be conducted by the developer
with the preliminazy cost estimate.
o. If the Council grants authorization, it shall be by written agreement with
the Developer, and on the following conditions among such other
conditions as the Council may from time to time impose:
(1) Developer shall prepare all plans and specifications and submit
same to the City for approval;
(2) Developer shall secure and dedicate any right-of--way required for
the improvement work;
(3) Developer shall secure all required permits and environmental
cleazances necessary for construction of the improvements;
(4) Developer shall provide performance bonds in a form and amount,
and with a surety satisfactory to the City;
(5) Developer shall pay all City fees and costs.
6-353
Ordinance
Page 8
(6) The City shall be held harmless and indemnified, and upon
demand by the City, defended by the developer for any of the costs
and liabilities associated with the improvements.
(7) The developer shall advance all necessary funds for the
improvements, including design and construction. The City will
not be responsible for any of the costs of constructing the facilities.
(8) The developer shall secure at least three (3) qualified bids for work
to be done. The construction contract shall be granted to the lowest
qualified bidder. Any claims for additional payment for extra work
or charges during construction shall be justified and shall be
documented to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
(9) The developer shall provide a detailed cost estimate which
itemizes those costs of the construction attributable to the
improvements. The estimate is preliminary and subject to final
determination by the Director of Public Works upon completion of
the Public Facility Project.
(10) The agreement may provide that upon determination of satisfactory
incremental completion of the public facility project, as approved
and certified by the Director of Public Works, the City may pay the
developer progress payments in an amount not to exceed 75
percent of the estimated cost of the construction completed to the
time of the progress payment but shall provide in such case for the
retention of 25% of such costs until issuance by the City of a
Notice of Completion.
(11) The agreement may provide that any funds owed to the developer
as reimbursements may be applied to the developer's obligations to
pay the Impact Fee for building permits to be applied for in the
future.
(12) When all work has been completed to the satisfaction of the City,
the developer shall submit verification of payments made for the
construction of the project to the City. The Director of Public
Works shall make the final determination on expenditures which
aze eligible for reimbursement.
(13) After final determination of expenditures eligible for
reimbursement has been made by the Public Works Director, the
parties may agree to offset the developer's duty to pay Impact Fees
required by this ordinance against the City's duty to reimburse the
developer.
6-354
Ordinance
Page 9
(14) If, after offset if any, funds aze due the developer under this
section, the City may at its option, reimburse the developer from
the Fund either in cash or over time as Fees aze collected, or give a
credit against the Impact Fee levied by this Ordinance or some
combination thereof, in the amount of the costs incurred by the
developer that exceeds their required contribution to such Facilities
as required by this Ordinance, for the design and construction of
the Facility not to exceed the estimated cost of that particulaz
Facility as included in the calculation and updating of the Impact
Fee and in an amount agreed to in advance of their expenditure in
writing by the City.
SECTION 18. Procedure for Fee Modification.
Any developer who, because of the nature or type of uses proposed for a development
project, contends that application of the Impact Fee imposed by this ordinance is
unconstitutional or unrelated to mitigation of the burdens of the development, may apply
to the City Council for a waiver or modification of the Impact Fee or the manner in which
it is calculated. The application shall be made in writing and filed with the City Clerk not
later than ten (10) days after notice is given of the public hearing on the development
permit application for the project, or if no development permit is required, at the time of
the filing of the building permit application. The application shall state in detail the
factual basis for the claim of waiver or modification, and shall provide an engineering
and accounting report showing the overall impact on the DIF and the ability of the City to
complete construction of the Facilities by making the modification requested by the
applicant. The City Council shall make reasonable efforts to consider the application
within sixty (60) days after its filing. The decision of the City Council shall be final. The
procedure provided by this section is additional to any other procedure authorized by law
for protection or challenging the Impact Fee imposed by this ordinance.
SECTION 19. Fee Applicable to Public Agencies.
Development projects by public agencies, including schools, shall not be exempt from the
provisions of the Impact Fee.
SECTION 20. Assessment District.
If any assessment or special taxing district is established to design, construct and pay for
any or all of the Facilities ("Work Alternatively Financed"), the owner or developer of a
project may apply to the City Council for reimbursement from the Fund or a credit in an
amount equal to that portion of the cost included in the calculation of the Impact Fee
attributable to the Work Alternatively Financed. In this regard, the amount of the
reimbursement shall be based on the costs included in the Report, as amended from time
to time, and therefore, will not include any portion of the fmancing costs associated with
the formation of the assessment or other special taxing district.
6-355
Ordinance
Page 10
SECTION 21. Expiration of this Ordinance.
This ordinance shall be of no further force and effect when the City Council determines
that the amount of Impact Fees which have been collected reaches an amount equal to the
cost of the Facilities.
SECTION 22. Time Limit and Procedure for Fee Protest and Legal Action.
Any fee protest or legal action, including those to attack, review, set aside, void or annul
this ordinance, shall be conducted in the manner and within the time limitations set forth
in Chapter 9 of the Mitigation Fee Act, title Protests, Legal Actions and Audits, starting
with Government Code Section 66020.
SECTION 23. Other Not Previously Defined Terms.
For the purposes of this ordinance, the following words or phrases shall be construed as
defined in this Section, unless from the context it appeazs that a different meaning is
intended.
(a) "Building Permit" means a permit required by and issued pursuant to the
Uniform Building Code as adopted by reference by this City.
(b) "Developer" means the owner or developer of a development.
(c) "Development Permit" means any discretionary permit, entitlement or
approval for a development project issued under any zoning or subdivision
ordinance of the City.
(d) "Development Project" or "Development" means any activity described in
Section 66000 of the State Government Code.
(e) "Single Family Attached Dwelling" means a single family dwelling
attached to another single family dwelling, with each dwelling on its own
lot.
SECTION 24. Effective Date.
This ordinance shall become effective sixty (60) days after its second reading and
adoption.
Presented by
Richazd A. Hopkins
Director of Public Works
6-356
Ordinance
Page 11
Exhibits:
A) Program Costs, Table 5-2 from Poggi Canyon Gravity Sewer Development
Impact Fee Update report dated Apri12009.
B) Development Impact Fee Per Land Use Category from Poggi Canyon Gravity
Sewer Development Impact Fee Update report dated Apri12009.
J:\EngineedSEWER\2006\PoggiCynUpdateWgenda\Striked ORDINANCE 2716.Ip.dw
6-357
Exhibit A- ProLram Costs
Constructed ProjeR Costs
Reaches 20t-204, 206.207' Ayres/Ciry 51,046,032
Reach 205 Gty/DIF 1,434,9t8
Reaches 208.213' Ayres 136,205
Reach 214 to 277 Otay Ranch Co. 638,748
Reach 218 to 219 McMillin 412,938
Reach 219 to 221 Otay Rands Co. 283,190
Poggi Extension in Olympic Pkwy' Easdake 24,000
Poggi Exension` Eastlake 1,094.707
Subrotal 41,070,738
Future Construction Costs
P253R-P270 Olympic Parkway west of BrandywineAVe. 5434,500
P270 - P305 Olympic Parkway east of Brandywine Ave. 5487,800
Subrotal 5916,300
Miscellaneous Cost
Updates/staff adminisaationt 5306,200
Project Totat 56,293,238
Less Gty contribution (Reaches 201-204, 206-207)` 5(1,046.0321
DI F Total 55,247,206
1 Ayres paymentsdated lLl6l98, t/25!00, iL18/00, and 3/8/01-51,042,520. The S1,046,032 it basedan S1,7S6, 440 tnmhrin
from Trunk Sewer Caplral Reserve Fund feu 5710,408 vans(gned hack.
2 Flnal audit wmpleted (or St 14632 Audit is pending for CO 99 for 572,756. Includes 9.5% esdma[ed sort casts an roul of
5124,388.
3 Thit segment is From SR 725 ro Staticrt 246+35 as shown on Dwg 02024A4. The cosu are based on the change order information
and were tnidally funded by CFD 061. Reimbursement ro CFD O61 is due.
4 Eastlake reimbursed from Trunk Sewer Gpital Reserve Fund in hla2h 2008. Portion !in Olympic Parkway from SR t 25 to the land
+k'aP1 funded in CFD 061 in the amount of 524,000. Portion in Eastlake Parkway it no[ DIF eligible and tr eli8i6fe ro 6e funded
via CFD 061.
S Administration vests inrJude future casts of S 120,000.
6 Represents cos[ d reaches 201204 and 206.207. In r 997, it was estimated ro be S 1, 756,440.
6-358
Exhibit B-Sewer Benefit Area Fees Based on Land Use Cate ories
., ~ .~ ..
nr~~',~~
~
.
~;~
_,~. -wa~eFCaRaf~4~.~Et7C~;Faetao-~•'~,/;1~.
~.
,~
~~
- ~
Residential-3F0 263 gpd/DU 1.00/DU
Residential-MFD 799 gpolDU 0.73/DU
Commerdal/Industrial 2,500 gpd/aece 9.43/aae
Multl-Story Commercial 0.072gpd/sf 0.272/1,000 sf
High School 20 gpd/student O.OB/student
Junior High School 20 gpd/student O.OF!/student
Elementary 13 gpd/student 0.06lstudent
Park 300 gpd/aae 1.89/aae
CPF 2,300 gpd/acre 9.43/aae
gpd: gallon per day
DU: dwelling unit
CAF: communityyurpose facility
SFD: single-family dwelling
MFD: multi-family dwelling
Multistory Commercial: Based on EUC ierhnfca! Sewer Study far high.rise narnresidendal land ores astuming a
floor area ratio of O.E (2,500 gpdper acre . (0.8 x 43,360 sffactU - 0.072 gpd/t0.
6-359
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
~ Uf:.. CIl), OF
'-~CHULA VISTA
6/16/09, Item 7
ITEM TITLE:
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COlJNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ENTERING INTO A PROPERTY USE LICENSE
AGREEMENT WITH VOCATIONAL TRAINING INSTITUTE DBA
PIMA MEDICAL INSTITUTE, IN~~
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC sYJ'
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
CITY MANAGE
ASSIST ANT CITY;
4/5THS VOTE: YES D NO l2J
SUMMARY
The PIMA Medical Institute (PIMA) is seeking to partner with the City ofChula Vista to expand
and improve the Animal Care Facility (ACF). The partners will enter into an agreement which
provides that site improvements be made to the City owned vacant lot next to the ACF and that
PIMA co-locate their veterinary training program with the ACF. In exchange for use of City
land and access to the ACF, PIMA will provide animal care services and equipment that would
otherwise fall to the ACF. To assist the City in funding the necessary improvements to the City
owned lot for PIMA Medical Institute staff is recommending appropriating $375,000 from the
2008 Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds for repayment to the City of Chula Vista of the Agency
Loan., If this item is approved, staff will return to Council/Redevelopment Agency for approval
of this appropriation together with a design build contract.
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 3 categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15303 (c) & (d), New Construction or
Conversion of Small Structures, of the State CEQA Guidelines because the proposed structures
do not exceed 10,000 square feet in floor area and are proposed in a non environmentally
sensitive urbanized area where utilities are readily available to service the needs of the structures
and occupants. Thus, no further environmental review is necessary.
RECOMMENDATION
Council adopt the resolution.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Not applicable.
7-1
6/16/09, Item~
Page 2 of 2
DISCUSSION
The Animal Care Facility continues to struggle with its limited operating budget. The needs of
animal care services continue to increase in a time when departments are being asked to cut
costs.
The PIl\1A Medicallnstitute (PIl\1A) is seeking to partner with the City of Chula Vista to expand
and improve the Animal Care Facility (ACF). PIl\1A is a private educational organization
dedicated to providing medical training at a reasonable cost to its students. PIl\1A approached
the City to enter into a partnership modeled after their arrangements in Clark County Nevada and
in King County Washington. PIl\1A would co-locate their veterinary school at the ACF and in
return provide animal care including spay and neuter surgeries, x-ray services and general
veterinary care.
The partners will enter into an agreement which provides that site improvements be made to the
vacant City owned lot next to the ACF including a modular building, a pet exercise area,
additional parking, security fencing and lighting, and interior furnishings and equipment at both
the modular building and the existing facility (see Attachment I-Conceptual Site Plan). This
partnership provides a way for the City to improve overall animal care services to the public
while at the same time, provides PIl\1A with a way to enhance the educational experience of their
students.
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.
CURRENT FISCAL IMP ACT
Currently, the Redevelopment Agency has approximately $1.4 million available for the issuance
of the 2008 Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds. Of these funds, $375,000 are recommended for
appropriation towards the payment of the Agency's outstanding City loan to then be used for this
project.
Although this proposal will enable the City to provide more animal care services, there is no new
net impact to the General Fund due to the loan repayment from the Agency. The site
improvements are estimated to be $400,000. In addition, PIl\1A will provide the interior
furnishings and equipment for the surgery and x-ray areas at their cost.
ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT
The proposal is for PIl\1A to split the $400,000 cost with the City. The City will invest an initial
$375,000 while PIl\1A will initially invest $25,000 with annual payments to the City for an
additional $175,000 investment over a 10-year period.
ATTACHMENTS
I. Conceptual Site Plan
2. Property Use License Agreement wi Attachments
Prepared by: Rick Ryals. Real Property Manager, Public Works Dept.
M :\Engineer\AGENDA \CAS2009\06~ 16-G9\PIMA License Agreemen t.doc
7-2
.... .
'; -.
'..; ..
..;.'....
';,';:..': .
".
..
'. ' ~,
..
" ...~.~q\G..
....~.. 1'..:7\).,' ,..'
'~'",':''''''::'
... '.. ,'. . '.:. ...... '" ~ .
'. ,.::
'"
. ":>~Q..
if'"
~
"
'.
.~
\
I
/1
~
~
.-:;/
'.' .
..;.....
':..;;
..,
'..';J'.
.'~
~,s:(,~:.~:... .
"f1,J.ML
~
art:1Cas
~:
!1 "put1/l'-
13f--Pb.
cJ
phON ~ 2
r (ZCt.--1 ;./J I JI.A(L 7/
',.'~'
..:,
i:....... ..
.~'"
~.
<;J '.
~.
5'/Iq IN (p
f/'HfHv
f3'--Pd:-.
irA 'f~tJT
,'.: .'
~
.A IT AGHMENT I
./
~... . ..
RESOLUTION NO. 2009-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ENTERING INTO A PROPERTY USE
LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH VOCATIONAL TRAINING
INSTITUTE DBA PINIA MEDICAL INSTITUTE, INC.
WHEREAS, the Chula Vista Animal Care Facility continues to struggle with its
limited operating budget; and
WHEREAS, the needs of animal care services continue to increase in a time when
departments are being asked to cut costs; and
WHEREAS, the PIMA Medical Institute (PIMA) is seeking to partner with the
City of Chula Vista and the Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency (RDA) to expand and
improve the Animal Care Facility (ACF); and
WHEREAS, this partnership provides a way for the City to improve overall
animal care services to the public while at the same time, provides PIMA with a way to
enhance the educational experience of their students; and.
WHEREAS, by contractual agreement, PINIA agrees to reimburse the City for
half of its total costs for tenant improvements ($200,000) which will be repaid over a 10-
year period.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista does hereby enter into a Property Use License Agreement with Vocational
Training Institute DBA Pima Medical Institute, Inc.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
~~ i:)z/"u7'1
Bart Mie eld
City Attorney
Richard A. Hopkins
Director of Public Works
7-4
THE ATTACf-IED AGREEJ\1ENT HAS BEEN REVIEWED
AND APPROVED AS TO FORM BY THE CITY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND WILLBE
FORMALLY SIGNED UPON APPROVAL BY
THE CITY COUNCIL
~/-?
~
-Ci"Mlesfeld
City Attorney
)>CC:~U7 r
Dated: & . ~ - (77
PROPERTY USE LICENSE AGREEJ\1ENT
BY AND BETWEEN
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND
PIMA J\1EDICAL INSTITUTE
FOR THE USE OF CITY OWNED PROPERTY
LOCATED AT
1171 FOURTH AVENUE, CHULA VISTA
7-5
PROPERTY USE LICENSE AGREEMENT
BY AND BETWEEN
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AND
PIMA MEDICAL INSTITUTE
FOR THE USE OF CITY OWNED REAL PROPERTY
LOCATED AT
1171 FOURTH AVENUE
CHULA VISTA
DATED AS OF
7-6
PIMA License Agreement
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
PROPERTY USE LICENSE AGREEMENT
PIMA MEDICAL INSTITUTE
SECTION PARAGRAPH PAGE
SECTION 1: USES
1.01 Premises 1
1.02 Uses 1
1.03 Reservation of Rights 2
SECTION 2: TERM
2.01 Term 2
2.02 Termination 3
2.03 Surrender of Premises 3
SECTION 3: COMPENSATION
3.01 Compensation for Use of Premises 3
3.02 Utilities 3
SECTION 4: INSURANCE RISKS/SECURITY
4.01 Indemnity 3
4.02 Insurance 4
4.03 Accident Reports 6
SECTION 5: TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF OCCUPANCY
5.01 Form of Agreement 6
5.02 Right to Occupy 6
5.03 Hours of Operation 7
5.04 Taxes 7
PIMA License Agreement
7-7
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
PROPERTY USE LICENSE AGREEMENT
PIMA MEDICAL INSTITUTE
SECTION PARAGRAPH PAGE
SECTION 6: IMPROVEMENTS/AL TERATIONS/REPAIRS
6.01 Construction of Premises 7
6.02 Construction at Animal Shelter 7
603 Acceptance of Premises 7
604 Waste, Damage, or Destruction 7
6.05 Maintenance 8
6.06 I mprovementsl Alterations 9
6.07 Liens 9
6.08 Signs 9
6.09 Ownership of Improvements 9
6.10 Breach by Licensee 9
SECTION 7: GENERAL PROVISIONS
7.01 Notices 9
7.02 City Approval 10
7.03 Nondiscrimination 10
7.04 Equal Opportunity 10
7.05 Entire Agreement 11
7.06 Interpretation of the Agreement 11
7.07 Agreement Modification 11
7.08 Attorney's Fees 11
7.09 Assignment and Subletting-No Encumbrance 11
7.10 Defaults and Termination 11
7.11 Other Regulations 12
7.12 Time is of Essence; Provisions Binding on Successors 12
7.13 Section Heading 12
7.14 Gend erlS ingu la r/PI ural 12
7.15 Non-Liability of Officers 12
7.16 Relationship between City and Licensee 12
7.17 Severance 13
7.18 No Decision 13
7.19 Venue 13
SECTION 8: SIGNATURES
8.01 Signatories 13
ii
PIMA License Agreement
7-8
EXHIBITS
Exhibit "A"
Exhibit "B"
Exhibit "C"
Exhibit "D"
Exhibit "E"
iii
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
PROPERTY USE LICENSE AGREEMENT
PIMA MEDICAL INSTITUTE
Sketch of Premises
Payment Schedule
Scope of Veterinary Services
Premises Improvements
Animal Shelter Improvements
PIMA License Agreement
7-9
THIS LICENSE AGREEMENT, hereinafter called "Agreement", dated as of
, solely for identification purposes, is executed between the City of
Chula Vista, a public body corporate and politic, hereinafter called "City", and the Vocational
Training Institutes, Inc DBA PIMA Medical Institute, Inc. a , hereinafter called
"Licensee", to establish terms and conditions of Licensee's use of certain real property owned
by City and to provide terms and conditions of Licensee's occupancy and use of City's property.
The effective date of this Agreement shall be the date this Agreement is approved by the City
("Effective Date").
RECITALS
WHEREAS, City is the legal and equitable owner of that certain vacant real property
located at 1171 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista,California, as more fully described herein below;
and,
WHEREAS, Licensee is the owner and operator of PIMA Medical Institute whose
principle place of business is located at 780 Bay Boulevard, Suite 101 Chula Vista, CA 91910;
and,
WHEREAS, Licensee desires to and has requested permission to use the City's real
property to establish a classroom and lab setting at the Chula Vista Animal Shelter for the
purposes and mutual benefits set forth herein; and,
WHEREAS, City hereby grants to Licensee and Licensee hereby accepts from City a
license to use the City's real property under the terms, covenants, conditions and provisions
contained herein; and
WHEREAS, City hereby acknowledges services provided by Licensee at said real
property as valuable consideration received in return for Licensee's occupation and use of the
City's real property in accordance with the terms, covenants, conditions and provisions set forth
herein below.
AGREEMENT
NOW THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HERETO MUTUALLY AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: USES
1.01 Premises. City hereby permits Licensee to use, in accordance with the terms,
covenants, conditions and provisions hereof, that certain vacant real property located at 1171
Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, County of San Diego, State of California, and more particularly
shown in a sketch thereof marked Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by this reference made part
of this Agreement (the "Premises"). In addition City hereby agrees to permit Licensee access to
and use of City's Animal Shelter Facility for the purposes set forth herein. In return for this
permission, Licensee hereby agrees to act in accordance with and abide by the terms,
covenants, conditions and provisions of this Agreement.
1.02 Uses. It is expressly agreed that the Premises shall be used by Licensee solely
and exclusively for the purpose of establishing a classroom and lab setting for use as a part
of its Veterinary AssistantlTechnician training programs and, as a part of those
1
Pima License Agreement
7-10
programs, obtaining access to shelter animals to gain practical experience with shelter
procedures and to provide veterinary services to shelter animals as set forth herein and for
such other related or incidental purposes as may be first approved in writing by the Chula Vista
City Manager (the "City Manager") and for no other purpose whatsoever.
Additionally, Licensee shall have access to City's Animal Shelter for the following purposes:
1. Access to live shelter animals for the training of student nurses in routine and
basic skills within the guidelines of the Animal Welfare Act and the Institutional
Animal Use Committee per the American Veterinary Medical Association
Committee on Veterinary Tech Education.
2. Access to the shelter surgery unit, anesthesia machines, and oxygen supplies,
when not otherwise used for shelter surgeries, for the purpose of training
students in surgical nursing.
Licensee covenants and agrees to use the Premises only for the above specified purpose and
to diligently pursue said purpose throughout the term hereof. Licensee shall not use or permit
any use of the Premises in any manner that disturbs the City's operation of the Animal Shelter
or the quiet enjoyment of surrounding property owners' use of their property. In the event that
Licensee fails to continuously use the Premises for said purpose, or uses the Premises for
purposes not expressly authorized herein, the Licensee shall be deemed in default under this
Agreement.
1.03 Reservation of RiQhts. City shall not unreasonably or substantially interfere
with Licensee's use of the Premises while Licensee is in possession of the Premises. However,
the City specifically retains the following rights:
a. Subsurface Rights. City hereby reserves all rights, title and interest in any and
all subsurface natural gas, oil, minerals and water on or within the Premises.
b. Easements. City reserves the right to grant and use easements or to establish
and use rights-of-way over, under, along and across the Premises for utilities, thoroughfares, or
access as it deems advisable for the public good.
c. Right to Enter. City has the right to enter the Premises for the purpose of
performing maintenance, inspections, repairs or improvements, or developing municipal
resources and services.
SECTION 2: TERM
2.01 Term. The term of this Agreement shall be for ten (10) years commencing on
the Effective Date of this Agreement. The term of this Agreement may be extended by an
additional five (5) year term upon mutual consent of the parties.
If City for any reason cannot deliver possession of the Premises to Licensee at the
commencement of the term, or if during the term of this Agreement Licensee is dispossessed
for any reason whatsoever, City shall not be liable to Licensee for any loss or damage resulting
therefrom.
2
Pima Uc~nse Agreement
7-11
2.02 Termination. Notwithstanding any other remedies provided by this Agreement,
City has the right, at its sole discretion, to terminate this Agreement upon one hundred-twenty
days (120) days written notice to Licensee. Should City terminate this Agreement for cause as
a result of breach by Licensee, all payments due to City as Set forth in Exhibit "B" "Payment
Schedule" shall be immediately due and payable.
Licensee has the right to terminate this Agreement upon one hundred-twenty days (120) days
written notice to City. Should Licensee terminate this Agreement prior to the expiration date any
and all payments due to City, as set forth in Section 6.01 hereof and the attached Exhibit "B"
shall be immediately due and payable.
2.03 Surrender of Premises. At the expiration or earlier termination of this
Agreement, Licensee shall surrender the Premises to City free and clear of all liens and
encumbrances, except those liens and encumbrances which existed on the date of the
execution of this Agreement by City. The Premises, when surrendered by Licensee, shall be in
a safe and sanitary condition and shall be in as good or better condition as the condition at the
commencement of this Agreement, absent normal wear and tear.
SECTION 3:
COMPENSATION
3.01 Compensation for Use of Premises. Licensee does hereby acknowledge and
agree that providing the services set forth in Exhibit "C" "Scope of Veterinary Services" to the
Chula Vista Animal Shelter, participation in the cost of constructing the necessary improvements
on the Premises, more particularly described in Section 6.01 hereof, maintenance and upkeep
of the Premises, in an attractive, good, neat, and orderly condition by Licensee during the term
of this. Agreement and the construction/installation within the Animal Shelter of those
improvements set forth in Section 6.02 hereof shall be considered material consideration for
City entering into this Agreement. City agrees that these improvements, maintenance and
services are valuable consideration received from Licensee and shall constitute all the property
use payment to be paid by Licensee for its use of the Premises in accordance with the terms,
covenants, conditions and provisions of this Agreement. For convenience only, consideration
as set forth in this Section 3.01 may be referred to as rent.
3.02 Utilities. Licensee agrees to order, obtain, and pay for all Gas and Electric
service and connection charges in connection with the occupation, improvement, maintenance
and upkeep of the Premises. City shall make these services available to the Premises as a part
of the construction set forth in Clause 6.01 hereof. City shall provide and pay for Water Service
to the Premises and all utilities used at the Animal Shelter.
SECTION 4: INSURANCE RISKS/SECURITY
4.01 Indemnity. Licensee hereby indemnifies, defends, and holds the City of Chula
Vista ("City") and its respective directors, officers, employees, officials, volunteers and agents,
harmless from and against any and all liability or claim of liability, loss or expense, including
defense costs and legal fees and claims for damages of any character whatsoever, and any
nature and kind, whether directly or indirectly arising from or connected with an act or omission
of Licensee, or any employee, agent, invitee, contractor, student or volunteer of Licensee, or
3
Pima License Agreement
7-12
any other person acting by or on behalf of Licensee on or about the Premises, or in any way
connected with the Licensee's operations under this Agreement or arising from the performance
of this Agreement including, but not limited to, liability, expense, and claims for: bodily injury,
death, personal injury, or property damage; provided, however, that nothing herein shall relieve
any party indemnified hereunder from liability to the extent that such liability arises from such
party's sole and active negligence or willful misconduct. This indemnity shall not require
payment of a claim by City, or any of their respective directors, officers, employees, or agents
as a condition precedent to the City's or City's recovery hereunder. Licensee's obligation to
indemnify hereunder shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by City or
their respective directors, officers, employees, or agents. Negligent or criminal acts by
members of the public at the Premises shall not be deemed to be the liability or responsibility of
City. This indemnity provision section shall sUNive the expiration or cancellation of this
Agreement for five (5) years past the date of expiration or cancellation.
4.02 Insurance. Licensee shall take out and maintain at all times during the term of this
Agreement the following insurance at its sole expense:
a. Licensee shall maintain the following minimum limits:
General Liability Insurance
Commercial General Liability Insurance covering liability of the Licensee with
respect to all operations to be performed and all obligations assumed by the
Licensee under the temns of this Agreement. Coverage for commercial general
liability shall be at least as broad as Insurance SeNices Office Commercial
General Liability Coverage (Occurrence Form CG 0001). Limits shall be no less
than one million dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence for bodily injury, personal
injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other
fomn with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit
shall apply to the Premises (with the ISO CG 2503, or ISO CG 2504, or insurer's
equivalent endorsement provided to City) or the general aggregate limit shall be
twice the required occurrence limit.
Automobile Liability Insurance
Automotive Liability Insurance covering the liability of Licensee arising out of the
use of all owned, non-owned, and hired vehicles which bear, or are required to
bear, license plates according to the laws of California and which are not covered
under the Licensee's Commercial General Liability insurance. Coverage under
this policy shall have limits of liability of not less than one million dollars
($1,000,000) per occurrence, combined single limit, for bodily injury and property
damage (including loss of use) liability. Coverage shall be at least as broad as
Insurance SeNices Office Automobile Liability Coverage (Form CA 0001),
covering Symbol 1 (any auto).
Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability Insurance
Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability Insurance complying with the
requirements of all applicable laws relating to workers' compensation insurance,
covering or insure all of the Licensee's employees working on or about the
4
Pima License Agreement
7-13
'.
Premises. Limits shall be no less than statutory limits per accident for bodily
injury and disease. By his/her signature hereunder, Licensee certifies that it is
aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code which
require every employer to be insured against liability for workers' compensation
or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code, and
it will comply with such provisions in connection with any work performed on or
about the Premises. Any persons providing services with or on behalf of
Licensee shall be covered by workers' compensation (or qualified self-insurance)
b. All insurance companies affording cover'age to the Licensee shall be required to
add the City of Chula Vista and the City of Chula Vista as "additional insured"
under the insurance policy(s) required in accordance with this Agreement.
Licensee shall furnish (or cause to be furnished) a certificate of insurance
countersigned by an authorized agent of the insurance carrier on a form of the
insurance carrier setting forth the general provisions of the insurance coverage.
This countersigned certificate (and endorsement) shall name the City and the
City, their officers, agents, employees, and authorized volunteers as additional
insured under the policy. Coverage provided hereunder to the City and City as
additional insured by Licensee shall be primary insurance and other insurance
maintained by the City and the City, their officers, agents and/or employees, shall
be excess only and not contributing with insurance provided pursuant this
Section 4.02, and shall contain such provision in the policy(ies), certificate(s)
and/or endorsement(s). The insurance policy or the certificate of insurance shall
contain a waiver of subrogation for the benefit of the City.
C. All insurance companies affording coverage to the Licensee shall be insurance
organizations acceptable to the City, and authorized by the Insurance
Commissioner of the State Department of Insurance to transact business of
insurance in the State of California. Insurance is to be placed with insurers
having a current AM. Best rating of no less than A-, VII or' equivalent or as
otherwise approved by City.
d. All insurance companies affording coverage shall provide thirty (30) days written
notice to the City should the policy be cancelled before the expiration date. For
the purposes of this notice requirement, any material change in the policy prior to
the expiration shall be considered a cancellation.
e. Licensee shall provide evidence of compliance with the insurance requirements
listed above by providing a certificate of insurance, in a form satisfactory to the
General Counsel (City Attorney), concurrently with the submittal of. this
Agreement.
f. Licensee shall provide a substitute certificate of insurance no later than thirty
(30) days prior to the policy expiration date. Failure by the Licensee to provide
such a substitution and extend the policy expiration date shall be considered a
default by Licensee and may subject the Licensee to a termination of this
Agreement.
g. Maintenance of insurance by the Licensee as specified in this Agreement shall in
no way be interpreted as relieving the Licensee of any responsibility whatever
5
Pima LiC!..ense Agreement
7-14.
and the Licensee may carry, at its own expense, such additional insurance as it
deems necessary.
. h. If Licensee fails or refuses to take out and maintain the required insurance, or
fails to provide the proof of coverage, City has the right to obtain the insurance.
Licensee shall reimburse City for the premiums paid with interest at the
maximum allowable legal rate then in effect in California. City shall give notice of
the payment of premiums within thirty (30) days of payment stating the amount
paid, names of the insurer(s), and rate of interest. Said reimbursement and
interest shall be paid by Licensee on the first (1st) day of the month following
the notice of payment by City.
I
i. City, at its discretion, may require the revISion of amounts and coverage at
anytime during the term of this Agreement by giving Licensee sixty (60) days
prior written notice. City's requirements shall be designed to assure protection
from and against the kind and extent of risk existing on the Premises. Licensee
also agrees to obtain any additional insurance required by City for new
improvements, in order to meet the requirements of this Agreement.
j. Notwithstanding the preceding provisions of this Section 4.02, any failure or
refusal by Licensee to take out or maintain insurance as required in this
Agreement, or failure to provide the proof of insurance, shall be deemed a default
under this Agreement and in such event, City may terminate this Agreement
upon three (3) days written notice to Licensee. For the purposes of this
Agreement, the condition to provide the insurance coverage required under this
Section 4.02 may be considered rent.
4.03 Accident Reports. Licensee shall promptly report to City any accident causing
any property damage or any serious injury to persons on or about the Premises. This report
shall contain the names and addresses of the parties involved, a statement of the
circumstances, the date and hour, the names and addresses of any witnesses and other
pertinent information. This report shall be promptly provided to the Chula Vista City Attorney's
Office when completed.
SECTION 5: TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF OCCUPANCY
5.01 Form of AQreement. This Agreement is a license granting conditional
permission to use and occupy real property, as a tenancy or other estate at will, and is not a
lease and shall not be construed as such. Except to the extent otherwise required by law, the
provisions of the California Civil Code relating to the lease of real property shall not apply to this
Agreement. Licensee's interest in the Premises shall not ripen in to a leasehold or fee interest.
5.02 RiQht to OCCUpy. Licensee's right to occupy the Premises may be terminated
by City at any time if Licensee fails to satisfactorily perform the improvement, maintenance, and
upkeep duties or responsibilities of Licensee set forth hereunder. City reserves. the right to
terminate this Agreement as may be provided for elsewhere herein. .
6
Pima License Agreement
7-15
5.03 Hours of Operation.
A. Premises. Permissible hours of operation for the Premises shall be
Monday through Friday 7:00 AM to 10:30 PM.
B. Animal Shelter. Access to the Animal Shelter shall be permitted during
normal Shelter operating hours. After hours access shall be by permitted with
prior approval of the Animal Shelter Manager.
5.04 Taxes. Licensee shall pay, before delinquency, all taxes, assessments, and fees
assessed or levied upon Licensee or the Premises, including the land, any buildings, structures,
machines, equipment, appliances, or other improvements or property of any nature whatsoever
erected, installed, or maintained by Licensee or levied by reason of the business or other
Licensee activities related to the Premises, including any licenses or permits.
Licensee recognizes and agrees that this Agreement may create a possessory interest subject
to property taxation, and that Licensee may be subject to the payment of taxes levied on such
interest, and that Licensee shall pay all such possessory interest taxes prior to their
delinquency.
SECTION 6:
IMPROVEMENTS/AL TERA TIONS/REPAIRS
6.01 Construction of Premises. It is agreed by the parties hereto that City shall
retain a contractor to design and construct all improvements on the Premises as shown on the
attached Exhibit "0". Additionally, City shall provide and install on-site a 32 foot by 60 foot
modular building for use by Licensee as a classroom and laboratory (classroom). Licensee
shall be responsible for all needed modifications, upgrades, repairs and tenant improvements to
the classroom. Licensee agrees to compensate City in the amount of $200,000 for the
construction on premises in accordance with Payment Schedule as set forth in the attached
Exhibit "B".
6.02 Construction at Animal Shelter. Licensee shall be responsible for the
construction and/or installation of those improvements within the Animal Shelter more
particularly described in the attached Exhibit "E". The ownership of these improvements is as
set forth in said exhibit.
6.03 Acceptance of Premises. The Premises is being offered to Licensee in an As-
Is and Where-Is condition without warranty, expressed or implied. Licensee represents and
warrants that it has independently inspected the Premises and made all tests, investigations,
and observations necessary to satisfy itself of the condition of the Premises and all
improvement appurtenant thereto. Licensee acknowledges it is relying solely on such
independent inspection, tests, investigations, and observations in making this Agreement.
Licensee further acknowledges that the Premises are in the condition called for by this
Agreement, and that Licensee does not hold City responsible for any defects in the Premises.
6.04 Waste. DamaQe, or Destruction. Licensee shall give notice to City of any fire or
other damage that occurs on the Premises within forty-eight (48) hours of such fire or damage.
Licensee shall not commit or suffer to be committed' any waste or injury or any public or private
nuisance and the Licensee shall keep the Premises, adjoining sidewalks, and other public
7
Pima License Agreement
7-16.
areas, clean and clear of refuse and obstructions, and to dispose of all garbage, trash, and
rubbish in a manner satisfactory to City. If the Premises shall be damaged by any cause which
puts the Premises into a condition which is not decent, safe, healthy and sanitary, Licensee
agrees to make or cause to be made full repair of said damage and to restore the Premises to
the condition which existed prior to said damage; or, at City's option, and upon receipt of written
demand thereof, Licensee agrees to clear and remove from the Premises all debris resulting
from said damage and repair the Premises in accordance with plans and specifications
previously submitted to City and approved in writing in order to replace in kind and scope the
improvements which existed prior to such damage. Licensee shall be responsible for all costs
incurred in the repair and restoration, or rebuilding of the Premises. City makes no guarantee
nor does it agree to make any repairs at Licensee's request.
In case the Premises are damaged or destroyed by fire or other casualty, or the Premises are
damaged or destroyed so as to make Premises unsafe, unsanitary or unhealthy for use, City
may elect to terminate this Agreement and will provide thirty (30) days notice of termination in
the event of fire damage or destruction.
Licensee shall not cause or permit any hazardous material to be used, stored, transported,
generated, or disposed in or about the Premises by Licensee, Licensee's agents, employees,
contractors, licensees, or invitees. 'Hazardous Material" means any hazardous, toxic, or
infectious substance, material, or waste which is or becomes regulated by any local
governmental entity, the State of California, or the United States government under any law,
regulation or ordinance.
6.05 Maintenance. Licensee agrees to assume full responsibility and cost for the
operation and maintenance of the Premises throughout the term of this Agreement. Licensee
will make customary and usual maintenance necessary to maintain and preserve the Premises,
all improvements, including fencing, adjoining sidewalks, and other public areas, in a decent,
safe, healthy, and sanitary condition satisfactory to City and in compliance with all applicable
laws. Licensee shall remove and lawfully and properly dispose of all garbage, litter, trash,
debris, and rubbish from or about the Premises, adjoining sidewalks, and other public areas, on
a daily basis. All components of the fencing, including but hot limited to posts and rails, shall be
mended/replaced on an as-needed, when-needed basis, using material of similar type and style.
Licensee shall maintain surface on the Premises in a good, neat and orderly manner. Weeds,
tree or shrub branches, leaves, twigs, and other similar debris shall be removed from the
Premises as needed to maintain a neat appearance at all times. Licensee shall provide access
control to the Premises to prevent access and parking of unauthorized vehicles. All
maintenance and other Licensee duties set forth herein shall, during the term hereof, be done at
Licensee's sole cost and expense and City shall not be called upon for any outlay or expense
related thereto.
If at any time during the term of this Agreement, City reasonably determines that the Premises
are not in a decent, safe, healthy, and sanitary condition, City may, at its sole discretion and
option, terminate this Agreement upon written notice to Licensee and regain possession of the
Premises from Licensee. In the event of such termination, or if City elects not to terminate, City
may, upon written notice to Licensee, have any necessary maintenance work done in order to
place the Premises back to a decent, safe, healthy, and sanitary condition at the expense of
Licensee. In such event, City shall provide Licensee written notice and itemized billing showing
the work performed and Licensee shall make payment to City no later than thirty (30) days
after receipt of said notice and billing. The rights reserved in this Section shall not create any
8
Pima License Agreement
7-17
obligations on City or increase obligations elsewhere in this Agreement imposed on City. The
provisions of this Section shall survive the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement.
6.06 Improvements/Alterations. No improvements, structures, or installations except
as provided for herein, shall be constructed on the Premises, and the Premises may not be
altered by Licensee without prior written approval by City. This provision shall not relieve
Licensee of any obligation under this Agreement to maintain the Premises in a decent, safe,
healthy, and sanitary condition, including structural repair and restoration of damaged or worn
improvements. City shall not be called upon to, or be obligated by this Agreement to make or
assume any expense for any existing improvements, repairs or alterations.
6.07 Liens. Licensee shall not, directly or indirectly, create, incur, assume or suffer to
exist any mortgage, pledge, lien, charge, encumbrance, or claim on or with respect to all or any
portion of the Premises without the prior written consent of the City Manager. Licensee shall
promptly, at its own expense, take such action as may be necessary to duly discharge or
remove any such mortgage, pledge, lien, charge, encumbrance or claim on or with respect to all
or any portion of the Premises for which Licensee does not have the prior written consent of the
City Manager.
6.08 Siqns. Licensee shall not erect or display any banners, pennants, flags, posters,
signs, ,decorations, marquees, awnings, or similar devices or advertising on or about the
Premises without the prior written consent of City. If any such unauthorized item is found on the
Premises, Licensee shall remove the item at .its expense within twenty-four (24) hours of
written notice thereof by City, or City may thereupon remove the item at Licensee's cost.
6.09 Ownership of Improvements. Except as noted herein, any and all
improvements, structures, and installations or additions to the Premises now existing or
constructed on the Premises by Licensee shall at Agreement expiration or termin'ation be
deemed to be part of the Premises and shall become, at City's option, City's property, free of all
liens and claims except as otherwise provided in this Agreement.
6.10 Breach bv Licensee. Licensee's refusal or failure to meet its obligations under
this Section 6 shall be deemed a breach of this Agreement, and in such event, City may
terminate this Agreement pursuant to the provision of Section 7,10 or elsewhere herein.
SECTION 7: GENERAL PROVISIONS
7.01 Notices. All notices, demands, requests, consents or other communications
which this Agreement contemplates or authorizes, or requires or permits either party to give to
the other, shall be in writing and shall be personally delivered or mailed, postage prepaid, to the
respective party as follows:
To City:
To Licensee:
City of Chula Vista
City Manager
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
PIMA Medical Institute
Mr. James Volpe, Director
780 Bay Boulevard, Suite 101
Chula Vista, CA 91910
9
Pima License Agreement
7-18
With Copy to:
City of Chula Vista
Department of Public Works/ Engineering
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Attention: Rick Ryals, Real Property Manager
Either party may change its address by notice to the other party as provided herein.
Communications shall be deemed to have been given and received on the first to occur of: (i)
actual receipt at the offices of the party to whom the communication is to be sent, as designated
above, or (ii) three working days following the deposit in the United States Mail of certified mail,
postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the offices of the party to whom the
communication is to be sent, as designated above, or (iii) actual receipt if made by recognized
reliable currier service who maintains a receipt of delivery.
7.02 City Approval. The City Manager shall be the City's authorized representative in
the interpretation and enforcement of all work performed in connection with this Agreement.
The City Manager may delegate authority in connection with this Agreement to the City
Manager's designee(s). For the purposes of directing Licensee in accordance with this
Agreement, which does not result in a change to this Agreement, the City Manager delegates
authority to the Real Property Manager and/or the Director of Public Works/Engineering. For
the purposes of interpretation of and/or changes to this agreement, the City Manager delegates
authority to the City Attorney.
7.03 Nondiscrimination. Licensee agrees not to discriminate in any manner against
or segregation of any person or persons, on account of race, color, religion, sex, familiar status,
national origin, ancestry, age, disability or sexual orientation in the use, occupancy, tenure or
enjoyment of the Premises, nor shall Licensee itself, or any person claiming under or through it,
establish or permit such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation with reference to
the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of the Premises.
7.04 Equal Opportunity. Licensee shall assure applicants are employed and that
employees are treated during employment without regard to race, familial status, color, religion,
sex or national origin. Licensee hereby certify to City that Licensee is in compliance and
throughout the term of this Agreement will comply with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,
as amended, the California Fair Employment Practices Act, and any other applicable Federal,
State and Local law, regulation and policy (including without limitation those adopted by City)
related to equal employment opportunity and affirmative action programs, including any such
law, regulation, and policy hereinafter enacted.
a. Compliance and performance by Licensee of the equal employment opportunity
and affirmative action program provision of this Agreement is an express condition hereof and
any failure by Licensee to so comply and perform shall be a default of this Agreement and City
may exercise any right as provided herein and as otherwise provided by law.
10
Pima Liceri~e Agreement
7-19
7.05 Entire Aqreement. This Agreement comprises the entire integrated
understanding between City and Licensee concerning the use and occupation of the Premises
and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, or agreements. Each party has relied on
its own examination of the Premises, advice from its own attorneys, and the warranties,
representations, and covenants of the Agreement itself.
7.06 Interpretation of the Aqreement. The interpretation, validity and enforcement
of the Agreement shall be governed by and construed under the laws of the State of California.
The Agreement does not limit any other rights or remedies available to City.
a. The Licensee shall be responsible for complying with all Local, State, and
Federal laws whether or not said laws are expressly stated or referred to herein.
b. Should any provision herein be found or deemed to be invalid, the Agreement
shall be construed as not containing such provision, and all other provisions which are
otherwise lawful shall remain in full force and effect, and to this end the provisions of this
Agreement are severable.
c. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties
hereto and their respective successors and assigns.
7.07 Aqreement Modification. This Agreement may not be modified orally or in any
manner other than by an agreement in writing signed by the parties hereto.
7.08 Attorney's Fees. In the event a suit is commenced by City against Licensee to
enforce payment of amounts due, or to enforce any of the terms and conditions hereof, or in
case City shall commence summary action under the laws of the State of California relating to
the unlawful detention of Premises, for forfeit of this Agreement, and the possession of the
Premises, provided City effects a recovery, Licensee shall pay City all reasonable costs
expended in any action, together with a reasonable attorney's fee to be fixed by the court.
Venue for any such suit or action shall be California Superior Court, San Diego County, South
County Branch.
7.09 Assiqnment and Sublettinq-No Encumbrance. This Agreement and any
portion thereof shall not be assigned, transferred, or sublet, nor shall any of the Licensee's
duties be delegated, without the express written consent of City. Any attempt to assign or
delegate this Agreement without the express written consent of City shall be void and of no
force or effect. A consent by City to one assignment, transfer, sublease, or delegation shall not
be deemed to be a consent to any subsequent assignment, transfer, sublease, or delegation.
7.10 Defaults and Termination. If City has a good faith belief that Licensee is not complying
with the terms of this Agreement, City shall give written notice of the default (with reasonable
specifiCity) to Licensee and demand the default to be cured within fifteen (15) days of the
notice. If Licensee is actually in default of this Agreement and fails to cure the default within
fifteen (15) days of the notice, or, if more than fifteen (15) days are reasonably required to
cure the default and Licensee fails to give adequate assurance of due performance within ten
(10) days of the notice, City may terminate this Agreement upon written notice to Licensee
Should City terminate this Agreement under this provision, all payments due to City as Set forth
in Exhibit "8" "Payment Schedule" shall be immediately due and payable.
11
Pima Li~nse Agreement
7-20
City may also terminate this Agreement upon written notice to Licensee in the event that:
a. Licensee has previously been notified by City of Licensee's default under this
Agreement and Licensee, after beginning to cure the default, fails to diligently pursue the cure of
the default to completion; or.
b. Licensee shall voluntarily file or have involuntarily filed against it any petition under
any bankruptcy or insolvency act or law; or
c. Licensee shall be adjudicated a bankruptcy; or
d. Licensee shall make a general assignment for the benefit of creditors.
Upon termination, City may immediately enter and take possession of the Premises.
7.11 Other Requlations. All use of the Premises by Licensee under this Agreement
shall be in accordance with the laws of the United States of America, the State of California, the
County of San Diego, and in accordance with all applicative rules and regulations and
ordinances of the City of Chula Vista now in force, or hereinafter prescribed or promulgated by
resolution or ordinance or,by Local, State or Federal law.
7.12 Time is of Essence: Provisions Bindinq on Successors. Time is of the
essence of all of the terms, covenants and conditions of this Agreement and, except as
otherwise provided herein, all of the terms, covenants and conditions of this Agreement shall
apply to, benefit and bind the successors and assigns of the respective parties, jointly and
individually.
7.13 . Section Headinqs. The Table of Contents and the section headings contained
herein are for convenience in reference and are not intended to define or limit the scope of any
provision thereof. .
7.14 GenderlSinqular/Plural. The neuter gender includes the feminine and
masculine, the masculine includes the feminine and neuter, and the feminine includes the
masculine and neuter, and each includes corporation, partnership, or other legal entity when the
context so requires. The singular number includes the plural whenever the context so requires.
7.15 Non-liability of Officials. No member, official or employee of the City shall be
personally liable to Licensee, its assigns or successors in interest, in the event of any default or
breach by the City, for any amount which may become due to Licensee it's assigns or
successors, or in any obligations under the terms of this Agreement. .
7.16 Relationship between City and Licensee. It is hereby acknowledged that the
relationship between City and Licensee is that of landowner and tenant at will and not that of a
partnership or joint venture and that City and Licensee shall not be deemed or construed for any
purpose to be the agent of the other. Accordingly, except as expressly provided herein, the City
shall have no duties or obligations with respect to the improvement, maintenance or upkeep of
the Premises.
12
Pima Lis:ense Agreement
7-21
7.17 Severance. If any party of this Agreement is invalid by reason of law or
governmental regulation, or if any provisions are waived by the City, the remaining portions of
this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
7.18 No Decision. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be deemed a gift or
dedication of any portion of the Premises to or for the general public or for any public purpose
whatsoever. This Agreement shall be strictly limited to and for the purposes expressed within.
7.19 Venue. If any action at law or in equity is brought to enforce or interpret the
provisions of this Agreement, any litigation concerning this Agreement shall be initiated in the
Superior Court of San Diego County, South County Branch.
REMAINDER OF PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTlONALL Y
[Signatures on Following Page]
13
Pima U~nse Ag reement
7-22
SECTION 8: SIGNATURES
8.01 SiQnatories. The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant
that they have the right, power, legal capacity and authority to enter into and to execute this
Agreement on behalf of the respective legal entities of the Licensee and the City.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto for themselves, their heirs, executors,
administrators, successors, and assigns do hereby agree to the full performance of the
covenants herein contained and have caused this Property Use Agreement to be executed as
of, but not necessarily on, the Effective Date by setting hereunto their signatures herein below.
CITY:
By:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
By:
LICENSEE:
By:
Dated:
NOTARY ACKNOWLEDGMENTS OF LICENSEE'S SIGNATURE(S) MUST BE ATTACHED
14
Pima Uc~nse Agreement
7-23
EXHIBIT" A"
PIMA Use Area
7-24
Exhibit B
Payment Schedule
$200,000
,2009
For value received, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, Vocational
Training Institutes, Inc. dba Pima Medical Institute, Inc. ("Maker") promises to pay to the order of the
City of Chula Vista ("Holder") the principal amount of $200,000. Except as stated below, this amount
will be paid without interest. Payment of principal will be made in six equal annual installments in the
amount of $25,000 each, with the ftrst such installment due July 1,2009 and subsequent installments due
on the same date in each year thereafter, with annual payments of$25,000 until July 1, 2014 and
following with annual payments of$IO,OOO until 2019.
Payments will be made to Holder at 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, Ca. 91910 or such other
place as Holder may from time to time designate.
In the event any payment is not made within ten days following its due date, Maker will be
obligated to Holder for a late payment charge in the amount of 5% of the past due installment. Late
payment charges are due immediately upon accrual. Prepayment may be made in whole or in part at any
time without penalty.
In the event any payment is not made within ten days following its due date, Holder may, upon
ten days written notice to Maker, during which ten days Maker may cure its default, declare the entire
unpaid balance of principal, and any accrued but unpaid late payment charges, to be immediately owing
in full ("Acceleration"). In the event of Acceleration, interest shall accrue on all unpaid amounts at the
rate of 10% per annum from the date of Acceleration through the date payment in full has been received
by Holder.
In the event Maker ceases to occupy the Chula Vista Animal Care Facility ("Shelter") operated
by Holder at 1171 Forth Avenue, Chula Vista, Ca. 91910, the entire unpaid principal balance ofthis note,
and any accrued but unpaid late payment charges, shall be immediately owing in full and shall bear
interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date occupancy ceases through the date payment in full has
been received by Holder.
This note is unsecured.
Maker agrees to pay all costs of collection reasonably incurred by Holder, including attorney's
fees.
Maker:
Vocational Training Institutes, Inc.
dba Pima Medical Institute, Inc.
by
President
7-25
EXHIBIT "e"
Scope of Veterinary Services
The PIMA Medical Institute (PIMA) will provide or make available to the City of Chula
Vista (City) the following services:
1.. Access to and use of radiography equipment including the taking of radiographs
of shelter animals during medical evaluation and treatment.
2. Access to and use of Blood Analyzer including the drawing and processing of
blood samples (CBC panels, General Chemistry panels, routine PCV).
3. Access to and use of Microbiology testing including the sampling of wound and
topical samples to test for the presence of dermatophytes and viral and bacterial
antigens. Results to be verified by supervising instructor or lab manager and
returned to shelter DVMs.
4. Access to and use of Fecal and Urine analysis materials to test for the preserice
of endoparasites and urine abnormalities, as well as ectoparasites.
5. Access to and use of Ophthalmoscope and Tonometer equipment for basic and
routine evaluation of optic senses.
6. Access to and use of Dental scaling and polishing equipment including the
completion of dental prophylaxis on shelter animals by student nurses during the
dental course, and under the direct supervision of PMI staff DVMs.
7. Access to use the PMI classroom occasionally for a meeting, provided that such
use is pre-scheduled and does not interfere with PMI class schedules.
8. Student nurses to complete a specified number of hours at the shelter performing
duties relevant to the veterinary coursework externship.
9. As scheduling permits, student nurses to participate in various shelter activities
aiding in the care and adoption of animals.
10. As scheduling permits, and in the best interest of City, use of PMI staff DVMs to
perform surgical altering of shelter animals during surgical nursing coursework.
11. Other services of basic and routine veterinary nature, as scheduling allows, and
within the scope of the educational process. Commercial treatment of animals
outside the scope of the City animal care and control program and the PMI
educational program is not permitted.
12. The administration of the student educational program and general supervision of
instruction shall be the responsibility of and under the supervision and direction
of PMI.
7-26
Page 1 of2
13. While on City property, PMI staff and externs shall, at all time, abide by all
Bylaws, policies, rules and regulations of City and veterinary clinical staff. In
providing services under this Agreement, PMI shall comply with applicable
federal, state and municipal laws and regulations and the standards of the
California State Board of Veterinary Governors.
7-27
Page 2 of2
Exhibit "D"
Premises Improvements
WORK TO BE DONE
The general scope of the project is to prepare design drawings and develop a vacant
site for the relocation of two (2) City of Chula Vista owned trailers, all grading necessary,
asphalt paving for parking with striping for ADA and 17 parking stalls, landscape and
irrigation as required, an electrical meter and power to the trailers from a SDG&E
location, telephone conduits, water lateral from the main located in the street, permanent
security fencing, 2 parking lot lights, sidewalk tie in, moving 'and setup of the trailers, A
fenced off area at the back of the lot will be used for exercising of the animals.
The work to be done includes all labor, material, equipment, transportation, project
accounting, supervision, scheduling, meeting notes, submittals, RFI's and daily reports
necessary for the project as shown on the drawings and described in these documents.
The completed project will be turn-key and work in general includes, but is not limited to
the following: an all new installation as outlined in, but not limited to the plans attached
below. The relocation and installation of the new equipment! trailers, which will include
protection and restoration of existing building components and installation of all
appurtenances and other work as may be necessary to render the improvements
finished and workable when the project is considered complete, with the exception of
interior improvements ( TI's ).
7-28
Exhibit E
Animal Shelter Improvements and Ownership
Item Nbr Description Qty Price Total Ownershio
078561912 Flat Top Electric Heated Sur(lery Table 1 $2,480 $2,480 Citv
078479430 Stainless Steel Tub Table 1 $2,063 $2,063 ciiV
078565748 Sur(lical Lights - single ceiling 1 $2,457 $2,457 Citv
078008317 VMS plus anesthesia machine 1 $2,702 $2,702 ??
078323654 T ech-3 Vaporizer Osoflurane 1 $1,119 $1,119 ??
078351529 Surgi-Vet Monitor V9204 1 $7,280 $7,280 Licensee
TBD Cart for Surgi-Vet Monitor 1 $600 $600 Licensee
078335349 M11 Autoclave 1 $4,838 $4,838 Licensee
TBD Fuji Digital Xray System 1 $36,000 $36,000 Licensee
l::iedecal vetennary Xray ::iystem
078481785 (Reconditioned, Generator)" 1 $15,000 $15,000 Licensee
Grand Total: $74,539
-...j
I
""
CD
. ,
CITY COUNCIL &
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
~~~~~ AGENDA STATEMENT
o-- - vG' `t7I~
~ ,.~'~ . ~' .- -CITY OF
'~~ CHULA VISTA
JUNE 16, 2009, Item
ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADOPTING THE SEVENTH
AMENDMENT TO THE GATEWAY CHULA VISTA
DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (DDA)
SUBMITTED BY: DEPUTY ~Y M.ANAGER/DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
DIRECTO
REVIEWED BY: CITY IvLANAGEI
4/STHS VOTE: YES ^ NO ~X
SUMMARY
The Gateway Chula Vista Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) was approved June 6,
2000, for the development and operation of a phased First Class, First Quality mixed-use
commercial office project with restaurant and retail components and common azeas. The first and
second phases have been realized, however, the third and final phase will not meet the construction
deadline of June 30, 2009.
The Seventh .Amendment to the DDA provides for changes to reflect the current anticipated
construction timeframe For Phase III. This amendment recommends the Phase III completion date
be extended to December 31.2014.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed action for compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the
proposed action is adequately covered in previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-
99-24. Thus, no further environmental review or documentation is necessary.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution approving the Seventh Amendment to the Gateway Chula Vista
Disposition and Development Agreement.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
On June 11, 2009, the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation recommended that the
Redevelopment Agency adopt the Resolution approving the Seventh Amendment to the Gateway
Chula Vista Disposition and Development Agreement.
g"-1
DISCUSSION
The Gateway Chula Vista DDA Artachment No. 3 Schedule of Performance required that the
construction of Phase III be completed by December 31, 2007. The Sixth Amendment to the DDA
extended the completion date for construction of Phase III improvements to December 31, 2008,
and authorized the Redevelopment Agency Executive Director to provide for additional extensions
of time to perform of up to 12 months in the aggregate. Subsequently, the Executive Director
extended the completion of Phase III to June 30, 2009. However, due to market conditions, the
developer has experienced significant setbacks in obtainins fmancing for Phase III. To allow
additional time for the construction of Phase III, the Seventh Amendment exrtends the construction
completion date to December 31, 2014.
The Developer has submitted an application requesting an amendment to the Gateway Specific Plan
to mirror the above change and also to remove the requirement for a First Class, First Quality
restaurant and to allow educational and training facilities. The Specific Plan amendment will be
presented for consideration to the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation, Planning Comrnission
and the City Council in the neaz future.
DECISION MAKER CONFLICT
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the Redevelopment Agency and has found no
property holdings within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property which is the subject of this
action.
CURRENT YEAR FISCAL IMPACT
The approval of the Seventh Amendment to the DDA will not result in any expenditures or
revenues in the current fiscal year. In 2010, Gateway Phases I and II will generate
approximately $633,000 in new property tax revenue and $463,000 in gross tax increment for the
City and Agency.
ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT
Currently there aze no identified future expenditures associated with approval of the item. The
approval of the Seventh Amendment may result in future discussions regazding the possibility of
Agency financial participation to address gap financing needs. The construction of Gateway
Phase III will help result in new sales tax and tax increment revenue to the City and Agency.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution of the Redevelopment Agency adopting the Seventh Amendment to the
Gateway Chula Vista Disposition and Development Agreement
2. Seventh Amendment to the Gateway Disposition and Development Agreement
Prepared by: Diem Do, Senior Project Coordinator, Development Services
Attachment 1
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADOPTING THE SEVENTH
AMENDMENT TO THE GATEWAY CHULA VISTA DISPOSITION
AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (DDA)
WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency and the Developer (Gateway Chula Vista LLC) are
parties to that certain Disposition and Development Agreement ("DDA") dated June 6, 2000, as
amended by that certain First Amendment to DDA ("First Amendment") dated September 25, 2001,
as further amended by that certain Second Amendment to DDA ("Second Amendment") dated
December 17, 2001, as administratively amended by that certain Third Amendment to DDA ("Third
Amendment") dated April 1, 2002, by that certain Fourth Amendment to the DDA (`Fourth
Amendment") dated April 1, 2003, by that certain Fifth Amendment to the DDA ("Fifth
Amendment") dated November 18, 2003, and by that certain Sixth Amendment to the DDA (`Sixth
Amendment") dated February 17, 2004. The DDA, First Amendment, Second Amendment, Third
Amendment, Fourth Amendment, Fifth Amendment and the Sixth Amendment are collectively
referred to herein as the DDA; and
WHEREAS, the DDA relates to the development and operation of a phased First Class First
Quality mixed-use commercial/office project with restaurant and retail components and common
areas of up to 385.089 squaze foot, including afive-tier li00 space parking structure that spans all
Phases of the Project; specifically the retail component will include up to 81.000 squaze feet with
restaurants, financial institutions and other retail uses. Phase I includes 102,329 square feet in a five
story office tower at the easterly portion of the Site, Phase II includes 132,334 square feet in a six
story office tower, and Phase III will include li0,426 squaze feet in a six story office tower at the
westerly portion ("Project"); and
WHEREAS, timing of construction of the Project's Phase III Improvements has been
delayed as a result of unfavorable overall mazket conditions and the effects of the recession on
financial lending institutions. As a result, pursuant to Section 701.1 (d) of the DDA. Developer has
requested an extension of time to complete construction of Phase III, and renegotiate the amount
and timing of the Agency Participation and one or more terms and provisions of the DDA; and
WHEREAS, Agency is willing to adjust Developers Schedule of Performance for
completion of the Phase III construction subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the Seventh
Amendment to the Gateway DDA; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed action for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the
proposed action is adequately covered in previously adopted Mitigated Nesative Declazation IS-99-
24. Thus, no further environmental review or documentation is necessary.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby approve the Seventh Amendment to the Gateway Chula Vista Disposition and
Development Agreement (DDA) in the form presented.
~'-3
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Chairperson is authorized and directed to execute final
forms of the Seventh Amendment, and Agency staff is authorized and directed to take all
reasonable actions necessary to implement the same.
Presented by:
Gary Halbert
Deputy City Manager/Development Services Manager
Approved as to form by:
~~
Bart C. Miesfeld v~~G~/
General Counsel
g"'~
THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT HAS BEEN REVIEWED
AND APPROVED AS TO FORM BY THE CITY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND WILL BE
FORMALLY SIGNED UPON APPROVAL BY
THE CITY COUNCIL
Dated:
SEVENTH AMENDMENT TO
DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
BY AND BETWEEN
THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND
GATEWAY CHULA VISTA 2, LLC AND
GATEWAY CHULA VISTA 3, LLC FOR
GATEWAY PHASE III CONSTRUCTION PERFORMANCE
EXTENSION, RESTAURANT AND EDUCATION
COMPONENT AMENDMENT
~°
SEVENTH AMENDMENT TO
DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
(Gateway Phase III Construction Performance Extension,
Restaurant and Educational Component Amendment)
This SEVENTH AMENDMENT TO DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT ("Seventh Amendment") is entered into as of July 1,
2009, ("Effective Date" or "Date of Seventh Amendment") by and
between the REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a
public body corporate and politic ("Agency") and GATEWAY CHULA
VZSTA 2, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company and
GATEWAY CHULA VISTA 3, LLC, a California Limited Liability
Company (collectively "Developer").
A. The Agency and the Developer are parties to that
certain Disposition and Development Agreement ("DDA") dated June
6, 2000, as amended by that certain First Amendment to DDA
("First Amendment") dated September 25, 2001, as further amended
by that certain Second Amendment to DDA ("Second Amendment")
dated December 17, 2001, as administratively amended by that
certain Third Amendment to DDA ("Third Amendment") dated April
1, 2002, by that certain Fourth Amendment to the DDA ("Fourth
Amendment") dated April 1, 2003, by that certain Fifth Amendment
to the DDA ("Fifth Amendment") dated November 18, 2003, and by
that certain Sixth Amendment to the DDA ("Sixth Amendment")
dated February 17, 2004. The DDA, First Amendment, Second
Amendment, Third Amendment, Fourth Amendment, Fifth Amendment
and the Sixth Amendment are collectively referred to herein as
the DDA.
B. The DDA relates to the development and operation of a
phased First Class First Quality mixed-use commercial/office
project with restaurant and retail components and common areas
of up to 385,089 square foot, including a five-tier 1300 space
parking structure that spans all Phases of the Project;
specifically the retail component will include up to 81,000
square feet with restaurants, financial institutions and other
retail uses. Phase I includes 102,329 square feet in a five
story office tower at the easterly portion of the Site, Phase II
includes 132,334 square feet in a six story office tower, and
Phase III will include 150,426 square feet in a six story office
tower at the westerly portion ("Project").
C. Capitalized terms used in this Seventh Amendment are
defined and set forth in the DDA, unless separately defined in
this Seventh Amendment, inclusive of the Attachments thereto.
Gateway Chula Vista Page 1
Seventh Amendment to Disposition and Development Agreement
D. Timing of construction of the Project's Phase III
Improvements has been delayed as a result of unfavorable overall
market conditions and the effects of the recession on financial
lending institutions. As a result, pursuant to Section 701.1 (d)
of the DDA, Developer has requested an extension of time on the
construction commencement and completion date for Phase III, to
renegotiate the amount and timing of Agency Participation and to
renegotiate of one or more terms and provisions of the DDA.
E. Agency is willing to adjust Developer's Schedule of
Performance for commencement and completion of the Phase III
construction subject to the terms and conditions set forth
herein.
F. The DDA and Gateway Specific Plan ("Specific Plan")
define the requirement of the construction of a six thousand
(6,000) gross leaseable square foot First Class and First
Quality sit down full service restaurant. Due to unfavorable
economic conditions the Developer has been unable to meet this
requirement and has requested that the requirement be removed.
G. Agency is willing to remove the First Class First
Quality restaurant requirement subject to the terms and
conditions set forth herein.
H. The Developer has identified medical trade
institutions that desire to locate in the Gateway building and
would occupy a significant amount of space within Gateway. The
DDA and the Specific Plan currently list educational and
training schools as a prohibited use.
I. Agency is willing to remove educational and training
schools as a prohibited use subject to the terms and conditions
set forth herein.
J. The Developer has submitted an application requesting
an amendment to the Gateway Specific Plan Section 2.5, Item G
and Table 2 to effectuate the removal of the prohibition of
educational or training facilities. The amendment will be
presented for consideration to the Chula Vista Redevelopment
Corporation, Planning Commission and the City Council in the
near future.
K. Pursuant to Section 1315 of the DDA, this Seventh
Amendment requires approval by the Agency Board.
Gateway Chula Vista Page 2
Seventh Amendment to Disposition and Development Agreement
~"~ "
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals,
which are a substantive part of the Seventh Amendment, the
covenants and consideration contained and exchanged herein,
Agency and Developer agrees as follows:
1. Agency and Developer agree to negotiate in good faith
on the amount and timing of Agency Participation,
pursuant to Section 800 of the DDA, and the
renegotiation of one or more terms and provisions of
the DDA.
2. DDA Attachment No. 3, Schedule of Performance,
Milestone No. 40 Commencement of Construction and
Development of the Applicable Phase Improvements is
hereby amended and restated as follows:
Commencement of Construction and Development of the
Applicable Phase Improvements. Developer, shall
commence construction of the Phase III Improvements on
or before December 31, 2010.
3. DDA Attachment No. 3, Schedule of Performance,
Milestone No. 43 Schedule of Performance for Phase III
Completion is hereby amended and restated as follows:
Completion of Construction of Phase III Improvements.
Developer shall have completed 100$ of the Phase III
Improvements of the Project on or before December 31,
2014.
4. Notwithstanding Sections 1, 2 and 3, DDA Sections
802.5 through 802.7 are hereby stricken from the DDA
and replaced with the following Section 802.5:
Any request for future Agency financial participation
shall be submitted by Developer to Agency in writing.
5. DDA Section 1001.2 (a) Commercial Retail Space, Banks,
and Restaurant is hereby amended and restated to
remove the requirement of no less than 6,000 square
feet of the gross leaseable building area in the Phase
I improvements or the Phase II Improvements in the
Project shall be for the use, occupancy, and operation
of a First Class, First Quality Restaurant.
Gateway Chula Vista Page 3
Seventh Amendment to Disposition and Development Agreement
,~, ~.
~'V2~
6. DDA Section 101. Definitions is hereby amended and
restated to remove the definition of "Restaurant" on
page 23.
7. DDA Section 1001.2 (f) (vii) Prohibited Uses in
Office/Profession Space is hereby amended and restated
to remove the prohibition of educational or training
facilities and Section 1001.2 (f) is hereby renumbered
accordingly.
8. Other Provisions. Except as expressly provided
herein, all other terms and conditions of the DDA
shall remain in full force and effect.
[Signature Block for Seventh Amendment begins on Next Page]
Gateway Chula Vista Page 4
Seventh Amendment to Disposition and Development Agreement
~'`
Signature Paqe to Seventh Amendment to
Gateway Disposition and Development Agreement
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of
Chula Vista, as Agency, and Gateway Chula Vista LLC, as
Developer, have signed this Seventh Amendment to the Gateway
Disposition and Development Agreement as of the Effective Date.
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CZTY OF CHULA VISTA, a public body
corporate and politic.
By:
Cheryl Cox, Chair
GATEWAY CHULA VISTA 2 LLC, a California Limited Liability
Company.
By: Coast Pacific Properties, LLC, a California Limited
Liability Company
Its: Co-Managing Member
By:
James V. Pieri, Managing Member
By: Chula Vista Asset Management, LLC, a California Limited
Liability Company.
Its: Co-Managing Member
By:
D. Gregory Scott, Cnairman Manager
GATEWAY CHULA VISTA 3 LLC, a California Limited Liability
Company.
By: Coast Pacific Properties, LLC, a California Limited
Liability Company
Its: Co-Managing Member
By:
James V. Pieri, Managing Member
Gateway Chula Vista Page 5
Seventh Amendment to Disposition and Development Agreement
`~~
By: Chula Vista Asset Management, LLC, a California Limited
Liability Company.
Its: Co-Managing Member
By:
u. Gregory acor.L, ~nairman nanager
ATTEST:
By
Agency Secretary
Approved as to form:
By:
Agency General Counsel
Approved as to form:
By:
Counsel to Developer
Gateway Chula Vista Page 6
Seventh Amendment to Disposition and Development Agreement
°/!
,1{t
~\, i't--
;---~
'-......~""'-
-----
.....--~......
OW OF
CHIUU\ VISTA
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
CHERYL COX
MAYOR
Jlme 8,2009
Mr. William Hall
676 Via Encantada
Chula Vista, CA 91913
Sent by email:
4~~:... ^ Cii~ <<>~.. ~ . ,~
Dear Bill,
Thank you for your willingness to serve as Chllla Vista's representative on the San Diego
Unified POtt District Board of Port Commissioners. Thank you, also, for engaging with the City
Council at our meeting of June 1,2009. Developing the Chula Vista Bayfront is critical to the
economic and social vitality ofollr.community. As a first-hand palticipant in years of
collaboration among residents, businesspeople, enviromnental advocates, staff, appointees and
elected officials, you are in a unique position. Chula Vista's waterfront can benefit residents and
visitors, be world class, environmentally sensitive, and revenue-generating.
The Chula Vista City Council's unanimous approval of the attached resolution speaks to the City
Council's desire that you work to move the process forward on the land swap with Pacifica and
on completing and celtifying the Chula Vista Bayfront ErR as it has been most recently
circulated. I understand t11at you will seek a budgetary allocation from your Port colleagues at
Tuesday's Commission meeting financially to SUPPOlt this process.
Your previous experience as a Commissioner will be beneficial to Chula Vista and to the region
as our organizations work together to create an exceptional bayfront along the southern pOltion
of San Diego Bay.
In appreciation,
~
Mayor
Attachment.
276 Fourth Avenue' Chllla Vista' California 91910' (619) 691-5044' Fax (619) 476-5379
ccox@chulavistaca.g.ov
@ f'oll.(u"'1'lf:::~i P.,,,,,,.
RESOLUTION 2009-070
(Redevelopment Agency Resolution No_ 2009-2003)
JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA URGING THE SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRlCT
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS TO RESUME
NEGOTlA nONS AND ULTIMA TEL Y CONCLUDE THE
EXCHANGE OF PORT DISTRICT ADMINISTERED LAND IN
THE HARBOR DISTRICT OF THE CHULA VISTA
BA YFRONT FOR PACIFICA COMPAt"ITES-O\VNED LAND IN
THE SWEETWATER DISTRICT OF THE CHULA VISTA
BA YFRONT, AND URGING THE BOARD OF
COMMISSIO!'-iERS TO DIRECT PORT STAFF TO MAKE
NECESSARY REVISIONS TO COMPLETE THE CHULA
VISTA BAYFROl\i-r MASTER PLAt~ ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT (EIR) AND TO THEN TAKE REQUIRED
BOARD ACTIONS TO CERTIFY THE FINAL EIR
WHEREAS, the Board of Port Commissioners (Board), Redevelopment Agency of the
City of Chula Vista and Chula Vista City Council (Agency/Council) have been working
collaboratively for over four years to develop the Chula Vista Bayfront Master Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Port and City conducted extensive public outreach to determine the
public's preferences for development of the Chula Vista Bayfront; and
WHEREAS, there is strong public support for locating residential development in the
Harbor District of the Bayfront and not in the Sweetwater District because the Sweetwater
District parcels border the existing wildlife refuge areas; and
WHEREAS, Pacifica Companies o",ns several of the subject parcels bordering the
",ildlife refuge areas; and
WHEREAS, a land exchange between the Port and Pacifica Companies would be
required to allow residential development in the Harbor District and preclude residential
development in the Sweetwater District thereby removing potential development adjacent to the
wildlife refuge areas; and
WHEREAS, the Port has ceased negotiations with Pacifica Companies regarding the land
exchange; and
WHEREAS, the Port and City have been working collaboratively to complete an
Environmental -Impact Report (EIR) for developing the Chula Vista Bayfront as a part of the
Chula Vista Bayfront Master Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Port and City have made significant financial investments in the EIR;
and
10-2
City Council Resolution No. 2009-070
(RDA Resolution No. 2009-2003)
Page 2
WHEREAS, the Port is the lead agency for the EIR, and
WHEREAS, the Board has not indicated its intention or schedule for concluding the EIR
process and for certifying the EIR; and
WHEREAS, the land exchange and the certification of the EIR are critical steps m
creating a vibrant, world-class Bayfront in Chula Vista.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council and Redevelopment
Agency of the City of Chula Vista hereby urges the San Diego Unified Port District Board of
Commissioners to direct Port staff to make necessary revisions to complete the Chula Vista
Bayfront Master Plan Environmental Impact Report and take the required Board of
Commissioners action to certify the Bayfront Master Plan Final Environmental Impact Report.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council and Redevelopment Agency of the
City of Chula Vista hereby urges the San Diego Unified Port District Board of Commissioners to
resume and ultimately conclude the exchange of Port District administered land in the Harbor
District of the Chula Vista Bayfront Master Plan for Pacifica Companies-owned land in the
Sweetwater District of the Chula Vista Bayfront Master Plan.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Chay~#Or
Mayor
10-3
City Council Resolution No. 2009-070
(RDA Resolution No. 2009-2003)
Page 3
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council and the Redevelopment
Agency of the City of Chula Vista, California, this 24th day of March 2009, by the following
vote:
AYES:
Council/Agency members: Bensoussan, Castaneda, McCann, Ramirez,
and Cox
NAYS:
Council/Agency members: None
ABSENT:
Council/Agency members: None
AITEST:
Af~Q J!_~~JXJ
Donna R. Norris, CMC, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFOR."N"1A
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
)
)
)
I, Donna R. Norris, City Clerk of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing
City Council Resolution No. 2009-070lRedevelopment Agency Resolution No. 2009-2003 was
duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council and Redevelopment Agency at a regular
meeting held on the 24th day of March 2009.
Executed this 24th day of March 2009.
~ tl-}hh~
Donna R. Norris: CMC, City Clerk
10-4
R''<:,,\ \C Gi:>~,\-'-~~
6-~~-o'1:
..{=k ~~O<S\~
CHULA VISTA CAN SOLVE ITS FINANCIAL CRISIS
* Chula Vista's budget problem is caused by a structural imbalance - expenses
cannot be supported by current revenues. .
* The only way to attack the imbalance is to reduce expenses!
* Declare bankruptcy now and renegotiate all city labor contracts and pension
contributions.
JudQe Rules Valleio Can Void Union Contracts
In a ground breaking ruling as well as a rare victory for common sense and the
overall good of taxpayers, Bankruptcy Judge Rules Calif. City Can Void Union
Contracts. In the first ruling of its kind, a bankruptcy judge held the city of
Vallejo; Calif. has the authority to void its existing union contracts in its effort to
reorganize, holding public workers do not enjoy the same protections Congress
gave union workers at private companies.
Municipal bankruptcy is so rare that no judge had yet ruled on whether
Congressional reforms in the 1990s that required companies to provide worker
protections before attempting to dissolve union contracts also applied to public
workers' union contracts.
"This will have a huge effect nationwide if it is upheld," said Kelly Woodruff, of
Farella, Braun & Martel in San Francisco, representing the firefighters and
electrical workers unions. Woodruff said the unions would certainly appeal if the
city ultimately voids the existing contracts with the two unions. "And I think we
have a good chance of success," she said.
"My understanding is that a lot of cities are watching this and particularly this
motion," said Woodruff. "If the city of Vallejo succeeds in using bankruptcy to
void union contracts I am sure others will follow," she said.
Vallejo attorney Norman C. Hile of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe's Sacramento,
Calif. office said, "This is a decision that is somewhat groundbreaking."
"There are a number of other cities and government entities watching it very
closely," he said, but declined to speculate on whether others would take the
Unions, local govemments split on bankruptcy bill
By Loretta Kalb, SacramentoBee.com
Published: Tuesday, Jun. 2, 2009 - 12:00 am I Page 1A
What started as a municipal bankruptcy in the city of Vallejo has morphed into an all-out fight
between California's local governments and unions over the sanctity of labor contracts vs. the
autonomy of cities and counties.
Next battle zone: the floor of the state Assembly, where legislation requiring local governments to
get state approval to file for bankruptcy Protection is headed for a vote later this week.
This won't be the last imbroglio spawned by the state's fiscal turmoil. But it is likely to be among
the hottest.
The bill by Assemblyman Tony Mendoza, D-Artesia, is sponsored by the California Professional
Firefighters and supported by nearly three dozen labor organizations in the state and AARP _
groups worried about labor contracts or pensions potentially being affected by bankruptcy filings.
The legislation, AB 155, would require local governments to get approval from the California Debt
and Investment Advisory Commission before filing. If it passes in the Assembly, it goes to the
Senate.
The commission provides guidance on localities' debts and investments.
The law is intended to help protect the state's credit rating on Wall Street, said Richard Garcia,
Mendoza's spokesman.
But Opponents say that the move is an attempt to thwart local governments, which may have to
resort to seeking bankruptcy protection. They contend state oversight would inject state politics
into what should be a local issue.
"Every city is in trouble," said Marc A. levinson, the lead insolvency lawyer on the Orrick
Herrington & Sutcliffe team handling Vallejo's bankruptcy filing.
"Nobody wants to go through bankruptcy. I Counseled Vallejo to stay out of bankruptcy. Butif you
can't pay your bills, what do you do?"
Strongly opposing the bill are the league of California Cities and the California State Association
of Counties.
Cities and counties rarely enter into bankruptcy, they say. And with all the state's fiscal
dissonance, the idea that the state should tell local governments when it's OK to file is absurd.
''This isn't an easy process. It's a rigorous examination of your financial conditions done by a
competent bankruptcy judge who can make a determination as to whether you're solvent or
insolvent," said Dwight Stenbakken, the League of California Cities' deputy executive director.
"This isn't something that a city does on a whim."
The legislation would not affect Vallejo's May 2008 filing. But since Vallejo went forward, the
economy has worsened. And more cities and counties are flirting with financial insolvency.
ThaI's just what worries the California Professional Firefighters.
When Gov. Arnold SchwaJzenegger declared last month that the state planned to borrow $2
billion in property taxes from local jurisdictions, cities began declaring that were in a "state of fiscal
crisis." It was a symbolic gesture aimed at discouraging the borrowing.
'.
Labor groups took it to heart.
The fiscal crisis "raised alarm bells," said Carroll Wills, spokesman for the Califomia Professional
Firefighters.
"Municipalities up and down the state have either spoken publicly about bankruptcy or have
contacted the bankruptcy attorney representative for Vallejo," Wills said.
But the issue goes well beyond Vallejo, he said.
''There's a central issue of the sanctity of the negotiated (labor) contract at stake," he said.
"Some of our local affiliates have been given this back-<:hannel nudge (from management): 'If you
guys don't respond (and make contract concessions), we're going to pull a Vallejo,' "Wills said.
Wills disputed the idea that the state shouldn't get involved in local filings or that it would inject
intense state politics in the process.
"Local politicians and bureaucrats have no special wisdom on fiscal matters," he said.
"Irs disingenuous for anyone to suggest that the state process would be any more political than a
local process," he said. "Look at Vallejo. It has been the hottest political issue imaginable in that
jurisdiction."
Califomia is one of a dozen states nationally that have no state constraints on federal bankruptcy
filings.
If the bill becomes law, California will join 16 other states that face some level of bankruptcy filing
oversight. Another 22 states don't allow localities to file for bankruptcy protection, Wills said.
Jean Hurst of the California State Association of Counties called AB 155 one of the "priority
measures to defeat," particularly in light of the seriousness of the state's budget crisis.
"When we look at this measure in the context of the fiscal environment, irs absolutely
unworkable," she said. 'We don't agree that it's an appropriate limitation of local government's
ability to manage its finances."
--
-'-
,- -
,~~v 'i
~,
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - April 27, 2009
FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT JOANN WEST, PUBLIC INFORMATION
OFFICER (707) 651-7152"
JUDGE ORDERS THE CITY OF VALLEJO AND THE UNlONS TO MEDIATION ON
THE MOTION TO REJECT COLLECTIVE BARGAINlNG AGREEMENTS
This afternoon, Judge Michael McManus issued a short order compelling the City of Vallejo, the
International Association of Firefighters (lAFF) and the International Brotherhood of Electrical
Workers (IBEW) to mediate their disputes over whether the collective bargaining agreements
should be rejected, the damages that will flow from rejection and the terms of any new
agreements in the event of rejection. The mediator will be Elizabeth L. Perris, a bankruptcy
judge resident in Portland, Oregon. Judge Perris has been a bankruptcy judge for over 20 years,
and has served two terms on the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Ninth Circuit. The schedule
for the mediation will be set by Judge Perris, in consultation with the unions and the City.
The motion for approval of the rejection of the City's collective bargaining agreements was filed
by the City in June, 2008 after the City filed its petition for relief under chapter 9 of the United
States Bankruptcy Code. Approval of the motion would allow the City to move forward with the
restructuring of its labor costs and developing a viable plan of adjustment. While the City has
other debts it must adjust, the City cannot restore balance to the General Fund unless it
restructures labor costs. A settlement through the mediation process also would perrnit the City
to achieve its goals. [fthe mediation does not result in a settlement, Judge McManus will rule on
the rejection motion.
Despite extensive efforts prior to this ruling, the City, lAFF, and lBEW have been unable to
agree on modifications that would lead to financial stability for the City. The City did reach
agreements to modify the existing collective bargaining agreements in January 2009 with the
Vallejo Police Officers' Association (VPOA) and the Confidential, Administrative, Managerial,
and Professional Association of Vallejo (CAMP).
While the City would have preferred a ruling on the merits, it is pleased that Judge McManus
chose a bankruptcy judge to serve as the mediator, rather than a labor mediator, as suggested by
the unions. The City is hopeful that the mediation will lead to an agreement.
More information regarding the City of Vallejo bankruptcy case can be found on the city
website at www.ci.valleio.ca.us
OHS Wcst:260651290.!
-,'-
- -
- -
~~-=
::::.1"."-.'_ : =
~",.,;."." E
~.
FOR IMMEDlA TE RELEASE - March 13, 2009
FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT JOANN WEST, PUBLIC INFORMATION
OFFICER (707) 651-7152
JUDGE RULES THAT COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENTS
MAY BE REJECTED
In a memorandum opinion filed this afternoon, United States Bankruptcy Judge Michael
McManus ruled that the Bankruptcy Code and California law authorized the City to reject
collective bargaining agreements. Judge McManus scheduled a status conference hearing for
March 23rd, at which time the City, the International Association of Firefighters (IAFF) and the
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) will report on the status oflabor
negotiations and will respond to questions raised by the Judge about the allocation oflabar costs
among the various funds controlled by the City. At the hearing, the Judge likely will set a
timetable for further hearings, if any. Jt is unknown when he will rule on whether the two
agreements at issue should be rejected, but the City will press for an early decision.
Today's ruling rejects the arguments by the unions that the bankruptcy court lacked the power to
reject collective bargaining agreements and instead was compelled to defer to state law and state
courts. In his ruling, Judge McManus opined that neither the California Supreme Court Sonoma
County decision relied upon by the unions nor any state labor law, provides the applicable
standard controlling the rejection of the City's collective bargaining agreements. Rather, the
standard is the one enumerated by the United States Supreme Court in its Bildisco decision.
The motion for approval of the rejection of the City's collective bargaining agreements was filed
by the City in June 2008 after the City filed its petition for relief under chapter 9 of the United
States Bankruptcy Code. Approval of the motion will allow the City to move forward with the
restructuring of its labor agreements and developing a viable plan of adjustment. While the City
has other debts it must adjust, the City cannot restore balance to the General Fund unless it
restructures the labor agreements.
The City did reach agreements in January 2009 to modifY the tormer collective bargaining
agreements with the Vallejo Police Officers' Association (VPOA) and the Confidential,
Administrative, Managerial, and Professional Association of Vallejo (CAMP). The City Council
and memberships of both groups have ratitied these new agreements.
Despite extensive efforts prior to this ruling, the IAFF and lBEW have not accepted
modifications to their respective labor agreements that will allow the City to maintain solvency
in its General Fund. The efforts oflabor to challenge the City's insolvency at a time of an
unprecedented economic downturn and the labor groups ongoing intransigence regarding the
modifications to their labor agreements has cost the City more than $3.5 million in bankruptcy
costs. These funds could have provided critical municipal services to the Vallejo community.
The City is pleased with the Judge's ruling, and believes that, fDllowing the next hearing or
hearings, the Court will approve the City's rejection of both agreements. Such rulings will allow
the City to focus its efforts and resources on the development of a plan of adjustment that will
enable the City to successfully emerge from bankruptcy.
More information regarding the City of Vallejo bankruptcy case, including today's memorandum
opinion, can be found on the city website at the Bankruptcy Information web page.
-====--
16=- .~
f E
.,~ ';,:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE-February 10, 2009
FOR MORE INFORMA TION, CONTACT JOANN WEST, PUBLIC INFORMATION
OFFICER (707) 651-7152
CITY OF V Al.LEJO AND CAMP ASSOCIATION REACH AGREEMENT ON LABOR
CONTRACT
An agreement modifying tbe collective bargaining agreement between the City of Vallejo and
the Confidential Administrative, Managerial, and Professional Association (CAMP) was
approved by the Vallejo City Council this evening. This agreement was the result of
negotiations between representatives of CAMP and city staff under the auspices of the chapter 9
bankruptcy case. TIle CAMP membership ratified the agreement last week. CAMP members
constitute an important employee group that provides stability and leadership integral in the
City's challenging fiscal environment.
The supplemental agreement reached with CAMP achieves short term and long term reductions
in costs as well as flexibility to reduce services in the future if necessary. The salary reductions
included in the agreement achieve an estimated $508,000 in savings between July I, 2008 and
June 30, 2010 in comparison to the existing agreement. Long term savings will be achieved
through caps on medical benefits for current employees and retirees. Additional reductions ill
sick leave cash out benefits for new and existing employees are provided in the agreement. The
agreement, also, reduces longevity pay for current employees and eliminates it for employees
hired after February I, 2009. The supplemental agreement extends the labor agreement with
CAMP through June 30, 2013.
Sandy Salerno, lead negotiator for the City, noted that this agreement with CAMP was a critical
piece of the puzzle. "The CAMP folks are the lynch pin that enables the City organization to
operate and implement City Council policies. Witb this agreement in place, Vallejo can continue
to move forward."
During the council's discussion of the proposed agreement at tonight's council meeting, Mayor
Osby Davis stated "We have employees who do work for us and are entitled to a fair wage. No
agreement we reach is going to give us everything we want. Supporting this agreement is the
right thing to do."
A complete copy of the Supplemental Agreement is available on the City of Vallejo web site at
Citv Council Agenda with Staff Reports
The City Council approved a supplemental labor agreement on January 27, 2009 with the Vallejo
Police Officers' Association. The City of Vallejo continues to be hopeful that it can reach
agreements with the two remaining labor groups (International Association of Firefighters and
the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.) The hearing' on the City's motion to reject
the collective bargaining agreements with the IAFF and IBEW concluded this afternoon in
United States Bankruptcy Court. . Judge McManus is expected to rule on that motion within the
next few weeks.
May 28,2009 Meeting at 3:30 pm Room B-129
Chula Vista FInancial Crisis is problematic to business redevelopment.
Solutions are to include obviously cutting line items that are unnecessary and
unproductive.
Since the creation of the Redevelopment Corporation approximately 5 years ago- we
would like to know what are the statistic that this entity has helped the redevelopment
and growth of Chula Vista (i.e.: new and old businesses)?
The Chula Vista Save Our Business Coalition would like to express their grave concerns
of the purpose and actions of the Redevelopment Corporation. The CVSOBC believes
that the Redevelopment Corporation has hindered, repressed and complicated business
development in Chula Vista. The CVSOBC would like to vigorously recommend to the
stakeholders of Redevelopment Corporation the following:
I. Disband, Dissolve and Close the Redevelopment Corporation or retire from
services performed for City ofCV.
2. Close the Redevelopment Department at the City.
Reasons for these actions are reflected by the end result that the Redevelopment
Department has only:
a. Added another level of bureaucracy which impedes redevelopment;
b. Added complications and stifles the redevelopment process;
c. Does not add any efficiency to the process; and
d. Depletes City's resources with no result of a tangible product.
The CVSOBC would like to additionally strongly recommend to the stakeholders of
Redevelopment Corporation regarding streamlining permit issuing process as follows:
a. Issue permits within 5 days from receiving application.
b. Applicant (i.e. including but not limited to: Owner, Designer & Builder)
will sign under penalty of perjury of Compliance with City Plan and City
Building Codes.
UTILIZING THESE RECOMMNEDATIONS THE END RESULT WILL BE:
Tremendous acceleration of redevelopment activity and increased increment on
redeveloped properties.
Copies of a few businesses supporting these recommendations represent many more that
have not been reached due to lack of time to get to other business before this meeting.