HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1989/05/31 AGENDA
City Planning Commission
Chula Vista, California
Wednesday, May 31, 1989 - 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Meeting of April 26, 1989
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Opportunity for members of the public to speak to the Planning Commission
on any subject matter within the Commission's jurisdiction but not an
item on today's agenda. Each speaker's presentation may not exceed five
minutes.
1. Consideration of Final EIR-88-2, General Plan Update
2. PUBLIC HEARING: GPA-89-6; Consideration of a comprehensive
update to the Chula Vista General Plan
3. Consideration of CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding
Considerations EIR-88-2, General Plan Update
4. Consideration of Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Chula
Vista General Plan Update EIR-88-2
5. PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-89-22; Consideration of proposed Fire
Station Master Plan - City of Chula Vista
OTHER BUSINESS
DIRECTOR"S REPORT
COMMISSION COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT AT p.m. to the Regular Business Meeting of June 14, 1989
at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers
City Planning Commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of May 31, 1989 Page 1
1. CONSIDERATION OF FINAL EIR-88-2, GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
A. BACKGROUND
This report is a Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) which
addresses the update of the Chula Vista General Plan. The proposed
updated substantially revised the Land Use, Circulation, and Public
Facilities Elements of the General Plan, and modifies the other
existing elements for consistency. The Draft Environmental Impact
Report was submitted by the City of Chula Vista to public review in
March 1989 and a public hearing was held on May 10, 1989. Several
letters of comment were received during the public review period. A
reproduction of letters and all responses is included in the first
section of the Final EIR. Some changes have been made to the text of
the Draft EIR. The actual text changes are underlined to distinguish
those from the original text. The revised Draft EIR and the letters
of comment constitute the Final Environmental Impact Report.
Text changes were made on the following pages in order to respond to
the various comments: l-l, 1-10, 3-12, 3-79, 3-83, 3-104, 3-105,
3-108, 3-109, 3-113, 3-118, 3-119, 3-123, 3-124, 3-130, 3-132, 3-135,
3-139, 3-140, 3-141, 5-20, 5-41, 11-2, ll-3.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Certify that EIR-88-2 has been prepared in compliance with CEQA, the
State CEQA Guidelines and the Environmental Review procedures of the
City of Chula Vista.
C. SIGNIFICANT REVISION
Significant changes in the text of the EIR have been made in the
following:
1. Air quality, page 3-44
2. Schools, pages 3-104, 3-112, 3-113, 3-119
3. Water, pages 3-108, 3-116, 3-120, 3-123, 3-124
4. Transportation, pages 3-134, 3-135, 3-136, 3-139, 3-140, 3-141,
3-142
5. Biology, page 5-14
WPC 6288P
City Planning Commission Page 1
Agenda Item for Meeting of May 31, 1989
PUBLIC HEARING: Draft Chula Vista General Plan
A. BACKGROUND
On May 10, 1989 the Planning Commission held a punic hearing on the Chula
Vista General Plan Environmental Impact Report. Comments from the Planning
Commission and the public were received. This punic hearing is also part of the
General Plan process and is directed to the Draft Chula Vista General Plan
document; including the text of the plan, land use map and ancillary plans and
documents that will be part of the total General Plan document.
B. RECOMMENDATION
1. Recommend to the City Council that the existing General Plan be
repealed and that the Draft General Plan be adopted in accordance
with the proposed changes listed in Attachment 3 and the staff
recommendations on the General Plan Alternatives listed below.
2. Change the land use designation for a portion of the northerly section
of Rancho San Miguel to Low Residential (0-3 du./ac.) as shown in the
General Plan alternative excluding the quarter acre lots and the bed
and breakfast inn.
3. Defer consideration of the Eastlake III and Olympic Training Center
Alternative until a future general plan amendment consideration in the
summer of 1989.
C. DISCUSSION
The Draft Chula Vista General Plan is the first comprehensive update of the
General Plan since 1972. The process began in August 1986 with the
selection of a consultant team, organization of local staff to participate in
the planning and preparation of a work program. The principal phases of the
work program can be generally summarized as follows:
1. Data collection and analysis including an economic base study.
2. Establishment of General Plan goals and obiectiYes including
interviews with local officials and citizens.
3. Preparation of General Plan Alternatives (Scenarios i-3) based on the
goals and objectives.
Testing of Scenarios 1-3 for adequacy of circulation system, public
facilities and fiscal issues.
5. Evaluation of Scenarios 1-3 and determination of direction for the
Draft General Plan (Scenario #)
6. Preparation and testing of Scenario #.
City Planning Commission Page 2
AgendaItem for Meeting of May 31, 1989
7. Preparation of Draft Chula Vista General Plan text and map based on
Scenario 4.
g. Preparation of Chula Vista General Plan Environmental Impact
Re port.
9. Completion of the Environmental Impact Report and additional fiscal
analysis of General Plan.
10. Initiation of EIR and General Plan public hearings.
Citizen Participation
The process of preparation of the Chula Vista General Plan has included the
participation of the citizens of Chula Vista, their offidals and staff and the
solicitation and consideration of their comments at each stage of the
process. This participation began with an initial program of interviews with
a broad range of individual citizens, representatives of various
organizations, elected and appointed officials and city staff. These
interviews focused on identifying the opportunities and problems that should
be addressed in the General Plan and the k~nd of community that Chula
Vista should be in the future. This process resulted in the establishment of
the initial goals and objectives of the General Plan. This process has
continued with several public City Council work sessions to further refine
these statements.
The review of the initial General Plan Scenarios 1-3 also included public
work sessions to receive comments on the alternative "futures" or appoaches
that were set forth. The result from these work sessions was a direction for
the development of Scenario ~ and the Draft General Plan.
Upon completion of the Draft General Plan, a series of presentations to
community groups was initiated to explain the draft plan approach, answer
questions and receive comments. Part of this process of community
meetings included the printing and distribution of a "newspaper" with a
s~nmary of the General Plan and reproduction of the General Plan map.
These handouts have also been placed in several convenient locations to
allow individual citizens to pick up copies.
Review and Comment Period on the Draft General Plan and EIR
The concluding phase of the public par ti d pati on has been the last 3 months
during which the entire Draft General Plan has been available for public
review. A total of 500 copies have been printed and distributed including
copies placed in the main public library. Since March 24, the Environmental
Impact Report has also been available for review and comment. All written
comments on the Draft General Plan that have been received have been
recorded and responses prepared. These are included as Attachment i.
City Planning Commission Page 3
AgendaItem for Meeting of May 317 1989
D. PLAN SUMMARY
The California State Law (Section 65300) requires that each city adopt a
comprehensive long term General Plan to guide the physical development of
the city and any land outside the city's boundaries that is determined to bear
relation to the city's planning. The Chula Vista General Plan is structured
to be in conformance with State Law and to provide a generalized blueprint
to guide the development~ redevelopment and preservation of the area. The
entire area comprising the General Plan consists of ##,417 acres and is
subdivided into five planning areas or communities. These are Central
Chula Vista, Bayfront, Montgomery, Sweetwater and Eastern Territories.
The General Plan process included the incorportion of the Community or
Specific Plans for the Bayfront, Montgomery and Sweetwater that were
either existing or being revised and updated separately. New area plans
were prepared for Central Chula Vista and Eastern Territories. All of the
plans were coordinated to produce the comprehensive General Plan
document.
Major General Plan Proposals
The General Plan establishes the framework and overall character for a
number of major additions to the urban form of Chula Vista. Some of these
are continued expansions of developments that are already underway.
Others will be new additions to the city but related to the existing
neighborhoods so as to be compatible with them and providing new facilities
and opportunities for all dtizens. The major plan proposals are summarized
in the beginning of the General Plan document in the section entitled The
Vision. The details of these major plan proposals are contained in the
various plan elements most partiduiarly Chapters i, 7, 10 and i4. The plan
proposals which have been most often noted and discussed throughout the
planning process are as follows:
1. Chula Vista's Urban Core and Bayfront - The general plan calls for a
continued redevelopment of the central area to emphasize its role as
the hub of the city. This would include an increased relatiooship to
the Bayfront to draw these two important areas of the city together.
The vision describes the creation of a dynamic urban center
characterized by a diversity of business, residential and recreation
activities. This would be facilitated by additional and improved street
connections to the gayfront, a office and residential center along the
Woodlawn Avenue corridor between the trolley stations and a shuttle
bus loop.
2. Eastern Territories - The General Plan for the Eastern Territories is a
framework for both development and preservation of this area. The
development is a balanced community of residential, commerical and
employment land uses. The residential density includes provision for
ali types and densities of heusing but maintains a dominant single
family character similar to the existing Chuia Vista neighborhoods.
City Planning Commission Page
Agenda Item for Meeting of May 31, 1989
The land develofanent in Eastern Territories is concentrated on the
higher mesas with the canyons and river valleys remaining as open
space corridors. These corridors are planned to provided connection
between neighborhoods, schools and parks.
Also included in Eastern Territories is the Eastern Regional Center.
This will serve in the future as the business and retail center for the
eastern area of the city. It is planned to include a retail and office
center, a business and research park and a site for a univeristy. These
mixed uses are planned to be organized around a system of roadways,
public transit, open space and trail corridors that extend from the
regional center and connect it to the surrounding neighborhoods and
the entire city.
3. Chula Vista Greenbelt and Open Space Network - The General Plan
calls for the creation of a continuous, 28 mile Greenbelt around the
city that would include parks, active recreation facilities, natural open
space, wildlife habitats and a connecting trail system. This continuous
system would begin at the Bayfront, extend through Otay River Valley
to the Otay Lakes, north through the Otay Lakes area and along Salt
Creek to Mother Miguel Mountain and Sweetwater Reservoir and west
along the Sweetwater Regional Park to the Bayfront.
Related to the Greenbelt in a network of open space corridors that
connect to the Greenbelt and extend the open space trail and park
system throughout the city.
#. Circulation - The planned circulation system for the city includes
many new and upgraded streets and highways which together comprise
a heirachy of roadways which will serve the future requirements. The
most significant new roadways are Route i25 which provides the third
north-south regional connection through the city and Orange Avenue
east of 1-805, a portion of which will be built as a expressway. Many
other roads are extended or expanded in width to accomodate new
de velo pm e nt.
General Plan Alternatives
Two alternatives have been included in the Draft General Plan. These
alternatives are for specific projects that have been proposed during the
later phases of the general plan process. They are identified on the General
Land Use Plan and included in the EIR to allow consideration of these
proposals as part of the public hearing process.
Rancho San Miguel Northern Section Alternative
The Draft General Plan identifies the entire northern section of the Rancho
San Miguel property as open space. Residential development is clustered on
the south section near what is considered the most probable alignment of
Route 125 and accessing from extensions of San Miguel Road and East H
Street. The southerly section is designated for low density residential (0-3
du/ac) and a neighborhood retail center.
City Planning Commission Page
Agenda Item for Meeting of May 31, 1989
The northerly section is impacted by a number of developmeet issues
including steep slopes, sensitive biological and wildlife habitat, proximity to
Mother Miguel Momtain and the Sweetwater Reservoir. The sensitive
visual, engineering and environmental issues assodated with development on
this property lead to its current designation as open space.
The Rancho San Miguel Northern Section Alternative includes the
development of low density residential (approx[mtely 1 acre) on a portion of
this property. It is to be in an area mostly under 25% slope located between
Mother Miguel Momtaln and the Sweetwater Reservoir. Additional
proposed development includes an approximately 80 unit-~ acre lot
residential development in a valley area north of the mountain, a bed and
breakfast type Inn and a public park and campground. In the alternative the
remainder of the property is designated open space.
The recommended change includes the low density residential (0-3 du/ac)
area between Mother Miguel Mountain and the 5weetwater Reservoir as
shown in the General Plan Alternative. This would include language related
to the preservation of wildlife habitats, steep slope areas, the "mass" of
Mother Miguel Mountain from development or grading impacts and the
provision of gravity flow stormwater and wastewater systems and other
measures as necessary to protect the Sweetwater Reservoir. The total units
permitted in this area would be a max[mum of 300 units. The final unit
count may be significantly lower based on future, more detailed site
planning, environmental and engineering studies. In addition would be the
inclusion of a park symbol in the small valley north of Mother Miguel
Mountain.
The residential development of the '~ acre lots in the small valley north of
the mountain and the bed and breakfast Inn are not recommended because
these uses are not compatible with the one acre estate lots planned for the
balance of the northerly section of the property.
Olym pi c Traihing Center and [~astlake III Alternative
The Draft General Plan identifies the area of F~astlake between Salt Creek
and the Lower Otay Reservoir as low density residential (0-3 du/ac). The
estate residential development is set back from the edge of the lake and
located near the upper partion of the natural ridge to preserve a substantial
open space area around the lake as part of the Chula Vista Greenbelt and to
protect the reservoir from pollution resulting from urban development.
The Draft General Plan Alternative includes the Olympic Training Center
(OTC) on the portion of the property south of Orange Avenue extended and
north of the proposed regional park. Adiacent to the OTC is an area for a
retail center and a resort complex. The residential neighborhood to the
north is a combination of low, low medium, medium and high density
resi denti al.
This proposal is currently under review by the staff. The Olympic Training
Facility and Eastlake Ill submittal will be before the Planning Commission
and the City Council in the summer of 1989. Therefore, at this time, the
City Planning Commission Page 6
Agenda Item for Meeting of May 31~ 1989
land use designation of the Draft General Plan is recommended to remain as
an interim designation until the Eastlake III and Olympic Training Center
facility are brought back for general plan amendment.
E. FISCAL ANALYSIS
The preparation of the General Plan has included a fiscal analysis of the
city. This study focused on the additional development which is proiected to
take place in the area covered by the plan through the year 2005. The
proiected impact of this development on the City's General Fund is a net
surplus of approximately $3.8 million in constant 1985 dollars.
At the request of the City Council a further expansion of this study was
undertaken to address specific issues and questions. The draft results of this
expanded study is included as Attachment #.
The overall conclusion of the expanded study fomd that~ from a fiscal
perspectiYe~ implementation of the General Plan will haYe a beneficial
impact on the City. NegatiYe impacts may result from other factors, such
as an extended differential between rates of cost and revenue escalation in
the future. There are opportunities for increasing existing revenues and
funding specific city services from sources other than the general fund.
These opportunities may be used to maintain the fiscal balance of the City
in future years.
FISCAL IMPACT: See the attached Fiscal Analysis Report, Attachment 2.
CllY OF
CHULA VISTA
PLANNIN~ DEPARTMENT
May 17, 1989
Rikki M. Alberson
Director of Planning
The Baldwin Company
11975 E1Camino Real
Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92130
Re: Draft Chula Vista General Plan
Dear Ms. Alberson:
This is in response to your February 17 letter covering the draft Chula Vista
General Plan. I certainly appreciate the time and thought reflected by your
comments and I would like to offer a few, general remarks on your points.
As you know, we have tried to offer the Planning Commission and City Council a
range of planning options in the form of different "scenarios" or visions of
community character during the course of the General Plan work.
The particular vision preferred by the City Council actually represented a
combination of plan elements from several of the scenarios. Finally, after
considerable testing of the land use plan and discussion with civic
organizations, boards, commissions and interested individuals, ! believe the
draft Chula Vista General Plan reflects what seems to be a consensus on the
direction this community prefers to take in working to build a better Chula
Vista for the future.
! realize you are at somewhat of a disadvantage in coming into the process
after the debate has occurred on which future "scenario" the City prefers for
Chula Vista. Thus, I will attempt to respond to your questions from the
perspective of the direction the City Council has taken up to this point, and,
hopefully, not cover ground that has already been covered in our meetings and
discussions regarding Salt Creek Ranch.
Your comments focus on eleven specific topics and seem pretty evenly divided
between points you agree with and find commendable and points that you would
like to see some flexibility, modification or clarification made prior to
adoption of the General Plan.
276 FOURTH AVENUE/CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 92010/(619) 691-5101
Rikki M. Alberson -2- May 17, 1989
I'm assuming that most of your comments are seeking to orient that portion of
the Chula Vista General Plan that covers your ownership (9500 acres) to
reflect features that are important to the preparation of the Concept Plan for
the entire holding, Obviously, ! can only respond to those comments that
directly touch upon the portion of the Baldwin Company ownership that lies
within the area covered by the Draft Chula Vista General Plan and only from
the perspective of the philosophy reflected by the City Council, A summary of
your comment is listed below followed by a response:
1. Ota¥ Lakes: The Draft General Plan emphasizes views from the lakes to
surrounding areas, but does not seem to address views from adjacent areas
to the lakes. The lakes are a highly valuable aesthetic resource and
could be extremely important to the development of a high quality
water-oriented community.
The opportunities presented through the orientation and integration of
development with the lakes should not be missed. The proposed plan
completely eliminates such opportunities by generally designating land
between the lakes and first ridge as open space. It is suggested that
this portion of the draft document be rethought to maximize all benefits.
Response: The Upper and Lower Otay Reservoir are owned and maintained by
the City of San Diego. The Lower Otay Lake Reservoir is a vital
component of the drinking water supply system for the City and
also serves as a valuable recreational and visual open space
resource.
The Draft General Plan is reflecting open space on the lands
owned by the City of San Diego as well as lands draining into
the lakes along the western side. These privately owned lands
are seen as extremely sensitive from the standpoint of land form
modification, potential for urban runoff of pollutants into the
lakes, and potential for sewer contamination from sewer systems
occurring within the water shed. We recognize that urban
inceptor systems and contour sewer systems may be technically
feasible. However, no specific studies have been completed on
these lands to demonstrate fail safe assurance that development
would not pose a potential public health risk to this public
water supply.
In addition, our General Plan studies indicated that the
planning area contained sufficient 1 and to accommodate
population growth beyond the year 2005 and the land area around
the reservoir was seen as coming on line sometime considerably
in the future. Thus, there would appear to be no immediate need
to study this area and make a definitive conclusion on the
proximity of urban development to the lake.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Rikki M. Alberson -3- May 17, 1989
Equally important the General Plan does propose a Greenbelt
System around the perimeter of the Chula Vista Planning Area and
the Otay Lakes is a vital element of that system. Therefore,
any open space adjacent to the lake would serve an important
role in the Greenbelt System as well as providing a substantial
open space buffer between the lake and surrounding development.
2. Scenic Highways: We agree with the proposed implementation plan. We are
concerned that -these plans will be implemented in a piecemeal fashion
without benefit of an overall theme or landscape plan. Our concern is
especially strong for smaller projects outside of a Planned Community.
Response: We share your concern and we will prepare an implementation
program to deal with these plans in a coordinated fashion.
3. General Plan Map:. It is somewhat difficult to distinguish the differences
among the various dot patterns that denote different residential
categories. The use of different patterns is suggested.
Response: We have experimented with various types of dot patterns and have
actually changed the dot pattern twice to make the different
categories as distinguishable as possible. The adopted General
Plan map will probably be printed in color to ensure readability.
4. Eastern Urban Center: The concept of an Eastern Urban Center is good. It
could provide a central focus for development of the Eastern Territories.
The location and size, however, should be flexible depending on the actual
location, size and nature of major uses such as a regional shopping
center, auto park, college, medical complex and resort. Wording to this
effect should be included in the General Plan.
The location of the Eastern Urban Center has been the result of a careful
analysis of many factors which are important to the successful development
of such a center and its key role in the future of the eastern area of the
City.
Response: We do concur that the sizes and locations of individual uses
' within the Eastern Urban Center should be flexible. We have
been careful to demonstrate this flexibility by portraying the
variety of uses expected within the Urban Center with symbols on
the General Plan Land Use Map, rather than using conventional
land use designations in fixed locations. Therefore, the
appropriate mix of uses planned for this area can change
substantially and still be in conformance with the General
Plan. However, it is important to note that the special plan
area designation and general plan text on page 14-15 directs
that the development of Eastern Urban Center be in accordance
with a single comprehensive urban design plan.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Rikki M. Alberson -4- May 17, 1989
5. Public Facilities: A very strongly worded section should be included
requiring all master plan facilities (water, sewer, drainage, etc.} to be
properly sized to handle all potential development within a logical
service area. This new sect~- could be developed as a series of general
goals that apply to all facilities.
A single project should never be permitted to size a facility that
considers upstream developable land to remain vacant or developed at
artificially low densities. Future uses in a currently unplanned area can
be estimated using existing area development as an average. Facilities
can then be planned accordinaly. This approach is taken by many districts
throughout the County (MET~, for example) and results in long-lived,
feasible master plans that maintain high levels of service and avoid the
disruption caused by the need for constant upgrading and associated
construction. Similarly, no project should be allowed to utilize a
temporary solution to a problem (such as a pump station) without
commitment to the ultimate permanent solution (such as the necessary.
gravity sewer line).
Response: The infrastructure system for the General Plan has been sized to
handle all potential development within the planning area shown
on the General Plan Land Use Element. We could not obtain any
information concerning future land use or logical service areas
concerning upstream development from the current property
owners. It would have been difficult to size infrastructure
facilities in the Chula Vista planning area so as to accommodate
upstream development without knowing the boundaries of the
service area and the planned development. Since neither of
these questions could be answered by the upstream property
owners in a definitive manner during the General Plan Update
process, we assumed the adopted County plans correctly reflected
official policy of the Board of Supervisors regardinq the
upstream areas in question.
In the future, it may be necessary to re-calculate the sizing of
these master plan facilities if upstream development plans and
corresponding service areas came into sharper focus. Certainly,
we would envision any large scale development planning program
to provide the facility planning and financing for an adequate
public facility program in conjunction with the City of Chula
Vista.
6. University: The designation of a future site for higher education is
Commended. It is suggested that wording be included to allow location and
size to be flexible depending upon the institution. In addition,
recognition of the very major adverse impacts that such a facility can
produce should be given. Public educational institutions remove land from
the tax base and normally do not pay any share of necessary offsite public
facilities such as water and sewer lines and roads. They are also major
users of facility capacities and generate large volumes of traffic.
CiTY OF CHULA VISTA
Rikki M. Alberson -5- May 17, 1989
These impacts must be borne by the surrounding community. Recognition of
these impacts is necessary to assure they are minimized and shared to the
greatest possible extent.
Response: Adequate wording has been included in the Eastern Territories
Area Plan on page 14-16, paragraph 4, to leave open the
possibility of shifting Hunte Parkway to the south to include
more land into the university site, if needed.
We recognize the tradeoffs involved in having public educational
institutions in our community, but we have found ways to work
successfully with institutions such as Southwestern Community
College to minimize the impacts and maximize the public benefits
such institutions provide to the community.
7. Land Use Compatibility: We are quite concerned about some potential
incompatibilities that occur on the General Plan map. These include the
designation of low density near the existing landfill, the use of
Low-Medium adjacent to the University and Research Park, the designation
of Low-Medium adjacent to the Otay Valley Road industrial areas, and the
use of Low near the existing quarry. In addition, the location of the
Eastern Urban Center in the midst of a large area with an overall density
of one to one and one-half homes per acre seems to be contradicto[v. A
truly innovative, mixed-use Urban Center should be surrounded by
complementary urban densities and uses. The Urban Center described in the
draft document will never come into being without the development of
necessary supporting urban residential uses.
Response: The land use surrounding the landfill consists of Low-Medium on
the west, Industrial to the south and southwest, Industrial and
Open Space to the north and Open Space and Low to the
northeast. The open space buffer around the north and east
sides is necessary to maintain a 1000 foot setback from buried
waste material s.
The Low-Medium adjacent to the University and Research Park
allows a range of 3 to 6 dwelling units per acre which can
accommodate a full range of densities at the project level plus
allow for some additional density transfer credit from school
sites, park and other public uses.
The City Council was very careful in selecting the Low Medium
Residential land use category for the majority of the
residential areas in the Eastern Territories in order to
maintain the basic residential character of the community. In
fact, the City Council explicitly rejected the higher densities
contained in Scenario 3.
The Eastern Urban Center is seen as being supportive of the
residential population of the Eastern Territories rather than
the level of residential population being determined by the
economic needs of the Eastern Urban Center.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Rikki M. Alberson -6- May l?, 1989
At any rate, the Eastern Urban Center is not seen as likely for
any substantial development until sometime after the completion
of Route 125 from Highway 54 to the Otay Mesa. This is
envisioned to occur sometime after the Year 2000. Perhaps by
that time, further General Plan studies will be necessary to
refine the land use pattern in this area.
8. Wolf Canyon-Rock Mountain: These two features are not unique in any sense
when compared with Salt ureek, Poggi Canyon, Mother Miguel Mountain, San
Miguel Mountain and Otay Lakes. The open space designation does not
preserve any unique natural resources and may actually hinder the
development of relatively scarce mineral resources. In addition, it must
be pointed out that natural crossing points for Otay River are ve~
limited. Those that exist must be used if land form alteration is to be
minimized and if the traffic generated by industrial development on Otay
t4esa is to be distributed to minimize congestion. The open space
designation would certainly make a road crossing more difficult if not
impossible.
Response: The State Mining and Geology Board has identified Rock Mountain
and the Otay River Valley as areas containing mineral resources
of statewide significance. The open space designation of these
resource areas contemplates extraction of the resources prior to
development. The Conservation Element contains further
information on the intended application of the open space
designation to these areas.
The Wolf Canyon system is seen as a highly significant landform
feature. In fact, Wolf Canyon is the only significant
north-south canyon between 1-805 and future State Route 125 and
will serve to connect the Eastern Urban Center and adjacent
residential areas to the west to the Otay Valley Greenbelt.
The question of an additional road crossing of the Otay River
being made more difficult by designating Wolf Canyon and Rock
Mountain as open space is not seen as a significant issue since
any additional road crossing the Otay Valley would have to cross
the open space designated applied to the entire Otay River
Valley.
With respect to any additional river crossing, the main reason
the Chula Vista General Plan does not show a third crossing of
Otay Valley, east of 1-805, is because we are attempting to
accommodate regional traffic on regional transportation
facilities such as 1-805 and Route 125. The quality of life in
existing and newly planned neighborhoods should not be impacted
by through regional traffic. If the City's street system is
designed to maximize the accommodation of regional traffic
traveling to and from Otay Mesa through Chula Vista, then the
total road capacity is reduced for local development. Otay Mesa
CIT~ OF CHULA VISTA
Rikki M. Alberson -7- May 17, 1989
may need to reduce the amount of industrial acreage by
substituting additional residential to create a more balanced
land use plan. Chula Vista intends to continue to work with the
City and County of San Diego on resolving this issue.
9. Traffic: The goals of Circulation Element are to be commended. We are,
however, concerned that the proposed system will not accomplish the stated
goals and is actually barely adequate to handle only the proposed general
plan especially since the supporting technical report was not available at
the time of this writing. Development in surrounding areas south and east
of the General Plan will use Chul~ Vista streets to the detriment of local
users. Severe congestion will result if steps are not taken to handle the
unanticipated. To avoid such future possibilities, the following is
recommended:
1. Provide a network of east-west and north-south prime arterials to
smoothly handle and distribute all regional traffic. Freeways will
not adequately serve this function. Orange, Palomar, Otay Valley,
"H" and Palomar should all be equal east-west traffic movers to avoid
impacts to local systems. Similarly, Otay Lakes, Hunte Parkway and
Paseo Ranchero will act to complement SR-125 in accommodating the
large regional volumes moving north and south to Otay Mesa. Without
such a system, SR-125 and 1-805 will not operate efficiently.
Back-up congestion will occur on the supporting arterials and major
roads which will, in turn, cause similar impacts to local
neighborhoods. It is recognized that such revisions will impact the
land use plan. However, the land use plan will never be realized if
the circulation and uses are incompatible.
2. Provide three crossings of Otay River to assure smooth regional
movements. Regional through trips must be accommodated. Many
studies have already shown that traffic congestion cannot be avoided
by simply not building roads. Instead, trips will be distributed to
the local streets causing further problems.
3. Plan for development outside the General Plan. A strong economy will
continue to attract immigrants to San Diego County. Growth will
occur in surrounding areas to the east and south. Daley Ranch and
our north (Proctor Valley) and east (San Ysidro Mountain) properties,
for example, are very developable. Residents of these future
communities will probably drive through the Eastern Territories to
Otay Mesa, Downtown San Diego and other regional employment areas.
This anticipated future growth must be planned for now. Experience
has shown again and again that an inadequate road system is not a
major factor in where people choose to live. It is recommended that
wider corridors be designated for regional roads (major streets and
prime arterials). This will allow expansion of roads, intersections
and transit systems 10 years from now to avoid future problems beyond
the Draft General Plan or standard planning "horizons". The concepts
now embodied in the General Plan would continue to be viable,
CITY OF CHULA V)STA
Rikki M. Alberson -8- May 17, 1989
providing constant direction and guidance. It would not become
obsolete before its time. The sociologic desire and demand for new
communities and opportunities does not wait on such artificial
boundaries and timeframes. Should the additional land not be needed,
it will remain as attractively landscaped areas.
Response: The Circulation Element system of road facilities was
tested utilizing the land use from Scenario 4 at the higher
end of the density categories and the system works. It not
only meets the adopted Threshold Standards for Level of
Service, many of the facilities exceed the desired Level of
Service.
The testing was performed by SANDAG and JHK and Associates
utilizing SANDAG's regional model. This included the
projected land use for industrial development on Otay Mesa.
This circulation plan is based upon Scenario 4 land use and
is consistent with the plans of surrounding jurisdictions
and with SANDAG's regional plan and population
projections. As plans and projections change in the
future, the General Plan will need to be updated at
appropriate intervals.
Your recommendations are to change the designation of the
following roads east of 1-805:
Orange Avenue - (planned as Expressway)
Palomar - Major/Collector to Prime Arterial
Otay Valley Road - Collector to Prime Arterial
"H" Street - Major to Prime Arterial
Otay Lakes Road Collector to Prime Arterial and extend
across Otay River
Hunte Parkway - Major to Prime Arterial and extend across
Otay River
Paseo Ranchero - (planned as Prime Arterial)
If the projected traffic volumes warranted the above
changes in designation based upon the land use contained in
the Draft General Plan, ! would agree with the
recommendation. However, our tests utilized SANDAG's
regional model which reflects plans for future development
for the entire region and no such changes are warranted.
With respect to plans for development to the east of the
General Plan area, we attempted to solicit input from the
property owner. We received no information about future
plans for the Proctor Valley area and the San Ysidro
mountain area. Without detailed land use data, it was not
possible for our consultants to plan for undefined future
development. It would not be possible to ask affected
property owners to give up more land -for wider road
corridors without adequate technical justification.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Rikki M. Alberson -9- May l?, 1989
The preliminary General Plan Update draft Environmental
Impact Report contains an extensive discussion of the
Circulation Element study carried out by JHK and Associates.
10. Otay River Valley Park: We generally agree with the idea of a regional
park in the Otay River Valley. The area is a wonderful and uncommon
resource that should be enjoyed by the public. It must be integrated into
the overall greenbelt via the Salt Creek corridor for maximum benefits to
be realized. ~e are, however, concerned with the seemingly contradicto,ry
shape this park seems to be taking. Large natural areas are discussed in
some parts of the draft Plan while various levels of recreational uses are
discussed in others. Given the disturbed nature of the river valley and
the demand for desirable urban recreational uses that will be generated,
we would support the development of a truly multi-purpose regional park
with a broad variety of facilities. Natural parks should be designated in
undisturbed parts of the greenbelt system for example, Mother Higuel
Mountain.
Response: The Otay River Valley seems to be large enough to accommodate
both active and passive uses. The plan sees a need for both
types of uses and' proposes the preparation of a master plan for
the entire Greenbelt System to further define appropriate uses.
ll. Vision: The vision expressed in the Draft General Plan is desirable. It
~be the underlying guide for new projects - both public and private,
as well as for future amendments. This vision must look both backward and
forward in time as both are important. A community must rely on and
preserve its heritage to have a solid definable base on which to build.
While roots are important - so is the shape of the future. Successful
long-lived dynamic communities recognize future trends and move to
integrate these new societal needs into the existing urban fabric. A city
which only seeks to continue the past becomes stagnant and
non-progressive, It is hoped that the stated vision will be expanded to
accommodate the need to develop compact, efficient, creative urban areas
that make the best use of limited land and resources. Outdated sprawling
suburban uses that require large amounts of land and resources for
relatively small populations will simply not be feasible.
Response: We firmly believe that the General Plan will accommodate the
'- very best in urban development. The plan makes provisions for a
diversity of communities limited only by the creative
imagination of urban designers. The various elements of the
plan are strongly connected with a comprehensive system of
transportation and open space corridors and parks, llne
residential pattern will be diversified to avoid urban sprawl
and provide housing opportunities for all income groups.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Rikki M. Alberson -10- May 17, 1989
Conclusion
We wish to emphasize that our responses to the above questions are based upon
the Draft General Plan. As the process continues with additional public input
and review, there very well may be modifications to the document.
I would invite you to also review and comment on the draft environmental
impact report which contains additional information concerning the preliminary
General Plan.
We believe the plan is a major step forward for the City and represents
considerable time, effort and expense to arrive at this juncture. Many of the
concerns you express are satisfied with the flexible current language of the
plan. Other ideas should be part of a comprehensive planning process for the
Otay Ranch and rigorously tested and evaluated before consideration as changes
to the General Plan.
Although major revisions of the plan are not recommended, we would welcome
further discussion with the Baldwin Company to explore areas of common
agreement.
Sincerely,
-~eorge Krempl ~ f
Director of Planning
BG:nr
WPC 6111P
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Attachment 2
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
GENERAL FUND FISCAL IMPACT MODEL
AND FISCAL ANALYSIS OF 1989
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
Draft for Review Only
May 8, 1989
Prepared for:
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 92010
Prepared by:
P&D Technologies, Inc.
t~01 We~t A Street~ Suite 2500
San Diego, CA 92101
and
3ohn McTighe & Associates
3160 Camino del Rio South, Suite 205
San Diego, CA 92108
{P&D 0893-11~-00)
I. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
BACKGROUND ANDPURPOSE
As part of the work on the update of the City of Chula Vista General Plan, P&D
Technologies prepared in 195g a fiscal impact study of additional development
which could take place in the area covered by the plan through the year 2005. The
projected impact of this development on the City's General Fund was a net surplus
of approximately $3.8 million in constant 1956 dollars.
Upon reviewing the study, the City Council and the staff raised a number of issues
relative to the interpretation of the projected surplus and sufficiency of existing
sources of General Fund revenues. Those issues are:
1. How sensitive is the projected surplus to changes in assumptions, particularly
to differential escalation of General Fund revenues and expenditures?
2. What are fiscal impacts in intervening years to 2005 and in years beyond 2005
toward buildout of the General Plan?
3. What options exist to enhance existing or introduce new sources of revenues
to fund the City's General Fund expenditures?
Can the fiscal impact model be updated on a periodic basis to monitor the
impact oi new development on the City's overall budget?
5. What are the financing requirements of replacing older infrastructure
systems, such as pavement re. surfacing and replacement of sewage collection
systems? What sources of funds are available for funding such programs and
what impact would they have on the General Fund and Capital Improvement
Budgets?
In order to address these issues, P&D Technologies and John McTighe & Associates
proposed a phased program of fiscal modelling and analysis. The first phase is to
I-1
address questions regarding the City's General Fund budget, that is, Issues 1, 2, 3,
and 4, the last as it is related to operating, rather than capital, expenditures. The
second (future) phase would address the capital budgeting implications of Issues ~
and 5. The division into two phases was motivated by the substantially dif£erent
modelling re quirements of capital budgeting. The data for future capital programs,
including replacement needs~ also would not be available until current studies on
public facilities and on the growth management program are completed.
In 3anuary 19597 the City Council directed P&D Technologies and 3ohn McTighe
and Associates to undertake the first phase of this work. This report contains the
results of this first phase. It is based on a substantially revised model of General
Fund revenues and expenditures. The analysis primarily addresses the sufficiency
of proiected operating revenues to meet the service needs of new development
envisioned in the General Plan.
SUMMARY OF MA20R CONCLUSIONS
Impact of New Development in Constant Dollars
In constant dollar terms, new development which is envisioned by the General Plan
will result in net positive fiscal impact to the General Fund. In fiscal year 1995-
96, annual revenues from new development will exceed expenditures by $0.7 million
(1.7% of projected budget). At buildout, anticipated to take place around the year
2020, the estimated surplus is $9 million or 15% of projected budget (see Table 1).
The surplus is due principally to higher property tax revenues from new develop-
ments. Assessments on new properties more closely approximate market value
than those on existing properties. The General Plan also envisions substantial
additions in commercial and industrial uses. These will generate additional sales
tax and miscellaneous revenues. Other revenues from new developments will
generally be comparable on a per capita basis to those from existing population.
Some service costs, such as street and street tree maintenance may be higher in
new developments, due to the somewhat lower housing density. However, these are
ofiset by the higher revenues noted above.
I-2
PROJECTED REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES
~t~¢~_ FU~D, i~'o~ t4m_Al~nN
~o
~o
~ ~o
o ~0
-
~ao
PROJECTED REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES
~o ~
$1200
~oo -
19~ 19~ 19~ ~ ~ ~10
ImpaCt of Differential Cost-Revenue Escalation
Differential escalation of revenues and expenditures will have a substantial
negative impact on the General Fund, particularly during the early years. If cost
escalation exceeds revenue escalation by one-half of a percent annually, there will
be a deficit of $0.6 milllion in FY 1995-96 (-1.0% of projected budget). Over the
long term, additional revenues will offset the cost escalation. At buildout, there is
an anticipated surplus of $8 million, or 3.5% of projected budget, in spite of the
differential escalation (see Table 2).
Additional Sources of Revenue
There are a number of opportunities for enhancing General Fund revenues or for
funding existing programs with new sources. Principal and perhaps the simplest to
implement among these are increases in business licenses and recreation charges
and fees. Utility user taxes may also be increased. In addition, lighting assessment
districts may be established and surcharges made to cover the cost of street
cleaning. Moderate increases and surcharges could generate from $0.5 to $1.0
million annually.
Overall Conclusion
From a fiscal perspective, implementation of the General Plan will have a
beneficial impact on the City. Negative impacts may result from other factors,
such as an extended differential between rates of cost and revenue escalation.
There are opportunities, however, for increasing existing revenues or for funding
specific public services which are currently funded through general revenues.
These opportunities may be utilized to maintain the fiscal balance of the City in
future years.
11. STUDY METHODOLOGY
STRUCTURE OF MODEL
The fiscal impact model used in this report is a model of the City's General Fund.
As such, it reflects operating revenues, expenditures, and transfers to and from the
General Fund. It does not address capital expenditures, except those which are
included in the General Fund budget.
The model is based on actual revenues and expenditures recorded in FY 1957-$$.
The proposed budget for FY 1988-89 was also examined for comparison and for
making near-term proiections to FY 1990-91.
All items in the General Fund were reviewed and placed in one of three categories:
General revenue/expenditures, revenues for services, and non-continuing revenues.
Revenues for services are fees and charges for specific services performed by the
City. As such, neither revenues tot services nor the corresponding revenue-based
services will impact the net deficit or surplus in the General Fund. For purposes of
estimating future year budgets, however, revenues for services are computed and
set equal to revenue-based services.
Non-continuing revenues are those revenues which are not expected to be con-
tinued in future years, especially over the long term. Examples are federal
revenue sharing and some state inter-agency transfers.
General revenues and expenditures are computed as the balance of the General
Fund. They form the basis for estimating the fiscal impact of new development
under the General Plan. General revenues are typically unrestricted funds which
are not identified with specific public services, such as property tax and sales tax
revenues. Net general expenditures are those for which no specific revenues are
available for funding. They represent the core expenditures for administration and
public services.
Net general expenditures differ from reported expenditures in two ways. First,
indirect costs are allocated to direct costs following the format of the full cost
I1-1
recovery study conducted by the City of Chula Vista (Chula Vista, 1957a). Second,
revenue-based service expenditures are subtracted from the total cost.
General revenues and expenditures are converted to unit revenues and costs based
on population, housing, acres of commercial and industrial uses, and other factors.
The unit revenues and costs are directly comparable to those used by P&D
Technologies in the 1988 fiscal impact study and by 3ohn McTighe & Associates in
fiscal impact studies of specific new developments in Chula Vista, with the
following exceptions. First, the unit revenues and costs were based on actual data
from FY 1957-$$, rather than FY 1956-$7 as in the 1988 study. Second, as noted
above, the unit figures are for general revenues and expenditures only and exclude
revenues for services and the correponding revenue-based services.
The unit revenues and costs are applied to projected population and land use data in
five-year increments until buildout.
GENEI~L ASSUMPTIONS
This section discusses the general assumptions used in the fiscal impact model.
Specific assumptions are discussed as notes to individual tables contained in
Section IV.
,~nnexations
The General Plan covers a territory substantially in excess of the currently
incorporated jurisdiction. It is assumed by the plan and this study that the City
will annex (1) the unincorporated Sweetwater community (Bonita and Sunnyside)
and (2) unincorporated areas in the Eastern Territories planning area.
Annexation ot unincorporated areas in the Eastern Territories is assumed to occur
at the time of development. Hence new development in this area is treated as if it
occurs within the City. This assumption poses no substantial difficulty, since
almost all of this area is presently undeveloped and requires no services.
II-2
Annexation ol the unincorporated Bonita-Sunnyside area has an immediate impact
on the General Fund budget, since it contained 13,t~00 persons in [987. The Cityof
Chula Vista conducted a fiscal impact study of this annexation in 1955 (Chula
Vista, 1955a). The study assumed that the annexation would occur in FY 1955-$9.
A small deficit in the operating budget associated with the annexation area was
forecast for the second half of that fiscal year, but a surplus of $16,000 was
forecast for the first full year of operation in FY 1959-90.
The present study incorporated the results of the City's analysis, but the annex-
ation was postponed to the beginning of FY 1990-91. That is, changes in General
Fund revenues and expenditures resulting from the Bonita-Sunnyside annexation
reflect the incremental impacts forecast in the City's 1955 study, not the
extrapolation of existing unit revenues and costs.
Absorportion Forecasts
The absorption rates for various [and uses used in this study are derived from
growth assumptions used in the Genera[ Plan Update and from an earlier economic
study conducted by P&D Technologies for the General Plan program (P&D
Technologies, 19gTa). Population projections are generally cons[stent with
SANDAG Series 7 Forecasts and others used by the City, including the recent
master plan for the Chula Vista Civic Center. Projected absorption of residential
land assumes a balanced mix of densities as depicted in the General Plan.
Absorption of non-residential uses is based on the economic study, adjusted to
reflect the slower growths in population.
INFLATION
The General Fund revenues and expenditures are subject to different inflationary
pressures depending on the source of fund or type of public service provided. For
this study, four rates of escalation were considered.
Consumer Price Index
It is expected that most revenues and non-employee service costs would follow the
San Diego CPI (All Urban Consumers). Over the long term, other inflation indexes,
II-3
such as the housing price index, should also approximate the CPI. 1981 was the last
year in which extraordinary inflation was recorded (13.5%). Between 1982 and
1987, the CPI increased from 96.2 to 117.5, for an average of #.08% per year. In
1988, the inflation rate increased to 5%. Although long term forecasts are
difficult, this study projects average annual increases oi 5% per year through 1995,
then declining to 4% by 2005 and through buildout.
Personnel Cost
The employees of the City of Chula Vista are represented by several bargaining
units, such as the Chula Vista Employees Association, Western Council of
Engineers, and others for police and fire protection workers. Between FY 1983-8t~
and FY 1987-88, these units achieved various pay increases ranging from 3% to 9%.
When weighted by the proportions of employee service costs represented by the
bargaining units, the average increase in personnel costs is 5.65% per year. Thus
personnel costs have increased on average 1.6 percentage points above the CPI.
Housing Price Inflation
Between 1982 and 1997, the price of existing homes in San Diego County has
increased 23.5%, or an average of #.3% per year. In Chula Vista, the price of a
single family home increased an average of 6.41% per year (Greater San Diego
Chamber of Commerce, 1988). Thus Chula Vista has experienced a higher inflation
oI housing price than the County as a whole.
In the near term, it is anticipated that difficulties associated with developing new
housing, combined with a continued growth in population and the general economy,
will result in housing price inflation which exceeds the CPI for several years.
However, this is not expected to be a permanent condition. Over the long term,
price inflation should be approximately equal to the CPl. It is even possible that
over a limited time period, housing price increases will lag the CPI, as occurred in
the County from 1980 to 1985.
II-t~
Proposition 13 Limit on Assessments of Existing Property
Proposition 13 limited the reassessment of existing properties to 102% of previous
assessment, if they have not changed ownerships. Properties which have changed
ownerships may be reassessed at the new sales or market price.
Various studies of household mobility have estimated that the average turnover of
housing occupancy is about 20%, including rental units. Turnover of single family
homes is around 10% oi occupied units. Thus, on average, approximately 90% of
units will be subject to the 2% limit, while 10% of units will be reassessed at
current market value. When extrapolated over 5 years (the typical period used in
this study), approximately 60% of units will be subject to the Proposition 13 limit,
while the remaining units will have changed hands at least once during the period.
Fewer data are available regarding the turnover of business properties, including
rental properties. For this study, it is assumed that these properties change
ownerships at one-hali the rate of single family homes, or once in 20 years.
II-5
III. ALTERNATIVE REVENUES
An examination of sources of alternative revenue available to the City has been
made. This has resulted in identifying the £ollowing potential revenue oppor-
tunties:
General Revenues:
o Business Licenses (increase in existing rates)
o Utility Users Tax Increase (increase in existing rates)
Functional Revenues:
o Lighting Special Assessment (new source)
o Recreation Charges and Fees (increase in existing rates)
o Street Sweeping Surcharge (new source)
o City-wide Special Taxes (Mello-Roos) for Services (new sources):
- Police Services
Fire Protection and Suppression Services
Recreation Program Services
Library Services
Park Maintenance Services
Storm Drain System Operation and Maintenance
o Area-wide Special Taxes (Mello-Roos) for Services (new sources):
- Police Services
- Fire Protection and Suppression Services
-Recreation Program Services
Library Services
Park Maintenance Services
Storm Drain System Operation and Maintenance
Each of these is discussed in the following paragraphs:
Business Licenses
The City's business license tax revenue amounted to $353,306 in 1956-$7. The
average revenue for the eighteen cities in California in the 100,000 to 150,000
population range during 1986-87 was $1,497,232. These ranged from $198,023
reported for Sunnyvale to $4,165,118 for Berkeley. Chula Vista's business license
tax collections were the second smallest in the state in this population size range.
It appears that Chula Vista's business license tax structure has fallen behind that of
III- 1
other cities. The implication of this over the long term is that the potential
revenue associated with business license taxes will not keep pace with the growth
of business land uses (commercial and industrial). A review o£ the City ol Chula
Vista's business Ecense tax schedule shows that most categories are on a nominal
flat fee basis, with the most common being a tax with a Hat fee of $25.00 plus
$3.00 per employee. Consequently, at the present rates the business license tax
does not offer the possibility of significant increases in City revenue over time.
However, il the tax structure were to be reviewed and brought in line with those
found in other cities, the business license tax could offer the potential for more
significant revenue from the expected commercial and industrial growth contained
in the General Plan.
Utility Users Tax
The City levies a tax on the use of natural gas~ electricity and telephone services.
This tax is presently levied at the rates of $.0025 per kilowatt hour of electricity,
$.00919 per therm of gas and 5% of the intrastate telephone services revenue
collected from within the City. These rates are less than authorized in the
Municipal Code. Chapter 3.t~g of the Code allows the levy of rates of $.0030 per
kilowatt hour of electricity, $.01103 per therm of gas and 6% of intrastate
telephone services. In the current fiscal year (1988-89) the budget estimate for
revenue from Utility Users Tax is $2,019,910. If the maximum rates of Utility
Users Tax presently authorized in the Municipal Code were to be levied, an
additional gg03~992 of revenue could be raised in the current year. As the General
Plan is further built outs the potential additional revenue increases significantly.
Street Lighting Special Assessment
The City is currently spending slighting over $1 million a year for street lighting
and traffic signal maintenance. The majority of this cost is for the electrical
charges for the street lights in the City. Many cities utilize a street lighting
special assessment to offset the direct costs for maintaining street lighting. The
assessment must be established following procedures which require that a majority
protest hearing be held. Once authorized~ the City Council may annually levy the
special assessment against each parcel of land in the City that received a benefit
III-2
from street lighting. Street lighting costs are anticipated to increase as the
General Plan builds out. With a street lighting special assessment in place, these
additional costs could be directly charged to the newly developing properties. In
addition, if the cost of energy changes, these changes in cost could be reflected in
the annual special assessment for street lighting, thereby avoiding a dispropor-
tionate impact on the general fund.
Recreation Charges and Fees
The 195g-$9 budget contains estimated revenue of 385,000 from swimming pool
charges and 338,750 from the various recreation fees. In comparing Cbula Vista
with other cities in the same size range, it appears that the City's recreation
related revenues may be on the low side. The average for the 17 cities reporting
revenues in this category in 1956-87 was $606,t~69, while the City of Chula Vista's
revenue was 31#5,927. On a per capita basis Chula Vista's average recreation
revenue per capita amounts 'co $1.21 while the range for the other cities reporting
in. this category was from 3.33 to 323.09.
Recreation tee revenues can be adjusted by the City Council through resolution or
ordinance to recover up to the full cost of providing the related service. Such full-
cost recovery would be similar to what the City has put in to effect for the various
planning and building related fees. As the City grows, the gap between the amount
of cost for recreation services and the amount of revenue raised by charges for
recreation programs will increase proportionate to the current difference between -
the two. if an adjustment in fees is not made, the net deficit related to this
specific relationship will continue to increase.
Street Sweeping Surcharge
An additional opportunity for revenue may exist in the potential ~or levying an
indirect surcharge through the trash franchise that would cover the City's cost o~
street sweeping. This is a functional area where the gap between the amount of
costs incurred in street sweeping (estimated 3253,700) and the fact that there are
no revenues directly associated with such costs results in an increasing deficit as
the City increases in size. However, since the trash franchise also increases with
III-3
the size of the City, it is possible that a surcharge attached to the trash fees would
result in a proportionate increase in revenue to offset the City's increasing costs in
street sweeping.
City Special Ta~s ior Services
The ,~ello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 was created to provide a means
to finance public iacilities and a limited number of public services through a
special tax mechanism in c~mpliance with Article XIIIA of the State Constitution
(Proposition 13). Accordingly, it is possible to establish a community facilities
district which encompasses an entire city to level a special tax to pay the cost of
police services, fire protection services, recreation program services, library
services, park maintenance services and storm drain system operation and main-
tenance services. The formation o£ such a district requires a series o£ actions by
the City Council and culminates in an election at which two-thirds of the voters
must approve the level of the special tax for it to become effective. The election
determines the maximum special tax that could be levied for the purposes set
forth. The City Council would then annually determine the amount of the special
tax to levy within the maximum allowed.
There are no prescribed formulas or methods of apportioning the special tax
contained within the law. The method for tax apportionment would be determined
by the City and its special tax consultant when preparing the studies necessary to
establish such a district. This method of apportionment is then submitted to the
voters at the election.
While this revenue source is not being recommended at this time, it is being
described as one that is available to the City should there be a future need to
examine revenue sources with significant potential.
Area-wide Special Taxes for Services
The Xiello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 described in the preceding
section could also be used within a limited geographic area to fund certain city
services. The law allows the formation of community facilities districts with
11I-4
limited geographic boundaries. The law also allows the formation of districts to be
authorized by landlowener elections ii fewer than twelve registered voters reside
within the boundaries of the proposed district. However, in such cases the law
prohibits the special tax from being levied to provide for services that were being
provided to the territory prior to the formation oi the district. Therefore only
those services that are new could be included within a community facilities district
authorized by a landowner vote. Further legal analysis would be necessary to
determine the extent to which additional services not now provided to vacant land
would be considered new services and qualifying ior financing from this source.
Of the alternative revenue sources described above, two appear to be amenable to
near term implementation. They are increases in business license tax and
recreation fees and charges. If both are implemented, approximately $0.5 milllion
in annual new revenues could result, with further increases as the City continues to
Next in potential difficulty of implementation are increases in utility users tax,
imposition of a street sweeping surchage, and establishment of a street lighting
special assessment district. However, these sources together may generate
upwards of $1.0 million in new revenues annually.
Mello-Roos Community Facilities Districts are perhaps the most difficult to
establish where there are already resident households. They are easier to establish
in currently vacant areas. However, as the area gains new residents, it may
become more difficult to levy a special tax ior current services, as opposed to
repayment of capital facilities financing. For this reason, it may be preferrable to
establish a Mello-lXoos district for current services with a decreasing schedule of
special tax rates and relatively early dissolution of the district, as the area is built
out. The district may thus offer a temporary source oi operating funds, when there
are high service costs due to initial start-up and low densities of development.
II1-5
IV. FISCAL IMPACT MODEL
INDEX OF MODEL TABLES
The following tables comprise the £iscal impact model used in this study,
Table 1. General Fund Summary by Fiscal Year
Table 2. General Fund Summary by Fiscal year~ After Inflation
Table 3. Proiected Population and Land Uses
Table 4. proiected General Revenues by Fiscal Year
Table 5. Proiected General Revenues by Fiscal Year, After Inflation
Table 6. proiected Revenues for Services by Fiscal Year
Table 7. Proiected Revenues for Services by Fiscal Year, After Inflatlon
Table $. Projected Net General Expendtiures by Fiscal Year
Table 9. proiected Net General Expendtiures by Fiscal Year, After
Inflation
Table 10. Actual General Fund Revenues in FY 1987~88
Table 11. Actual General Fund Expenditures and Indirect Cost Allocation in
FY 1987-89.
Tables 3, I0 and 11 are the primary source tables. They are used to generate the
projections in Tables t~ through 9. Tables I and 2 are summaries of the projections.
IV-I
NOTES TO TABLES
i. Transfers vary from year to year. The following table compares actual
transfers in FY 1987-85 to projected transfers for FY 1988-89.
FY 1987-88 FY 1988-89
Asset Seizure Prograra -0- $ 309,290
California Library Services Act $ 163,250 108,030
Public Library Fund 63,000 I 17,050
Worker's Corn pensation Investment 69,500 57, l~00
Income
Federal Revenue Sharing 103,760 i2,200
Traffic Safety Fund t~05,000 #03,000
Sewer Service Fund #19,600 853,t~30
Montgomery Sewer Maintenance 206,670
Otay Valley Loan Repayment -0- 19~890
Debt Service 1987 Certificates of -0- (262,300)
Participation
TOTAL $1 , #30,780 $1 , 788 ~ 990
Of the above categories of transfers, federal revenue sharing and Otay Valley
loan repayment were excluded from analysis since they are not reliable
sources of funds in the future. Sewer service and Montgomery sewer
maintenance were excluded (along with full-cost expenditures on sewer and
pump maintenance), because they represent an enterprise fund, with no net
fiscal impact to the General Fund.
Projected FY 1990-91 transfers used in Tables 1 and 2 were estimated from
the projected FY 1988-89 transfers, except for debt service on 1987
Certificates of Participation, discussed below.
2. The Finance Department has projected amounts to be transferred from the
General Fund to partially pay debt service on 1987 Certificates of Partici-
pation. The amounts shown in Tables 1 and 2 are averages for the fiscal
IV-19
years ending in the year indicated. That is, FY 1990-91 estimate is the
average of FY 1955-91; FY 1995-96 estimate is the average of FY 1991-96;
and so forth.
Projected reserve balance is computed as the sum of reserve balance in the
previously shown fiscal year and the average surplus or deficit times the
number of years from the previous fiscal year.
#. Population and housing projections are based on (1) "Economic Analysis for
the City of Chula Vista Revised General Plan" (P&D Technologies, 1987a), (2)
draft City of Chula Vista General Plan (Chula Vista, 1959a), (3) for FY 200~-
06, "Fiscal Impact Analysis of Proposed General Plan" (P&D Technologies,
1955), and (#) demographic and land use data for the unincorporated
Sweetwater community (memos by Sally Sharer-Finch to the Sweetwater
Community Planning Group, August and October 1957).
Existing land use acreages are from the City of Chula Vista, "Land Use and
Zoning Analysis" (Chula Vsita, 1987b). Buildout land use data are from the
draft General Plan, adjusted to reflect net acres, e xdusiYe of street.
Differences in figures for FY 1990-91 (before and after annexation of
Sweetwater community) reflect existing population, housing, and land use for
the unincorporated community.
Population and housing projections are from a background paper prepared for
the General Plan Update, "Eastern Territories General Plan, Scenario #"
(P&D Technologies, 1997b). Figures were extrapolated for years beyond
2005.
6. From P&D Technologies (1987a); absorption to year 2000 is applied to 2005,
then extrapolated to buildout.
7. The General Plan devotes 1,035 gross acres to retail and thoroughfare
commercial uses. Assuming a net to gross ratio of 90%, this represents 932
net acres.
IV- 20
8. The General Plan devotes 255 gross acres to professional and administrative
uses. Current development practice indicates, however, that a portion of
research and development, or limited industrial, land will be devoted to
office use. This analysis assumes that i0% of R&D space will be office, or
203 gross acres, resulting in a total of 458 gross or 412 net acres.
9. The General Plan devotes 2,029 and 373 gross acres to R&D and general
industrial uses. Subtracting 203 acres Ior office use, the remaining industrial
land use is 2,201 gross or 1981 net acres.
10. Total length of City-maintained streets is assumed to grow about one-half as
much as the total developed acres of urban uses (residential, commercial and
industrial). This reflects the reduction in population density from 22.6
persons per residential acre in 1987 to 10.8 persons per acre at buildout.
11. From JHK & Associates, interpolated by developed acres.
12. From Engineering Sciences, interpolated by developed acres.
13. From City of Chula Vista, draft Fire Station Master Plan (1959b).
14. Assessed values for 1987 obtained from County of San Diego. Assessed
values in the unincorporated Sweetwater community is estimated to be $498
million (Chula Vista, 19gsa). Assessed values of newly developed properties
are estimated as indicated.
15. From City of Chula Vista (1988a). The Master Property Tax Agreement
between the City of Chula Vista and the County of San Diego would not apply
to the annexation of the Bonita-Sunnyside area.
16. From City of Chula Vista~ Finance Department; reflects the Master Property
Tax Agreement between the City of Chula Vista and the County of San
Diego.
IV-21
17. These local taxes and licenses are generated by multiple categories of land
uses. The assumed proportions are consistent with those assumed in the
fiscal impact analysis of the General Plan (P&D Technologies,
18. Assessed values are escalated as follows:
Residential Properties
- Annually, 90% of existing properties will be subject to the
Proposition 13 limit
10% of existing properties will be sold and re-assessed at market
values
All new units will be assessed at market values.
Commercial Properties
Same as residential properties, but the annual rate of ownership
turnover is assumed to be one-half of residential properties.
19. Building and other permits are related to the volume and value of new
construction. This model uses the number of new residential units as a proxy
for all new construction, including corn mercial and industrial construction.
20. Reimbursement from the Port District for maintenance of the ~ Street
Marina, assumed to be self-funding.
21. See Tables 10 and 11 for a listing or charges and fees and assignment of
revenues to departments and activities.
22. Prom City of Chula Vista (19~9b).
23. Sewer system maintenance and pomp station maintenance are enterprise fund
activities supported by charges and other revenues. They do not impact the
net General Fund balance.
IV-22
24. Escalation o£ departmental costs is assumed to be based on a mix of increases
in personne! cost and the §enera! price leve! (Consumer Price index). The
approximate proportions by which these increases affect the expenditure area
based on the mix of employee service costs and other service costs, as shown
in Table 11.
IV-23
V. LONG TERM F~CALIMPACT MODEL
(This section is currently under preparation
and will be submitted next week.)
VI. REFERENCES
Chula Vista, City of. 1987a. Untitled staff report for full cost recovery and
revision to the Master Fee Schedule. With attachments. August.
City Vista, City of. 1987b. Land Use and Zoning Analysis, City of Chula Vista
Land Use Inventory. October.
Chula Vista~ City of. 1988a. Resolution of the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista Approving the Negotiated Property Tax Exchange and Other Agreement
Relating to the Bonita-Sunnyside Reorganization (Resolution No. 13988).
With attached staff report. March.
Chula Vista, City of. 1985b. 1988-89 Proposed Budget. May.
Chula Vista, City of. 1989a. General Plan (Draft).
Chula Vista, City of. 1989b. Fire Station Master Plan (Draft). Revised March.
Greater San Diego Chamber of Commerce. 1988. Housing Market Price Index --
Percent Change in Value, Communities and Cities in San Diego County 1977-
1988. Economic Bulletin~ Vol. 36, No. I0. November.
P&D Technologies, 1987a. Economic Analysis for the City of Chula Vista Revised
General Plan. January.
P&D Technologies, 1987b. The City of Chula Vista General Plan Update, Eastern
Territories General Plan, Scenario #. December.
P&D Technologies. 1988. The City of Chula Vista General Plan Update, Fiscal
Impact Analysis of Proposed General Plan. Revised April. With addendums
issued in June and July.
VI-I
ATTACH MENT 3
Recommended Text Modifications to Draft ChulaVista General Plan
ITEM CHAPTER PAGE DESCRIPTION
i I 1-2 Add sentence to Section 2.1 Land Use as follows:
"Surrounding jurisdictions include National City to the north
and west~ San Diego County to the north~ east and south and
the City of San Die$o to the south."
2 1-9 Revise Objective 22 as follows:
Obiective 22. Focus regional traffic corridors traversing the
general plan area to Interstate 3, Interstate 805, State Route
5% and the proposed State Route 123. Major east-west roads
should be used to effectively distribute traffic to the north-
south f reewa~s."
3 I 1-13 Change last sentence of descriptien of Residential Low-
Medit~n to read as follows:
"Under clustered site plans and within community activity
centers some units of hi~her density would also be consistant
with this designation.'
~ i 1-16 Add Item 3 to list of Mi~ed Land Use Areas as follows and
renumber previous Items 3 and # appropriately:
"3. The Eastlake Village Center at the intersection of
Telegraph Canyon Road and State Route 123. This area is
desisnated for community retail~ high density residential,
professional and administrative offices."
3 I 1-22 Change Items 1 and 2 of the criteria for transfer o£ density
to read as follows:
"1. Transfer of density in permitted as an opportunity in an
urban development area between a potential residential area
and a residential development area as noted above."
............ lt~.
"3. Allowable rate of transfer is indicated in the Table 1-5."
6 1 1-23 Change Table 1-3 as follows:
1. Expand description of transfer allowance to "Maximum
D ensit y T ransf er AII owan ce".
2. Under 2.0 Schools; indicate 2.1 Higher education
facilities, 2.2 High schools and 2.3 Junior high schools as
"Potential Residential DeveloFment Area".
7 1 1-26 Change in Section 6.4 Multi-family Residential Develol~nent,
Item 1 to read as follows:
"1. Multi-family development in existing neighborhoods
should be located on parcels directly accessable from a
g-lane collector or higher classification street. Multi-
family development can be considered on lesser
classified streets in the developing areas of the city if
supported by an acceptable traffic analysis."
g 1 1-35 Change the section entitled Eastern Urban Center to read as
follows:
"The Easter Urban Center is a new concentration of urban
facilities and services. It is located in the area bounded by
Orange Avenue on the north, Route 12~ on the east, and Olay
Lakes Road on the west and south. The major facilities
planned for this area are discussed in the Eastern Territories
Area Plan. This urban center is expected to be developed at a
time considerably in the future. Development will respond to
public facility availability and area need." T!:z !t~tial
· ~ ....... ~ · ..... 2000.
9 i 1-37 Change the second sentence of the first paragraph of
Gommunity Activity Centers to read as follows:
"They are not exclusively community retail centers and may
include hiEher density residential, employment, education,
health care, recreation and other public and private
Set vi ces
10 I 1-38 Change the section entitled Olay River Valley to Olay Lal~e
Regional Park as follows:
"This major regional open space corridor is to be improved
with a series of community, neighborhood and spedal purpose
parks.
candidate sites place improved parks along this section in the
Greenbelt at approximately l~ to 2 mile intervals with
interconnecting bicycle and hiking trails. The eastern
terminus of this Greenbelt section is the Otay Lake County
Parkexpanded to a full regional park facility.
This portion of the Chula Vista Greenbelt is a important
re~onal recreation area and as such should include a broad
variety of recreation and open space uses ran~in~ from
natural or restored habitats to public or private active
recreation. This portion of the greenbelt will act as the
centerpiece of the entire system extendin~ from the
water~ront to Salt Creel< and Otay Lakes."
11 2 2-27 Change the fourth bulleted item to read as follows:
"o Palomar Street from Interstate 5 east to the intersection
of to Orange Avenue and Palomar Street )ust east of
Broadway." =a=th af Cku!=
12 2 2-32 Change the first sentence of the second paragraph under
Sectio~ 6. Circulation Plan to read as follows:
"It is important to reco~aize that the alignments shown
within the Orange Avenue corridor and San Miguel corridor
are Eeneral in nature and actual alignments will depend on
future detailed studies so as to best relate to issues of
toposraph},, utilit}' easements, environmental issues and other
factors." are '--*~*: ..... ~ arc =ub~=t *~ ~'~ .... *'*~*:* '~
13 3 3-2~ Change ;tern 7 under the section Otay~/ater District to read
as follows:
"(7) The area within the Otay Ranch United Enterprises land~
east of Medical Center Drive, north of the Otay River,
west of the lower Otay Reservoir, and south of
Telegraph Canyon Road should be served by separate
facilities as determined at the time development [~ans
l# 7 7-9 Change Table 7-2 Existing and Future Chula¥ista Commt~ity
and Neighborhood Parks as follows:
1. Delete Item "I.1 Sunbow" and renumber following items
appropriately.
2. Add items "2.31 Eastlake Greens, 2.32 Eastlake Trails
and 2.33 Salt Creek."
15 7 7-1# Change the first sentence of Section 6-6 Spedal Purpose
]Parks or Recreation Areas to read as follows:
"Chula Vista will consider the creation of special purpose
parks or recreation areas, either public or private, at the
time suitable property may become avaiiable for such a use
and there is a suffident resident demand for the spedalized
acti vi t y ;'
16 l0 10-6 Include two additional objectives ruder Goal I. Urban Growth
amd Chan~e as follows and renumber subsequent goals as
appropriate:
"Objective 4. Promote the consolidation of small lots and
redeveioj~ment of comprehensively planned and desiEned
commericaJ and residential projects."
"Obiective ~. Facilitate the redeveloj~ment of the area along
the Woodlawn corridor between E and H Streets."
17 14 14-6 Change under Goal 2. ~Je~v Urban De~lopme~t, the
parenthetical phrase in the first sentence from (20 to 30
years) to (20 to ~0 years).
lg 14 14-$ Change the first bulleted item on page 14-~ to read:
o "The dominate residential land use is in the low and
low/medium categories, representing detached single
family homes, although significant opportunities for
higher density single and multi-family homes will also be
pro vi ded ."
19 14 14-9 Change the first sentence of the last paragraph of Section 5.1
R esidenti al Character the wot d "sm alle r" to "other".
20 14 1~-11 Replace the second paragraph including the list of areas and
& 12 description of vehicular access with the £ollowinF¢
The principal vehicular access to the land use sub-areas (Figure
14-2) is as follows:
IA Residential - Otay Lakes Road and Rutgers Avenue
lB Residential- Rutgers Avenue
2 Residential - Eastlake Parkway
3 Eastern Urban Center - Otay Lakes Road and Rutgers
A yen ue
Business Park- Eastlake Parkway
4BBusiness Park- Eastlake Parkway and Hunte Parkway
5University - Orange Avenue and Eastlake Parkway
21 14 14-13 Change the last sentence of the first paragraph under the
section entitled Pedestrian and Bicycle Transportation and
the subsequent balleted list as Iollows:
'?, tyre2 cf ="x Several segments of the open space and trail
system connect to this concourse. These include:
o Rutgers Avenue trail and open space.
o ~ Wolf Canyon.
o Eastlake Parkway north to the Eastlake High School and
community park.
o Eastlake Parkway south to the residenti~ neigh~rhood
and commerdal center.
o Otay V~ley Park Road to the re~al ~rk."
Add a sentence after the first sentence of the second
paragra~ ruder the section entitled ~ic Tramit as
f oll ow s:
"In addition to these locations other sto~ ma7 be warranted
in Eastern Territories"
22 14 1~-15 Delete ~der the section entitled E~tern Ur~n Center the
phrase "a 276 acre area" from the first sentence of the first
paragra~.
23 l~ 1~-17 Change the first sentence of the fourth paragraph of S~i~
5.~ Other A~vity C~tem~ Ch~a Vi~a Commuffity H~t~
A~tyCenter to read as follows:
"The site planing of this area shoed demonstrate
com~tibility of the placement of non-m~ic~ buil~n~ dose
to me~cal facilities. The hospit~ and related uses shoed be
protected ~*~* *~ ~*~ ~ :*- ~'~*~ ..... from
mnecess~y noise~ traffic and other disruptions from
commerci~ and other high intensity activities."
2~ i~ 1~-18 Change ruder S~tim 5.5 C~e~ C~mmity ~r~ the
list of community ~r~ to delete "6. Smbow" and renum~r
following items appro~iately.
Add the following sentence to the end of the second
para graph:
"Locati~s and configuration of the commmit7 ?ar~ and
trail sTstems shall ~ in accordance with the ~rk location
criteria included in Section 6.10 o~ the Parks and Recreation
Element and with the godelines for the Ch~a Vista
Greenbelt included in the Land Use Element~ Parks and
Recreation Element and Eastern Territories Area Plan."
25 I# lt~-20 Change the section entitled Mo~tain Landlorms as follows:
Mother Mi~uel Mountain is the most prominant mountain in
the Eastern Territories.
~:o'dnt-~2n. Mother Miguel Mountain should be preserved as
open space with no development on the slopes which define
the mass of the mountain. Limited low density residential
develol~nent may be permitted on the lower portion of the
foothills situated northwest and southwest of the mass of the
mountain if site planning can adequately address the hillside
development guidelines, environmental issues including
particularly wastewater and storm drainage away from the
Sweetwater Reservoir, preservation of important views to
and from the site and grading in a manner which keeps cut
and fill slopes to a minimum.
Another significant land form in Eastern Territories is Rock
Mountain. On the north and easterly sides of Rock Mountain
low density residential is shown on the land use plan adiacent
to but not intruding into the slopes which define the mass of
the mountain. The continuation of the rock quarry operation
on the south side of Rock Mountain adjaent to Otay Valley is
permitted consistant with the provisions in the Open Space
and Conservation Element, and required permits of the
regul ati ng age ndi es.
26 14 14-21 Change the third sentence of Item 3 to read as follows:
"A cluster plan should create an open space buffer adjacent
to the business park, and may include local parks, and
recreation facilities and circulation elements include an
arrangement of residential uses and circulation so as to
achieve an appropriate transition between business park and
residential community."
27 14 1~-23 Change Item 2 to two separate items as follows and renumber
following items as appropriate:
2. Wastewater from developed areas to gravity flow west
to utility systems in Salt Creek.
3. Storm drainage from developed areas to be collected in
an urban runoff system and~ by gravity flow, directed
away from the reservoir.
Change the first sentence of Item ~ (previously Item 3) to
read as follows:
"Site planning, grading, landscaping and architectural design
which is oriented to produdng a high quality view from the
lake and open space and parks east of the lake to the various
developments visible from the lake and Wueste Road."
28 1# 1#-23 Add Section 5.10 Otay Ranch to Chapter i# -Eastern
Territories Area Plan to read as follows:
SECTION 5.10 - OTAY RANCH
The City of Chula Vista is cognizant of the strategic
importance of the Otay Ranch to the entire South Bay Re~ion
of San Diego County and to the City of Chula Vista. The
City has included the portion of Otay Ranch west of the Otay
Lakes in its planning area since 196#.
The City recognizes that it is important that the General
Plan be flexible. It should be ca~able of modification based
on the results of planning stuclies in the future that are more
detailed and focused than those used to prepare the General
Plan.
The city further recognizes that the development of Otay
Ranch will have a substantial impact on Chula Vista andy
therefore~ the City Council has adopted a "Statement of
Intent~' regarclinE the cooperative relationship with the
property owner in plannin~ the property. The City wants to
work with the owner of the Otay Ranch property to prepare a
comprehensive master plan at the earliest possible date. The
property owner has indicated that they wi]] utilize their best
efforts to incorperate the major opportunities as set forth in
the General Plan such as the university~ regional ~ark and
urban center. This master plan should include the entire
Otay Ranch (22,500 acreas) in order to determine the long
term plans for appropriate development and preservation of
the property.
The Cit)as General Plan document is the most comprehensive
planning to date for this area and represents the broad
desires of the City of Chula Vista. The Otay Ranch is
encouraged to proceed with a comprehensive planning
pro,ram to identify plan refinements or amendments
necessary to best accomplish the ~oals and objectives of the
General Plan.
29 Appendix A-10 Change the definition of Sphere of Influence to read:
"Sphere of Influence. A plan for the probable ultimate
physical bot~dary and service area of a local agency,"
30 Appendix N/A Relocate Items 1-3 listed t~der Appendix entitled Reference
to Major Adopted Git}, Plans; A. Specific Plans/Planned
Comrnt~ities to the list of Addilional General Plan
Doc~nents as Items 3, 6, and 2 respectively and renumber
other items appropriately.
31 Appendix A-10 Add definition of SpedficPlan to read:
"Specific Plan. A development plan that includes text and
diagrams specifying in detail all the items contained in
California Government Code Section 65451."
32 Appendix A-10 Add definition of Sectional Plan Area (SPA) Plans to read:
"Sectional Plan Area (SPA) Plans. A subcommunit¥ of a
planned community area or neighborhood created for the
purpose of having identified planning units, which have
common services, a strong internal unity and integrated
pattern of land uses and circulation."
33 Introduction Change the second sentence of section entitled Additional
xiv Planning and add an additional sentence as follows:
"This is expected to include a variety of Specific 5p::[a!
Plans, Sectional Plan Area (SPA)~ Plans, site plans,
architectural and engineering design. These are seen as a
refinement of the general plan but in more detail with more
precise land use allocation as well as implementing
ordinances and text which are in concert with the goals and
objectives of the general plan."
Recommended Map Modifications to Draft Chula Vista General Plan
1. General
1.1 Identification in the Land Use Legend under "Special Plan Area" a
second type of area entitled 'Special Study Area" and a map note
indicating "Special Study Areas are subject additional, future planning
and studies to identify plan amendments necessary to best accomplish
the goals and objective of the General Plan."
1.2 Locate the existing and future fire station in accordance with the Draft
Fire Station Master Plan dated March 23, i959.
2. Bayf font Plan Area
2.1 Revision to the Mid-Bayfront plan to reflect the adopted Local Coastal
Plan and also reflect the results of the Sierra Club lawsuit against the
City of Chula Vista.
2.2 Designation of the Mid-Bay~ront portion of the Bayfront as a Special
Study Area.
Central Chula Vista
3.1 Correct the boundary of the General Plan Area to include all land south
of State Route 5#.
3.2 Change the designation of the parcel on the west side of Broadway
between E Street~ Flower Street and 3efferson Avenue from Visitor
Commerical to Retail Commerical.
3.3 Designation of the residential medium area east of Second Avenue and
north of D Street extended and south of the Sweetwater Flood Control
Channel as a Special Study Area.
Sweetwater
Correction of the boundary of the General Plan Area to delete the area
within the National City Sphere of Influence.
Delete the neighborhood park designation from the Bonita Meadows
project.
5. Eastern Territories
5.1 Add a commercial retail designation to the property north of Sunbow
and south of Telegraph Canyon Road.
Realign East H Street east of State Route 125 to reflect the current
plans for Rancho San Miguel and Salt Creek Ranch and change the
designation of the additional property south of East H Street to
Residential Low Medium (3-6 du./ac.)
Revise the location of the park site in Eastlake Greens to a location
south of the elementry school and east of Eastlake Parkway.
Designation of the Otay Ranch portion of Eastern Territories as a
Special Study Area.
5.5 Designation of the approximately 13 acre area south of the Eastlake
High School as Residential Low-Medium (3-6 du./ac.)
5.6 De$±gnation of two add±tional elementary school $±tes in the
Eastern Territories.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of May 31, 1989 Page 1
3. CONSIDERATION OF CEQA FINDINGS & STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION
A. BACKGROUND
The final EIR for the General Plan Update identifies several
potentially significant environmental impacts.
When an EIR has been completed which identifies one or more
significant environmental impacts, one of the following findings must
be made:
1. Changes or alternatives have been required of, or incorporated
into the project which mitigate or avoid the significant
environmental effects identified in the final EIR, or
2. Such changes or alternatives are within the responsibility and
jurisdiction of another public agency making the finding.
3. Specific economic, social or other considerations make
infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives
identified in the final EIR.
The attached findings are made relative to the conclusions of the
final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed General Plan
Update based on the EIR text and appendices, and all documents, maps
and illustrations included in the public record.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Adopt that attached "CEQA findings" statement of overriding
considerations.
C. CLASSIFICATIONS OF IMPACTS
The following impacts have been found in the final EIR to be clearly
less than significant:
1. Community social factors
2. Community tax structure
3. Utilities (gas & electric)
Impacts in the following areas have been found to be mitigated to a
level less than a significant:
1. Hydrology/water quality
2. Geology/mineral resources
3. Archaeolo~t~
4. Paleontology
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 31, 1989 Page 2
5. Noise (developing areas)
6. Land Use/Zoning
7. Parks & Recreation
8. Services
9. Hazardous Waste/Risk of Upset
Based on a preliminary analysis, subject to refinement when more
precise development plans are available, the impacts in the following
areas would be significant:
1. Air Quality
2. Biology
3. Noise (existing urban areas)
4. Conversion of agricultural land
5. Landform/aesthetics
6. Land use/zoning (existing urban area along "H" Street)
7. Open space
8. Transportation
WPC 6289P
CHULA VISTA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
EIR #gg-2
CANDIDATE CEQA FINDINGS
In Accordance with Section 21081 of the
California Environmental Quality Act and
Section 15091 of Title I~ of the
California Administratic~ Code
May 31, 1989
I. BACKGROUND
It is the policy of the State of California and the City of Chula Vista that the City
shall not approve a proiect if it would result in a significant environmental impact
if it is feasible to avoid or substantially lessen that effect. Only when there are
specific economic, social or technical reasons which make it infeasible to mitigate
an impact, can a proiect with significant impact be approved.
Therefore, when an EIR has been completed which identifies one or more
significant environmental impacts~ one of the following findings must be made:
1. Changes or alternatives have been required of~ or incorporated into the
project which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects
identified in the final EIR, or
2. Such changes or alternatives are within the responsibility and iurisdic-
tion of another public agency and not the agency making the finding.
3. Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the
mitigation measures or proiect alternatives identified in the final EIR.
The following findings are made relative to the conclusions of the final Environ-
mental Impact Report (E1R) for the proposed General Plan Update (Sch #88052511)
based on the ErR text and appendices, and all documents, maps and illustrations
induded in the public record.
!I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project is an update of the Chula Vista General Plan. The proposed
update substantially revises the Land Use~ Circulation and Public Facilities
Elements of the General Plan and modifies the other existing Elements for
consistency. It should be noted that there is no proposed development associated
with this project, as the "project" is the Plan Update.
The EIR is a "tierecf' EIR (CEQA Guidelines Section 15152). The General Plan
Amendment tiering concept allows agendes to deal with broad environmental
issues in ErRs in early planning stages and then provide more detailed examination
of specific proiects that are consistent with or implement the General Plan in later
EIRs. The later ErRs are excused from repeating the analysis of the broad
environmental issues examined in earlier EIRs.
Ill. INSIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
The Final EIR for the General Plan Update concluded that the proiect would not
have any significant adverse impacts in the ~ollowing areas (numbers refer to the
section of the EIR where the issue is discussed).
Community Sodal Factors (3.10)
CommmityTax Structure (3.1 i)
Public Utilities (Gas and Electric) (3.13)
-1-
~/'. IMPACTS FOUND TO BE MITIGABLE TO INSIGNIFICANT LEVELS
1. GEOLOGY/SOILS/MINERAL RESOURCES (:3. l)
The presence of known fault traces~ andent and/or recent landslides~ areas of
liquefaction, geologic formations and soil associations with known instability
will require further investigation in more detailed stuc~es prior to specific
project approval.
Findinl~s
A. Changes and other measures have been included in the project or are
otherwise being implemented which mitigate this environmental effect
in that:
1) For each future development proposal, site specific/project
specific detailed surface and subsurface geotechnical stu&es must
be conducted to ascertain specific site conditions and potential
hazards.
2) Certain areas should be avoided for development. These include
landslide areas~ alluvium near streambeds~ MRZ-2 classified
areas~ and fault areas.
3) Site specific investigations should be required to to accurately
define the fault location and incorporate setbacks of at least 30
feet.
#) Site specifi% project-specific evaluation to determine the quality
of the aggregate resource should be conducted.
5) All sand and gravel extraction operations shall include a
restoration plan that relates to the goals of the Chula Vista
Greenbelt and will assist in its implementation through creation
of trails, parks and restored habitat.
B. Ali significant effects will be eliminated by virtue of mitigation
measures identified in the Final EIR and changes incorporated into the
project as set forth above.
2. HYDROLOGY/WATER QUALITY (3.2)
Future development in the General Planning Area would result in over-
covering of the soils and increased surface water runoff. Potentially adverse
impacts would result if ckainage facilities are not sized to accommodate
future flow.
Findings
A. Changes and other measures have been included in the proiect or are
otherwise being implemented which mitigate this environmental effect
in that:
-2-
1) Projects will be in compliance with the Public Facilities Element
and Drainage Master Plans of the City.
B. All significant effects will be eliminated by virtue of mitigation
measures identified in the Final FIR and changes incorporated into the
project as set forth above.
3. ARCHAEOLOGY/PALEONTOLOGY (3.#)
Several areas of high- and medium-potential for archaeological and
paleontological resources have been identified in the Planning Area. The
potential for future development to significantly impact resources is high.
Findi nss
A. Changes and other measures have been included in the proiect or are
otherwise being implemented which mitigate this environmental effect
in that:
1) Any future development projects in t[~ Eastern Territories~
5weetwater and Montgomery regions, should conduct archaeo-
logical surveys to document the potential existence of sites that
could be affected by development.
2) In the Bayfront and Central Chula Vista areas, archaeological
surveys may be required of any development projects that include
vacant or previously undisturbed acreage. Particular care should
be taken to require historical studies for any structures that
appear to be architecturally or historically sensitive.
3) If future surveys document a historic or pcehistoric site, then
further study will be required in accordance with CEQA. Impacts
to cultural resources should be mitigated through either
preservation or data recovery.
4) Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a project applicant should
present a letter to the City of Chula Vista indicating that a
qualified paleontologist has been retained to carry out an
appropriate mitigation program.
5) A paleontological monitor should be on-site during the original
cutting of previously undisturbed sediments of the San Diego and
Otay formations and at least half-time during cutting of
previously undisturbed sediments of unnamed marine terrace
deposits~ unnamed river terrace deposits, Sweitzer, Sweetwater
and Mission Valley formations.
6) When fossils are diseavered, the paleontologist (or paleontological
minitor) should recover them. Fossil remains should be cleaned,
stored, catalouged and deposited in a sdentific institution with
paleontological collections such as the San Diego Natural Hisotry
Museum.
-3-
B. All significant effects will be eliminated by virtue of mitigation
measures identified in the Final EIR and changes incorporated into the
project as set forth above.
TRANSPORTATION/ACCESS (3.1#)
The proposed circulation network for the City of Chula Vista would be
adequate to accommodate future land uses and traffic growth in most areas,
and traffic would flow at level of service C. The intersection of Paseo
Ranchero at Otay Valley Road has been identified as potentially congested as
well as the East H Street/I-S05 interchange. These impacts are considered
significant but mitigable.
Findinlss
A. Changes and other measures have been incorporated in the project or
are otherwise being implemented which mitigate this environmental
effect in that:
I) The General Plan Circulation Element contains a circulation map
with roadway classifications designed to accommodate the pro-
jected traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service.
2) The General Plan Update provides for a broad range of land uses
including employment and recreational opportunities. This will
serve to reduce the number of external or regional trips.
3) The Circulation Element encourages a regional transit system
along the 5R-125 route corridor~ an east-west bus route to
connect the existing urban core and future eastern urban center,
and an urban core/bayfront shuttle.
#) All future projects will be reviewed on a project-by-project basis
for conformance with the Circulation Element~ Threshold Policy
and to determine site specific impacts.
The Paseo Ranchero/Otay Valley intersection should be designed
as a grade-separated facility to eliminate turn-movement
conflicts.
6) The I-g05/East H Street intersection could be addressed in several
ways. Traffic reduction measures could be implemented for l-g05
including a high occupancy vehicle and/or express bus on l-g05
and traffic demand management measures in future projects. The
intersection geometry and signals could be coordinated to
minimize turn-movement conflicts.
All significant effects will be eliminated by virtue of mitigation
measures as identified in the Final EIR and changes incorporated into
the project as set forth above.
-4-
5. NOISE (3.8)
Significant noise impacts would occur if residential units are constructed
within future 65 dB(A) CNEL contours, adjacent to roadways or construction
noise exceeds the City standards. Th~s situation applies primarily to the
rural) undeveloped areas of the City~ Eastern Territories and Sweetwater. In
the built areas of the City (Central) Bay~ront and Montgomery)~ additional
traffic on existing streets fronted by existing homes) could result in sig-
nificant, unmitigable impacts. Th~s issue is discussed in part V of these
Findings.
Findings
A. Changes and other measures have been included in the project or are
otherwise being implemented which mitigate this environmental effect
in that:
I) The City would adopt a Noise/Land Use Compatibility matrix to
serve as a guideline. This matrix would be created specifically by
the City or they could adopt the City of San Diego's.
2) For each future development proposal, site specific/project
specific detailed acoustical analyses would be required. These
analyses would refine the ultimate expected noise volumes and
determine the extent and design of all noise attenuation
measures. Such measures include walls~ special construction
materials in windows and walls and site design to place sensitive
receptors with acceptable noise contours.
B. All significant effects to noise in the Eastern Territories and Sweet-
water Planning areas will be eliminated by virtue of mitigation
measures identified in the Final EIR and changes incorporated into the
project as set forth above.
6. GENERAL PLAN/LAND USE/ZONING (3.9)
Adoption of the proposed General Plan Update would result in no substantial
changes to the existing General Plan or land uses in the Montgnmery~
Bayfront~ or Sweetwater Planning areas. The Plan would involve substantial
land use changes in the Central Chula Vista Planning area west of Broadway.
The Plan Update would involve substantial changes to the existing land uses
in the Eastern Territories as rural land would be developed with urban land
uses. In one area of the Central Chula Vista core, the proposed plan would
result in significant, unmitigable land use incompatibility when a 6-lane
major roadway (H Street) is created adjacent to existing, predominantly
residential uses. This impact is discussed in Part V of these Findings.
Findings
A. Changes and other measures have been included in the project or are
otherwise being implemented which mitigate this environmental effect
in that:
i) All policies and guidelines o£ the Land Use Element) particularly
community and urban design)should be adhered to in the planning
and approval process.
2) The City should initiate a work effort to review all land use
designations associated with the General Plan Update and existing
zoning to evaluate consistency and correct any discrepancies.
B. All significant effects Mil be eliminated by virtue of mitigation
measures identified in the Final EIR and changes incorporated into the
project as set forth above.
7. PARKS AND RECREATION (3.12)
The projected popolation at I~ildout of the General Plan area is 20%#00
persons. This increase in population will create a greater need for park and
recreation facilities. To meet this demand, at least 22 new parks and
recreation areas are proposed. Additional mini-parks and special purpose
parks would be located when more detailed planning of specific projects is
completed. Based on the projected population of the General Plan area and
the total of 1,116 acres of park land within the area, a total of 5.33 acres of
park land would be provided for every 1,000 persons. Applying the City)s
standards of 3 acres per 1,000 residents (east of I-$05), the General Plan
would provide sufficient park and recreation facilities.
Findi n~s
The proposed General Plan Update will create no significant impacts in this
category.
8. UTILITIES AND SERVICES (3.13)
Implementation of the General Plan Land Use Element would result in
additional population which would generate students, consume water,
generate wastewater and place an increased demand on fire and police
providers. The Land Use Element does incorporate existing and future school
site locations to meet projected demands. With the exception of two
elementary school sites, facilities have been adequately planned. A substam
tial increase in police personnel would be necessary to meet additional
demand, as well as a second police facility. Additional fire stations would be
necessary as well. The infrastructure system for water delivery within the
service area of the Sweetwater Authority is planned to accommodate
buildout; however, there is no guaranteed supply of water from Northern
California or the Colorado River. The Otay Water District must make
substantial improvements to their infrastructure to assure delivery and is also
subject to the regional constraint of uncertain water supply. Until the San
Diego METRO wastewater treat-merit system upgrade is complete, there is
not enough capacity to treat the sewage to be generated at buildout.
Findings
A. Changes and other measures have been included in the project or are
otherwise being implemented which mitigate this environmental effect
in that:
-6-
1) All future developments would be evaluated on a proiect-by-
project basis for their impacts to the school system and consis-
tency with the Land Use Element.
2) All developers would pay school fees oi $1.53 per square foot of
habitable space for residential development and $.2} per square
foot for commercial development.
3) The General Plan Update should incorporate two new elementary
school sites to assure no impacts to schools.
4) The City may condition project approval on requiring compliance
with the school district's recommendations, through Mello-Roos
district or other alternative forms of financing as needed.
To minimize demand on police providers, preventive measures
should be implemented at the neighborhood level, specifically
crime watch programs. The Police Department must work with
developers and other City departments in determining appropriate
location, accessibility and land use compatibility standards for a
new police station site. They must also provide protection in
accordance with the Standards in the Threshold Policy.
6) The Fire Department must review all development proposals for
consistency with the Fire Station Location Study and the
Standards of the Threshold Policy.
7) The Master Plans of the 5weetwater Authority and OWD should be
reviewed at least every five years or when land use designations
are modified to determine the need for new treatment, storage
and distribution facilities.
8) As required by the Threshold Policy, the City must prepare an
annual l~-month development forecast for the CWA, Sweetwater
Authority, and Otay Water District. Also, prior to approval of
development plans, the developer shall obtain a water service
availalility letter from the pertinent water district. This will
phase development to match the available water supply.
9) The City should work with the Sweetwater Authority, OWD and
CWA to achieve construction of a third aqueduct to supply water
to the region.
10) The City shah also encourage and monitor water conservation
techniques and programs by implementation of the policies con-
tained in the General Plan including:
o Mandate the use of water conservation devices in new
development including low water use toilets, shower iixtures
and other amenities.
o Promote low water usage landscaping that is drought
tolerant.
-7-
o Mandate the use of reclaimed wastewater for all reasonable
applications except in severe hardship cases.
o Estab]ish~ in concert with the water agencies~ a public
inlormafion program to educate the community concerning
water conservation and the use of reclaimed wastewater.
o EstabEsh a water conservation monitoring program.
il) Construction and upgrading of new wastewater transmission
facilifies would be in cortformance with the Public Facilities
Element of the General Fian and the Wastewater Master Plan.
The City should actively participate in the METRO expansion
planning process. A phased reclamation program should be
designed and existing wastewater programs should be maximized.
13. All significant effects will be eliminated by virtue of mitigation
measures identified in the Final EIR and changes incorporated into the
project as set forth above.
9. HAZARDOUS WASTE/RISK OF UPSET (3.15)
Within the City of ChulaVista there are 27 known and listed hazardous waste
sites as well as one hazardous waste treatment site. Future development
may result in significant impacts if such development allows greater contact
between humans and hazardous waste.
FindinEs
A. Changes and other measures have been included in the project or are
otherwise being implemented which mitigate this environmental effect
in that:
l) The City would work with the County to encourage a reduction in
household waste generation and safe disposal of waste. Prior to
approval of development plans the City shall refer to the State
Hazardous ~/aste and Substances Site List to verify the potential
for direct or indirect impacts to hazardous waste. When any
development is proposed on or near a known hazardous waste site,
an analysis would be prepared to verify potential impacts and
devise a dean-up method if necessary.
B. All significant effects will be eliminated by virtue of mitigation
measures identified in the Final ErR and changes incorporated into the
project as set forth above.
V. IMPACTS POUND INFEASIBLE TO MITIGATE TO AN INSIGNIFICANT LEVEL
It should be noted that the conclusions reported in these Findings are based on
assumed worst-case conditions and general development concepts. At the time of
actual development, site-specific, project specific evaluation will be undertaken.
At that time the conclusions and analysis of significance may change.
-$-
1. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES (3.3)
Development of the planning area (specifically Eastern Territories) consistent
with the Plan Update would result in the loss of considerable acreage of
native habitats and open foraging grounds. These habitats are known to
support many sensitive plant and animal species, Eventual buildout would
result in significant, cumulative impacts to biological resources which are
unmi ti ga ble.
Findings
A. Changes and other measures have been incorporated in the project or
are otherwise being implemented which mitigate this environmental
effect in that:
1) Mitigation measures are recommended on a species or habitat
basis ~ be implemented by the environmental review process of
the City.
2) A significant amount of open space and preserval, ion of natural
habitat is a central feature of the Plan Update.
3) A landscape plant materials selection guideline is provided for
future planning purposes.
A land clearing ordinance should be adopted by the City to
minimize the destruction of native habitat assodated with land
clearing. This would be interfaced with any fire modification
programs undertaken by the Fire Department.
B. Potential mitigation measures or project alternatives which would
eliminate or substantially lessen the environmental effects and were
not incorporated into the project were found infeasible, based on
economic, social, and other considerations as set forth in the Final EIR
and listed below.
1) The loss of some native habitat is considered unavoidable because
the planning area includes a large area that is relatively undis-
turbed by previous activity.
2) To develop the planning area in a manner that would retain
substantially more open space would result in an inefficient
infrastructure desig% poor community structure and would not be
responsive to the current and forecasted housing market needs.
3) The preservation of all biological resources would eliminate the
proposed housing~ employment and recreational opportunities in-
corporated into the General Plan Update and conflict with the
basic intent of the General Plan process.
#) Such preservation would preclude the City of Chula Vista from
benefitting from the projected increase in net revenue which
-9-
would accrue to the City from development of the Eastern
Territories.
5) The preservation of the biological resources of the Eastern
Territories would preclude the property owners from achieving
the goals of eventually developing their land.
C. All significant biological environmental effects that can feasibly be
avoided have been eliminated or substantially lessened by viture of the
project changes and mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR and
incorporated in the proiect as set forth above. There remain some
cumulatively significant biological impacts.
D. The remaining unavoidable significant effects have been reduced to an
acceptable level when balanced against the facts set forth above and in
the Statement of Overriding Considerations.
2. NOISE (3.6)
The increase in traffic would result in additional noise generated along
roadways. In the existing urban area some sensitive receptors, primarily
residential development, may be subject to exterior noise levels in excess of
65 dB(A). Give that mitigation may be impractical or infeasible, some
significant, unmitigable impacts would occur.
Findings
A. Changes and other measures have been incorporated in the proiect or
are otherwise being implemented which mitigate this environmental
e~fect in that:
l) Construction o~ noise attenuation barriers (walls), special con-
struction materials in windows and walls and site design to place
sensitive receptors within acceptable noise contours.
2) Eliminate trucks from the roadway which can reduce the noise
generated by 2-3 dB(A).
3) Remedial action to reduce the interior noise level to 45 dB(A) by
installation of double-paned windows, room or central air con~
di ti oni ng.
B. Potential mitigation measures or project alternatives which would
eliminate or substantially lessen the environmental effects and were
not incorporated into the project were found infeasible, based on
economic, sodal, and other considerations as set forth in the Final EIR
and listed below.
1) The right-of-way on an existing street may be inadequate to
construct a noise wall.
-10-
2) The removal of truck trips from drculation element roads would
be infeasible~ particularly because the subject roads serve to
access the central Chula Vista commerciai core.
3) The installation of double-paned windows, on a large scal% would
be infeasible.
C. All significant noise environmental effect that can feasibly be avoided
have been eliminated or substantially lessened by viture of the project
changes and mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR and
incorporated in the proiect as set forth above. There remain some
significant noise impacts in isolated areas in the existing, urban area.
D. The remaining unavoidable significant effects have been reduced to an
acceptable level when balanced against the facts set forth above and in
the S tatem ent of O ye rri ding C onsi derati ons.
3. CONVERSION OF AGRICULTURAL LANDS (3.7)
The conversion of several thousands of acres of agricultural land to urban
uses is considered a significant, unmitigable impact; particularly because of
the unique areadimates of the region and crop suitability which could allow
for "off-season" vegetable production.
Findings
A. Changes and other measures have been incorporated in the project or
are otherwise being implemented which mitigate this environmental
effect in that:
1) The loss of agricultural land is considered unavoidable because the
planning area includes a substantial area that is, or could
potentially be, devoted to agriculture.
B. Potential mitigation measures or proiect aiternatlYes which would
eliminate or substantially lessen the environmental effects and were
not incorporated into the proiect were found infeasible, based on
economic, sociai~ and other considerations as set forth in the Final EIR
and listed below.
1) Mitigation to reduce impacts is possible via large-scale preser-
vation. Such preservation would eliminate the proposed housing,
empioyment~ and residential opportunities incorporated into the
General Plan Update and conflict with the basic intent of the
General Plan as envisioned.
2) Such preservation would preclude the City of Chula Vista from
benefiting from the proiected increase in revenue which would
accrue to the City from development of the Eastern Territories.
3) The preservation of agricultural land would preclude the property
owners from achieving the goals of eventually developing their
land.
-11-
C. All significant impacts to agricultural resources that can feasibly be
avoided have been eliminated or substantially lessened by virtue of the
project changes and mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR and
incorporated in the project as set forth above. There remains a
significant, unmitigabJe impact to agriculture.
D. The remaining unavoidable significant ef£ects have been reduced to an
acceptable level when balanced against the facts set forth above and in
the Statement o£ OverridingConsiderations.
LANDFORM/AESTHETICS (3.8)
Adoption of the General Plan Update would involve little, substantiative
change to the land~orm and visual quality of the built environment of Chula
Vista, including the Montgomery, Bayfront, Central and Sweetwater areas.
However, in the Eastern Territories, where land is currently vacant and
undeveloped, land use changes associated with the General Plan Update would
result in a significant change to the existing land~orm or visual quality.
Although almost half of the area would remain in open space, the majority of
[an~orm and visual resources such as mesas and hilltops would be significant-
ly al tered.
FinclinEs
A. Changes and other measures have been incorporated in the project or
are otherwise being implemented which mitigate this environmental
effect in that:
1) Development should be required to adhere to all policies and
guidelines contained in the Land Use Element~ particularly
regarding hillside development and community an.d urban design.
2) The impacts to landform and aesthetics are considered unavoid-
able because the planning area includes a substantial area of
unbroken~ undeveloped topography characterized by hilltops,
mesas and canyons, which would be irretrievably altered by
deveiopment.
B. Potential mitigation measures or project alternatives which would
eliminate or substantially lessen the environmental effects and were
not incorporated into the project were found irffeasible, based on
economic, social, and other considerations as set forth in the Final EIR
and listed below.
l) Mitigation to reduce impacts is possible via large-scale preser-
vation. Such preservation would eliminate the proposed housing,
employment, and residential opportunities incorporated into the
General Plan Update and conflict with the basic intent of the
General Plan as envisioned.
2) Such preservation would preclude the City of Chula Vista from
benefiting from the projected increase in revenue which would
accrue to the City from development of the Eastern Territories.
-12-
3) The preservation of open space land would preclude the property
owners from achieving the goals of eventually developing their
land.
C. All significant impacts to landform/aesthetics that can feasibly be
avoided have been eliminated or substantially lessened by virtue of the
project changes and mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR and
incorporated in the proiect as set forth above. There remains signifi-
cant, unmitigable impacts to landform/aesthetics.
D. The remaining unavoidable significant effects have been reduced to an
acceptable level when balanced against the facts set forth above and in
the Statement of OverridingConsiderations.
5. LAND USES/GENERAL PLAN/ZONING (3.9)
In general, land uses within the urban core are compatible and there would be
no adverse impacts associated with the proposed Plan Update. However,
there is one area in the Urban Core where land use incompatibility may
occur. Land uses along H Street between Second Avenue and 1-805 are
established residential. With buildout of the General Plan and Circulation
Element, H Street would become a 6-lane major road with an ADT in excess
of 35~000. While this would not result in congestion, there would be impacts
to commt~ity character.
Findings
A. Changes and other measures have been included in the proiect or are
otherwise being implemented which mitigate this environmental effect
in that:
1) To fully mitigate the potential land use incompatibility between
residences along H Street between Second Avenue and 1-805, the
roadway classification would need to be changed to one which
would accommodate less traffic.
B. Potential mitigation measures or project alternatives which would
eliminate or substantially lessen the environmental effects and were
not incorporated into the project were found infeasible, based on
economic, social, and other considerations as set forth in the Final EIR
and listed below.
I) The reclassification of H Street in this segment and its final
improvement to a smaller roadway would not accomplish the goals
of the Circulation Elemenet and congestion would result.
C. All significant impacts to commtnity character in this area that can
feasibly be avoided have been eliminated or substantially lessened by
virtue of the project changes and mitigation measures identified in the
Final EIR and incorporated in the project as set forth above. There
remains a significant, unmitigable impact to land use.
-13-
D. The remaining unavoidable significant effects have been reduced to an
acceptable level when balanced against the facts set forth above and in
the Statement of Overriding Considerations.
6. OPEN SPACE (3.12)
The vast majority of the Eastern Territories planning area is currently rural
and perceived as open space by the residents of ChOa Vista. As stated in the
General Plan text, existing open space in this planning area includes a total
of 20,826 acres consisting of 20,788 acres of rural, undeveloped area and 38
acres of park. With adoption of the proposed Plan Update, a substantial
amount of open space (8,567 acres) would be developed. Because this area is
designated interim open space to be developed at a later date, the change in
land use designations is not considered adverse; however, the loss of open
space itself is seen as a significant impact.
As part of the PlanUpdate, an open space greenbelt would be created around
the planning area which would preserve the Otay and Sweetwater River
Valleys, Rock Mountain, Mother Miguel Mountain and the Otay Reservoir in
open space. Developed parks are to be located along the 28 mile, circum-
ferential greenbelt, but the maiority of the acreage would be comprised of
undeveloped open space. Also, the maior canyon systems in the planning area
(Salt Creek, Wolf, Poggi and Rice) will be preserved as open space.
A. Changes and other measures have been incorporated in the proiect or
are otherwise being implemented which mitigate this environmental
effect in that:
1) While the Plan Update wood develop approximately 8,567 acres
with urban uses, it would retain approximately 12,220 in open
space.
2) The Plan Update provides for a 28-mile drcumferential open
space network of parks and native habitat to preserve significant
features of the planning area.
3) The Plan Update provides a strong policy framework for the
implementation of the greenblet network and the continued
administration and maintenance of such a network by a regional
park entity.
B. Potential mitigation measures or proiect alternatives which would
eliminate or substantially lessen the environmental effects and were
not incorporated into the proiect were found infeasible, based on
economic, social, and other considerations as set forth in the Final EIR
and listed below.
1) Development, in an economically feasible manner, of the Eastern
Territories will involve some loss of open space.
2) To develop the Eastern Territories in a manner that would retain
substantially more open space wood result in an ineffident
infrastructure design, poor community structure, would not be
responsive to the current and forecasted housing market needs
and uneconomical grading.
3) The preservation of all open space in the Eastern Territories
which would fully mitigate the adverse impact, would preclude
the development with the proposed housing, employement, and
recreational opportuniQes incorporated in the General Plan
Update and would conflict with the basic goals of the Chula Vista
General Planning process.
4) Such preservation would preclude the City of Chula Vista from
benefiting from the projected increase in net revenue which would
accrue to the City from the General Plan Update.
5) The preservation of the Eastern Territories for such use would
preclude the various property owners from achieving the goals of
developing their land.
C. All significant environmental effects to open space that can feasibly be
avoided have been eliminated or substantially lessened by virtue of the
project changes and mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR and
incorporated in the project as set forth above. There remain some
significant biological impacts.
D. The remaining unavoidable significant effects have been reduced to an
acceptable level when balanced against the facts set forth above and in
the Statement of OverridingConsiderations.
7. TRANSPORTATION/ACCESS (3.1#)
The proposed circulation network for the City of Chula Vista would be
adequate to accommodate future land uses and traffic growth in most areas,
and traffic would flow at level of service C. Several roadway segments have
been identified as having future ADT greater than the capacity of the
roadway at LOS C which is regarded as a potentially significant impact.
These segments are listed in Section 3.1# of the FEIR, page 3- 135.
Findings
A. Changes and other measures have been induded in the project or are
otherwise being implemented which mitigate this environmental effect
in that:
1) Mitigation to reduce congestion on specific street segments
include decreasing trips and/or increasing capacity on the road.
Also~ modifi4cations to the intersections at either end of the
roadway segment would improve traffic conditions in the general
area.
B. Potential mitigation measures or proiect alternatives which would
eliminate or substantially lessen the environmental effects and were
-15-
not incorporated into the project were fomd infeasible, based on
economic, sodal, and other considerations as set forth in the Final
and listed below.
1) Increasing capacity on specific roadway sections would involve
widening roadways to create additional lanes. In the built urban
area, this is infeasible because of existing urban development.
2) Reducing trips allocated to specific segments would require a
modificaton to the land uses of the General Plan to minimize the
number of trips generated. This modification would not realize
the goals of the Land Use Element of the General Plan.
C. All significant impacts to transportation in this area that can feasibly
be avoided have been eliminated or substantially lessened by virtue of
the proiect changes and mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR
and incorporated in the proiect as set forth above. There remains a
significant, unmitigable impact to transportation.
D. The remaining unavoidable significant effects have been reduced to an
acceptable level when balanced against the facts set forth above and in
the Statement of OverridingConsiderations.
g. AIR QUALITY (3.5)
Development of future projects would result in increased traffic on new and
existing roadways and additional air emissions. The future population and
growth is not anticipated in the 1982 SIP.
Findings
A. Changes and other measures have been incorporated in the proiect or
are otherwise being implemented which mitigate this environmental
effect in that:
1) All measures recommended in the 1982 SiP and any future SIP
should be adopted and enforced by the City.
2) Encourage the use of alternative transportation modes by
promoting public transit usage and providing secure bicycle
facilities.
3) Provide mass transit accommodations for convenience o£
customers (bus shelters) and vehicles (bus turnouts).
4) Encourage a regional transit system along the SR-125 route
corridor, an east-west bus route to connect the existing urban
core and future eastern urban centers, and an urban core/bayfront
shuttle.
5) To avoid creation of air pollution "hot spots" at intersections, the
drculation system at that intersection should be improved to
level of service C.
-16-
B. Changes to the project or other activities which mitigate this
significant effect are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other
public agencies and not to a large degree of the City of Chula Vista.
1) Overall control of regional growth and the implementation of the
RRAQS is under the jurisdiction of the County and all of the
cities of the County.
2) Control of vehicular emissions through a vehicle inspection
maintenance program is under control of the State of California.
C. All significant impacts to air quality that can feasibly be avoided have
been eliminated or substantially lessened by virtue of the project
changes and mitigation measures identi£ied in the Final EIR and
incorporated in the project as set forth above. There remains signifi-
cant, unmitigable impacts to air quality.
1) The citizens of Chula Vista and the region would be deprived of
the housing, employment, and recreational opportunities inherent
in the proposed plan if it were not adopted.
2) The City of Chula Vista would be deprived of the surplus revenue
projected from buildout of the entire plan.
3) The City of Chula Vista and the County would not benefit from
the capital improvements and public facilities which will be
constructed as part of the project.
D. All significant environmental effects that can feasibly be avoided have
been eliminated or substantially lessened by virtue of the mitigation
measures identified in the Final EI]P. and incorporated into the project
as set forth above. There remain significant cumulative impacts on
regional air quality due to non-compliance with RRAQS. The 1982 SIP
is currently being revised to incorporate Series VII forecasts and the
General Plan Update will be in conformance at that time. When the
General Plan is in conformance significant impacts may be eliminated.
E. The remaining unavoidable significant effects have been reduced to an
accepteable level when balanced against facts set forth above in the
S tat em ent of O ye r ri dj ng C onsi der ati ons.
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
BACKGROUND
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State EIR Guidelines
promulgated pursuant thereto provide:
(a) CEQA requires the decision-maker to balance the benefits of a
proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining
whether to approve the project. Where agendes have taken action resulting
in environ-mental damage without explaining the reasons which supported the
decision, courts have invalidated the action.
(b) Where the decision of the public agency allows the occurrence of
significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not mitigated,
the agency must state in writing the reasons to support its action based on
the final fIR and/or other information in the record. This statement may be
necessary if the agency also makes a finding under Section 150gg(A) (2) or
(aX3).
(c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the
statement should be induded in the record of the project approval and should
be mentioned in the Notice of Determination. (EIR Guidelines, Section
15089)
STATEMENTS
The following statements are considerations which warrant approval of the project
and therefore override the significant environmental impacts identified in
EIR-$8- 2:
A. The comprehensive General Plan includes area plans for the five communities
of Chula Vista: Central Chula Vista~ B~y~ront, Montgomery, Sweetwater and
Eastern Territories. These plans are coordinated to produce a comprehensive
planning document for the #0,000 acre planning area.
B. The General Plan Update plans for continued redevelopment of the central
area to emphasize its role as the hub of theCity. The Plan Update provides
for a dynamic urban center with a diversity of business, residential and
recreational activities.
C. The General Plan for the Eastern Territories is a framework for both
development and preservation of this area. The development is a balanced
community of residential, commerdal and employment land uses. The
residential density includes provision for all types and densities of housing but
maintains a dominant single family character similar to the existing Chula
Vista neighborhoods.
D. The Eastern Territories contains the Eastern Regional Center which will
serve as the business and retail center for the eastern area of the City. It is
-18-
planned to include a retail and office center, a business and research park and
a site for the university. These mixed uses are planned to be organized
arouod a system of roadways, public transit, open space and trail corridors
that extend from the regional center and connect it to the surrounding
neighborhoods and the entire City.
E. The General Plan Update calls for the creation of a continuous, 2S-mile
Greenbelt around the City that would include parks, active recreation
facilities, natural open space, wildlife habitats and a connecting trail system.
This continuous system would begin at the Bay[font, extend through Otay
River Valley to the Otay Lakes, north through the Otay Lakes area and along
Salt Creek to Mother Miguel Mountain and Sweetwater Reservoir and west
along the Sweetwater Regional Park to the Bay~ront.
F. The planned circulation system for the City includes many new and upgraded
streets and highways. Together, these comprise a heirarchy of roadways
which will serve the future requirements. The most significant new roadways
are Route 125 which provides the third north-south regional connection
through the City and Orange Avenue east of I-$05, a portion of which will be
built as a expressway. Many other roads are extended or expanded in width
to accommodate new developm ent.
G. The project will result in a comprhensive planned community providing a
logical extension of City services, including public transportation, law
enforcement, fire protection and public utilities.
H. As a planned community, the project will provide a wide range of transpor-
tation alternatives in addition to the single-passenger automobile, such as:
an extension of the public transportaton system, a pedestrian/bicycle trail
system, and residenti al and school/park corn pie xes.
I. Eventual project completion will resuJt in a positive fiscal impact on the City
of Chula Vista, as detailed in the Fiscal Analysis prepared by P&D
Technologies (see Appendix G).
Two alternatives have been included in the Draft General Plan. These alternatives
are for specific proiects that have been proposed during the later phases of the
General Plan process. They are identified on the Land Use Plan map and described
in the EIR in Section 5.0 (Alternatives) as Rancho San Miguel Alternative (5.4) and
EastLake Vistas/Olympic Training Site Alternative (5.5). If the City Council
chooses to adopt either of these alternatives the potential environmental impacts
have been adequately described in the text of the EIR for purposes of this program
EIR. When development plans are more final, subsequent environmental review
will occur.
The staff report Ixepared by the City of Chula Vista recommends incorporation of
the Rancho San Miguel Alternative, with modifications as stated in the staff
report. It does not, at this time, recommend incorperation of the Olympic Training
Site Alternative.
Rancho San Mi~uel Alternative
The following statements are considerations which warrant approval of the proiect
and therefore override the significant environmental impact identified in EIR-$8-2.
A. The development will provide housing opportunities to satisfy the regional
demand for housing.
B. Construction o£ komesites will be sensitively planned and will utilize stem-
wall foundation, post and beam construction and multiple level structures to
minimize grading.
C. Of the total site acreage (1,862 acres) approximately 210 acres, or 11
percent, will be impacted by grading.
D. The remaining area will be available for recreational and open space uses and
will be incorporated into the Citywlde greenbelt system.
420-
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 31, 1989
4. Consideration of Mitigation Monitoring Pro§ram for the Chula Vista
General Plan Update EIR-88-2
A. BACKGROUND
Recent California legislation (AB 3180) requires the adoption of a
mitigation or reporting program in conjunction with certifications
of Final EIRs. The purpose of the law is to establish a reporting
or monitoring program to assure implementation of recommended miti-
gation measures.
It should be noted that there is no proposed development associated
with this project, as the "project" is the Plan Update. Accordingly,
as stated by CEQA Guidelines, Section 15146, the degree of specificity
of this EIR corresponds to the degree of specificity in the General
Plan Update document. Because of the general nature of the "project",
the mitigation measures recommended in the EIR are, for the most
part, general as well. The monitoring program is also general in
nature and consists of five steps.
1. Adoption and implementation of the General Plan Update
2. Continued implementation of the Threshold Policy
3. Implementation of CEQA
4. Adoption of Noise/Land Use Matrix
5. Implementation of other Master plans and ordinances
as specified.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program.
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
(5CH #8B052511)
(EIR
Prepared for:
City of Chula ¥is~a
276 Fourth Avmue
Chula Vista, California 92010
(~) 69~-5~0~
Prepared by:
p&D Technologies~ Inc.
~01 V/est "A" Street
Suite 2500
San Diego~ California 92101
(619) 232-tt466
(Job #893-109-00)
May 31, 1989
INTRODU CTIO N
Recent California legislation (Al3 3180) requires the adoption of a mitigation or
reporting program in conjunction with approval of Mitigation Negative
Declarations or certifications of Final EIRs. The purpose of the law is to establish
a reporting or minitoring program to assure implementation of recommended
mitigation measures.
The followng monitoring program is recommended as part of the Chula Vista
General Plan Update EIR. The EIR analyzes the environmenteal consequences of
adoption of the proposed updated and modified elements. The General Plan Update
is "Scenario U', the final scenario created as part of the planning process. This
scenario adopts, by reference, several existing specific plans including the
Montgomery and Bayfront Spedfic Plans~ the Sweetwater Community Plan, El
Rancho del Rey Specific Plan~ Rancho del Rey SPA I and EastLake I SPA Plan.
Because the western section of the City is predominantly l~uilt, the locus of the
planning effort was on the undeveloped Eastern Territories.
It should be noted that there is no proposed development assodated with this
project, as the "proiect" is the Plan Update. Accordingly, as stated by CEQA
Guidelines, Section 15146, the degree of specificity of this EIR corresponds to the
degree of specifidty in the General Plan Update document. More detailed,
environmental analysis will be necessary at later stages of specific project planning
and development. Because of the general nature of the "proiect", the mitigation
measures recommended in the EIR are, for the most part, general as well.
Measures recommended in this plan level EIR are intended to serve as guidelines
for future environmental review on a site-specific, project-specific level. The
monitoring program is also general in nature and consists of five steps.
1. Adoptio~ and Implementation of the General Plan Update.
The General Plan Update defines the goals and polities of the City of Chuia Vista
regarding future development in the iurisdiction and Sphere of Influence. The nine
elements of the General Plan provide policy guidelines for Land Use, Circulation,
Open Space and Conservation and Parks, among others. The implementation of
these policies are assumed in the EIR and explicitly stated as mitigation in several
sections. Implementation of the General Plan would assure that ail future
development projects would be consistent with those policies and would incorporate
the mitigation measures recommended in the EI~.
2. Continued Implementation of the Threshold Policy.
In November 1957, the City of Chula Vista adopted a Threshold Policy which
established performance standards for eleven issue areas. Standards, or thresholds,
have been determined for fire/emergency medical service, police, traffic,
parks/recreation~ drainage, libraries, air quality, economics, schools, sewer and
water. A Growth Management Oversight Committee (GMOC) is responsible for
periodic review oi the standards. Compliance occurs on a project-by-project level
for some issues. For example, the water standard requires a service availability
letter from the servicing agency prior to approval of development plans. These
threshold policies or standards have been incorporated as mitigation measures in
the EIR and as the Growth Management Element of the General Plan Update.
Continued implementation and yearly review~ as stated in the policy, will serve to
monitor the measures recommended in the EIR.
3. Implementation of CEQA.
The State of California has adopted legislation, in the form of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which requires environmental review of
develol~ment projects early in the planning stage. The City of Chula Vista
implements this law under the direction of the Environmental Review Coordinator
and the Planning Department. Continued implementation of CEQA will assure that
all future development proposals are reviewed for potential environmental impacts.
Subsequent technical analysis, biology, geology, archaeology, etc., will be required
as necessary. Site-specific, project-specific environmental review would result
from continued implementation of CEQA. The core mitigation measure, stated in
all issue areas, is the requirement for such project-level review; thus, the
implementation of CEQA would serve as the monitoring and reporting program.
-2-
Adoption of Noise/Land Use Compatibility Matrix.
To ensure consistent implementation of and review of proposed projects, adoption
of a noise compatibility standard has been recom~nended as mitigation. This noise
compatibility matrix can be created specifically for the City of Chula Vista, or the
City can choose to adopt the City of San Diego's community noise standards (Table
3-7 of the EIR). Whichever option is selected, a compatibility matrix must be
adopted as part of the Noise Element with adoption of the General Plan Update.
5. Implementation of Other Master Plans and Ordnances as Specified.
The City of Chula Vista and other local service agencies have adopted ordinances
and master plans to guide future develoI~ment. Conformance with these plans is
recommended as mitigation in several issue areas. Specifically, conformance with
the Grading Ordinance to minimize impacts to geology/soils/landform,
conformance with the Flood Control Master Plan to reduce impacts to
hydrology/floodin~ conformance with the Fire Station Master Plan to reduce
tire/emergency response impacts; and compliance with the Master Plans of the
Sweetwater Authority and Otay ~/ater District to reduce impacts to water
distribution and availability. As future development plans are reviewed by the Gity
and other local agencies, they will be reviewed for compliance with their Master
Plans and ordinances. Because conformance is required as mitigation, this action
will assure this mitigation is implemented.
-3-
PETER. SON ,~ PR. ICE
Hay 19, 1989 MAY 24 1989
Ms. Betty Dehoney
P & D Technologies
401 West "A" Street, Suite 2500
San Diego, California 92101
Re: Draft Environmental Impact Report
City of Chula Vista
General Plan Update
EIR No. 88-2
Chula Vista Bayfront
Dear Ms. Dehoney:
We have reviewed the above-referenced Draft Environmental
Impact Report with specific focus on the proposed land use
designations for the Chula Vista Bayfront property. As you are
aware, our client, Chula Vista Investors, is currently processing
plans to the City of Chula Vista for a new specific plan and
local coastal program amendment. The proposed uses on the site
are different from the previously approved specific plan land
uses. Therefore, we would request that the Environmental Impact
Report address the potential of designating the Chula Vista
Bayfront area as a "special plan area". We have attached a
zeroxed copy of portions of the General Plan land use map
indicating that portion which we would request be designated a
special plan area.
We believe that it is inappropriate to enact the General
Plan with the specific land uses of a previous project. If the
Chula Vista Bayfront project is approved, then the Planning
Commission and City Council would have to amend the General Plan
again to reflect the newly approved land use.
Ms. Betty Dehoney
May 19, 1989
Page Two
We believe that this requested modification to the General
Plan would provide the City with flexibility in dealing with our
client's proposed project, without the need to amend the General
Plan again in the future. If for some reason the Chula Vista
Bayfront project is not approved by the City, then the previously
approved project would still exist and still be consistent with
the requested special plan area designation.
This special plan area designation for the Chula Vista
Bayfront property would not require any further environmental
analysis. It would simply be an amendment to the text and the
general plan land use map designating the site as a special plan
area.
We would respectfully request that you analyze this
relatively minor amendment to the proposed General Plan so that
the Planning Commission and City Council will have the ability to
act upon our request at the appropriate time. Thank you for your
consideration of this request.
Very truly yours,
PETERSON & PRICE
A Professional Corporation
Matthew A. Peterson
~P:tbs
Enclosure
cc: City of Chula Vista Planning Commission
Doug Reid, Environmental Quality Department
Chula Vista Investors
CI'IY OF
CHULA VISI'A
DRAFT
LAND USE
RESIDENTIAL INDUSTRIAL
dM/ac
I'"''"-I Low 0-3 ~ ResearChManufacturing & Limited
Medium 3-6 ~ General
1;[~[~;;~;~i~;;~;t Medium 6-1 I
PUBLIC & OPEN SPACE
Medium- f_-~--~_-_-_-_l Public & Quasi Public
~ High I 1-18
[~i~ High 18-27 I::~t Parks & Recreation
ti ':t Water
COMMERCIAL
~ Retail [ 1 Open Space
[ ~ Eastern Urban \
Administrative
:an D/ego Bay
City Planning Commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of May 31, 1989 Page 1
4. PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-89-22; Consideration of p~oposed Fire Station
Master Plan - City of Chela Vista
A. Background
The attached Fire Station Master Plan was prepared by the City's Policy
Analysis and Program Evaluation Unit, in conjunction with staff from the
Fire, Planning and Engineering Departments. The report was prepared as
part of the City's General Plan update and details the number and location
of fire stations required to meet the City's long-term fire protection
needs. A general timetable for opening new stations and/or relocating
current stations is outlined. The report also details specific guidelines
to be used in evaluating new development projects to assure that the
City's fire service threshold is maintained. Lastly, the report looks at
several fire related issues such as the need for a new fire training
facility. The major recommendations are highlighted in the report's
executive summary.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has conducted an Initial Study,
IS-89-71, of potential environmental impacts associated with Plan. Based
on the attached Initial Study and comments thereon, if any, the
Coordinator has concluded that there would be significant environmental
impacts, and recommends adoption of the Negative Declaration issued on
IS-89-71.
B. Recommendations
1. Based on the Initial Study and comments on the Initial Study and
Negative Declaration, find that the proposed Fire Station Master Plan
will have no significant environmental impacts and adopt the Negative
Declaration issued on IS-89-71.
2. Adopt a motion recommending that the City Council:
a. Adopt in principle the proposed 8 fire station network for the
Planning Area, and
b. Adopt the fire coverage guidelines detailed in Table 4 of the
report (page 23) which are to be applied to individual
development projects.
C. Discussion
In addition to corporate Chula Vista, the Planning Area, as defined for
the fire station study, included the area served by the Bonita-Sunnyside
Fire Protection District, the Otay Ranch (Baldwinl property west of Otay
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 31, 1989 Page 2
Reservoir, and other eastern developments including Salt Creek-! and Salt
Creek Ranch Rancho del Rey, EastLake I, II and III, Sunbow I and II,
Rancho San Miguel; and Bonita Meadows Estates. The Planning Area's
present fire station network consists of 5 Chula Vista based stations and
1 station located in Bonita-Sunnyside.
Under the proposed network, the City's Fire Station #4 (on Otay Lakes
Road) would be closed in concert with the building of new fire stations in
the Rancho del Rey and Salt Creek-I developments. Additionally, the
City's current Fire Station #3 (on East Oneida~ would be relocated to the
Sunbow-II development. The report identifies an optimal site for a fire
station within Baldwin's Otay Ranch property, west of the Otay Reservoir.
The above changes would provide an 8 station network to serve the Planning
Area. (As noted in the report, the Master Plan would be reviewed if
significant changes occur in the City's Sphere of Influence or if
substantive changes in the circulation network or planned land uses are
contemplated.)
Based upon Scenario #4 data, the proposed 8 fire station network would
~rovide 5 minute coverage to 77% of the Planning Area's dwelling units
compared to a current 5 minute coverage rate of 77.3%); 98.8% of the
area's dwelling units would be within a projected 7 minute response
(compared to a current rate of 99.3%).
A developmental impact fee is recommended to pay for the costs associated
with modifying the City's fire station network.
Lastly, the report develops specific response time guidelines to be
applied to residential and commercial/industrial projects during the
City's internal review process. The proposed project guidelines will
provide an ongoing mechanism to insure that threshold service levels (i.e.
responding to 85% of all emergencies within 7 minutes) are maintained.
As previously noted, the principal recommendations are highlighted in the
report's executive summary.
WPC 6275P
negative- declaration_
PROJECT NAME: Fire Station Master Plan
PROJECT LOCATION: Throughout Chula Vista
PROJECT APPLICANT: City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010
CASE NO: IS-89-?l DATE: May 4, 1989
A. Project Settin~
Draft of the City's Fire Station Master Plan.
B. Project Description
The project consists of a report, the Fire Station Master Plan, that
evaluates Chula Vista's future fire protection needs based on various
factors which include, but are not limited to: Overall Coverage Rates,
Coverage of High Call Demand Areas, Coverage For Special High Risk Sites,
and Maximum Response Time. Based on data generated using this methodology
assessments were made regarding the best possible location of fire
stations within the coverage area (Chula Vista) that would provide desired
fire protection.
C. Compatibility with Zonin~ and Plans
The project is a draft of the City's Fire Station Master Plan, therefore,
compatibility with Zoning and Planning does not apoly.
D. Compliance with the Threshold/Standards Policy
1. Fire/EMS
The proposed Fire Station Master Plan deals directly with such issues
as fire protection, response times, and emergency medical services
within the City. The plan is designed to ensure that the Threshold/
Standards Policy is not exceeded, and that an acceptable level of
Fire/EMS service is maintained throughout the City.
2. Police
Upon review of the project staff has concluded that the Police
Threshold/Standard policy does not apply.
3. Traffic
Upon review of the project staff has concluded that the Traffic
Threshold/Standard policy does not apply.
4. Park/Recreation
Upon review of the project staff has concluded that the Park~ItA
Recreation Threshold/Standard policy does not apply.
city of chula vista planning department ¢1~
environmental review section (~HULA. VISTA
5. Drainage
Upon review of the project staff has concluded that the Drainage
Threshold/Standard policy does not apply.
6. Sewer
Upon review of the project staff has concluded that the Sewer
Threshold/Standard policy does not apply.
7. Water
Upon review of the project staff has concluded that the Hater
Threshold/Standard policy does not apply.
E. Identification of Environmental Effect~
Because the project is a draft of the City's Fire Station Master Plan
there will be no environmental effects involved.
F. Mitigation necessary to avoid significant effects
No mitigation will be necessary due to the nature of the project.
G. Findings of Insignificant Impact
BaSed on the following findings, it is determined that the project
described above will not have a significant environmental impact and no
environmental impact report needs to be prepared.
1. The project has the potential to substantially degrade the quality of
the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below
self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or prehistory.
The project has no potential to reduce or otherwise negatively affect
the quality of the environment.
2. The project has the potential to achieve short-term environmental
goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals.
The project does not have the potential to achieve short-term
environmental goals to the disadvantage of any long-term
environmental goals.
3. The project has possible effects which are individually limited but
cumulatively considerable. As used in the subsection, "cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of an individual
project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects
of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects.
The project has no possible effects which are individually limited
but cumulatively considerable.
4. The environmental effects of a project will cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
The project will not cause any substantial adverse effects on humans,
either directly or indirectly.
H. Consultation
1. Individuals and Organizations
City of Chula Vista: Roger Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer
Ken Larsen, Director of Building and Housing
Carol Gove, Fire Marshal
Hal Rosenberg, Traffic Engineer
Michael J. Mezey, Planning Intern
Applicant's Agent: Marty Chase
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 92010
2. Documents
Chula Vista General Plan
Chula Vista Municipal Code
Chula Vista Fire Station Master Plan
This determination, 'that the project will not have any significant
environmental impact, is based on the attached Initial Study, any comments on
the Initial Study and any comments on this Negative Declaration. Further
information regarding the environmental review of the project is available
from the Chula Vista Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA
92010.
E VIRO~ N~A~AL REVIEW COORDINATOR
EN 6 (Rev. 3/88)
WPC 6216P
city of chula vista planning department CFIYOF
environmental review section.(~HULAVl~A
A ~ FOR OFFICE USE
Case No. /S- ~ ~'~/
INITIAL STUDY Receipt No.
Date Rec'd ~ ~ ~c7-~.~
City of Chula Vista Accepted by ~F~-f~
Application Form Project No. ~ .A~z_~
A. BACKGROUND
1. PROJECT TITLE Fire Station Master Plan
2. PROJECT LOCATION {Street address or description) See Attached
Assessors Book, Page & Parcel No.
3. BRIEF PROJECT DESCRIPTION Report assessinq the number and location
of fire stations required to meet Chula Vista's long term fire
protection needs.
4. Name of Applicant City of Chula Vista
Address 276 Fourth Avenue Phone 691-5296
City Chula Vista State CA Zip 92010
5. Name of Preparer/Agent MartS Chase
Address 276 Fourth Avenue Phone 691-5296
City Chula Vista State CA Zip 92010
Relation to Applicant Assistant Director of Management Services
6. Indicate all permits or approvals and enclosures or documents
required by the Environmental Review Coordinator.
a. Permits or approvals required:
XXX General Plan Revision Design Review Committee Public Project
Rezoning/Prezoning __ Tentative Subd. Map Annexation
Precise Plan Grading Permit Design Review Board
Specific Plan Tentative Parcel Map Redevelopment Agency
Cond. Use Permit Site Plan & Arch. Review
Variance Other
b. Enclosures or documents (as required by the Environmental Review
Coordinator).
Location Map Arch. Elevations Eng. Geology Report
--Grading Plan Landscape Plans Hydrological Study
Site Plan -- Photos of Site & Biological Study
Parcel Map Setting --Archaeological Survey
Precise Plan Tentative Subd. Map Noise Assessment
Specific Plan Improvement Plans Traffic Impact Report
--Other Agency permit or Soils Report ~xx Other Master Plan
Approvals ReqOired
EN 3 (Rev. 12/82)
-8-
Case No. /~'F~'?~'
CITY DATA
F. PLANNING DEPARTMENT
1. Current Zoning on site: /
North
South
East
West
Does the project conform to the curre~t~zoning? . .
2. General Plan land use
ue'Signatio~ on site~'
North
................ ~OU.t~
East
West
Is the project compatible wi{h the G6ne~l ~lan Land USe Diagram~
(
IS the projec~'area designated for conservat~9m or open s~ace";; adj'ac~nt
to an area so designated?
project located adjacent to any scenic routes?
Is
the
{If yes, describe the design techniques being used to protect~r enhance
the scenic quality of Chula Vista.)
How many acres of developed parkland are within the Park Service District
of this project as shown in the Parks and ~ecreation Element of the
General Plan?
What is the current park acreage requireme)~ts in the Park service
District?: "':.:,
How many acres of parkland are necessary to ~serve the proposed project?
,(2AC/lO00 pop. )
Does the project site provide access to or have the potential to provid~ ~
access to any mineral resour'ce? (If so, describe in detail.)"
-9-
3. School s
If the proposed project is residential, please complete the following:
Current Current Students Generated
School Attendance Capacity From Project
El ementary
/
Jr. Hi gh
,/ ·
Sr. High
4. Aesthetics
Does th~ projeci~ contain'featureS Which-couldr be ~onstrued to be at
variance from nearby features due to bulk~ form, texture or color? (If
so, please describe.)
5. Energ~ Consumption ' ~.~
Provide the estimated consumption by the proposed project of the following
sources:
Electricity {per year)
Natural Gas (per year)
Water (per day) ....
6. Remarks: ~e~ ~o~/~ ~
D~rector of Plann~o~R~r~entat~e ~ Date
Case No.
G. ~NGINEERING DEPARTMENT
1. Drainage
a. Is the project site within a flood plain? ~,-~~_T
b. Will the project be subject'to any existing flooding hazards? ~(~
c. Will the project create any]flooding hazards?
d. What is the location and dessription of existing on-site
· drainage facilities?
e. Are they adequate to serve l~he project? ~ ~
-- f,. What i.s thelocation and-description-of existing off-site
........... dr a~ nage- fac~i t.i t-les? ................
g. Are they adequate to serve the project?
2. Transportation
a. What roads provide primary access to the project?
b. What is the estimated number of one-way auto trips to be
generat~)d by--.th~project.~(per d~y-~? ~ ~
c. What is the ADT and estimated level of service before and after
project completion?
Before After
A.D.T.
L.O.S.
d. Are the primary access roads adequate to serve the project?
If not, explain briefly.
e. Will it be necessary that additional dedication, wideni.nq and/or
improvement be made to existing streets?
If so, specify the general nature of the necessary actions.
- ll
Case No. ~ ~Sq-~
3. ~eology
a. Is the project site subject' to:
Known or suspected fault hazards? ~
Liquefaction?.
Landslide or slippage?
b. Is an engineering geology report necessary to evaluate the
project? )~
4. Soils ;
a. Are there any anticipated adverse soil conditions on the project
b. ~If, yes, what are-these adverse soil Condi%ibns?
c. Is a soils report necessary?
5. Land Form
a. .What; ,~s.the average-natural 'slope'of ~he site?
b. What is the maximum natural slope of the site?
6. Noise
Are there any traffic,related noise levels impacting the site that
are significant enough to~tify that a no3se analysis be required
of the applicant?
7. Air O~al ity
If there is any direct or indirect automobile usage associated with
this project, complete the following:
Total Vehicle
Trips Emission Grams of
{per day) Factor poll.ution
Hydrocarbons X 18[~ =
NOx (NO2) X 20.0 =
Particulates
Sulfur ~ 1.5 :
X .78 =
8. ~e Generation
How much sol~d an~..li~quid {sewage) waste will be generated by the
proposed project per day?
lihat is the location and size of existing sewer lines on or adjacent
to the site?
Are they adequate to serve the proposed project?
- 9. Public Facilities/Resources Impact
If.the project could exceed the threshold of having any possible
significant impact on the environment, please identify the public
facilities/resources and/or hazards and describe the adverse impact.
/Include any potential to attain and/or exceed the capacity of any
~ sewer,~culve[t, etc. serving the-project area.)
~ema~ks/necessa~ ~t~oat~on measures
ROUTING FORM
DATE: March 30, 1989
Current Plng. Engineering Dept. Building Dept.
TO: ~-l Advance Plng. F"l R. Daoust F~ Ken Larson
[] Fire Dept. Police Dept. Parks & ReCreation
F'-I Other Keith Hawkins Shauna Stokes
FROM: ~'l Environmental Review Coordinator
SUBJECT: [-~ Application for Initial Study (DP --- /FA- 415 /IS-89-71 )
Preliminary Draft EIR (DP__/FB-__/EIR- )
Review of a Draft EIR (DP. /FB- /EIR- )
[-"] REview of Environmental Review Record (FC-I/ERR_ )
The project consists of:
Fire Station Master Plan
Location:
Citywide
Please review the document and forward to me any comments you have by 4-11-89
Please submit all time incurred for this document below:
Da te
Person ~= Time
EN 4 (Rev. 12/82)
ROUTING FORM
DATE: March 30, 1989
Current Plng. Engineering Dept. Building Dept.
/~ [] Advance Plng. r'-I R. Daoust F~ Ken Lamson
~(bOf~ m'] Fire Dept. Police Dept. Parks & ReCreation
~ Other Keith Hawkins Shauna Stokes
~R~: r~ Environmental Review Coordinator/p/o~,~_~
SUBJECT: [-~ Application for Initial Study (DP --- /FA- 415 /IS-89-71 )
r--1 Preliminary Draft EIR (DP /FB- /EIR- )
~ Review of a Draft EIR (DP /FB- /EIR- )
~ Review of Environmental Review Record (FC-__./ERR- )
The project consists of:
Fire Station Master Plan
Location:
Citywide
Please review the document and forward to me any comments you have by 4-11-89
Please submit all time incurred for this document below:
Date Person Time
EN 4 (Rev. 12/82) (~ ~ ]~q'(c~
--- ~ REVISED 3/23/89
DRAFT
Fire Station Master Plan
Policy Analysis and Program
Evaluation Unit (February, 1989)
Marty Chase, Project Manager
Cheryl Fruchter, Principal Management Analyst
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i-v
INTRODUCTION 1-3
PART I. FIRE RESPONSE TIME STANDARDS AND PERFORMANCE
A. Components of Fire Response Time 4
B. Current Response Time Performance And The Fire Threshold 5
C. The Measures Used To Assess Alternative Fire Station Networks 6-7
D. General Methodology: The Computer Model 7-8
E. Coverage Rates: The Current Fire Station Network 8-12
PART II. FUTURE COVERAGE IN THE PLANNING AREA
A. Proposed Fire Station Network: Description 13-16
B. Proposed Fire Station Network: Overall Coverage Rate 16-19
· C. Proposed Fire Station Network: Coverage of Special "Risk: Sites 19-21
D. Suggested Project Level Guidelines 22-26
E. The Scenario #4 Road Network 26-27
F. Costs/Benefits Of Expanding Or Decreasing The Proposed Network 27-31
(Fire Network Recommendations) 32
G. Financing Needed Fire Stations 33
H. Time Table For Fire Station Construction 33-38
PART III. RELATED FIRE SERVICE ISSUES
A. Fire Training Facility 39-40
B. Radio Communications 40-41
C. Paramedic/Ambulance Coverage 41-42
D. Optimal Location For The Bonita Fire Station 42-46
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
As part of the General Plan update, the Management Services Department's
Policy Analysis and Program Evaluation Unit (PAPE) has completed a review of
the long term fire coverage needs within the City's Planning Area. The study
illustrates that significant efficiencies can be achieved if fire coverage
needs are planned for on an area-wide basis.
The Planning Area's present fire station network consists of 5 Chula Vista
based stations and 1 station located in the Bonita-Sunnyside Fire Protection
District. First-in automatic aid is provided to the Planning Area from
stations located in National City and San Diego.
Under the proposed network, new fire stations would be built in the E1 Rancho
del Rey development and in Baldwin's Salt Creek-I development (formerly part
..of Eastlake I). The City's current Fire Station #4 on Otay Lakes Road would
be closed in conjunction with the opening of the E1 Rancho del Rey and Salt
Creek-I fire stations. Additionally, the City's current Fire Station #3, on
East Oneida, would be relocated to the Sunbow-II development. Lastly, a fire
station would be located within Baldwin's Otay Ranch property, west of the
Otay Reservoir. It is proposed that coverage for the Otay Ranch area be
supplemented by coverage from 3 Chula Vista based stations. As detailed in
the report, it is likely that a second fire station based in Otay Ranch would
be required to adequately serve that area if joint station location planning
and joint fire coverage did NOT occur.
At buildout, it's projected that 98.8% of the Planning Area's dwelling units
would be within a 7 minute fire station response as compared to a current 7
minute coverage rate of 99.3%; 77% of the area's dwelling units would be
within a 5 minute response as compared to a current 5 minute coverage rate of
77.3%. Also, under the proposed network, the first and second-in response
times to 29 special sites, identified as having a potentially high risk of
life or property loss, would meet or exceed proposed standards. A preliminary
time table for constructing new stations and recommendations for financing
fire related facilities are provided in the report. The Fire Station Master
Plan should be reviewed should significant changes occur in the City's Sphere
of Influence or if substantive changes in the circulation network or planned
land uses are contemplated.
In addition to looking at overall coverage rates, the report proposes specific
-.response time guidelines which would be applied to residential and
industrial/commercial projects during the City's internal project review
process. As detailed in the report, the Fire Department is presently meeting
the fire service thresholds which were adopted by Council as part of the
overall growth management program. The proposed project guidelines will
provide an ongoing mechanism to insure that threshold service levels are
maintained.
Lastly, several related fire issues are covered in the report. These include
the need for a new fire training facility and the optimal location for the
Bonita fire station.
The key report recommendations are highlighted below. The recommendations
relating to Council action are:
RECOMMENDATION l: Adopt in principle the proposed 8 fire station network
(Station Network) for the Planning Area.
RECOMMENDATION 7: Adopt the project guidelines detail ed in Table 4 of
(Project this report (page 23). These guidelines will provide
Guidelines) an on-going mechanism to insure that the fire service
threshold will be maintained.
The recommendations for staff action are:
RECOMMENDATION 2. Staff work with the developer to set aside a site
(Station Network) within the Sunbow-II development for the relocation of
Fire Station #3.
Lead Department: Planning
RECOMMENDATION 3. Staff work with the developer to set aside a site
(Station Network) within the Salt Creek-I development for a new fire
station. This would replace the originally planned
site in the Eastlake I development.
Lead Department: Planning
RECOMMENDATION 4. Staff continue to work wi th the developer on plans for
'(Station Network) the E1 Rancho del Rey fire station.
Lead Department: Planning
RECOMMENDATION 5. Staff work with Eastlake to obtain appropriate credits
(Station Network) for the original fire station site in the Eastlake-I
Village Center which will not be used.
Lead Department: Planning
RECOMMENDATION 6. Staff assess alternative uses for Fire Station #4 on
(Station Network) Otay Lakes Road, which would be vacated in conjunction
with the opening of fire stations in E1 Rancho del Rey
and Salt Creek-I (including its potential use as a
paramedic site by Hartsons), and for Fire Station #3
on East Oneida, which would be vacated in conjunction
with the proposed relocation to the Sunbow-II
development.
Lead Department: Planning
RECOMMENDATION 8. Staff continue efforts to modify the Scenario #4 road
(Road Network) network to improve access into the Bonita Meadows
Estates development, in order to bring the development
into compliance with the proposed project guidelines.
Lead Department: Engineering
iii
RECOMMENDATION 9. Staff establish a developmental impact fee (DIF) to
(Financing) cover the costs for modifying the City's fi re station
network, as outlined in this report.
Lead Department: Administration
RECOMMENDATION 10. The E1 Rancho del Rey and Salt Creek-I fire stations
(Operation of be targeted for operation when Eastlake Greens reaches
Rancho del Rey 40-50% buildout. Based on current time lines, this
& Salt Creek-I buildout level is expected to occur by FY 1992-93 or
stations) before. The actual buildout rate will depend on a
variety of external factors such as prevailing
interest rates, the timing of major roads, and the
water allocation formula which is being developed.
Lead Department: Fire
RECOMMENDATION ll. Staff insure that sufficient fire protection and
(Olympic Center) medical treatment capabilities are developed on-site
for the Olympic Training Center to mitigate the need
for any interim changes in the City's current fire
station network, until such changes are warranted by
development in the nearby Eastlake Greens area.
Lead Department: Planning
RECO~ENDATION 12. Staff develop a financial plan, similar to a multi-year
(Financing) CIP budget, to prepare for the annual increase in
operating expenses associated with a sixth fire
station ($618,000 per year in 1988 dollars).
Lead Department: Administration
RECOMMENDATION 13. The relocation of Fire Station #3 be targeted to
(Relocation of coincide with the earliest of the following events:
Fire station #3) the buildout of the Otay Rio Business Park; the
relocation of San Diego's Fire Station #6; or
achievement of a 50% buildout level for the Sunbow
development.
Lead Department: Fire
RECOMMENDATION 14. Construction of a new fire training facility ($321,000)
(Training should be given strong consideration for inclusion in
Facility) the City's CIP budget in the near future.
Lead Department: Fire
RECOMMENDATION 15. An appropriate share of the cost for the new fire
(Training training facility be included in the fire developmental
Facility) impact fee (DIF) to be established by Administration.
Lead Department: Administration
RECOMMENDATION 16: Staff determine the desirability of jointly using the
(Training fire training classroom as a briefing room for police
Facility units assigned to patrol beats east of 1-805 and
delineate associated space and equipment needs.
Lead Department: Police
RECOMMENDATION 17: Staff work with developers and the City's Senior
Radio Communica- Electronics Technician to determine an appropriate
tions) location for a communications tower east of 1-805.
(This facility is needed to improve radio-radio
communications for both police and fire service as
development occurs in the eastern territories.
Lead Department: Planning
RECOMMENDATION 18. The cost of the communications tower be included in
{Radio Com- the fire developmental impact fee {DIF) to be
munications) established by Administration.
Lead Department: Administration
RECOMMENDATION 19. Staff continue to work with Hartson to assess current
(Paramedic and future paramedic service needs east of 1-805.
Services) Lead Department: Fire
RECOMMENDATION 20. Staff continue to explore possible conditions under
(Bonita Fire which the City's financial participation in the
Station) construction of a new Bonita fire station would be
desirable. (This station would replace the current
Bonita station. The optimal station site is the
current location on Bonita Road and Acacia.)
Lead Department: Administration
INTRODUCTION
Substantial Savings Can Be Realized If Fire Coverage Needs Are Planned For On
An Area-Wide Basis.
As part of the General Plan update, the Policy Analysis and Program Evaluation
Unit (PAPE), in conjunction with staff from the Fi re and Planning departments,
has completed a review of the long term fire coverage needs within the City's
Planning Area. In addition to corporate Chula Vista, the Planning Area, as
defined for the study, included the area served by the Bonita-Sunnyside Fire
Protection District, the Otay Ranch (Baldwin) property west of Otay Reservoir
and other eastern properties including Baldwin's Salt Creek I and II
developments; Bonita Meadows Estates, Rancho San Miguel, Eastlake II, Eastlake
Greens and Sunbow I and II. Thus, the Planning Area, as shown in Figure 1 on
the following page, represents the City's entire Sphere of Influence as well
as special planning areas.
The fire station study illustrates that significant savings can be achieved if
fire coverage needs are planned for on an area-wide basis. By jointly
planning the location of fire stations and through the use of automatic aid
assistance, a more efficient fire station network can be achieved for the
entire Planning Area.
FIGURE 1: Major Developmen~ In The Planni .~a ~--
2
The study is divided into three parts:
PART I establishes service objectives and measures current
performance;
PART II develops an optimal fire station network for the Planning
Area;
PART III addresses related fire service issues.
PART I. FIRE RESPONSE TIME STANDARDS AND PERFORMANCE
In PART I the factors affecting the Fire Department's response time to service
calls are reviewed, response time standards for evaluating alternative fire
station networks are developed, and the department's current response time
performance and overall coverage rates are assessed.
A. Response Time is Primarily Determined by the Number and Location of Fire
Stations.
Response time, as used in this report, represents the time it takes from
receipt of a call for service until a fire company arrives on-scene. Response
time can be broken down into three principal components:
Dispatch Time: The elapsed time from receipt of a call in the dispatch
center until the first fire company is alerted.
Turnout Time: The time required for firefighters to don their gear, check
route information, and depart the station.
Travel Time: The time from departure until the fire company arrives
on-scene.
Travel time is the major component of response time and the most variable.
The number and location of a community's fire stations are the major
determinants of travel time.
It's important to point out that there are a number of variables, in addition
to response time, which can influence the extent of life or property loss.
These include such factors as the use of smoke detectors, which can reduce the
elapsed time between the actual start of a fire and its detection, or the use
of sprinkler systems, which can retard the growth of a fire during the
preliminary stages. For medical related calls for service, the extent of
community training in CPR or other first-aid techniques can similarly affect
potential loss. While such variables can significantly enhance performance,
response time remains a critical factor in the overall effectiveness of a
city's fire service.
B. The Fi re Department Responds To 92% of Emer~encs Calls Wi thin ? Minutes.
In November, 1987 Council adopted growth management thresholds for fire
services as part of the General Plan update. The service thresholds were to
reflect the department's "current performance levels". Both staff and the
Crossroads/Developer Coalition recommended that the 7-minute response time
threshold be set at 85% to account for two factors:
normal year to year variation in performance which would be expected
to occur without any change in population or service demand,
reflecting changes in the geographic distribution of calls, and
possible short-term declines in response time performance during the
initial phases of development, reflecting the normal lag time unti~
increased workload warrants construction of new fire stations.
Thus, the threshold represents a "floor" below which service levels should not
fall.
Upon adoption of the threshold, staff enhanced existing information systems to
more accurately measure performance. Under the current system, all three
response time components (dispatch time, turnout time and travel time) are
measured. Based on recent performance data for an 8-month period, roughly 92%
of emergency calls are presently responded to within 7 minutes.
C. Fire Coverage Measures Were Established To Assess Alternative Fire Station
Networks.
Four measures were developed to assess the impact of alternative fire station
locations. These measures, which are described below, reflect the relative
efficiency, effectiveness, equity and risk of different fire station networks.
EFFICIENCY: The Overall Coverage Rate. This measure looks at the
percentage of dwelling units within a 5 and 7 minute
response time. A fire station network was deemed more
efficient than another if it provided greater coverage with
the same number of stations.
EFFECTIVENESS: Coverage of High Call Demand Areas. This measure looks at
response times to areas having the highest call for service
rates. A network was deemed more effective if it provided
quicker response times to high demand areas.
RISK: Coverage For Special High Risk Sites. This measure
assesses response times to areas of potentially high
property loss (e.g. large industrial or commercial
developments) or potentially high loss of life (e.g.
hospitals). For high risk sites, the response times of
both first-in and second-in fire companies are assessed. A
network was deemed to have less "risk" if it provided
quicker responses to these special sites.
EQUITY: The Maximum Response Time. This measure looks at the
longest response time to populated areas in the City and is
used to assess the comparative equity of alternative
networks. A network was deemed more equitable if it had a
lower maximum response time.
It's important to note that these four coverage measures can conflict with one
another. If, for example, the overall coverage rate (efficiency) was the sole
deployment criteria, stations would tend to be located in areas having the
highest density. Conversely, if the major deployment criteria was to maximize
equity, stations would be located to equalize response times to all parts of
the City. Similarly, if the primary emphasis was placed on minimizing large
dollar losses, stations would be located in areas with high commercial or
industrial value, to the possible detriment of overall efficiency or
effectiveness.
It is al so important to recognize that performance on each of the four
measures can be improved by spending more money. However, the cost of
creating a new fire company is substantial. For Chula Vista, annual
FY 1988-89 costs to staff and operate a fire company approximate $618,000.
Thus, in assessing alternative fire station networks, a fifth measure,
relative cost, was applied:
COST: A network was deemed more cost-effective if it met the service
standards with fewer stations.
In the following two sections the methodology used to measure fire coverage
rates is discussed, minimum coverage objectives are set for each measure and
the department's current performance is measured.
D. A Computer Model Was Used To Measure Coverage Rates.
To assess fire station coverage under alternative station networks, a
computerized fire station simulation model was utilized. This model,
developed by Public Technolog_v, Incorporated (PTI), is presently used to
determine fire station response zones under the automatic aid agreements
within the County. Important points to note about the model are:
-- Using the Scenario #4 road network developed by the General Plan
consultants, the simulation model was used to project travel times to
more than 500 zones within the Planning Area.
-- The travel times projected by the model are conservative. As such,
estimates of the Planning Area's current and future coverage rates
may be somewhat understated.
-- To estimate total response time, 1.3 minutes was added to travel time
projections to account for dispatch and turnout times. This estimate
was derived ~rom recent performance data.
-- The same land use scenario used in testing the transportation model
was used to assess alternative fire station networks.
E. Minimum Coverage Standards Were Developed for Each Performance Measure.
Based upon current departmental performance, minimum standards were
established for the four fire coverage measures. These standards are
discussed below.
.EFFICIENCY Provide 7 minute coveraoe for at least 95% of the
STANDARD dwelling units in the Planning Area.
Current
Coverage: 99.3% of dwelling units are within a 7 minute
response.*
Discussion: The minimum standard (95%) is set slightly below
the current coverage rate (99%) to account fo~'
the lower densities, more hilly terrain, and
non-grid street system occurrin9 in areas east oF
Interstate-805.
* It's important to note the difference between the current coverage rate
(i.e. 99.3% of dwelling units within 7 minutes) and the current
performance rate (i.e. 92% of emergency calls responded to within 7
minutes). This difference primarily reflects two factors: (1) actual
performance includes responses to non-residential areas which are not
reflected in the coverage rate, such as responses to brush fires and (2)
the coverage rate is generally based upon average travel, turnout and
dispatch times while actual performance includes some calls where special
factors, such as adverse weather conditions, may significantly increase
the response time to a particular call.
EFFECTIVENESS
STANDARD Provide an average coverage rate of no more than
4 minutes to the Planning Area's high call for
service areas.
Current
Coverage: The existing fire station network provides for an
average 3.6 minute coverage in the area's hi~¥
demand zones.
Discussion: The area having the highest per-capita call rate
is bordered by I-5, "C" Street, Fifth Avenue and
"I" Street. Overall, the call rate west of 1-805
is approximately twice the per-capita rate east
of 1-805, reflecting a substantially higher
per-capita level of medical calls. This
difference is primarily due to age and other
demographic differences between the populations.
Meeting the efficiency and effectiveness objectives outlined above should
insure that the threshold standard of responding to 85% of all emergency calls
within 7 minutes is met.
RISK-RELATED
-STANDARD For SPRINKLERED high risk sites, provide a
maximum first-in response of 7 minutes and a
maximum second-in response of lO minutes.
For NON-SPRINKLERED high risk sites, provide a
maximum first-in response of 4 minutes and a
maximum second-in response of 10 minutes.
Current
Coverage: Table 1 identifies 19 special risk sites within
current Chula Vista. As shown in the table, the
projected coverage to most sites is substantially
better than the minimum standard. However,
minimum standards would not be met for the Otay
Rio Business Park under the present fire station
network and may not be met for the Otay Valley
Road Redevelopment Area.
Discussion: The current first-in response time to a central
point within the Otay Rio Business Park is
projected at 8.6 minutes, compared to the 7
minute maximum; the projected second-in response
is 10.4 minutes, compared to the 10 minute
maximum. (As previously noted, the simulation
model uses conservative travel speed assumptions
and, as such, likely overstates some response
times. However, since this conservative bias is
generally consistent in all areas, the model
provides the most objective method for assessing
relative coverage.)
In 1990-91, the City of San Diego plans to
construct a fire station at the eastern end of
Brown Field. However, the projected response
time from the Brown Field fire station to a
central point in the Otay Rio Business Park is
around 8 minutes, resulting in only marginal
improvements in fire coverage for the area.
For the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Area, the
first-in fire response is presently provided by
San Diego's Fire Station #6, which is located
west of 1-805 and south of Main Street. As shown
in Table 1, fire coverage for the area is
currently within the 7 and 10 minute maximum.
However, San Diego plans to relocate this station
further south lafter the Brown Field station is
built). When this relocation occurs, first-in
response times to a central point within the Otay
Valley Road Redevelopment Area would come from a
Chula Vista based fire station and would exceed
the 7 minute maximum (8.1 minutes). The
second-in response, although within the 10 minute
maximum, would increase from 7.1 minutes to 8.8
minutes.
In the following section of the report, fire
station networks are outlined which would improve
coverage into both the Otay Rio Business Park and
the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Area.
10
EQUITY
STANDARD Provide a maximum response time of 10 minutes to
any dwelling unit within the Planning Area.
Current
Coverage: 100% of dwelling units are within a lO minute
response time.
Discussion: Automatic aid is provided to current areas of
Chula Vista from Bonita and San Diego based fire
stations. Even in the absence of such
assistance, all of the City's dwelling units
would be within a 10 minute response from Chula
Vista based stations.
PART II of the report describes an optimal fire station network which will
meet or exceed the minimum coverage standards.
TABLE 1: Response Times To Sites with Potentially High Life Or Property Loss.
EXISTING
STANDARD NET~)RK
Joint or
1st-in 2nd-in 1st-in 2nd-in Auto, tic
Time Time Time Tin Aid Meets
SITE (Min) (Min) (Min) (Min) Coverage Standard
COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL
Chula Vista Shopping Center 7 10 3.9 5.9 YES
Eastlake Envplo~q~ent Park ? * 10 6.7 9.2 YES
East[ake Village Center 7 * 10 5.9 8.4 YES
E[ Rancho del Rey E~[oyn~nt Park ? * 10 4.6 7.4 YES
OLay Valley Road Redevelop~nt 7 * 10 6.7 8.1 SD (1st-in) YES
OLay Rio Business Park 7 * 10 8.6 10.4 SD (1st-in) NO
Rhor Industries (Bayfront) 7 10 5.5 ?.7 NC (2nd-in) YES
Terra Nova shopping Center 7 10 5.7 6.1 YES
MEDICAL
Coilingwood Manor 7 10 2.5 7.8 YES
Co~m~Jnity Hospital 7 10 4.2 7.6 YES
Fredrica Manor 7 10 3.8 6.4 YES
Scripps Hospital 7 10 3.9 5.9 YES
Bouthwood Psychiatric Hospital ? 10 2.7 5.5 YES
Vista Bill Hospital 7 10 4.2 7.6 YES
OTHER
Asbury Towers 4 ** 10 3.8 6.4 YES
Civic Center 4 *** 10 1.3 6.7 YES
Congregational Towers 4 *** 10 2.5 5.5 YES
South Bay Regional Center 7 10 3.1 5.6 YES
Southwestern College 7 10 2.1 8.5 BON (2nd-in) YES
* For testing purposes, sprinkLering was assurm~d
** Partially Sprinkkered Building
*** Non-Sprink[ered Building(s)
12
PART II - FUTURE FIRE COVERAGE IN THE PLANNING AREA
The Scenario #4 Land Use pattern was used to evaluate the Planning Area's fire
coverage needs at buildout.
A. A Plannin9 Area Network Of 8 Fire Stations Can Exceed The Minimum Coverag~
Rates And Performance Standards, If The Stations Are Properly Located.
Figures 2A and 2B illustrate the Planning Area's existing fire station network
and a proposed 8 fire station network. Important points to note about the
figures are:
The present Planning Area network {Figure 2A) consists of 5 Chula
Vista fire stations and 1 Bonita-Sunnyside station. First-in
automatic aid is presently provided to the Planning Area from
stations located in National City and San Diego.
The proposed Planning Area network {Figure 2B) would consist of 6
Chula Vista based stations, 1 Bonita-Sunnyside station and 1 station
located within the Otay Ranch {Baldwin) property west of Otay
Reservoir.
The proposed network recommends building a new Chula Vista fire
station in the E1 Rancho del Rey development. This station should be
located proximate to East "H" Street and Paseo Ranchero, providing
ready access to major street arteries running east-west and
north-south.
The proposed network recommends buildin9 a new Chula Vista fire
station in Baldwin's Salt Creek-I development {formerly part of
Eastlake I). The recommended site is different from the site
originally proposed for the Eastlake development and would facilitate
fire coverage into the Bonita Meadows Estates, Rancho San Miguel and
Baldwin Salt Creek developments. The proposed site would also
produce marginal improvements in response times into some areas of
Bonita-Sunnyside, under an expanded automatic aid agreement. A
possible site for the Salt Creek-I fire station has been tentatively
identified by the City's Planning Department.
FIGURE 2A: Current
Planning
Area Network
.
· / % z
14
FIGURE 2B: Proposed 8 Station
Network at
Buildout
· ......... . ~...... ~ ..........
'X
!
15
Under the proposed network, the City's current Fire Station #4 on
Otay Lakes Road would be closed in conjunction with the opening of
the E1 Rancho del Rey and Salt Creek-I fire stations.
The proposed network recommends the relocation of Fire Station #3.
This station is presently located on East Oneida, in a residential
neighborhood west of 1-805. It is proposed to relocate the station
to a site east of 1-805, proximate to the intersection of Orange
Avenue and Brandywine, within the SunBow-II development. This
location would provide ready access to major north-south and
east-west arterials. The relocation of Fire Station #3 would
significantly improve coverage into the Otay Valley Road
Redevelopment Area and the Otay Rio Business Park. Current coverage
to City areas west of 1-805 would not be significantly impacted. The
proposed relocation would also enable the City to provide first-in
coverage into some residential and industrial areas of Baldwin's Otay
Ranch property.
Under the proposed 8 station network, a fire station would be located
in Baldwin's Otay Ranch property west of Otay Reservoir. It's
proposed that coverage for the Otay Ranch area west of the reservoir
be supplemented by coverage from 3 Chula Vista based stations. As
detailed in a subsequent section of the report, it is likely that a
second Otay Ranch fire station would be required to adequately serve
this area if joint station location planning and joint coverage did
not occur. The proposed Otay Ranch fire station could, in turn,
supplement coverage into the Eastlake Greens and Eastlake II
developments, and the Olympic Training Center.
The projected coverage rates for the 8 station network are discussed in the
following sections. Also reviewed are the potential costs and gains
associated with decreasing or expanding the proposed network.
B. 98.8% of The Planning Area's Dwelling Units Would Be Within A 7 Minute
Response.
Under the proposed 8 station network, the 7 minute coverage rate for the
Planning Area is projected to be 98.8%. This exceeds the 95% minimum coverage
rate and is only slightly below the 1988 rate of 99.3%. The slight reduction
in overall coverage principally reflects the addition of areas east of 1-805
that are harder to serve because of hilly terrain and non-grid street systems.
1G
Other important points to note about the overall coverage rate are:
The percentage of dwellin9 units within a 5 minute response time
would essentially remain unchanged between 1988 and buildout. Under
the proposed network, approximately 77% of the Planning Area DUs are
projected to be within a 5 minute response, compared to a 1988 rate
of 77.4%.
Automatic aid assistance from stations outside of the Planning Area
would decline. In 1987, 6.7% of the Planning Area's dwelling units
were covered by first-in responses from fire stations located in San
Diego and National City. Under the proposed 8 station network,
consisting of 6 Chula Vista based stations, 1 Bonita station and 1
Otay Ranch station, both the percentage and absolute number of
dwelling units covered by "outside" automatic aid agreements would
decline. At buildout, it's projected that only 1.4% of the Planning
Area's dwelling units would be covered by first-in responses from
stations in San Diego or National City. This change would primarily
result from the proposed relocation of Fire Station #3 and San
Diego's planned relocation of a fire station.
The relocation of Fire Station #3 would not have a major impact on
coverage rates in the western section of Chula Vista. Coverage in
southern Chula Vista (Montgomery) would improve slightly while
coverage for central Chula Vista would decline slightly. The
proposed relocation would significantly enhance coverage to the
Sunbow development, the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Area and the
Otay Rio Business Park, as well as to western parcels within the Otay
Ranch property.
A more balanced workload between fire stations would be created.
Table 2 compares the fire station service areas in 1987 and at
buildout. In 1987, Chula Vista Fire Stations #1 and #5 had the
largest service areas, providing coverage to 14,437 and ll,801
dwelling units respectively. This represented 50% of all Planning
Area residences. Roughly 60% of all fire company responses were made
by these two stations. At the other extreme, the Bonita Fire Station
and Chula Vista Fire Station #4 had the smallest service areas,
providing coverage to 4,447 and 4,957 dwelling units respectively.
In 1987, these two stations each responded to roughly 1-2 service
calls per day. Under the proposed net~ork, the service area for
Chula Vista Fire Station #3 would expand significantly, totalling
11,733 dwelling units at buildout. Additionally, the proposed new
fire stations in E1 Rancho del Rey {CV #6), Salt Creek-I (CV #4) and
Otay Ranch and would have projected service areas of 12,387, 13,751
and 15,081 dwelling units respectively. The primary service area for
Chula Vista Fire Station #2 would remain comparatively small,
consisting of 5,933 dwelling units. Tactically this station serves
Table 2. Fire Station Service Areas Under The Current And Proposed Networks.
CURRENT NETgORK PROPOSED NETI,~'ORK AT BUILOOUT
Station (DUs) (1987) Station (DUs) **
CV #I * 14,437 DUs 3,131 calls CV #1 16,728
CV #2 5,904 952 CV #2 5,933
CV #3 7,384 897 CV ~ 11,733
(Sunbow Ii)
CV #4 4,957 341 CV //4 13,751
(Salt Creek-I)
CV #5 11,801 1,617 CVS5 14,550
CV #6 ...... CV #6 12,387
(El Rancho
del Ray)
Donita 4,433 609 Bonita 5,457***
Otay Ranch ...... Otay Ranch 15,081
San Diego/ 3,510 242 San Diego/ 1,409
Nat~[ City Natal City
* Station #1 has 2 fire companies
** Includes DUs to be covered under possible automatic aid agreements
*** Based on pretiminary County projections for Year 2000-2005 (exctuding
Bonita Meadows Estates and Rancho San Migue[ properties which are
included in the overall Planning Area estimates).
as the principal backup station for the City's downtown area. While
the service area for the Bonita station would also remain low, this
station would be the principal backup station for the Bonita Meadows
Estates, Rancho San Miguel and Baldwin Salt Creek developments.
Overall, the generally larger service areas for the Planning Area's
eastern stations would create a more balanced workload between fire
companies.
It's important to note that Chula Vista Fire Stations #1 and ~5 would
continue to have proportionately higher response rates because of the
higher per-capita call rate occurring in the western section of the
Planning Area.
C. The Proposed 8 Station Network Will Improve Coverage Of High Risk Site~
In addition to overall coverage rates, three other response time measures were
established: an equity standard of providing a maximum 10 minute response for
100% of the dwelling units in the Planning Area; an effectiveness measure of
maintaining a quick response to the area's highest call zones; and a risk
measure of providing acceptable first and second-in responses to sites with
potentially high levels of life or property loss.
Under the proposed network all dwelling units within the Planning Area are
projected to be within a 10 minute response {98.8% are projected to be within
7 minutes).
Under the proposed network the average response to high demand areas would
remain at 3.6 minutes, as compared to the target of 4 minutes or less. The
proposed relocation of two Chula Vista fire stations would not impact response
times to these areas.
Lastly, the projected response times to special sites are detailed in Table
3. As shown in the table, the coverage of many special sites would be
improved under the proposed 8 station network. Important points to note about
the table are:
Ten (10) new "high risk" sites have been identified within the
Planning Area, based on the proposed Scenario #4 Land Use. These
include large industrial/commercial areas as well as the planned
University site and Olympic Training Facility. For testing purposes
it was assumed that all identified sites would be sprinklered.
Both the Otay Rio Business Park and the Otay Road Redevelopment Area
would meet the minimum response time standards for sprinklered
sites. The first-in coverage would be provided by Chula Vista's
~ted Fire Station #3.
First-in coverage to special sites in the E1 Rancho del Rey and
Eastlake I developments would be under 4 minutes.
First-in coverage to proposed development on the mid-Bayfront would
be 4.2 minutes, within the guidelines for sprinklered sites. It's
important to note that the current model does not address possible
fire coverage needs if a second Bayfront peninsula were to be built.
More detailed planning information would be required prior to
assessing the impacts of a second peninsula.
In the long-term, the Otay Ranch fire station could provide first-in
coverage for the Olympic Training Center. Projected response times
from this site would meet guideline criteria. In the short-term,
however, it is important that on-site fire protection and medical
treatment capabilities be developed at the Olympic Training Center to
supplement interim coverage from existing and planned Chula Vista
based stations.
First-in coverage for several industrial areas within Baldwin's Otay
Ranch property west of the reservoir could be provided by the
relocated Fire Station #3. Without this coverage, these special risk
sites would not receive a first-in response under 7 minutes from the
station based in Otay Ranch.
First-in coverage to the proposed University site (Otay Ranch
property) ~ould be under 4 minutes.
20
TABLE 3: Response Times To Sites With Potentially Bigh Risk of Life Or Property Loss.
GUIDELINE EXISTING PROPOSED
STANDARD NETWORK NETWORK
Joint or
1st-in 2nd-in 1st-in 2nd-in 1st-in 2r~J-in Automatic
Time Time Time Time Time Time Aid Meets
SITE (Min) (Min) (Min) (Min) (Min) (Min) Coverage Guideline
COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL
Chuta Vista Shopping Center 7 10 3.9 5.9 3.9 5.9 YES
Eastlake Employ~nt Park ? * 10 6.7 9.2 2.8 4.3 OTAY (2nd-in) YES
East[ake Village Center ? * 10 5.9 8.4 3.6 4.6 OTAY (2nd-in) YES
El Rancho del Rey Employ~)ent Park 7 * 10 4.6 7.4 3.0 6.8
Otay Valley Road Redevelopment 7 * 10 6.7 8.1 4.8 9.1 OTAY (2nd-in) YES
Olay Rio Business Park 7 * 10 8.6 10.4 6.9 7.9 OTAY (2nd-in) YES
Rhor Industries (Bayfront) 7 10 5.5 7.7 5.5 7.7 NC (2nd-in) YES
Terra Nova Shopping Center ? 10 5.7 6.1 4.0 5.7 YES
· *SunBow Industrial Park (Parcel JlO) ? * 10 -- -- 2.7 5.2 OTAY (2nd-in) YES
·*Otay Ranch Industrial Park (Parcel J5) ? * 10 __ __ 6.5 7.6 CV (1st-in) YES
·*Otay Ranch Industrial Park (Parcel J6) ? * 10 -- -- 6.6 8.1 CV (1st-in) YES
·*Otay Ranch Industrial Park (Parcel J7) ? * 10 -- -- 5.8 6.9 CV (1st-in) YES
· *Olay Ranch Retail Center (Parcel L1) ? * 10 __ __ 2.8 5,? CV (2nd-in) YES
·*Otay Ranch Office Park (Parcel L2) 7 * 10 __ __ 3.6 6.1 CV (2nd-in) YES
· *Olay Ranch Industrial Park (Parcel M1) ? * 10 -- -- 2.6 5.6 CV (2nd-in) YES
MEDICAL
Cottingwood Manor ? 10 2.5 7.8 2.5 7.8 YES
Community Hospital 7 10 4.2 7.6 3.6 6.0 YES
Fredrica Manor 7 10 3.8 6.4 3.8 6.4 YES
Scripps Hospital ? 10 3.9 5.9 3.9 5.9 YES
Southwood Psychiatric Hospital ? 10 2.7 5.5 2.7 5.5 YES
Vista Hill Rospital 7 10 4.2 7.6 3.6 6,0 YES
OTHER
Asbury Towers 4 10 3.8 6.4 3.8 6.4 YES
Civic Center 4 10 1,3 6.7 1.3 6.7 YES
Congregational Towers 4 10 2.5 5.5 2.5 5.5 YES
Mid-Bayfront (Hotel) 7 10 4.2 7.1 4.2 7.1 NC (2nd-in) YES
· *Olympic Training Facility ? 10 6.8 8.8 6.8 8.8
South Bay Regional Center ? 10 3.1 5.6 3.1 5.6 YES
Southwestern College 7 10 2.1 8.5 3.7 5.2 YES
· *Proposed University Site (Parcel M3) 7 * 10 -- -- 3.6 6.5 CV (2nd-in) YES
· Sprinklering assumed for new sites
· * Other potentially high risk sites based on Scenario #4 land use
21
D. Project Level Guidelines Are Needed To Effectively Implement The
Ihresholds.
General coverage targets, applied to the Planning Area as a whole, were
established to assess the overall adequacy of the proposed fire station
network. However, as proposed developments move through the development
process and planning data becomes more detailed, the adequacy of fire coverage
should to be reviewed at the individual project level. While the citywide
threshold provides a helpful benchmark for evaluating the department's annual
performance, the threshold is less useful in judging individual projects
during the planning process. As such, more specific guidelines are needed to
assess residential and industrial/commercial projects. These proposed project
guidelines are detailed in Table 4 on the following page. As a general
simplification, the guidelines are stated in tems of the travel time
component (i.e. 1.3 minutes less than the total response time).
Important points to note about the project guidelines are:
The project guidelines are applied within the context of the overall
coverage standards, i.e. that at least 95% of the Planning Area's
dwelling units are within a 7 minute response time.
For residential projects, 85% of the proposed dwellin~ units are to
be within a 5.7 minute travel time from a current or planned fire
station and 100% within an 8.7 minute travel time.
For commercial/industrial projects classified as special risks by the
City's Fire Prevention Bureau, the first-in travel time is to be
within 2.7 minutes if the site is not sprinklered or within 5.7
minutes if the site is sprinklered.
The guidelines are to be applied to the overall coverage within a
proposed development or project. For example, the guidelines would
be applied to the E1 Rancho del Rey development as a whole rather
than to each Specific Planning Area within the development.
22
Lastly, it's important to note that the thresholds represent the
City's accepted fire response standards. The guidelines, although
not part of the threshold themselves, represent a tool to help insure
that the City's fire service levels are maintained. Because the
guidelines are more restrictive than the threshold standard, an
exemption procedure is provided. It is important to emphasize that
an exemption to the project guidelines shall NOT be granted if, in
doing so, the citywide threshold standard would not be met.
TABLE 4
Proposed Project Guidelines
I. FIRE COVERAGE GUIDELINES FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS
For residential projects:
1. 85% of the dwelling units shall be within a 5.7 minute TRAVEL TIME
from a current or planned fire station;
2. 100% of the dwelling units shall be within an 8.7 minute travel
time from a current or planned fire station. (This correlates to
the "Equity" objective of 100% coverage within a 10 minute
response.)
· II. FIRE COVERAGE GUIDELINES FOR INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS
For industrial or commercial sites which are classified as "special
risk" sites by the City's Fire Prevention Bureau:
1. The first-in travel time from a current or planned fire station
shall not exceed 2.7 minutes if the site is NOT SPRINKLERED and the
second-in travel time shall not exceed 8.7 minutes,
OR
2. The first-in travel time from a current or planned fire station
shall not exceed 5.7 minutes if the site is SPRINKLERED and the
second-in travel time shall not exceed 8.7 minutes.
III. GUIDELINE EXEMPTIONS
Exemptions to the guidelines may be granted by the City Council for a
specific project by 3/5th vote subsequent to the review and
recommendations of the City's Fire Prevention Bureau. Exemptions may be
granted in consideration of such factors as (1) the limited size of the
project; (2) the use of residential sprinklering; (3) the rural
character of the project and surrounding areas or (4) other
considerations as deemed appropriate. Exemptions shall NOT be granted
if, in doing so, the citywide fire service threshold would not be met.
22
The projected coverage rates for major residential developments within the
Planning Area are compared to the proposed guidelines in Table 5. (A
comparison of special industrial/commercial sites was provided in Table 3.)
In reviewing the data it's important to note that the reliability of coverage
projections depends on the level of planning detail available. Thus,
projections for E1 Rancho del Rey, where data is available by Specific
Planning Area, are more reliable than projections for developments more
distant in time, such as Eastlake II. As more detailed information becomes
available for specific developments, a more definitive review of fire coverage
rates should be conducted as part of the project review process.
Table 5. Fire Coverage By Development Under The Proposed 8 Station
Network.
DUs within
5.7 Minutes
Travel Time
Bayfront 100%
Bonita Meadows Estates 70% - 100%
Eastlake I 100%
Eastlake II 91% - 100%
Eastlake Greens 100%
E1 Rancho del Rey 100%
Rancho San Miguel 100%
Salt Creek-II 88% - 93%
Sunbow 100%
Otay Ranch-Baldwin 90% - 99%
Important points to note about the coverage rates shown in Table 5 are:
-- BAYFRONT. 100% of the proposed dwelling units would be within a 5.7
minute travel time from Chula Vista Fire Station #1.
-- BONITA MEADOWS ESTATES. The development would not meet the project
guidelines under the current Scenario #4 road network. The 100% coverage
rate shown in Table 5 is based on a modified road network which would
provide direct access into the development from the planned fire station
in Salt Creek-I. This access could be provided by a frontage road running
between East "H" Street and Blacksmith Road, a freeway interchange at
SR 125 and Blacksmith or by realigning the proposed interchan9e at SR 125
and San Miguel Road. This last alternative is recommended by the City's
Engineering Department and is currently being pursued. Without improved
access, the 7-minute coverage rate could drop below the 85% guideline
level.
-- E~STLAKE GREENS. The projected 100% coverage rate for the development
includes first-in coverage from the proposed Otay Ranch fire station. If
projections only reflected responses from Chula Vista based stations, the
7-minute coverage rate would fall from 100% to 92%, which is still within
the project guidelines.
-- EASTLAKE I. 100% of the proposed dwelling units would be within a 5.7
minute travel time from the planned Salt Creek-I fire station.
-- EASTLAKE II. The projected coverage for the development includes first-in
coverage from the Otay Ranch based fi re station. If projections only
reflected responses from Chula Vista based stations, the 7-minute coverage
rate would fall from 100% to 91%, which is still within the project
guidelines.
-- EL RANCHO DEL REY. 100% of the dwelling units would be within a 5.7
minute travel time from the proposed fire station to be located within the
development.
-- RANCHO SAN MIGUEL. Based on the current Scenario #4 land use, 100% of the
proposed dwelling units would be within a 5.7 minute travel time from the
planned fire station in the Salt Creek-I development. It is important to
note, however, that if development occurs within the northern portion of
Rancho San Miguel along Mount Miguel, the project ~uidelines ~oul~
possibly not be met under the proposed 8 station network. Compliance with
the guidelines would depend on such factors as the location and
proportionate number of dwelling units proposed for the northern section
of the development and on the coverage needs to any non-residential
facilities planned for the area. The costs and benefits of adding a
station in the Rancho San Miguel development in order to meet guideline
criteria should development be approved in the northern section are
discussed in a subsequent section of the report IPart II, Section F).
-- SALT CREEK-II. Based on the planned location of a fire station in the
Salt Creek-I development, it is projected that 88-93% of the proposed
dwelling units in Salt Creek-II would be within a 5.7 minute travel time.
(100% of the units in Salt Creek-t would be within 5.7 minutes.)
-- SUNBOW (Phases I and II). 100% of the proposed dwelling units would be
within a 5.7 minute travel time from the relocated Fire Station #3.
-- OTAY RANCH. Between 90% 99% of the proposed dwelling units would be
within a 5.7 minute travel time from the Otay Ranch Fire Station or from
Chula Vista based stations. If first-in coverage did not include Chula
Vista based stations, the guideline coverage rate (dwelling units within a
5.7 minute travel time) would drop to 80-85% and 5-7% of the dwelling
units would be beyond an 8.7 minute travel time (10 minute total response
time). The projected percentage of dwelling units within a 3.7 minute
travel time (a 5 minute total response) would drop from 69-77% to 53-66 if
first-in coverage was limited to the Otay Ranch station. Also, as
previously noted, first or second-in coverage from Chula Vista based
stations would be required to meet the minimum project ~uidel~nes ~or
industrial sites, unless a second fire station were constructed within the
Otay Ranch development.
E. Significant Changes In The Scenario #4 Road Network Could Im@act Coverage
Projections and the Proposed Fire Station Network.
As previously noted, the lower densities, hilly terrain and non-grid road
system in the eastern portion of the Planning Area are all factors
contributing to slightly higher response times. Offsetting these factors, in
part, is the system of primary arterials planned under the Scenario #4 road
network. The projected coverage rates and, in turn, the proposed fire station
network, are particularly sensitive to two circulation elements, which are
highlighted below:
-- SR 125. The analysis was based on SANDAG's currently planned
alignment for the future freeway. From a fire coverage standpoint, a
different alignment for SR 125 north of East "H" Street would not
appreciably affect overall coverage for the Planning Area. A more
substantial coverage impact would possibly occur in the Otay Ranch
and Eastlake II developments if the entire SR 125 alignment were
shifted further east. A more detailed assessment of these impacts
would depend upon the specific changes in land uses and road network
resulting from a change in alignment.
-- Orange Avenue. Under the proposed network, the Otay Ranch based fire
station and the relocated Fire Station #3 would be located at sites
proximate to the major Orange Avenue (east-west) arterial. To
provide adequate coverage within the Otay Ranch development under the
proposed 8 station network, a major east-west arterial south of
Palomar and north of Otay Valley Road appears to be required. Fi re
coverage for the area should be reevaluated if current plans for
Orange Avenue are substantially modified.
Expanding or Reducing The Proposed Fire Station Network Does Not Appear To
Be Cost Effective.
In developing the proposed 8 station network, staff assessed more than 35
alternative networks, including networks of 7 and 9 stations. Expanding or
reducing the 8 station network would have a significant cost impact. In 1988
dollars, start-up fire station costs (excluding land) approximate $600,000
(station design, construction and equipment); annual personnel and operating
costs approximate $618,000.
While a 7 station network would yield substantial operating cost savings, it
would not meet the overall coverage standards or the guidelines established
for specific projects. Only 90% of the Planning Area's dwelling units would
be within a 7 minute response (compared to a 99% rate which is currently
achieved and which is projected for the 8 station network), while 1-2% would
be beyond a lO minute response time. Moreover, the 5 minute coverage rate
under a 7 station network would drop significantly. The proposed 8 station
network provides 5 minute coverage for 77% of the area's dwelling units,
compared to a 1987 coverage rate of 77.4%. Under a 7 station network, the 5
minute coverage rate would drop to under 67% at buildout. Lastly, under a 7
station network it is likely that the Salt Creek, Bonita Meadows Estates,
Rancho San Miguel and/or Eastlake II developments would not meet the 85%
coverage rate established in the project guidelines.
Given the resulting reductions in coverage, decreasing the network to 7 fire
stations is not considered to be cost effective.
The analysis also examined possible gains resulting from an expansion of the
network to 9 stations. As detailed below, adding a 9th fire station would
only produce marginal improvements in coverage while incurring substantial
start-up and on-going costs. Two possible 9 station networks are shown in
Figures 3A and 3B. Important points to note about the figures are:
The network shown in Figure 3A provides a 9th fire station (CV #7) to
primarily serve the Rancho San Miguel and Bonita Meadows Estates
areas. Under this scenario, the planned Salt Creek-I fire station
would be relocated to the southern portion of the Eastlake I
development. The proposed Otay Ranch fi re station would be shifted
southwest.
The network shown in Figure 3B provides a 9th fire station to
primarily serve the western portion of the Otay Ranch property and
the southwestern section of Chula Vista. Based upon current land use
planning for the area, the added station would be located near the
site proposed for the relocation of Fire Station #3. In this
expanded scenario, Fire Station #3 would not be relocated.
Under the 9 station network shown in Figure 3A ICV #7 located in
Rancho San Miguel), 7 minute coverage within the Planning Area would
increase only marginally, from 98.8 to 99%. The 5 minute coverage
rate would also show a modest increase, from 77 to 78.3%. The major
impact of this station site would be to assure that any development
occurring in the northern section of Rancho San Miguel was in
compliance with the proposed project guidelines. This station would
also produce marginal coverage improvements in the Bonita-Sunnyside
area.
28
FIGURE 3A: Alternative 9
Station
Network
I
.
2.O
FIGURE 3B: Alternative 9
Station
Network
3O
Similar types of coverage impacts would result under the 9 station
network shown in Figure 3B (a second Otay Ranch site). Under this
scenario, the 7 minute coverage rate would remain at 98.8%. The 5
minute coverage rate would increase marginally, from 77% to 79.6%.
The low gains resulting from adding a 9th station in this site
primarily reflects the underlying land use planned for the area.
Most of the coverage provided by the new station would simply
supplant already adequate coverage provided under the 8 station
network by the relocated Fire Station #3 and the E1 Rancho del Rey
Fire Station.
Under both 9 station scenarios, a greater imbalance would be created
among fire stations with regard to service areas and workload. A 9th
station in the Rancho San Miguel area would have a primary service
area of only 2,500-3,500 dwelling units. Under this scenario, there
would also be a shift in service area and workload from the planned
station in Otay Ranch to the Chula Vista based Fi re Station #4.
Similarly, a 9th station located in the Otay Ranch area would reduce
the primary service area of Chula Vista's Fire Station #3 by 31%,
from 11,700 to 8,100 dwelling units. Chula Vista's Fire Station #2's
service area would also be slightly impacted, decreasing to only
5,200 dwelling units. The primary service areas for the 2 stations
within the Otay Ranch area would approximate 7,200-8,200 dwelling
units each, less than two-thirds the size of Fire Station #5's area
(13,000 units under this scenario) or the area to be served by the E1
Rancho del Rey Station (12,400 units).
Given the comparative gains and costs, the addition of a 9th fire station does
not appear to be warranted. It is important to note, however, that if
development occurred in the Otay Ranch property east of the Otay Reservoir,
one or more additional fire stations would be required to serve the area.
This portion of the Otay Ranch property is not included in the City's Planning
Area as defined in this report.
Based on the foregoing analysis, the following recommendations are made
regarding: (1) an optimal fire station network for the Planning Area, (2)
establishing project guidelines to further implement the fire service
threshold, and (3) possible modifications in the Scenario #4 Road Network to
facilitate fire coverage:
RECOMMENDATION 1. Council adopt in principal the proposed 8 station
(Fire Network) network for the Planning Area.
RECOMMENDATION 2. Planning and Fire staff work with the developer to set
(Station Network) aside a site within the Sunbow-II development for the
relocation of Fire Station #3.
RECOMMENDATION 3. Planning and Fire staff work with the developer to set
(Station Network) aside a site within the Salt Creek-I development for a
new fire station. This would replace the original
site within the Eastlake I development.
RECOMMENDATION 4. Staff from the Fire and Planning departments continue
(Fire Network) to work with the developer on plans for a fire station
site within the E1 Rancho del Rey development,
proximate to East "H" Street and Paseo Ranchero. The
E1 Rancho del Rey SPA 1 has reserved up to 3 acres
within the East "H" Street park for a fire station and
possible training facility.
RECOMMENDATION 5. Planning staff work with the Eastlake developer to
(Station Network) obtain appropriate credits for the original fire
station site in the Eastlake-I Village Center which
will not be used.
RECOMMENDATION 6. Planning Staff assess alternative uses for Fire
(Station Network) Station #4 on Otay Lakes Road, which would be vacated
in conjunction with the opening of fire stations in E1
Rancho del Rey and Salt Creek-I (including its
potential use as a paramedic site by Hartsons) and for
Fire Station #3 on East Oneida, which would be vacated
in conjunction with the proposed relocation to the
Sunbow-II development.
RECOMMENDATION 7. Council adopt the project guidelines as detailed in
(Project Guide- Table 4 (page 24 of this report). These guidelines
lines) will provide an on-going mechanism to insure that the
fire service threshold will be maintained.
RECOMMENDATION 8. Engineering staff continue efforts to improve access
(Road Network) into the Bonita Meadows Estates development, through
realignment of the proposed interchange at SR 125 and
San Miguel and/or through other appropriate
modifications to the Scenario #4 Road Network.
Improved access is required for the development to
meet the proposed project guidelines.
22
G. New Development Should Finance The Cost of Building New Fire Stations And
Relocatin~ Existin~ Stations.
As part of the overall 8 station network to serve the Planning Area, this
study recommends a 6 station network within corporate Chula Vista. As
detailed in preceding sections, the proposed changes in the City's fire
station network are designed to produce a unified system which will provide
adequate fire coverage to newly developing areas and maintain the citywide
fire threshold standards established within the General Plan. As such, the
costs of the proposed changes, including the building of new fire stations in
the E1 Rancho del Rey and Salt Creek-I developments and the relocation of fire
station #3, should be financed by a developmental impact fee (DIF) assessed to
all new development. This more equitable citywide fee should replace the
current DIF agreement with Eastlake-I.
RECOMMENDATION 9. Administration develop a developmental impact fee
'(Financing) (DIF) to cover the costs for modifying the City's fi re
station network, as outlined in this report.
It is important to emphasize that the fire station costs to be financed by the
citywide DIF do NOT include the costs of building the proposed fire station in
the Otay Ranch development. The Otay Ranch area is not currently within the
City's corporate boundaries and hence the fire related costs associated with
the development are not be incorporated as part of the City DIF.
H. A Preliminary Time Table Has Been Developed For Constructin9 New Fire
Stations In Chula Vista.
It is generally not cost effective to construct new fire station facilities at
the onset of new development. Given the substantial on-going expenses
22
associated with operating a fire station ($618,000), stations are optimally
constructed when (1) there is sufficient new workload to warrant a new station
or (2) the response time to new development exceeds acceptable levels.
The general pace at which new construction proceeds is closely related to a
variety of external factors such as water availability, sewer capacity, the
timing of major roads such as SR 125 and the prevailing interest rates. As
such, forecasts of buildout rates need to be regularly updated to reflect
existing market conditions. With this caveat in mind, preliminary time tables
have been developed for the construction of the fire stations in the Salt
Creek-I and E1 Rancho del Rey developments and for the relocation of Chula
Vista Fire Station #3.
1. The Salt Creek-I and E1 Rancho del Rey Fire Stations May Be Needed By
FY 1992-93, Based on Current Buildout Projections.
During the initial phases of development in the eastern section of
the Planning Area, fire coverage into the Eastlake I and E1 Rancho
del Rey developments will be provided by Chula Vista's Fire Station
#4, currently located on Otay Lakes Road. At buildout, it is
projected that 100% of the dwelling units within Eastlake I and 92%
of the dwelling units within E1 Rancho del Rey SPA I will be within a
7 minute response from the existing Fire Station #4. The response
time from Fire Station #4 to the planned Eastlake I Employment Park
and Village Center and to the E1 Rancho del Rey Employment Park will
also meet proposed guidelines. In the short term, Station #4's
primary service area would increase from 4,957 dwelling units to
9,305 dwelling units. The increased workload associated with the
larger service area would not pose any special operational problems.
Thus, in terms of both workload and response times, the need to close
Fire Station #4 and open two new stations is not directly impacted by
the buildout rates for Eastlake I or E1 Rancho del Rey SPA I.
Development of Eastlake Greens will necessitate improvements in the
fi re station network. Wi thin E1 Rancho del Rey, the response time
from Fire Station #4 will remain adequate until construction of SPA
III, which is not expected until the mid to late 1990's. Prior to
that, however, planned development in Eastlake Greens, south of
Eastlake-I, will necessitate the need to open the Salt Creek-I fire
station. Coverage for the Eastlake Greens development from Fire
Station #4 would not be adequate. Current projections are that this
development would be approximately 20-40% built out by Calendar Year
1991 and 40-60% built out by CY1992-CY1993. Taking into account
projected service levels, the threshold standards and overall cost-
efficiency, the fire station in Salt Creek-I should be targeted for
operation when Eastlake Greens reaches a 40-50% build out level. As
previously noted, the actual buildout rate will depend on a variety
of factors such as prevailing interest rates, the timing of major
roads, and the water allocation formula.
Two other developments, Bonita Meadows Estates and the Olympic
Training Center, may precede the development of Eastlake Greens. The
fire coverage needs for these developments are discussed below.
Interim Coverage for Bonita Meadows Estates Would Be Provided by Fire
Station #4. Based on current projections, buildout of the Bonita
Meadows Estates development could occur by Calendar Year 1991-92. In
the short-term, primary coverage into the Bonita Meadows Estates
development would be provided by Chula Vista Fire Station #4. This
interim coverage could be supplemented by expanding existing
automatic aid agreements with the Bonita-Sunnyside Fire Protection
District. The possible terms for expanding automatic-aid or
contractual agreements are subject to negotiation with the District.
It should be noted that, based on current land use plans, the
projected coverage rate would fall somewhat below the guideline level
during this interim period. Long-term coverage for the development
would be provided by the fire station located in the Salt Creek-I
development. As previously discussed, coverage from the Salt Creek-I
station would meet project guidelines if access into the development
is improved.
Fire protection and medical treatment capabilities should be
developed on-site for the Olympic Training Center, to supplement
interim coverage provided by Chula Vista-based stations. The Olympic
Training Center is currently targeted to commence construction in
Calendar Year 1991. As previously noted, the long-term coverage
needs for this site could be provided by the proposed Otay Ranch fire
station. Short-run coverage for the site would be provided by the
Salt Creek-I station, which is targeted to come on-line in
conjunction with planned residential development in Eastlake Greens.
In the interim, it is important that fire protection and medical
treatment capabilities be developed on-site for the Olympic Training
Center to mitigate the need for any changes in the City's current
fire station network, until such changes are warranted by development
in the nearby Eastlake Greens area. It is important to note that
response times to the site from current or planned Chula Vista based
stations would likely exceed the proposed guideline criteria.
(Actual response times would depend on the road system in place at
the time the facility became operational.) As such, the facility
would require an interim exemption from the proposed project
guidelines. Such an exemption may be justifiable based on the extent
of sprinklering and the facility's on-site capacity for medical
treatment and fire protection.
Based upon the foregoing buildout projections, it is recommended that:
RECOMMENDATION 10. The E1 Rancho del Rey and Salt Creek-I fi re stations
(Operation of be targeted for operation when Eastlake Greens reaches
Rancho del Rey 40-50% buildout. Based on current time lines, this
& Salt Creek-I buildout level is expected to occur by FY 1992-93 or
stations) before.
Based upon current buildout projections, the City may need to operate an
additional, sixth fire station within the next 4 fiscal years. This would
result in an annual operating cost increase of $618,000 in 1988 dollars. As
such, the City should take action now to plan for this financial contingency.
RECOMMENDATION ll. Staff from Planning and Fire insure that sufficient
fire protection and medical treatment capabilities are
developed on-site for the Olympic Training Center to
mitigate the need for any interim changes in the
City's current fire station network, until such
changes are warranted by development in the nearby
Eastlake Greens area.
RECOMMENDATION 12. Administration develop a financial plan, similar to
(Financing) a mul ti-year CIP budget, to prepare for the
significant increase in annual operating expenses
associated with a sixth fire station.
2. Relocation of Fire Station #3 May Be Needed By FY 1992-93.
A target date for relocating Fire Station #3 is dependent upon several
factors, including (1) the buildout schedule for the Otay Rio Business
Park, (2) the timing of the relocation of San Diego's Fire Station #6,
which currently provides first-in coverage to the Otay Valley Road
Redevelopment Area and, (3) the buildout rate for the Sunbow development.
Phase 1 of the Otay Rio Business Park, roughly 30% of buildout, is
projected to be completed by Calendar Year 1990. (A target date for
100% buildout is difficult to project at this time given current
uncertainties regarding road improvements.) First-in coverage to the
Business Park would be provided under automatic aid by the City of
San Diego's Fire Station #6. The first-in time to a central point
within the park is projected at 8.6 minutes, compared to a target
response of within ? minutes; the second-in response time is
projected at 10.4 minutes, compared to a target response of within l0
minutes.
The City of San Diego plans to relocate its Fire Station #6 after a
new Brown Field station is built. The new station is targeted for FY
1990-91; however, San Diego's current project schedule is running
behind. When Fire Station #6 is relocated, first-in response times
to the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Area would increase from 6.7
minutes to 8.1 minutes, compared to a target response of within 7
minutes.
As proposed under the 8 station network, the relocation of Fire Station #3
would provide adequate first-in coverage for both the Otay Valley Road
Redevelopment Area and the Otay Rio Business Park The projected
first-in response time from the relocated station to these developments
would be 4.8 and 6.9 minutes respectively.
.It is projected that Sunbow (Phases I and II) will reach a combined
33-50% buildout by Calendar Year 1992-1993. The preferred site for
Fire Station #3 is in the Sunbow-II development, proximate to
Brandywine and Orange Avenues. The Sunbow Business Park is not
anticipated until after CY 1992.
Based on the foregoing projections, it is recommended that:
RECOMMENDATION 13. The relocation of Fire Station #3 be targeted to
(Relocation of coincide with the earliest of the following events:
Fire station #3) (a) the buildout of the Otay Rio Business Park; (b)
the relocation of San Diego's Fire Station #6; or {c)
achievement of a 50% buildout level for the Sunbow
development. While the exact timing of these
individual events is presently difficult to ascertain,
current projections are that one or more will occur by
FY 1992-93.
Chula Vista's Fire Station #3 was constructed in 1958-59 and while no major
building problems are foreseen in the near term, the preliminary relocation
timetable would need to be adjusted should a major building repair be required
prior to FY 1991-92.
PART III of the report deals with related fire station issues.
PART III. RELATED FIRE SERVICE ISSUE
This section of the report deals with the following issues:
A. The need for a new fire training facility;
B. The need to improve radio communications in the eastern territories;
C. Ambulance/paramedic services within the Planning Area; and
D. The optimal location for the Bonita Fire Station.
A. A New Fire Training Facility is Needed.
The City's current training tower is located at Fire Station #2 on East "J"
Street. The tower was built in 1973 and, as a wooden structure, has
deteriorated over the years from water damage. The new fire station built on
the site has restricted access to the facility, limiting water flow training
as well as multiple company training exercises. In addition to ongoing
'training by Chula Vista fire fighters, the facility has been used for joint
training exercises by fire companies in Chula Vista, National City, San Diego
and Bonita, all part of the area's automatic aid and mutual aid network.
As previously detailed, the E1 Rancho del Rey SPA I sets aside 3 acres in the
East "H" Street park for a fire station and trainin9 facility. A site within
the E1 Rancho del Rey development will provide a central training location as
the City grows.
RECOMMENDATION 14. In light of the restricted access to the current
(Training training tower, construction of a new fire training
Facility) facility should be given strong consideration for
inclusion in the City's CIP budget in the near
future. Fire and Planning staffs should continue to
work with E1 Rancho del Rey to develop a location and
design for the facility that will meet general aesthetic
as well as operational considerations.
Costs for a training tower and classroom are estimated at $321,000. Since the
new training facility will enhance fi re service throughout the Planning Area,
new development should pay a proportional share of the project cost.
RECOMMENDATION 15. An appropriate share of the cost for the new fire
(Training training facility be included in the developmental
Facility) impact fee (DIF) to be established by Administration.
It is possible that the classroom used for fire training could also function
as a briefing room for police units assigned to patrol beats east of 1-805. A
briefing area in the eastern part of the City would reduce travel times to and
from beats. To make the facility compatible for joint police/fire usage, it
may be necessary to expand the area designed for parking and/or to add '"locker
room" space.
RECOMMENDATION 16. Staff from the Police department determine whether it
'(Training is desirable to have a briefing facility at this site
Facility) and, if so, delineate associated space and equipment
needs.
B. Improved Radio Communications Need To Be Developed For The Eastern Section
Of The ?tanning Area.
Chula Vista Fire Station #4, on Otay Lakes Road, is currently equipped with
radio receivers and relay stations to improve communications east of 1-805.
As development continues in the eastern section of the Planning Area,
communications problems will likely increase due to signal "shadowing" from
interceding hills. These problems will affect radio-radio communications for
both fire and police services. To ameliorate the "shadowing" problem, a high
ground site is needed for a communications antenna tower, with an ancillary
structure sufficiently equipped to operate a 12-volt radio relay station.
This structure could be built in conjunction with a school site in Eastlake or
on a separate high ground site in the Eastlake or Rancho San Miguel
developments.
RECOMMENDATION 17. Planning staff work with developers and the City's
(Radio Com- Senior Electronics Technician to detemine an
munications) appropriate location for the communications tower.
The costs of the radio communications tower are estimated at $24,000.
RECOMMENDATION 18. The cost of the communications tower be included in the
(Radio Com- fire developmental impact fee (DIF) to be established
munications) by Administration.
C. Present And Future Needs For A Paramedic Ambulance Site East of 1-805
Should Continue to Be Evaluated.
Paramedic and general ambulance services are presently provided within the
Planning Area under a contract wi th Hartson Ambulance Service. Currently,
Hartson operates two paramedic sites within Chula Vista, located at Third
Avenue and Whitney Iwest of 1-805) and Telegraph Canyon Road and Crest least
of 1-805). The Telegraph Canyon Road site was recently established by Hartson
on an experimental basis and is being evaluated in ten~s of the overall
response patterns within Chula Vista and the South Bay. Additionally,
paramedic services are provided to the Planning Area from Hartson's sites
located in National City (east of 1-805), Imperial Beach and South San Diego.
The City's present contract with Hartson expires in February, 1989. It is
planned that the new contract will incorporate a general response time goal
for paramedic services within Chula Vista which is consistent with the goal
currently in-effect in other South Bay jurisdictions. This goal is to:
Respond to 90% of paramedic calls within l0 minutes.
Recommendations as to the location of future paramedic sites must take into
account demand and response time data for the entire South Bay region. As
such, specific site recommendations cannot be addressed in this report.
However, it is clear that as new development occurs, there will be a need for
one or more paramedic sites in the eastern section of the Planning Area. As
previously mentioned, the temporary site at Telegraph Canyon Road and Crest is
being used to assess whether present demand and response patterns make it
efficient to establish an eastern site at this point in time.
'RECOMMENDATION 19. Fire staff continue to work with Hartson to assess
(Paramedic current and future service needs east of 1-805.
Services)
D. The Current Site Is The Preferred Location For Rebuilding The Bonita Fire
Station.
The City currently contracts with the Bonita-Sunnyside Fire Protection
District to provide first-in responses to fire and medical calls to selected
areas of Chula Vista. The contract was initiated in 1963, in conjunction with
the annexation of property along Bonita Road. At present, the areas protected
under the contract include:
-- Commercial areas along Bonita Road
-- Residential areas north of the Chula Vista Golf Course (Bermuda Dunes
Area) and residential areas south of Bonita Road, between Camino Del
Cerro Grande and Acacia Street (Fallbrook Court Area).
Additionally, both the City and District maintain Automatic Aid Agreements
with one another. Under automatic aid, the closest fire station responds to
calls for service without regard to boundaries and without charge. The
current automatic aid agreement calls for the District to provide first-in
coverage to residences in the ~len Elementary School area. Chula Vista
provides first-in coverage to district areas which include "SunnyVista" and
Interstate I- 805 between "E" and "H" Streets. The contract and automatic aid
areas are shown in Figure #4 on the following page.
In Calendar Year 1987, the District responded to a total of 57 calls for
service in areas of Chula Vista, under both the contract and automatic aid
agreements. The contract cost for FY 1987-88 was $47,680.
The District fire station is currently located on Bonita Road, just east of
Acacia Street, on property leased from the County. The station is housed in a
single family dwelling located on the property, which was built in 1951 and
occupied by the District in 1972. The fire engines are housed in a
"truckport" next to the house.
During FY 1987-88 staff was directed by Council to pursue discussions with the
District concerning the termination of contract fire services and the
provision of all fire protection services through an expanded automatic aid
agreement. Towards this end, staff was directed to (1) work with District
staff to evaluate alternative sites for the existing Bonita-Sunnyside fire
station which would optimize coverage for both District and City areas and (2)
assess the costs and benefits to the City of assisting the District in site
acquisition and/or site construction costs for building a new fire station to
replace the existing station.
In May, 1988 the contract with the District for fire services was extended
through FY 1988-89, to enable staff to complete the present fire station
location study.
Based upon the Land Use and Road Network currently proposed in Scenario #4,
the following findings are made concerning the optimal location for the Bonita
Fire Station.
1. The Projected 7 Minute Coverage Rate For The District Would Neet Proposed
Standards.
The District's coverage rate for 1987 and 2005 was compared to the
standards used to evaluate the proposed 8 station network. For 1987,
94.7% of the District's dwelling units were estimated to be within a 7
minute response, as compared to the 95% standard established for the
overall Planning Area. By 2005, the District's 7 minute coverage rate is
expected to reach 95.8%. (The projected coverage rate is based on the
County's preliminary growth estimate for the area, excluding the Bonita
~leado~s Estates and Rancho San Miguel developments. Additional increases
in coverage may also result from improvements in the District's road
network, tentatively planned by the County.) All of the District's
dwelling units are within a 10 minute response time. There were no high
call demand zones or special risk sites identified within the District.
2. Coverage For New Development Would Be Provided By The Salt Creek-I Fire
Station.
Under the proposed 8 station networV, the Salt Creek-I fire station would
provide first-in coverage for the Bonita ~eadows Estates, Rancho San
Miguel and the Salt Creek developments. Based upon its current location,
the District fire station would primarily provide back-up coverage for the
Bonita Meadows Estates development and for a small portion of the proposed
Rancho San Miguel development.
3. The Current Site Appears To Be The Best Location For The Bonita Fire
Station.
Ten (10) alternative sites for the Bonita fire station were identified by
City and District staff. As shown in Figure 5, these sites provided a
broad geographic distribution of locations within the District. A site
was considered to be an acceptable alternative only if it p~
coverage equal to or greater than current rates for both District and City
areas. Based on the analysis, an optimal site for the Bonita fire station
wou-~-~l-~-be proximate to Bonita Road, between Central Avenue and Otay Lakes
Road. This area included five of the ten test sites. They were:
-- the existing site at Bonita Road and Acacia, which is owned by
the county and shared with a County Road Maintenance Station;
-- a site at the Chula Vista Golf Course, next to the South Bay
Restaurant;
-- a privately owned parcel adjacent to the current site at Bonita
and Acacia;
-- a City-owned parcel across from the existing site, at Bonita
Road and Central; and
-- a City-owned parcel located at Sweetwater Road and Central.
These five sites are highlighted below:
Bonita Road & Acacia Site (Current Location). The size of this
County-owned parcel is approximately 2.25 acres. The parcel is
presently zoned rural-residential and is shared with a County Road
Maintenance Station. Based on a recent consultant study, the County
is currently reviewing the possible consolidation of its road
maintenance operations, which could affect its future plans for the
site. IUnder one scenario, the road maintenance operations at the
current Bonita site would be transferred to another site.)
Otay Lakes Road & Bonita Road Site ICV Golf Course). This property
is currently zoned commercial-visitor. The size of this City-owned
parcel is 3 acres. A 1984 appraisal places the property value at
$1,050,000. This site may pose egress problems Iheading east) during
heavy traffic periods. It may also restrict the use of the remainder
of the parcel.
Bonita Road & Central Avenue Site. The total size of this City-owned
parce) is 1.4~ acres. The site is currently zoned for agriculture.
The Spring Valley Sanitation District has a 39-inch outfall sewer
running through the site which, in staff's view, could create added
construction expenses. {The 4.4 feet of fill required for the site
for flood protection may add more dead load to the existing sewer
main than it could resist.) Additional limitations associated with
this parcel include an equestrian/jogging trail which traverses the
site and the possible lack of space for ancillary fire needs due to
the parcel's configuration.
Sweetwater Road & Central Avenue Site. The size of this city-owned
parcel is 1.89 acres. The site is presently affected by potential
flooding problems at the Sweetwater/Central intersection. Possible
response time problems would be mitigated by the County's proposed
Proposition "A" project to bridge the area. Additional limitations
associated with the site include an equestrian/jogging trail and
possibly significant drainage problems.
Bonita Road & Acacia Site {Adjacent to the current station parcel).
This is a privately owned parcel of 3.63 acres, zoned as rural
residential-2 units per acre. The site would represent a possible
alternative if the present site is not available for purchase from
the County. {The parcel is currently on the market.)
In summary, based upon projected coverage rates and a preliminary survey of
alternative sites, the existing fire station site at Bonita Road and Acacia
appears to be the preferred location for rebuilding the Bonita fire station~
-pending clarification from the County as to its intended use for the property.
The total project cost, including land acquisition, site improvements and
station construction could approximate $1,000,000. A more definitive cost
projection cannot be made until the project scope is better defined and
possible land acquisition costs are more fully assessed.
RECOMMENDATION 20: Administration continue to explore with the District
{Bonita Fire possible conditions under which the City's financial
Station) participation in the construction of a new Bonita fire
station would be desirable.
WPC 0996I