Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1993/06/23 (2) City Planning Commission Agenda Item for Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page #1 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit PCC-93-39; request to establish short-term transitional housinq for homeless families UP to 44 people at 31 Fourth Avenue - South Bav Communitv Services A. BACKGROUND 1. South Bay Community Services is proposing to establish a short term housing project for homeless families for a maximum of 43 tenants in family groups and one resident manager at an existing apartment located at 31 Fourth Avenue (APN 566-010-10). The complex consists of 12 one bedroom units and 2 two bedroom units (see Attachment "A" for the locator map, site plan and revised project description). 2. An Initial Study, IS-93-36 (Attachment "B"), of potential environmental impacts of the project was conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator on May 17, 1993. The Environmental Review Coordinator concluded that there would be no significant environmental effects and recommends that a Mitigated Negative Declaration be adopted. 3. On April 28, 1993, South Bay Community Services held a community meeting for area residents. The notes from that meeting are attached as Attachment "C." 4. On June 8, 1993 the Resource Conservation Commission considered the Negative Declaration for IS-93-36 and voted 5-1-1 to recommend that the City Council adopt it.. The RCC also voted to recommend an annual review of the project by a 6-0-1 vote. Several issues were also raised by the RCC. These are discussed in detail in Section C of this report but are listed below. See the draft minutes as Attachment" M". A. School impacts, specifically to teaching professionals and classrooms in which there is the potential for children to be enrolling and leaving every a 60 days due to the fact that residents within the project will have a maximum 60 day stay. B. The overall increase in the number of residents at the complex. The number should be capped at 44. C. Economic impact on rents in the vicinity of the project.. There is a perceived potential that the existence of this facility could cause the rents in other apartment complexes in the vicinity to drop as people would not want to rent in proximity to a transitional housing project for homeless families. D. The potential for concentration of this type of use in the vicinity. /-1 City Planning Commission Agenda Item for Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page #2 5. On June 8, 1993, the Planning Department received a letter from Mr. Hart G. Klein (see Attachment "D") requesting that the public hearing for this case be continued to sometime in July or August of this year. Planning staff, in consultation with the City Attorney, concluded that a continuance was not warranted, neither from a planning/land use/ environmental perspective nor from a legal perspective, based on the information provided by Mr. Klein, since it did not include new issues not yet addressed in the Negative Declaration or Conditional Use Permit.. Staff does not recommend that Planning Commission continue this project unless new issues are identified or unless identified issues have not been adequately addressed. 6. On June 8, 1993, the Planning Department received a letter with attachment from Mrs.. Regina Hickey dated May 29, 1993 (Attachment "E"). Mrs. Hickey raised several issues related to parking, access, safety, and play areas. These issues are addressed in the body of the report. B. RECOMMENDATION 1. Find that this project will have no significant environmental impacts and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration issued on IS-93-36. 2. Adopt Resolution PCC-93-39 recommending that the City Council approve PCC-93.39 based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained in the attached draft City Council Resolution. c.. DISCUSSION 1 . Zoning and Land Use: ZoninQ Land Use General Plan South East West R-3 R-3 R-3 Apartments Apartments Eucalyptus Park Med-Hi (11-18 du/ac) Med-Hi (11-18 du/ac)/ Commercial Med-Hi (11-18 du/ac) Med-Hi (11-18 du/ac) Public/Quasi Public Site North R-3 R-3/CCD Apartments Apartments 2. Existing Site Characteristics: The 18,000 sq. ft. site currently contains an existing 9,412 sq. ft. multi-family residential structure consisting of 14 apartments. The site also contains 18 F:\HOME\PLANN ING\MARTIN\SBA Y COMM\93 39PC. RPT 1-... City Planning Commission Agenda Item for Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page #3 parking spaces along the eastern edge of the parcel.. The building was originally constructed in 1972 and has been used as an apartment complex since that time. The current number of residents at this location is approximately 34. A landscaped courtyard is at the center of the complex with dwellings on either side to the north and south of the courtyard. Pedestrian access to the site is from Fourth Avenue, while vehicles can legally access the 18 parking spaces to the rear via an access easement off of APN's 566-010-49 and 15. 3. Proposed Use/Project Advantages: South Bay Community Services is proposing to provide transitional housing and off-site support services for homeless families. The longest length of stay will be 60 days. A maximum of 43 tenants will live in the apartments in their respective family units. A resident manager will also reside in one of the dwellings. It should be noted that the project will serve only homeless families, not the habitually homeless or homeless singles. It will serve families willing to work in order to re-establish themselves in the community as contributing members of society. A wide variety of support services will be available off-site to meet the residents varying needs including job training, job referral, youth entrepreneurship training, Head Start, child care, health care, individual and family counseling, domestic violence prevention and intervention, transportation, nutrition education, budgeting education, parenting skills, literacy training, homework assistance, mentors, Big Brothers/Big Sister, recreation and after-school programs. As explained in the revised project description (see page 3 of Attachment "A"), the maximum number of people per unit will be follows: 11 one bedrooms @ 3 persons/unit = 2 two bedrooms @ 5 persons/unit = 1 one bedroom @ 1 person /unit = TOTAL 33 persons 10 persons 1 person (resident manager) 44 persons 4.. Similar Establishments: Several other similar establishments exist throughout the County, as listed in Attachment" F". North County Housing Foundation in Escondido operates a transitional housing project for families containing 18 beds. North County Interfaith Council, Escondido operates a 30 bed transitional and short term housing project. In Encinitas, Community Resource Center operates a transitional housing project with 25 beds. The Salvation Army also provides F :\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\SBA YCOMM\9339PC. RPT 1-3 City Planning Commission Agenda Item for Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page #4 50 beds for short term shelter for families in San Diego. The main concern, as discussed later in this report, in looking at these other projects is parking and the adequacy of the 18 parking spaces to handle the proposed number of tenants. 5. Issues Raised by the Resource Conservation Commission: As expressed earlier in this report the RCC raised several issues of concern to them. These are addressed below: A. School impacts, specifically to teaching professionals and classrooms in which there is the potential for children to be enrolling and leaving every a 60 days due to the fact that residents within the project will have a maximum 60 day stay.. Response: In response to the routing of the Initial Study (lS-93- 36) the Chula Vista Elementary School District replied in a letter dated May 12, 1993 "Since it appears no new construction is involved, no school fees are required" (see Attachment "G"). This comment was based on the original project description which was for 50 people, not the current proposal for 44.. Thus it can be deduced that if the original proposal was of no concern to the school district so far as the minimal increase in children and their impacts to the school district, the revised project would be of less impact. The impact will be lessened even more by the policy of South Bay Community Services which encourages parents to keep their children enrolled in the school they currently attend. If however, the parents wish to transfer them to another school, that is their prerogative. In addition, children will be conveyed by van to the schools they attend by South Bay Community Services. The impact, however, to the school district will be minimal. B. The overall increase in the number of residents at the complex. The number should be capped at 44. Response: The CUP is capped at 44 people because the application lists this number. It would require an amendment to the CUP approved by the City Council for the number to increase above the approved number. C. Economic impact on rents in the vicinity of the project.. There is a perceived potential that the existence of this facility could cause F :\HOME\PlANNING\MARTIN\SBA YCQMM\9 339PC. RPT /-- r City Planning Commission Agenda Item for Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page #5 the rents in other apartment complexes in the vicinity to drop as people would not want to rent in proximity to a transitional housing project for homeless families.. Response: The executive summary of the 1988 document titled The effects of Subsidized and Affordable Housing on Property Values: A Survey of Research (Attachment "H") compiled by the Department of Housing and Community Development, State of California, summarizes findings from 15 documents. It states: "This paper lists and summarizes a total of 15 published papers: 11 on the effects of subsidized housing on property values, one on the effects of group homes for the handicapped, and three on the effects of manufactured housing.. .. .. .Four of these publications address situations in California. Of these 15 publications, 14 reached the conclusion that there are no significant negative effects from locating subsidized, special-purpose or manufactured housing near market-rate developments. Some, in fact, reported positive property value effects after locating subsidized units in the neighborhood" .. No evidence has been supplied that this project will cause property values to drop. To the contrary, studies such as cited above have indicated that values generally remain unchanged. D. The potential for concentration of this type of use in the vicinity. Response: Given the information on property values coupled with the fact that the general vicinity is not in a state of decline, it is staff's conclusion that even given other institutions in the area providing various types of public services, the area will not decline or be any kind of a magnet to gangs. This same issue was voiced in a letter dated 6/2/93 from Andre Lachaumette, an owner of property in Chula Vista who resides in Camarillo. California. Mr. Lachaumette stated that he feels "transients and drug addicts would be encouraged to congregate to the area hurting the progression of our established community" (see Attachment "I"). Given the rules which residents of South Bay Community Services facilities must abide by, this does not seem realistic (see Attachment "J"). F :\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\SBA YCOMM\9339PC. RPT /-.5 City Planning Commission Agenda Item for Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page #6 Because of the change in the project description, not all the rules in Attachment "J" will apply. South Bay Community Services is revising and finalizing these rules for submittal to the Planning Director for review and approval. This is also a condition of approval. These rules are much stricter than those usually applied to residents of typical apartment complexes and are more easily enforced because there is not a lease agreement or other contract, as between a tenant in an apartment complex and the owner, that would preclude quick eviction. If a resident of a facility as is being proposed by South Bay Community Services breaks the rules, he or she can be immediately released from the program and removed from the premises. D. ANALYSIS General Plan Conformance: The project is in conformance with and implements the Chula Vista General Plan. Specifically, Goal 3, Objectives 10 and 12 of the Land Use Element are implemented by the project. These state: GOAL 3. HOUSING AND COMMUNITY CHARACTER Traditionally, Chula Vista has been characterized by single family, detached residences and neighborhood-serving uses.. It is the goal of the city to accommodate a full diversity of housing types, while maintaining an orientation to detached single-family living. Objective 10. Encourage the development of a diversity of housing types and prices. Implementation: The project will provide housing units for homeless families at minimal cost to them. Objective 12. Provide for the development of multiple-family housing in appropriate areas convenient to public services, facilities and circulation. Implementation: The project will make housing available to homeless families in an area that provides the necessary public conveniences (shopping, parks, public transportation, etc.). It is, in fact, very important that these conveniences be available to the prospective residents because of their lack of mobility. , ...~ F :\HOME\PlANNING\MARTIN\SBA Y COMM\9339PC. RPT City Planning Commission Agenda Item for Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page #7 In addition to the above, the project also conforms with and implements goals and objectives of the Housing Element. Goal 3 of Section 2.1 and General Objectives 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 of Section 2.2 of this element are implemented by the project. These state: 2.1 GOALS The following goals jointly constitute the overall aim of the Housing Element of the City of Chula Vista. 3. The systematic renewal, rehabilitation, conservation, and improvement of the residential neighborhoods of the Chula Vista General Plan Area. Implementation: The project conserves a usable apartment complex by renewing the facility for residential purposes. 2.2 GENERAL OBJECTIVES The following goals jointly constitute the overall aim of the Housing Element of the City of Chula Vista. 1 .. The overall increase of the housing stock of the planning area; Chula Vista provides its fair share of regional housing needs.. Implementation: This project will provide housing for homeless families, which will be part of Chula Vista's fair share of regional housing needs. 2. The provision of adequate housing for the elderly, handicapped, large families and persons and families of low or moderate income, and the homeless. Implementation: As stated, subject project will provide adequate housing for transitional homeless families. 3. The broadening of local residents' choice of housing, housing types, and living environments. Implementation: By making a transitional housing facility located at 31 Fourth Avenue available to homeless families, their choice of housing types is broadened and they will be in a better position to re-establish themselves economically. In addition, preference will be given to Chula Vista citizens. F :\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\SBA Y COMM\9339PC. RPT /- ? City F'lanning Commission Agenda Item for Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page #8 4. The protection of the quality-of-life of existing settlements within the planning area. Implementation: The subject project will not deteriorate the quality-of-life of surrounding residents because of the rules. Among other rules, persons residing in this facility will not be allowed to have alcoholic beverages on-site. This will decrease the potential for drunkenness and the deterioration of the quality- of-life resulting from such over consumption. This rule is not applied to neighboring apartment complexes. 6. The integration of low and moderate income housing into the existing middle-class residential neighborhoods of the planning area, and the preclusion of the establishment of "ghettoes" or low-income enclaves.. Besides Objective 6, this project also implements the related Section 2.3 Housing Policy, Item 9, which states: Low and moderate income households are entitled to the same residential and environmental amenities as those which are standard to other families. Scaled down amenities and qualities build slums, and therefore must be carefully avoided. Implementation: This area is generally considered middle-class, and the introduction of homeless families will implement these Objective 6 and Item 9. Zoninq Ordinance Conformance: The subject use is quasi-public. As such, a conditional use permit is required per Chapter 19.54. Public/quasi-public uses are permitted in any zone with a CUP. Land Use Compatibilitv: Given the nature of the proposed land use, the existing surrounding residential uses and the proximity to services and amenities, the land use is considered to be compatible with the neighborhood. Parkinq: This project initially raised concern among staff because of the slight increase in the number of inhabitants in the complex in regards to parking. At present, 19 spaces exist, but one will be lost in order to provide a handicapped space. However, this use is considered a quasi-public use, and as such the Planning Commission can set the parking ratio per Section 19.54.050. Based on this, and after reviewing the information contained in Attachment "F" and comparing the parking ratios at other similar projects with this project's F :\HOM E\PLANNING\MARTIN\SBA Y COMM\9 339PC. RPT /- g City Planning Commission Agenda Item for Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page #9 parking space-to-bed capacity, staff is convinced that there is more than adequate parking. In addition, it is apparent that there will be no overall increase in parking and that, in fact, a decrease could be expected. The projects mentioned in Section C.4 of this report are taken from Attachment "F" and have the following breakdown for parking: Orqanization/Citv North County Housing Foundation, Escondido No.. of Beds No. of Parking Spaces Average Spaces/Bed 18 6 0.33:1 North County Inter- Faith Council, Escondido 30 10 0.33:1 Community Resource Center. Encinitas 25 ....Q 0.24:1 Totals 73 22 0.30:1 South Bay Community Services, Chula Vista 44 18 0.41:1 Compared to the other similar projects, the proposal has more than adequate parking.. When broken down by parking spaces per unit, the ratio for the proposed project is 1.29 spaces per unit (18/14 = 1..29).. Based on this information, staff has concluded that the proposed parking is more than adequate to meet the needs of the homeless families who will reside at the facility, and recommends that the Planning Commission make the same determination .. Access/Traffic/Circulation: Access to the site is from an easement off of Offerman Lane to the north of the project parcel. Based on the study of other similar uses outlined in Attachment "F," and the Negative Declaration for 15-93- 36, there will be no increase in traffic generation. The City's Engineering Department calculated that traffic on Fourth Avenue would remain at 17,580 ADT (average daily trips) and that Fourth Avenue in the vicinity of the project will remain at a level-of-service (LOS) "C" or better.. Given the statements from the directors of other similar projects, the actual traffic figures should decrease slightly because there will be fewer vehicles. This is based on statements that indicate that homeless families generally tend to have fewer cars than permanently domiciled families. The circulation pattern to the parking lot has existed for several decades and has proven to be adequate to meet the needs of the residents of all the F :\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\SBA YCOMM\9339PC. RPT I~ , City Planning Commission Agenda Item for Meeting of June 23, 1993 Page #10 apartment complexes in the vicinity.. No changes to the circulation pattern are anticipated, especially since emergency vehicles have adequate turnaround space. Visual/Aesthetics/Architectural Treatment: The applicant does not plan to change the established architectural style of the complex. Plav Areas: On page 5 of the attachment to her letter of May 29, 1993 (Attachment "E"), Mrs. Hickey also mentions the lack of play area for children. The proximity of Eucalyptus Park across Fourth Avenue, in addition to the other off-site activities the children will be involved with will fill the time of the children who temporarily reside here. Even if the children do chose to play in the parking area to the rear of the complex, it should be kept in mind that children have been doing this since 1972 when the complex was first constructed. To place restrictions on the children to keep them from this area would be inappropriate, especially since children in neighboring apartment complexes would not have the same restriction placed on them by virtue of their residing in a typical apartment.. Trash Service: A trash enclosure exists on the parcel immediately to the north of subject site at 17 Fourth Avenue at its southeast corner. This neighboring parcel is owned by South Bay Community Services. The existing trash enclosure has been in place for several years and has proven to meet the needs of the residents of both of these complexes. In the event, however. that the existing bin is not adequate to meet the demand, the frequency of pickup can be increased to ensure a health problem is not created. Public Safetv: In a memo dated May 14, 1993, Mary Jane Diosdado of the Crime Prevention Unit of the Chula Vista Police Department responded to the request for comments on the conditional use permit (see Attachment "K"). In this memo Ms. Diosdado made several recommendations to increase the security of the project which have been included as conditions of approval. In addition to the above-mentioned memo, Mr.. William J. Winters, Retired Chief of Police of the Chula Vista Police Department states in a letter dated May 19, 1993 (see Attachment "L") that "I am confident that South Bay Community Services will do a very effective job in administering this Short Time Housing Project, and it will not have an adverse effect on crime or calls for Police service" . E. CONCLUSION Based on the factors noted above, we are therefore recommending approval of the proposal in accordance with the draft City Council Resolution. F: \HO ME\PLANNING\MARTIN\SBA YCOMM\9339PC. RPT /-/0 B B % ~ ~ Lo.. ----I"""-~------~..,. CI: I. I.... _.... ~ I r----------- 0 : u. I I I I , , I -, I I , I"'--r--i " I I ,: I I I' I I ,I I I % ~ a: o z STREET ~ '. ~ . .) .' ') ",'.' ." - II I '/ .~ 'J~ .~;~:~:::/! ':::.~ "..".~ ','.:~. ",.~:~"'.:' .. .' ~ I .'~ ..; ."'.. '. j _. r' I ..'.'.., ..-... 'EUCAL TYPTUS PARK' ,. " r ~ ';... '.>';1;"/ ," . ..', ,':j.'.-,;;~-~,..:"~~~ ;/ -;. r ",J ~ ,..~..).>' i:' ~ ' .,J."J.~ ',~ .J 'J;'.... ", J) "1 .' I", ", ~ 1 j 1 ,.. J ..- , , "..' I I ..- ~j ~-=1 I I -l STREET > t 0 t- !r cr :r +-- -I ] r=ID I r- ~ W--j! rn1~f -~ . r xO -1 ~L ~; ...................-.....--... -- - l Q ell: i .. X f- ,II: o Z , ---i-------- PROJECT _ _ _ LOCATION '" 0- ct i ~ , 1__ _ ll'- ~-'r-( - I l- - : '10 ~ I , -'- ~ cr w .,. W ...J ~ q; W VI -, r --' to fi - -t --+ ---1 I r r- -- ~ ~ - --~--=.l ~ ~ ~ j- ...:1 :::: ~ ~ ..::: 'W t:::$ - - - ... . CIIULA VISTA PLA:\:\ING DEPARTMENT C) APPLICANT SOUTIIBAV cmnll''\ITV PROJECT DESCRIPTION SERVICES Short term housing (up to 60 days) for homl'less ADDRESS JI FOl'lnll .\\T:'\l'E families for up to 50 people (Public/Quasi USt'. SCALE. FILE NUMBER J{equ ires City Council approval) NORTH \" = 400' pee - 93 - 39 ~ J - 1/ ~ - -'~ -'~ ~ .W < < Z (f)W -f- -f- - f-L.- f-L.- ~ It) ~f- Z. Z 0 -- Wo Wo 0 0 It) >::>0 0(1) 0(1) I ~ L.- ~~~ - - 0> OL.-O:: (1)0 (1)0 >- II) ~ OWO 0 Wit) Wit) 0:: .;,: -0> +' a.Z Z >-Wo> O::r') O::r') ...... < Z w W .._00 =~< &j We; ~ f- ..::>< ZO to a. -' >- >- < ZZU 0CX)f-r') < W "iWU ..-'0:: ..-'0:: cij g:)!S1 < 0 OW --O-~ U f- > ~-W ~-W ::> -> - f- -' 0:: Z <- ::Ea. Z::Ea. f- W(I) ~..: f- ...J - Z f-<< a.(I) Z< < < < -< -< - 0 ~f-~ L.- a < f- - ~Of- a.0 UUIt- i5L.-f- i5L.-f- ~ Z(I) -L.- a.. .;- ..J gI(I) 0::l:5 -(I) ~ - f-(I) I- 1- 5!Z <>--' 0 0 II f-- U f-- (1)1 -'>-~- Nf-Z N~5 -'C!i'S! -'0 ..UJ . <: -'0::> UJ +'U> 0 8::< > -'::> L.- ~~ -(I) < a:: f-i5< 1.tJ+"~W o::~ mo ~::> 0::> 0 0 0 ::> ~8 W D_O(l)< ~9 ~:I:U-~ Z::E~ ~::E.::. W>-I aJN W UL.--' 00 g - ~ 0:: -0:: (l)f- ~ .... LJ ~~~ ..JO)NT UJtO 0::1-1t) f- 0 W f-< OX!5 UJ...... . Z < ...... ~~ W=>-I (l)r') 25a1 ! (I) a. a.- UJ Woo -' W Or')U t:)Z~"- ZOr')U -0:: -< OUJL.- ~O> f-~ - < t:) 0:: W (I) ~(f) x 0:: X s: - (/) u a. -' < 0 W a. W (I) VJ en w o :; a: w en > I- Z :::> :a: :a: o o > < m :I: I- :::> o en ~ W- < o W - 0:: ~- t-< - -' C'J- <'-' ~ IZ a.- UJ- (I)~ W <!if U_ a. < B-; tJl ~I ~~i -I i' - < I U x W U Z-' 0-' U< ~ . tO~ U ,0 X-' WID B~ 0> i7i < 0:: f- 0:: o o -' L.-~ ~:f 00:: UW W> (1)0 .... ,OV ,OV .....:. ~;.- ,Z~ ,Z~ ,8 ,ll ,DDZ ~ -' < ~ W < 0 ~o::- W(I) .f- ~~x eJ W I I f- ~!i 0< L.--' OZ 1-< UJ~ (l)W WL.- UL.- UO < < 0::- <> -' ::>W L ~~ W> >< T1= Ii -' ~-' -'< aJ~ .~ ~~ OZ U- < .f- XW Wo:: 3~m:mjlS u-,f ~ ~ OZ W~ UJ- OUJ ,; es~ w "..' o::W ::::> .. a.Z Z W ..... aJ > cO:: __ "."::> ..... 0.. U .... 0.. x W a. ~~ -~ f- (l)W -W X 0:: Wf- . .'.. "... ";'; ~ I , f- .... a::: .... ::::> r 0 .. lL.. (31V^I~d) 3NVl NV~~3jjO .., ".: ,- J 0:: ~~ OL.- UJ~ .< X 0:: Wf- ~ Ii ~ ~.~ ~ : !~~ ~ !Q .U ~ m"~ _C ~. (/)~i ~-~ ~ ~I -hi. ,.. '1.... ..... - ,- 315 4th Avenue, Suite E . Chula Vista. CA 91910 . (619) 420-3620/9790 (5051 May 27, 1993 Barbara Reid Martin Miller City of Chula vista Planning Department 276 Fourth Ave. Chula vista, CA 91910 , , Dear Ms. Reid and Mr. Miller, South Bay Community Services has decided to modify its project description for the short-term housing facility at 31 Fourth Avenue. Instead of removing the kitchens from the 14 units, we will be leaving the kitchens in place; we will not be installing a commercial kitchen or providing congregate meals. We anticipate that our rehabilitation costs will be less than $15,000 and will consist mainly of deferred maintenance repairs, carpet replacement, termite work, and painting. We do not anticipate the need for a building permit for this rehabilitation. As a result of leaving.. the kitchens in place, we will have a maximum capacity for 43.tenants plus the 1 property manager. This has been calculated as follows: . 11 one bedrool"s @ J"perA.:>ns . 33 per&ono 2 two bedrooms @ 5 persons - 10 persons 1 one bedroom @ 1 manager - 1 Derson 44 total ;If you require additional information, please call me at 420-3620. Si.c.r,'Y,~~ 1ne Lembo ive Director -..-.. . /" 13 ~~ mitigated negadve declaration ~~~. -(1- -.......~--- ""~ CrTYOF . OfUlA VISTA PROJECT NAME: South Bay Community Services - Sixty Day Short-Term Housing for the Homeless PROJECT LOCATION: 31 Fourth Avenue ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 566-010-10 PROJECT APPLICANT: South Bay Community Services, Inc. CASE NO: IS-93-36 DATE: May 17. 1993 A Project Setting The project setting consists of an existing 14 unit, two-story 9,412 sq. ft. apanment building on an 18,000 sq.. ft. parcel located at 31 Fourth A venue. The fourteen apanment unit building, constructed in 1972 consists of 2 two-bedroom units and 12 one- bedroom units. The current number of residents at this building is approximately 34 people. The units center around a landscaped courtyard. The pedestrian entrance to the complex is on Fourth A venue and the parking area is in the rear of the complex - accessed from Fourth A venue via Offerman Lane - a private road, and through a vehicular access on the property located at 17 Fourth A venue. Through a review of the Title Report, and further cliscussion with staff at the title company, staff determined that the above sited easements are legal easements. Eighteen parking spaces are provided for this builcling. The adjoining land uses are: multi-family apanments to the south and east, Eucalyptus Park across Fourth Avenue to the west and multi-family residential and retail commercial to the north. B. Project Description The proposed project is the conditional use of an existing multi-family apartment builcling for families in need of transitional housing. A maximum stay of 60 days is allowed. No exterior physical alterations are anticipated. Only minor interior alterations are anticipated.. The applicant's original proposal was to provide housing for up to a maximum of 50 persons. This objective was to be achieved by the removing kitchens and dining rooms in 12 of the 14 units and turning the "dining-room and kitchen areas" of each unit into an adclitional bedroom.. One of the remaining one-bedroom units was to be convened into a community kitchen and clining facility and the other one bedroom unit was to provide living quaners for the on-site property manager. clt)' of chula vlata planning department environmental review Metlon / - j6( ~ ~ ~ ~ ..... ::::: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..... ..... ~ Page 2 In response to the Notice of Initial Study of the above cited proposal, five comment letters and four phone calls were received from surrounding residents. In addition, one property owner met with staff to voice his concerns. Some of the concerns raised by residents included an increase in density (50 people ill the building instead of 34), noise, traffic, parking, public health and safety, and conce:rns about the potential impacts of delivery trucks bringing food and services for the congregate kitchen.. As a result of reviewing the comments from residents as well as the comments from various City departments and discussions with City staff, South Bay Community Services has modified their proj,ect description. Instead of r,emoving the kitchens from the 14 units, the kitchens will be left in place.. There will no longer be a congregate kitchen or the provision of congregate meals.. This amended project description is in compliance with fmdings of the Court under Section 15070 of the California Enviromnental Quality Act that "Any needed or proposed mitigation measures must be incorporated into a proposed negative declaration and the project revised accordingly before the negative declaration is released for public review. " (Sunstrom v.. Mendocino - 1988) As a result of leaving the kitchens in place, South Hay Community Services expects to have a maximum capac:ity for 43 tenants plus the property manager. This has been calculated as follows: II one-bedroom units with up to 3 persons per unit and 2 two- bedroom units with up 1to 5 persons per unit.. One additional one-bedroom unit will be occupied by the managf~r.. The reduced number of residents and the fact that the units will remain self-contained will reduce potential impacts of increased density and potential impacts from delivery trucks servicing the complex.. Parking requirements for multi-family residential units in the public-quasi public zone are for 1..5 spaces for one bedroom units and 2 spaces for two bedroom units.. The project has 18 parking spaces including one handicapped space. Therefore, if this was a new apartment complex being developed within the City of Chula Vista, the parking requirement would be 22 spaces. However, as the proposed project is a public - quasi-public use in the Zoning Ordi:nance for short-tenn housing for homeless families, the fmal detennination of the number of parking units that are required will be made by the Planning Commission in response to staff recommendation.. Staff recommendation, based on the "Parking Use Survey" attached to the Initial Study done on other similar ~Ises, is 1 parking space per 3 residents. This low ratio of the number of parking spaces needed per resident is due to the fact that few residents have cars.. A parking survey that was conducted of 11 other similar facilities within San Diego County by South Bay Community Services concluded that the average number of on-site parking spaces per bed was 0..16. Comments from contact persons included, "On the average, one third of the residents have cars.." (Pacific Beach Safe Harbor); "We have no parking becausle few homeless have cars.." (YWCA-Women in Transition San Diego). /'15 Page 3 Title to the land and apartment building and the access easements is currently vested in Park Vista Apartments and South Bay Community Services is in escrow for purchase of the property.. South Bay "Community Services" (SBCS) is a community-based nonprofit organization serving the South San Diego Bay. SBCS began in 1971 as a treatment rehabilitation center for drug abusing teens. Over the years, other youth and family support programs that have been initiated by SBCS including: juvenile diversion, alternate schooling, counseling, job training, literacy/tutoring, AIDS prevention education and affordable housing assistance.. SBCS also runs Casa Nuestra, currently the only homeless housing in the South Bay region, providing beds and 24 hour services for runaway and homeless teens. This project, transitional living for 13 families not to exceed 43 tenants. is for Chula Vista and National City homeless families.. The city of residence will be detennined by school records or other proof of last pennanent residence.. Families will be referred from local organizations which currently work with the homeless including schools, police, private nonprofit organizations and religious institutions. Families with any drug abuse, alcohol or mental illness problems, single adults, criminals or people who are not able to abide by strict rules, regulations, and a program designed to help them become self-sufficient will not be accepted.. Families will not be able to enter the project without a referral from an established agency.. No family will be pennitted to "walk-up" to 31 Fourth Avenue and move in to the project.. The sign currently posted in the front lawn will be removed.. There will be no sign pronouncing that the building provides short- tenn housing for homeless families.. This housing facility will not serve the habitually homeless.. SBCS is coordinating a team of private, local service providers for this facility including: Metropolitan Area Advisory Committee (MAAC) Project, Lutheran Social Services and Episcopal Community Services.. All of these services will provide a wide range of services geared at helping families achieve self-sufficiency.. The services include: job- training and referral, child care, case management, health care, permanent housing referral, budgeting, independent living skills, literacy training, psychological counseling and transportation.. The only on-site activity will be property management. All other activities, such as child care, education and recreation, will be off-site. A large percentage of the children will be group transported to their off-site activities. (please see attached A Tvoical Dav For a Familv Livin!! in South Bav Community Services Short-Tenn Housin!! at 31 Fourth A venue for an in-depth description of who works with the tenants and what happens on a typical day. On-site property management will be provided by an experienced property management finn with wide experience managing units for the homeless and lower income families. The SBCS Development Director, who reports to the Executive Director, will be responsible for asset management, including liaison with the property management finn, landscaping company, utility providers and other contractors.. The Development Director will supervise a Program Director with specific responsibilities /,/' Page 4 regarding the property including maintenance, day-to-day operations and work with the on-site manager.. If the project is approved tenants currently residing in the building will receive relocation assistance under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970. This policy includes any family or individual that must move as a direct result of rehabilitation, demolition or acquisition.. This assistance may include: advisory services, payment for moving expenses, and replacement housing assistance.. The discretionary action on this application is a Conditional Use Permit. C. Compatibility with Zoning and Plans The General Plan Designation for the site is Medium High Density Residential (11-18 dwelling units per acre) and the zoning is R-3-Apartment Residential Zone. Conditional Use Permits are required for public-quasi public uses. The proposed use is permitted with a Conditional Use Permit under the definition of public-quasi public (19..04.190 in the Zoning Ordinance) as an unclassified use. (Chapter 19..54 of the Zoning Ordinance authorizes unclassified uses..) As the proposal is for a public-quasi public use a conditional use permit is required. D.. Identification of Environmental Effects Designated The Initial Study conducted by the City of Chula Vista (attached as Environmental Checklist form) determined that the proposed project will not have a significant environmental effect, and the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report will not be required.. A Negative Declaration has been prepared.. F.. Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Environmental ImDacts A specific mitigation measure regarding a potential surface drainage problem has been identified.. The mitigation measure required to reduce the potentially significant impact to a level of less than significant is that a monitor financed by the applicant field check the existing on-site drainage and that the applicant correct any problem. This mitigation measure is made a condition of project approval, as well as a requirement of the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program (Addendum "An). G. Mandatorv Findings of Significance Based on the following fmdings, it is determined that the project described above will not have a significant environmental impact and no environmental impact report needs to be prepared .. While the City is not required to prepare a negative declaration where a categorical exemption is appropriate (Guidelines 15301), as is the case here, the City recognizes that transitional housing is often controversial and that a negative declaration provides the '.17 Page 5 public with an opportunity to comment on the project and to better refine mitigation measures.. 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 proposed project consists of the renovation of an existing multi-family apartment building within an urbanized area of the City. There are no known significant biological or historical or prehistorical resources on the site. 2. The project has the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals. One of the City's Long Term Enviromnental Goals (found in the Housing Element of the General Plan) is to recognize that homelessness is a regional problem and that the provision of transitional housing in the South Bay is a means of addressing that problem.. The approval of this facility is in accordance with the City's General Plan and would be a meaningful step towards achieving the short-term goal of the provision of housing to assist the homeless and would also be a step toward the long-term City goal of answering the homeless problem.. 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. This project does not have the potential to be individually limited but cumulatively considerable. The enviromnental analysis contained in the Initial Study considered potential cumulative impacts. It was detennined that there was a very minor cumulative improvement to traffic and air pollution due to the expected project-related reduction in traffic.. 4. The environmental effects of a project will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Substantial adverse effects on human beings usually result from hazardous materials, noise, safety hazards, etc.. One existing potential safety impact was cited, due to potentially inadequate existing drainage. Mitigation is possible to remedy this existing impact and thus reduce it to a level below significant Thus, no substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly are expected .. /' /8' Page 6 H. Consultation I.. Individuals and Onmnizations City of Chula Vista: Roger Daoust, Engineering John Lippitt, Engineering Cliff Swanson, Engineering Hal Rosenberg, Engineering Garry Williams, Planning Ken Larsen, Director of Building & Housing Carol Gove, Fire Marshal Barbara Brookover, Senior Crime Analyst Captain Keith Hawkins, Police Department Marty Schmidt, Parks & Recreation Dept. Barbara Reid, Planning Rich Rudolf, Assistant City Attorney Diana Richardson, Community Development David Harris, Community Development Martin Miller, Planning Capt. Rod Hawkins, Fire Department Chula Vista City School District: Kate Shurson Sweetwater Union High School District: Tom Silva Applicant's Agent: Robert, Bein & Frost/Shoulders and Sanford 2. Documents General Plan, City of Chula Vista Title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code Corporation Grant Deed for APN-566-01O-10 and 566-010-15 for Park Vista Apartments Telephone Conversation with Hans Giroux, Acoustician, May 27, 1993 Faxed Comments on Mitigated Negative Declaration From Tina Thomas, Partner in the Law Firm of Remy and Thomas ResDonses to Issues Raised Rel!ardinl! Short-Term Housinl! For Homeless Families at 31 Fourth Avenue, South Bay Community Services Relocation Assistance to Tenants DisDlaced From Their Homes, U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 1- 11 Page 7 Meetin\! Notes From an Amil 28. 1993. Community Meetin\! on Short-Term Housing, South Bay Community Services 3. Initial Study This environmental determination is based on the attached Initial Study, any comments received on the Initial Study and any comments received during the public review period for the Negative Declaration. The report reflects the independent judgment of the City of Chula Vista. Funher information regarding the environmental review of this project is available from the Chula Vista o _ 7~~' 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010. E~~t REVIEW COORDINATOR EN 6 (Rev. 12/90) Attachments: 1) 2) Vicinity Map Site Plan WPC F:\HOMEIPLANNING\979.93 /.2d ADDENDUM A Potential ImDact Inadequate Drainage Mitigation Measure A monitor wi]] field check the existing on-site drainage.. Any problem wi]] be corrected by the applicant.. /. 2./ ~ /' . .. = r-i--: ;i --:, / .W "'w -~ -~ ~ ~~ !Z~ ~~ -- ~5J 0 ~i.i!;; - 1515 a::: . - - 0> i I/')/l! I/')/l! ;(/) - .... Iti -- ~,.., ~,.., -0> ~~= .. fW !~~ ~~~~~ - - - .~ ~ ~ I .... ~i!~ 2::!~ 2::!~ Iii :~ -~ - tl/')..J!j< -~ -~ .... ~<< - I...J ~i:~ ~1515;:~ ILO !jit!: !jit!: !j - - ~I/') .!"~ ii~> N~~ N....!j '< ..J~> ....U> ~;- I~= 15 'e::: ~~~~g ~~ :~ i~g f~~g - ~ ! ~ - 5z.-:::- ~:8 1/')1') :t5 -a::: ~ x W , ~~ ~ ~~ . , ~~ ~~ [;5l!! '" w '0 - > a: w I~ II:: z ~ :i '-E o o > < m :z: .... ~ o (/) ~ - ~ ~ ~ ts ~ ~~ ~ . ~I/') ~~~ ~...: t ~~ ~g~ ~~ c~ ~~ I~J !!~ ~~ ~c )( .... . I/')IL -15 ~. WID --c en.... en.-_ X _ W I/') z < ...1'0 Q.T, . - w .. t-W -~ UJ&J ... ,07 ,07 -, ..... ,Z~ ,Z~ .S ~ ~- < .-~~ ~- ~~ 1/')- ~i t\_ IL ~ 91 .~ t".' ~"'. .' :s . ..~........ . .,." ... Ci5 :: i; ~ ~~ :~ ~ ~ !.::;. ~:': a < ...._I/')X~ ';~ . .: X :' W YJ~ .... ~ " 0> 0> ,ooz 0; < ~I ~ i: ~ ~ I ~~ i~ ~~ ~i x~ _ U1.W Li.J- ~ ~~ ~~ T-C Ii ~~ ~. .~ ~~ < .~ [;5~ .... . ..: '.. ~ . ~ , F= .... '. .. ~ .. .., . I.L. (it v ^ I ~d) 3Nvl NVmG..:I.:.IO /-'22.. \.: . ~i .~ x a::: ~ w~ I ~II ~ ~.~ ~ (/)11 ~ ., ~~~ ~ I.u hi -.- (/)~I ili -h. '11 .. . ~- B B. :JI ~ (. (. %0 II: ~ o ... ... ~ ...--,..- .,- --~..~ : ~-_..______L_..:t --I . I I I I I , I I I I I I I I ..; I I I I I "--r---/ I' I ,: I I " I j ,I I I , - - - 1 % ~ II: o Z G .. i ~ % ~ II: o Z STREET :t /;:j'~,~F../j/~;;:.' .'" .. >; .'... ' '. :':; ~..: ~ .- .... ..~ ..", "~'....1"~ : . oJ . .'<0' .'. ~ ,.. /,". .. . .'.'.; '. :".... .ieUCAL TYPTUS PARK'" " "it'}~h:Y~;{> .....r':... ",,,, .. 'J-1'(;-1, I..' J J ... I ~ ',' I I', " ';..;. ~....' .. ~ '" ;;: '" ... z i STREET : I t > ! I ... It T. CIC -, -------- PROJECT LOCATION 3: ~ ~ 101 -' J c IX KIMBA L t r - - _.~ ~ _. .. - .--- -.~ -.- j :~_n --~ _.. J. . CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT (!) APPLICANT: SOUTIIBA Y COMML')\/TY PROJECT DESCRIPTION: SERVICES Short term housing (up to 60 days) for homeless ADDRESS JI t'OI'IHII o\n:~n: families for up to SO people (Public/Quasi use. SCALE FILE NUMBER Requires City Council approval) NORTH \".., 400' PCC. 93 - 39 /- ~ 3 APPLICATION CANNOT BE ACCEPTED UNLESS SITE PLAN IS FOLDED TO FIT INTO AN 8-1/2 X 11 FOLDER FOR OFFICE USE INITIAL STUDY Case No. 7<.-_ 9<> _ 2/:... Deposit rf. /)...~, ~ -~/D Receipt N. ///~ 7~ Date Rec'd ~~. ~ Accepted by ;" . Project No. ~ _/....~ A. BACKGROUND City of Chula Vista Application Form 1. PROJECT TITLE To 13" ~&""\",,.z-J Z. PROJECT LOCATION (Street address or description> ~(~ h>.tM... J....<ek,J;:: Assessors Book, Page & Parcel No. rr,t:;- 01 f)-Io 3. BRIEF PROJECT DESCRIPTION --F, u""',-\- ""f-~~t- y.-cp""oh" 4. Name of Appl ican~ /,,~ ~ (ro>'<">1'-":'" S-;;2..,,~tF'::>, It-iC Address ~\5 rQ";~ Av~E Phone 420- ~[,:2D City G....\..I;. \}.-"-,+A State c..t Zip 1(&(10. 5. Name of Preparer/Agent fi!. br /~e"fLS ;(' <~ Fa;,."2..,,"":> Address :;C;C~q ~ ~~v'& Phone 2?"r:l-;"r'2 City 0h. 'D'"'j" State G4 Zip Q2/D:;"5f:;r:; Relation to Applicant ~;~ 6. Indicate all permits or approvals and enclosures or documents required by the Environmental Review Coordinator. a. Permits or approvals required: --- General Plan Amendment ___ Design Review Application ___ Public Project --- Rezone/Prezone ___ Tentative Subd. Map Annexation Precise Plan ___ Grading Permit ::: Redevelopment Agency ::: Specific Plan ___ Tentative Parcel Map ___ O.P.A. ~ Condo Use Permit Site Plan & Arch.Review ___ Redevelopment Agency --- Variance ::: Project Ar~a Committee D.D.A. --- Coastal Development Use Permit ___ Other Permit b. Enclosures or documents (as required by the Environmental Review Coordinator). --- Grading Plan Arch. Elevations --- Parcel Map ::: Landscape Plans Precise Plan ___ Tentative Subd. Map ::: Specific Plan ___ Improvement Plans --- Other Agency Permit ___ Soils Report or Approvals Required ___ Hazardous Waste Assessment ___ Hydrological Study ___ Biological Study ___ Archaeological Survey ___ Noise Assessment ___ Traffic Impact Report ___ Other WPC 0413P/9459P -1- "2f B. PROPOSrO PROJECT 1. a. Land Area: sq. footage '" t,9;ODD or acreage 0.A;\ If land area to be dedicated, state acreage and purpose. b. Does the project involve the construction of new buildings, or will existing structures be utilized? U'5e-<C,(~~'t%-"6h>l.ES 2. Comp1ete this section if project is residential. a. Type development: Single family Two family Multi family ~ Townhouse Condominium , b. Total number of structures 2 c. Maximum height of structures 2. ~.~ors d. Number of Un i ts: 1 bedroom ,1.. 2 bedrooms 2 3 bedrooms 4 bedrooms Total units I~ e. Gross density (OU/total acres) 31,1"1- f. Net density (DU/total acres minus any dedication) g. Estimated project population ~C) h. Estimated sale or lr..ental /price range '*' D - 157) /...." 1. Square footage of structure 'flt\ "2- ~ j. Percent of lot coverage by buildings or structures ?O~D k. Number of on-site parking spaces to be provided ,q l. 'Percent of site in road and paved surface "" ~e'7D 3. Complete this section if project is commercial or industrial or mixed ..YH. foJ (PI a. Type(s) of land use b. Floor area Height of structure(s) c. Type of construction used in the structure d. Describe major access pOints to the structures and the orientation to adjoining properties and streets e. Number of on-site par~ing spaces provided f. Estimated number of employees per shift , Number of shifts Total g. Estimated number of customers (per day) and basis of estimate ___ h. Estimated number of deliveries per day WPC 0413P/9459P -2- /.2,.5 i. Estim.ted range of service area and basis of esti~ate j. Type/extent of operations not in enclosed buildings k. Hours of operation 1. Type of exterior lighting 4. If project is other than residential, commercial or industrial complete this section. ~ ,.... a. Type of prOject b. Type of facilities provided c. Square feet of enclosed structures d. Height of structure(s) - maximum e. Ultimate occupancy load of project f. Number of on-site parking spaces to be provided g. Square feet of road and paved surfaces h. Additional project characteristics C. PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS 1. If the project could result in the direct emission of any air pOllutants, (hydrocarbons, sulfur, dust, etc.) identify them. I.cN~ 2. Is any type of grading or excavation of the property anticipated ~ (If yes, complete the following:) a. Excluding trenches to be backfilled, how many cubic yards of earth will be excavated? b. How many cubic yards of fill will be placed? c. How much area (sq. ft. or acres) will be graded? d. What will be the. "Maximum depth of cut Average depth of cut Maximum depth of fill Average depth of fill WPC 04I3p/9459P -3- /. ~ y 3. Will there be any noise generated from the proposed prOject site or from points of access which may impact the surrounding or adjacent land uses? NO 1\\0,2.> ~.<.+J r ~..~+ 4. Describe all energy consuming devices which are part of the proposed project and the type of energy used (air condition..ing, ell!ctrical appliance, heating equipment, etc.).~ A.-!c, ~I.~~ k~J 1'\<;'. ~ .......~, r,.-,&"';j ,+-I,~__ 5. Indicate the amount of natural open space that is part of the prOject (sq. ft. or acres) ~ 6. If the project will result in any employment the nature and ~ype of these jobs. ? ,,~ tM,.m..........~-r ..xI...' '" Q 7. Will highly flammable or potentially substances be used or stored site? t:ll.., explosive materials or wi th in the project 8. How many estimated automobile trips, per day, will be generated by the project? ~ev- ~ c'-','-i2"'-4 V'- ~r ~H.'.\-..es. v.;'.l\ ",,\oUt-> C~S.. Describe (if any) off-site improvements necessary to implement the project, and their pOints of access or connection to the project site. Improvements include but not limited to the following: new streets; street widening; extension of gas, electric, and sewer lines; cut and fill slopes; and pedestrian and bicycle facilities. !J~ 9. D. DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 1. Geoloav Has a geology study been conducted on the property? /VO (If yes, please attach) Has a Soils Report on the project site been made? ~u (If yes, please attach) 2. Hvdroloov Are any of the following features present on or adjacent to the site? AiD (If yes, please explain in detail.) I. Is there any surface evidence of a shallow ground water table? b. Are there any watercourses or drainage improvements on or adjacent to the site? WPC 0413P/9459P -4- /.~2.? c. Does runoff from the project site drain directly into or toward a domestic water supply, lake, reservoir or bay? d. Could drainage from the site cause erosion or siltation to adjacent areas? e. Describe all drainage facilities to be provided and their location. 3. twa a. Are there any noise sources in the project vicinity which may impact the project site? Alu 4. Bioloav a. Is the project site in a natural or partially natural state? NO b. If yes, has a biological survey been conducted on the property? Yes_ No _ (Please attach a copy). c. Describe all trees and vegetation on the site. Indicate location, height, diameter, and species of trees, and which (if any) will be removed by the,prpject. 71;.>"".:': ~~ -1"'-<;<'~ e\CY, ^L".J!' .,);l\ ~~ 11P~..w nL __' 5. Past Use of the Land a. Are there any known historical or archeological resources located on or near the prOject site? NV b. Are there any known paleontological resources? ~t c. Have there been any hazardous ,aterials disposed of or stored on or near the project site? _!-it) d. What was the land previously used for? ~~1rM~ WPC 04I3p/9459P -5- 1- 2. 8 6. Current Land Use a. Describe all structures and land uses currently existing on the project site. c;ce 1':.7_ b. Describe all structures and land uses currently existing on adjacent property. . North Co,..~,~..Q - p~ (""~~."""'+ -~..t5 South 111\ F- - -h..o ..+or. IV East ,All f' - ~",,"~r-'e" West '1p..\(A , ~.JL~I~*'-''' t'~ 7. Social a. Are there any residents on site? (If so, how many?) sS-.{o b. Are there any current employment opportunities on site? (If so, how many and what type?) f'1>y"~ .WLN'if"- +- r"...~ 1"",,,1.;'4"""'0 8. Please provide any other information which may assist in the evaluation of the proposed project. -n.e <-Ie- "'--\ "'3>1 ~v.~ ~ ,,,\,( k~_ t.~ h. ""reJ oc...e.. ~ 'es; 't-L~""~ ,,",~r~ ()..G,Ic.;~ .L~~ th~ hc,1'1~. A \(A-/v ,':,Il +tct""",pc;>r- ~~ \1"'; il~~ + c..a.{S {... l11ov/.<-.. c.ct.oo! +- f'ff -:;,{f S<:c~ c.~~c es. t ~vc:t. as- ~ 01" +r~\1..I\.....1 n>"J. ~h', IJ. CA R-e j WPC 0413p/9459P -6- I.- ~ cr E. CERTIFICATION or ~"".,~l"" 2'f~"TI~.t J>\~~.z... ~~""2>"""C\.{ ~p\.1"~~ C;~t'-"') I, Consultant or Agent* HEREBY AFFIRM, that to the best of my belief, the statements and information herein contained are in all respects true and correct and that all known information concerning the project and its setting has been included in this application for an Initial Study of possible environmental impact and any enclosures for attachments thereto. DATE: *If acting for a corporation, include capacity and company name. WPC 0413p/9459P -7- /-~ II! II! ~ ~ E '" ~ I "'1-1 ~~i E g> I 73~1 !~I m i ~ c ~ Itj ~ i J m ~~ i m!2 I ~~ i~ ~ Ii I is ~8 I ii j-3( Q '" ~ . 1 .2 ~ , 10 A TYPICAL DAY FOR A FAMILY LIVING IN SOUTB BAY COMMUNITY SERVICES SBORT-TERM BOUSING AT 31 FOURTB AVENUE Familv Background Mr. and Mrs. Jones and their two children had been evicted three months ago from their two-bedroom apartment for not paying rent for two consecutive months. They were unable to pay their rent after their son entered the hospital for a broken leg and ankle suffered when falling off his bicycle. The Jones family had no family in the area, and had been living with different friends. After this arrangement became inconvenient, they ended up on the street. They went to local church for help and were referred to Lutheran Social Services, where they were given a meal, preliminarily screened, and referred to South Bay Community Services. Screening Process South Bay Community Services' Case Manager met with the family and obtained information on the family and its background. The son went to Mueller Elementary School in Chula Vista, the father had recently left the Navy, was working as a stock clerk at a local retail store, and was looking for a better paying job, and the mother was not working, but was looking after their four year old daughter. After following some of their references (including their old landlord and the school administration office) to ensure the validity of their history, the Case Manager determined that the family was eligible to live at 31 Fourth Avenue. Next, the Case Manager reviewed the Bouse Rules, Program Regulations, and Case Plan expectations with the entire family. Each of them agreed to abide by the rules and regulations and work toward becoming self-sufficient. Each signed copies of the rules and regulations. Joining other Families After the Jones family settled in their unit, they joined the rest of the families for dinner in the community kitchen. Mrs. Jones helped the volunteer teen group from a local church prepare dessert, since she liked to cook. Mr. Jones joined some of his new friends to attend a class on opening and balancing a checking account presented by a volunteer from a local bank branch. Develo~ing the Case Plan After breakfast and before leaving for work and school the next day, the family met with the Case Manager to develop their "Case Plan". They worked together to develop a "mission" - to become self-sufficient and move back into an apartment near Mueller School within two months. They created three main goals: increase their family income, increase their ability to keep their apartment, and /- .3 ~ ,. & 11 increase their control over their lives. To meet these goals, specific, measurable objectives were created: 1. Their daughter would be enrolled in Episcopal Community Services' Parkway Bead Start program, and begin within one week. 2. The mother would now have more time to work. Because she needed training, she decided to enroll in the MAAC Project's Clerical Job Training program. After graduating from the six-week program, she would be assisted with finding a job. 3. She would also sign-up for literacy tutoring through the Chula vista Literacy Team to improve her reading and writing skills. 4. Mr. Jones would continue working, but realign his work schedule to weekends and evenings, leaving enough weekday hours free to attend bookkeeping classes. Bis objective being a promotion to assistant store manager within six months. 5. The Jones' would enroll their son in SBCS' Better Options After-School Today program at Mueller Elementary School. The program not only provides child care, but also offers homework tutoring and other learning assistance, and encourages parent involvement. 6. Ms. Jones would begin volunteering at the South Bay Family YMCA (across the street) for five hours a week to improve her clerical skills and would help cook dinners at 31 Fourth. 7. Mr. Jones would volunteer four hours a week at 31 Fourth assisting with landscaping, he would begin to teach his son some of the gardening and other skills he had learned from his father. 8. All family members would increase writing skills by keeping daily journals. 9. Both parents would attend parenting skills and independent living skills classes offered in the evenings at SBCS' offices with on-site child care. Classes would include nutrition, meal planning, shopping, budgeting, budgeting, and other skills. They would learn how to find an affordable apartment and understanding basic landlordltenant relations and laws. 10. The family would participate in monthly resident council meetings to evaluate the program and staff, and modify procedures. ~h. Dav After developing the case plan, Mr. Jones took the bus to work, their son was driven to school with other children in the SBCS project van, and Ms. Jones stayed with the Case Manager to work on enrolling their daughter in Bead Start and enrolling herself in job I-~ , i 12 training. She would be given bus vouchers to attend the training and her daughter would be taken to Bead Start in the project van. The son was able to join the after-school day care that same day. After a ride home in the SBCS van from the Program Director, he joined his family for dinner, a quiet evening, and an early bedtime. On weekends, the family would enjoy the same recreational and cultural activities as other Chula Vista families (i.e. parks, bayfront, fairs, etc.). These families are no different than any others. They are not homeless because of any personal or individual defect. MonitorinQ and EvaluatinQ Re.ident's ProQre.. As families move toward self-sufficiency, their needs will change and their treatment plan will be modified. In order to review their progress toward attaining goals and objectives, the Case Manager will meet at least weekly with each family during their first three months in the program and every other week thereafter. The Program Director will review weekly progress made on individual cases and the Case Manager's performance. The Case Manager will also receive weekly clinical supervision from SBCS' Clinical Director, a licensed MFCC. Additional Hote. Three meals would be provided to the Jones family and all other families. Breakfast would be served from 6:30am to 7:30 am, at which time bag lunches would be offered. Dinner will be served from 6:00pm to 7:00pm. Special arrangements will be made for individuals whose schedule does not fit these times. SBCS has been given a van by the U.S. Marshalls Service for use transporting residents to school, work, and activities. To encourage independence, SBCS will offer free bus tokens to individuals able to utilize public transportation. Finally, a number of community organizations have offered to transport residents as needed. /. 3 ~ . ~ / CITY DATA Case No.l<3,. C\,~ -.31c- F. PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1. Current Zon1na on site: North South East West ~-,3 ~ -~~ I::> -~~ C'> 'I:t. ~ . LC: [) ~rA.. c -,~ Does the project conform to the current zoning? 2. General Plan land use designation on site: North South East West ~A.,,,," '>,;\,01'. ~"-'"i~\ ~,ciP\~\c.\ -...) I J II yA-rLl ' Is the project compatible with the General Plan Land Use Diagram? \~" Is the project area designated for conservation or open space or adjacent to an area so designated? \,.. Is the project located adjacent to any scenic routes? (If yes, describe the design techniques being used to protect or enhance the scenic quality of the route.) 3. Schools If the proposed project is residential, please complete the following: Students Permanent Temporary Current Generated CaD8citv Clo8citv Enrollment From Proiect School Elementary Jr. High . Sr. High ~"'"\ ~~"( (i.:,. OJ~ -\~,';,. ,os. ~ (>' ~ ~,'d.K - ~\ ~cdv\ '-"\, ':\~ ~v'~;i'\~ \k ,;~;. ( I 4. Remarks: . ~ ,\. . ---.;yg (u-:/ - r, '/) ( / Director of Pl.nnin or Rfprese~at;ve -1) 'J::i.:J /rr.I'17~ Date WPC 0413p/94S9p -8- /-~~ DE MINIMIS FEE UETERMINATION (Chapter 1706, Statutes of 19JO - AS 3158) A It is hereby found that this project involvu no potential for any adverse effect, either individually or cumulatively on wildlife resources and that a "Certificate of Fee Exemption" shall be prepared for this project. _ It is hereby found that this project could potentially tmpact wildlife, individually or cumulatively and therefore fees in accordance with Section 711.4 (d) of the Fish and Game Code shall be paid to the County Clerk. Yf ~"d { .../', (.tel ~.;/ ) Enviro ental Rekiew Coo dinater ~/~/ ~-..5' Date WPC 0413p/9459P -26- /-3' Case No. _7..5'- 9'..?.. k H-l. PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT 1. Is project subject to Parks & Recreation Threshold requirements? ~... If not, please expla~ Q)i","'~ ~~ ~ (100 - 2. How many acres parkland are necessary to serve the proposed project? ~ ... 3. Are existing neighborhood and adequate to serve the population ~~ community parks near the project increase resulting from this project? Neighborhood Community Parks 4. If not, are parkland dedications or other mitigation proposed as part of the project adequate to;J.serv the population increase? Nei ghborhood ._ Community Parks 5. To meet City requirements, will 1'>/A I applicant be required to: Provi de land? Pay a fee? 6. Remarks: ~'1\~ ~. Pa ks and Recreation Director or Representative 'S'I\.~ Date . WPC 04I3p/9459P -13- /- 31 y~- 567 12Ev (SED G. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Case No. r5-q3-~ REV(5€D J. Drainaoe a. Is the project site within a flood plain? ND. If so, state which FEMA Floodway Frequency Boundary ~~. b. What is the location and description of existing on-site drainage facilities? c", 'I9~c.1!: FlJ-NIb ~ouen+ ~"'JF- c. V~C>Iv". F'b/o.1t>I""&. ~ ~/L Are they adequate to serve the project? ..th~-"""" 'Tz:> ROlw:>u../""-_ If not, explain briefly. ~&: ~/Tl'l: ~/'.'~/C. T:::JD~/U.&:.' I...Pho.IIEM~ MAY" 'AI:=:." JJ,C/"'.r--.aDY d. What is the lo~ation and description of existing off-site drainage facilities?Sv"""~= F,~.I U,.,R-ntWAb> AiJ..L1t::' {:but!::rH .l.VI<AJt.JS: ~ ~WN<:...,.-D~A.A u-/IA ILlI.F.r:, WHtGJ.I '1>rQ'tJ"YD--- ~ A "'T.R"rr~/r>>.1 C.J.b4A/NE e. Are they adequate to serve the project? )1:0<;, 110 ''''qrVF 1101 1i!u1J~ A20M If not, explain briefly. ~/,A" SI7C.. 2. TranSDortation a. What roads provide primary access to the project? ~~ AVFJVu~ b. What is the estimated number of one-way auto trips to be generated by the project (per day)? Nt') 1IICfl-~'-E.. OVE~ Exl<J;rfJ.Ja f~. c. What is the ADT and estimated level of service before and after project completion? 110 IA/~ IN ~FFIG GENEMT'tc..J. Before After A.D. T. 175'P.,1) J7~ L.O.S. t.C6 'c" 1>"-. ~.(L ~~"~~.e. If the A.D.T. or L.O.S. is unknown or not applicable, explain briefly. ~. d. Are the primary access roads adequate to serve the project? If not, explain briefly. VFS. /"38 WPC 9459P -14- . Y5-5'67 IZE-V(~D f. Case No. -rS~_ Are there any intersections at or near the p01nt~~t'5~Ri result in an unacceptable level of Service (LOS)? ~c. If so, identify: location N'/A. Cumulative L.O.S. N.,IA. Is there any dedicat ion required? y~~ ~~(; Fa 1f'"I ~'lFlJUE: . If so, please spec1fY.f'aJ~r""Aw.JvF" I~:Z: g:.~~... ~,J/R..-LA,IJE A.I~:TbQ ~rr In"""'l: t!..~~ ~A1r~~L p'.........., A NJ I~.'I~^",~~ Ij~~ t>F ~I t'~h rT1Q./ WIU-t --t~d11Zl!P ""715 "'fE~d7'Ne? . /~t.F-Wll1rH ~~ ()F &...rt;> S ere any s ree. wideninll require, .If). ~~77D If so, please specify. 0/..4-- e. II. h. Are there any other street improvements required? Alc. If so, please specify the general nature of the necessary improvements. AI 4- . . 3. Soils N/A. E.K1-snN~ 'f>'TJ!.vc.~ES. a. Are there any anticipated adverse geotechnical conditions on the project site? b. If yes. specify these conditions. c. Is a soils report necess~ry? 4. Land Form a. What b. What Noi!:e is the average~ slope of the site? 2~ is the maximum~ slope of the site? 5% 5. Are there any traffic-related noise levels impacting the site that are significant enough to justify that a noise analysis be required of the applicant? }./~. 6. Waste Generation How much solid and 11quid (sewage) waste w111 be generated by the proposed project per day? 2 A~ .. ~~/ . ) ;J,() /..6./1>>.>' 6V4Z EIc1fJnt.J' 72---lM:N>fP'V( I.D EW. W!rR- Solid T"JrA.SU .l:E.lJr~'&'~/a#J. ~1aufd EJ1.'J4nAM: ~"'L../.~-~..I-.~..,.,,,.J What is the location and size of existing sewer lines on or downstream from the site? B'\A:.P 11..1 t:iY.--u "'lIbJo~ ...,.,. I,.," VGP 7:>""'''S~~AJI 1M lIt!:. " _~I::"r. Are they adequate to serve the proposed project? ~. WPC 9459P -IS- /- 39 7. Remarks WPC 9459P YS-sb7 TZEvtSE:D tase No. E-93-3{;, REVISEb Please identify and discuss any remaining potential adverse 1l1pacts, lIitigation ~asures, or other issues. -16- ~/1Iq'3 Date I 1,lIlJ ~ " M E M 0 RAN DUM '. June 3, 1993 , . t'i ;;:. ~ .0:-00, :.; r:', ) 'e; ~. - " FROM: Russ collins, Sweetwater Authority Bill Ullrich, Senior civil Engineer Harold Rosenberg, City Traffic Engineer Roger Daoust, Senior civil Engineer Mary Jane Diosdado, Crime Prevention Unit Rod Hastie, Captain, Fire Department Barbara Reid, Associate Planner --?,1'/f"..{ \ <;3 TO: \ ,. ~ ~ $ \, -= I) (, ., -" \. SUBJECT: South Say Community Services-31 Fourth Avenue .. , . 'Thank you for your comments regarding the application for a Conditional Use Permit for the above cited address. The applicant tIas revised the project description as attached. I will be contacting you to determine if the requirements you forwarded previously will still apply. I would appreciate a written response by June 9, 1993. However, I will contact you prior to that time to obtain your verbal comments. Thank you in advance, Barbara Reid " ~-r~~~~~~~ "'. YIu ~~~~~~'t!~~-4 ~i4<f~ M~~J4,P~ a ~ I"~~~,fk c~ Jk lj';~, ~ ~A,ult;m~~~-I ~ ~1' //~.~,.e-~, Wav( &/ll/r5 /- '1/ , 315 4th Avenue, Suite E . Chula Vista. CA 91910 . (619) 420-3620/9790/5051 May 27, 1993 Barbara Reid Martin Miller City of Chula Vista Planning Department 276 Fourth Ave. Chula Vista, CA 91910 Dear Ms. Reid and Mr. Miller, South Bay Community Services has decided to modify its project description for the short-term housing facility at 31 Fourth Avenue. .. Instead of removing the kitchens from the 14 units, we will be leaving the kitchens in place; we will not be installing a commercial kitchen or providing congregate meals. We anticipate that our rehabilitation costs will be less than $15,000 and will consist mainly of deferred maintenance repairs, carpet replacement, termite work, and painting. We do not anticipate the need for a building permit for this rehabilitation. As a result of leaving the kitchens in place, we will have a maximum capacity for 43 tenants plus the 1 property manager. This has been calculated as follows: , , .:::-:.":? b-=~!'"0QJ"'~ ~ , per:"hinF.: = " pe~Eon::: . - -~ 2 two bedrooms @ 5 persons - 10 persons 1 one bedroom @ 1 manager - 1 cerson 44 total If you require additional information, please call me at 420-3620. SincerE'ly, 7J;iR ~j" Wathe ine Lembo Exe tive Director &.a>cnod..._", . \':::'''''''- " ~ n~( " .'0".-y"v' c \, ~~ / "'~2.. l . ~ APP':NDIX I ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM (To Be Completed By Lead Agency) I. Background 1. 2. Name of Proponent Address and Phone <:; ~ ;j,,' E ~()I '-If> BU'I (("""1"111' /),Ie{ .5(~,-.. (L,;. Number of Proponent ,~/,') 'I'll) I}V<..,,"K,f , (hv/c, L'~i\ (r, 9/9/ 0 3. 4. 5. Date of Checkl i st ~ /17 /9 ..j' , Name of Proposal "')~r,j --"C'rL ,fice_,,'J Initial Study Number -L5.. '73.. ;;;>(... -It: ^ i", Q~j",,--..:J fI.- r.'.-'(/-P..... II. Environmental Impacts (Explanations of a 11 "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets.) ill MAl6f till 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or changes in geologic substructures? 1./ b. Disruptions, displacements, compacti on or overcovering of the # so il ? L/ - c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? - k' d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? J-/' - /.~.3 WPC 9459P -20- . e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soil s, either on or off tl,;! site? - f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? 2. Air. Will result in: a. Substant ia 1 air emi ss ions or deterioration of ambient air quality? - b. The creation of objectionable odors? c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? 3. Water. Will the Proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course or di recti on of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? - b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? ~ c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? - 1- +' Y WPC 9459P -21- ~ y v L ... -- .- v ~ WPC 9459P d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? - e. Discharge into surface waters, or any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? - f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? - g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? ./ ./ ..L - ./ h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? 1. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in or number (including crops, and the diversity of species, of any species of plants trees, shrubs, grass, aquatic plants)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? ~ ./ ~ '-"" - c. Introduction of new species of plants into In area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? - -22- /. ~.-5 .--- - d. Reduction in acreage agricultural crop? of any - 5. Ani.al life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animal s (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? b. Reduct ion of unique, rare animals? the numbers of any or endangered species of c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barri er to the mi grat i on or movement of animals? d. Deteri orat i on to exi st i ng fi sh or wildlife habitat? - 6. Noise. Will t~e proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? - b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? - - 7. light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? - 8. land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? WPC 9459P 1- ~ G, -23- ...r::: ./ ~ ~ ....::" ./ " _../' .-" 9. Natural Resources. result in. Will the proposal a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? - b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? - 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? - 13. Transportation/Circulation. proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? Will the b. Effects on exi st i ng parki ng facilities, or demand for new parking? - c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? -Y' --- -Y' ~ ./ ./ .-/ ---- - d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? - /..(17 WPC 9459P -24- ~ e. Altfrations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? - f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? - 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? - c. Schools? - d. Parks or facilities? other recreational - e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services? 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substant i a 1 amount of fuel or energy? - b. Substantial increase in demand existing sources or energy, require the development of sources of energy? upon or new - 16. Thresholds. impact the Policies? Will the proposal adversely City's Threshold/Standards WPC 9459P I- +18' -25- v v ../ ....Y' ../ v ./ ./ ....../ ,./ ~/ 17. Human Health. Will the p~oposal result in: a. Creation of any potential health mental health)? health hazard or hazard (excluding b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the pub 1 i c, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the qual ity or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? - 20. Cultural Resources. a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? - b. Wi 11 the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? - c. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? - d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? WPC 9459P -26- I.~r ~ ->:/ ./ ./ ,/ ~ ./ t-/ 21. Mandatory Findings of Significance. WPC 9459P a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the envi ronment, substant i ally 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? J b. Does the project have the potent i al to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage or long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) ./ c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the envi ronment is significant.) v - d. Does the project have environmental effects wh i ch will cause sub stant i a 1 adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? .-/ - /" 5t!J -27- ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST EARTH As the proposed project consists of renovations to the interior of an existing multi-family apartment building, there will be no changes in topography, or conditions that could lead to an increase in wind or water erosion. No unique geologic physical features exist on the site. AIR The project is in conformance with the existing Air Basin Plan. There could be a minor traffic/air quality reduction if fewer of the tenants drive cars as certain studies indicate. WATER This project is not in the Coastal Zone and there are no rivers or wetlands or other sensitive aquatic resources within the immediate area that could be impacted by the project. The Threshold/Standards Policy requires that the developer will request and deliver to the City a service availability letter from the Water District. Individual projects will provide necessary improvements consistent with the Drainage Master Planes) and City Engineering Standards. Engineering staff have noted that there is the potential for some drainage impacts as a result of potentially inadequate on-site drainage. This is considered potentially significant as it creates a safety hazard. A Mitigation Measure to reduce this to below a level of significance has been included in the Negative Declaration. PLANT AND ANIMAL LIFE The project is in an urbanized area of the City and the site, if not first disturbed previously, was disturbed in 1972 when a multi-family apartment building was constructed. There are no sensitive or endangered plant or animal species in the immediate area. The project is in an urbanized area of the City. The multi-family apartment building proposed for use by SBCS was constructed in 1972 and has been in continual use as an apartment building since that date. NOISE Potentially, because the proposed use could house more residents than at the existing facility, 43 residents in addition to a resident manager, this would be an increase in the number of people in the facility from 34 currently to a total of 44 residents. There is an expectation that as a result there could be an incremental increase in noise. However, it is expected that the sounds of children and adults will be minimum as the program developed by the South Bay Community Services makes use of off-site facilities for counseling, day-care job training for residents and their children as well as local schools. Therefore, noise is not expected to be a significant impact. The proposed use is similar to existing uses, that is as a multi-family dwelling. There is expected to be approximately 9 more people living at the site than the current number of residents. However, due to the expected WPC F:I.HQ1\.fEIPLANNING\96S.93 / - .5( Page 1 reduction in resident vehicles from the present use, there would be no substantial change to the existing environment of the site ill regard to vehicular use. In fact, there may be a slight reduction in noise. LIGHT AND GLARE Staff in the Crime Prevention Unit of the Police Department recommend security lighting in all areas around the buildings, walkways and parking area. In order to avoid potential lighting impacts, a condition will be included that security lighting will not negatively impact surrounding residents. LAND USE The proposed project would continue in effect the multi-family dwelling use of the site. However, it will alter the structure of the possible long-term tenant to short-term temporary housing for the homeless - under a conditional use permit. Concerns were raised regarding noise, traffic, and increase in density, and public safety issues. Each of these issues has been discussed in the appropriate sections of the Initial Study. NATURAL RESOURCES No natural resources are expected to be impacted. The proposal, therefore, is not expected to increase the rate of the use of natural resources. RISK OF UPSET No hazardous materials or substances will be stored on site. Therefore, there cannot be a risk of an explosion or release of hazardous substances in the event of an accident or upset conditions. In the meeting with a representative of the Fire Department, Fire Department staff commented that they have adequate emergency access to the site and that two fire hydrants are in close proximity to the site. POPULA nON There may be a very minor increase in population at this site from the current 34 residents to a maximum of 43 residents. This does not substantially alter the population characteristics of the area. HOUSING The proposed project could create. a demand for a small amount of additional housing as the residents go through the process of becoming self-sufficient, obtaining employment skills and obtaining employment. Because of the small number of residents, the existing housing stock in the City of Chula Vista will be adequate to serve the project residents. /-~c WPC F:\HOr-.fE\PLANNING\968.93 Page 2 TRANSPORT A TION/CIRCULA TION No substantial 'increase in traffic generation is expected as a result of this project. In fact, therc is an expecled decrease in traffic since fewer of the residents are expected to have vehicles. (See attached survey completed by SBCS of other similar facilities and the parking needs.) Traffic safety hazards were cited as a concern in the project area specifically the legality of use of the access easement to the property, the fact that a number of traffic accidents have occurred on Fourth A venue in the vicinity of the facility and that there could be additional vehicles servicing the facility particularly as a result of the provision of the congregate kitchen. The question of the applicant's legal access to the site upon purchase of the property has been resolved by the title company. There is adequate turnaround space and access for emergency vehicles as reviewed by City Traffic Engineers and Fire Department staff. As only a small number of the future residents are expected to have vehicles, there is nol . expected to be an increase in traffic accidents. (See attached survey completed by SBCS of other similar facilities and the parking needs.) The project description no longer includes a congregate kitchen. The Threshold/Standards Policy requires that all intersections musl operate at a Level of Service (LOS) "C" or better, with the exception that Level of Scrvice (LOS) "D" may occur during the peak two hours of the day at signalized intersections. Intersections west of 1-805 are not to operale at a LOS below their 1987 LOS. No intersection may reach LOS "E" or 'T" during the average weekday peak hour. Intersections of arterials with freeway ramps arc exempted from this policy. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Policy. Engineering staff commented that the primary access roads are adequate to serve the projcct. . As Fourth Avenue is designated as a four-lane major strect in thc City's Gencral Plan. an irrevocable offer of dedication will be requircd to mcet the halj~width standards of said designation. The requirement for an offer of dedication is not just as a result of this project. but is required by the Engineering Department as a result of the application for a conditional use permit. : PUBLIC SERVICES A. Fire/EMS The Threshold/Standards Policy requires that fire and medical units must be able to respond to calls within 7 minutes or less in 85% of the cases and within 5 minutes or less in 75% of the cases. The City of Chula Vista has indicated that this threshold standard will be met, since the nearest fire station is 1.25 miles away and would be associated with a 3 minute response time. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard. /- S.3 WPC F:\HOME\PLANNING\968.93 Page 3 The Fire Department is also requiring standard fire prevention equipment and facilities on-site, such as detectors and fire extinguishers. Staff from the Fire Department have also indicated that they have adequate emergency access. B. Police The Threshold/Standards Policy requires that police units must respond to 84% of Priority 1 calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time to all Priority I calls of 4.5 minutes or less. Police units must respond to 62% of Priority 2 calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time to all Priority 2 calls of 7 minutes or less. The Police Department has indicated that the proposed project will comply with this Threshold Policy. Specifically, a Senior Analyst with the Police Department commented that the general consensus among departmental staff was that the increase in police calls for service as a result of this type of housing is negligible. As with any increase in the number of residents, there is a corresponding expectation that calls for service will increase slightly. However, this project does not create any unique concerns. The staff in the Crime Prevention Unit of the Police Department recommend standard crime prevention measures. They recommend that management re-key each unit as it is re-assigned to a new family by installing an electronic locking system in which each unit may be accessed by the use of a pass key computer card. Staff further recommend trimming back trees and shrubbery supplemented with security lighting in all areas around the building. Further the Police recommended that addresses be clearly displayed at the main entrance and unit designations at each door. The Crime Prevention Unit is available to provide a security survey with specific recommendations prior to any occupancy and to provide training and assistance for the on site management in maintaining a "neighborhood watch" atmosphere. These standard measures are not unique to this project and are considered prudent security measures for any project. C. Schools The existing school system is not expected to be impacted by the small number of children who will be residing in this facility and the transitional nature of the residency. D. Parks As this project consists of the renovation of existing multi-family housing and as multi- family housing is not covered by the threshold/standards policy for. Parks and Recreation the applicant is not required to pay impact fees or dedicate park land. E. Energy The proposed facility is not expected to substantially Increase demand on existing energy sources or to create a need for new energy. ,...s'f WPC F:\HOME\PLANNING\968.93 Page 4 UTILITY AND SERVICE SYSTEMS The proposed project is not expected to create a need for any new utilities or service systems. The Threshold Standards require that sewage flows and volumes not exceed City engineering standards. Individual projects will provide necessary improvements consistent with sewer master plans and City engineering standards. The existing 8-inch VCP in Fourth Avenue and 10-inch VCP downstream in "C" are adequate to serve the project. HUMAN HEALTH This proposed project will not create any human health problems. AESTHETICS As no changes are being made to the building, and as the building at present does not impact any scenic vistas or views to the public, the proposal will not result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view. RECREATION The small number of people who will be residing in this residence will not result in a negative impact to the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities. CUL TURAL RESOURCES There are no significant cultural resources in the area. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 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. While the City is not required to prepare a negative declaration where a categorical exemption is appropriate (Guidelines 15301), as is the case here, the City recognizes that transitional housing is often controversial and that a negative declaration provides the public with an opportunity to comment on the project and to better refine mitigation measures. 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 ofthe major periods of California history or prehistory. The proposed project consists of the renovation of an existing multi-family apartment building within an urbanized area of the City. There are no known significant biological or historical or prehistorical resources on the site. /-:,5 WPC F:\HOME\PLANNING\968.93 Page 5 2. The project has the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals. One of the City's Long Term Environmental Goals (found in the Housing Element of the General Plan) is to recognize that homelessness is a regional problem and that the provision of transitional housing in the South Bay is a means of addressing that problem. The approval of this facility is in accordance with the City's General Plan and would be a meaningful step towards achieving the short-term goal of the provision of housing to assist the homeless and would also be a step toward the long-term City goal of answering the homeless. problem. 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. This project does not have the potential to be individually limited but cumulatively considerable. The environmental analysis contained in the Initial Study considered potential cumulative impacts. It was determined that there was a very minor cumulative improvement to traffic and air pollution due to the expected project-related reduction in traffic. 4. The environmental effects of a project will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Substantial adverse effects on human beings usually result from hazardous materials, noise, safety hazards, etc. One existing potential safety impact was cited, due to potentially inadequate existing drainage. Mitigation is possible to remedy this existing impact and thus reduce it to a level below significant. Thus, no substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly are expected. /"5" WPC F:IJ-IOMBPLANNING\96B.93 Page 6 SWEETWATER AUTHOR!. /...;inv;4" (~....(f-; -->~ <: .r'~' :P. .-;A. \!~l'HO~\~/ ~ 505 GARRETT AVENUE POS1 OFFICE BOX 2328 CHULA VISTA CALIFORNIA 91912-2328 (619) 420.1413 FAX (6191 425~ 7469 June 9, 1993 .J"'.' . GOVERNING BOARD SUE JARRETI, CHAIRMAN BUD POCt<WNGTQN, VICE CHAIRMAN EDWIN J STEELE GEORGE H WATERS MARGARET A WELSH JAMES S WQLNIEWICZ CARY F WRIGHT WANDA AVERY TREASURER DlAN J REEVES SECRETARY-ADMINISTRATIVE AIDE Ms. Barbara Reid City of Chula Vista Planning Department 276 Fourth Avenue Chu1a Vista, CA 91910 Subject: WATER AVAILABILITY PROPOSED SHORT TERM HOUSING FOR THE HOMELESS 31 FOURTH AVENUE CASE NO: 15-93-36 5WA Gen. File: Water Availability, 1993 Dear Ms. Reid: This letter is in response to the additional information received concerning the Conditional Use Permit for the subject project within the Sweetwater Authority service area. There is a 16-inch A.C. water main located on the east side of 4th Avenue adjacent to the proposed development. The Authority's records indicate that there is one existing water service which serves the property. Enclosed is a copy of 1/4 SEC. 136 map which shows these faciE ties. Since this is an existing apartment complex where the plumbing will not be modified and the existing facilities meet the fire department's requirements, the Authority will continue to provide water service to the site. If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Russell Collins at 420-1413, ext. 239. Very truly yours, SWEETWATER AUTHORITY ~ .) _ \ J \ ,(~.....-,--L c. ~':::':f' ~~ ~ James L. Smyth -Acting Chief Engineer enclosure: photocopy of 1/4 SEC. 136 map t:\lorelei\wp51,southbey.wat pc: Russ collins, Sweetwater Authority South Bay community Services , 31 Fourth Ave., Chula vista, CA 91910 .-57 A Publte Agency_ Scrz-ing Sationol City_ Chula I'isla and Surroundi,!!! Area_' 51 j J lA." "'"~~''o'~''''' - ...-' ...... ~.L_ 0'...... --- ...,.". .. "J". --... ... . E'CTC"'PKD ra.....__ 't I .. .. .T.. -'! .. 11'--1. :.. ., - ~ ~ IrYCI"t ; . tCU MIoMl...ln --: ITE )F PROf D$Eb D:~~€L.MENT i ~'+ ... . r..~~t&IJi ~ . If'" I( : Q,-" " ! ' "T_'u"__~I""'-~:"_~ )1 / I _"'ii~~-:~-m"Jf''''- rw-----'!'.-------.-1 r. . '.'.-. 'M .~!.e ! .,._. 'JII .. .. ..0.AU".4' ::; lit ~ "~IICI.I ) ~.~an o-~....,. I ~~"" ~~~~ Ij ~ i/-~ ..' .~.oo; ~o l '" 4' " ~ "I .x.... - · rYJ" _--....... -..... "f '-..~';';~ Ie: 3'A~~~< ~~ r~~ I~ ~. I. . 0: .(~Ol N,& <N; P::" : LL l r .. tn_ . -::: ""*'M .. ~ . z I I' . ..- . '"-7(, . .. -; ~L. ; : . ",i I I~ ~.~ 'i i ! . ~ _.I-..~ --1! ~ _11.- .K~LO....\~ mr '"''' o'U. ,...... -: ... '-... .~.... " "'..,... 4 ~ 14:LI~S '~j~Y~N'W1;~;~lii ~~ -;/i:I- ..-;, If :8.i~: ~~p 14:19: :; 11 .' 2 'I ~.~ .1 ~ -.::: E ~, '!'~ r, : a. :::; IIoo.,..u . (,) 0 : I'" ..' !t. . .. 0.,;"'::.5 l" ....... ! CI .1 t I I ~ ....~~ ....:r .....~. .....~,' I ~ ~" . - (: ~.. ; - I I C ~ ~: ..!.)r _, Li, t" j~ <f. . : =: ;~~: ~ UB " , st t . !; 1 . -. r....!~ '- . - - ~,'~ . ~ ~.t ~ Ii: 'I "I ~ Ii. . ~ r...,.'-:~p . .1:~ ........!!- :"i Yr, '... I . : I I . ~ '. -"" . ~...,~.," IINI ..11....... I ..I.~..~M..._. ."~ _. 1;' .ate.. .1:." ,_ ,.... "'))1.' . ....... t~ -:'-'-!I I I "..:s..~l. r.::".,~ ,",),.t,~....~...t .".",- ~,t,...1 "4. ..),... - - - ... U Q,o -c: II I. I. ""i\..IIT...,: I ; ~." !}? ~:' c." '.~ _.'; . ": .r'o, ..~ L.. ;"" ~ !:; I ~~ ,!~~. -:~. ....- .'J;., t. N"I' .....t.. -If r- ~ i '"I :... .'. -' ~ ,:.; I . ~ ';1 I . I,: ~ I,...,.:' . C '~-, 2 .'U" 7'1 I! -..--.......-.., : : :: :._....;..::;.--,-Q..: ' _I' 2 "' ..,...., . I , . ....__ __...... _ _. ; I ..,. '"': ., tT" ......o..1---'! ""1iII ,,. !tt ...n. .,..... - it . ~~.._..._____..A...___.____ ---.-., I. ~, .11 .. : ----------; . . ......- --::J..' .. . I r...... ..e, L__, ..,u.: :J -ro;-. ......, .w " : !! .. ~~?~: ~:: ,i,..: ~~, !, ." ~~ ,~., ; '" I, :. t~" ".;g ~u...__.. -..-.-- ,- .~,-" > ..2 EI'I: RAY ;: T~RRA~~ !~=!- -------------.., I ..... ..", -'"":I, ~ . "'01 ,'.. -~~~.~-~-------1.2_4---.l~~:.:~-t=_I- .....J ~i ;;..;; I~U .".,~ ::-"'iz j: - ......... 51' ~. ....1 ! r;' "-;~, -.A. ~" )1...., -... ~,""" I '" . at' 271". . I ..~..,.' '" ....,a:. ..... ; M~ t~...: 250u' . ! .... . · 0:- ~,' "-'1""" r/l ZI ", ZI t' .,.'"., .". .6. t. :-j.,. .....,., ...."..... ._~ .""C C'I'C),.O"'M.J) ~.' _911 - -;- LJ ::::> Z LJ .j .... ... , 1"':'- .... "'-- .... "'-- f-- .... I 5 l-. g- ~ql ~/ wo. ...... - ~.... a~"1 ,~ I <> , -' ,f ..w . 240." / ~.~;':o. J .-...... - ~Z7// Ml1' 8 U Wr ." .' j!f~ ~ .~ tJ,,~ fO~ '" ' .1:"....:1- 'I",.' '"'.I."nc I~T". I ..... ".. !.... / I .~. ~ . ..._' 10 -:--..J ~....... '..0 .,. ,yo. ..... 10';" \....i. '7 . ........,. J : I n - "". - ~ '- b-- : '; I~w if!!. I 'W --.. .. -- ...~ ... . ...0...... 1C.J.1 I ~ ,0...,," "':..... I - ! . .1......: .... ,.', ..... s!n/),I~ "''''0 ..... .-- I : :!...!;a, ,~ ~-cr-' ! - ;-.. .. -.. zo_ t:.~oo w" ...... oia- 11 11 " ~i 135 j~'" . ~-::,- R. 00 ,,~ .. If _...._C c... 'I. ... -I, --;.;-. ..1' ,.. .... .. lev 1711 , ....9wO U& --- ~ R ~ I~ ~ 1.1;: . -ill · .- .- "e!ll_ <X '.cw. ,ol, .' ~, , ., ., , ~"CSj ---'~-- .""~" , . ~~ I I '..11' . ..~""~ ~ ; , . ,.,,~ .." "I ,. . I."" .---, .- - .J" _ .,'-'~'J . ,--, ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Sweetwater Aumority 505 Garrett Ave. Clula Vista, CA 92010 JUNE 2, 1993 31 FOURTH AVENUE '!his letter will serve to confirm that existing water supplies and fire hydrants are adequate for fire protection. purposes for this developrent. CAroL A. OOVE FIRE MARSHAL CAG/l a cc. Barbara Reid Planning Dept. 1,,5 fJ ROUTING FORM ! DATE: May 10, 1993 .- 19;: t\.~':' 12 :':1 \I:;j M -, TO: . PLANNI~;G & F ACILi i. Ken Larson, Building & Housing John Lippitt, Engineering (EIR only) Cliff Swanson, ~ngineering (EIR only) Hal Rosenberg, Engineering (EIR only) Roger Daoust, Engineering (IS/3, EIR/2) Richard Rudolf, Assistant City Attorney (EIR only) Carol Gove, Fire Department Marty Schmidt, Parks & Recreation Crime Prevention, Police Department Current Planning Gordon Howard, Advance Planning Bob sennett, City Landscape Architect Bob Leiter, Planning Director Chula Vista Elementary School District, Kate Shurson Sweetwater Union B.S. District, Tom Silva (IS & EIR) Maureen Roeber, Library (Final EIR) Other 'O::r '. '- ;:: FROM: Barbara Reid Environmental section SUBJECT: Application for Initial Study (15- 93-36/FA-~/DQ -010 ) Checkprint Draft EIR (20 days) (EIR-____/FB-____/DQ ) Review of a Draft EIR (EIR-____/FB-____/DP) Review of Environmental Review Record FC-____ERR-____) The Project consists of: A Conditional Use Permit to allow transitional or short term housing (up to 60 days) for homeless families in a 14 unit apt. complex. The project will house up to 50 individuals at one time. Location: 31 Fourth Avenue Please review the document and forward to me any comments you have by 5/14/93 Comments: If additional buildings are constructed, school fees will be required. hmsSilva Assistant Director of Planning /- ~lJ . e~i . a:. 'K 135 51 j ~ ~ I ,&v I I #" .,.'~. ,_ II e" .~- , ~ ...:. ~. ...... c...... L... .J>. .." ., . ..J[. .,,' .. , .. 'I' ... 1M' .. -=!- .1- i .:....._......... ~l_.... 4 ~... r.. 'fO'.~9.....,i : ~~;I .JtN:~I:;'::-ll ~ '/ .{E bF p~~~ b,Eb D...~~I~: '~HENT l ~ "-11'-01.) ":I ~ ICtDIf"J. -: I ," W I .. . eM.7",:: . Ii i.- = : ...., <>'~ I Q, ." J ~ -.T_'--"_~:I:''''--'l''r.'-.:iiJ't- ~' ....' . ~ .-.p;~;;---_.-Jli-.u onion..t......._... .1 r','rM". ..fJ << r.... 14 ~!f .....c WA.A,IMO.I ....... ... ..0....1140_4 :;; .. ~ " , -....( .,....,..IJ....1t41 /i ~e ' ~I/~~~/.~ N ~~ "'0 I ,.t. I ~ .,. ..~.~ ~ "I(,'" .'." IV] ~. .. . Q:~- -:F <.,~ ~ ~ .'" .. =~ ./4jr /~f · ~N !; ;g.. i - ~ -~(5ia N& r d "no : LL tc i! ~,j ...':".. __'. -; .._.. 0 . . .....i . ~ ~ _ 12 %/~.,.. . ,__, I.~~~! ~; ~\Iej ..u... L- .. ~ ,.~ MACE I I __..J~___ .". ... ....c. I ,.... 14 :L..... !":: ..If} ~ .-11'1 N' w/;~!bl ~:I! ~ ~ -;~ .. -e ~_' ;.:- '''''5 '{'" P 14 9 i :;: ~:I ~ '! ( ,- OJ' "I<--- r, :J iJ ~ _~ -!. ...hoU ;..' -.. 0 : I" .. I I ~: "'"'""'i'ii";'-- I . 1-.. '-' < ..Q - , 0 .' { ,~ _ ,. ~ ;. ...::..' 'i ~ . : ~ i:. ;;: : IE -, i . a: · - ~ ~ ." '.. ..'.::: US , ' 'Gt ~ .fo..~.:,,~~ a .IH":'~-:[.J,.sJ..~."?' ~8 ;iU\; Ii: : i 011 . jIi,....~ ...1 .. :I .a.~ r.h~..r 1:,. _~ : ~.' .. ! J.. I . ; J I 2 : Ie ~.,' --- ..- ..... . _ ~ "&;".,. C-.I T... ..D....... I.i...~....._~, .~_'- ,)to ..tc...'-'"'......))I,,~ '.~"'. t.or~1 ~ I I I ""fS_ "!!~' ':""C ~JI'.C'~'.'""'" r. '...v. ,......c.... I "'." ~,. .. .n .....c.. '"'&11. _ -. '- 0(1 ."I.v. I ..... ....._n .'~ . I .)r- ,~. ( , .;:: I RECI. ..~ ~'" - I ~ !;: : ~:~ ti-,~~. -":" ;';..~I .~., I ....I' ....nll_ ....,. - .,.' i: ):' : l;~ ~c;'.' 2' ,~:- .; :_g. 2 ..y..;; I': : ~;;;iU - -: ; H: 1-1: ~-- -~;.~ rn"l~ , .'" :.. I ",.,"2 ~ -, ---------....----J---- __--...,. ,,~ w..,.... _________ ~. ..;,._~ -2 I I r "" ..os 1----1 ...ta..: 1-: "'.-:'0. I ' ,,4 '7 ~ ~II I i :;'--~-F=: ::::; G : ~ i .. .. ..'1 _ _. w ::> z w ~ ... - -1- .... -- -. .... ~, >>306 0""1.0 -- .... - J: I ~m:~ -- .... -. .... MO&4 1'71' T ...-7 :_.11 ~f7 // 8 ~~ ~r .~ Ii' i!d ~ .3,1,,~ ,,~ ~ ' .,.".~ R~.' ; ~2}ft"4 ~2tO _os I DOl< .\., / . \\,,_....-; I j .._ 10 ~'........~........ ..- ....;,;,-, 7 . /..,-,.,', J =. . II' : Ifl7'l -- ~ - ..- IU i - Fuoo - - HI?" ......... - 4 -::- . . . 'an' i . . . . - - = I , . I ... ... u.." - -. . . - - -. - -. I -. ...... '-:-')~ > -::;:;::,:.;- ___u__, I r-----.c ._____________JL~~---~--~~~~-~ -- -~ ~ ,..(,( ... -;~ ....... . . 1& ,,.,0 ~ q <I '" -!1 ''1 .; .. ..,.. ...- ..,.".:., ...... ~ : -z';i'" t-;; ~n!: Wo ~ I .I~"'" -~ =, '..LL._ El': RAY d I .~!iRR~;~.}.'= I, IJ.II" I .I' -._' : 20". i....:! Jt7O' ~ :: ..,....Ii f- - : .: I . .~ I I' f'o# " ,~ 1-; ,.,.,M. II.n JI,.IIe - ~ " i' I _2711....;, ~ . to!~. tf. 250u'" ,,". : "011"'''& 1 : ZI :-..- .. .. "'I!'I .".'~!~ 2 ",',.:JO ..,.,,,~' .."", ....,"~, $ .i~1 ~ ~ .s~ r I I~~I_ i ,OG... ~, 'C '" rill 0' ~I . ., ., , I'... . . . "}Io<l!:~ ."".n-. : .QAItU ~ '"'. "i" ., ..t ~~J..^. ,- ~. ;,~ r~ Ii .~ "',.,;1'" .' ""!>)De . J (' ...".I~ DATE: TO: May 18, 1993 Barbara Reid, Environmental section Mary Jane Diosdado, Scps~i Crime Prevention, PD ,,/1,/'-7 Initial Study, 31 Fourth Av ".;';.1" FROM:. SUBJECT: Comments regarding this project have just recently been provided to Martin Miller, Planning Associate for a Conditional Land Use Permit. My primary concerns were to improving the exterior lighting and landscaping. In addition, I recommended upgrading the building security. I have spoken directly with the Project Administrator and we will be work~ng together on these recommendations. Attached is a copy of those recommendations. If you have other concerns that need to be addressed, please contact me at 691-5127. /- ~ ':L . FROM: May 14, 1993 Martin Miller, Associate Planner Via Acting Captain w~n, Investigations Mary Jane Diosdado, S~j~J Crime Prevention Unit ~~'V RCC::IVEO MAr >.' " I;, DATE: TO: PLIi;, SUBJECT : Short Term Housing for Homeless Upon reviewing the plans for 31 Fourth Avenue, I discussed some issues with Kathryn Lembo, South Bay Community Services. With the upcoming re-modeling of this location, we discussed possible considerations to improving each unit's security. Although most of the improvements are planned for the interior of each unit, i.e; kitchen areas converted to a bedroom, I advised her that with the limited sixty day occupancy, it would be necessary for the management to re-key each unit as it is reassigned to a new family. This would be the only way to insure each new tenant would have a certain sense of security. I recommend the most cost effective way to implement proper key coding for each unit would be to install an electronic locking system. This kind of system allows access to each unit by the use of a pass key computer card. This type of security has been implemented in many hotels due to significant volume of keys that are not turned in by customers. Conversion to this type of system should take place prior to any occupancy. One of these systems is "Vingcard" a computer electronic lock system. The visibility factor is a concern in all multi-family units. Lighting and landscaping requirements will not only improve the security, but will also effectively deter crime. Trimming back trees and shrubbery, supplemented with. high efficiency security lighting will discourage criminal activity. Maintain a minimum of one candle foot of light in all areas around the buildings, walkways and parking area, and clearly display the address at the main entrance and unit designations on each door. By increasing this visibility factor it allows patrolling officers the ability to monitor actlvity in and around the site. The Crime Prevention Uni t is available to provide a securi ty survey with. specific recommendations prior to any occupancy. We would also llke to provide training and assistance for the on site management in maintaining a "Neighborhood Watch" atmosphere. I appreciate the opportunity to have input into the planning process. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me anytime at 691-5127. co: Brookover, SCA 1-63 .. ^ . rrf/-" INTERDEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE DATE: May 19, 1993 TO: Barbara Reid, Associate Planner, Planning Dept. Brookover,~enior crime Analyst, Police Dept. FROM: Barbara SUBJECT: South Bay Transition House, 31 Fourth Avenue As a result of your request for police input regarding the potential increase in crime at and around the location of the proposed South Bay Transition House, 31 Fourth Avenue, I spoke with several police supervisors. The general consensus was that the increase in police calls for service,. as a result of this type of housing, will be negligible. There is an expectation that calls for service will increase slightly with any housing development project, and the type of housing, in this particular case, is not an issue. There were a total of 43 documented crime incidents along 00-99 Fourth Avenue during the past six months. The majority of these incidents involved assaults; many were associated with domestic violence. It is anticipated that this type of activity will continue, and perhaps increase slightly. It is also possible that petty thefts at nearby stores will also increase slightly. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me. cc: Merlin Wilson, Acting Investigative Captain I,. ~~ city of Chula vista - CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT 84 EAST "J" STREET . CliULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910 . 619425-9600 EACH CHILD IS AN INDIVIDUAL OF GREAT WORTH BOARD OF EOUCA TION JOSEI'\< D CUMMINGS, PI1.D. LARRY CUNNINGHAM May 12, 1993 SHARON GilES PATRK:K A. JUDD GREG R. SANDOVAL SUPERINTENDENT XlMN F VUGAIN, PhD A,.c } ! :....~ "\", "J:.:: Ms, Barbara Reid Environmental Review Coordinator City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 RE: 15-93-36/ FA-623/ DP-010 Location: 31 Fourth Avenue Project: 14 Unit Apt. Complex (In existing bldg.) for Homeless Families Dear Ms. Reid Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Notice of Initial Study for the 14 Unit Apartment Complex project referenced above, Since it appears no new construction is involved, no school fees are required Should this situation change, school fees for residential development would be due. The current fee of $2.65/square foot is distributed as follows: $1.17 for Chula Vista Elementary School District, $1.48 for Sweetwater Union High School District. Even though no fees appear to be necessary, the District is still required to sign off on the Certificate of Compliance, Sincerely, ~ -\z. '::>~'-"-'x l" Kate Shurson Director of Planning & Facilities KS:dp cc: South Bay Community Services, Inc. mamftlemrr....'lTlc~let /- (PS - ROUTING FORM DATE: May 10, 1993 TO: Ken Larson, Building & Housing John Lippitt, Engineering (EIR only) Cliff Swanson, Lngineering (EIR only) Hal Rosenberg, Engineering (EIR only) Roger Daoust, Engineering (IS/3, EIR/2) Richard Rudolf, Assistant City Attorney (EIR only) Carol Gove, Fire Department Marty Schmidt, Parks & Recreation crime Prevention, Police Department Current Planning Gordon Howard, Advance Planning Bob Sennett, City Landscape Architect Bob Leiter, Planning Director Chula Vista Elementary School District, Kate Shurson Sweetwater Union H.S. District, Tom Silva (IS & EIR) Maureen Roeber, Library (Final EIR) Other FROM: Barba ra Rei d Environmental section SUBJECT: Application for Initial Study (IS- 93-36/FA-~/DQ -010 ) Checkprint Draft EIR (20 days) (EIR-____/FB-____/DQ ) Review of a Draft EIR (EIR- ____/FB- ____/DP ) Review of Environmental Review Record FC-____ERR-____) ~ A Conditional Use Permit to allow transitional or short term housing (up to 60 days) for homeless families in a 14 unit apt. complex. The project will house up to 50 individuals at one time. 31 Fourth Avenue The Project consists of: Location: Please review the document and forward to me any comments you have by 5/14/93 Comments: r',*,~<:> -r I~'. ~~ ~ ~ tf.j. J? .11 .tt~. /r~~ . i.._...... ~ ) '7 i 1'1 '13 -"- M"YI 9 19q~ - \)e.~-\.J ~R.t..C....Q..i ~._......__ .~.--~LvQ,..<-~~~.~M -~"-'~ .~--w'0t.<'<-rr,:I~-~-~~- Ck,. o.L (J. ~ "3J.-n<f .f:W_a.."..,.k.,.'......h~___ _ __ ----4~~~~ ~~ - .. 8....L.,."'JL~~,}Aw.IP .oU..u "CI:O--'A. ,,~.l...._ -r1'L..l~. ~~_.~~ #-IJ~., _-f}.A.IJ- ~.,~ . .. --~1--~-~. 4~_~~ --~..~. ~--_. .--.--.---------- -----1.u~~~ .c..~L~.c-v~..C.H , ~~w-r-~1 ~~~.) a.- -_ ~ Ai iJv,.. ~ V......t..- ~_ ~ 6-y\.. ~ ~............,~~,,<~e~.frV~ ~ ~ ____c.~ ~ "-'~~~/rv ~ ..m-".....!QO~ ~ ~ ~L___ .-- j.lv..-~ .w0r~~ ~ ~&J~ ~~~~'1;lj..A..~ . ~~~~J.R.~. -------.'---- - -~----~.__.. --.- ",~"'IA.JlJ -------- -- dP~~-----. -------- ---- ---~~ 3'(0 )) ------- ----~..€r ~i~t"r ,-C!A-511 Cjl~ '(.0 -57 p. 'I . -...------ .. r '~I \ 1- '-? // r May 29, 1993 JU"I\"' i l .) t.' ~, Planning Commission of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista CA 91910 PUr.' . \1\ Case No's: PCC-93-39/lS-93-36 In response to your Notice of Proposed mitigated Negative Negative Declaration dated May 26, 1993 on the above case, I would respectfully request that you consider my response to the Planning Department, a copy of which is enclosed, be considered a challenge to this Mitigated Negative Declaration or conditional use permit, as this ill-conceived proposal will surely end up in court and I do not wish to lose any of my constitutional rights because of my ignorance of your ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES. Everyone of the issues I raised in this enclosed response to the Planning Department should be preserved for me should a positive approval ~6 given by whatever Agency approves such silly proposals. Furthermore, the South Bay Community Services, Inc. is in violation of their Conditional Use Permit at 1515 Hilltop Drive, Chula Vista. I challenge the Planning Department that they are not heeding the complaints of the next door neighbor, Mr. and Mrs. Leo Wood at 1525 Hilltop Drive, as their conditional use permit provides that neighbors will not disturbed. I wish to preserve my constitutional rights to present evidence of the above violation at 1515 Hilltop Drive, should a Court case develop, as evidence that the South Bay Community Services, Inc. is not capable of handling 8 teen-agers let alone 50 homeless. I wish at this point to enter whatever is necessary to prove my points in court and I do not wish to be limited by you or anyone else. At the hearings to date, each speaker has been limited to 2 or 3 minutes. This length of time is not sufficient to bring to the attention of the Planning Commission the danger to human life, the financial loss on the part of adjacent property owners, thee~cnomic unfeasibility of the proposed project and the unwillingness of the South Bay Community Services, Inc. to allow the community to seek out and find a more suitable location for their transitional housing. 1-~8 .. - 2 - I would like to preserve my constitutional rights that I be allowed to present into evidence in a Court Hearing that the City Council voted funds in the amount of $720,000 at a Council meeting at 1:00 a. m. in the morning. This vote came before the surrounding neighbors were notified of the plans for 31 4th Avenue. I would like to preserve my constitutional rights that I be allowed to present into evidence in a Court Hearing th~ the City Council, after hearing complaints at a Council meeting about granting $150,000 to the South Bay Community Services for additional expenses in connection witha~~~u~imz 31 4th Avenue, title to be vested in their name, the City Council at the next meeting removed the S150,000 from the South Bay Community Services, Inc. and tacked it on to funds being allocated to the Otay Lighting District, the $150,000 going to South Bay Community Services, Inc. I would like to preserve my constitutional rights that I be allowed to present into evidence in a Court Hearing that the ~Iayor and City Council and the Planning Department as well as the South Bay Community Services, Inc. acted ca~ritiously in entering into an agreement to contribute funds for 31 4th Avenue, title to be vested in South Bay Community Services, Inc. without first giving adjacent property owners the chance to voice their opinions. I would like to preserve my constitutional rights that I be allowed to present into evidence in a Court Hearing that adjacent property owners will be severely damaged should the City Council approve the proposed transitional housing at 31 4th Avenue and that I should be guaranteed the legal right to ask for damages from the Chula Vista City Council as well as from South Bay Community Services, Inc. I would like to preserve my constitutional rights that I be allowed to present into evidence in a Court Hearing that the City of Chula Vista and the Planning Department did not give me sufficient advice and notice, should it be considered that I am in default of any of their administrative rules. I hereby request thar the Planning Department and the Chula Vista Planning Commission advise me of my consti- tutional rights to raise ALL OF THE ISSUES which would bring about a NEGATIVE RESPONSE TO THIS PROPOSAL. I am anxiou;7awaiting and expect to receive written instructions from the person or persons in charge of the ways in which I may bring up all of the issues /-tplf J . - 3 - against this proposal. I would like to preserve my constitutional rights that I be allowed to present into evidence in.a Court Hearing that the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista refused my request to build low-rent housing at 21 4th Avwnue, Parcel I, Parcel Map l2~. I would like to preserve my constitutional rights that I be allowed to present into evidence in a Court Hearing that the Chula Vista City Council has voted funds to purchase 17 4th Avenue, Parcel 4, Parcel Map 127, for low rent housing, Hud to pay 60% of the rent. I would like to preserve my constitutional rights that I be allowed to present into evidence in a Court Hearing that the Chula Vista City Council has voted funds to purchase 31 4th Avenue, Parcel 3, Parcel Map 127, for transitional housing for the homeless. I would like to preserve my constitutional rights that I be allowed to present into _evidence in a Court Hearing that my constitutional rights have been violated when a public agency, such as the South Bay Community Services, Inc. be given public funds to provide low rent housing when the private sector is denied this right on the very same Parcel Map--side-by-side locations. I would like to preserve my constitutional rights that I be allowed to present into evidence in a Court Hearing that my constitutional rights have been violated when a public agency, with no housing experience, be favored over me, a private sector low-rent housing provider with 40 years of experience in the City of Chula Vista; In the event, at the public hearing each and everyone of these points are not adequately presented to the Planning Department at their Hearing on May 23, 1993. I would like to preserve my constitutional rights that I be allowed to present into evidence in a Court Hearing that the passage of a conditional use permit for 31 4th Avenue, Chula Vista, as a short term shelter for the homeless is a dangerous location for the residents therein and against the public interest. Regina Hickey 21 4th Avenue Chula Vista CA 91910 cc: Hart Klein Bernita Sipan /-?d -. .1a y 12 Application for a c"D1TIht.::i.l:Ym:Il use permit for 31 4th Avenue should be denied because applicant is attempting to use the private property surrounding 31 4th Avenue for her per- sonal use. Applicant is attempting to interject commercial use in an R-4 zone, which is already dangerously overcrowded because when #17, #31 and #45-49 were built the planning department's requirements were one parking space per unit. As you know, your experience has led you to upgrade your requirements to one and one-half to one on all new and up- graded buildings. Lots 7 & 8 of Quartersection 136 were subdivided according to Parcel Mmp 127. 21 4th Avenue is Parcel I, 45-49 is Parcel 2, 31 4th Avenue is Parcel 3 and #17 is Parcel 4. The map mailed out by Doug Reid is incorrect because it does not show the easement which allows access to parcel 2, 3 and 4 to the parking areas behind their buildings. Title to the easement was retained by the owner of 21 4th Ave. #17 has rights of egress and ingress to its parking area, 31 has rights of egress and ingress to its parking area. The rights of 31 4th Avenue end right there. 31 4th Avenue has no right to the turn aroun~ provided at 21 4th Avenue or at 47 4th Ave. This is private property and if these two owners do not exercise their legal right to keep all occupants of 31 4th Avenue off their property, then the owners stand a very good chance of being sued for negli- gence in the event of a law suit arising from the operation of a "transitional 60 day time limited housing" at #31 4th. In other words, 31 4th Avenue is landlocked and their parking spaces will be limited to those they can fit into their 100 feet of land. Nothing over and above this. #31 4th Avenue has made no provision for the 20' hammerhead turn-around re- quired by the fire department and other emergency vehicles and it questionable if they have space enough to provide one. In this inadequate space of one parking space per units, the proposed "limited housing" will have to fit delivery trucks bringing in food, they have to fit in at least two sanitainers to service their housing, they will have to provide parking for school buses to load and unload the children, they will hav; to provide parking for TV trucks, SDG & E trucks and telephone trucks. Since the easement is limited by deed to ingress and egress there can be no parking in the easement. This equipment is for the access of the fire truck and other emergency Aft. y 1 (-, .'-'" /.. ?I . . - 2 - equipment and for the exclusive use of the 42 families who live beyond in a land-locked situation at 45-47-49 4th Avenue. Furthermore more, the pprkiug spaces behind 31 4th Avenue are so narrow that a large van such as a Suburban, a trash truck, a delivery truck a service truck, etc. cannot back out of the parking space into the 20' easement and turn around to head out. These large vehicles will have to back out of their parking space, back out against incoming traffic across the easement behind 17 4th Avenue and will head into a planter strip installed to divide traffic going into and coming out of 21 4th Avenue. Since the planter strip prevents them from turning around, these large vehicles will have to turn the corner and back out to 4th Avenue against the on-coming traffic. When these large vehicles reach 4th Avenue, they have no place to turn around and they will have to back onto 4th Avenue against on-coming traffic in order to turn their vehicle facing the traffic in the right direction. As the owner of-214th Avenue and the owner of all private driveways on Parcel Map 127, I have already faced a similar situation a few years ago when the owner of the 17 4th Avenue building, in attempt to earn a reasonable return on his investment, leased his facilities to a half way house for cancer patients who were receiving drastic diet treatment for the arrest of their cancer. The delivery trucks and- the increased traffic for the change from ordinary R-4 activities to a "semi-commercial" (such as the "transitional housing" will be were faced)wjt~ faced wit the same situation the applicant will face; that is the delivery trucks could not turn around on my property because I would not let them. The owner solved the problem by removing all land- scaping in the rear of his building and install a concrete turn-around behind the building so that these trucks could cross over the incoming traffic and reach the out-going traffic lane in order to face in the right direction. The applicant might be able to do something similar if two parking spaces were reserved for large vehicles and a concrete driveway was built between the two buildings so that the large vehicles could pull far enough so that they could back across in the incoming traffic to reach the out-going traffic lane in order to face in the right direction to reach 4th Avenue. Of course, the spaces for the two sanitainers would /.. ?:2 _ 3 _ take two spaces and the concrete turn around would take two spaces in addition would encroach upon the only area the children of the homelss would have to play in the evenings and on week-ends and holidays when they were not cared for by the applicant. The applicant admitted that she would not care for the children at the above times. After all South Bay Community Services, Inc, is an office. They are not care-givers but contract their intended care out to others who do not attempt to give 24 hour care. They tend to be open only during regular school house. The parking situation on 4th Avenue is worse and not better. The City has painted red the curb from the fire plug in front of 17 4th Avenue to the corner of 4th and C Streets. This leaves parking spaces on the curb in front of lots 2, 3, and 4 of Parcel Map 127 which amount to 12 or 13 spaces for the 84 families who now occupy the apartment buildings on the above lots. Since the private parking behind these three buildings is already woefully inadequate, according to current standards of the planning department, the over- flow must park on the street. This is public parking and may not be reserved for anyone of the above parcels--first come; first served. These spaces may be available, or may not be and cannot be counted as parking for the increased use of 31 4th Avenue. When the school buses draw up to load and unload the homeless children, they will have to park in the traffic lane if parking is not available in front of 31 4th Avenue. If the concrete turn-around is build behind 31 4th Avenue, the buses could, of course, pull right up to the building on the concrete pad provided and the children could then board the buses with safety. The problem with this plan is that there then would be absolutely no place for the children to play unless the parents of the children walk them down to the light at the intersection of 4th and C Streets, cross them across the street and stay at the park with them while they play so that they can escort them safely back to the transitional housing. Another alternative which might come to mind is parking spaces might be leased from Land of China /. 73 - - :4 - Restaurant. If the homeless just park in the spaces provided by Land of China Restaurant, this busines~ will be faced with the same legal problem which I faced. If parking is permitted and not legally prohibited, then Land of China Restaurant stands to be sued for any occurrence on their property arising from the operation of the transitional house at 31 4th Avenue. That, of course, is up to them. It is possible they will be willing to donate parking to the transitional house. The other alternative would be for the City to donate additional parking to the transitional house at the park across the street. The homeless and their children could safely cross at the traffic light at 4th and C Streets and walk the short distance to their transitional housing. So much for the inadequate parking at 31 4th Avenue. It may be that Mayor Tim Nader is so in favor of this housing that he will work out one of the above solutions to insufficient parking. The other problem is safety. Considering 31 4th Avenue is on a hill and approaching traffic leading north on 4th Avenue is travelling at a high speed because there is no stop light at the corner of 4th and D Streets. This speeding traffic is TOTALLY UNAWARE OF STOPPED SCHOOL BUSES or residents of 31 4th Avenue who might be jaywalking across 4th Avenue in an effort to find a short cut to the park. In the past 10 years, 9 people have been injured in front of 31 4th Avenue, pertaining to the traffic on 4th Avenue. This statistic was provided by the Manager of 31 4th Avenue, who has lived there for 12 years. Currently, there are 2 children living at 31 4th Avenue. In order for the applicant's plan to work, she will be forced to increase the number of children being exposed to these traffic hazards. If there is an accident, then the applicant will be morally and legally responsible, especially in view of this written report reporting all the traffic and parking conditions which exist and will exist upon the approval of this application. There is no access for the handicapped. There is no curb cut in front of 31 4th Avenue. The only accessible one is the one I installed at my driveway leading into 21 4th Avenue. I"?~ -- - 5 - Another issue I would like to bring to your attention is serious overcrowding of the 31 4th Avenue as a transi- tional housing. There is currently two two-bedroom units and 10 one bedroom units. I haven't been provided with a copy of the plan to remodel 31 4th Avenue, but I understand the two bedroom units will be remodeled into kitchen and community areas. Using the standard of safe housing used by apartment builders today, the limit is two people per bedroom plus one. Using arithmetic, 10 one bedroom units would provide sleeping accommodations for two " adults and one child for a total of 30 occupants. The double standard used by the planning department and the city council will allow 50 people in an area that the current standard limits to 30 people. The apartment ownem around 31 4th Avenue conform to the st~ndard but applicant apparently does not plan to conform but will crowd in 20 extra children (persumably) because they will live there for only 60 days. I get a little tired. of this double standard. I am required by the planning department to follow the letter of the law, but all around me are serious infractions on the part of property owners and business owners because they have the favor of the City Council (or whatever reason the infractions are allowed). I hope I have provided you with sufficient irrefutable evidence that the project proposed by applicant has serious and fatal flaws which will lead to a negative recommendation on the part of the Environmental Review Section of the Planning Department. I hope I do not see one more example of favoritism on the part of an agency which should apply the law fair and equally to all applicants. Regina Hickey 21 4th Avenue Chula Vista CA 91910 420-3869 cc: Mayor and the City Council Hart Klein Bernita Sipan Land of China Restaurant Chula Vista Fire Chief /"?5 . %0 a: :) o 10. ... ~ --- - -I"'" - -,'" ... - ---~..,.. I I L. _..., J j----------- --, , , I , I , I I ... I I ,r--r--" " I .: I I II I I ,I I I , - -- 1 o c i ... % ~ II:: o Z % ~ II:: o Z -------- PROJECT LOCATION :r ... i I Ii'.';", --1 -,,',. "J .' STREET , .-' I., ~, " .' I . '~ ,J. >' ". .; 'r' 1- L_ I - .. .1 , ,. , .,.', , ....' '. - " . .. ',. .... ,I .. I ,....... .~ . I .I":, - , - .. , ,,, ," r- " ." " 'EUCAL TYPTUS PARK ,,, " I ,.r ~~,. I' I , , " ,. .. , \ . ',, " , . , I I -. " , I :". , ; .. , , .. , ; ,.' " - .' -; '1", - -' .'.'-, .. '. -,. - I .J ." - ;,'J 1 " "'.1'" " , ; ,,' " J , ". , .. , ." . . ._. . -'.( ~J . ' , , ,.... , ' .. I' , I, , t......:.....:. >--- - - " .. to-- .. '" I ;; \oj r . - I I ... z i I B B ~ ~ :J t=ID ~I M A..L I I I D ~ETi..!D.~ o , ~ r-- FEn I I --I ,_-" --I --1 ' -- ~ ." ~ . . ~. . CHULA VISTA PLAi\'NING DEPARTMENT ~ APPLICANT' SOVTII BA \' CO~I~IV~ITY PROJECT DESCRIPTION: SERVICES Short term housing (up 10 60 days) for homele~s ADDRESS JI rOt'HIII '\H,n: families for up to SO people (Public/Quasi u~~. SCALE, F'LE NUMBER Rrquirrs City Council approval) NORTH 1" = ~OO' PCC - 93 .. 39 I-?~ . CREASER & WARWICK, INC. . 345 "F" STREET, SUITE 230 . CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910 . (619) 420-3300 May 17, 1993 2/ Environmental Review Coordinator City of Chula Vista P.O. Box 1087 Chula Vista, CA 92012 RE: 31 Fourth Avenue Gentlemen, We represent the property commonly known as 125 Fourth Avenue, a ninety- six (96) unit apartment development. To allow a "transitional time limit housing" unit in such close proximity would have a significant negative environmental effect on our property especially at such a time in the business cycle as we now face. Our property represents a considerable long term investment in Chula Vista. Any action on the part of the City that threatens the stability of the neighborhood could have serious adverse consequences to the character of the community. Sincerely, CREASER & WARWICK, INC_ " . ,/. p'. ~. I.- ~ '- ........-\- Phil Creaser, President '- ~.... .~~::: _1.0 - ,..?? -. . ~: 31 f.'DUrr!, I1Vt"l4t- f}fje.C,1 ~ I~ 1f13 c; ~ ~ ~J _.___~_~_ ~Mw~~~ ~~ ~rk<<"(/~ ~~~~~,!4~tJe.v.~ .dv ~ ~ ~ tv ~ ~O~ ~ _IJ~It:", ~"tv1kklrl!144/k;4J~~1 I;'wc~r 4, ~ziv.w30~~~1~ ~1t.vd.i- ~.h,tU4'~~~~~~~r~ ~~~'!~~::t(I~~A;~ ~ut~t2,~ill~ ~~~f:!j ~/M~~~~ ~~ ~;'5'D'.7~~1.)..3~ ~~~,. 1~wk ~ .l1tw.1M..-~) ,a" ~ ~ Uv ttu.t. ~ ~w..IUv~~ ~-~I~. ~~,N1UW~ . fi1w.,~Ju4.AUU-~. ~ k i' -- 'r~;'" -tAl.; ~IMJA/, ~"fj:.II.-. f1i ~ o.rtJ~.6M, ~ ~~ I U-J (~.lk I ~ . I~~)) ~ ~ .. r~~~ '. -i~!4.:':I-1 ~:,p. ~m;~~~ ~ -r.w!h. I ~a.&c~Qh&,~~~~~&f.~J~ 4; ~A4dU~AI,~ M~~~~ ~ ~a. L4f~J:J~~tU~~ ~,~~ ~~~"~L,t~4 ~ tv ~ tW.tW .z 'f4MmL Z/u ~ +-t 1 ~ ~~, ENOu&H 1:5 tN()U6ff~..tiwfUU.,! /,. ? g 1kf:~~1J ~... ~"'.a' ~I.A...._~ AL.[1I. C ...00......1..0. .. .JO.... .CC.... D..."'I. 0 1.01o.t.C;. .Jr..O..~ . GOL.O.t-c;' ~.V.., .0.''''.0.... "'..0....... , "'110..0'" .oar-"" 1 ao.-"',o"" ......,p. ..Chr.'" II" 4;_....1.1 It !:il"",' .,.,C,..CL. oJ .....C. .,c,..ItO" .I:,.IJ......"" 10."",.. C.Of;1. ."It["'[- O.....,D _ . 1.1"'10.1. ~tTIt.. .CI...ItC.J McDOKAJ.J.). HECHT & SOLBERG .. ....,.HC..""I. ,....:::;...uc,"'a. ~fIIO,.I:..'O"""L. COIt-o"ATlo...a ...,.,.O.....IJ;Y.. ..,.. Io.AW .00 w<<-aT ..0AO.....y elOMTI-I "LOOfll 'AM 1:11.11:00. c.u.J'OaJollA 8.'0- TE.L.It~MO"'E tele) .~..3... "'ELIECO.IIt" '.18' .3...... rn. . . .' .......... ..0....,0........ CO..'II'....t,o.. ,.. 2i1 I','.., i '.--- :..// --._- C~__ May 21, 1993 VIa DSSENGER Mr. Douglas D. Reid Environmental Review Coordinator city of Chula vista post Office Box 10B7 Chula Vista, California 92012 Re: 'outh Jay community services application for Conditional U.e Permit, Environmental .evie. Initial Study, 31 Fourth Avenue Dear Mr. Reid: On behalf of our client, Mr. Hart Klein, the owner of properties located at 45, 47 and 49 Fourth Avenue in the city of Chula vista, we submit to you this letter in response to the above- referenced Initial Study ("IS"). As you can see from the c01llJllents found herein, we bel ieve the proposed Conditional Use Permit ("CUP") for "Transitional Housing" requires an Environmental Impact Report (IIEIR") pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the CEQA Guidelines. PACTS There are presently fourteen (14) exilting dwelling units ("DUe") on the subject property located at 31 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California. As we understand the application, the existine; fourteen (14) DUs will be redesigned to acco1llJllodate fifty (50) beds. One of the DU. will be utilized by an on-site manager and one DU will serve as a kitchen for the total fourteen (14) DUs. Therefore, the fifty (50) beds will need to be distributed in the remaining twelve (12) DU.. It is obvious that this proposal will greatly increase the intensity of use for the 31 Fourth Avenue ..."""'.,...,..,.+-u I'?r Mr. Douglas D. Reid May 21, 1993 Page 2 We are informed by our client that the proposed project, along with a total of approximately one hundred six (106) DUs, will take access by a very narrow alley. We are also informed that this particular section of Fourth Avenue is heavily travelled and has a recent history of a number of traffic related accidents. This could be caused, in large part, by the increased commercial development that has occurred in the immediate vicinity of the 31 Fourth Avenue property (e.g. Target and petco). The property is also situated in close proximity to an on and off ramp for State Route 54. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED Based on the facts, as outlined hereinabove, it would appear that an ErR should address, at the very least, the issues of traffic, parking, noise, air quality and the combined issues of the pUblic's health and safety. A thorough discussion of these and other potential significant environmental impacts, and the required mitigation thereof, of the CUP will afford the general public an opportunity to fully understand the project. An opportunity that CEQA and its Guidelines are designed to guarantee. We thank you for an opportunity to take part in the IS. Please send us a copy of the city's Notice of Preparation and/or any other pertinent City documents relating to the proposed CUP. Sincerely, Paul E. Robinson, A.P.C. MCDONALD, HECHT , SOLBERG PER/bar cc: Mr. Hart Klein /- g~ South Bay Community Services Inc. 315 4th AvenUe, Suite E . Chula Vista' CA 91910 . (619) 420-3620/9790/5051 May 12, 1993 ~i ,. Ms. Barbara Reed City of Chula vista Planning Department 276 Fourth Avenue Chula vista, CA 91910 Dear Ms. Reed: It was a pleasure speaking with you on the phone yesterday. Thank you for explaining the items requested as the City of Chula vista Planning Department processes the short-term housing project for homeless families proposed by South Bay Community Services and a coalition of local service agencies, religious institutions, and community groups. Attached you will find the agenda and notes from a Community Meeting held on April 28, 1993. Notices were sent to all neighbors on the required mailing list, plus those who attended a meeting organized by one property owner in early April (David Harris is sending you notes from that meeting) . The other materials you requested, including site pictures, slides, and information on similar homeless housing projects operating in San Diego County will be finalized by next week. If you have any questions, or need any additional information, please feel free to call me at 420-3620. cordiallY'1 ~\;\r ---... Dan MarcM Community Development Director cc: Amy Wolfe, Planning Department David Gustafson, Community Development Department &.t::Pa1ed n part tJ( . /. 5/ A ttach men! "C" Unltac:lw.y d SanDegJCo.rry 7:30-7:40 7:40-7:50 7:50-8:00 8:00-8:30 SOUTH BAY COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMUNITY MEETING AGENDA Wednesday, April 28, 1993 7:30-8:30pm Introduction to South Bay Community Services Charles Pugsley, Board of Directors President Description of Short-Term Housing Project Kathryn Lembo, SBCS Executive Director Answers to Previous Community Questions Kathryn Lembo, SBCS Executive Director Question and Answer Period /- 3~ SOUTH BAY COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMUNITY MEETING ON SHORT-TERM HOUSING April 28, 1993 LOCATION: Chula vista Boys & Girls Club, 465 L Street ESTIMATED ATTENDANCE: 40 ESTIMATED SUPPORTERS/OPPONENTS: 20/20 Attendance List passed by SBCS: Unavailable. Currently in the possession of Mrs. Charles W. Hickey, 21 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910 Introduction to South Bay Community Services South Bay Community Services (SBCS) is a community-based, IRS 501 (c) (3) nonprofit organization serving the South San Diego Bay Area. The agency's mission is to provide children, youth, and families with services and programs which reinforce the family's role in the community and assist individuals to aspire realistically to lives of self-fulfillment. SBCS began in 1971 as a treatment rehabilitation center for drug- abusing teens. Over the years, other youth and family support programs have been initiated including: juvenile diversion, gang intervention, alternative schooling, after-school child care, employment assistance, counseling, literacy/tutoring, entrepreneurial training, AIDS prevention education and affordable housing assistance. SBCS also runs Casa Nuestra, the only homeless housing in the South Bay region, providing beds and 24-hour services for runaway and homeless teens. SBCS served over 6000 local youths and family members in 1992. Description of Short-Term Housinq proiect and Answers to Previous Community Ouestions The project will provide 50 beds for Chula Vista and National City homeless families with children working to become self-sufficient. It will be located at 31 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista. Outside funds have been committed to leverage Chula Vista's money, including $250,000 from National City, $31,000 from the local FEMA Board, and $105,000 from the State of California's Proposition 84 Bond funds. The State awarded SBCS 87% of the dollars available for the entire San Diego County, citing the need for a project like this in the South Bay, and this project's viability. Private donations for operations totaling more than $40,000 have already been raised from groups like the San Diego Community Foundation, Household Bank, Horne Depot, and Wells Fargo Bank, plus individual donors. Additional private dollars are currently being sought. Fieldstone Corporation, a private developer is considering donating rehabilitation work and materials. Families will be referred from local organizations which currently work with the homeless including schools, police, private nonprofit organizations, and religious institutions. 1~83 Families with any drug abuse, alcohol, or mental illness problems will not be accepted into the program. They will be referred to, and provided transportation to, other programs. SBCS worked with City staff, the Ecumenical Council, and service agencies to find an appropriate project site. 31 Fourth was chosen after researching many other possibilities including bank foreclosures, motels, abandoned buildings, and apartments. The project costs much projects in the area. cost over $100,000 per less per unit (@ $71,000) than similar A project recently built at Third and Oxford unit. SBCS is coordinating a team of private, local service providers including MAAC Project, Lutheran Social Services, and Episcopal Community Services to provide a wide range of services geared at helping families achieve self-sufficiency. The services include: job training and referral, child care, case management, health care, permanent housing referral, budgeting, independent living skills, literacy training, psychological counseling, and transportation. There will be off-site child care and recreation activities for the children, as well as on-site property management. SBCS will hire an experience property management company. SBCS staff has met with Mrs. Hickey, Mr. Klein, property residents, and neighbors; listening to their concerns, answering questions, and providing materials which they have requested. Based on the experience of similar projects around the State of California, the project will not decrease values of surrounding properties, or add to the area's transient population, gang membership, or crime. Rather it will diminish these problems in Chula Vista and National City by helping families become self- sufficient. Neighbors of SBCS' homeless youth shelter, including those directly adjacent on the north and east sides, have signed a statement that it, "has not posed any problems to our neighborhood.... they have been considerate neighbors to us". Attendees Questions and Answers How will families enter the project? Families will be referred through an established network of social services providers, religious institutions, community groups, and government agencies which currently work with homeless families. No family will be able to enter the project without such a referral. No family will be able to walk up to 31 Fourth Avenue and move in to the project. Will the project be a safe house for illegal immigrants? No, the project will provide housing and supportive services 1- IS ,r for families willing to work to get back on their feet. South Bay Community Services does not intend to house non-U.S. citizens or families which are not from Chula vista or National City. HUD guidelines and Federal Fair Housing law prohibit SBCS, and any property owner, from rejecting certain housing applicants. Then, how will you know families are Chula vista or National City residents? Since the housing is only for families with children, we will be able to utilize school records. Can we meet a family that will live there? Yes, homeless families will be asked to attend future public meetings. (NOTE: At least one homeless family attended the May 11, 1993 City Council meeting where a Public Hearing on CDBG funding for the project was held.) This project will increase the huge federal budget deficit. How in good conscience can a public entity do that? #1. This project is utilizing dollars approved by Congress in the 1992 fiscal year budget. These dollars have already been appropriated for use funding homeless housing in America and are already calculated as part of the federal deficit. #2. Private dollars are also being utilized. Donations for operations totaling more than $40,000 have already been raised from groups like Household Bank, Home Depot, local religious institutions, and individual donors. Additional private dollars are currently being sought. Fieldstone Corporation, a private developer is considering donating rehab work and materials. #3. South Bay Community Services is not a public organization, but a private organization, under Section 501(c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Service code. You paid too much for the apartment. SBCS is in escrow to buy the 14-unit building for $720,000. It was appraised by an MAl appraiser in April, 1992 at $750,000. SBCS worked with City staff, the Ecumenical Council, and service agencies to find an appropriate project site. 31 Fourth was chosen after researching many other possibilities including bank foreclosures, motels, abandoned buildings, and apartments. The project costs much less per unit (@ $71,000) than similar projects in the area. A project. recently built at Third and Oxford cost over $100,000 per unit. The apartment is unsuitable for children. A number of children currently live in the apartment building. Children in the proposed project will be provided with after-school child care, Head Start, volunteer "Big Brother\Big Sister" and supervision programs. Eucalyptus Park and the YMCA are directly across the street and are constantly busy with children playing. Your program will decrease our property values. A study conducted by the State of California's Department of Housing and Community Development reviewed 15 studies nationwide on 1''' 8 S the effects of affordable housing projects on neighboring property values. It reports, "of these 15 publications, 14 reached to conclusion that there are no significant negative effects from locating subsidized, special-purpose or manufactured housing near market-rate developments." Neighbors of your homeless youth shelter have written and called the City with complaints about noise and other problems (a sign was posted with a letter from one neighbor, the Woods Family). SBCS surveyed neighbors within the last two weeks. Eight neighbors, including families directly adjacent to the north and east signed the following petition, "We, the undersigned, declare that we live in the vicinity of South Bay Community Services' runaway and homeless youth shelter, Casa Nuestra. We have found that Casa Nuestra has not posed any problems from their facility's clients. The exterior of the house is kept clean and blends in with the other houses on the block. They have been considerate neighbors to us." The proposed project will add to neighborhood problems like gangs and crime. SBCS operates a Gang Intervention Program in which four experienced counselors work with gang members and youths involved in gangs. They will help screen families to ensure no gang members or associates live in the project. Families will also be screened for alcohol, drug use, and mental illness. Those needing these services will be referred to other programs in San Diego. There will be no alcohol or drugs allowed on the property. How will the property be managed and maintained? SBCS will hire an experienced property management company to operate the property. This company will subcontract with landscape and janitorial companies to maintain the property. Additionally, SBCS will hire one Manager to work with families, linking them to needed supportive services, and one half-time Director to supervise project operations. /'s~ \Ve. the undersigned, declare that 'Ne live in the vicinity ot South Bay Coc::::t:':':1ity Sc:rvices' runaway & homeless youth shelter, C~sJ. :-IuestrJ.. \Ve have faund that C.1sa >fuestia has ilot ?osed .1ay ?robl~m.s to our neighborhood. 7tere n.1ve '~een no ?fobieCJs 7.;i(: noise. ,g:lrbage. loite:-ing, or In/otber such probleUls from tbeir r"Jcility's clients. The e:ne:-:Jr of :heir 20use IS kept cleln and blends in with the other houses on the block. They have been considerHe neIghbors to us. A I / _ i ~AME ;jIlT:!':! \1 I rlkJnrTif 11- .::... 1. i ,-,/ i 11/\;(' "L.YrIOm, (;.":;1 i r -r,-1I(~'" : ! i I ,\ r ;'; : '/,1 Y 'i '('(;' i i\ ;' i ,:1 ---I'''-!. I ' )' -~'--" --:-' /- AODP,ESS()/t..!:'\ I'G :il//ll (,i ~'AIE /1 "'-"/ .,(\.-n ,-1 ii.') .....-)_ - I -I~ C!(i!! 111 J. !1n- t. ..! \ l,~1 Ijlt' . "I It l'>7', ,,;.:.. J :t:,,'\\ ( ! \ -n 71'1"" (;Xl!! (ilt'l! ..J I ]l(OpFy'tiS. ! ---ril. ! J.b -,UDL! ,.CicrS ____ i I ~\) Prfj ItA It r1E1!INA ~::- I 1~--rH ~\,JJ ric,U[Hb ?C. I \ I' \ - '1_ .\ i cD 12-1"- J \"'.c r (\.cr"\i~l~ /' i sr4 IS C/ ,kf\ff -A1!L - I JFt~ -ffV E p~1 '\)c ,Lit/1m \ N I\; A 53> - ?'z:n; 4- h{,)c,3 Ofi4Zz;-c7f2 a. q~ 1544 152Y- , ~ ,vt .:;.,{ (,,' u \f ^ ~.- ~~~\~tc (e -z I r~..... \' . / ~ ' u ;) \ ..:r(l ~ i,'" / , I C'3J=z. 4- :]9- 9?J l-:fJ7 JUI~ 08 '93 13: 32 HL-'~T KLE I N 61957812.' . TO: P01 was n~"'d.A:; The /' ~/7 ; O\>1~r: PIsa.S9CI-)l>cl.:".... beton' '~,. .. r,"ga~- , ,JUNE 8.199.:: CITY OF C'iULA VISTA DOB LEITER- DIRECTOR PLANNING DEI'.r~RTMEI'IT 276 FOURTH AVE. CHUlA VHHA. CA 9191r) RE. SOUTH BAY CrJMI1LJNlTY SERVICES AF'PLIClHION FOR CONDIT!lJNAI... LJ[;E F'ERMH, ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW INlTJi\L STUDY. 31 F[]Uf~n; AVE,NUE- DEAR 11F'. Lc lTD.: OUI': REVIEW OF- THE" INI lIAL. STUDY" SHOWED THAT MOST DEPARTMENTS AS>:ED TO COMMENT ON THIS PRO,JECT GAVE IT A VERY QUICK REVIEW INDEED. THE DEAlJl I NE TO RI::Sf'[]NSE WAS I NDr ED VEF~Y SHORT. WE, THE NEIGHBDRS, FIND IT VEF~Y DHlJlJl'.'E<I~m THAT THE IMPACT ON SCHOOLS, PARf~ING, TRAFFIC, SAFE'TY, USE OF EAS"i'It:I'II, ETC. WERE TREATED VERY LIGHTLY BY ALL CONCERNED. IF AF'PROVED, THI!, F'RUJECT WILL BE VERY VISIBLE AND SHOULD BE I MF'L,EMENTE,D WITH THE GRHHEi';:T U,RE. W ITHClUT DETA I LED PLANN I NG AND NEIGHBOI'iHCJOD INVOLVEMENT. THIS COULD BE A REAL E'YE5OF,E AND PROBLEM FelR THE CITY. ;;,DUn; L;AY COM~IUI';lTY 81;"I';,VIC[5 AND Tf-IE CITY OF CHULA VISTA HAVE BEEN WORkING ON TH'I;, FkOJECT FOR MANY MONTHS. IN TURN, WE THE I\!E ICiHErORS HAVE HI-m VEr", U TTlE '1 11'1;, TO RESPOND TO THE INITIAL REVIEW AND WILL HAVE LESS TIME TO ADDRESS CONCERNS WITH T",'IE "CCJI\lDlT!ONAL. LJSt: Pt::I'<I"IIT' SIhlCE THE: ~JTP1FF k!::.I""Uh'T I~~ i,m-l DUE Fur;; AWHILE, WE WILL BE U~IDER tHE GUN TCJ CHALLENGE I TEM~3 A~JD AT TfiE, SAi'IE TIME GET READY FOR THE ,'LANNING COl1MISS!ON 11EETINl; ON JUNE 2~', 1'193_ OUR AlTORNEY IS NOW C.]I\! VAC~~T1C)N AI\ID vllL.L NUT BE H\.J,r.dLAEiLE IT) PREPARE IJUH CASE WITHIN THIS 'f II-IE' FRAME. I HIS TYPE OF i'i""ICm LA~ID USE CHANGE SHOULD BE STUDIED PROF'ERLY AND NOT r'US';LlJ THfmUI3H THE f'ROCESS. FOR WHATEVER REASON THIS F'FWJEC:T 10; Ot\! (\ VERY FAST TRACK. WE ARE ASKING FOR H REASONABLE PEFiIDD UF l"IMf': TO RESPOND oro THIS PROJECT BE I NO F'ROPCJSED I N OUR NE IGHIJORH00l1. WE HAVE 5EIH ~IANY LETTEf':ci HI Tf-IE MAYOR AND COUNCIL STATING MANY OF OUR CONCERNS. WE HAVE HA[) ZERO RESPONSE. IT IS TIME THAT THE NEIG~1l<CI"S, TAXPI<YERS, AND VIJIl:F,S ARE PROVIDED AN EQUAL OF'F'ORTLlI\!I1V TO REVI!icW AND STUDY THIS F'ROJt';CT WITHOUT SUCH TIGHT DEADLI NEB. or.E AIJDITIDNi'rL MUNTH SEEI'1S FAIR TO PUT OUfi ACT TOGETHER. WE' ASK YOUR COOPE'Ri~TlDN HI R,,",CH[lJULE THE F'I ANNINCi COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING 10 SOMUJ~IC IN LAT!c: JULY Of< EAI'iI_Y AUGUST. 51NCERELY~ Cc..: ~t.-'>L~CQ\~!OO~ ~ ~ITOt"--...., 1/_ gg Attachment \-'8\L ~\-\b(L... G. \L$ \,..J 5~. '}'l..'Z- "D" May 29, 1993 JUtv ., i Planning Commission of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista CA 91910 Case No's: PCC-93-39/lS-93-36 In response to your Notice of Proposed mitigated Negative Negative Declaration dated May 26, 1993 on the above case, I would respectfully request that you consider my response to the Planning Department, a copy of which is enclosed, be considered a challenge to this Mitigated Negative Declaration or conditional use permit, as this ill-conceived proposal will surely end up in court and I do not wish to lose any of my constitutional rights because of my ignorance of your ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES. Everyone of the issues I raised in this enclosed response to the Planning Department should be preserved for me should a positive approval ~s given by whatever Agency approves such silly proposals. Furthermore, the South Bay Community Services, Inc. is in violation of their Conditional Use Permit at 1515 Hilltop Drive, Chula Vista. I challenge the Planning Department that they are not heeding the complaints of the next door neighbor, Mr. and Mrs. Leo Wood at 1525 Hilltop Drive, as their conditional use permit provides that neighbors will not disturbed. I wish to preserve my constitutional rights to present evidence of the above violation at 1515 Hilltop Drive, should a Court case develop, as evidence that the South Bay Community Services, Inc. is not capable of handling 8 teen-agers let alone 50 homeless. I wish at this point to enter whatever is necessary to prove my points in court and I do not wish to be limited by you or anyone else. At the hearings to date, each speaker has been limited to 2 or 3 minutes. This length of time is not sufficient to bring to the attention of the Planning Commission the danger to human life, the financial loss on the part of adjacent property owners, thee~~nomic unfeasibility of the proposed project and the unwillingness of the South Bay Community Services, Inc. to allow the community to seek out and find a more suitable location for their transitional housing. 1"8' Attachment "E" - 2 - I would like to preserve my constitutional rights that I be allowed to present into evidence in a Court Hearing that the City Council voted funds in the amount of $720,000 at a Council meeting at 1:00 a. m. in the morning. This vote came before the surrounding neighbors were notified of the plans for 31 4th Avenue. I would like to preserve my constitutional rights that I be allowed to present into evidence in a Court Hearing th~ the City Council, after hearing complaints at a Council meeting about granting $150,000 to the South Bay Community Services for additional expenses in connection witha~~~d~~m~ 31 4th Avenue, title to be vested in their name, the City Council at the next meeting removed the $150,000 from the South Bay Community Services, Inc. and tacked it on to funds being allocated to the Otay Lighting District, the $150,000 going to South Bay Community Services, Inc. I would like to preserve my constitutional rights that I be allowed to present into evidence in a Court Hearing that the Mayor and City Council and the Planning Department as well as the South Bay Community Services, Inc. acted ca,ritiously in entering into an agreement to contribute funds for 31 4th Avenue, title to be vested in South Bay Community Services, Inc. without first giving adjacent property owners the chance to voice their opinions. I would like to preserve my constitutional rights that I be allowed to present into evidence in a Court Hearing that adjacent property owners will be severely damaged should the City Council approve the proposed transitional housing at 31 4th Avenue and that I should be guaranteed the legal right to ask for damages from the Chula Vista City Council as well as from South Bay Community Services, Inc. I would like to preserve my constitutional rights that I be allowed to present into evidence in a Court Hearing that the City of Chula Vista and the Planning Department did not give me sufficient advice and notice, should it be considered that I am in default of any of their administrative rules. I hereby request thar the Planning Department and the Chula Vista Planning Commission advise me of my consti- tutional rights to raise ALL OF THE ISSUES which would bring about a NEGATIVE RESPONSE TO THIS PROPOSAL. I am anxiou17awaiting and expect to receive written instructions from the person or persons in charge of the ways in which I m~y bring up all of the issues /-1~ - 3 - against this proposal. I would like to preserve my constitutional rights that I be allowed to present into evidence in a Court Hearing that the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista refused my request to build low-rent housing at 21 4th Avwnue, Parcell, Parcel Map 127. I would like to preserve my constitutional rights that I be allowed to present into evidence in a Court Hearing that the Chula Vista City Council has voted funds to purchase 17 4th Avenue, Parcel 4, Parcel Map 127, for low rent housing, Hud to pay 60% of the rent. I would like to preserve my constitutional rights that I be allowed to present into evidence in a Court Hearing that the Chula Vista City Council has voted funds to purchase 31 4th Avenue, Parcel 3, Parcel Map 127, for transitional housing for the homeless. I would like to preserve my constitutional rights that I be allowed to present into _evidence in a Court Hearing that my constitutional rights have been violated when a public agency, such as the South Bay Community Services, Inc. be given public funds to provide low rent housing when the private sector is denied this right on the very same Parcel Map--side-by-side locations. I would like to preserve my constitutional rights that I be allowed to present into evidence in a Court Hearing that my constitutional rights have been violated when a public agency, with no housing experience, be favored over me, a private sector low-rent housing provider with 40 years of experience in the City of Chula Vista; In the event, at the public hearing each and everyone of these points are not adequately presented to the Planning Department at their Hearing on May 23, 1993. I would like to preserve my constitutional rights that I be allowed to present into evidence in a Court Hearing that the passage of a conditional use permit for 31 4th Avenue, Chula Vista, as a short term shelter for the homeless is a dangerous location for the residents therein and against the public interest. Regina Hickey 21 4th Avenue Chula Vista CA 91910 cc: Hart Klein Bernita Sipan 1- '1 -c, '-- .-....."'-..-- .:'-.~jL) May 12 .- Application for a cco~nb:'!:i~l use permit for 31 4th Avenue should be denied because applicant is attempting to use the private property surrounding 31 4th Avenue for her per- sonal use. Applicant is attempting to interject commercial use in an R-4 zone, which is already dangerously overcrowded because when #17, #31 and #45-49 were built the planning department's requirements were one parking space per unit. As you know, your experience has led you to upgrade your requirements to one and one-half to one on all new and up- graded buildings. Lots 7 & 8 of Quartersection 136 were subdivided according to Parcel Mmp 127. 21 4th Avenue is Parcell, 45-49 is Parcel 2, 31 4th Avenue is Parcel 3 and #17 is Parcel 4. The map mailed out by Doug Reid is incorrect because it does not show the easement which allows access to parcel 2, 3 and 4 to the parking areas behind their buildings. Title to the easement was retained by the owner of 21 4th Ave. #17 has rights of egress and ingress to its parking area, 31 has rights of egress and ingress to its parking area. The rights of 31 4th Avenue end right there. 31 4th Avenue has no right to the turn aroun~ provided at 21 4th Avenue or at 47 4th Ave. This is private property and if these two owners do not exercise their legal right to keep all occupants of 31 4th Avenue off their property, then the owners stand a very good chance of being sued for negli- gence in the event of a law suit arising from the operation of a "transitional 60 day time limited housing" at #31 4th. In other words, 31 4th Avenue is landlocked and their parking spaces will be limited to those they can fit into their 100 feet of land. Nothing over and above this. #31 4th Avenue has made no provision for the 2d hammerhead turn-around re- quired by the fire department and other emergency vehicles and it questionable if they have space enough to provide one. In this inadequate space of one parking space per units, the proposed "limited housing" will have to fit delivery trucks bringing in food, they have to fit in at least two sanitainers to service their housing, they will have to provide parking for school buses to load and unload the children, they will have to provide parking. for TV trucks, SDG & E trucks and telephone trucks. Since the easement is limited by deed to ingress and egress there can be no parking in the easement. This equipment is for the access of the fire truck and other emergency I" '2. - 2 - equipment and for the exclusive use of the 42 families who live beyond in a land-locked situation at 45-47-49 4th Avenue. Furthermore more, the p~rkiug spaces behind 31 4th Avenue are so narrow that a large van such as a Suburban, a trash truck, a delivery truck a service truck, etc. cannot back out ~f the parking space into the 20' easement and turn around to head out. These large vehicles will have to back out of their parking space, back out against incoming traffic across the easement behind 17 4th Avenue and will head into a planter strip installed to divide traffic going into and coming out of 21 4th Avenue. Since the planter strip prevents them from turning around, these large vehicles will have to turn the corner and back out to 4th Avenue against the on-coming traffic. When these large vehicles reach 4th Avenue, they have no place to turn around and they will have to back onto 4th Avenue against on-coming traffic in order to turn their vehicle facing the traffic in the right direction. As the ownet.ofc21-4tft-Avenue and the owner of all privatedrivew~1s~~n'F.t~.1 Map 127, I have already faced a similar situation a few years ago when the owner of the 17 4th Avenue building, in attempt to earn a reasonable return on his investment, leased his facilities to a half way house for cancer patients who were receiving drastic diet treatment for the arrest of their cancer. The delivery trucks and c_ the increased traffic for the change from ordinary R-4 activities to a "semi-commercial" (such as the "transitional housing" will be were faced)w.t~ faced with the same situation the applicant will face; that is the delivery trucks could not turn around on my property because I would not let them. The owner solved the problem by removing all land- scaping in the rear of his building and install a concrete turn-around behind the building so that these trucks could cross over the incoming traffic and reach the out-going traffic lane in order to face in the right direction. The applicant might be able to do something similar if two parking spaces were reserved for large vehicles and a concrete driveway was built between the two buildings so that the large vehicles could pull far enough so that they could back across in the incoming traffic to reach the out-going traffic lane in order to face in the right direction to reach 4th Avenue. Of course, the spaces for the two sanitainers would " '.:J1 - ~ - take two spaces and the concrete turn around would take two spaces in addition would encroach upon the only area the children of the homelss would have to play in the evenings and on week-ends and holidays when they were not cared for by the applicant. The applicant admitted that she would not care for the children at the above times. After all South Bay Community Services, Inc, is an office. They are not care-givers but contract their intended care out to others who do not attempt to give 24 hour care. They tend to be open only during regular school house. The parking situation on 4th Avenue is worse and not better. The City has painted red the curb from the fire plug in front of 17 4th Avenue to the corner of 4th and C Streets. This leaves parking spaces on the curb in front of lots 2, 3, and 4 of Parcel Map 127 which amount to 12 or 13 spaces for the 84 families who now occupy the apartment buildings on the above lots. Since the private parking behind these three buildings is already woefully inadequate, according to current standards of the planning department, the over- flow must park on the street. This is public parking and may not be reserved for anyone of the above parcels--first come; first served. These spaces may be available, or may not be and cannot be counted as parking for the increased use of 31 4th Avenue. When the school buses draw up to load and unload the homeless children, they will have to park in the traffic lane if parking is not available in front of 31 4th Avenue. If the concrete turn-around is build behind 31 4th Avenue, the buses could, of course, pull right up to the building on the concrete pad provided and the children could then board the buses with safety. The problem with this plan is that there then would be absolutely no place for the children to play unless the parents of the children walk them down to the light at the intersection of 4th and C Streets, cross them across the street and stay at the park with them while they play so that they can escort them safely back to the transitional housing. Another alternative which might come to mind is parking spaces might be leased from Land of China /..,~ - :4 - Restaurant. If the homeless just park in the spaces provided by Land of China Restaurant, this business will be faced with the same legal problem which I faced. If parking is permitted and not legally prohibited, then Land of China Restaurant stands to be sued for any occurrence on their property arising from the operation of the transitional house at 31 4th Avenue. That, of course, is up to them. It is possible they will be willing to donate parking to the transitional house. The other alternative would be for the City to donate additional parking to the transitional house at the park across the street. The homeless and their children could safely cross at the traffic light at 4th and C Streets and walk the short distance to their transitional housing. So much for the inadequate parking at 31 4th Avenue. It may be that Mayor Tim Nader is so in favor of this housing that he will work out one of the above solutions to insufficient parking. The other problem is safety. Considering 31 4th Avenue is on a hill and approaching traffic leading north on 4th Avenue is travelling at a high speed because there is no stop light at the corner of 4th and D Streets. This speeding traffic is TOTALLY UNAWARE OF STOPPED SCHOOL BUSES or residents of 31 4th Avenue who might be jaywalking across 4th Avenue in an effort to find a short cut to the park. In the past 10 years, 9 people have been injured in front of 31 4th Avenue, pertaining to the traffic on 4th Avenue. This statistic was provided by the Manager of 31 4th Avenue, who has lived there for 12 years. Currently, there are 2 children living at 31 4th Avenue. In order for the applicant's plan to work, she will be forced to increase the number of children being exposed to these traffic hazards. If there is an accident, then the applicant will be morally and legally responsible, especially in view of this written report reporting all the traffic and parking conditions which exist and will exist upon the approval of this application. There is no access for the handicapped. There is no curb cut in front of 31 4th Avenue. The only accessible one is the one I installed at my driveway leading into 21 4th Avenue. /" '.5 - 5 - Another issue I would like to bring to your attention is serious overcrowding of the 31 4th Avenue as a transi- tional housing. There is currently two two-bedroom units and 10 one bedroom units. I haven't been provided with a copy of the plan to remodel 31 4th Avenue, but I understand the two bedroom units will be remodeled into kitchen and community areas. Using the standard of safe housing used by apartment builders today, the limit is two people per bedroom plus one. Using arithmetic, 10 one bedroom units would provide sleeping accommodations for two adults and one child for a total of 30 occupants. The double standard used by the planning department and the city council will allow 50 people in an area that the current standard limits to 30 people. The apartment owne~ around 31 4th Avenue conform to the standard but applicant apparently does not plan to conform but will crowd in 20 extra children (persumably) because they will live there for only 60 days. I get a little tired of this double standard. I am required by the planning department to follow the letter of the law, but all around me are serious infractions On the part of property OWners and business owners because they have the favor of the City Council (or whatever reason the infractions are allowed). I hope I have provided you with sufficient irrefutable evidence that the project proposed by applicant has serious and fatal flaws which will lead to a negative recommendation on the part of the Environmental Review Section of the Planning Department. I hope I do not see one more example of favoritism on the part of an agency which should apply the law fair and equally to all applicants. Regina Hickey 21 4th Avenue Chula Vista CA 91910 420-3869 cc: Mayor and the City Council Hart Klein Bernita Sipan Land of China Restaurant Chula Vista Fire Chief I"~ 'iii"'" :@i 01 "" ,g, . 0'" N ~ ~ ~ k :: .... :0:: ~ 8~ CO ~ ~ dd c:i ...t:: \,,; ON ~ ...... ...... "'" '" !!! <: Q) rn :!! w ~ i= c ::::i II:! ~ a: ~ CJ E rn z ~ Ci5 ~ 5i .....=>> ~ <0 rnJ: S1 ~~ ~ ~~ 52 i~ ~ ~ ~ :.t:i1j rn ~~ I ~ l58 ~ >-Yd ~c ~ rn~ I- '7 ~ ~ !8 ~ o E Q) I 1:: BOARD OF EDUCA TIOH JOSEPH D. CUMMINGS, Ph.D. LARRY CUNNINGHAM SHARON GILES PATRICK A. JUDD GREG R. SANDOVAL SUPERINTENDENT JOHN F VUGRIN, Ph.D. CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT 84 EAST "J" STREET. CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 9191() . 619425-9600 EACH CHILD IS AN INDIVIDUAL OF GREAT WORTH , J ~~. .~~~ . ". May 12,1993 Atli; - { -' p. L../ 'l/~/ , ~ .. . ',,\, ..l.... .... I.n" "'..... ~ Ms Barbara Reid Environmental Review Coordinator City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 RE: 15-93-36/ FA-623/ DP-010 Location: 31 Fourth Avenue Project: 14 Unit Apt. Complex (In existing bldg.) for Homeless Families Dear Ms. Reid: Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Notice of Initial Study for the 14 Unit Apartment Complex project referenced above. Since it appears no new construction is involved, no school fees are required. Should this situation change, school fees for residential development would be due The current fee of $2.65/square foot is distributed as follows $1.17 for Chula Vista Elementary School District, $1.48 for Sweetwater Union High School District. Even though no fees appear to be necessary, the District is still required to sign off on the Certificate of Compliance. Sincerely, ~~c S;h~'X~ Kate Shurson Director of Planning & Facilities KSdp cc: South Bay Community Services, Inc. mamfilemgrv.'lJlcnore<>fee 1"/9 Attachment "G" The Effects of Subsidized and Affordable Housing On property Values: A Survey of Research State of California George Deukmejian, Governor Business, Transportation and Housing Agency John Geoghegan, Secretary Department of Housing and Community Development Christine D. Reed, Director Housing Policy Development Division Nancy J. Javor, Chief Principal Author Marco A. Martinez Support Staff Kim Bailey Farrell Savage-Low Barbara Tillman 1988 r/D~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The California Legislature has recognized, in housing element law and numerous other provisions of the Government Code, that local and State governments have a responsibility to use their powers to facilitate the improvement and development of housing to make adequate provisions for the housing needs of all economic segments of the community (Government Code section ~5580(d)). Yet, many California cities find it difficult to promote and encourage low- and moderate-income housing opportunities for their citizens. Resistance often comes from local citizens themselves, who fear that the development of low- and moderate-income housing or the inclusion of affordable units in market-rate developments will in some way lower the aesthetic and, more importantly, the economic value of their properties. As a result, many potentially beneficial projects may be rejected or made so difficult to develop that developers, non-profit agencies, and other housing producing organizations target their efforts elsewhere. This paper lists and sU1llIl1arizes a total of 15 published papers: 11 on the effects of subsidized housing on property values, one on the effects of group hbmes for the handicapped, and three on the effects of manufactured housing. The listing is not presumed to be complete, but does include all known and readily available material on this subject. Four of these publications address situations in California. Of these 15 publications, 14 reached the conclusion that there are no significant negative effects from locating subsidized, special-purpose or manufactured housing near market-rate developments. Some, in fact, reported positive property value effects after locating subsidized units in the neighborhood. Only one example, describing a situation in Virginia, found evidence that subsidized housing had an adverse effect on the values of adjacent non-subsidized housing. This paper is offered in the hope that planners, city officials, housing developers, and affordable housing advocates will find it useful in countering or defusing the argument of damaged property values wherever it arises in opposition to the development or improvement of affordable housing. i / -10 I ~ -J- '13 7C W~ '.k /frJ a.r C C7I ce..",-. . .1., '''//....,1/. ~ ~ Q U>1Ct4-N..d ~ ~ t.v1 C.A uJ)a. vtA:fo.., ~ CWrt ~ ~ ~c( ~ -d.J.. I ~<J~ 8-C4\.{ Q.M.o( j ~ j;' l/Y\ (fu)( ~ ~ ~'" . "3lM.Q~ 0.. ~ ~ ~d << Q. dd::i.~~ -fb ~ ~ CLv\.ct ~ a.cfo( ~ ~<- ~,J- ~, J -fcl .Ut~ ~ ~ Cr Cl..d. ~ do u..~d ~ ~ c.~,~..(./lO-.ff-c{ -tv C-h\ ~O- r- to ~ ~c.. ~ ~ r-c~ ~ ~ ~~d ~~. j) VW\-~ ~~ ~ /lQ ~o.:.Q ~ ~ ~~ ~ C- ~ ~'...(>-6 ~~J fr: ~ ~ ~ ~ tJ6~ ~ ~ ~ -tl..o. ~. ~VI1 ftAfb/2~ ~rtJ~ nE Jd-.q (~ ~(/.k VISl'"1't GI' Cfir'YJ M (Ll 0 C /I- (( 3 ()I''L C 80s-') 'fq ( ~ 3S-3o Attachment "]" 1-1t:J 2 SOUTH BAY CO~ITY SERVICES SHORT-TERM HOUSING + The project will provide 50 beds for Chula Vista and National City homeless families with children working to become self- sufficient. + The project will be located at 31 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista. The site is near public transportation, police and fire units, service providers, shopping, and parks. + A recent study by the Regional Task Force on Homelessness shows over 1,000 homeless Feople in the South Bay, but only 8 shelter beds, compared to 1,550 beds in the County. + Funding sources include the Cities of Chula Vista and National City, State of California, federal government, private donations, and in-kind donations. + Families will be referred from local organizations which currently work with the homele8s including schools, police, nonprQfit organizations, ar.d religious institutions. + Families with any drug abuse, alcohol, or mental illness problems will not be accepted into the program. They will be referred to, and provided transportation to, other programs. + Before entering the progran, all family members will be required to sign a strict set of "Rules & Regulations" including no alcohol or drug use or possession; adherence to their case plan; plus commitment to housecleaning, cooking, and other chores. Failure to meet these rules is grounds for immediate eviction. + After reviewing a number of sites for the project, including bank foreclosure properties, motels, and new construction, 31 Fourth Avenue was found to be the most economical. + South Bay Community Services operates the region's only homeless shelter, Casa Nuestra, a home housing eight runaway and homeless youths. + SBCS is coordinating a tearr. of local service prmTiders including MAAC Project, Lutheran Social Services, and Episcopal Community Services to provide a wide range of services geared at helping families achieve self-sufficiency, + The services include: job training and referral, child care, case management, health care, permanent housing referral, budgeting, independent living skills, literacy training, psychological counseling, and transportation. (shel\Bhbulle4.doc) /-/~ Attachment "J" DATE: May 14, 1993 Martin Miller, Associate Planner Via Acting Captain w~?n, Investigations Mary Jane Diosdado, s~/~j Crime Prevention unit ~:F~ Short Term Housing for Homeless "1.:.' TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Upon reviewing the plans for 31 Fourth Avenue, I discussed some issues with Kathryn Lembo, South Bay Community Services. with the upcoming re-modeling of this location, we discussed possible considerations to improving each unit's security. Although most of the improvements are planned for the interior of each unit, i.e; kitchen areas converted to a bedroom, I advised her that with the limited sixty day occupancy, it would be necessary for the management to re-key each unit as it is reassigned to a new family. This would be the only way to insure each new tenant would have a certain sense of security. I recommend the most cost effective way to implement proper key coding for each unit would be to install an electronic locking system. This kind of system allows access to each unit by the use of a pass key computer card. This type of security has been implemented in many hotels due to significant volume of keys that are not turned in by customers. Conversion to this type of system should take place prior to any occupancy. One of these systems is "Vingcard" a computer electronic lock system. The visibility factor is a concern in all mUlti-family units. Lighting and landscaping requirements will not only improve the security, but will also effectively deter crime. Trimming back trees and shrubbery, supplemented with high efficiency security lighting will discourage criminal activity. Maintain a minimum of one candlefoot of light in all areas around the buildings, walkways and parking area, and clearly display the address at the main entrance and unit designations on each door. By increasing this visibility factor it allows patrolling officers the ability to monitor actlvity in and around the site. The Crime Prevention Unit is available to provide a security survey with specific recommendations prior to any occupancy. We would also l~ke to provide training and assistance for the on site management in maintaining a "Neighborhood Watch" atmosphere. I appreciate the opportunity to have input into the planning process. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me anytime at 691-5127. cc: Brookover, SCA I 'Ie::> 'Y' Attachment uK" ,,;; ~ - - May 19, 1993 Martin Miller Associate Planner 276 4th Ave Chula Vista, CA 91910 Dear Mr. Miller: As you know, South Bay Community Services will be administering the program that will provide a Short Term Housing Facility at 31 Fourth Avenue in Chula Vista. Some residents have suggested that this program will increase crime and calls for police service at this location and the adjacent area. In my professional opinion, this will not occur, and in fact, we may actual see a decrease for police services once this program is in place. My opinion is based on the fact that I served as Chief of Police in Chula Vista from 1965 until my retirement in 1991. During that time, the Chula Vista Police Department and South Bay Community Services worked very closely together on several programs involving families and youth in the South Bay. During the period 1981 through 1991 I served as a member of the South Bay Community Services (SBCS) Board of Directors including two terms as President of the Board. I have personal knowledge of the fact that SBCS has an excellent record of achievement with a variety of projects, many of which have significantly enhanced the community. In summary, I am confident that South Bay Community Services will do a very effective job in administering this Short Time Housing Project, and it will not have an adverse effect on crime or calls for Police service. Sincerely, {lll!~ V~ u/: i;, william. . Winter~. Retired .hief of Police I -I"l '!; Attachment uL" MINUTES OF A SCHEDULED REGULAR MEETING Resource Conservation Commi..sion Chula Vista, California DRAFt 6:00 p.m. Mondav. .Tune 7.1993 Conference Room #1 Public Services Buildim! CALL MEETING TO ORDER/ROLL CALL: Meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chairman Kracha. Present: Commissioners Kracha, Hall, Johnson, Burrascano. Staff Present: Environmental Review Coordinator Doug Reid, Associate Planner Barbara Reid. Mr. Reid advised the commission that member McNair had advised him verbally of her resignation. APPROV AL OF MINUTES: MSUC (Johnson/Hall) (4-0) to approve the minutes of the May 24, 1993 meeting as presented. NEW BUSINESS: 1. Review of Negative Declaration IS-93-36 - South Bay Community Services Associate Planner Barbara Reid introduced Dan Marcus of South Bay Community Services to review the proposal. Mr. Marcus cited the need for homeless family housing in the South Bay area, adding that this issue was addressed in the city's General Plan. He stated that this program would provide services for the homeless, coordinating with various public agencies. Families may stay for up to 60 days, during which time they must be working or actively seeking employment; a case manager wilJ be assigned to each family. House rules will include prohibitions against drugs, alcohol, etc. -Commissioner Myers arrived at 6:08 p.m.- Mr. Marcus answered questions from the commissioners. This program is for families only, both (approximately 50/50) one- and two-parent families. -Commissioner Ghougassian arrived at 6: 10 p. m.- In response to further questions, Mr. Marcus stated that the City has committed to acquisition funds, with South Bay Community Services to be responsible for operations funding. If families are not stabilized after 60 days, SBCS will assist them into apartment units; additionally, a transitional housing program is being studied for the adjacent property. The original proposal has been modified somewhat in response to concerns raised; for example, each unit will have a kitchen, rather than the communal kitchen originally planned. Each case manager will handle twelve families, and the house rules are not yet completed. Hart Klein, a neighboring property owner, addressed the commission, advising that the Chula Vista Housing Authority had turned the project down on a 2-1 vote due to concerns about the fiscal sense of the program, finding it unreasonably expensive. He stated that the neighbors were against the project, and cited traffic/safety, lack of a play area for the children, and insufficient on-site parking as some of the reasons for opposition to the program at this location. I - IOtP Attachment "M" RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION -2- JUNE 9. 1993 Assistant Planner Reid summarized the concerns received in writing from neighbors, along with staffs response, as follows: I) lack of a play area - this is an existing problem rather than one created by the program; 2) insufficient parking -a parking survey had been conducted, resulting in the conclusion that the majority of homeless people do not have vehicles; 3) traffic accidents on Fourth A venue - project will not increase impacts due to less traffic originating from project; 4) noise -an accoustician had indicated that no impact would be anticipated; 5) fire access -fire department feels that access is sufficient. Commissioner Johnson asked if there was anything SBCS could do to make this project acceptable to the neighbors; Mr. Klein responded that the neighbors were also concerned about the fiscal responsibility of this program, citing other ways in which money could be spent to achieve a homeless housing program. Mr. Marcus responded that alternatives had been looked at. Ms. Reid pointed out three corrections to be made on page two of the mitigated negative declaration for this project. In paragraph one, third line, replace "resident" with "property owner"; paragraph 6, line one, replace "19" spaces with "24" spaces; paragraph 6, line ten, replace "0.38" (parking spaces per bed) with "0.16". Commissioner Ghougassian asked what would happen if the program proves unsuccessful; Ms. Reid responded that this would be handled through the conditional use permit as the land use document. Commissioner Myers stated that she strongly disagreed with the statement on page four of the environmental checklist which indicates that the existing school system is not expected to be impacted; she stated that the constant rotation of children from this program will impact the area school. Commissioner Hall voiced agreement with Myers' statements. MSC (Burrascano/Johnson) (5-1, Ghougassian opposed) to accept Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-93-36. MSUC (KrachalGhougassian) (6-0) that a condition of approval be included in the conditional use permit requiring annual review of the program. Commissioner Ghougassian felt that the City Council should note the following with regard to this program: I) the existing population is 34 persons; 2) sensitivity should ~e demonstrated to the economic impact of this program on the neighborhood; 3) he is opposed to an additional potential project next door for long term homeless, as it perpetuates the homeless. 2. Bud~et for Fiscal Year 1993 - 1994 Environmental Review Coordinator Doug Reid explained the proposed budget for the next fiscal year, which has been tentatively approved by the City Council. Commissioner Kracha asked for an explanation of expenditures by this commission for the next meeting; commissioner Hall stated that she would like to look at ways of using excess funds next year to purchase plaques ,-It:) ? RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION -3- JUNE 9. 1993 for historic sites. 3. Review of Plannin~ Commission Al!enda for June 9. 1993 Mr. Reid explained the items before the Planning Commission at its next meeting. STAFF COMMENTS: Mr. Reid reported that the City Council had continued the proposed administrative procedures regarding the listing of the California Gnatcatcher from the meeting of June 1, 1993 until June 22, 1993. COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS: Commissioner Hall stated that she had responded to the letter from the City Clerk indicating her continued interest in serving on this commission. Commissioner Myers stated that she had a schedule conflict with a class, and would therefore miss meetings for the next three months. Mr. Reid indicated that these would be excused absences. Commissioner Ghougassian stated that he would probably miss the next meeting due to a business trip. AD.TO~fENT: The meeting was adjourned at 7:37 p.m. ,1\, . " i1},-~, N;2VL(\.0, Patty N~vins, Recorder / -/eJ S ~ CITY OF CHULA VISTA PARTY DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Sta tement of di scl osure of certa' n ownershi p interests, payments, or campai gn contributions, on all matters which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all other official bodies. The following information must be disclosed: 1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the application, bid, contract, or proposal. N/A If real property is involved, list the names of all persons having any ownership interest. N/A 2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more than 101 of the shares in the corporation' or owning any partnership interest in the partnership. N/A 3. If any person identified pursuant to (l) above is a non-profit organization or a ~rllst. j ist the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. Charles Pugsley, Chair ~hirley Ferrill, Treasurer Reves Franco, Vice Chair Ka thryn Lembo, Executive Di rector 4. Have you or any person named in (l) above had more than $250 worth of busi ness t,'a.~s":~ed with any member of City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and Counc":', within the past twelve months? Yes No x If yes, please indicate person(s) 5. Have JOU and/or your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contributed more than $1,000 to a Councilmember in the current or preceding election period? Yes No x if yes, state which Councilmember(s): Person is defined as: "Any individual, finn, copartnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, city and county, city, municipality, district or other pol itical subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as a unit." (NOTE: Attach additi nal D ~./C', at~: ~,) / ,fPr, 0701 P A-ll 0 Kathryn Lembo Print or type name of /-/0 T contractor/applicant RESOLUTION NO. PCC-93-39 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL GRANT A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST TO ESTABLISH A SHORT- TERM, TRANSITIONAL HOUSING PROJECT FOR HOMELESS FAMILIES AT 31 FOURTH AVENUE IN THE R-3 ZONING DISTRICT WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a conditional use permit was filed with the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista on April 28, 1993 by South Bay Community Services ("Applicant"); and WHEREAS, said application requests approval ofa conditional use permit (PCC-93-39) to establish a short-term, transitional housing project for homeless families for a maximum of 43 residents and one resident manager in the R-3 Zoning District ("Project") at 31 Fourth Avenue ("Project Site") (Attachment "A" in the Staff Report); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a hearing on said conditional use permit application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners within 1,000 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least 21 days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely June 23, 1993 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed; and WHEREAS, the Commission found that the project would have no significant environmental impacts and adopted the Negative Declaration issued on IS-93-36. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION hereby recommends that conditional use permit PCC-93-39 be approved by Council subject to the findings and conditions in the attached draft City Council Resolution. That a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the applicant and the City Council. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this day 23rd day of June, 1993 by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: Susan Fuller, Chair Nancy Ripley, Secretary I-lIt:!) D R AFT RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-93-39, A REQUEST TO ESTABLISH A SHORT-TERM, TRANSITIONAL HOUSING PROJECT FOR HOMELESS FAMILIES AT 31 FOURTH AVENUE IN THE R-3 ZONING DISTRICT WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a conditional use permit was filed with the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista on April 28, 1993 by South Bay Community Services ("Applicant"); and WHEREAS, said application requests approval of a conditional use permit (PCC- 93-39) to establish a short-term, transitional housing project for homeless families for a maximum of 43 residents and one resident manager in the R-3 Zoning District ("Project") at 31 Fourth Avenue ("Project Site") (Attachment "A" in the Staff Report); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 23, 1993 and voted _ _ _ recommending that the City Council approve subject Project; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for a hearing on said application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners within 1,000 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least ten days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 6:00 p.m. July 13, 1993 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council and said hearing was thereafter closed; and WHEREAS, the Commission found that the project would have no significant environmental impacts and adopted the Negative Declaration issued on IS-93-36. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby find: 1 . That the project will have no significant environmental impacts and adopt the Negative Declaration issued on 15-93-36. The City Council hereby finds that the Project will have no significant environmental impacts in that the Project does not have: A. The potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause I-II( Resolution No. Page #2 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. B. The potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long term, environmental goals. C. Impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. D. Effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. The following findings are required pursuant to Section 19.14.080 of the Municipal Code: 2. That the proposed use at the particular location is necessary or desirable to provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood or the community. The conditional approval of PCC-93-39 at the proposed location is necessary and desirable in order to provide a service which will contribute to the general well being of the community in that there is an existing, apartment complex in place, and the service to be provided by South Bay Community Services will contribute to the community by providing short-term, transitional housing for homeless families in the South Bay area. 3. That such use will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity, or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity. The conditional approval of PCC-93-39 will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the project vicinity or injurious to property or improvements in the project vicinity in that the project is residential in nature and will not negatively impact parking, circulation, services or residences in the project's vicinity. /-112. Resolution No. Page #3 4. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in this code for such use. The conditional approval of PCC-93-39 complies with the regulations and conditions of the Municipal Code in that the project is conditioned to comply with the requirements of all applicable City departments, will not generate excessive traffic, and provides adequate off-street parking in accordance wit the Planning Commission determination, pursuant to the Chula Vista Municipal Code, Section 19.62.050. 5. That the granting of this conditional use permit will not adversely affect the general plan of the City or the adopted plan of any government agency. The conditional approval of PCC-93-39 will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Chula Vista in that quasi-public uses are unclassified, which are allowed in any zoning district upon approval of a conditional use permit. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL hereby grants conditional use permit PCC-93-39 subject to the following conditions whereby the applicant shall: 1. Comply with and implement all requirements of the Chula Vista Municipal Code and applicable Fire Department and Building Department requirements, as appropriate. 2. Prior to occupancy, submit the rules for residency to the Director of Planning for review and approval. 3. Implement a solution to the courtyard drainage problem, as identified in the Negative Declaration for IS-93-36, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 4. Make dedication of street right-of-way in the form of an 100 (irrevocable offer of dedication), to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 5. Schedule a security survey with the Chula Vista Police Department and implement their suggestions, as appropriate, in order to enhance the security of the facility. 6. This permit shall be subject to any and all new, modified or deleted conditions imposed after approval of this permit to advance a legitimate I-II; Resolution No. Page #4 governmental interest related to health, safety or welfare which the City shall impose after advance written notice to the Permittee and after the City has given to the Permittee the right to be heard with regard thereto. However, the City, in exercising this reserved right/condition, may not impose a substantial expense or deprive Permittee of a substantial revenue source which the Permittee can not, in the normal operation of the use permitted, be expected to economically recover. 7. This conditional use permit shall become void and ineffective if not utilized within one year form the effective date thereof, in accordance with Section 19.14.260 of the Municipal Code. Failure to comply with any condition of approval shall cause this permit to be reviewed by the City for additional conditions or revocation. That a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the applicant. Presented by Approved as to form by Robert A. Leiter Director of Planning Bruce M. Boogaard City Attorney I-II~ ~~~ :- ~~ ~ --~- ~~~~ CIlY Of CHULA VISfA PLANNING DEPARTMENT June 14, 1993 Mr. Hart G. Klein 11070 Caminito Vista Pacifica San Diego, California 92131 RE: Your letter of June 8, 1993 requesting continuance of PCC-93-39 from the scheduled June 23, 1993 public hearing before the Planning Commission Dear Mr. Klein: We are in receipt of your letter of June 8, 1993, requesting a continuance of PCC-93-39 from the scheduled June 23, 1993 public hearing before the Planning Commission. While we understand your desire for additional time to review the proposal prior to the Planning Commission hearing, we do not feel there is a basis for staff to recommend a continuance of the public hearing as requested. However, we will forward your letter to the Planning Commission for their consideration. Please also note that your have the right to appear before the Planning Commission regarding your request for a continuance or any other issue related to the project. The City Council will render the final decision on the project at a subsequent public hearing, at which you will also be given notice and the opportunity to be heard. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call Martin Miller at 476- 5335 or me at 691-5101. Sincerely, /> ;/ .//. /' i~t7 i.~/1//-- Robert Leiter Director of Planning cc: Planning Commission Ken Lee, Assistant Planning Director Steve Griffin, Principal Planner Doug Reid, Environmental Review Coordinator Barbara Reid, Associate Planner Martin Miller, Associate Planner. David Harris, Community Development Specialist I { .5 /- 276 FOURTH AVE/CHULA VISTA CALIFORNIA 91910/1619\ 691-5101 ~(~ ~ ~~.-...:-.:;;... ......................~ ~- -- CIlY OF CHUlA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT June 15, 1993 Mrs. Regina Hickey 21 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, California 91910 RE: Your letter of May 29, 1993 Dear Mrs. Hickey: We are in receipt of your letter of May 29, 1993. In response to your request for written instruction on the ways in which you may bring up all the issues on this project, please note that a public hearing is scheduled before the Planning Commission for June 23, 1993 at 7:00 p.m. at which time you have the right to present any evidence against this project. You may also submit additional written evidence to the Planning Commission at or prior to the public hearing. A subsequent public hearing will be held by the City Council in July for this project. You will be noticed of this public hearing as well. Sincerely, MI1A_cr -=> ...."" Martin Miller Associate Planner cc: Planning Commission Robert Leiter, Director of Planning Ken lee, Assistant Planning Director Steve Griffin, Principal Planner Doug Reid, Environmental Review Coordinator Barbara Reid, Associate Planner David Harris, Community Development Specialist /- /1 ~