HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Rpts./1996/04/03 (2)
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 1
Meeting Date 413196
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: Conditional Use Permit PCC-96-18; Consideration of
proposal for 265-space recreational vehicle storage facility on 4.2 acres
within the SDG&E power line corridor between Oleander and Raven
Avenues - John Kirby, Darry] Hammer and Mark San Agustin.
The proposal is to develop a storage facility with space for 265 recreational and other sorts of
vehicles on 4.2 acres located in the 1200 block of Oleander Avenue, between Oleander and
Raven Avenues. The site is privately-owned R-l (single family) zoned property within the
SDG&E high voltage transmission line corridor.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has conducted an Initial Study, IS-96-19, of potential
environmental impacts associated with the project. Based on the attached Initial Study and
comments thereon, the Coordinator has concluded that there would be no significant
environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated, and therefore recommends adoption of the
attached Mitigated Negative Declaration issued on IS-96-19.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission adopt attached Resolution PCC-96-18 denying the request in
accordance with the findings contained therein.
DISCUSSION:
Zonin!!: Regulations
Recreational vehicle storage yards are designated in the zoning regulations as "Unclassified
Uses" which can be considered for location in any zone subject to approval of a conditional use
permit. Approval of a conditional use permit requires positive findings to be made for all of the
following (CYMC 19.14.080):
1. 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;
2. 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;
3. That the proposed use will comply with the regu1ations and conditions specified
in this code for such use;
4. That the granting of this conditional use will not adversely affect the general plan
of the city or the adopted plan of any governmental agency.
The Code also requires such applications to address the following issues (CVMC 19.58.400):
"An application to establish a recreational vehicle (RV) storage yard (storage area for
motor homes, camping trailers, boats and other recreation equipment) shall address the
following issues: (1) height limit for stored items, (2) screening (landscaping and
fencing), (3) surfacing, (4) access to the site, (5) office facilities, (6) customer parking,
(7) lighting, (8) hours of operation, (9) security, (10) signing, (] 1) surrounding land uses
and structures. The application shall also be accompanied by a comprehensive list of
items which would be eligible for storage. Any subsequent additions to the list shal] be
subject to the approval of the Planning Director.
The approval of an RV storage yard judged by the Commission to represent an interim
use of land based upon zoning, development patterns, and/or pending plans in the area
shall be subject to a review and report filed each year by the owner with the City Zoning
Administrator. Failure to file the report or abide by the conditions of approval shall
cause the matter to be set for a rehearing before the Commission to consider revocation
of the permit or other appropriate corrective action. Permits for interim RV storage
yards shal] be granted for a maximum period of five (5) years with extensions subject to
rehearing before the Commission. "
Site Characteristics
The site is a 250 ft. wide by 800 ft. long portion of the SDG&E power line corridor. The
property extends between Oleander Avenue on the east and Raven Avenue on the west. The site
is bordered by single family homes to the north and south, Greg Rogers Park to the east across
Oleander Avenue, and a naturally vegetated extension of the SDG&E corridor to the west across
Raven Avenue. The entire area is zoned R-1 single family residential.
The site is presently vacant with the exception of the SDG&E power lines, a single SDG&E
transmission line tower near the westerly boundary, and retaining walls at the southwest corner
previously associated with an adjoining residence. A stand of trees along with coastal sage scrub
is located at the southerly central portion of the property. The slope of the land is gently down
from east to west and north to south, with a larger manufactured slope at the south central
portion of the site.
Proiect Proposal
The project plan shows a total of 265 RV storage spaces; 246 of which are accessed via a main
entry off Oleander (and a secondary SDG&E maintenance entry off Raven), and 19 spaces in
a separate compound at the southwest corner accessed exclusively off Raven. The spaces and
secondary drives are surfaced with decomposed granite, and the primary drives are paved in
asphalt.
More than 150, or 60% of the spaces are dimensioned as standard parking spaces and are
arranged primarily around the perimeter of the site. The balance of the spaces to the interior
and some along Raven Avenue are designed to accommodate larger vehicles. An office trailer
is shown at the northeast corner of the property adjacent to the main entrance.
The landscape plan shows the Oleander and Raven frontages treated with 6 ft. high stucco walls
fronted by landscaping, with decorative paving and wrought iron gates at the entry drives. A
combination of 6 ft. high chain link and/or wood fencing with minimum ]0 ft. wide landscape
strips interior to the lot is shown along the north and south property lines. The plan also shows
the retention of the grove of trees on the south central portion of the property.
The applicants have submitted a profile of the project, describing the operation and offering their
judgement on compatibility issues (please see attached). The facility is proposed to operate from
9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Monday thru Friday, 7:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday, and
would be closed on holidays. The lot would accommodate vehicles of all sorts up to 12 ft. high,
excluding tracked vehicles such as bulldozers. Screening would be provided by the fencing and
perimeter landscaping which is anticipated to grow to 12-16 ft. high.
With regard to compatibility, the applicants state that development of the site will address
present problems with fire hazards, transients, nuisance activities and trash, and will also provide
a convenient storage location for neighborhood RV's. The proposal is to have a night watchmen
to provide security, and the lot is intended for storage only--maintenance or repair of vehicles
or other activities would be prohibited, according to the applicants. Traffic to and from the site
is anticipated to be minimal.
Public Forum
A public forum was held on February 21, 1996, at 6:00 p.m. at the Boys and Girls Club on
Oleander Avenue. Well over 100 surrounding residents were in attendance, the vast majority
of whom raised concerns and voiced opposition to the proposal. A summary of the meeting has
been prepared by one of the residents and is attached hereto for your review. Several letters that
have been received are also attached.
The surrounding residents raised a wide range of concerns with the project, some dealing with
site clearance activities which have already occurred, but most having to do with the RV storage
lot proposal itself. These issues include traffic and traffic safety, noise, lighting, drainage,
privacy, monitoring and control of activities, and security, among others. The neighbors are
basically concerned with the introduction of a commercial use within their neighborhood and its
impact on their residential enjoyment and quality of life.
ANALYSIS:
A recreational vehicle storage yard is in many ways more benign than many commercial and
industrial uses. The leve] of traffic to and from the facility is generally minima] and the leve]
of activity within the yard would also be expected to be modest provided it could be properly
controlled. There also appears to be sufficient demand for such spaces on a community-wide
basis, with only about 10% or 150 spaces availab]e out of a total of ] ,500 spaces reported in six
]ocal storage yards surveyed (although one yard can increase its capacity by 250 spaces by
improving an additional 2.5 acres of property already approved for RV storage).
Several large commercial RV storage facilities have been approved within the SDG&E corridor,
mainly in commercial and industrial areas, but also on the periphery of mobile home parks and
multiple family areas. Smaller storage facilities have also been incorporated into mobile home
parks and planned residential developments to serve the needs of the immediate residents. For
instance, a small storage lot serves the Foxhill development located directly to the east of Greg
Rogers Park.
The facility in question would, however, be the first large independent commercial RV storage
operation in a single family area. Although it may also serve the needs of surrounding residents,
it is scaled to meet demand from well beyond the immediate neighborhood. By definition, such
a use should general]y be separated from single family homes. But beyond the question of
genera] land use compatibility and conventional zoning practice, we believe this use at this
particular location would have the following specific negative impacts on the surrounding area.
With regard to visual quality and compatibility, the perimeter of the site could eventually be
screened once the landscaping matures and provided it is properly designed and maintained. On
the other hand, this would take several years, and views into the lot would occur at the entries
regardless of the eventual height and health of the landscape planting. It is believed that views
of and into a vast parking lot of RV's would significantly detract from the character and visual
quality of the neighborhood.
For security purposes, the Police Department has recommended low pressure sodium lighting
at a minimum height of 15 ft. in order to minimize shadow areas between the vehicles.
Although lighting can be designed to prevent direct glare on to surrounding properties, it cannot
be arranged to preclude a general "g]ow" from the illumination of the yard that would be visible
throughout the nighttime hours. This would further announce the presence of the facility as well
as represent a particular disturbance to adjoining residents.
In terms of noise and activity impacts, the proposal is to only allow vehicles to be dropped-off
and picked-up. In the normal course of events this would include vehicle engine and warm-up
noises, the sound of tires on gravel, and the loading and unloading of supplies and the attendant
noises associates with those activities. In practice, we have also found that it is extremely
difficult to control other activities which could occur in a facility of this size, including cleaning,
minor maintenance and repair of vehicles. All of these noises and activities, particularly when
associated with a commercial operation, would represent a disturbance to neighboring residents.
Finally, it would be difficult if not impossible to ensure the security and privacy of residents
adjoining a four acre site filled with row upon row of large vehicles. The Police Department
reports that vandalism and theft are not uncommon in larger storage yards. In commercial or
industrial settings, these activities would likely be confined to the stored vehicles. But in a
residential area with directly abutting homes, these activities could easily spill over into the
adjoining dwellings and the surrounding neighborhood. Simply the existence of a large enclosed
compound bordering their home would likely be a continuing security concern to most residents.
For these reasons, we are recommending denial of the request in accordance with the findings
contained in attached Resolution PCC-96-18. If the Commission should favor the application,
we recommend a continuance of this item to the meeting of April 24, ]996. The continuance
would allow staff to direct the application to the Safety Commission for comment and
recommendation, and to develop a list of conditions for the Commission's consideration.
A copy of the report has been forwarded to Chairman Liken of the Safety Commission and he
has been invited to attend the public hearing.
Two sets of petitions have been received, one from the residents and one from the applicant.
These will be presented to the Commission at the public hearing.
Attachments
1. Commission Resolution
2. Applicants Project Profile
3. Public Forum Meeting Summary
4. Environmental Documents with Disclosure Statement
5. Correspondence and Memos
6. Exhibits: Locator, Site Plan, Landscape Plan
(m:\home\plannmg\mo\pcc96-18.rpl)
ATTACHMENT 1
COMMISSION RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION NO. PCC-96-18
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION DENYING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO
ESTABLISH A RECREATIONAL VEHICLE STORAGE YARD
ON 4.2 ACRES IN THE 1200 BLOCK OF OLEANDER
AVENUE
WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a conditional use permit was filed with the
City of Chula Vista Planning Department on December 20, 1995 by John Kirby, Darryl Hammer
and Mark San Agustin; and
WHEREAS, said application requests approval to establish a recreational vehicle storage
yard on 4.2 acres within the SDG&E power line corridor in the 1200 block of Oleander Avenue
between Oleander and Raven Avenues, in the R-l single family zone; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has conducted an Initial Study, IS-
96-19, of potential environmental impacts associated with the project and has concluded that
there would be no significant environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated, and therefore
recommends adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration issued on IS-96-l9; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Director 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 an area of at least] ,000 ft. of the exterior boundaries of the property at least 20
days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely April 3,
1996, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning
Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed, and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION
does hereby find, determine, resolve, and order as follows:
1. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS
Based on the evidence and testimony presented at the public hearing the Planning
Commission hereby finds as follows:
A. That the proposed use at the 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 provision of additional recreational vehicle storage spaces could be
considered a desirable service for the community as a whole provided the spaces
were available at an appropriate location consistent with good zoning practice and
the maintenance of compatible land use relationships. In this particular instance,
however, a large commercial recreational vehicle storage facility such as the one
proposed is considered inconsistent with the character and the general well being
of the surrounding residents in this R-I single family neighborhood.
B. That such use will not under the cicumstances of the particular case, be
detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or
working in the vicinity.
The development of an RV storage facility at this location would have an adverse
impact on the single family character and livibility of the area because of views
of and into the storage lot from surrounding homes and streets, night lighting of
the lot, noises and activities associated with the operation of the facility, and
concerns with security from thefts and vandalism and residential privacy because
of the existence of a large enclosed compound within the neighborhood and
adjacent to homes.
C. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions
specfied in the code for such use.
Compliance with all applicable codes, regulations and conditions is required for
aI] uses receiving approval of a permit. In this case the Commission has been
unable to make findings for approval.
D. 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 introduction of a large commercial RV storage facility at this location is
found to be inconsistent with General Plan Policy calling for the preservation and
reinforcement of existing residential neighborhoods (General Plan Objective 15,
Page 1-7).
II. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ACTION
Based on the findings outlined above the Planning Commission hereby denies Conditional
Use Permit PCC-96-04
III. A COPY OF THIS RESOLUTION SHALL BE TRANSMITTED TO THE
APPLICANTS
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this 3rd day of April, 1996, by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
William C. Tuchscher II, Chair
Nancy Rip]ey, Secretary
M: \home \planning\pcc9618 .res
ATTACHMENT 2
APPLICANT'S PROJECT PROFILE
INTRODUCTION
The following is a profile which shall summarize and answer any
questions which may need owner definition to address City of Chula
Vista or community concerns. We write using "Uses" 19.58 400
Recreational vehicle storage yard(s) and Conditional Use Permit
application as a format.
/
CONTENTS
I. The 11 Issues as Defined by 19.58400
II. Types of Recreational Vehicles
III. Findings
IV. Neighborhood Site Location
V. The Best Solution
VI. Owners Summary
/
VII. Supplimentallnformation
SECTION I.
THE 11 1 SSUES RS DEF 1 NED BY 19.58488
IN REFERENCE TO CHAPTER 19.58
USES SECTIONS: 19.58.400 RECREATIONAL VEHICLE STORAGE YARDS
Page 1.
An application to establish a recreational vehicle (RY) storage yard (storage area for motor homes,
camping trailers, boats and other recreation equipment) shall address the following issues: (1) height
limit for stored items, (2) screening (landscaping and fencing), (3) surfacing, (4) access to the site, (5)
office facilities, (6) customer parking, (7) lighting, (8) hours of operation, (9) security, (10) signing,
(11) surroundiniYland uses and structures. The application shall also be accompanied by a
comprehensive list of items which would be eligible for storage. Any subsequent additions to the list
shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Director.
The approval of an RV storage yard judged by the Commission to represent an interim use of land
based upon zoning, development patterns, and/or pending plans in the area shall be subject to a
review and report filed each year by the owner with the City Zoning Administrator. Failure to file the
report or abide by the conditions of approval shall cause the matter to be set for a rehearing before the
Commission to consider revocation of the permit or other appropriate corrective action. Permits for
interim RV storage yards shall be granted for a maximum period of five (5) years with extensions
subject to rehearing before the Commission. (Ord. 2169 2, 1986).
SECTION I. CONT.
THE 11 ISSUES RS DEF I NED BY 19.58488
Page 2.
We wish to state are intent regarding the 11 "issues" which are defined by 19.58400. We believe our
projection which we initiated through the Civil Engineer and landscape Designer, have been outlined
to Equal or Exceed Chula Vista's standards in plans we've submitted. We are careful to not impact, but
regress, such subjects as drainage, nuisance, traffic, views, noise, neighborhood architecture, and
devaluation through the careful implementation of these 11 issues.
1) Height limit for stored items-Approximately 12 feet or equivalent to highest peak on a single
level home/which is about 10 feet or 5th wheeL
2) Screening (landscaping or fencing)-Our project height of trees shall defuse all sight lines into
RV. Storage vehicles and grow to approximately 12.16 feet high. Our south side eucalyptus
trees exceed 20 feet. Also 90% of the RY storage area perimeter have adjacent properties 10.20
feet below RV storage grade leveL Fences shall suit screening purposes to the advantage of the
adjacent properties. Parking arrangements shall have smaller height vehicles near parimeter to
soften views. The overall landscape shall abundantly exceed any landscape in neighborhood.
3. Surfacing-We will only pave vehicle paths and use natural materials on parking pads to match
terrain, to minimize drainage runoff. Our desire is not to disturb natural site conditions by
minimizing paving for drainage purposes. We believe any manmade surfacing should be
nominaL
4. Access to site-Front gate public gate access immediately off Oleander. Raven access meant as
a courtesy to SDG&E use for maintenance/inspection only.
SECTION I. CONT.
THE 11 ISSUES RS DEFINED BY 19.58400
Page 3.
5. Office Facilities-A temporary or mobile/construction trailer is planned. limited to a non-
permanent structure is planned similiar in size to a small RY.
6. Customer parking-We have designated eighteen paved off street parking stalls for customers.
7. Lighting-Entrance light at front gate. No lights are intended to be installed unless specified by
the City of Chula Vista. Nightwatchman shall be employed for evening security purposes. We
do not want to impose unnecessary lighting in the neighborhood which is now adequate.
8. Hours of operation-Monday through Friday, 9 AM to 5 PM, Saturday and Sunday, 7 AM to 6 PM.
Holidays closed.
9. Security-Nightwatchman to be employed. Perimeter fencing-Security gate.
10. Signing- Sign by entrance, 21" X 24". Very low key, minimum size to meet building address
requirements.
11. Surrounding land uses and structures-Public Park, (2) Little League baseball diamonds, Boys
and Girls Club, (2) Elementary Schools, Bus stops, public telephone ,805 Freeway and
residential homes. We believe with the exception of the residential homes that the above are
running at minimum capacity/use. Oleander is an established public bus route which runs at
frequent intervals.
Concluding the address of these "11 items" the plans submitted depict a soft blending of our R.V.
Storage intermixing with area neighborhood/community.
SECTION II.
TYPES OF RECRERTloNRL UEHIULES
IN REFERENCE TO CHAPTER 19.58
USES SECTIONS: 19.58.400 RECREATIONAL VEHICLE STORAGE YARDS
Page 4.
Recreational vehicles, trailer boats and any other type of vehicle common to city streets, which may be
used only on an occasional basis. We would exclude track vehicles such as bulldozers, but may
include other construction vehicles such as skiploaders, back hoes, bobcats, trucks and trailers.
/
SECTION III.
F I NO I NGS
IN REFERENCE TO "CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPliCATION" (PAGE 1.)
Page 5.
NOTE: In order to grant a Conditional Use Permit, the following findings must be made by the Zoning
Administrator or Planning Commission:
1. That the proposed use at the particular location is necessary or desirable to provide a service or
facility which contribute to the general well.being at the neighborhood or the community.
Owner Response:
We, as owners of proposed RV. Storage and homeowners in both neighborhood and community know
that he general well-being shall be upgraded with the granting of RY storage. We are sure of this
because fire citations will no longer be issued; (former owner) and no brush fire calls. Also access with
./
increasing juvenile foot traffic will be deleted. We have discovered "transient campsites" which have
hosted "unregulated activities". It is advantageous to grant this RV> storage to conclude "nuisance
activities" which irritate neighborhood. Our plans for RV. storage will be desirable to the immediate
neighbors in particular for two, of many, reasons; Neighbors can now have a place to park
motorhomes and secure an open field. There is no doubt this facility shall provide a "Welcomed"
Contribution to neighborhood and community.
2. 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.
Owner Response:
We are absolutely certain that the granted R.V. Storage shall not incur any detrimental activity, safety,
health or condition whatsoever, to persons or property. No hazardous by-products shall be originated
or allowed on premises i.e. vehicle repair or scheduled maintenance proceedures.
SECTION III. CONT.
FINDINGS
Page 6.
3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the
Municipal Code for such use.
Owners Response:
All effort by owners to meet or exceed Municipal CodeslRegulation are instituted for uniform building
standards and appearance of neighborhood. Professional services have been retained to assure
compliance.
4. That the granting of this Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the General Plan of the
City of Chula Vista or the adopted plan of any governmental agency.
Owners Response:
We have researched at the City of Chula Vista Planning Depr. for any proposed future plan use which
could adversely affect City of Chula Vista. We have no knowledge of City of Chula Vista alternate uses
now or in the future.
5. The application may wish to address these findings. If so, the application may attach another
sheet.
Owners Response:
See Attached.
SECT! ON III. CoNT.
FINDINGS
IN REFERENCE TO "CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPUCATION"(PAGE 6.)
Page 7.
IN REFERENCE TO:
B. FILING APPLICATION 1. g
A daily and/or weekly profile which describes in detail the operations and activity levels associated with
the use. Note any days or weeks when operations/activities vary, including any special or extraordinary
events or activity levels.
/
A) Hours of operation:
Monday - Friday 9AM.5PM
Saturday.Sunday 7AM.6PM
Holidays. Closed
B) Expected higher traffic on 3-4 day weekends.
SECTION I U.
NEIGHBORHOOD/SITE LOCRTION
Page 8.
The R.V. location is 4.42 acres. It is located on the 1200 block of OleanderlRaven. The city of Chula
Vista General Plan for this area is single family dwellings, with the current primary use of this land
abrogating this plan, i.e. power lines, towers and gas. The presence of SDG&E power lines, tower and
gas line prevent using the land for housing as is indicated by the current zoning. This parcel location
is an ideal spot because it is adjacent to several large community centers; two elementary schools,
Gregg Rogers Public Park, two Little league diamonds, two churches, Boys and Girls Club, Public
Telephone, Bus Stop, Day Care, community hospital and 805 Freeway. The RV storage facility will
easily blend into tile adjacent community centers and eliminate an unsightly vacant lot that has been
an illegal collection area for graffitilIocal trash (washers, dryers, tv.'s, microwave, auto tires, tree
trimmings, palm trees, logs, fill dirt etc.). We have been welcomed by the neighborhood and fire
department in clearing of this property. It has also given us the opportunity to direct the camp sites of
transients to shelters which suit their needs. This RV storage facility is virtually "transparent".
We believe impact issues such as traffic noise , lighting shall be non.existent Because, of the current
high decibd noise levels from 805 freeway, and the unending westerly breeze from the ocean, noise
Can be heard at Sharp Hospital two miles away. My home, which is in the Same neighborhood and
same distance the freeway, is constantly bombarded by noise. We expect the noise levels to increase as
City of Chula Vista expansion grows east This facility would contribute less noise pollution than Chula
Vista's easterly expands ion.
SECTION IU. CONT.
NEIGHBORHOOD/SITE LOCRTION
Page 9.
The traffic patterns which are entrenched in this neighborhood are a thoroughfare for several hundred
cars, major local city bus line, access way to public park, and day care facilities on a daily basis. The
R.V. storage facility will increase traffic 1.5 cars on a daily basis. The adjacent community centers are
not to capacity and could increase substantially in the future. The RV Storage Facility shows 1.5 cars
impact as a peak at full capacity. We believe that the single public telephone across the street will
outnumber our patron visits by 3 to 1. The projected light traffic impact is the historic nature of the RV
Storage Facility.
-'
Lighting would not be initiated in this RV Storage Facility because of the "over spray" lighting from all
adjacent neighborhood lighting/street lighting. The soft over spray glow will sufficiently illuminate the
RV Storage Facility to our needs, we are glad to benefit from this.
SEnlON U.
THE BEST SOLUTION
Page 10.
The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for the RV Storage Facility as proposed, will blend in the
neighborhood and provide an additional assets to the immediate community by the elimination of an
unsightly vacant lot. This parking facility would offer a secondary use that would not have an adverse
affect such as convenience stores, churches, parks, planned residential developments all located in or
adjacent to R-1 planning.
The presence of SDG&E power lines, towers and gas line prevent using the land as is indicated by the
current zoning R- L The RV Storage Facility shall not incur any detriment to health, safety or welfare of
the general public from noise or traffic. Landscape and fencing will be put in to enhance property.
Most residences adjacent are at a significantly lower elevation making the parking of vehicles on this lot
not visible. We see no injurious impact on surrounding property. We are confident that the zoning,
administrator, planning commission and surrounding neighborhood will gladly welcome this RV
Storage Facility as an additional benefit of great value for the neighborhood and community welfare.
SECTION U I.
OWNERS SUMMRRY
PROPOSED USE: R.V. STORAGE FACILIlY
Page 11.
We wish to fulfill the great need for residents of Chula Vista to be able to park their recreational
vehicles within their city limits. Most Chula Vistians have homes whose lots would not compliment
sufficient parking accommodations for their R.V.'s. These RV.'s are squashed, squeezed and bullied
into garages, driveways, fields, carports, sidewalks, commercial areas, industrial areas, stores,
neighboring site lines, curbs, public streets and backyards. However, it is actually likely these R.V.'s
progress, after initially being bought, onto the driveways, in front of homes. Then they are parked on
the public streets,Almost permanently, which is an ordnance violation of the City of Chula Vista. This
problem is growing by leaps and bounds in the City of Chula Vista and there are inadequate
substantial facilities to alleviate this problem. These RV.'s become large neighborhood eye sores. On
my street which is the 400 block of Montcalm in Chula Vista, we have seven inoperable cars, six RV.'s
and trailers, two boats, two large trucks, one dune buggie, one trash trailer and one cement mixer,
most have not moved for at least one year. R.Y.ers need a facility which they can park for a nominal
fee. Our particular R.Y. storage blends so well we believe it is "invisible". We wish to be granted a
Conditional Use Permit which shall address this great need.
SECTION U II.
SUPPLEMENTRL INFORMRTlON
Page 12.
Maps, aireal, details, pictures, property profile and Conditional Use Permit Application attached.
Questions regarding this matter shall be promptly attended to by Mark San Agustin 446 Montcalm
Street, Chula Vista, CA 91911. 421.2627 (home), 421-1958 (business) 982.7145 (pager).
/
ATTACHMENT 3
PUBLIC FORUM MEETING SUMMARY
February 27, 1996
Mr. Steve Griffin
City of Chula Vista Planning Department
276 Fourth Ave.
Chula Vista, CA 9]9]0
Dear Steve:
PROPOSED RV STORAGE FACILITY
File No. IS-96-16/PCC-96-18
PUBLIC FORUM MEETING NOTES
I submit the following notes to you as my accounting of the above referenced meeting
held at the Oleander Boys & Girls Club on Wednesday, February 2], ] 996, at 6:00pm.
Please be advised that the notes were taken directly from audio tape recordings of the
meeting, and the following documentation has been edited for length and to eliminate
duplicity. It is intended that these notes will provide an overview of the bulk of the
comments, questions & answers and information shared at that forum. These notes are
not intended to be used as official "meeting minutes", as only pertinent information has
been selected to form these notes. A copy of the entire meeting, on audio cassettes, are
available for review upon request.
Attendees:
Steve Griffin
Keith Barr
Barbara Reid
Douglas Reid
Emmet Horsfal
Terry Nebel
Mark San Augustin
Darrell Hammer
John Kirby
(SG)
(KB)
(BR)
(DR)
(EH)
(TN)
(MS)
(DH)
(JK)
Chula Vista Planning Dept.
Chula Vista Planning Dept.
Chula Vista Planning/Environmental Section
Chula Vista Environmental Review Coord.
Chula Vista Fire Department
SDG&E
Applicant
Applicant
Applicant
100+ Neighborhood & Community residents
7:00pm
(COMM)
SG Made opening statement setting tone and purpose of the public forum. SG noted
that the city staff would take notes during the forum and report the information back to
2
the planning commission. SO gave a brief description of the project and explanation of
Conditional Use Permits (CUP), and stated that there would be no city position taken
until after tonight's forum. The second public forum, Planning Commission forum, is
tentatively scheduled for March 27th at City HaIL Notices would go out approximately
20 days prior to the meeting. SG then stated that the forum would now be turned over to
the applicants unless there were questions for him on process & procedure.
COMM Requested what findings are required by the Municipal Code to grant a
CUP. Secondly, could the Planning Commission's decision be appealed?
SO Described 4 points of the Code and described the appeals process.
COMM
to SO.
Voiced multiple process & procedure, use, zoning and hearing questions
SG Described the property in question as an unclassified use and addressed the
process & procedure, use, zoning and hearing questions. SO also described other similar
storage yards, and that the type of equipment, vehicles, etc., that could be stored in the lot
was subject to the CUP. Additionally, he stated that value, with respect to the values to
the surrounding homes, had to be determined on whether on not a project had a negative
impact on the neighborhood. In the sense of compatibility and quality. Similar questions
were also fielded by SG. SG then turned the forum over to MS.
MS "My name is Mark San Augustin, one of the owners and partners ofthe this Greg
Rogers Recreational Vehicle Storage Facility. This is John Kirby, he is another owner,
and this is Darrell Hammer, he is the other owner. Anyways, I'm sure that most of you
don't like us already; the funny thing is, I'm not sure ifI like you either."
"Anyway, were homegrown people in Chula Vista. I grew up here and came from a
Navy family. We went to and fro' about the United States; ended up here in Chula Vista.
I went to West Palomar Elementary, went to the junior high and high school, Castle
Park; graduated there; met my wife here and had my children here in Chula Vista.
"I have a right to do business here and live here. Darrell Hammer has lived here for...how
many years? (question directed to DH) All his life, 35 years. We have played in these
canyons, lived in this area. John Kirby has had his children grown up in this area. So,
were not just outsiders walking out here and happen to fall on this land, but we have
deliberately purchased this property."
"We have proposed a RV storage facility to do very particular things. Some of the things
I want to clear up right off, is that it is not intended to run a business out of the property.
We have two people set in that particular project. One during the day, and one during the
night to watch the motor homes and wheeled vehicles. That's all I want. We can be
picky enough in our market to capture this motor home market to come and park on our
property, and charge them a fee, and make a profit on that. So, that's one of the things I
3
wanted to clear up. Another thing is, people are not living in those motor homes, all
right. They aren't allowed to work on their motor homes, change their tires or do any
type of maintenance. They are there to just park it, pick it up and take it back out the
gate. That is what were charging for. That is all we want to do."
MS Summarized the site usage, as listed in the handout and application to the City of
Chula Vista. He also indicated, "that this parcel location is an ideal spot, because it is
adjacent to several large community centers. Two elementary schools, little leagues, the
churches, Boys & Girls Club, a telephone booth, a bus stop, a day care, a community
hospital and the 805 freeway." MS further engaged his summary, including his belief
that that site would be "virtually transparent." He also claimed that "the current high
decibel noise of the 805 freeway and unending westerly breeze would be in comparison
to the noise produced by the proposed development." Additionally, "lighting will not be
initiated in the R V storage facility because ofthe overspray light from the adjacent
neighborhood lighting and street lights. The soft overspray glow will sufficiently
illuminate the RV storage facility to our needs, and we will gladly benefit from this." MS
then completed his summary, and indicated this would "benefit the community by
elimination of an unsightly vacant lot," and that it would not provide any "detriment to
the community welfare."
MS Showed the landscape design concept, but didn't describe it He further stated
that they believe that they have followed proper procedure & code when filling out the
description and "uses" of the proposed RV storage facility. MS then opened the meeting
up for questions.
COMM "You have named those facilities, the Boys Club, day care, the park, etc.
Everything you named is an enhancement to a neighborhood. You also mentioned open
space. The park is open space, but you want to take this area and fill it up with cars. You
also mentioned that there would be I to 5 cars coming in and out of the lot per day. Well,
Mr. Hammer over there, comes flying down the road in his truck at 6:00am..."
MS "Hey, thank God he's going to work and has ajob, and doesn't collect welfare."
COMM "Do you understand that you have stamped out a "green machine?" Do
you know what a green machine is? My yard is destroyed because of what they (meaning
Darrell Hammer) did. They did not remove weeds, they plowed that field. They
removed 25 year old Manzanitas." Additional comment from community member..."Did
everyone here pitch in to buy that lot to turn it into a park?" Additional comment from
community member..."When we bought our houses here, we were told that nothing
would ever go there."
MS "Let's not let this get out of hand here." Note that to this point, MS had not
addressed any questions or comments.
4
COMM "My yard is a focal point for drainage, not to mention having people
looking down in my yard. I'll let you answer this."
MS "I want to say that we don't expect that to happen, all right?" We expect to have
late model motor homes coming in. We want to create some CCR's to allow us to be
selective in our marketing. That's part of our marketing plan."
COMM (Addressed as Mr. Stokes) "I'd like to address a couple ofthings as far as
a safety aspect. The first aspect is that you talk about the lighting from the surrounding
neighborhood, with the street light stanchions & everything around there (meaning
surrounding residential lighting). From your grade section, on the plan, you have a 2
story house off to the left down the bank It looks like to me that the (existing) light is
almost going to be at grade in the new area, and all surrounding this property. (Same
person speaking to the group)...Ifyou people want to find out about that, take a drive up
the street when we leave tonight and look into that property to see if it is lit properly
enough. (Back to MS)...Ifthis thing supposedly is loaded with motor homes, which is
your wish because you have paid for the property,"
MS 'This is my wish."
COMM "OK, and that's perfectly fine. Those motor homes and appurtenances in
there are going to block such light from the street. Now, second issue, if there is no light
in there, and this is the security issue, if there are lights in there, the surrounding houses
are going to get light wash in their backyards practically 24 hours a day...This lighting
may be required by the police department for security on such a large piece of property.
If there are no lights, (as was stated earlier by MS) and you have illegal activity going
through there, kids trying to graffiti the motor homes or steal stuff out ofthere,...what's
going to happen is, there may be more police going into that lot, and if they (meaning
perpetrators) can't get out on Oleander and can't get out on Raven, their going to go over
the 6 foot fence into the residential lots or yards back there, and that isn't safe. So, it's
kind of a catch 22 where you don't have enough light as it is up there...especially if it's
graded up high like that. So, how do you plan to address this?"
MS "Well, Mr. Stokes, the City of Chula Vista has sent me come comments and the
police department says there needs to be some lighting in that area. We do not have this
engineered out. However, we will bring an engineer in to locate that light. I'd like to say
something also. If you look at Greg Rogers Park, you drive up the street, take a look at
the park also, does that light intrude into your home..."
COMM "OK, stop there for a second. There are no houses on either side that
adjoin the park, but there are on the north & south sides of this RV storage facility
property. In my mind, you have to take that as a completely separate issue..."
5
MS "We are making general concepts ofthis, and I'm not making the claim that our
land is exactly the layout of the park. We were just using this as an example. I'mjust
saying for lighting purposes..."
COMM Same person stated that there is a security problem with or without
lighting in addition to the privacy issue.
COMM "I have 2 kids. ] can see that lot from my back yard. Personally, I liked it
just being an open space...A lot of things have been said tonight, and a lot of what you
(meaning MS) have said I think is kind of irrelevant to the reasons that we came here
tonight It's pretty obvious that it should go without saying that the reason you bought it,
to develop that property, is to make money."
MS "Absolutely."
COMM "All right now, the reason we moved into our houses is so we could have
decent places for our kids and ourselves to live. One of my criteria for moving into this
neighborhood is that is was residential entirely. The nearest store is over a mile away,
and those stores actually serve us. Now tell me, apart from you making a buck on this
property, what value will that bring to us and the houses in the area? Will this enhance
our property values? Will this enhance the quality oflife?"
MS "My answer is that the motor homes are going to come out of the City of Chula
Vista and we are marketing to the City of Chula Vista. The second part of the question is
it is our objective to give the opportunity for the neighborhood, in this particular area, and
the community of Chula Vista to have a place to park their motor homes on our property.
That is my answer."
COMM (Addressed as Mr. Tripp) "Ok, as a City (San Diego) beaurocrat, my
intention in not to kill you guys dream, but as a part of what ] do normally, I drove
around and tried to find out where you guys project would fit (Photos were shown) The
south/east corner of 3rd and Orange...but the proposed land is underneath a powerline
easement which SDG&E is prohibited from allowing any structures for any reasonable
use."
"According to the County Assessors Office, it was sold for tax purposes in '9], for about
$61,000.00. On the assessment roles, Mr. Kirby is listed as having a 2/3 interest and Mr.
Hammer has 1/3. I'd like to know what your relationship is to the ownership ofthe
property?"
"] drove by 3rd & orange, there's plenty ofland out there that they've got room for motor
homes. There's a place at 1325 Broadway. Others (meaning individuals) with plenty of
room that evidently keep their motor homes in their yards & don't want to pay a monthly
service, or maybe the police doesn't have the staff to ticket/motivate people to have rental
in a storage yard"..."According to the City's general plan, page] 5], it talks about there
6
SDG&E easements being part of an open space system, and the planning department has
a land use map showing this. In the last sentence, the development of commercial uses
which would disrupt the continuity of the system is not recommended...it's a bad fit for
what these gentlemen want to propose."
"I understand that Mr. John Kirby, are you the Kirby of Kirby Development Company?
(Mr. Kirby nodded yes) So, in public records, Mr. Kirby owns several properties and is
affiliated with a development company. But understand, that if we were sitting in their
shoes, you'd be motivated to earn some income off a piece of land that isn't being used,
but there's a lot of stuff that goes deeper than that. So, I'm done & we'll see you on the
27th."
MS "I am an owner. 1 am a 1/3 owner."
COMM
"How is this possible when there is a 1/3 and a 2/3 ownership?"
MS "Do you want the answer to the question? I am a 1/3 owner. Mr. Tripp, is that
sufficient?"
COMM "Why isn't your ownership disclosed on the public record? Are you part
of a silent partnership?"
MS "I have disclosed that."
COMM
Posed questions regarding the clearing ofthe land.
MS "As 1 mentioned, we own the land, and we are managing the land. We may not be
doing what you want us doing. It's our dirt. We are going to clear it and keep it clean.
We are managing it like we need to manage it. The neighborhood is used to seeing it
how they want, and that's not the way it's going to be."
COMM Concerns voiced about the type of vehicles, backhoes, construction
vehicles, etc. proposed for storage in the RV storage facility.
COMM " 1 probably go up and down this street 6 to 8 times a day, and 1 have seen
very few people drive 25 miles per hour. Plus, 1 have seen a policeman parked up here
with a radar gun, and they still don't go 25 mph. So, my concern is for the children of
this neighborhood with the Boys & Girls Club, child care, park and two schools. You
should have thought about that."
JK "Ma'am, I'd like to answer that point you brought up. You say that you go up and
down the street 7 or 8 times a day, and you don't go 25 mph. Then, 1 consider you part of
the problem."
7
COMM 1 didn't admit to going over 25, but I will tell you that going down that
hill, your foot is on the break the whole time. But, I really am concerned about the
children. "
COMM
"I believe it's your responsibility to clear your land."
MS "Right"
COMM "...Take this to her (meaning the Mayor) neighborhood. I'm sick and tired
of it I've lived here for 20 years & I'm not putting up with it any longer."
SG " 1 hope you understood at the beginning that this isn't a city project They are
able to apply for this. The Planning Commission and City Council, as far as I know,
aren't even aware of this project yet With respect to the grading issue, I have been told
there is a "cease & desist" order issued, and there should be no further grading, and they
should have the equipment removed from the site. If there are any specific questions
regarding, the grading, I have been told to have you contact Mr. Dennis Davies..."
COMM (Addressed as Mr. Reeves) "One statement that kind of bothered me, "It's
our land to do with what we want. To grade it, to do anything we want to." If that's his
attitude..."
SG 'There are city regulations with respect to the grading. Not only moving earth,
but also certain plant materials and species that might be on the site. What I was told by
the Engineering Department, was they went and looked at the level of grading. They said
it was "borderline" on ifthey had moved enough dirt to require a grading permit. So,
what they did was require a "cease & desist" order. But, what I was told was, normally, a
property owner gets something from the Fire Marshall's office to clear the brush. It's
usually done with something less than a bulldozer. It's usually done with a weed eater or
something."
COMM 'This gentleman sitting right here, myself and my wife took up a petition
to clear the land just on the other side of this area we are talking about They told us at
that time that we could not move that underbrush or anything. They had one individual
the city hired, and had him go down there and had him hand work that area to clear it for
the fire hazard. Then, now, I look up and this whole area is graded down there now.
Somebody is doing something contrary to what the city wants them to do."
EH "May I address that? "The notice went out from the Department ofFish & Game
and the u.s. Fish & Wildlife. They sent a letter basically saying anywhere in the city,
nothing would be done...Then after quite some time, the policy was that if anything was
in question, we would contact U.S. Fish & Wildlife. They would come to the site and
assess the site and tell us what or what would not go."
8
COMM
site?"
"So, did you give him (meaning the applicants) permission to grade the
EH "No." He also stated that the site was cleaned up in the most recent previous
years, but only with a weed whacker, and that his hands were "tied" as the Fire
Department has no budget to get contractors to give bids to clear the property. Ifwhat
should happen is that the owner fails to clear the site, then the Fire Department calls the
low bidder to clear the area, then the city would put a lien on the property for the price of
cleaning plus 25%."
COMM
'That's not the issue here."
EH Further stated that the notice went out to the former owner, who lived in Mexico,
to clear the property. Mark San Augustin negotiated to do a move on and clear the land,
and take over that responsibility, prior to the sale of the property.
COMM (Addressed as Mr. Stokes) "I work for the San Diego Unified School
District in the Facilities office. When we buy a piece of property to develop it for a
school site, we have to find out what is on the property before we grade iLin '93, they
went out and weed whipped all the grass down, but left all the shrubs in place. Now, this
is one issue in the whole scheme of things, and not to harp in that, but the environmental
issued should have been dealt with. There is a moderate amount of integrity here on the
part of the owners that, I believe, has been "breached" as far as we are concerned. All
you would have had to do (directing to MS) is to retain a biologist to go out there, look at
it, make a report and file it with someone...and it's your property..."
MS "My property, right."
COMM "Right, it is your property. No body is contesting that. However, it's like
with the SD school district. I can say what goes on a site with in the limits of the law,
within the limits of what we are supposed to do. What I'm saying is that something is not
right here, and I think you all are getting the picture that there is something that didn't
happen from the time they were told to clear the land, to "Oh, I didn't know that didn't
mean take out protected species or habitat area."
MS "Now, I haven't put words in your mouth, don't put words in my mouth. We are
professional men. We are managing our land, and that is what we are doing."
COMM "No, I'm not putting words in your mouth, if you want to interpret it that
way, that's your call to do., but what should have been done first, is your bio study is
done on the property before you clear it, or do anything else on it. I think Mr. Griffin and
others can attest that this thing was done a little backwards...the city, as far as I'm
concerned, shares a measure of responsibility in this. Also, was there any thing dumped
out there years ago that was covered up, that we don't know about? No body knows."
9
EH "All I can say is that 1 followed city policy."
COMM
things up.
Stated that we're not trying to "cook" you or MS, we're just bringing
DR "Under our ordinance, it permits loss of coastal sage in an area thirty feet adjacent
to the property line. In this case, thirty feet adjacent to, well, north/south boundaries of
the property would have been permitted to have been cleared under an order from the Fire
MarshalL We did not become aware of the loss of coastal sage until later. At that point,
we contacted U.S. Fish & Wildlife and the Department ofFish & Game and spoke to
personnel in both agencies."We have information of what we will permit to occur down
there under a mitigation plan to offset the loss of coastal sage habitat. On our habitat
maps at the city, this area is identified as a "potential study area." Which means, before
they touch the property, they have to do a biological study on the property to find out
what's there...that was not done."
COMM
"Are there any financial penalties against these three gentlemen?"
DR "It is a violation of the municipal code..."
MS "Please be careful what you say."
COMM (Addressed as Mrs. Jones) Stated that Mr. San Augustin and Mr. Kirby
were seen in another easement adjacent to the property in question, possibly looking to
purchase it and eventually expanding their business. (Another resident) "I see this as a
residential neighborhood."period. If you want commercial buildings, go down here to
Main St. Oleander development is off limits...period. 1 suggest that for the next meeting
you get a bigger hall because I am going to fill it. 1 would suggest you change your mind
Mr. San Augustin. Why don't you do it now and end it?"
MS "Mrs. Jones, you are wrong about the assumption to us purchasing the property
across the street."
COMM
'That was told to my neighbor by yourself yesterday."
MS "No, that's not what I said. I said, 1 would like to know who the owner of that
property is."
COMM Stated additional use and future questions to MS including businesses
being operated out the R V storage facility. The attending neighbors were encouraged to
get a copy of the four items needed to approve a CUP and get involved.
COMM "Barbara (BR), 1 came in a little late, but is there an initial study being
done on the property?"
10
BR "Yes...the project cannot go forward until that is completed. Doug (DR) was
mentioning earlier that the consultant with u.s. Fish & Wildlife and the Department of
Fish & Game were in the field, and we are very interested what their requirements are
going to be."
COMM
"So, you are looking at potential mitigation."
BR "Exactly,...that would be a requirement ofthe environmental document."
COMM "In a mitigation, they either have to, ifI understood this, and in my own
personal dealings, that the mitigation is either on the property in question of on a similar
site,"
BR "Right, it would have to be on a site acceptable to both the city and the resource
agency."
COMM (Directed at MS) "How is the liability going to work?.. Who is actually
going to be liable?..How about your marketing analysis. Did you actually go into the
neighborhood and ask if anyone would like to put an RV in the park? Everybody here is
against it, so I don't think you would get any business from here...are you a sole
proprietorship ofa corporation?" (Additional resident) "See, that's another point where if
you read in the application it said neighborhood & community. My understanding of a
neighborhood is with in the immediate vicinity. The community may be interpreted to be
the collective of the City ofChula Vista. The thing is, where in that application does is
state that the community has, basically, agreed that this is going to be an amenity? Who
has stated, or who, on a petition or anything has stated that this is going to be an amenity
in this area within our neighborhood?"
MS "Well apparently, there's not a whole bunch in this room."
JK I'd like to answer your question. I'm not really up on the requirements of the city
regarding R V parking regulations, but I do know that they are not allowed to be parked
on the street. So, there is a requirement for this facility. That is the answer to the
question you asked."
COMM Group collectively stated no that is not right. The question was not
answered. (Speaking to the group) "Did you all understand the question I asked?" (The
group unanimously responded "yes") "What my question was...(referred to the
application, and quoted a portion)..."We as owners of the proposed RV storage and
homeowners in both neighborhood and community know that the general well being shall
be upgraded by the granting ofRV storage." That statement brings all of us in agreement
with you, which is a bunch of malarkey. Ok, in crude terms, that is basically it. Again,
there is an integrity problem with filling this out (referring to the application) with out
checking with the community and that's what I'm pointing out here."
II
MS "It's a matter of we have an opinion of that we have a large amount of people who
want this thing."
COMM Resident stated that if there was a petition in favor of this project, "I am
going to check out every last one." Another stated that we need to let them speak. "Were
all hot, but if they are going to speak condescendingly, we will have our chance at the
Planning Commission Forum on March 27th. An additional resident stated that "We
ought to think about wrapping this up." With that, everyone stood up, except the
applicants, and began to leave.
8:45pm
Forum concluded
Thank you for your patience and diligence in reviewing these meeting notes. I look
forward to working with and assisting you in the immediate future regarding this project
Be advised that copies of this document will be forwarded to the City Council and the
Planning Commission for review.
If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to give me a call at work or
home.
~~/{-~
John A. Stokes
463 Thrush Street
Chula Vista, CA 91911
(619) 656-1044 h
(619) 293-8277 w
jas
c: Shirley Horton, Mayor - City of Chula Vista
Chula Vista City Council
Armondo Buelna, Asst to Mayor and City Council
Mary Salas, City of Chula Vista Planning Commissioner
Chula Vista Planning Commission
Bob Leighter, City of Chula Vista Planning Director
Douglas Reid, City ofChula Vista Environemtnal Review Coordinator
Barbara Reid, City of Chula Vist Environmental Review Section
Anne Moore, City of Chula Vista Asst City Attorney
Greg Rogers Park Neighbors
rvlot7
ATTACHMENT 4
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS
WITH DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Mitigated Negat..e Declaratio
PROJECT NAME:
Greg Rogers Recreational Vehicle Storage Facility
PROJECT LOCATION:
Between Oleander and Raven Avenue within the SDG&E
easement
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.:
620-651-31
PROJECT APPLICANT:
Mark San Agustin, John Kirby, Darrell Hammer
CASE NO: IS-96-16
DATE: February 27, 1996
A. Proiect Settin!!
The project site consists of 4.42 acres of land under an SDG&E easement. Except for
uses in the southwest corner of the property that are accessory to adjoining residences,
and the overhead SDG&E high voltage transmission power lines consisting of electrical
circuits with voltages of; 69KV, 138KV and 230 KV, the land is vacant. The average
natural slope of the site is 6% with a maximum natural slope of 26%. The site is
disturbed and is devoid of vegetation except for the coastal sage scrub on the
manufactured slope in the southerly central portion of site. Drainage from the site is
either collected at the base of the southerly slope and diverted south through the existing
brow ditch to a sidewalk under drain at/near Cardinal Place or travels easterly to
Oleander, or westerly to Raven.
The project site is bordered by single-family homes to the north and the south, Greg
Rogers Park to the east across Oleander and property with native vegetation to the west
across Raven.
B. Proiect Description
The applicants are proposing the development of a 268 space Recreationa] Vehicle
Storage Facility, to include: recreational vehicles, trailers, boats and any other type of
vehicle common to city streets. The proposal is -also to include construction vehicles
such as skiploaders, back hoes, bobcats, trucks and trailers. Eighteen of the parking
spaces have been designated for customers. The hydro-seeded coastal sage on the
southerly sloped portion will remain and the applicant will be required to submit and
receive approval for landscape plans by a registered landscape architect. The site plan
shows a mobile construction trailer office on the northeasterly corner adjacent to
Oleander.
City of chull Y'"I pllnnin; deplrtment
eny'ronmentl' reylew .ecllon
~{f.t-
-~-
~..............~
~~
CITY OF
CHULA VISTA
Access from the site will be from Oleander with access from Raven being limited to SDG&E.
The applicant proposes to only pave vehicle paths and to use gravel surfacing on the parking
pads and in between pads.
The hours of operation are Monday through Friday 9 AM to 5 PM, Saturday and Sunday, 7
AM to 6 PM and closed on holidays. A night watchman is to be employed from closing of the
facility at night until opening the next day.
The discretionary actions for this project include: the granting of a conditional use permit, a
coastal sage loss permit (or exemption), grading permit, site plan and architectural review, and
deviation from paving standards.
C. Compatibility with Zonini and Plans
The parcel is generally planned for open space and zoned R-]. The proposed unclassified use,
RV Storage is conditionally permitted in all zones and will be compatible with the zoning and
Genera] Plan with the approval of Findings for a conditional use permit.
D. Identification of Environmental Effects
An Initial Study conducted by the City of Chula Vista (including an attached 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. This
Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with Section ]5070 of the State CEQA
Guidelines.
A number of concerns were raised by residents, in telephone calls, in the attached letters and
at the public forum that were determined to not have a significant impact these include:
drainage, traffic, children's safety, noise, crime security, lighting, and fire. These issues are
discussed in the environmental check list. In accordance with CEQA requirements for a
negative declaration, no formal reply is required.
The following impacts are those that were determined to be potentially significant and are
required to be mitigated to a level below significant. A discussion of each of these potentially
significant but mitigable impacts from the proposed project follows:
I. Aesthetics
The placement of an RV Storage Yard adjacent to residential areas could have a
negative visual impact. The requirement that a landscape plan acceptable to the City
plus site plan and architectural review be approved and installed will provide a buffer
and mitigate any visual impacts to a level below significant.
2. Biolo\:y
One-half of the site or 2 acres are designated as a special study area (further biological
study needed) on the City's Draft Chula Vista Plannin\: Area Revised Multifile Habitat
Plannin~ Area Boundaries mqp. Letters and calls from surrounding residents in
addition to meetings with representatives from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
California Department of Fish and Game confirmed that there was disturbed coastal
sage on the site prior to the clearing by the applicant.
A determination was made by staff in consultation with the Resource Agencies that the
equivalent of one acre of disturbed coastal sage was taken. This potential]y significant
impact can be mitigated to a level below significance by the following mitigation
measure.
E. Mitil!ation necessarv to avoid sil;nificant effects
Specific project mitigation measures are required to reduce potentially significant
environmental impacts identified in the initial study for this project to a level below significant.
Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project design and have been made
conditions of project approval, as well as requirements of the attached Mitigation Monitoring
Program (Attaclunent "A").
The applicant shall:
. Obtain a CSS Loss Permit or an exemption from the requirement for a permit;
. Acquire one acre of CSS habitats in or adjacent to a preserve area identified on the
"Revised Multip]e Habitat Planning Area Boundaries" map (6/20/95);
. Transfer the property to an entity that will provide maintenance of the property in
perpetuity;
. Assure maintenance in perpetuity.
F. Consultation
]. Individuals and Or~anizations
City of Chula Vista: Barbara Reid, Planning
Roger Daoust, Engineering
Samir Nuhai]y, Engineering
Steve Thomas, Engineering
Marty Schmidt, Parks & Recreation
Ken Larsen, Building & Housing
Emmett Horsfall, Fire Department
MaryJane Diosdada, Crime Prevention
U.S. Fish and Wildlife: Ellen Barryman
California Department of Fish and Game: Terri Stewart
San Diego Gas and Electric: Terry Nebe] and Tom Acuna
Chula Vista City School District: Kate Shurson
Sweetwater Union High School District: Tom Silva
Applicant's Agent: Mark San Agustin
2. Documents & Information
. Chula Vista General Plan (]989) and EIR (1989)
. Title ]9, Chula Vista Municipal Code
. Feb. ]996, Site visits and telephone conversations with: Terri Stewart,
California Department of Fish and Game, and Ellen Barryman, United States
Department of Fish and Wildlife
. City of Chula Vista Draft Chu]a Vista Planning Area Revised Multiple Habitat
Planning Boundaries Map
. Comments received from residents within ] ()(J() feet of the site and at a public
forum held on February 2], 1996.
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 this Negative Declaration. The report reflects the independent judgement
of the City of Chula Vista. Further information regarding the environmental review
of this project is available from the Chula Vista Planning Department, 276 Fourth
Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 9]910.
7f~(~/?~,~
ENVIRON ENTAL VIE COO DINATOR
(grrvstor. nd)
A TT ACHMENT A
Mitigation Monitoring Program
IS-96-16
This Mitigation Monitoring Program is prepared for the Greg Rogers RV Storage Project, in
order to comply with AB3180. This legislation requires public agencies to ensure that adequate
mitigation measures are implemented and monitored on mitigated negative declarations, such as
IS-96-16.
AB 3] 80 requires monitoring of potentially significant and/or significant environmental impacts.
The mitigation monitoring program for this project ensures adequate implementation of
mitigation for the following potentially significant impacts:
Biologv and Aesthetics
Biologv - Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant is required to acquire one acre
of CSS habitat in or adjacent to a preserve area identified on the "Revised Multiple Habitat
Planning Area Boundaries" map and to obtain agreement that the Resource Agencies and the
City of Chula Vista find the land acceptable as mitigation. Within a one year of the acquisition
of mitigation ]and,the land must be transferred to an entity that will provide maintenance of the
property in perpetuity.
Aesthetics - A Landscape plan acceptable to the City plus site plan and architectural review is
required prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Due to the nature of the environmental issues identified, the Mitigation Compliance Coordinator
(MCC), Consultant shall be the Environmental Review Coordinator (ERC) for the City of Chula
Vista. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the conditions of the
Mitigation Monitoring Program are met to the satisfaction of the ERC.
ADDENDUM TO MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR IS-96-16,
GREG ROGERS RECREATIONAL VEHICLE STORAGE FACILITY
PROJECT NAME: Greg Rogers Recreational Vehicle Storage Facility
PROJECT LOCATION: Between Oleander Avenue and Raven Avenue within the SDG&E
easement
PROJECT APPLICANT: Mark San Agustin, John Kirby, Darrell Hammer
PROJECT AGENT: Mark San Agustin
CASE NO.: IS-96-16 DATE: March 22,1996
I. INTRODUCTION
The environmental review procedures of the City of Chula Vista allow the Environmental
Review Coordinator (ERC) to prepare an addendum to a Negative Declaration or Environmental
Impact Report, if one of the following conditions is present:
]. Some changes or additions are necessary to a previously certified EIR but none of the
conditions described in Section 15162 (of the CEQA Guide]ines) calling for preparation
of a subsequent EIR have occurred.
2. Only minor technical changes or additions are necessary to an adopted negative
declaration.
This addendum has been prepared to the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) issued on IS-96-
]6 as only minor technical changes or additions are needed. These minor technical changes are
regarding the mitigation for potential biological impacts as discussed in the MND, and the
mitigation monitoring program (MMP).
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project is the development of a 268 space Recreational Vehicle Storage
Facility, to include: recreational vehicles, trailers, boats and any other type of vehicle
common to city streets. The proposal is also to include construction vehicles such as
skiploaders, back hoes, bobcats, trucks and trailers. Eighteen of the parking spaces have
been designated for customers. The site plan shows a mobile construction trailer office
on the northeasterly comer adjacent to Oleander.
III. PROJECT SETTING
The proposed project consists of 4.42 acres of land under an SDG&E easement. Except
for uses in the southwest comer of the property that are accessary to adjoining residences
and the overhead SDG&E high voltage transmission power lines consisting of electrical
circuits, the land is vacant.
The project site is bordered by single-family homes to the north and the south, Greg
Rogers Park to the east across Oleander and property with native vegetation to the west
across Raven.
The discretionary actions for this project include: the granting of a conditional use
pennit, a coastal sage loss pennit (or exemption), grading pennit, site plan and
architectural review and deviation from paving standards.
IV. COMPATffiILITY WITH ZONING AND PLANS
The parcel is generally planned for open space and zoned R-l. The proposed
unclassified use, RV Storage is conditionally pennitted in all zones and will be
compatible with the zoning and General Plan with the approval of Findings for a
conditional use pennit.
V. IDENTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Biologv
As a result of additional analysis on the status of the Multiple Species Conservation
Program, staff detennined that the requirement for the acquisition of one acre of Coastal
Sage Scrub (CSS) habitats adjacent to an area identified on the "Revised Multiple Habitat
Planning Area Boundaries" map (6120/95), (Section E, Mitigation) for mitigation should
be changed.
As the 6/20/95 map of the Multiple Habitat Planning Area recommended by the Chula
Vista City Council may change as a result of further biological research consultation with
landowners and the Resource Agencies and further review by City Council, the
requirement in both the MND and MMP should be amended to read:
"Acquire one acre of CSS habitat in or adjacent to a preserve area identified on the "Revised
Multiple Habitat Planning Area Boundaries" map 6/20/95 or other area acceptable to the
Director of Planning.
Change the tenn "maintenance" in Section E of the Negative Declaration to "management."
..,..~.,~-.~-._.~.-.~,."
VI. CONCLUSION
Pursuant to Section 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines and based upon the above to the
proposed project will result in only minor technical changes or additions which are necessary
to make the Mitigated Negative Declaration adequate under CEQA.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR
c-'d f,Ld (:pVJ rlh~)
REFERENCES
Chula Vista General Plan (1989)
Title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code
City of Chula Vista Environmental Review Procedures
,._....>,~..=.~
"/
GREG
ROGERS
PARK
PROJECT
LOCATION
~
:-\
~
S-
~
~
~
~
Efb' PALOMAR
STREEI
\
CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
C5
~~. Greg Rogen Recreational
. Vehicle StortJge
PROJECT 1200 Blk. of Oleander Ave.
ADDRESS,
PROJECT DESCRlPnON,
INITIAL STUDY
D TIO
Request: Proposal for a RV storage yard in the 5. D. G.& E.
riglit of way located between Raven Ave. and Oleander Ave
NORTH
SCAlf,
No Scale
FILE NUMBER, 15.96-16
PCC-96.18
APPLICATION CANNOT BJ CCEPTED UNLESS SITE
PLAN IS FOLDED TO FIT INTO AN 8-1/2 X II FOLDER
INITIAL STUDY
For Office Usc: ()nIy
Case No. IS- 9~ /0
'OpSl Amnl "'" I h"<'
Receipt No./u0.,7;y,
Date Rec'd.z 72.
Accepted by /,? ?
Project No. FA-Ie 9':<
Opst. No. DO- .:2lr</'
CIP No.
Related Case No.
.o/c" .9&-r:.f' "
City of Chu]a Vista
Application Fonn
T9t",e>:fO
A. BACKGROUND
1. Project Title Gre Ro ers Recreati ona 1
2. Project Location (Street address or description) 1200
Chula Vista CA 91911
Yeander/Raven Avenue
Assessors Book, Page & Parcel No. 620-651-3100
3. Brief Project Description No permanent structures- R. V. Storage Faci 1 i ty
Wheeled vehicles only.
4.
Name of Applicant Mark San Aqustin,
Address 446 Montcalm St.
City Chul a Vi sta
./
Name of Preparer/Agent
Address 446 Montcalm
C~y Chula Vista
Re]ation to Applicant Owner
Indicate all permits or approvals and enclosures or documents required by the Environmental
Review Coordinator.
5.
6.
John Kirby & Darrell Hammer
Pager 421-1958 Phone 421-2627
State CA Zip 91911
Mark San
Street
Agustin
Fax#
Phone 421-2627
Zip 91911
State
CA
a. Permits or approvals required.
General Plan Amendment
Rezone/Prezone
_ Grading Permit
_ Tentative Parcel Map
Site Plan & Arch. Review
_ Special Use Pennit
_ Design Review Application
_ Tentative Subd. Map
_ Redevelopment Agency OPA
_ Redevelopment Agency DDA
_ Public Project
Annexation
_ Specific Plan
L Conditional Use Permit
Variance
_ Coastal Development
Other Permit
If project is a General Plan Amendment and/or rezone, please indicate the change in designation from
to
b. Enclosures or documents (as required by the Environmenta] Review Coordinator).
_ Grading Plan
_ Parcel Map
Precise Plan
= Specific Plan
_ Traffic Impact Report
Hazardous Waste Assessment
Arch. Elevations
= Landscape Plans
_ Tentative SuM Map
_ Improvement Plans
_ Soils Report
_ Geotechnical Repott
Hydrological Study
- Biological Study
- Archaeological Study
- Noise Assessment
= Other Agency Pennit
Other
'\'PC:F:\HOME\PL\NNING\STORED\I021.A.93 (Ref. 1020.93) (Ref. 1022.93)
Page 1
7. Indicate other applications for permits or approvals that are being submitted at this time.
a. Permits or approvals required.
General Plan Amendment
_ Rezone/Prezone
_ Grading Permit
_ Tentative Parcel Map
~ Site Plan & Arch. Review
_ Special Use Permit
_ Design Review Application
_ Tentative SuM Map
_ Redevelopment Agency OPA
_ Redevelopment Agency DDA
_ Public Project
Annexation
_ Specific Plan
X Conditional Use Permit
Variance
_ Coastal Development
Other Permit
B. PROPOSED PROJECT
1.
a.
Land Area: square footage 192535 or acreage 4.42
If land area to be dedicated, state acreage and purpose.
b. Does the project involve the construction of new buildings, or will existing structure be
utilized? None
2. Complete this section if project is residential or mixed use.
a. Type of deve]opment:_ Single Family _ Two Family _ Multi Family
Townhouse Condominium
b. T eftal number of structures
c. Maximum height of structures
d. Number of Units: I bedroom
2 bedroom
3 bedroom
4 bedroom
Total Units
e. Gross density (DU/total acres)
f. Net density (DU/total acres minus any dedication)
g. Estimated project population
h. Estimated sale or rental price range
i. Square footage of structure
J. Percent of lot coverage by buildings or structures
k. Number of on-site parking spaces to be provided
I. Percent of site in road and paved surface
3. Complete this section if project is commercial or industria] or mixed use.
a. Type(s) of]and use R.V. storage-unclassified.
b. Floor area Height of structures(s)
c. Type of construction used in the structure
WPC:F:\HOME\PLANNING.STORED\J021_A.93 (Ref. 1020.93) (Ref. 1022.93)
Page 2
d. Describe major access points to the structures and the orientation to adjoining properties
and streets 01 eander
e. Number of on-site parking spaces provided 268
f. Estimated number of employees per shift 1
Number of shifts 2 Total 2
g. Estimated number of customers (per day) and basis of estimate 1-5 survey
h. Estimated number of deliveries per day -0-
i. Estimated range of service area and basis of estimate Want to ma rket Chul a
Vista residents.
j. Type/extent of operations not in enclosed buildings All of operation is
outside of enclosed buildings.
k. Hours of operation 7 AM - 5 PM M- F 9 AM - 5 PM S-S Ho 1 i da ys-Cl osed
1. Type of exterior lighting None
4. If project is other than residential, commercial or industrial complete this section.
a. Type of project Recreational Vehicle Storage Facility
b. Type of facilities provided Pa rki ng on 1 y.
c. Square feet of enclosed structures Mobil offi ce- 160 squa re feet
d. Height of structure(s) - maximum 12' - 10 I
e. Ultimate occupancy load of project --
f. Number of on-site parking spaces to be provided 268
g. Square feet of road and paved surfaces Estimated 2400 I +-
h. Additional project characteristics See C.U.P. & supplement-sections I-VII
C. PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
]. Will the project be required to obtain a pennit through the Air Pollution Control District (APCD)?
No
WPC:F:'J-IOME\PLANNING\STORF.D\1021.A.93 (Ref. 1020.93) (Rd. 1022.93)
Page 3
2. Is any type of graumg or excavation of the property anticipated? nom; na 1
If yes, complete the following:
a. Excluding trenches to be backfilled, how many cubic yards of earth will be excavated?
1000 yards minus
b. How many cubic yards of ftll will be placed? None
c. How much area (sq. ft. or acres) will be graded? 10%
d. What will be the: Maximum depth of cut 2'
A verage depth of cut I'
Maximum depth of ftll 3 '
Average depth of ftll l' - minus
3. Describe all energy consuming devices which are part of the proposed project and the type of
energy used (air conditioning, electrical appliance, heating equipment, etc.)
None
4. Indicate the amount of natural open space that is part of the project (sq. ft. or acres)
None.-
5. If the project will result in any employment opportunities describe the nature and type of these
jobs. Two jobs- Hand; capped student per schoo 1 di stri ct.
6. Will highly flammable or potentially explosive materials or substances be used or stored within
the project site? None
7. How many estimated automobile trips, per day, will be generated by the project? 1-5.
8. 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 fIl] slopes; and
pedestrian and bicycle facilities. None
WPC:F:\HOME\PLANNING\STORIDJ021_A.g) (Ref. 1020.93) (Ref. 1022.93)
Page 4
D. DESCRIPTION OF ENVII<.ONMENTAL SETTING
1.
Geo]ogy
Has a geology study been conducted on the property?
(If yes, please attach)
Has a soils report on the project site been made?
(If yes, please attach)
No
No
2. Hydro]ogv
Are any of the following features present on or adjacent to the site? No
(If yes, explain in detail.)
a. Is there any surface evidence of a shal]ow ground water table? No
b. Are there any watercourses or drainage improvements on or adjacent to the site?
No
c. Does runoff from the project site drain directly in to or toward a domestic water supply,
lake, reservoir or bay? No
d. CtSuld drainage from the site cause erosion or siltation to adjacent areas? No
e. Describe all drainage facilities to be provided and their location. No
3. Noise
a. Are there any noise sources in the project yicinity which may impact the project site?
No
b. Will noise from the project impact any sensitive receptors (hospitals, schools, single-
family residences)? No
4. Bio]ogv
a. Does the site involve any Coastal Sage Scrub vegetation? No
b. Is the project site in a natural or partially natural state? No
c. If yes, has a biological survey been conducted on the property?
Yes No X (Please attach a copy.)
d. 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 project. None-
Euculyptus trees.
WPC:F:\JIDME\PLANNINGSTORED\1021-A.93 (Ref. 1020.93) (Ref. 1022.93)
Page 5
5. Past Use of the LaM
a. Are there any known historical or archeological resources located on or near the project
site? No
b. Are there any known paleonto]ogical resources? No
c. Have there been any hazardous materials disposed of or stored on or near the project site?
No
d.
'What was the land previously used for?
Vacant- Easement SDG&E.
6. Current Land Use
a. Describe all structures and land uses currently existing on the project site. Bloc k
wall.
b.
Describe all structures and land uses currently existing on adjacent property.
North Fence
South "
"
East
West
"
Block wall area.
7. Social
a. Are there any residents on site? No If so, how many?
b. Are there any current employment opportw1ities on site? No
If so, how many and what type? No
8. Please provide any other infonnation which may assist in the evaluation of the proposed project.
tonditional Use Permit application.
WPC;F:\HOME\PL\NNING\STOREIJ\J021.A.93 (Ref. 1020.93) (Ref. 1021.93)
Page 6
----.. ----..
E. CERTIFICATION
I. as owner/owner in escrow*
Mark San Agustin
Printnarne
or
I. consultant or agent*
Mark San Aqustin
Print name
HEREBY AFFIRM. that to the best of my belief. the statements and information herein contained are in all
respects true and COffect 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.
/'
1
--
or
~7r<:
Date {
*If acting for a corporation. include capacity and company narne.
WPC:F:\HOMNLANNlNG\ST0RED\1021-A.93 (Ref. 1020.91) (Ref. 1022.93)
Page 7
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Statement of disclosure of cenain ownership interests, payments, or campaign contributions, on all matters which
will require discretionary action on the pan of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all other official bodies.
The following information must be disclosed:
1. List the names of all persons have a fmancial interest in the contract, Le., contractor, subcontractor,
material supplier.
2. If any person identified pursuant to (I) above is a corporation or pannership, list the names of all
individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any pannership interest in
the pannership.
John & Darrell Hammer, Shari & Mark San Agustin, John Kirby
3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any
person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustee of the trust.
4. Have you h1Id more than $250 wonb of business transacted with any member of the City staff, Boards,
Commissions, Co~~~~ and CO~il,within the past twelve months?
~. NO ~ 1l:'t1/1(
5. Please identify each and evety person, including any agents, employees, consultants or independent
contractors who you have assigned to represent you before the City in this maner.
None.
6. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contributed more than $1,000 to a Council
member in the current or preceding election period? Yes [ ] No b<I. If yes, state which Council
member(s): .
None.
Person is dermed as: . Any individuaJ, fmo, co-parmcrship, joint \lenwre, association, soc:ia1 club, fraternal organiz.ation, corporation, estate,
trust, receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, city and county, city, municipality, disQic( or other politicaJ subdivision, or any other group
or combination acting as a unit.
(NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary)
Date: ,~c,,"5
~~
Mark San Agustin
Print or type name of contractor/applicant
WPC: F: \HOME\PLANN ING\STORED\ I 02j-A. 91Ref. 1020.93) (Ref. 1022.93)
Page 11
~. . e....u
~ .' r7, - ~
. - ~ !4' . '.'J:~1
. ':
-~
!~~
\ 't ,-,. 6
\ ... ~
':tIt
'~"
",
'.
Case No.: IS-96-l6
CITY DATA SHEET
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
I. Current Zoning on site: R-I
North: R-l
South: R-l
East: R-I
West: R-I
Does the project conform to the current zoning? Yes-subject to the issuance of a Conditional Use
Permit (CUP).
II. General Plan land use designation on site: Open Space
North:
South:
East:
West:
Low-Medium Residential
Low-Medium Residential
Open Space
Low-Medium Residential
Is the project compatible with the General Plan Land Use Diagram? Yes-as an interim use.
Is the project area designated for conservation or open space or adjacent to an area so designated?
Yes
Is the project located adjacent to any scenic routes? No
(If yes, describe the design techniques being used to protect or enhance the scenic quality of the route).
III. Schools
If the proposed project is residential, please complete the following: N/ A
School
Capacity
Enrollment
Units
Proposed
Generating
Factors
Students
Generated
From Project
Elementary
.30
.29
.10
Junior High
Senior High
IV. Remarks: N/A
~~'~~0~
Director of Plan ing or R presentative
::J. /01 iq-{.
/ ate
Case No. IS-96-16
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Name of Proponent: Mark San Agustin, John Kirby, Darrell Hammer
2.
Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
3.
Address and Phone Number of Proponent:
446 Montcalm Street
Chula Vista, CA 91911
421-2627
4. Name of Proposal: Greg Rogers Recreational Vehicle Storage
5. Date of Checklist: February 27, 1996
Po(erlUally
Potentially Significant Leu than
SipiDcaDt Unlul Signl6cant No
Impact MIUpted Impact hDpact
J. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the
proposal:
a) Conflict with general plan designation or 0 0 0 181
zoning?
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans 0 0 181 0
or policies adopted by agencies with
jurisdiction over the project?
c) Affect agricultural resources or operations 0 0 0 181
(e.g., impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts
from incompatible land uses)?
d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of 0 0 0 181
an established community (including a low-
income or minority community)?
(m:\home\pJanning\envirorun\gregrog.mit)
Page 1
PoteaUall)'
Sipl6nat
hapact
PoteaUall)'
Sipi6(aat
Ualell
Mitipted
Lell thaa
SlpIi6(a.t
Impact
No
I..pad
Comments: The proposed RV Storage will not conflict with the General Plan designation of Open
Space or the R-l zoning designation if a conditional use permit is approved. This "unclassified"
land use is conditionally permitted in all zones.
With the adoption of the biological mitigation measure to provide one acre of coastal sage scrub
off-site as detailed in Attachment A, Mitigation Monitoring Program, the project will not conflict
with the environmental plans of the City, the Resource Agencies or SDG&E.
II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the
proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local 0 0 0 181
population projections?
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either 0 0 0 181
directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in
an undeveloped area or extension of major
infrastructure) ?
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable 0 0 0 181
housingO
Comments: The proposed R.V. Storage will not induce population growth or displace housing.
III. GEOPHYSICAL. Would the proposal result in or
expose people to potential impacts involving:
a) Unstable earth conditions or changes in 0 0 0 181
geologic substructures?
b) Disruptions, displacements, compaction or 0 0 0 181
overcovering of the soil?
c) Change in topography or ground surface relief 0 0 0 181
features?
d) The destruction, covering or modification of 0 0 0 181
any unique geologic or physical features?
e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, 0 0 0 181
either on or off the site?
I) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach 0 0 0 181
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?
(m:lhornelplanning\environm\gregrog.mit)
Page 2
PotenU.lly
Sianl8c.nl
Imp.c!
POlenU.Uy
SipUlc.nl
Ublen
Mitipted
Ln.tb.n
SilniBc.nl
Imp.d
N.
Imp.d
g) Exposure of people or property to geologic 0 0 0 181
hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud
slides, ground failure, or similar hazards?
Comments: There are no known unstable earth conditions, changes in topography or ground
surface relief features, destruction, covering or modification of unique geologic or physical features
related to this project.
A soils study is required prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage 0 0 181 0
patterns, or the rate and amount of surface
runoff?
b) Exposure of people or property to water 0 0 0 181
related hazards such as flooding or tidal
waves?
c) Discharge into surface waters or other 0 0 0 181
alteration of surface water quality (e.g.,
temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)?
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any 0 0 0 181
water body?
e) Changes in currents, or the course of direction 0 0 0 181
of water movements, in either marine or fresh
waters?
f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, 0 0 0 181
either through direct additions or withdrawals,
or through interception of an aquifer by cuts
or excavations?
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of 0 0 0 181
groundwater?
h) Impacts to groundwater quality? 0 0 0 181
i) Alterations to the course or flow of flood 0 0 0 181
waters?
j) Substantial reduction in the amount of water 0 0 0 181
otherwise available for public water supplies?
(m:\home\~Janning\environm\gTegrog.mit)
Page 3
Poteatially
SIpUic:ant
Impad
Poteatlally
Sipi8cant
Valeu
Mjtip~d
Leu than
Sipillcant
Impad
No
Impad
Comments: As a result of paving of the driveable portion of the site and the gravel coverage of
the rest of the site, there will be an insignificant amount of increased surface runoff.
Concerns raised by residents included: the possibility of grading impacting the natural drainage and
the surrounding residences being subject to flooding, and the possibility of fuels leaking from
recreational vehicles polluting the groundwater. Engineering staff confirm that the amount of
grading that will be required for the project will not impact the natural drainage.
Discussion with staff at the Otay Water District indicate there are no potable waters beneath the
site.
V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute 0 0 0 181
to an existing or projected air quality
violation"
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? 0 0 0 181
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, 0 0 0 181
or cause any change in climate, either locally
or rcgionally?
d) Create objectionable odors? 0 0 0 181
c) Create a substantial increase in stationary or 0 0 0 181
non-stationary sources of air emissions or the
deterioration of ambient air quality?
Comments: The Engineering Department projects that the automobile trips per day will average
133. This low traffic generation will have an insignificant impact on air quality.
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the
proposal result in:
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion?
o
o
181
o
b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to
nearby uses?
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-
site?
o
o
o
181
o
o
o
181
o
o
o
181
(rn:\hornelplanninl!~n\'ironrn~cgrog.mit)
Page 4
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or
bicyclists?
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting
alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)?
g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts?
Pote.Ually
PotenU.lly SlpUIc:aat Lell than
SipUh:ant Vnlell SilDiftunt N.
IlDpac! Mllipted hllpact Impact
0 0 0 181
0 0 0 181
o
o
o
181
h) A "large project" under the Congestion
Management Program? (An equivalent of
2400 or more average daily vehicle trips or
200 or more peak-hour vehicle trips.)
Comments: The existing level of service on Oleander Avenue and east Palomar Street and Raven
Avenue is A. The 133 trips per day that are projected as a result of this project would not
decrease the level of service. Engineering staff require 2.5 feet of dedication on both Oleander
Avenue and Raven Avenue.
o
o
o
181
The applicant has estimated that on an average individual users of the park will move their vehicles
twice a ycar. Concerns raised by residents include: safety for children who will walk past the
proposed R V storage site on their way to school, sports or other recreational activities, cars
frequently exceeding the posted speed limit of 25 miles per hour, turning left in the middle of the
block near the Boys and Girls club being dangerous, creation of more traffic, fact that large
vehiclcs, opcrated by "usually" inexperienced drivers, not conducive to good traffic control on two-
lane street will be sharing two-lane streets with residents.
The issues of cars exceeding the posted speed limit and the unsafe crossing of streets by children
are not caused by this project. A study regarding the same could be considered by the City Traffic
Engineer.
It is the opinion of the City Traffic Engineering Division that vehicles turning on Oleander in the
middle of the block have adequate site-access and visual access.
The City does not regulate who is permitted to drive RV's and RV's are permitted to drive on all
City Streets.
Engineering staff have commented that no traffic mitigation is required and that the project is
consistent with the criteria established in the City's Transportation Phasing Plan General Plan
Traffic Element and all other pertinent traffic studies.
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES, Would the proposal
result in impacts to:
a) Endangered, sensitive species, species of
concern or species that are candidates for
listing?
o
o
181
o
Page 5
(rn:\homc:\planning\environm~grog.mit)
PotnUally
Potelltially SllIIlflcaII( Leu tba.
Slplflcaat V.I.., Siplflcaat N.
Impad Mltipted I.pad Impact
b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage 0 0 0 ~
trees) ?
c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g, 0 ~ 0 0
oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)?
d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian and 0 0 0 ~
vernal pool)?
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? 0 0 0 ~
t) Affect regional habitat preservation planning 0 ~ 0 0
efforts?
Comments: One acre of the site was identified as disturbed sage scrub and is within an area
designated as disturbed coastal sage scrub on the City's Draft Multiple Species Conservation Plan
Map. As mitigation for grading of this land, the applicant will be required prior to the issuance of
a grading permit to purchase one acre of coastal sage scrub off-site at a location to be approved by
the Environmental Review Coordinator of the City of Chula Vista and staff of the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Services and the California Department of Fish and Game in conjunction with Attachment
A of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Plan.
VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would
the proposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation 0 0 0 ~
plans?
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful 0 0 0 ~
and inefficient manner?
c) If the site is designated for mineral resource 0 0 0 ~
protection, will this project impact this
protection?
Comments: The proposed RV Storage Park will not conflict with adopted energy conservation
plans and the site is not designated for mineral resources.
IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of
hazardous substances (including, but not
limited to: petroleum products, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation)?
b) Possible interference with an emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
o
o
o
181
o
o
o
~
Page 6
(rn:\homelplanning\environm\gl'egrog.mit)
PotenUally
Pountially Slpllh:ant Le.. than
Slplflt.nt V.lle.. Slplfltaat N.
Impatt Mitipled Impad Impact
C) The creation of any health hazard or potential 0 0 0 181
health hazard?
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of 0 0 0 181
potential health hazards?
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable 0 0 0 181
brush, grass, or trees?
Comments: Concerns by residents included: R V's leaking oil and fuel mixing with dry grass
growing under vehicles and causing a serious fire hazard, possibility of oily grass catching fire and
igniting fuel tanks in close proximity, the proximity of the project to the canyon across Raven
where a brush fire could occur and be exacerbated by the proximity to the fuel tanks, and the
possibility of a high voltage transmission power line falling and igniting a fuel tank.
Fire Department staff stated that dead weeds would not be allowed under the storage area. The
County Department of Hazardous Materials could be contacted if there was a specific concern. If
the County Hazardous Materials Department found soil contamination, they could require
mitigation and clean-up.
The Fire Department representative also stated that if a fire started in the brush west of Raven it
would be brought under control before it crossed Raven. The Fire Department is also requiring
up to ] 0 fire hydrants on the site. Fire Prevention staff stated that motorhomes do burn
occasionally but it is not usually in RV parks, it is on the road. A member of the Fire Prevention
staff stated that in his over 20 years of service in Chula Vista, no R V's in parks has burned.
Staff at SDG&E stated that the only way a high voltage line would fall would be in a major
catastrophe such as an earthquake. He further stated that the result would be a power outage as
opposed to igniting a fuel tank.
X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? 0 0 181 0
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 0 0 0 181
Comments: There will be a less than significant increase in noise as the currently vacant parcel in
close proximity to existing residential uses will have vehicles exiting and entering the area. As it is
expected that the park will receive tenants over a period of time and as the applicant is proposing
that the project hours be limited from 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM during the week and 7:00 AM to 6:00
PM on the weekend, the noise impact will be minimal.
(m:\homelpJanning\environm\gregrog.mit)
Page 7
Poteatially
Poteatially SJpUh:aat Ltuthaa
SJp.ID~aC Ualn_ Sipllh:....t No
Impad Mltipted hap.cl Impart
XI. PUBLIC SERVICES, Would the proposal have an
effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered
government services in any of the following areas:
a) Fire protection? 0 0 0 181
b) Police protection? 0 0 0 181
c) Schools? 0 0 0 181
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including 0 0 0 181
roads?
e) Other governmental services? 0 0 0 181
Comments: The project is not expected to have an effect upon or result in a need for new or
altercd governmental services.
o
o
o
181
XII. Thresholds. Will the proposal adversely impact the
City's Threshold Standards?
As described below, the proposed project does not adversely impact any of the seen
Threshold Standards.
a) FirelEMS
o
o
o
181
The Threshold Standards 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 112 to 3/4 miles away and would be
associated with a 5 minute response time. The proposed project will comply with this
Threshold Standard.
Comments: The Fire Department will require knox boxes or knox key switches. 1996 UFC has
new requirements for water supply to R V storage parks including at least 10 fire hydrants. Access
roads must be able to support 30 ton vehicle weight.
b) Police
o
o
o
181
The Threshold Standards require 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 1
calls of 4.5 minutes or less. Police units must respond to 62.10% 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 proposed project will not comply with this Threshold Standard.
Page 8
(rn:lhorne~lanning\environmlgegrog.mit)
Potentially
SiplllC'ant
ImpaC't
PotenUally
SiplillC'a.t
U.leu
Mitipted
Lea. thin
SipiBC'anl
ImpaC't
N"
ImplC't
Comments: Concerns raised by residents included: the fact that the RV storage facility would
become a magnet for graffiti, vandalism, that criminals would break into the R V's to steal TV's,
stereos, and other expensive electronic equipment and that the park would attract drug dealers.
The police department does not believe there is a need for additional crime prevention measures
other than that upon approval, prior to completion of this project, it is recommended that the
business take advantage of a commercial security consultation in the operation of the project.
c) Traffic
o
o
o
181
The Threshold Standards require that all intersections must operate at a Level of
Service (LOS) "C" or better, with the exception that Level of Service (LOS) "D" may
occur during the peak two hours of the day at signalized intersections. Intersections
west of 1-805 are not to operate at a LOS below their 1987 LOS. No intersection may
reach LOS "E" or "F" during the average weekday peak hour. Intersections of arterials
with freeway ramps are exempted from this Standard. The proposed project will
comply with this Threshold Standard.
Comments: See comments under Section VI above.
d) ParkslRecreation
o
o
o
181
The Threshold Standard for Parks and Recreation is 3 acres/l,OOO population.
Comments: The proposed project is not expected to comply with the Parks and Recreation
Threshold Standards as it is not a residential project.
c) Drainage
o
o
o
181
The Threshold Standards require that storm water flows and volumes not
exceed City Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary
improvements consistent with the Drainage Master Planes) and City
Engineering Standards. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold
Standard.
Comments: Existing drainage is adequate for the proposed project.
t) Sewer
o
o
o
181
The Threshold Standards require that sewage flows and volumes not exceed
City Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary
improvements consistent with Sewer Master Plan(s) and City Engineering
Standards. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard.
(m:lhornelplannmg\envirorunlgregrog.mit)
Page 9
Putt.tlally
Sipllh:aat
Impact
Pou..Ually
Sipllltaat
V.le..
MIUpttd
IAuthan
Slpllleaat
Impact
No
Impad
Comments: There will be no construction of permanent structures. There is an existing 8" PVC
line at the intersection of Raven Avenue and Redwing Road. This line flows in the southerly
direction down Raven Avenue and is adequate to serve the project.
Residents raised concerns that R V owners may not thoroughly drain and rinse their gray water and
raw sewage tanks prior to entering the facility and that they will pollute the surrounding ground
and contaminate other properties in the neighborhood. It is the responsibility of the management
of the R V Park to regulate what the tenants do. There is no groundwater near or beneath the site
to pollute. If a complaint is received, the engineering department could investigate the same.
g) Water
o
o
o
181
The Threshold Standards require that adequate storage, treatment, and transmission
facilities are constructed concurrently with planned growth and that water quality standards
are not jeopardized during growth and construction. The proposed project will comply
with this Threshold Standard.
Comments: No comments.
XIII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would
the proposal result in a need for new systems, or
substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a) Power or natural gas? 0 0 0 181
b) Communications systems? 0 0 0 181
c) Local or regional water treatment or 0 0 0 181
distribution facilities?
d) Sewer or septic tanks? 0 0 0 181
e) Storm water drainage? 0 0 0 181
f) Solid waste disposal? 0 0 0 181
Comments: This proposal will not result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations in
any utilities.
(m:lhome'{>Janning\environm\gregrog.mit)
Page 10
XIV. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Obstruct any scenic vista or view open to the
public or will the proposal result in the
creation of an aesthetically offensive site open
to public view?
b) Cause the destruction or modification of a
scenic route?
c) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic
effect?
d) Create added light or glare sources that could
increase the level of sky glow in an area or
cause this project to fail to comply with
Section 19.66.100 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code, Title 19?
e) Reduce an additional amount of spill light?
Poh!llUally
Siplftc:a,1t
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
PoteaU.lly
SlpUlcallt
V.le..
Mltiptt'd
181
o
181
o
o
t....th.n
Slplflra"l
Impact
o
o
o
181
o
No
Impact
o
181
o
o
181
Comments: Residents have expressed concerns about: a commercial sign, views of a fenced and
recreational vehicle lot, and all night lighting. Lighting will be subject to city code requirements
and as such will be required to be below a level of significance to the surrounding neighborhood.
There is the potential for a significant visual impact when an area adjacent to a residential that has
historically been vacant is developed. The requirements that this project have a landscape plan
and go through architectural review could mitigate any potentially significant impacts to a level
below significance.
XV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Will the proposal result in the alteration of or
the destruction or a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
b) Will 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?
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
181
181
181
181
lm:\homclp!anning\environm\gregrog.mit)
Page 11
Potentially
Potentially Sipilh:ant Lr..l.ban
Slpllh:ant Unleu SIpl8cant No
IInpact Mltipted Impact Impact
e) Is the area identified on the City's General 0 0 0 181
Plan EIR as an area of high potential for
archeological resources?
Comments: There are no cultural resources on the site.
XVI, PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Will the 0 0 0 181
proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction
of paleontological resources?
Comments: There are no paleontological resources on site.
XVII. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or 0 0 0 181
regional parks or other recreational facilities?
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? 0 0 0 181
c) Intcrfere with recreation parks & rccreation 0 0 0 181
plans or programs?
Comments: This project would not increase the demand for recreational facilities or regional parks.
It would not effect existing recreational opportunities.
XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE:
See Negative Declaration for mandatory findings of
signIficance. If an EIR is needed, this section
should be completed.
a) Does thc project have the potential to degradc
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
thc number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important cxamples of the major pcriods or
California history or prehistory?
o
181
o
o
Comments:
With implcmcntation of the biological mitigation mcasure and the mitigation
monitoring program in attachment A the project does not have the potential to
degrade the quality of the environment or threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community.
(m:'.homelplanning\environmlgregrog.mit )
Page 12
Potentially
SipUicant
I....p.d
Potentially
SipUlc.....
Ualeu
Mltipted
Leutlr.an
81p1ll1eaat
Impact
No
Impact
b) Does the project have the potential to achieve
short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term,
environmental goals?
Comments: The project does not have the potential to achieve short term environmental goals to
the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals as the requirement that the applicant provide
off-site coastal sage scrub and monitor the same as described in attachment A Mitigation
Monitoring is congruent with the goals of the Resource Agencies and the City of Chula Vista
Environmental Review Coordinator.
o
o
o
181
c) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a 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.)
Comments: The project with the mitigation measures as required does not have any impacts that
are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable.
o
o
o
181
d) Does the project have environmental effect
which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Comments: With the mitigation measures that are required the project will not have any
environmental effect which will cause substantial adverse effect on human beings, either directly or
indirectly.
o
o
o
181
EJ'I.'VIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least
one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated," as
indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
o Land Use and Planning
o Population and Housing
o Geophysical
o Water
o Air Quality
o Transportation/Circulation
. Biological Resources
o Public Services
o Energy and Mineral Resources
o Utilities and Service Systems
. Aesthetics
o Cultural Resources
o Recreation
o Hazards
o Noise
o Mandatory Findings of Significance
(m:\homelpIBn.!1ing\environmlgregrog.mit)
Page 13
DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, 0
and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the .
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation
measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an 0
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but 0
at least one effect: 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the
earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant
impacts" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
'7"5 ::f d (~(c;
Signatur '
/) 11< (....:1 )
./
February 27. 1996
Date
Environmental Review Coordinator
City of Chula Vista
(m:\home\p!anning\en\lironm \gregrog.m it )
Page 14
~
ROUTING FORM
DA!l'E:
January 12, 1995
'l'O :
Ken Larson, Building & Housing
John Lippitt, Engineering (EIR only)
Cliff Swanson, Engineering (EIR only)
Hal Rosenberg, Engineering (EIR only)
Roger Daoust, Engineering (IS/3, EIR/2)
Anne Moore, Asst City Attorney (Draft Neg Dec & EIR)
Carol Gove, Fire Department
Marty Schmidt, Parks & Recreation
Crime Prevention, Police Department (M.J. Diosdado)
Community Development, Redev. Economic Dev. only
Michael Meacham, Conservation Coordinator
Current Planning
Duane Bazzel, Advance Planning
Garry williams, Landscape Planner
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)
LAFCO (IS/Draft EIR - If annexation is involved)
Martin Miller, Project Tracking Log (route form only)
Doug Reid (Community Development Projects)
Other
/
FROM:
Barbara Reid
Environmental section
SUBJECT: Application for Initial Study (IS-96-l6/FA-693 /DQ-264 )
Checkprint Draft EIR (20 days) (EIR-_/FB-_/DQ )
Review of a Draft EIR (EIR- _/FB- _/DP )
Review of Environmental Review Record (FC-_ERR-_)
Review of Draft Neg Dec (IS- /FA- /DQ- )
The Project consists of: A RV storage facility for 268 wheeled
vehicles in the SDG&E right-of-way with
no permanent structures on 4.2 acres.
Location: Southeast corner of Raven & Oleander
Please review the document and forward to me any comments you have
by 1/23/96. . ~,\e ~~',Ie~\'e CO\\.J<WJro\c~ WM\-...I"I\ClA\,\ &~I\\\d't
\\'O.\Cc0ed. ---\~~'. ~DG--L ~ l).:)o..\cI ~ ~~\,\ t'd\ wcm\
Comments: -\~-ew \I"\'\~~ e~~el'\ o.u.\ ,,\::>\G\t\s ~(),,\ ~ dA<A.\J,)1"\ ~\~ Q...
"<O'0f>-\<2"-eC\. ~c~ CVC\.:, \<:'C'"\ .S><- -"...
<5l~ l'eo ~(~ ~h~ ~ ~~
w.
, r...n
~~'Sfw,...
~ P\t~p\~~
"''1(=1-- .
.
DATE:
JRf:
--
rlWM
-7t7
FJl(5M:
o 6 ~, - L/O - YS 6' 't 3
ROUTING FORM
\'31415161.;>
,,:-,7- ~ 1<9~
.~ ~ ~
,: 0
JAN1996 ~
~fGflVfD j
" ~4'
/~ ,1,'1>
c 0[67:gl,..
~-
.';~'
;;<J,
January,;:2, 1995
..
Ken Larson, Building & Housing
John Lippitt, Engineering (EIR only)
Cliff Swanson, Engineering (EIR only)
Hal Rosenberg, Engineering (EIR only)
'f,Roger Daoust, Engineering (IS/3, EIR/2)
Anne Moore, Asst City Attorney (Draft Neg Dec & EIR)
Carol Gove, Fire Department
Marty Schmidt, Parks & Recreation
Crime Prevention, Police Department (M.J. Diosdado)
Community Development, Redev. Economic Dev. only
Michael Meacham, Conservation Coordinator
Current Planning
Duane Bazzel, Advance Planning
Garry Williams, Landscape Planner
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)
LAFCO (IS/Draft EIR - If annexation is involved)
Martin Miller, Project Tracking Log (route form only)
Doug Reid (Community Development Projects)
Other
Barbara Reid
Environmental Section
SUBJECT: Application for Initial Study (IS-96-16/FA-693 /DQ-264 )
Checkprint Draft EIR (20 days) (EIR-_/FB-_/DQ )
Review of a Draft EIR (EIR-_/FB-_/DP)
Review of Environmental Review Record (FC-_ERR-_)
Review of Draft Neg Dec (IS- /FA- /DQ- )
The Project consists of: A IN storage facility for 268 wheeled
vehicles in the SDG&E right-of-way with
no permanent structures on 4.2 acres.
Location: Southeast corner of Raven & Oleander
Please review the document and forward to me any comments you have
by 1/23/96.
Comments:
....
-
( . c .' _ _ .- ('
OL .... (
c: . t. . .:- (
(. ., C .;.... .; (.(
0.' .'~.C' (
Of: ,'.OC (
C.: ..ro(
g~-,I...-"'-t.,;..t..(
------ .--
(: .
Ol_
e..
I.'
o.
O.
().
O~ _....
-
- ( (
.. t. ( (
.., (
. .. ( (
~.( (
.... ( C
..( (
-.;;L,{"L'
.
,
,
J
.
I
~
/
TO r:> ,
I / l'I/_'1<
"
1"- ) j' .;. I
DATEr)! //, / /'
,
/.. ?
/f
i..;~ l! f /.- ....
~;....:~,-/,,/ -,[
I;, ,
Ie'
bv
,
I )
/'? e.--
, ,
. .-,
, -
/, _r /. .;:: //
0/ / /9/ ),(
. ,
. -'1/1'" .<,
I
-r h' I 0
y;-./'/?
~ '~-- ...-1
_/ ,1:., ,_
I ,-
\; - ) -;r1//) 0/ ,
~~I~NED AI, x I'
./
/.t.l~o. dk~ ~ d~
, I ---
{-...~~,ib. ;??;~;f- ",Jjl k-"L
~~/=-,. "~y /'7'~~) j,..:I -u;>~ e
/"_jJJ?.J~8P .;2,5'......" ,I!~
{/A~...-..JL ~_ fl .-.. (7 ~ - .a_ d~.
DATE"
REDlFORM
J,'....u.------~
" ~,
SIGN~~~ L-.
SEND PAR S 1 AND J INTACT.
PART 3 Will BE RETURNED WITH REPLY.
4S 465
POL Y PAK (50 SETS) 4P46S
,3<.-
yS- 6 '13
Case No. 'X$ -9i.-lb
INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMENT SHEETS
ENGINEERING DIVISION
I. Drain a ge
A. Is the project site within a flood plain? .AI 0
If so, state which FEMA Floodway Frequency Boundary. ,AI / A
B. What is the location and description of existing on-site drainage facilities? >>DI\)<- ,
.5"'?fA".... I"JI!."';NA'f-- -fowA/L/s RAv<N AII"<-N"-'-
C.
Are they adequate to serve the project?
If not, please explain briefly.
I'll lit
D. What is the location and description of existing off-site drainage facilities? -rlI-r;u-
;1.t.<- /Vo e )<..iSf,NV o{(- S..z;,... dI!.A.NA~ PAc" 1,77t.s Nt II..: 10 th-c.....
to .
-- t:'---r
O/!AJ;.< c I ..J ,~.( .
,
E. Are they adequate to serve the project? y' {S
If not, please explain briefly.
n. Transportation
A. What roads provide primary access to the project? (f;)t--GAt'-'1)r;g., AvE ANI>
1::"'.$, P.AL-ot-1A-F:- .5Tf2..e€T
B. What is the estimated number of one-way auto trips to be generated by the project (per day)?
'1. 'l.. Aqz..e-,S X 30T1Z-ip.s/ACI2E .:: 133 Tfi!..lp.s ~~ bAY
C. What are the Average Daily Traffic (A.D.T.) volumes on the primary access roads before and
after project comp]etion?
Street Narne Before After
a.E;1.<..'J::>Ee- A-v'C S/90 5""3 ;13
eA,ST fAU,""'~ S/. .;L1/7o ~bo3
AAve,..J Ave; <:. /000...+, <. 1000 e~t..~,A<<-
Do any of these volumes exceed the City's Level-of-Service (L.O.S,) "C" design ADT
volume? If yes, please specify. jIJ 0 .
t. 0, c;''A 'ON C>t. ~1ft<Jt>~i2- .Allt: 11;1117> Q E-rlST" f.A/..C..w+rz- ST.
,g. f..A-1i~ N It ve- . tV I A
wPC:F,IIIOME\PlANNINGlSTOREn'J022.93 (Rd. 1021.93) (Rd. 1021>.93)
Page 2
""'5 - 6 'I")
Case No, IS - 11> -I to
If the A.D.T. or L.O.S. "C" design volume is unknown or not applicable, explain briefly.
N/,A
I 0 S "A"
c-. . . 0.'\J eAc./-f
j2Q,A!>WAY
D,
flue the primary access roads adequate to serve the project?
If not, please explain briefly. /II/A
YeS
E. Would the project create unacceptable Levels of Service (LOS) at intersections adjacent to
or in the vicinity of the project site? IJ 0
If so, identify: Location Iv'IA
Cumulative L.O.S. /ilIA
F. Is the proposed project a "large project" under the Congestion Management Program? (An
equivalent of 2400 or more average daily vehicle trips or 200 or more peak-hour vehicle
trips). If yes, a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) will be required. In this case the TIA will
have to demonstrate that the project will not create an unmitigatable adverse impact, or that
all related traffic impacts are not mitigated to a level of non-significance.
Yes >( No 133 < ,;2'700
The following questions apply if a Traffic Impact Analysis is not required.
G. Is traffic mitigation required to reduce traffic impacts that will result from implementation of
the proposed project? Yes >< No
If yes, please describe. loll A
H. Is the project consistent with the criteria established in the City's Transportation Phasing Plan,
General Plan Traffic Element, and all other peninen! traffic studies? Please reference any
other traffic impact studies for roadway segments that may be impacted by the proposed
project. ye 5
I. Is a traffic study required? Yes X No
J. Is there any dedication required? Y t= S
If so, please specify. .;? S I oN Oleq~ de.....4.'1- J. $" I tn. ~ ,,<WI Av
Abt>/TIOAlA L ;./..ON':' Ff'Z-ONTl'<qc
WPC:F,'HQMlN'LANNtNGlSTORIDJ022.93 (1Ie!. 1021.93) (Rd. 1020.93)
Page 3
'1'5-6'/3
Case No. "X"S -76 -I b
K.
Is there any street widening required?
If so, please specify. 11/ J A
I/o
L. Are there any other street improvements required? Y 13 .s
If so, please specify the general nature of the necessary improvements.
DfZ.IVEWAYS PE-/2.. CotTY srAAlbAf<'.....D,S
M. Will the project and related public improvements provide satisfactory traffic service for
existing conditions and future build out General Plan conditions? (Please provide a brief
explanation). YeS, p,eoJ eCT W/L-L- f'f2.Qv/De" .
SATtSF,A.cTO~'f ,tZAFnC 5!:-/Z.VIC-G FO/z-'-
cXISTINt..- ColIJi)ITto/'J.s A;U() FJTrt2..E: &JnDcx.'T,
m. Soils
A.
B.
C.
AIe there any anticipated adverse geotechnical conditions on the project site? GIlt/kA/v"",,!
If yes, specify these conditions. AI / A
Is a Soils Report necessary? y<s. PR,w;:. f 0 f/,<.- /,5,St411t/U- or 11
~1?1l1#f/
,
,0< "",IT.
IV. Land Fonn
6'/0
A. What is the average natural slope of the site? /.
B. What is the maximum natural slope of the site? ;;. 6/' 0
V. ~
AIe there any traffic-related noise levels impacting the site that are significant enough to justify that
a noise analysis be required of the applicant? /IJ D
VI. Waste Generation
How much solid and liquid (sewer) waste will be generated by the propcsed project per day?
Solid LUll: IfIO",,)
Liquid AJ -rJI~.L<.- c..}:I/ b-<... AJD c.. ::7;,,((7;'/ 0+ ~n." ~1/'7Z-",s
Af"/ili>p.-. lIe'/'''' w'( ..... "";v. .
What isth locatIOn and size of existing sewer lines on or downstream from the site?
-1'1,v-- ;5 A,..! e.-,<;s-T:N'\"' 8" pvc.. L:tV<-- Ai- 14<- /AI/(t<s<<-riJ,v' Qf:
u
RAv-<,./ AV<.vlAL-- AN'/ ~-ulw;#'Y- 1:0/1/. 11-/" ,t;"'"'-. F/vwS ;A/ I/,<-
v
50"'1;"'''/"7 d;~-<r-r.-Jw c1..o..../r.J }?Av-(,J A<x-ww.
Are they adequate to serve the proposed project? (If no, please explain) Y-c s .
WPC,)',\IIOMNI-'NNINOISTORIDJ022.93 (Ra, 1021.93) (Ref. 1020.93)
Page 4
Case No. Y5- 6'/\
VD. Nationa] PoHutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Reauirements
Will the applicant be required to me a Notice of Intent with the State Water Resources Control Board
for coverage under an NPDES Stormwater Pennit? /fJ D
. H yes, specify which NPDES pennit(s) and explain why an NPDES pennit is required. A/ / .A
Will a Stonn Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) be required for the proposed project?
Yes y: No
Additional comments .N' iJ .
vm Remarks
Please identify and discuss any remaining potential adverse impacts. mitigation measures, or other
issues.
I ;{ 72-/;: (,
, v
Date
City
WPC:F,~MElPt.ANNlNG'STORED'J022.93 (Ref. 1021.93) (lief. 1020.93)
PageS
, '
C H U L A V S TAP 0 L I C ED E P R T MEN T
CRI~E PREVENTION UNIT
PLAN REVIEW RECOMMENDATIONS
Ft-"
~ .
...... "
DATE:
February 2, 1996
Barbara Reid, Environmental ~..)
CAm Brooko~~~ capta~~ Withers, Investigations
~ <. P' /~i/ ";/",1"
Mary Jane Diosdado.')S~pS
RV Storage INITIAL STUDY 96-16
J~
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
PROJECT:
'.,
-XX- The Police Department and the Crime Prevention Unit will be
able to provide an adequate level of service for this
proposed site,
~ There is no expected increase in personnel or equipment in
order to maintain Police Department services,
~ Please forward additional information regarding this project
to the Crime Prevention Unit.
Estimated response time for Priority 1 calls to this project:
Grid: 66 1.91% of the CFS are P-1 with an A.R.T. of 6:00
Estimated response time for Priority 2 calls to this project:
Grid: 66 25.69% of the CFS are P-2 with an A.R.T. of 8:00
Comments: From 01/01/95 to 12/31/95 there were 533 Calls For
Service with this Reporting District. 165 of these calls
resulted in crime cases.
~: The above listed average response time(s) are above the
recommended thresholds.
upon approval, prior to completion of this project, it is
recommended that the business take advantage of a commercial
security consultation of the project site. Recently, security
recommendations were provided regarding this site on a DRC.
Thank you for the opportunity to have input into this project.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me any
time at 691-5127.
cc:
CPTED
PD/cpu 11/95
c-
DATE:
~
~
SUBJECT :
ROUTING FORM
PFC't.-"V". -
"- I t..U
JAN 1 2 /996
CITy 0' ,
BU"DI r v, I
JL NG& -/~i0;':;
HOUS/NO D'E'
LI 1',
January ~2, ~995
Ken Larson, Building & Housing
John Lippitt, Engineering (EIR only)
cliff Swanson, Engineering (EIR only)
Hal Rosenberg, Engineering (EIR only)
Roger Daoust, Engineering (IS/3, EIR/2)
Anne Moore, Asst City Attorney (Draft Neg Dec & EIR)
Carol Gove, Fire Department
Marty Schmidt, Parks & Recreation
Crime Prevention, Police Department (M.J. Diosdado)
Community Development, Redev. Economic Dev. only
Michael Meacham, Conservation Coordinator
Current Planning
Duane Bazzel, Advance Planning
Garry williams, Landscape Planner
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)
LAFCO (IS/Draft EIR - If annexation is involved)
Martin Miller, Project Tracking Log (route form only)
Doug Reid (Community Development Projects)
Other
Barbara Reid
Environmental Section
Application for Initial Study (IS-96-~6/FA-~/DQ-264 )
Checkprint Draft EIR (20 days) (EIR- _/FB- _/DQ )
Review of a Draft EIR (EIR- _/FB- _/DP )
Review of Environmental Review Record (FC-_ERR-_)
Review of Draft Neg Dec (IS- /FA- /DQ- )
The Project consists of: A RV storage facility for 268 wheeled
vehicles in the SDG&E right-of-way with
no permanent structures on 4.2 acres.
Location: Southeast corner of Raven & Oleander
Please review the document and forward to me any comments you have
by ~/23/96.
Comments:
BC['r"L'7.L;-,,- -
ND CD,"iA'~,J~
~f l flv'?{ 1&
...
~
ROUTING FORM
DATE:
January 12, 1995
TO:
Ken Larson, Building & Housing
John Lippitt, Engineering (EIR only)
Cliff Swanson, Engineering (EIR only)
Hal Rosenberg, Engineering (EIR only)
Roger Daoust, Engineering (IS/3, EIR/2)
Anne Moore, Asst City Attorney (Draft Neg Dec & EIR)
Carol Gove, Fire Department
Marty Schmidt, Parks & Recreation
Crime Prevention, Police Department (M.J. Diosdado)
community Development, Redev. Economic Dev. only
Michael Meacham, Conservation Coordinator
CUrrent Planning
Duane Bazzel, Advance Planning
Garry Williams, Landscape Planner
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)
LAFCO (IS/Draft EIR - If annexation is involved)
Martin Miller, Project Tracking Log (route form only)
Doug Reid (Community Development Projects)
Other
FROM:
Barbara Reid
Environmental section
SUBJECT: Application for Initial Study (IS-96-16/FA-693 /DQ-264 )
Checkprint Draft EIR (20 days) (EIR- _/FB- _/DQ )
Review of a Draft EIR (EIR-_/FB-_/DP)
Review of Environmental Review Record (FC-_ERR-_)
Review of Draft Neg Dec (IS- /FA- /DQ- )
The Project consists of: A RV storage facility for 268 wheeled
vehicles in the SDG&E right-of-way with
no permanent structures on 4.2 acres.
Location: Southeast corner of Raven & Oleander
Please review the document and forward to me any comments you have
by 1/23/96.
\-C7-~(o
Comments:
N-O COlM~l.A.~
o.t t-'A,.J~ + t~
~-
)0
...
~
~ p.- ..~ ~,
~
.~
DATE:
(
-
----/
,-
ROUTING FORM
........J
JAIV
1 9 19J6
January 12, 1995
.'-'
1.... ':"1 , "I I ./ ;\/\~ ~
Ken Larson, Building & Housing
John Lippitt, Engineering (EIR only)
cliff Swanson, Engineering (EIR only)
Hal Rosenberg, Engineering (EIR only)
Roger Daoust, Engineering (IS/3, EIR/2)
Anne Moore, Asst City Attorney (Draft Neg Dec & EIR)
Carol Gove, Fire Department
Marty Schmidt, Parks & Recreation
Crime Prevention, Police Department (M.J. Diosdado)
Community Development, Redev. Economic Dev. only
Michael Meacham, Conservation Coordinator
Current Planning
Duane Bazzel, Advance Planning
Garry williams, Landscape Planner
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)
LAFCO (IS/Draft EIR - If annexation is involved)
Martin Miller, Project Tracking Log (route form only)
~. " ._- 'Doug Rei<:t (Community Development Projects)
TO' Other ~,
. . Barbara Reid I Environmental section
'10.
Frcrr-..1
~
SUBJECT: Application for Initial Study (IS-96-16/FA-~/DQ-264 )
Checkprint Draft EIR (20 days) (EIR-~/FB-_/DQ )
Review of a Draft EIR (EIR- _/FB- _/DP )
Review of Environmental Review Record (FC-_ERR-_)
Review of Draft Neg Dec (IS- /FA- /DQ- )
The Project consists of: A RV storage facility for 268 wheeled
vehicles in the SDG&E right-of-way with
no permanent structures on 4.2 acres.
Location: Southeast corner of Raven & Oleander
Please review the document and forward to me any comments you have
by 1/23/96.
Comments: ~ '
~ i<-..dJ? ~ ~ 4. ~ K/IU)'Y- V(j ~ ...
Iq1~urc- L ~~ ~>N:;::-'L_ ~ ~-:tr{2.i/:
~~" ~ ~~~~~;t;;.~-~~
.tL.- ~ ,A4d.t~ .4-c 7r . , . J . ,1. ... ,j,~
Q..uQ.M. ~.,J... ~4- at..k.-w--~j 6V ~ ~ ~
\.wi
(
Case No. 75 - 7'G- /&
FIRE DEPARTMENT
A. What is the distance to the nearest fire station? And what is the Fire Department's estimated
reaction time?
B. Will the Fire Department be able to provide an adequate level of fire protection for the
proposed facility without an increase in equipment or personnel?
C. Remarks
Fire Marshal
Date
WPC,F,'HQMlN'LANNlNG\5TOREn\1022.93 (Rd. 1021.93) (Ref. 1020.93)
Page 6
BOARD OF EDUCATION
';CSE?~ D. CUMMINGS. Ph.D.
SI-I,ARCN G,LES
PATRICK A JUCD
P.~ME!...A B. SMITH
~IKE A SPEYF.ER
SUPERINTENDENT
L!SIA S. GIL Ph.D.
I
SCHouL DISTRICT
EACH CHILD IS A.l'< INDMDUAL OF GREAT WORTH
January 12. 1996
J"I.I.~
r\lt ~'~ .!~()~
- .'-'--
Mr. Steve Griffin
Planning Department
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
RE:
PCC-96-18
Applicant:
Location:
Oleander RV Storage Yard
1200 Block of Oleander
Dear Mr. Griffin:
This is to advise you that the project located in the 1200 Block of Oleander, is
within the Chula Vista Elementary School District which serves children from
Kindergarten through Grade 6 Parkview School is the home school for this
projec:.
District enrollment has been increasing at the rate..oL approximately
1 - 2 peroent over the past several years, and this is projected to continue.
Permanent capacity has been excaeded at many schools and temporary
raiocatable classrooms are being utilized to accommodate increased
enrcllments. The District also buses students outside their attendance areas,
both to accommodate growth and assist in achieving ethnic balance.
State law currently provides for a developer fee of $.28 for non-residential area
to be charged (Chula Vista Elementary School District - $.13/square foot;
Sweetwater Union High School District - $.15/square foot) to assist in financing
facilities needed to serve growth.
If you have any questions, please contact this office.
Sincerely,
M~~~
Kate Shurson
Director of Planning
msw:c:srnaJJcom
~ ","
. . '(4
e.. ..; ~ . , . .... ---j
~~
//
FEB-20-1996 11:15 FROM LRND RECORDS EB5R
TO
96915171
P.02
Jle
.$ollE San Diego Gas & Electric
P_o_ BOX 1&11'SAN DIEGO. CAft112>4'!O"ltl~
January 23, 1996
FILE NO.
Mr. and Mrs. Arie Jajati
783 Brookstone Road, No. 301
Chula Vista, CA. 91911
CERTIFIED MAIL
RE: Unauthorized Grading, APN 620-651.31
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Jajati:
Inspection of our 250' wide right-of-way on the subject propetty revealed unauthorized grading. Please
be advised that the provisions of our easement require written approval for any change of grade. This
review and approval would normally be processed through me. I am not aware of this project. If you
have received permission from someone else at SDG&E.I would appreciate that person's name.
There is a "flyer" on site referring to Mr. Mark San Agustin. I have had repeated telephone conversation
with Mr. San Agustin and on August 16,1995, ! sent him a copy of OUr recorded easement. On several
occasions I have personally advised him that there were to be nO improvements constructed on our
easement without our prior review and approval.
Therefore, if you have not obtained permission from another person at SDG&E, I will need a copy of
your grading and improvement plans to review for possible safety, clearance and compatibility conflicts.
I must insist that until this review and approval process is completed, activity on our right-of-way be
terminated. If 1 see continued activity, you will leave no choice but to refer this matter to our Legal
Department.
__._~ou h~ve any questions, please call me at 696.2502.
sincelelY,
{~.v0,
Terry W. Nebe
Property Mana ment Representative
cc: M. San Agustin
D. C. Davies
City ofChula Vista
jnjati
TOTRL P.02
~:' H f-H._ U <J h ,,': L_
.l,: Q 1 ,,-~o (~~L.)~
MRR 2S '96
9:19 l~o,U,iL P.v2
(AlIFORNIA-THf Rf~OV~<;fS AO~NL.
PEn WilSON. Gv...fttOr
<<TMENT OF FISH AND GAME
WRIDOE OR.
:>0. co. 92123
.'
(619) 467~251
March 25, 1996
Mr. Doug Reid
Environmental Review Coordinator
Planning Department
City ofChula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, California 91910
Greg Rogcrs Recrelltional Vehicle Storage Project, Case No. 15-96-16
Dear Mr. Reid:
The Department ofFish and ~me's (DI'G) Natural Community Conservation Planning
(NCCP) Program stllff has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Greg Rogers
Recreational V chicle Storage Facility located between Oleandcr and Raven Avenue in the City of
Chula Vista, The 442 acre project proposes to develop a facility for tho storage of268
re\;rcational vehicles,
The project site is located within a SDG&E power line casement and does not pre8ent1y
contain biological resources. The property, prior to recent clearing, did contain coastal sage scrub
vegetation as provided by materials !Tom the Cily ofChula Vista, the Multiple Species
Conservation Planning (MSCP) Program vegetation map and vegetation maps provided by
SDG&E in 1993 for a then-proposed repowering project.
The DFG concurs with the Negativc Dcclaration that one acre of collltal sage scrub
previously existed on the site, and that the mitigation measures outlined in the document will
reduce biological impacts to below a levcl of significance, The lnitigation measures include
acquisition of coast al sage scrub habitat in an appropriate area identified for future preservation
under the City's Subarea Plan, Because the take of eoaslal sage scrub habitat is an acre or less, is
not in a core area for California gnatcatchers, is not IC1cated in 8 regionally significant wjJdlife
corridor, and IS adequately mitigated, the project meets the criteria for exemption ofa 4(d)
,)tnrJe If the project area is redesigned to impact the slope areas now containing coastal sage
.';',,,ii, the project ,-,wid not proceed under the 4(0) Special Rule b\ICIIUsc the City has ewustoct
,r's 5% allocation ofinterun take of coast III sage scrub. The project, and any subsequent non-
exempt projects within the City, would nced to be incorporated into the processing for the City's
Subarea Plan,
Section E and the Initial Study of the document indicate "maintenance" will be provided
by the project proponent in perpetuity for the mitigation site. The DFG requests. this be changed
to "management" to more accurately re!1ect the intent of the City's ultimate Subarea Biological
Preserve,
~ I I nt'j 1) VI I'lL
11) "JJ.';)-4C!r -4t;.':;:J
rlHK: L::>':JO
:J ; iU j~U
r . U:'
Mr Doug Reid
March 25, 1996
Page Two
In conclusion, the DFG concurs with Iha proj~\ and mitigation as proposed. Comments
;an be directed to Ms. Terri Stewart at the I~(tcrhead address, or by telophone at (619) 467-4209
Sincerely, ~
~f.~v
William E. Tippets
NCCP Field Supervisor
cc: Department ofFish and Game
Terri Stewart
San Diego
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Ellen Berryman
Carlsbad
11II;!:rvvtorovtu
GREG ROGERS RECREATIONAL
VEHICLE STORAGE FACILITY
March 26, 1996
Doug Reed, Environmental Review Coordinator
Planning Department
City of Chula Vista
276 4th Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
f
. ~~ -.
,
MAR 8
1J~
,
r ~ '
'.; . '-.'
RE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Dear Mr. Reed:
The report on the initial study prepared by staff was very succinct in presenting the opinion of the City
of Chula. There are, however, requirements outlined in the "Mitigated Negative Declaration" that we
feel should be given careful study and consideration. We also feel that we should have the opportunity
to become involved in Ihe process of setting up the final requiremenlS of the mitigation.
We request further clarification regarding the visual impact. Guidance from the "Architectural Review
Board" will assist our landscape architect in modifying the original plan proposed in the Conditional
Use Permit application.
The Mitigated Negative Declaration section D.2. Biology indicates "further biological study needed".
\Xihile biological mitigation may be indicated, some amount of time will be required to assess areas to
be considered.
Our plans are to continue with this application. We conditionally accept the mitigation provided that
the one acre mitigation could be reduced if our findings, or other's employed by us, or StatelFederal
municipalities allow total exemption or lower partial mitigation land volume.
Sincer ly,
ssa
Mark San Agustin' John Kirby' Darrell Hammer
446 Montcalm Street . Chula Vista. CA . 91911
16191 421.1958
-:x.s -9 10 - \ lo
Case No,
'-
APPENDIX IV
Comments
/i~eceived During the Public Review Period
_ No Comments Were Received During the Public Review Period
.
WI'C""~=93 (RoC. 11111.93) (Ref. 1020.93)
FEB-14-96 WED 13:39
P.OI
'.'
February 14, 1996
'" -:) vr;
\, \ r
o/N:\ () ('
\ \J. -.\,G:-/\
\ C\\(;
\"\
~'
Mr. Douglas D. Reid
Environmental Review Coordinator
City ofChula Vista
P.O. Box 1087
Chula Vista, CA 91912
Dear Mr. Reid:
PROPOSED RV STORAGE F~ClUTY
File No. lS.96.16IPCC.96.18
Initial Study (1.8,) / Em'ironmental Information
In a discussion with Mrs. Bonnie Reeves, a long time area resident, it was stated to me
that a fire citation was issued to the owners of the above property in question, to have the
area cleared as it presented a fire hazard. At the time, the surrounding residents
concurred with this directive, however, as time progressed and no clearing had been
performed, a conversation took place on May 4, 1993 wilh Mr. Emmett Horsfal, a Chula
Vista Fire Department representative, whereby he stated the following:
· The City Fire Department had received an Information Bulletin from the U.S.
Department of the Interior stating that the UNatcatcher", residing in the area in
question, had been classified as an endangered/threatened species.
· This bulletin stated that there was a "No Take" rule conceming the bird. Meaning
that neither the bird nor the brush could be transplanted or removed.
It was further stated to me that as a result of this infonnation, Mr. Horsfal sent a letter to
the State fish and Game Department for further clarification, and that until such time as
deemed by them, the site could not be touched. Thus explaining the reason for the time
involved in clearing the site. Eventually, the seasonal grass was cut down, but the
sluubbery remained in place as it was under the "No Take" rule.
This is the same: area that is in que:stion for the above: propose:d project. It would seem
that natural habitat area was disturbed, without a biological study being performed. and
may influence the breeding/migration of the above species. Please consider this
information with regard to this project.
FEB-14-9S WED 13:39
Mr. Douglas Reid
Proposed R V Storage Facility
Page 2
Please be advised that I will be forwarding this letter to the Depa11ment ofFish and Game
for their records. If you have any questions, please feel free to give me a call at
656-1044.
.~-
Jolm A. Stokes
463 Thrush Street
Chula Vista, CA 91911
c: Shirley Horton, Mayor - City of Chula Vista
Chula Vista City Council
Armando F. Buelna, Ass!. to Mayor and City Council
Roger Daoust, City ofChula Vista Engineering
John Lippitt," " .. "
Cliff Swanson, " ~. H "
Bob Leiter, City of Chula Vista Planning Director
Steve Griffin, City of Chula Vista Principal Planner
Michael Meacham, City of Chula Vista Conservation Coordinator
Anne Moore, City ofChula Vista Asst. City Attorney
Greg Rogers Park Neighbors
Department ofFish and Game
rvlot6
P,02
r
1319 Raven Ave.
PUBES 3304
Chula Vista,91909
February 4, 1996
Doug Reid
Environmental Section
Planning Department
City of Chula Vista
Chula Vista, Ca 91910
FI' ~< r- .--
.. .-.
" ...". ,.
rES 0 5
~~r'"}~
'..'._"
[)' r \.
~ L. fi. 1\" ~"
Dear Mr. Reid:
Today my husband and I were appalled to learn that the City ofChula Vista is considering
a Conditional Use Permit for a recreation vehicle storage facility with room for 268 vehicles, to
be located one block from our house. Because we received no notice from the City of Chu]a that
this might occur, I am responding to the limited information I was able to obtain from a neighbor.
Weare completely and absolutely opposed to this project. I have read portions of the project
application and find the information regarding our neighborhood to be very distorted and
inaccurate, beginning with the location of the site. There is no southeast comer of Raven and
Oleander. There is no comer at all at the easement site; Raven and Oleander are parallel streets
on the west and east sides of this portion of the easement. Our neighborhood is a quiet residential
community of three and four bedroom houses built approximately 18 years ago. Many ofthe
original owners, like ourselves, still reside here. This morning I walked our neighborhood,
including the SDG&E easement and found children playing and gardens flourishing in a fiiendly,
safe, clean, and attractive environment. Nearby arnenities, such as the eastern Chula Vista Boys
and Girls Club, ball fields, a large and lovely park and schools only add to the positive, healthy
and inviting neighborhood in which we've chosen to live. It never occurred to any of us that our
City government would consider siting a commercial venture in the middle of our residential
neighborhood.
The easement is surrounded by three and four bedroom houses and across from Greg
Rogers Park. The nearest commercial establishments are nearly one mile away, on Telegraph
Canyon Road and Orange Avenue. The 805 Freeway cannot be viewed or accessed in less than I
mile. The hospital mentioned in the application, is miles away. The churches are approximately 1
mile distant and the "Day Care" is part of the one nearby community structure, the Boys and Girls
Club. For years my husband and I have jogged and walked, both day and evening, through the
SDG&E easement between Oleander and Raven. We have never seen any inappropriate activity
or cause for concern. In warm weather, the park across the street is filled with families
celebrating birthdays and picnicking. The ball fields are filled with the community's youth
demonstrating their athletic skill as their families cheer them on. The nearby Boys and Girls Club
provides positive social activities for residents of all ages, ITOm early morning to late in the
evening.
Traffic has increased on Oleander substantially since we first moved to this community. It
already is increasing difficult to make a left hand turn north at the comer of Oleander and Palomar
streets. The proposed access to the easement is between the tops of two hills, with limited sight
by both vehicles and pedestrians. Children walk past the proposed R V storage site constantly on
their way to school, sports and other recreational activities. Large vehicles pulling in and out,
directly across ITom the Park parking area, with children racing for home or parent's car would be
an accident waiting to happen. Perhaps one should question why the property owners, expecting
only 1-5 vehicles per day are building an 18 space parking lot.
No arnount of carnouflage could disguise the fact that our residential neighborhood had
been invaded by a commercial enterprise. Were you to visit our neighborhood, you would see
that the description of our area as a trashy, noisy, hotbed of crime was written with the intent to
deceive City staff into granting a Pennit for a totally unsuitable project, one certainly to lower the
value of nearby housing. We purchased our home on Raven with the knowledge and confidence
that the neighborhood was zoned only for residential use. All other activities that have moved
into the area, have enhanced the family life that we all enjoy. This project would certainly
degrade the neighborhood.
While we understand that the owners are trying to benefit ITom their unwise decision to
purchase land that is suitable only for open space or park land, we must strongly oppose this
Conditional Use Pennit application based on the reasons given above an below.
1. Height
The stored vehicles will rise above the houses to the south of the easement, making this
the most noticeable lot in the neighborhood.
2. Screening
The houses on Oleander on either side of the easement face directly on it. The few mature
eucalyptus trees provide little screening. While the proposed trees for the project may grow to
12-16 feet in height, they will take many years to do so. In the meantime, our residential
neighborhood is daily faced with a commercial eyesore. Clearly it is anticipated that the
recreational vehicles will be visible, since the project designers plan to place "smaller vehicles near
the perimeter to soften the views." The large commercial sign, the open gate and the office trailer
are not compatible with this residential neighborhood. Houses adjacent to the project, that now
looks out on open space, would find their view has become a fenced and recreational vehicle lot,
certainly not what they expected when they purchased their property. Unless the current owner is
planning to put in mature trees, manicured lawns, flowering beds and bushes, lush gardens and
open park land, the proposed landscape cannot possibly "exceed any landscape in neighborhood."
3. Surfacing
The coming and going for 268 recreational vehicles across what has been a dirt and grass
easement during much of the year, will make this project not only an eyesore, but a dusty one at
that.
4. Access to Site
The ITont gate access is directly across ITom the area use by park and ballfield users for
parking and drop offi'pick up of children. Street inclines to both the north and south of this
proposed access have hilltops which limit vision in both directions. Cars ITequentIy exceed the
posted speed limit of 25m ph. During weekends, when the applicants admit their use is projected
to be the highest, this stretch of Oleander is lined with the cars of those using the Park and the
nearby Boys and Girls C]ub, ITom early morning to late in the evening. Chi]dren, doing what
children do, cut across the street, since there is no comer or crosswalk. Turning left, especially,
in the middle of this block will be very dangerous.
The Raven Avenue access leads directly into a block that is residential and a cul-de-sac.
5. Office Facilities
See other comments regarding the lack of appropriateness of having a commercial facility
in the middle of a residential neighborhood.
6. Customer Parking
As noted above, commercial parking will negatively impact the already busy street.
7. Lighting
Neighbors whose homes abut the entrance will now have all night ]ighting shining in their
windows.
8. Hours of Operation
The proposed hours of operations mirror most of the busiest use times on Oleander. In
addition to the Park and Boys and Girls Club cited above, this section of Oleander is the main
thoroughfare for children walking and riding to the two elementary schools a few blocks away.
9. Security
Clearly with the addition of a night watchman, perimeter fencing and a security gate, the
applicants are anticipating problems caused by their business, that have not previously been
present in the neighborhood. Our neighborhood has a very low crime rate; in 18 years young
people who had run out of gas, once tried to siphon gas out of one of our vehicles and a car
window was once broken. We have never felt the need for the measures described above. Our
neighborhood will look like it is crime-ridden, solely because of the addition of a commercial
structure.
10. Signage
A 2-foot sign on perimeter fencing with a security gate does not seem very low key. All
other surrounding structures, houses, have one to two inch numbers, if that, indicating their street
address.
11. Surrounding Land Uses and Structures
The surrounding land is filled with homes and an attractive and very heavily used park.
No one who has lived or traveled on this section of Oleander could believe that the park, the
ballfields and the nearby Boys and Girls Club are not actively supported by the community. In
eighteen years, I have never seen any evidence of fire or transient activity (with an open, level
field it is highly unlikely). The "increasing juvenile foot traffic" belongs to children going safely to
school and the many activities afforded by the Park and the nearby Boys and Girls Club. The bus
stop is seldom used, since most people drive and the public phone is in the Park for the benefit of
young people calling home for a ride at the end of a ball garne or other recreational activity.
The are no large community centers adjacent to this property, the elementary schools are
blocks away, the nearest church, to my knowledge is even further on east Naples Street, the
community hospital, though visible because of its vantage point on top of a hill, is miles away and
traffic rrom Highway 805 is seldom heard. As I took my morning stroll by the easement, the most
notable sound was that of birds singing.
While the applicants home street apparently resembles a junk yard, the only inappropriate
vehicles in my neighborhood, are the heavy equipment, already grading the easement and the
construction trucks parked outside one of the applicants home, on a short residential street.
We urge you not to approve this application.
Sincerely,
/ (r~~0
MARY HOBSON
1:
::Jd)Lq-CLl~ i q,
-~+0( 1\; ; -LJG~~~i C''"-.J 0 \::CfO€d
);:;;./'-..Yv ; j-UI jil.(., \-1-01:' i2'EV',("l() Ct(yJ, MCJ..-1Dr
~tJ::(\.J\ /i \ \\- R-E-~d j
.~ 0.\11 G(,('\ +'\\'3 'l(\ It:SjAfJ5c
--10 1)-(\1'5 . nG+~-F~c\ o+- fC5~'( b k.. R, u, '. .
.":=):.tD\C(~-h\C:.\\lt-j .--1bi a!cB wh-ee\eJ \/eh\c.ks
C\+ \'dCO bl'K ~ 0 l-ec~nd-e,~ /ke,
\ "}(q- 5\\~/ A 0..111 CfPCS'\l)j
~ h\:-::> \)fC> ))0S a..[ '. . _ .~,
~ ~~h)? +is+ -trcr+-+~~ lS
\>lj -\-'\\-0+ ~~\'\::t-r(\ . L/tJ C ~~'C\JI etC.f) ,~t::'
-t l'~I\.Q.., ~(€.- -tW 0 S~ \\001.::5 lD h. \ ck, ll'~ +11 ,5
IGG-c\ c\Ql \V\ ~'50 0., \S6~ ~ ~j\\ l S c.\l.A~
,1) C\ 'j \.'C,-!). C T:I +\\. ~ },-C C\ ct~ ~\ ~\ J CAn J ,y-~( 5
t<~C()QI\S pctJ\t: '-\\;tQ+ cc~so ~hQ... CI€C\nc\x.n ){ilC,
---tc',-~h--t.,C C1o..\ l~=-h~c~~-c \ s.,.-J \,~\scnc\11~
V"'\6- (IC ~)\'6n0 =- \ r' (;~+ \ c -61 51{\-€e"V\~ fu. pt. .
(-\.~\C\. -\\(~\-hc C(J\\~!O-{ s~t, 19€.\S\o..nc C\Vuc
. ')F~-(diV'~ ~r~lc. G('\. L,LC'und€\ A-uE, ,
~J.--) \II (. y, \-eG..d s \. '\ +0 \\~,_~<)tC' c lId
.. CC\V~C\f) '~l\~ ~~c\-f(..-.~.-+.~.. "(~!f'C c \.l~ I del F),
.. -5~'Q.Ol\d 1 S5l-t.C ,l)0jI0{'~() ) ~ he. -=jo{~,i~
"~'Ld P(~/l kVl~'--~,_'~~\'lOo/ S\:)l'6 ~3c';J's ~
:.~llr ls C;JlLb / 1)6_ \ ~ \,Ie;L_: k(~i -e )"-.eci ,~YA E'-
:-+ I ck\ :5 ~-n'-C.LL CtflC'.. 8-1 ' v c -h c/ d.:5' (> cu l d .
~L\\{:~ h()~{:\-~ t~\"lt\ t \Jl~C(s~_ h (-\ ~ 2.XiSCc!-2 r
.J l \-e.. ~S:C\1;~:..j-~\ (1 -fl\-E:...-:~.Y\ ,) n-c' \'" I:\. 1...>...l\C,i ')
:::.J . Ij ) .
\~~)~\Slc\'(:!-;Vl~ '-fh,s vroj<--CI ~Y'opDscd 01)
L~ 'k c,- n d ~ ~ _ -tv c ' .
.-..L.! l' 0 Yl
l, r ic-e b(..~+
, -- i".- 5
v~()r~ II-Ca..r ,
\..'f'LI..-
C
(\ U--L..
(1) ))) /J-(, ~tlCi('.
-\ VI..-c.. rCI ~C.'I\ ~\
L\ i.J -;0 U..)c uJ ~ I diE:.- -+:: brl(~ j L,--p
. 6H\.EC PCli\+S bt\'lJ ~\-+h-e\ ----hd5~ C'\
.. ---lVvE, ~-t\~t.. hC\\,t. \,)f'*I\ S\Ylc,l) \)iC~,:sh
'"
..1\\cJi()"\~\\'s c\J<'r\ lrC-\cc \0.1". If..h\ch
. -SC\lj)t.- \lCl\.>c .beLI) cS'tcu--+-c6 bVj nQ\~Vtb0i'hOod
. Ktd~5 \0.C\\....c\\~S ,-\y\~ +\(u\W~~ ~J\do\-c((\.
", \!€ S)~ h-(>[.c \~ -\Cc'+ -\-n"f-+sc. C\v\..cl L~\.~n\rli.s
. \t\ ~ h,s C\)cV\ '5\)c\c-E::- \c+, bu.:~t ~\ k<"L 11o..s
.. U~\lq:' \,xc n -~\ rQ VI 81 C n-t C' l\ v\ ly 5 de. -S, 1\}.Je,.
de; hc\\,(. a..\'\ \\\€~C\...\ C\.\'l<-V\~ e\DD\-E.\\~
.. \j.':",l\\c\i C'j\ \~,) -\-'o...vc. \ -4-h\0L,-sh -1k,:,,) Op..!21l
,
5?~ *0+, \(tS) -ih€((... \0 ..soVV\e. C\\~~
6Y\ lYe€- b6-.cks I'de D-F -kv\c..es on ~/l1'€...
6f~n 8p4-ce \~t,
n~ . N'-E..lj h bo ,:3 C\ 0-d ~ --+::-e-I
~-h'-o n ~1 ~ =:t h \ 'S pro pC' :SEd S' i -f-c. Lu (+h
'I\C:\-t~6€q -h~cd=-t;-c I~:::::,nt;+ 0-. jccdideC\. .
==r-+s tvc,t- c1-e- 3 i r-a b it --Iv t (y) YY\ ed ~ q+-e..
n~ l ~:)\ be [:S L""" h. (; fl CA 0*-.. ~ (:5 f\..,~~ ct CA. pc +: ~'Of
'--~~+s Y\E.-~~~\\ bors We (l(C oe-en 10
c-th-ev-. lc\eu.s ----r-~ -thts O?-Qf\ 'SpC\c~ \0+
82Cl~~ b€+w~.o) Cl'E'e<.1t c\er- AVE.. Qn d
k.~IJ€~ ~e. . ~A.:;e.. C\(C- cd\ s+rcn~'.lj c)3C\\I\~i
-t h~s pru y(<5-€~ ~ lJ. S; kX:..S3 ~ heft VV\ o v.- ,
rW-l'jhbC>\\\OD~, l~jc a.l\ -iCe I ~(h\0 ~~p-e cjt
prc, p05c'c\ ,5hGl"\O\ D-c.. lDC'~-\-(C\ d..1-- d)~q'f\ 5l
Cc:,jY\~y\-c. f-c. ~ 0- \ L\.(t..~ cS \c.. ~ ST \-c\.le 6\.\5\ I\JL.S'
C'.Q\\--\--<I~' l1\~~ -\0 0.. leSlcl,,'ni-Icc.{) C\lfCCL
~~1 0.... Ctl IY\Y\;l.-(' rC ~ (I...) O'C\-Q...,.
Ih Clll~ ~"6 ~ --fy t) 6 v.... \" --+ i ,,'~
\-e5)~c+-~l\ ~ }
1(€.-\)\(\ l~-€... C)01\.'K S t L()o..Y\.~~ -'-....)~I\E S /i?c;q ~E
he,ln-€..- Cl\..'n.cy-- 4 \Jcr,\ ~0t\C",\\\-ec\~\ -€1\-tS O..\--- --fI:,c ,
"
January 30, 1996
Iv....,.
'I......... "'-. ~.. ~ : \ I ;:~~ f"
City of Chula Vista
Attn: Environmental Review Coordinator
P.O. Box 1087
Chula Vista, Ca. 91912
FrBO 2'()r
iJ 1f-
~,
PLA'
o lV,r.!.
, ~. i 1',/ \.....
Gentlemen:
This letter is in response to the pending RV storage. Since our property is
one that backs to the property in question, we challenge you to consider the
following:
1) Increase of traffic on Oleander. We already have the activity from the Park.
With cars parked on both sides of the street, it is already a dangerous
situation watching for kids. Having large RV's in this area would only
increase the opportunity for a potential accident or death.
2) Why put a RV storage in a residential area not even zoned for it? There are
many commercial areas this could be put in off of "H' Street.
3) Proposed fencing will be a delight for the taggers.
4) What about the water run off from the property?
5) What effect will this have to the designated open space in that area?
In driving around the immediate area, we have 36 RV's of which 7 were parked
on the street. There were 20 boats and again, 7 were parked on the street. This
would indicate the storage is not needed for the residents locally.
We ask you to consider how this RV storage would be an asset to this area.
Remember these are our homes in this area. You need to drive by any storage
lot and see how it looks after it has been there for a while. Why would you
even consider putting something like that there? We feel the neighborhood
is in petty good shape, please do not clutter it up.
Very truly yours, \~ \.
~MJ. t., ~ 1 V\.a.A.A4---
Jac~ & Deanna Marks
463 Redwing Road
Chula Vista, Ca. 91911
o
-....".
rES 0 5 13~>
r.
..
To: Barbara Reid
Environmental Coordinator
City Of Chula Vista
January 26, 1996
With de\.;'p concern, I am writing you this letter.
My family of five, we have been leaving at this addrees , from when
thL: onf' family homes Wf'Tf> huilt i.n 1970j So for the past 25 years
W~ have been members of this community.
It is my understanding that this residential community is a residence
zone and not a business zone; That is why we are not allowed to put-
up commercial advertising. It is my strBgest disire to bring this to
your attention to help us keep this storage project out of our neigh-
borhood, for several reasons.
1. This is not a buisines5 Zone.
2. This storage project will bring the value of our properties down.
3. After talking to the neighbors we are 100% against it; Some of the
area residents are furious about it.
4. More reason to attract burglary.
5. And as a board-member of Park View Little League which is right
across the street; I am very concerned about the safety of the
little children that play baseball right there across the street.
6. And as a parent, my child attends grammar school right there by
the park at Greg Rogers Elementary School.
7. Also the children from th~ Boys And Girls Club go back and forth
every day to school, in groups of about 30 kids.
8. I & my family are completly against it.
9. Please help us to encourage our kids good habits; By showing them
that we will fight for them to protect them.
10. Please do not allow money hungry individuals take this away from
our kids.
Sincerely and ever grateful,
-------- - ' /'
~{(l1.idk/ b(F'2.
rinidad Gonzalez
f
February 5, 1996
<,
Mr, Douglas D. Reid
Environmental Review Coordinator
City of Chula Vista
P.O. ilox 10B7
Chula Vista, CA 91912
PHOPO",;O RV STORAGE FACILITY
File No. IS-96-l6/PCC-96-lB
INITIAL STUDY (I.S.)
Denr Nr. Reid:
In rev; el"ing the "ApplicaLlon for Ill';' t lal Study" and related
c10ClllileTlts, the following environmental lSSl1es have surfaced.
On 0a~e #5 of the "Application for IS, item #4, BIOLOGY,
qu~stions a&b ask if the site involves coastal sage scrub and if
the project site is in a natural or parti311y natural state.
Wherehy hoth answers are listed as "No". Question "c" asks that
if items a&b were anaered "Yes", has a biological survey been
C0'1011Cto,j on the property. Again, the 'ln~W3r is listed as "No".
The or;~inal condition of the site was R nntural to partially
n(1r.l1I"Rl state with a variety of shrubs, ~2-1Gonal tall grasses,
wilri fJowers and the possibility of CORstR] sage scrub, This
3';' ',2 ,J:l~ cleared of the vegetation an.] ,>,>\r'ified during or shortly
befor3 the middle of December 1995. Conversely, the date of the
H;\p;Jlicution for IS", as received by t:12 City of Chula Vista, is
lic~2G C3 December 22, 1995, which is a:tc" the site was cleared
and :;cClrified.
QU'Sti0~ "d" of item #4 requests a "d~3c~1,tion of all trees &nd
v2'~2tation on the site. Indicate 10cRtion, height, diameter and
w;,i,-:::1 (if any) will be removed by the :,coj"ct." The answer listed
is "lfone - Eucalyptus trees." This an,s-'.1er is not factual.
HO'12'Jer, since all evidence has been coc,veniently removed from
the site, vegetation species, with exc?~tjon to the trees, can
not 02 accurately verified.
In that regard, the "Application for IS" s~~ms to have been
completed and submitted in bad faith, If coastal sage scrub or
othp-r protected species of vegetation wp-re verified in a biologi-
cal study, as should have been done, np-~Rtive ramifications may
have resulted to this project.
Mr. Douglas D. Reid
Proposed RV Storage ~acility
February 5, 1996
Page 111
Witn the above information in mind, it 18 r2quested, not only
by myself, but multiple residents in the area, that you take
tneae actions into consideration when researching and producing
th0 IS.
~/1~
JOhn A, Stokes
463 T~r~Rh Street
Chu13 Vista, CA 91911
(6~9) 1)56-1044
CoO .)tltrley Horton, Hayor - City of Ch111C\ Vista
Chula Vista City Council
'::1a1 .1oseI1hl-~r,~,City
Roger Daoust,
John Lippitt,
CU ff S~"anson, "
Goh Leiter, City of Chula Vista P18nning Director
0ichael Meacham, City of Chula Vi~t. ~nnservation Coord.
!lone cloore, City of Chula Vista Asst. ';ity Attorney
Gre~ Rogers Park Neighbors
of Chula VistFl Eno;fneering
" " " "
"
" " "
Ii
j-:-lful\ll ;
tJ,AlJl v.J t- EteU-,-" /lUEIe,
J27.1- Je.AU<;.v piJE
J'a.l't 3::) 6"'7(.
,;
,0'
tcuS/CS DI2 e,J
b /l!uiVDhVYtehto! levie0 r!txH,draa-for
C ~ uf CAu/G Ur:5+~
. ': j ,':'---.....
FtsO 5 :'J^",
-. ,
c9ir '. 'thlj Je+fev is ih Y'eSa,.J -L \.fie.- prvposeJ tu
S'-fo ,. OS "" f' 0 cd "...j'1 i h 'I h e I J..oo b k)c..Jv (,) F- )(0. <X?., A J.e.. I h '-H e....
SbG+ E hSh+ of WQ'1' 'N-e. hove.. ]\'V~c( a.+-/J.7S'~VfEiY1 Av<.-
+-01" I q '1 €ovS I-"S /...t Q~s 41e S"~, eet- frurn "Me Vi3A.+ d ~'1'
'rV~) OhJ 011 \.Ue- net'Shh.)rs il1~i.5 avea hod-. b€eh IQd -i.o be/,-pv-e-
%c.t "He S/J6t- t rls)J- of <.....Jd'1 Lu?o.r --b he. o.lJsv-eeh be/+-/: '-da-t-
heue" hOIfJP€h("J,) W [f. he'!" beeh ~ hd.+-L.t~ ~I -t;('lot, 'there.;
wCv-e seve, 0./ ueY'';4 I~e old mah<...~.,(tc h~~j.,es ) dca,c~ c)
jCt:: p/ani-; wild r;./JtJ..J0,,; same <:ac-h...s ~lIlcl ~ec..Johcl '5.....cs~{""J,
The cpp I/Ci.\hb Gild. hC'-/-' OI'1~ Y-~YI<>DUe l/.J,~ dr-'1 'j"D~.J \fd~'1
r~~eJ -cuerl.j-fhihS' -rh-e E'l1vir"hmenif a~ eLo{o5'1 oft..f..lte
+',elJ ~)~j been hBjQ..J.Il)~ frY> pCK.-1eol b'-( lAAoiC,. fe-of/G' Yhe. rndnzi:}Y1,k
ol1d. (k~'d pc>s.~ /')0 i,v~ hci.2.0"J; Gl1c( In -tdd-J hQ.J.Sec( b'rJJ,;
\"c)bh,+j) OpDSSU.y",5 i:\nd. ~kU.hb, kryu UseJ +0 ~"'1Lt.eh-+ 1fJ).e..
-DelJ 111+-hE: euel1il15S,) eaiif1j ;nJ("ch -f;Vh.. Cf1,..~ 5roU....J,
.A/II enLJin>()W'C'.-rta.\ S-kl1 ShO>J..,) /la~ heeh dlJY\t:;. k>fw~~
'-t-hOJe -pe'-11(-e. WOI-€ (j/la..;oc1 -+0 -btuJ, \.f1..e. held.
Yve (\ re h isA./1 OPpCI4".-J ""'"" or- f.-U s-f-uyc<;e 10+ ih enoll-
het'SUorh,,<:>cl, .A~pkl+ dttd. pvA d,Y>) l)e.h,'J~ d,~ 1'10 re.p B,-,<"i'}-Le;:j-
~r lYIah~c':\Yli+a- aVId l./he,. oniMb!J Uho IiIN2.eP if) i+, {he pe"iPk,
who ).-~<'..{ 'the :De IJ sho~d be vnode ~ I-es-{ore If,
~nc.ere
~/...SrF7 I
, ~
February 5, 1996
{
--,
'. '~....
Charles H. & Lai-Ching McDermott
448 Redwing Road
Chula Vista, CA 91911-3838
1"(805,'1
;.:1]f,
L'
',;.
Environmental Review Coordinator
ATTN: Ms. Barbara Reid
P.O. Box 1087
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Ms. Reid:
We have received the Notice of Initial Study for the proposed
Greg Rogers Recreational Vehicle Storage, file # IS-96-16 PCC-96-
18. We are against the development of the property for the
purpose of RV storage.
We have reviewed the project description and have the
following co~ments.
1. Issce #3 of the proposal states, "Surfacing will be of
natural materials i.e., dirt only, asphalt where vehicles will
trave1.R When vehicles are parked for extended periods of time
they leak oil & fuel. This oil & fuel will be absorbed into the
ground and the surrounding area. This will cause a pollution and
fire hazard to the neighborhood. During the rainy season this
oil & fuel will run off into neighboring property. Grass will
grow, as it does now, under the vehicles and'when mixed with the
oil & fuel, will be a serious fire hazard.
2. Under Section C. ProJect Characteristics/para #6 the question
is asked, "If any highly flammable or potentially explosive
material or substance be stored on the site?R Answer, "NOR.
What about all of the gasoline, diesel fuel and propane stored in
these vehicles? Think what would happen if the oily grass should
catch fire, for any reason, and start igniting all of these fuel
tanks in very close proximity to each other.
3. Under Section C, Project Characteristics/para #8 the question
is asked, "Are any improvements i.e. water, electric, gas, and
sewer lines required?R Answer "NOR. What about toilet
facilities for employees? Are they to use Porta-Potties? Where
will water for vegetation come from? Will the existing fire
hydrants be adequate to combat a fire in this area?
4. Some owners may not thoroughly drain and rinse their gray
water and raw sewage tanks prior to entering the facility.
Valves and fittings sometimes leak. This will pollute the
surrounding ground and contaminate other properties in the
neighborhood.
5. Most RV's have TVs, stereos, CBs, microwave ovens and other
expensive electronic equipment in them. A large concentration of
unoccupied vehicles, with these types of equipment installed,
will be a great attraction/temptation to the criminal element and
encourage them to enter our neighborhood.
6. We feel the project will become an eye sore on the
neighborhood and lower property values.
ve.rY RespectfU1QI'
. I ~
If/~{~:1;#2~' \
Charles H. McDermott
ct:ll:":,, ;Jjtt~ tlt1~/!-
Lai-Chrng McDermott
-.
-
BERNER ASSOCIATES
(619) 479-7028
REALTORS
4806 WHIPPOC>lM1ll LANE
BONITA, CA 91902
,I'
Fran -
~ tr
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR
P.O. Box 1087
Chula Vista, CA. 91912
Subj: Case No. IS-96-16 PCC-96-18
Proposed RV stora~e facility.
1200 Block of Oleander Ave.
To the Coordinator
In my opinion the proposed RV Park will have a detrimental
effect upon the market value of all homes in the area. It
will have a definite and direct effect upon homes along
Raven Ave. and Redwing Rd. A 10 or 20% reduction in value
does not appear unreasonable.
Anything that reduces privacy and increases traffic will
have an immediate negative effect on the desirability of a
neighborhood. Nor do people want to live where the dust and
noise level has been increased.
I am writing on behalf of a concerned friend who resides on
Redwing Road. This family will probably sell their home in
a few years and are rightly concerned that their retirement
plans are being put in jeopardy.
( ;i?-#7~ 'Z--><-!-'1..
Carroll A. Berner
Broker/Owner
Feb.1,1996
9
,
!i<"'I:ifl..L -ti:5. /7...LLcL
FL'"
"Q /; t
"
,C't
&ij tl'J... f(J/d]j!/('PcL {( jOc-(t-
~i;tl/~1t~ /l/:4~~ ~~~a~~:(
;/(~{' -- 90 -- /;1 ~/(c-i .' dlClz./[,::)T _/;;U' dL,.~jty)-
;;,~:t ;t'L" 1tG~'ltfL?~t;07J'
,/ ' -J. . 'j /
. ,/ ' :: .' / (?;?) {! ;';' .::'~ {,l(,? 1/ r c}{I ;/ /-: (.c.,':./
~/,.a~7 /'!(,);;"~' 1j,/)/c~/j) ;/). )/(~7/~/l((< ~',--
,../_ //c"(c'cf..'( '-''/' ![~~. . / /Uf./{!c....-L t<.<
..~ Jl-- - c:- . 1/) U /( ;/ ",A:i'/ (( tc:'/L. Y /' 'c />7(1.1, .:!..~
;2 /! _'~(7'/';/""~://cC(;c,'# ?f:~~/ 1.7 j.;.?.:.)/2J<.
i J . iI .' " --: .; . -1/). J. /. ) / //
~. ,/-/(eC~r (~. / .cv (./ L( I,. I.! - au ~c . r !.. "_ /'
/.j(ij Z.;t //1 (j '-Y C/2J-<LC ''.~lL:~i/;.J7((
.' ,,' -i' /... / /.., c;/. /, . '0' /,
,,. ..'., ///. /(..//,; /. ,/ //-:/ ...'// . ."l~~ /./'-'1 ;' ,~
(;'('7..;,~:./L. '/~. (, 'Z" ,/0. '", ;'~~c'(h,.,/c';~~7/<(-' L '/
. iL '-- . '!(i" IL. -,. (Lc<) , ,
. ;::(~ ,/:!...lc~~{!1 r ,;;;!j;/ cj (!i.ll/f!lt<<j.
di(i!ril1L flL 7U' //!ii7;(tlcJ1/C/) J,( 1.:J.
l:u/a~7i~.. !:C~(Y4:Ll~~/ ~I/);~.~U {}t;/oi:icl~z ~
,t:; ~/ ;{~u. / ~/!7 J.~(!fld " ;;;6~ 7L.~
If{e- Jd!?JZfYJlld?l!;;aJ{cnc, ~ /
11'(}((c'y'"-(/cf" I. ~~//-)ICL/:.J. ('{/;l).~/.(/( '.(/'y, v/,/tl/1.-V'
. -.);/ /fyl /C;:~.. IlIl!. !(/( {d-t(jf:f~y. I
j !<(j('?~... ~'/~(('.:;/fc;cf~~':? ~/u,(t( (-1u:~(//::-4~
.L u v, ....L)~ t (,/ L:. ,'Ii c.e . /vu;l;< 0 t11/{OocL., d. )
;:./, , ,d /:/Va~:L;&, ,Z (1(///6:~",:,I,' ~~{Ulj,t~/,
tUI?t, 9~, (//tJ&!.. I )/({~,~~LJ1,-/ ;i /;7.1
,,!tL{ 9 A tf<1i //ddd'-- ;;ftf'j 'v / .1/(1 k6~:J .
I()/a/U! /;:/~// 5({//d~'4,''l,fL ;7/'U;?tU;:-L/t..
. 7/!; ~/ld~_~ i~ !~/t1 ci/a(~ 7'
!U~~~< u'fJ~J,Ji"J7/{#AY /J:'-/
pca/~t?r ;;0 _, /~/dcL~// ~<I
,/(,Ie "u,"~ ~7/cZ;? u) ':'160(, j-
/c//# /(,L;,,\L([(t- Uc..--- /''UJ;ijt/irU. cCLtz.{ JY,-,c
J/;}t.~/ (( Y JJcI.U//C cut tiJ4 /L /?!C)iLLI/, (
,f, / /.
t//,~,.i--/C'~ /-/ "
idL{f// . ;;(,') (!(;.'f5!~'C:/./l~{ (tl//l'uic!/ {4
-,I./(~/:V' '/ '///1'// (j,L(f?lt'/ 1///;//("/./<:-
;: . ___."'oJ-_ ' . l, /1 .;; _ --', '.. --< -<- ~
'-I, /, ~, ' , -/y .'>- /:) ,/" (
I ','I .j t.. I: '- //U CiA Uj ([ / /6 ~.l u~( l-
I / ,,' " /;:- /1 '. ' . . /, I
('../ (ICUi'.'~' I~ (lLJ.: of/fU/1 (' /:.<ju!u:',/v'
/_ 7~ ,/ ~'A i;cJ !/!('()(/l / .' , / "
uJ/~~ t., ~ cu:/J:~/j 7 (07/ -k!C;Lu{C;:'Z; 07/ , ;(/ .
, c'-' c I ("(17/ ('" ) ,:_') _ ,j y/ L,ij L7 _ qp)'-! ./C/ aJ:CZk
&/ /}J<f:W0d~Y /
/&::~ ~ fiL~/Zf Jdiul <;;; -<i:C<. L '"
/ ('
v-' C~G..., J C(,,-,. ,,'~ r,,-~_\ ~---- ---.......
. I '
r",. _/ .;,/ ,
~ ~ " II,' , AI.. . ,~'
/;U~(;..../".j!j/o/~:- ....e'l .lot.
(%<:Jc?z... 1/5 Ic-/ d {flY / /
i"-:.. "';:-"r" ,
1250 \Vaxwing Lane
Chula Vista, CA 91911-3821
2 February, 1996
FEBO G 7J:?f,
Douglas D. Reid
J
Environmental Review Coor'dinator
PO Box 1087
Chula Vista, CA 91912
Dear.r.iI Reid
I am responding to the Notice of Initial Study regarding the proposal to place an RV
,;torage yard at the property located at the 1200 block ofOlearlder Avenue.
My wife, Connie J "lack and I, Travis A. Mack, wi,;h to state Out opposition to placinf:
this type "ffacility there. 11lat location, which is only one house away fit'm our home,
would be the only conmlercial establi,;hment in the middle of what is entirely a residential
area. We cannot see arlY benefit that this facility would bring to us, OUt children, or to the
rest ofthe conullunity. Vie believe that it would only lower oUt. propetty value, arId detract
ITom the quality ofJife that we, (>tit children arId oW' neighbors enjoy here.
V:e wish to be informed in advance of any actions, or decisions to act on this proposed
project We e},.'pect to be afforded a charlce to influence this matter.
7
~=(f/1# c~~ln~
t
,,-.1"'\'.
j"::C:-ic';' t 13a /J ~J
_. ~-f:f1. ~f I2ew o-z .... ...... ... ..
______.._ __.."...___.__0._
- --------. - - ---
J;I k7'~~kzA-r w-f W u~
, /~(itrP0~~
LAf V'yt &/t~.... ~d ~ ;LtA.-/
KIUCS.l4 U/-P 1k~f J1n/Y7~ ~
fuA-t Vvt a-&.1~ ~ CIf, t{ ~ UC3- ~
~~i -r~cJIh~i-~~~)
~!. ~ r ~7 (/U{ c;LUD
12, Uc <; ~ ...j--~1i ~ Jt-~, .
f~ ~ l_:d?Q1):;J~-~- ._n
.. 7 ~~ ~ ~. -
7hr---Ia1 . ~ .
;
January 26, 1996
JAN] ('
"
. H
Douglas D, Reid/Barbara Reid
Environmental Review Coordinator
P.O. Box 1087, Chula Vista
California 91912
Dear Sirs:
This is in response to your letter regarding the proposed RV storage (numbering
268 vehicles) on the 1200 block of Oleander. As residents of this housing area,
we strongly oppose this project for the following reasons:
1. Oleander is a very busy street as is- we have city transits, school
buses, and all sorts of vehicles comin~from Telegraph Canyon or from
the Orange exit into Oleander.
We also have the Girls and Boys Club which houses a nursery for youngsters
and school age children'who also walk to 'and from the school.
On Bingo nights you should see the cars parked on Oleander because there
are not enough parking spaces within the G. and B, Club compound. Cars
are usually parked in our street on Redwing Rd. during these times,
Having a storage area right in our housing will create more traffic ~
and more likely our side streets will be utilized coming and going to
this RV Parking/Storage locati~n, thus i~viting strangers to the
neighborhood. How aho~t the drainage, since they will have to oave
some of that open space. '
Majority of residents are in the 50-60+ age bracket and some retired,
we can not afford to move at today's housing prices. Please leave our
housing area alone, Do a study somewhere else where you have more space
--preferably the industrial or commercial locations. to the south.
This study will ;.,.pact the quality of life in our area.
This open space have been graded and scraped, a lot of the natural
plants have been destroyed~also used as sanctuary for migratory birds.
Your very careful study of this project will be greatly appreci~ted,
2.
There are 3 schools servicing this area, therefore young children
are walking to and from school during the day,
3.
We have Greg Rogers Park where Little League games are held and on
weekends we have cars parked on both sides of the road when the
park is being used for parties and picnics thus brinaing a big crowd
ta this neighborhood.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Sincerely, ,''' " IV
~~~ f-1/iL1~~~
LEONARDO AND VILMA COQUIA ~I
460 Redwing Rd" Chula Vista
Tel. 421-8753 - home
691-5730 - work
1
City of Chula Vista
Environmental Review Coordinator
276 Fourth Ave. Chula vista
;1'_;,,1
'--" ...., : ~
\,
January 24, 1996
Attn.: Barbara Reid
Dear Ms. Reid;
My name is John Maschka, and I reside at 1272 Raven, Ave. in the City
of Chu1a vista. I am writing in response to the notice I received
regarding the purposed R.V. storage near my home (case No. 15-96-16).
I have several objections to this type of enterprise being placed in
my neighborhood. My concerns are as follows:
TRAFFIC
From the map provided it appears that the location is open on both
the west and east sides; the west side being Raven Ave. and the east
opening onto Oleander. If the applicants are planning to allow
ingress and egress on both streets that subjects both streets to the
possibility of large, heavy vehicles using our street. Both streets
are the customary 40' residential width. Some motorhomes , in
particular, can exceed this width. This makes exiting to such a
street difficult, and has the potential of causing through traffic to
become blocked until the motorhome clears the way.
There is also the potential of people parking the R.V.s on the
street. For example, someone wishing to return to the storage lot and
arriving before they are open for business. In my particular
situation, the south end of the 1200 block of Raven Street, curves
and descends on a slight grade before it hits Palomar. Large
vehicles parked on the west side of the street block the view of any
cars coming north on Raven when pulling out of my drive.
ESTHETICS
AS I understand, the applicants are purposing a 12' fence around the
property. I am also assuming that they purpose to use chain link. The
west side, which faces my house, is open for about 200'. That means
that I and my neighbors would have to look at 200' of chain link
fence. This is not the type of eye sore one wants on a residential
street. The applicants have already cleared the area of the
pre-existing plants and tress (including an old growth stand of
Manzanita trees) which gave the neighborhood a "green belt". I don't
wish to see this replaced with an ugly fence.
In closing I must add that I feel this type of enterprise in a
residential area is totally inappropriate. Ours is a quiet
neighborhood and I, like most of my neighbors want to keep it that
way. In the past we have had to fend off such incursions as
convenience stores, and the like, and to allow a commercial activity
is likely to open the door to all types of commercial endeavors.
Sincerly / C. ' ..
fduf?Jku~
FEB0513::!r
r
February I, 1996
c.
,... .'
To: Barbara Reid , \-< E.' ( th
Re: Greg Rogers Recreational
~I\R..IL
Vehicle Storage Project
My name is Linda Lawrence. I am the original owner at 1275 Raven Avenue. I
have lived here for 26 years. I share 19R feet of my property with the SDG&E property that
is being considered for lease for R. V. storage space rentals. I have some concerns with Ihe
application that has been submitted to the city regarding the lease of this land; I strongly
disagree with many of the points made in the application.
f'irst, the natural vegetation and wildlife was destroyed illegally by the applicants on
the last week of August, 1'195. This almost five acre field was alive with squirrels, rabbits,
king snakes, hawks, opossums, skunks, and an occasional coyole. My children built forls in
the large manzanita trees, picked wild mustard flowers, went exploring for bird nests, and
collected rocks all year long. They rode their bikes on the many trails and discovered the
"Big Dipper'" in the night sky away from the street lights. This land was in a totally natural
state, alive with hundreds of species of native plants and animals. I was out of town the
weekend in ^ugust when this field was stripped to bare dirt. Seeing this dead, bare, graded
field upon my return made me want to cry.
Second, most of the homes in this area have large lots with room for storing
recreational vehicles such as trailers, motorhomes, and boats alongside garages. They are
not parked in front yards. driveways, or along the curb in fronl of homes. Therefore, I do
not see a great need for R. V. storage in the immediate neighborhood, nor do any of the
numerous neighbors I have talked to about this issue.
Next, this area is very dark at night. I am very concerned about these empty vehicles
attracting people looking for stereos, cameras, microwaves, CB radios, camping equipmenl,
and the like. These things can be stolen and sold before an owner even knows his or her
vehicle has been vandalized. One night security watchperson cannot adequately partol over
250 vehciles on close to five acres; nor could he or she stop a group of people seeking
trouble late at night.
Several neighbors have been told hy one of the applicants that he intends to store his
company vehicles in this area. Being the wife of a man who has worked in construction for
over 20 years, I am sure these trucks will be exiting well before business hours and returning
late into the evening. Construction trucks are usually required to be on job sites by 7:00
A.M. These trucks will need to he loaded, unloaded, cleaned, and repaired. This applicant,
being in the concrete business, will have his vehicles loaded with concrete finishing tools,
board feet lumher for forms, melal stakes, and chemicals such as concete cure, paint,
solvents, and cleaners.
In the 26 years I have lived adjacent to it, I have never known of a transienl camp
anywhere on the property. The prohlem of illegal alien foot traffic has been reduced to
almost nonexistence in the 10 years or so since the newer housing tract closed off the open
areas just east of interstate 805. I can only recall one microwave oven, an old chair, and an
occasional load of yard debris being dumped next to my house. That is not a lot of garbage
for 26 years. We take pride in our neighborhood and have promptly hauled off any trash
that has been illegally dumped there.
The need for R. V. storage in the Chula Vista area has been greatly exaggerated by
the applicants. 1 called the Orange Tree Trailer Park and was told they had storage spaces
available. The K.O.A. campground in Chula Vista has storage spaces available. Senrly
Storage on Main Street has spaces availahle. All of these storage facilities are within a ten
minute drive of my home.
As I stated in the beginning of my letter, 1 feel the application for this project has
misrepresented many important points, among them:
(l) The natural hahitat was destroyed prior to any permits being pulled by the
applicants.
(2) Applicant has personal ptans to use the area for construction equipment storage.
(3) Neighhors were misrepresented hy applicants as being supportive of the project,
when the lots in this neighborhood have adequate space to keep R.V.s on private
property.
(4) Security concerns would call ]'Jr lights to be installed, which are not welcome
shining in our hedroom windows at night.
(5) Traffic surrounding major holidays would increase significantly, congesting our
neighborhood streets, our community park, and our little league baseball field.
(6) Freeway access is not convenient, with large rigs having to travel through blocks
and blocks of residential streets before finding their way to the interstate or major
thoroughfares.
On behalf of all concerned neighbors around the streets Oleander, Raven, Thrush, and
Redwing, as well as many cul-de-sacs in our community, I implore you to consider all these
poinls before allowing this projecl to become an unwelcome reality. PLEASE PRESERVE
OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
With Deepest Concerns;
'J ) \-----P
.7\ l~- ,J(~-I (pc.u,^->,,-<___ ~
Linda Lawrence
1275 Raven Avenue
Chula Vista. CA 9 I 911
(619) 421..7571
\
;
February 3, 1996
\~~.
c.\\~ .
~x.:Q
j
Environmental Review Coordinator
P.O. Box 1087
Chula Vista, CA. 91912
\ \.\,,',.;.,'
\'" '
Dear Mr. Reid:
I am writing in regards to the Environmental Impact siudy for the R V storage facility for 268
Wheeled vehicles in the 1200 block of Oleander Ave. If the conditional use permit is granted, it
will cause many detrimental affects to the quality oflife in our neighborhood and property values.
Our property values will be draslically lowered, not the assessed value (for property taxes) but the
market value, which is the dollar value we expect to receive should we sell our homes. Few
people would be willing to purchase a home which is situated next to or in the vicinity of a facility
such as this. Why you may ask. We will be subject to noise created by people who store their
RVS at this facility. These people will be spending time cleaning and maintaining their vehicles,
possible loud music and or partying. Possibly throwing trash into our back yards. The persons
responsible for building this facility will not be able to control this activity without hiring security
guards to patrol the facility around the clock. They will not do this as the costs would be
prohibitive.
How will the proprietors control what is stored in these vehicles? They say they will issue by]aws
for people who use their facility but will they check to insure those bylaws are being followed? I
think not as that would require checking each vehicle and, again, the costs would be prohibitive. I
am not permitted to build a fuel storage facility in my back yard. Yet completion of this facility
will permit the storage of possibly 20,000 gallons offuel in my back yard. Not only gasoline, but
extremely combustible propane and other flammable types of fuel. This Rl zoned, residential
neighborhood should !!.Q1 be placed in jeopardy by approval of a conditional use permit for the
proposed facility. Can you imagine the possible catastrophe which would be caused by just one
R V catching fire and igniting surrounding vehicles? Do you want to place the families in this
neighborhood at risk? The persons requesting the use permit are not conctmed with our safety. If
they were they would not consider placing use in danger. The two main partners don't live in this
area and the minor partner (Darrell Hammer) only wants an area to store his construction
vehicles.
Those of use whose property abuts the easement will have other problems created by this facility.
When shrubs and bushes are removed and the surface is graded flat, the natural drainage will be
disrupted and our yards will be subject to flooding. Water would flow into our garages and homes
and we could suffer foundation damage. When this happens, the costs of our homeowner
insurance policies will be raised drastically. A law enacted within the past few years permits
insurance companies to raise premiums on houses which are considered to be subject to flooding.
Some insurance premiums have been doubled. The company building this facility has stated they
will prevent this rrom happening, but will we be reimbursed when this happens? I think not, as
again the costs would be prohibitive.
When I mentioned that I objected to bright lights shinning into my bedroom windows all night, the
builders said they were not erecting lighting. However, if there are no plans to erect lighting, how
will they be able to police the area to prevent crime and vandalism to vehicles stored there? This
type of facility will attract that type of criminal activity like a magnet. We don't deserve to be
subjected to this type of criminal activity in our neighborhood. A dark area with RVs as cover will
attract drug dealers to peddle their drugs. Vandals and taggers will have a ball. This will require
additional coverage by the Chula Vista Police Department as the builders will not supply 24-hour,
seven day a week security to prevent this type of activity. They are in this for quick, easy profit
with very little investment. This is a "lock the gate" and walk away type of business.
Although the builders claim the neighborhood residents have a desire for this facility, the plans
were being carried out in secrecy. In fact, the one minor partner who lives in the neighborhood
said, when confronted, that he was told by Mark San Agustin to IlQ1 under any circumstances tell
anyone what they were planning. Does this sound like the neighborhood wants this facility? In fact
I can't find anyone who even knew what was being planned much less having asked for it.
There are additional safety issues of which I am concerned about. They are as follows:
. The entry/exit on Raven is situated on a blind, uphill curve.
. The entry/exit on Oleander Ave. Is directly opposite the entry/exit of Greg Rogers Park
and at the top of a hill. The park generated traffic is heavy on weekends. The traffic which
would be generated by the proposed RV storage facility would also be on the weekends
introducing heavy, unsafe conditions for both vehicular and pedestrian traffic.
. It will increase traffic passing by the elementary school with large vehicles, operated by
usually by inexperienced drivers. These vehicles are not conducive to good traffic control
on secondary, two-lane streets which must be shared by residents, Greg Rogers Park users
and elementary school generated traffic.
. Leakage of various types of toxic fluids and waste from stored vehicles. Area wi!! not be
paved but covered with gravel. Any leakage will go directly into the soil. I believe this to
be indirect conflict with EP A regulations.
I appreciate your very kind consideration of the points made for denial of the requested
conditional use permit. Should you have any questions, please contact me at 531-5703 (office) or
421-2866 (home).
Sincerely,
(O:tI=
r '\,~~"
Q \\";) ..
~S\J -
1(((( (I )((, :) {
EDWARD B. WHITTEN
OC' ..' ((I
'..-. ( C.
(~.".C(J
(0.1.: . _ ..~. C '-(
DC:" d.(!"(
U." ..t.(
.co 19....(
.. . . ~ -:. ~ (
v "-__
...~-
of
.~
o.
.
IJ'
..
n.
..
L l ( ,
... (
I.' ( ,
I \.l (
.. (
ee( (
... (
~ ~ l "
~ -_._,..~.. "..
__....--....oL___..._._~
.1
---_...~- -
. .......... .....,"='"'=..,;.:.;."~:;,;,..
..J._._........,-.;:.:;..... . .' -".
.... ~- I:
If
,:
~1Y.i..~.-i../tJL f1.4., J..ud.., t
R . r
~~ /'. .A./~~ ~ Ii
',\ u.v r
\. L/~ ~ /~(, 0 .;/-~ JP~ ~ 1'1
1~A<4 ~. ./ ~ "14---<- i
~ ~~ -t-A./ ~~aZ' \\
I/"'-'~~/,~ *
\1 L/t.r.... h ~ ~~.c" ~i:f
\\ 61\[~
:I~ .".,.\;
: ~.~
:! k,.~" 'f"
j "-~ It- ;(~-'1
11 ?;L.. ~PL ';r,.
~ ~V~.~ ~~
:\ <(' (tf / / ""
~ ~f';
Ii ~i\
J E
j t
' /.
'\ fiEC::- .r' if
'.\ \:
!I FEao 5 7J~ 1)/1') \:.
~ 0 ~ 1~
:i PLAN!;.;,:
1 :
~ q
;\ ~'
~~~===".,".~h,..h!
-
0(' t(..
C'." I..
Ot. ft.
C.: l...
01:' L.
U. ~ (..
.C ..
t-.".__'-'c....c....,
---
of
.-
n,
.
( j ,
.
0'
.'
-_."---
( ( l. '
l ..
( ,..'
, ( .'.
( . .'
I << ..
C <<..
l.. ~ L.
...
HI~
1!j0<:",
~j5
j~i
~~i
~
_I
_ ~ ..V\
~ ~ ~ '" f' \.... '" '::.. 1
<:....,'~ "~~~~ \:!:,
~~~~'~'\~~~~i-ti~ j
v .,.; ... ~ ~ ~ ~.., ~ -<... ~ \b I\J. ~ ....
~ ~.... ~.:;" '{\t '\<> ~-:::.. ,- ......
_"~ ~~""~Ib-<: :-..."'..... "-
I ~ ...,...... \ '" I. '!I. X ..J. '^
~ '" =:; . ' "
~ "I ~)., <' ,:; \- .:; 0 'II. ~ ,~ ~
"'j 'I., " ": ..."to ': -< ~ ~ D c:;. ~ ~" \,
~. ~ : ~ ~:~ ~~ ~ ~ '-l ~ ~ ~ ~
...... ~ ~ '" -1 v '- , ~ ~ '^' ~ ~""-...),
~~ i "- ~ -::,: ~ ':; ~ ~ v u ~ 'IJ ~ ~ ~ '
~"",\.I..",':il'-w~ "'t...!t-:~'-i'.:i~
.. - <" . ~ <:\' ~ ..... ",," ' ""
~ ~ ':; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "1. " ~ ~ oJ 1_ \)
:::: ~ .... .... \~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.... ,,~~ to ~
...... ,-,,,,,,,,"t Ir>~~ _"......
, ,- - ,," -
"":":;j, ;,; ,-:; "I ... "I
'"'< .-.)...,..".. ~ ..... .... "t '" _.
<....'" "<: ....~....~...,l.)'\1,
'" ..3 ~ I:.:t ~ .... \., ~'\ ..... 'J ~ , ~ '\( \!,;
'" ,;'.." ~ -.... '" ...... '" :) - .... 'q ~
r-.. "". ~ .....' ~"> .. '" o::.t
/-"- -< "" 'w " \oj ,,!, '\ --::: "::t,, ,.. ...
~ .~ ;::t ~ ~ ~ '< - '-.! .... ~
~ __ ...... ~ " \... ;t ~ '"' ~ <e( <t ~...
"!- "~"'(.~....\(\~ VI
ATTACHMENT 5
CORRESPONDENCE AND MEMOS
.'
.~OGE San Diego Gas & Electric
P,O, BOX 1831' SAN DIEGO, CA 92112-4150' 6191696-2000
February 27,1996
FILE NO
Mr. Steve Griffin
Planning Department
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA. 91910
RE: Greg Rogers Recreational Vehicle Storage
1200 Blk. of Oleander Ave.
Dear Mr. Griffin:
This letter is written in response to a request by Ms. Barbara Reid for documentation of
SDG&E's position on the subject storage facility.
It is SDG&E's policy to allow secondary uses of its major electric and gas transmission
rights-of-way that are compatible with our primary use. A preliminary review of the subject
facility revealed that this use will be allowed providing sufficient cover is maintained over our
existing eight inch gas main located along the northwesterly easement boundary and the
developers agree to redesign this area. To maintain our patrol and maintenance access to the gas
main, we will require this area to be used as their main access road or the parking spaces over the
gas main be eliminated We will also require formal documentation of the use must be executed
prior to any construction.
Should you have any questions or require additional information. please do not hesitate to call
. ~t 696-2 02.
" / Sin~erelY,
J fir,
.( }e~w.Neb ~
'\. Property Manag ment Representative
.0>
cc: M. San Agustin
P. Barnes
J. B. Burton
R. A. Gregorich
jajati2
f-"-'t-'-'\ ;~:--..
\\::- .,,--' ::.' "-/ -- '.
Claire M. Strickland
528 Wisteria St.
Chula Vista, CA. 91911
MAR 1~; 19%
PLANNii'-!(:
Planning Commission
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA. 91910
RE: PCC-96-]8
Site: Propose site RV storage for 268 vehicles and equipment.
March ]8, 1996
Dear P]anning Commission Members:
I appreciate your attention to my letter in opposition of PCC 96.]8. I'm sure
that you are aware that the majority of homeowners in the proposed area are
concerned that a RV storage and heavy equipment yard is being considered in
our R-I residentia] area.
Some of the concerns I have on the proposed project are as follows:
Operating a Commercial business in a residentia] area on Oleander Street, across
the street from a Boys and Gir]s Club, litt]e ]eague basebal] fie]d, Greg Rogers
Park and close to two elementary schools where children often cross this busy
street unsupervised.
I'm concerned that this proposed site will become an area for ilIega] activities
such as theft, vandalism and will spill out into our community.
In a letter from your office Initial Study IS 96-16 it was stated a negative
declaration finding no significant environmental impact has been recommended.
I question if they have considered oil and gas ]eaks and spillage from these
vehicles into the ground and the impact to the ]ower areas in the neighborhood.
My concern is RV vehicles and equipment maneuvering on a very busy street
where children are being picked up by their parents, where schoo] buses and city
buses plus residentia] autos travel and this is the only two ]ane street from
Te]egraph Canyon Road to Main Street East of the 805 Freeway.
] believe there is a place for RV and heavy equipment storage yards ]ike the
facilities on Main Street or KOA off 805 Freeway. I DO NOT believe a
commercial business should be placed in a residentia] neighborhood.
I question how much tax revenue would generate for our City from this business.
I feel a business such as a RV and equipment storage yard wou]d on]y deva]ue
our property in this residential community.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
(~R),
Claire M. Strickland
cc: Honorable Mayor Shirley Horton
City Council Members
Star News
li:, R I
"1.-',1 J
.'
,
March 13, 1996
Steve Griffen
Planning Engineer
Planning Department
274 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mr. Griffen:
I am writing in response to being notified of the possible issuance of a conditional use permit for a
storage facility for 268 Recreational Vehicles (RV) in the 1200 block ofOJeander Avenue. I am
emphatically opposed to this proposal.
Why? First, traffic is a major concern. On Oleander Ave. There are two schools which use this
street daily for going back and forth. Also a Boys and Girls Club, Day care, Little League Fields
and Greg Rogers Park use Oleander Ave. For daily access to their facilities. I personally have
phoned the Traffic Engineering Department and Traffic Sgt. Deblanc and Susan Mihalka
concerning speeding traffic on Oleander Ave. Which leads to my second concern, the safety of
children in the area.
The safety of the children who attend Greg Rogers and Park view schools plus Boys and Girls
Club, Park view Little League fields (there are five (5) fields) and use other facilities located in
Greg Rogers Park.
Please give serious consideration to the safety of the children when evaluating #,M a project of
this type in an otherwise R I, single family, residentially zoned neighborhood.
I can be their voice but you, and others with the authority to effect outcome, must be the people
who listen, show concern and refuse to authorize a facility which would place these children in
harm's way.
I would like to bring up another item mentioned in the request for the Conditional Use
Permit(CUP). Brush fires. There have been small brush fires, however these fires are not started
by "illegal aliens" but neighborhood children who have grown bored during the summer.
There has been slight dumping in this open area, but nothing to the magnitude indicated by the
petitioners for the CUP. There has ~ been transient campsites in this area. We do not now
have an illegal alien problem nor have we ever had such a problem. The illegal aliens only travel
through this area. There is some graffiti in this area but programs of removal have almost
eliminated the problem in this area. I see an opportunity for "taggers" to regain their lost canvases
should an R V facility be permitted to set up shop at this location. The consortium requesting this
facility have all but dumped a broken down earth mover in this area. It is only a matter oftime
before this trashed vehicle will attract taggers.
My neighbors and I feel strongly this proposed site with increased traffic is not a good idea. It is
not desirable to neighbors in the surrounding area who have in fact signed a petition against it.
As concerned neighbors, we are open to other uses for this open space located between Oleander
Raven Avenues. Weare all united in our opposition to the proposed business in our
neighborhood. We all feel this type of proposal should be located in the Main Street commercial
area or even Eastlake Business Center but never in a residential area. This is a residential area I1Q1
a commercial one. There are many RV or wheeled vehicle storage areas in Chula Vista, none of
which are filled to capacity and in fact most are less than half filled. With facilities of this type
readily available, why should there be another placed in a neighborhood in which the residents are
so solidly against it?
Thank you for your very kind consideration in denying the Conditional Use Permit for this RV
storage facility.
Respectfully,
Kevin Lee and Wanda Jones
1299 Raven Ave
Chula Vista CA. 91911
Very concerned homeowners and parents of five (5) growing sons.
Cdr. Gary Uh]enkott Ret. ,- .
505 Wisteria St.
Chula Vista, Ca. 91911
.', -~ -) ~_..
'\
MAR 1 8
"l~"'c
'''' ,.,'.1
Planning Commission
276 Fourth Ave.
Chula Vista, Ca. 9]910
RE: PCC-96-18
~ ~/-
'.\"';
Dear Planning Commission:
P]ease give me the courtesy to read my letter in opposition of PCC-96-18..
I am sure that you have received several letters in opposition, to this conditional
use pennit. I am not against free enterprise nor do I lack understanding of the
need for any city to generate tax dollars on all usable property. I also believe
however that it is the planning commissions responsibility to insure that ]and
usage is compatible with those operations/usage's already in effect. The
Oleander site is unquestionab]y ]ocated in an area zoned for single fami]y homes
and will not be improved by a commercia] operation no matter how minimal its
impact.
As you review this request please consider the following!
Commercial operations should not be located in areas where large numbers
of unsupervised children travel. The Oleander site is locate directly across the
street and in close proximity of three or four little league bal] fie]ds, three
elementary schools, a boys and girls club, and Greg Rogers Park.
RV storage area would provide justification for individuals to loiter in this
area. This type of operation would also provide secured areas for possible illegal
activities with an abundant supply of customers/victims.
RV storage areas become home for abandoned and derelict vehicles. Often
the legal cost to remove or ]ocate owners is such that when you have 268 spaces
getting rid of these eyesores dose not receive high priority.
Fuel leaks, Oil ]eaks , and Propane leaks could be hazardous. Although
environmenta] review has found negative impact it seems only logical that these
older vehicles and heavy equipment would have some fluid ]eakage on to the
gravel pads and thus into the soil which would then contaminate neighboring
sites on lower elevations as it moved along the hard subsurface.
There are no shortages of RV storage sites within close proximity and in
properly zoned areas. Main street, KOA, and Orange Ave. all have spaces.
RV storage sites are not attractive. The site at Foxhill is marginal, but it is not
as large and is only for residents therefore more easi]y maintained.
RV storage sites have a reputation for break-ins. A]though I do not have any
factual data to back this up, several previous and present owners have
comp]ained of ]ost and damaged items while RV's were in storage. This site cou]d
therefore draw an unsatisfactory e]ement.
Heavy Equipment could present a dangerous but attractive nuisance to
children. With large numbers of heavy equipment pieces and trucks children
drawn to them could become critically injured.
I am certain that the ]egal issues and the fact that your own planning
document precludes this operation in a residentia] community, and specifically
commercial operations on this site, will be more than enough to influence
disapproval of this request. However should the best interests of the surrounding
community be ]ost than I wou]d ask for three restrictions on the usage of this
property:
1. THAT ONLY RECREATIONAL VEHICLES BE
ALLOWED.
2. THAT ALL VEHICLES HAVE A CURRENT
OPERATIONAL VEHICLE LICENSE.
3. THAT VEHICLES 10 YEARS AND OLDER NOT BE
ALLOWED.
Business will take me out of town during the schedu]ed meeting so p]ease
]et me thank you in advance for your time and your consideration. As a 25 year
Navy veteran I a]ways felt safe leaving my family in this neighborhood for the ]8
years I have been a home owner. Please do not destroy this environment for the
sake of PCC-96-]8.
CC; Star News
:;- 8-96 FRI 16:46
P,02
a::pf "T~
5-rev~ ~FF1N.
March 8, 1996
(Via Fax #691-5171,585-5612)
City of Chula Vista
Engineering Dcpartment
Altn: Mr. Dennis Davies
Subject;
Proposed RV Storage Facility
Oleander & Raven
In a previous convcrsation with your officc and in a public forwn meeting with planning
department representatives, it was stated to myself and others that there is a "Ccase and
Desist" order on this propel1y due to the cnviromnentaJ, grading and misccllaneous
issues.
In that regard, this is to infotm you that a bobcat, a low flatbcd (equipment type) trailer
and some beams wcre moved onto the site this afternoon. It would seem that this is a
violation of the "Cease and Desist" order pl'cviousIy issued to the owncrs. With this in
mind, it is requcsted that you look into this situation. Be advised that a copy of this
memo will bc forwarded to the planning department and the City council offices for thcir
records.
If you have any questions regarding this information, please fccl nee to give mc a call
at 293-8277.
(S~A,~
John A. Stokes
463 Thrush Street
Chula Vista, CA 91911
c: Steve-Gri~hula Vista Planning Department '"*-?K
Chula-vista City Council
Armondo Buelna, Ass!. to the Mayor & City Council
rvlotiO
Mr. Steve Griffin,Project Planner
City Planning Dept.
City of Chula Vista.
276 Fourth Ave.
Chula Vista,CA. 91910
Fr--~_
t.. tj ; .'
.W . I ._,~.
"',
RE: Case No: pcc-96-l8
Dear Mr Griffin,
I was unable to attend the public forum for the above reference case. However I want to
foward my comments. The subject property is located in a residential neigborhood
across for a city park, near-by a elementary school, across ITom baseball diamond and
the Boys and Girls club.This means there children everywhere.
The subject use is more of an industrial one. The vehicle storage will increase traffic flow
of large vehicle not common to the area. In addition the parked vehicle will invite ----
to break in the compound to steal valuables. This will cause overflow to the neigborhood.
Again, this use is an industrial one. There are many vacant industrial parcel currenty
available within the city limits. Why , then a Industrial use in a residential area? Can it
that they can lease this parcel below the market rate. I suggest that they search for
property which the zoning conforms with the use. One of the principal is a real estate
agent, I arn sure with proper due diligence he could find a vacant industrial lot. If not
please foward him my number I am aware of many.
Why is this even being considered?
Thank You for younn service.
Sincerely,
J:Jwt,9vdr, f:)
Georeg Rodriguez
1179 Oasis Ave.
Chula Vista, ca 91911
(619) 421-4678
February 14, 1996
Mr. Douglas D. Reid
Environmental Review Coordinator
City of Chula Vista
P.O. Box 1087
Chula Vista, CA 91912
Dear Mr. Reid:
PROPOSED RV STORAGE FACILITY
File No. IS-96-16/PCC-96-18
Initial Study (I.S.) / Environmental Information
In a discussion with Mrs. Bonnie Reeves, a long time area resident, it was stated to me
that a fire citation was issued to the owners of the above property in question, to have the
area cleared as it presented a fire hazard. At the time, the surrounding residents
concurred with this directive, however, as time progressed and no clearing had been
performed, a conversation took place on May 4, 1993 with Mr. Emmett Horsfal, a Chula
Vista fire Department representative, whereby he stated the following:
. The City fire Department had received an Information Bulletin from the U.S.
Department of the Interior stating that the "Natcatcher", residing in the area in
question. had been classified as an endangered/threatened species.
. This bulletin stated that there was a "No Take" rule concerning the bird. Meaning
that neither the bird nor the brush could be transplanted or removed.
It was further stated to me that as a result of this information, Mr. Horsfal sent a letter to
the State fish and Garne Department for further clarification, and that until such time as
deemed by them, the site could not be touched. Thus explaining the reason for the time
involved in clearing the site. Eventually, the seasonal grass was cut down, but the
shrubbery remained in place as it was under the "No Take" rule.
This is the sarne area that is in question for the above proposed project. It would seem
that natural habitat area was disturbed, without a biological study being performed, and
may influence the breeding/migration of the above species. Please consider this
information with regard to this project.
Mr. Douglas Reid
Proposed RV Storage Facility
Page 2
Please be advised that I will be forwarding this letter to the Department of Fish and Garne
for their records. If you have any questions, please feel free to give me a call at
656-1044.
John A. Stokes
463 Thrush Street
Chula Vista, CA 91911
c: Shirley Horton, Mayor - City of Chula Vista
Chula Vista City Council
Armando F. Buelna, Asst. to Mayor and City Council
Roger Daoust, City ofChula Vista Engineering
John Lippitt, H '" '" "
Cliff Swanson, " ... .. "-
Bob Leiter, City of Chula Vista Planning Director
Steve Griffin, City ofChula Vista Principal Planner
Michael Meacharn, City ofChula Vista Conservation Coordinator
Anne Moore, City of Chula Vista Asst. City Attorney
Greg Rogers Park Neighbors
Department ofFish and Garne
rvlot6
C H U L A V I S TAP 0 L ICE D E PAR T MEN T
CRIME PREVENTION UNIT
PLAN REVIEW RECOMMENDATIONS
FROM:
PROJECT:
steve Griffin, Principal
~~.J. Diosdad~~CPS, B.
~WCaptain withers v
'"
R E P CS--'1 ,..;
. . reuss, U\Ir
~
PCC 96-18, Oleander RV storage Yard
Planner !ik 1IIIJIq~'
Brookover, cAk, and
,.~
.}41V1. . .,1:)
^ 6 'n
I;>"'? 'oJ""
"'~-""'/:I' '.0
~ i .
~, ,
DATE:
TO:
January 15, 1996
VIA:
Following are recommendations to insure proper utilization of
security hardware, alarms (access control), lighting, and
landsca~ing to reduce criminal activity and to heighten crime
prevent~on awareness through the concept of "defensible space"
and environmental design.
ACCESS CONTROL
-X- Upgrading perimeter security
Doors
-X- Steel door frames -X- Solid core doors
Astragals
-X- Deadbolts, flushbolts, and electronic locks
Glass
-X- Window security ___ sliding glass door(s) -X- Glazing
Exterior
-X- Security hardware
-X- Fencing and Gates
-X- Security system(s); cameras and
special applications
SURVEILLANCE/DETECTION
-X- Upgrading Lighting
___ High pressure sodium -X- Low pressure sodium
Metal Halides -X- Break resistant/tamper proof fixtures
-X- Minimum Pole height (15 feet) -X- Transitional lighting
-X- Placement
-X- Landscape Application
-X- Trees/Shrubbery; maintained -X- Graffiti deterrent
Placement ___ Visibility factors
cc:
CPT ED
PD/epu 11/95
C H U L A V I S TAP 0 L ICE D E PAR T MEN T
CRIME PREVENTION UNIT
PLAN REVIEW RECOMMENDATIONS
.,
continuation of surveillance/detection:
___ Exterior View Fencing
___ Wrought Iron
Tubular steel
Chain link
___ Security Alarm systems
Perimeter
Motion detection ___ Robbery/Hold Up
Burglary/Intrusion
POLICE RESPONSE
-X- Addressing -X- Access to property
Knox Box
-X- Visibility; allowing patrol officers to monitor activity
-X- Reporting procedures
POLICE SERVICES
-X- Training of management and employees in security procedures
and crime prevention awareness.
-X- Security Survey performed by the Crime Prevention Unit.
SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS
After a site inspection I had found that the existing lighting in
the area will not be adequate for the proposed RV storage yard.
The street light on Oleander Avenue will not provide adequate
lighting for the east end of the facility. The street light on
Raven Avenue will only give limited light to the west end of the
proposed yard and will cause shadowing between vehicles in the
yard. The center area would be without lighting.
Low pressure sodium lights need to be use as they will provide
adequate lighting for the yard with minimum glare. The lighting
needs to be mounted on poles a minimum of 15 feet in height. The
lighting will be needed at both ends and in the center of the
yard.
The supplemental information sheets attached to the plans
mentions a night watchman to be employed for security but does
not give the hours the night watchman will be on site.
cc:
CPTED
PD/epu '1/95
C H U L A V I S TAP 0 LIe E D E PAR T MEN T
C RIM E PRE V E N T ION U NIT
PLAN REVIEW RECOMMENDATIONS
.,
A security evaluation of the site ~rior to completion is highly
recommended. The security evaluat~on can be scheduled by
contacting the Crime Prevention unit at 691-5187.
Crime Prevention personnel are available for trainin~ of
management and emplorees regarding emergency and pol~ce reporting
procedures. Schedul~ng of this training is recommended to
coincide with the beginning of regular operations of the
business.
Thank you for the opportunity to have input into the planning
process. If you have any questions or if I can be of further
assistance please call me at 691-5187.
cc:
CPT ED
PD/epu 11/95
MEMORANDUM
J Ai-J~ ,1 n""r-
"V_:'J
January 19, 1996
File # 0610-40-ZB-494
TO:
Steve Griffin, Planning Department
Clifford L. Swanson, Deputy Public Works Director/c'/?~
Engineer ~
Steve Thomas, Senior Civil Engineer/Traffic Engineer~
VIA:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Conditional Use Permit for RV storage yard
of way at the 1200 block of Oleander Ave.
PCC-96-18)
in SDG&E right
(your file no.
The Public Works Department has reviewed the subject proposal. We
do not propose the inclusion of any conditions of approval for the
Conditional Use Permit. However, we request that you provide the
applicant with the following list of items which will be required
(but not limited to) in conjunction with the building permit.
1. These items are required under the authority of the Chula
Vista Municipal Code:
a. Sewer connections Fees
b. Traffic Signal Fees
c. Public Facilities Development Impact Fees
d. SR-125 Impact Fee
e. Replace broken Sidewalk on Raven Ave.
2. A construction permit from this department is required for any
work performed in the City right-of-way.
3. A grading permit is required.
JP
cc. Ken Lee, Planning Department
(M:\home\engineer\permits\cupzb494.jp
REQUEST FOR COMMENTS
Cnula vista Planning Department
DATE: January 8, 1996
r.-
~-
. I,. ....
-.... -- ,~. '~. ~ - .~"\
. ~ ..J
JAN 1 9 !J:!5
{:.I
...:00..:...
Fv-ol'l'tt,
PLANNING:
_Graphics
_Env. Review Coordinator
-X--Advance Planning
_Landscape Architect
-X--Ken Lee (Notice Only)
_Martin Miller (Notice Only)
EMERGENCY RESPONSE:
-X--Police-Crime(Diosdado)
-X--Fire Marshal
ENGINEERING:
-X--Land Development
_Advance Planning
To ~
~Fl\.61"1": steve Griffin l
PCC-96-18
ZAV-
PCZ-
PCM-
PUD-
PCA-
GPA-
Conditional Use Permit
Variance
Zone Change
Miscellaneous
Planned unit Development
Zoning Text Amendment
General Plan Amendment
Other
Y,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT:
_Otay Valley Rd. Redev.
_Town Centre I
_Town Centre II
_Southwest Redevelopment
_Bay front Redevelopment
BUILDING , HOUSING:
-X--Permit Processing
_Code Enforcement
SCHOOL DISTRICTS:
-X--Chula vista Elementary
-X--Sweetwater Union H.S.
OTHER:
Conservation Coordinator
(Planning Department)
Applicant/Project Name:
Oleander RV Storaae yard
Location: 1200 Block
Oleander
Request: RV storaae vard in
SDG&E riaht of wav between
Oleander and Raven Ave.
Deposit Account Number DO-263
Planning commission Meeting Date
Zoning Administrator Hearing Date N/A
Comments to be received by Januarv 19. 1996
COMMENTS: ~ ~ ~~'v- ~"f- W4- ~ ~ K~A ~ '
Iqq<:, Uf-e- ~ u:::'~ A, ~ 4V-1'~A'-!tfi- fJ./I. .
~p./1 ~~" ~~ ~~FM- ~.M--~4<:t~~
;;tj,.J.- tl'-<L~ ~ kO-b.-k ~ f.Ji.P)f>>, -;- g 0 ~ ~ w-.w)d
~../1..-~~/.jJ ~
ATTACHMENT 6
EXIDBITS: LOCATOR, SITE PLAN, LANDSCAPE PLAN
;/
\
GREG
ROGERS
PARK
PROJECT
LOCATION
~
:.-\
~
~
~
~
C5J
~
E^S"f P^LOM^R
\
CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
C)
~. Grell Rogers Recreational
. Vehlde SloRllle
PROJECT 1200 Blk. of Ol_n.. Ave,
ADDRESS,
PROJECT DESCIIJPIION,
INITIAL STUDY
NORTH
SCA1.E,
No Scale
Reguest: Proposal for a IN storage yard in the S.D.G.& E.
FILE NUMBER, 15-96-16 riglit 01 way IocaIed betwMn RaVen Ave. and Oleander Ave
PCC-96-18
~~'
.D :
~:;:: ~~
~" ~~
'.
/
/
~ 111 '
~[;I '
~ 1'1
..::; "
:
:
:1:1 '
,
.
>
~ mJ,
;[','1
<' ,
. '
'1'1' '
"':; "
[~I "
~
'1'1
~ _3
"~,,,
III.
'.
./
,.".
1;1
J ~
~ ~ ~ - "'
t ;;; '=/) ~ ,'0 ~
_ ~ ;;;.~ u~ i : ~
o i:!t f- ci 2.. ~ t
~l:I~:! i:..sU~~:'::
;t ;till;!: =' J~ "-
~ ~ ~3~ (fJ ~ .~ <i
~ ~:t!~ ].~i~ ~
'" ~!;)~. j~~ -iJk
5 ~"'~ o,S I'" ~ ~
~~~> ~~~~~~
~..:'\ i:S ~ ~~
It:) i~ ~
, > . j' '
<.>" oJ '" I
~- ~ ~ ,~
~ ,." ~
;, i
~ ~ ~
"
r'f,," 1
L~
I
"
u
'I
b
~~
~~~
;~;
~~~
I!;
~~~d
~~~~
'I ;i;i
, ,,"
~ &~~g
'" ~~~~
,
';; '" ~
~~~ ~ ~
~~~ ~ i
p.. '" I
I ~~:;: ,,~
~~~: ~g
~~,~X ~"< :.r
~,," '"~ ~ .
~5'~~ ~~ d
;801~ ~," ~~
w'il'
8 r'~~~ ~ ~
~I ~~;~!! ~~ ~
, r
~'~
, '
_, g ;8
_ ,,OJ,,
, jj
~ &l';
! "
":j ~:3
\
: I")' 1 \
"' ~ ~ 'IJ ~i' ,
" --'" ~~ >----
: ~'~ /1
-- -~~t a:J If '1 d
\7 If N 1 a
\. 21 1f.J
; 1"1'
'" 01 ':'
" -
I:.],
.'1 ~
..:::
~
~
. 1;;9
o~
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
i
,
,
,
~ ' ~
[.,' i;!
'I ~ !!' " ! 1, !, !
'i~~ ~i'':I~~1:' ,g ~
6),,~.~~~~~i5 ~~;j
~ : ~ ' ! , ~ i j , , i I! :
Q D ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e ~: ~ ~~ f
'I"! d i i 'I,' i ~,'i "
(5 . - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;:'i~ ~
~.. . , ' , '1111 j~;~
Ii _\
f \
1-'-.-\
.. _._~\
I"~)
I
._ 4__:1
~:..::~
::::~;;3
"~~~
~- ~'
-.-......
,r; :=-.=1=
r f'C'::::F
<~;;;:c~=='-:
~~~ .-~C~~?-~
- ~:!!/ .,~i -=~~'::}'
. IA'r :~".
~\ I -:-'::'';
-=-1
--',
.Jl.....\.-:.--::...
;-' ',I ( . :
~ - "",,"'" i :u_".
'.,j~:r,; iI~; ~-~
I~"" r-\-'i~ ~.:~~-=-
\ \"C-' -"--'
'~:'lJ \ ;::~~~
-J- L':.j
, ....-..-..,
h... .._._.
. :.:-.:.:: ':.:'.::'~
.~ _. ..-!
..~_..._-
, ,.' r1D" ,..C',::':::
! I \.::\ lJjl~ - :<:~:.::~~
\ -,.,.. "1 ,..... u__u,
,:\1,':' ? '\=-~j':J
'" ~\'ijn . "''':0
'-..\:,);;'!I:~::':-!
aQ c, c::"c,
- --',
. --.....,'
-,
--~
;-t
~,--""
-----10
"--1
~-==.~
...::::::..
~
i-
<..
7.
\,\
~
\-:--
\)\
\~
C\) I
.\
&~~.~i.
.':::\
}fi
~,<1
'c'j.
--=-:
::-:.~
.~-!:
'J;
'~i.
.1.
::;.,
.,. .
"
.~
..
-\~
.;.
...
~1.
...~
..,
--
.~.....~
.._',.4'
_.~-..,.
~-:;':i
=::-i
_........t.
.---...
---
_.-.-4
#1.
-:,c::;
i,C3 II
;':;;':::1:~
~\
., :s
1 ~
, '
..
.~