HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991/04/16 Item 16
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ~
Meeting Date 4/16/91
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: PCA-91-04; Consideration of proposed amendments to
Chapters 19.04 and 19.48 of the Municipal Code relating to the provision
of community purpose facilities
SUBMlIT~D BY:
Ordinance 2452 Amending Chapters 19.04 and 19.48
Director of Planning ~
REVIEWED BY:
City Manager I h
(
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_No X)
BACKGROUND
In 1989, the City Council directed the formation of a Church Task Force, and requested that this
task force examine the appropriate amount of land for religious facilities in new development
projects in the eastern portion of the City.
In August, 1990, Council expanded the purpose of the task force to include all community
purpose facilities, which aside from non-secular (religious) facilities, included other secular
facilities (i.e.; boys clubs, girls clubs, YMCA, etc.). A report was then submitted to the City
Council by the Task Force which included recommendations.
In September, 1990, Council directed staff to prepare a draft ordinance which would assure that
adequate land be set aside for community purpose facilities within master planned communities.
No guidelines currently exists through policy or Municipal Code to provide for these land uses
within the PC (Planned Community) zone.
Council also directed staff to review recommendations contained in the Community Purpose
Facilities Task Force report and coordinate workshops involving representatives from the
construction industry, major landowners, social service providers, and the Task Force. Three
workshops were held between November and January to discuss the issues and to acquire any
additional data toward formulation of the proposed zoning text amendment.
On February 5, 1991, Council referred the draft ordinance to the Planning Commission for their
review and recommendations.
1 (, .-1.
Page 2, Item ~
Meeting Date 4/16/91
RECOMMENDATION: That Council
1. Adopt Negative Declaration, 15-91-17.
2. Adopt the proposed Municipal Code amendments per the attached Planning Commission
Resolution PCA-91-4;
3. Refer the issue of the adequacy of daycare facilities in new developments to the Child
Care Commission and staff for review and recommendations.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
Human Services Council
Representatives of the City's Human Services Council have been consulted and have attended
three workshops conducted by staff prior to the public hearing on the proposed ordinance by the
Planning Commission (see Exhibit B).
Planning Commission
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed item on March 13, 1991, and
recommended the following:
1. The City Council adopt the proposed Municipal Code amendments with the following
revisions:
a. Revise the definition of community purpose facility to read:
"Community purpose facility" means a structure for assembly, as well as
ancillary uses such as a parking lot, within a planned community including
but not limited to those which serve the following types of purposes:"
(with list to follow).
b. Revise item no. 2 in the list of purposes to read:
"Social and human service activities, such as Alcoholics
Anonymous"
1 (,. - z..
Page 3, Item ~
Meeting Date 4/16/91
DISCUSSION:
Present Regulations or Standards
The City presently requires that an of the community purpose facilities (as defined in attached
Planning Commission Resolution PCA-91-4) obtain a conditional use permit for locating in any
zone. The uses are considered "unclassified uses" in the Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 19.54 in
the Municipal Code).
The eastern portion of the City is predominantly zoned P-C (planned Community) and the means
for implementing development within the P-C zone is through a SPA plan.
No criteria presently exists within the P-C zone standards (Chapter 19.48 ofthe Municipal Code)
for the required provision of land use acreage for community purpose facilities.
Most of the undeveloped area east of 1-805 consists of large land holdings, and, consequently,
development of this property has and will result in large master planned communities. Planning
for these communities will result in the predesignation of land uses under the P-C zone. Unless
an amendment to an approved master planned community is processed through the Planning
Commission and City Council, the approved land use designations will remain in place
indefinitely. Major projects processed to date have provided land area for non-secular facilities,
although not based on a needs analysis. If secular as wen as non-secular community purpose
facilities are not planned for in our expanding community, it will be very difficult for these land
uses, which are essential parts of the community fabric, to locate in the future.
Rel!ulations/Standards of Other Jurisdictions
The Planning Department contacted 17 cities within San Diego County to acquire information
on similar type land uses or land use designations. There were no other cities in the County that
have combined land uses into this type of designation and there has been a lack of retrievable
information on existing facilities. An 17 cities either did not compile data on community
purpose facilities uses or were unable to quantify their data. What staff has discovered is that
the City of Chula Vista appears to be pioneering in the area of requiring provisions for
community purpose facilities in master planned communities.
The Urban Land Institute (ULI) and the American Planning Association (APA) have been
contacted through nationwide computer library links for any information that could help in
addressing this issue, but neither major planning organization has been able to provide helpful
information.
1~-3
Page 4, Item ~
Meeting Date 4/16/91
ANALYSIS
Definition of Community Puq>ose Facilities
"Community purpose facility" means a structure for assembly, as well as ancillary uses such as
a parking lot, within a planned community including but not limited to those which serve the
following types of purposes:"
I. Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, and other similar organizations;
2. Social and human service activities, such as Alcoholics Anonymous
3. Services for homeless;
4. Services for military personnel during the holidays;
5. Senior care and recreation;
6. Worship, spiritual growth and development, and teaching of traditional family values;
7. Daycare facilities that are ancillary to any of the above.
8. Private schools that are ancillary to any of the above.
The uses that make up the general definition of community purpose facilities were derived
through City Council direction.
Staff has excluded daycare facilities that are not ancillary to the above listed community purpose
facilities. It is clear that the entire issue of adequacy of daycare facilities is one which requires
separate analysis and recommendation. Staff recommends that the City Council refer the overall
issue of daycare facilities to the City's Child Care Commission and staff to look independently
at daycare needs. Consideration should be given to the analysis and recommended policies on
this issue which have been developed as part of the Dtay Ranch planning program; in addition,
input should be sought from the Planning Commission and Parks and Recreation Commission.
Following this review, staff would return to the City Council with recommendations on how
these facilities might be assured within new master planned communities.
1.'-~
Page 5, Item ..1k..
Meeting Date 4/16/91
Pro.vosed Ordinance
Staifis recommending that Chapter 19 of the Municipal Code be amended to include community
purpose facilities within the P-C zone (see attached Planning Commission Resolution PCA-91-4).
The following rationale has been used for determining the appropriate acreage requirement (see
Exhibit A for calculations):
Non-Secular Community PUJ;pose Facilities
A determination was first made of the number of Chula Vista residents that regularly
attend worship services (29.8%1 of 134,000 = 39,932).
A survey, by members of the Community Purpose Facilities Task Force, was conducted
to determine how many Chula Vista residents regularly attend worship services and what
percentage of those attend the peak service on the peak day. This figure (54.9 % f was
then compared to the estimated worship attendance figure for the City to determine
citywide attendance at the peak service on the peak day (54.9% of 39,932 = 21,925).
An analysis consisting of the optimum size sanctuary, ancillary school facilities, parking
and setbacks that could occur on 1 acre of land was conducted by the Task Force. The
maximum number of sanctuary attendees on 1 acre was determined to be 14()l.
The appropriate acreage necessary to accommodate the estimated Chula Vista worship
attendees is then determined (21,925 -;- 140 = 157 acres).
Secular Facilities
From information provided by the Chula Vista Human Services Council, staff determined
that 30 acres of secular community purpose facility acreage is currently needed for the
existing city (see Exhibit B for calculations).
Staff compiled existing secular community purpose facility acreage figures from the
City's land use inventory. A total of 46 acres, which included 19.05 acres of private
school land, was found to exist. In examining this private school acreage, it was
1 Reference Community Purpose Facility Task Force report.
2 Reference Community Purpose Facility Task Force survey.
3 Reference Community Purpose Facility Task Force report.
1(.-5
Page 6, Item ~
Meeting Date 4/16/91
determined that nearly all the acreage was presently attached to existing non-secular
facilities and functions as weekday school space for children and adults as well as
"Sunday School"-type space in conjunction with the adjacent non-secular facilities. Since
this type of acreage has been accounted for in the non-secular facilities calculations, the
actual existing secular acreage totals 29 acres. The figure of 30 acres will be used in
staff s calculations.
Determining Acreage Factor
The estimated acreage for secular and non-secular community purpose facilities was then
determined to be 187 acres (30 + 157 = 187). When this figure is compared to the total
City population, a factor of 1.39 acres per 1,000 people was determined as the required
acreage factor (187 + [134,000 + 1,000] = 1.39 acres).
Implementation of Ordinance
At the time of submittal of a SPA plan, the California Department of Finance (DOF)
figures for estimated household size will be applied to the number of anticipated dwelling
types to determine an estimated population (by thousands). This figure will then be
multiplied times the acreage factor of 1.39 to determine the total acres required for the
project. Staff will then work with the developer to determine the most appropriate
location(s). The proposed ordinance also provides for a reduction in required acreage
if it can be assured that there are provisions for rental space for community purpose
facilities.
Recent planned community projects processed within the City have designated property
for non-secular use. The proposed ordinance will provide a consistent means of
determining the appropriate amount of land to be reserved for each project for not only
non-secular but secular social service land uses.
Letters From the Public
Attached to this report are letters from the public which were received prior to the public
hearing and recommendation of the Planning Commission.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
(CPP.A113)
1\0- t
ORDINANCE NO. 24~2..
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING
CHAPTERS 19.04 AND 19.48 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL
CODE RELATING TO THE PROVISION OF COMMUNITY PURPOSE
FACILITIES
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain
as follows:
SECTION I: That Section 19.04.055 is hereby added to
Chapter 19.04 (Definitions) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code to
read as follows:
Sec. 19.04.055 Community purpose facility.
.Community purpose facility. means a structure for
assembly, as well as ancillary uses such as a parking
lot, within a planned community including but not
limited to those which serve the following types of
purposes:
Boy Scouts, Girl
organizations;
Scouts,
and
other
similar
A.
Social and human service activities,
Alcoholics Anonymous;
such as
B.
C. Services for homeless;
D. Services for military personnel during the holidays;
E. Senior care and recreation;
Worship, spiritual growth and development,
teaching of traditional family values;
and
F.
G. Day care facilities that are ancillary to any of
the above;
H. Private schools that are ancillary to any of the
above.
SECTION II: That Section 19.48.020 of Chapter 19.48
(Planned Community zone) is hereby amended as follows:
Sec. 19.48.020
Regulations generally-Minimum
-Ownership restrictions.
acreage
The
zones and
following regulations shall
all development shall be
apply in
subject
all P-C
to other
-1-
lk-7
provisions of this chapter, except that where conflict
in regulation occurs, the regulations specified in this
section shall apply:
A. P-C zones may be established on parcels of land
which are suitable for, and of sufficient size to
be planned and developed in a manner consistent
with the purposes of this chapter and the
objectives of this division. No P-C zone shall
include less than fifty acres of contiguous lands;
B. All land in each P-C zone, or approved section
thereof, shall be held in one ownership or under
unified control unless otherwise authorized by the
planning commission. For the purposes of this
chapter, the written consent or agreement of all
owners in a P-C zone to the proposed general
development plan and general development schedule
shall be deemed to indicate unified control.
C. All land in each P-C zone, or any section thereof,
shall be subJect to the requ1rement that adequate
land be designated for "community purpose
facilities," as defined in Section 19.04.055. A
total of 1.39 acres of net usable land (1nclud1ng
setbacks) per 1,000 population shall be designated
for such facilities in any planned community, and
shall be so designated in the Sectional Planning
Area (SPA) Plan(s) for each planned commun1ty.
This total acreage requirement may be reduced only
if the City Council determines, in conjunction with
its adoption of a SPA Plan, that a lesser amount of
land is needed, based on availability of shared
parking with other facilities, or other community
purpose facilities that are guaranteed to be made
available to the community. Any shared parking
arrangements pursuant to this section shall be
guaranteed regardless of any future changes in
occupancy of facilities.
SECTION III: That section 19.48.040 of Chapter 19.48 of
the Chula vista Municipal Code is amended as follows:
Sec. 19.48.040
Application-General development
required-Contents required.
plan
A. The application shall include a general development
plan which shall consist of a plan diagram and
text. The application shall be accompanied by a
fee as set forth in the master fee schedule of the
city. The plan diagram shall show the following:
1. The topographic character of the land;
-2-
~~-i
B.
2. Any major grading intended;
3. The general location of all existing and
proposed uses of the land;
4. The approximate location of all traffic ways;
except those solely serving abutting uses;
5 .
Any public
playgrounds,
natural land;
such as
space
schools, parks,
and undisturbed
uses,
open
and,
6. The approximate location of different
residential densities of dwelling types.
The application
indicates:
include
which
shall
a
text
1.
Description of
boundaries and
planning areas;
the project, including the
names of proposed sectional
2. The anticipated sequential development of each
section of the development for which specific
uses are intended or for which sectional
planning area plans will be submitted;
3. The approximate area of each sectional
planning area of the development and the area
of each separate land use;
4. For residential development or res idential
areas of any P-C zone development:
a. The approximate number of dwelling units
proposed by type of dwelling. This may
be stated as a range with maximum and
minimum number of units of each type,
b. The approximate total population
anticipated in the entire development and
in each sectional planning area. This
may be stated as a range with a maximum
and minimum number of persons,
c. The general criteria relating to height,
open space, and building coverage,
d.
The
acre
area
number of dwelling units per gross
proposed for each sectional planning
of the development,
-3-
.1.l.-9
e.
The approximate
sites proposed
type,
land area and
for public use
number of
of each
f. Where appropriate, the approximate retail
sales area space in square feet and gross
area in acres proposed for commercial
development with standards of off-street
parking and landscaping and circulation
for vehicles and pedestrians;
5. For commercial or industrial areas of any
proposed P-C zone:
a. Types of uses proposed in the entire area
and each sectional planning area thereof,
b.
Anticipated employment
development and in
planning area thereof.
stated as a range,
in
each
This
the entire
sectional
may be
c. Methods proposed to control or limit
dangerous or objectionable elements, if
any, which may be caused or emitted by
proposed uses. Such dangerous or
objectionable elements may include fire,
explosion, noise or vibration, smoke,
dust, odor, or other form of air
pollution, heat, cold, dampness, electric
or other disturbance, glare, liquid or
solid refuse or waste or other substance,
condition or element which might
adversely affect the surrounding area,
d. The approximate standards of height, open
space, buffering, landscaping, pedestrian
and vehicular circulation, off-street
parking and loading proposed for the
intended structures or uses;
6.
For institutional, recreational or
nonresidential uses of any P-C zone:
other
a. Approximate types of uses proposed in the
entire area and each sectional planning
area thereof,
b. Significant applicable information with
respect to enrollment, residence,
employment, patients, attendance, and
other pertinent social or economic
characteristics of development,
-4-
ilc- , 0
c. The approximate standards of height, open
space, buffering, landscaping, pedestrian and
vehicular circulation, off-street parking and
loading, proposed for the intended structures
or uses.
d. Determination of the amount of acreage
required to be designated for .community
purpose facilities. pursuant to Section
19.48.101 (c).
SECTION IV: That Section 19.48.090 of Chapter 19.48 of
the Chula Vista Municipal Code is amended to read:
Sec. 19.48.090
Sectional
planning
content.
planning areas and sectional
area plans- Requirements and
A. All P-C zones shall be divided into sectional
planning areas. These areas of subcommunities
shall be depicted on the plan diagram of the
general development plan of a P-C zone, and shall
be addressed in the text thereof.
B. Sectional planning areas shall be composed of
identifiable planning units, within thich common
services and facilities, a strong internal unity,
and an integrated pattern of land use, circulation,
and townscape planning are readily achievable.
Where practicable, sectional planning areas shall
have discernible physical boundaries.
C. Prior to any development within a sectional
planning area, the developer shall submi t a
sectional planning area plan, accompanied by the
requisite filing fee as presently designated, or as
may in the future be amended, in the master fee
schedule, and a completed, official application, to
the planning commission for public hearing,
consideration, and recommendatory action, unless
such sectional planning area plans are not required
by the text of an adopted general development
plan. The sectional planning area plan shall
include the fOllowing site utilization plan and
documents.
1. A site utilization plan of the sectional
planning area at a scale of one inch equals
two hundred feet minimum or as determined by
the director of planning. The plan shall
extend a minimum of three hundred feet beyond
the boundaries of the sectional planning area
and show the following:
-5-
~l. -11
a. The boundar ies of the sectional planning
area;
b. North arrow and scale;
c.
preliminary
ratios and
appropriate);
grading
spot
(including
elevations
slope
where
d. Existing and proposed streets (This shall
include all public and private streets as
well as their approximate grades and
typical widths. The names of the
existing streets shall be indicated);
e. Existing easements (identify);
f. Existing and proposed riding and hiking
trails;
g. Existing and proposed bicycle routes;
h. pedestrian walks;
L
Permanent
towers,
channels,
physical features (i. e., water
transmission towers, drainage
etc.) ;
j. Land uses (include the acreage of each);
i. Parks,
ii. Open space,
iii. Schools (indicate type),
iv. Public and quasi-public facilities
(include type),
v. Residential:
Dwelling type (Le., single family,
duplex, attached, etc.)
Lot lines
Lot size
Number of units (indicate density
for each dwelling type)
parking (covered or open parking and
parking ratio)
-6-
~(., -12..
Typical floor plans and si te plans
at a minimum scale of one inch
equals twenty feet. (The site plan
shall include sufficient detail of
adjacent development to determine
the relationship of driveways,
landscaping, walks, buildings, etc.)
The building elevations of
of structure (including
colors and materials)
each type
exterior
vi. Commercial:
Location and proposed use of each
structure
The building elevations and floor
plans of each structure (include
exterior colors and materials)
Retail floor area (square footage)
Landscaped areas
Circulation (vehicular and
pedestrian)
Off-street parking (standards and
ratio)
vii. Industrial:
Location and proposed use of each
structure
The building elevations and floor
plans of each structure (include
exterior colors and materials)
Retail floor area (square footage)
Landscaped areas
Circulation (vehicular and
pedestrian)
Off-street parking (standards and
ratio)
viii. Location and acreage of sites, in
conformance with Section 19.48.020C.
A specific listing of types of uses
to be included in this category,
which are compatible with the
permitted uses in the planned
community.
2.
Development standards (i. e., permitted land
lot coverage, height and bulk requirements,
etc.) for each land use area and designation.
uses,
signs,
-7-
.11--13
3. Development to occur in phases shall be so
indicated on the plan. A skeletal plan shall be
prepared for those areas indicated for future
development. The skeletal plan shall indicate
circulation, building locations, preliminary
grading, areas devoted to landscaping, density and
parking. The submission of each subsequent phase
will require a new application and a fee as
presently designated, or as may in the future be
amended, in the master fee schedule, for a
modification of a sectional planning area plan,
together with the required detail plans.
SECTION V: This ordinance shall be reviewed annually by
the City Council to evaluate the applications of its provisions.
SECTION VI: This ordinance shall take effect and be in
full force on the thirtieth day from its adoption.
Presented by
f:~I' f:(
Bruce M. Bo04aa d, City Attorney
f
\
Robert A. Leiter, Director of
Planning
8747a
-8-
~t..-l t
04 !,;'1',',1 14:31 FROM
TO 9422i6'Hl
F,D:;j!/b
1 ..~.
\,~ )
\.'"
r~ \1'
,
,"', (,
~<.~. ,
ORDINANCE NO. 2452 A
Revised 4/16/91
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING
CHAPTERS 19.04 AND 19.48 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL
CODE RELATING TO THE PROVISION OF COMMUNITY PURPOSE
FACILITIES
The city council of the City of Chula vista does ordain as
follows:
SECTION I: That section 19.04.055 is hereby added to Chapter
19.04 (Definitions) of the Chula vista Municipal Code to read as
follows:
Sec. 19.04.055 Community purpose facility.
"Community purpose facility" means a structure for
assembly, as well as ancillary uses such as a parking lot,
within a planned community including but not limited to those
which serve the following types of purposes:
A. Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, and other similar organizations;
B. Social and human service activities, such as Alcoholics
Anonymous;
C. Services for homeless;
D. Services for military personnel during the holidays;
E. Senior care and recreation;
F. Worship, spiritual growth and development, and teaching
of traditional family values;
G. Day care facilities that are ancillary to any of the
above;
H. Private schools that are ancillary to any of the above.
SECTION II: That section 19.48.020 of Chapter 19.48 (Planned
community Zone) is hereby amended as follows:
Sec. 19.48.020 Regulations generally-Minimum
Ownership restrictions.
acreage
The following regulations shall apply in all P-C zones
and all development shall be subject to other provisions of
cpf3.wp
April 16, 1991
Revised community Purpose Facility
Page 1
u,,--lS
ia4/16 1991 14:32
FROM
TC' '?4:':;:':;';'~90
F.O::
this chapter, except that where conflict in regulation occurs,
the regulations specified in this section shall apply:
A. P-C zones may be established on parcels of land which are
suitable for, and of sufficient size to be planned and
developed in a manner consistent with the purposes of
this chapter and the objectives of this division. No P-C
zone shall include less than fifty acres of contiguous
lands;
B. All land in each P-C zone, or approved section thereof,
shall be held in one ownership or under unified control
unless otherwise authorized by the planning commission.
For the purposes of this chapter, the written consent or
agreement of all owners in a P-C zone to the proposed
general development plan and general development schedule
shall be deemed to indicate unified control.
C. All land in each P-C zone, or any section thereof, shall
be subject to the requirement that adequate land be
designated for "community purpose facilities," as defined
in Section 19.04.055. A total of 1.39 acres of net
usable land (including setbacks) per 1,000 population
shall be designated for such facilities in any planned
community, and shall be so designated in the Sectional
Planning Area (SPA) Plan(s} for each planned community.
This total acreage requirement may be reduced only if the
City Council determines, in conjunction with its adoption
of a SPA Plan, that a lesser amount of land is needed,
based on availability of shared parking with other
facilities, or other community purpose facilities that
are guaranteed to be made available to the community.
Any shared parking arrangements pursuant to this section
shall be guaranteed regardless of any future changes in
occupancy of facilities.
SECTION III: That Section 19.48.040 of Chapter 19.48 of the
Chula vista Municipal Code is amended as follows:
Sec. 19.48.040 Application-General development plan required-
Contents required.
A. The application shall include a general development plan
which shall consist of a plan diagram and text. The
application shall be accompanied by a fee as set forth in
the master fee schedule of the city. The plan diagram
shall show the following:
1.
The topographic character of the land;
cpf3 . wp
April 16, 1991
Revised Community Purpose Facility
Page 2
Iii -Ih
"'4/16/1991 14: 32
F !=:'O 11
TO '?4127690
P. 04
2. Any major grading intended;
3. The general location of all existing and proposed
uses of the land;
4. The approximate location of all traffic ways;
except those solely serving abutting uses;
5.
Any public
playgrounds,
land; and,
uses, such as schools, parks,
open space and undisturbed natural
6. The approximate location of different residential
densities of dwelling types.
B. The application shall include a text which indicates:
1.
Description of the
boundaries and names of
areas;
project, including the
proposed sectional planning
2.
The anticipated sequential development of
section of the development for which specific
are intended or for which sectional planning
plans will be submitted;
each
uses
area
3.
The approximate area of
area of the development
separate land use;
each sectional planning
and the area of each
4. For residential development or residential areas of
any P-c zone development:
a.
The approximate number of dwelling units
proposed by type of dwelling. This may be
stated as a range with maximum and minimum
number of units of each type,
b.
The approximate total population anticipated
in the entire development and in each
sectional planning area. This may be stated
as a range with a maximum and minimum number
of persons,
c.
The general criteria relating to height, open
space, and building coverage,
d.
The number of dwelling units per gross acre
proposed for each sectional planning area of
the development,
cpf3.wp
April 16, 1991
Revised Community Purpose Facility
Page 3
1(,- \1
e4./16/1';"~1 14: 33
FR 0 r'1
TO 94227698
F' . ~J S
e. The approximate land area and number of sites
proposed for pUblic use of each type,
f. Where appropriat~, the approximate retail
sales area space ~n square feet and gross area
in acres proposed for commercial development
with standards of off-street parking and
landscaping and circulation for vehicles and
pedestrians;
5. For commercial or industrial areas of any proposed
P-C zone:
a. Types of uses proposed in the entire area and
each sectional planning area thereof,
b. Anticipated employment in the entire
development and in each sectional planning
area thereof. This may be stated as a range,
c. Methods proposed to control or limit dangerous
or objectionable elements, if any, which may
be caused or emitted by proposed Uses. Such
dangerous or objectionable elements may
include fire, explosion, noise or vibration,
smoke, dust, odor, or other form of air
pollution, heat, cold, dampness, electric or
other disturbance, glare, liquid or solid
refuse or waste or other substance, condition
or element which might adversely affect the
surrounding area,
d. The approximate standards of height, open
space, buffering, landscaping, pedestrian and
vehicular circulation, off-street parking and
loading proposed for the intended structures
or uses;
6.
For institutional, recreational
nonresidential uses of any P-C zone:
or
other
a. Approximate types of uses proposed in the
entire area and each sectional planning area
thereof,
b.
Significant applicable information with
respect to enrollment, residence, employment,
patients, attendance, and other pertinent
social or economic characteristics of
development,
cpf3.wp
April 16, 1991
Revised Community Purpose Facility
Page 4
't, - let
,) -t 1':, 1.;' ';'1 14: 34
FRorl
To) ';.42:.276'~';:\
P. ('6
c. The approximate standards of height, open
space, buffering, landscaping, pedestrian and
vehicular circulation, off-street parking and
loading, proposed for the intended structures
or uses.
d. Determination of the amount of acreage required to
be designated for "community purpose facilities"
pursuant to section 19.48.101 (c).
SECTION IV: That Section 19.48.090 of Chapter 19.48 of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code is amended to read:
Sec. 19.48.090
sectional
planning
content.
planning areas and sectional
area plans- Requirements and
A. All P-C zones shall be divided into sectional planning
areas. These areas of subcommunities shall be depicted
on the plan diagram of the general development plan of a
P-C zone, and shall be addressed in the text thereof.
B. sectional planning areas shall be composed of
identifiable planning units, within which common services
and facilities, a strong internal unity, and an
integrated pattern of land use, circulation, and
towns cape planning are readily achievable. Where
practicable, sectional planning areas shall have
discernible physical boundaries.
C. Prior to any development within a sectional planning
area, the developer shall submit a sectional planning
area plan, accompanied by the requisite filing fee as
presently designated, or as may in the future be amended,
in the master fee schedule, and a completed, official
application, to the planning commission for public
hearing, consideration, and recommendatory action, unless
such sectional planning area plans are not required by
the text of an adopted general development plan. The
sectional planning area plan shall include the following
site utilization plan and documents.
1. A site utilization plan of the sectional planning
area at a scale of one inch equals two hundred feet
minimum or as determined by the director of
planning. The plan shall extend a minimum of three
hundred feet beyond the boundaries of the sectional
planning area and show the following:
a.
The boundaries of the sectional planning area;
cpf3.wp
April 16, 1991
Revised Community Purpose Facility
Page 5
'''-lq
'13 4 / 1 ,; / 1 9 ':;. 1 1 4 : 35
cpf3.wp
April 16, 1991
FROM
TO 942:::'6';,.D
F'. .j7
b. North arrow and scale;
c. preliminary grading (including slope ratios
and spot elevations where appropriate);
d. Existing and proposed streets (This shall
include all public and private streets as well
as their approximate grades and typical
widths. The names of the existing streets
shall be indicated);
e. Existing easements (identify);
f. Existing and proposed riding and hiking
trails;
g. Existing and proposed bicycle routes;
h. Pedestrian walks;
1.
physical features (i.e., water
transmission towers, drainage
etc.);
Permanent
towers,
channels,
j. Land uses (include the acreage of each) for:
i. Parks,
ii. Open space,
iii. Schools (indicate type),
iv. Public and quasi-public
(include type),
facilities
v. Residential:
Dwelling type (i.e., single family,
duplex, attached, etc.)
Lot lines
Lot size
Number of units (indicate density for
each dwelling type)
Parking (covered or open parking and
parking ratio)
Typical floor plans and site plans at a
minimum scale of one inch equals twenty
Revised COF~unity Purpose Facility
Page 6
I h- 2tJ
04...1t 1',91 14:3'::,
F F~ 0 1'1
cpf3 . wp
April 16, 1991
TO '?4':::27<;,'?~:'
F . ~:: .;
feet. (The site plan shall include
sufficient detail of adjacent development
to determine the relationship of
dri veways, landscaping, walks, buildings,
etc.)
The building elevations of each type of
structure (including exterior colors and
materials)
vi. Commercial:
Location and proposed use of each
structure;
The building elevations and floor plans
of each structure (include exterior
colors and materials);
Retail floor area (square footage);
Landscaped areas;
Circulation (vehicular and pedestrian);
Off-street parking (standards and ratio);
vii. Industrial:
Location and proposed use of each
structure;
The building elevations and floor plans
of each structure (include exterior
colors and materials);
Retail floor area (square footage)
Landscaped areas
Circulation (vehicular and pedestrian)
Off-street parking (standards and ratio)
viii. Communitv Puroose Facilities:
Location and acreage of sites, in
conformance with section 19.48.020C.
A specific listing of types of uses to be
included in this category, which are
compatible with the permitted uses in the
planned community.
As to anv land uses desianated on the
sectional olannina area olan for use as
communitv ouroose facilities:
(al Conditional Interim Uses Permitted
Revised Community Purpose Facility
Page 7
I~- ~
004/16/1991 14:36
cpf3.wp
April 16, 1991
2.
3.
F Ror'l
TC 942:769(1
P. 0 "
After 5 Years. The city Council. upon
receiyinq the advice and recommendation
of the Planninq Commission. may, after
~iYe (51 yerrs e~ ~n-use as a community
uroose fac'lit . accordance with the
procedures for ~ssuance of conditional
use permits contained in Chapter 19.14 of
this Code. conditionallY permit interim.
non-permanent. non-residential uses which
are not communitv purpose facility uses
that Council finds (il the interim use to
be compatible with the surroundinq land
uses on the condition the Council finds
(iil that the communitv pUrPose facilitv
use is not imminentlY likelv: and (iiil
that denial of an interim use would
constitute a further hardship to the
landowner. If an interim use is
permitted bv the city Council. it shall
in no event be permitted for lonqer than
5 vears. and shall be terminable within
said 5 year period upon one year's
advance notice of intent to terminate
said conditional use permit by the City
Council. city Council shall Clive such
one vear notice upon beinq advised of a
sale or lease bY the owner to a purchaser
or tenant for use as a community purpose
facility.
(bl Review bY city Council. For each
approved sectional planninq area plan on
which is desiqnated one or more community
purpose facility uses. City Council shall
review said plan annuallY for the pUrPose
of determininCl the actual market interest
~~Si~~~Of~~
Development standards (i.e., permitted land uses,
lot coverage, height and bulk requirements, signs,
etc.) for each land use area and designation.
Development to occur in phases shall be so
indicated on the plan. A skeletal plan shall be
prepared for those areas indicated for future
development. The skeletal plan shall indicate
circulation, building locations, preliminary
grading, areas devoted to landscaping, density and
parking. The submission of each subsequent phase
Reyised Community Purpose Facility
Page 8
It,-lt,
"84/ 1 6 ./ 1 9 ';' 1 1 4 : 37
FR Orl
TO '~4::276?O
P. 1 B
will require a new application and a fee as
presently designated, or as may in the future be
amended, in the master fee schedule, for a
modification of a sectional planning area plan,
together with the required detail plans.
SECTIon -':1: 'Phis ereiiaaRse shall Be re..;ieveEi ann\ially B~i' "the.
city Ceaaeil ~e e~al~a~e ~fte appliea~iefts sf i~s prs7isieno.
SECTION VI: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full
force on the thirtieth day from its adoption.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Robert A. Leiter,
Director of Planning
Bruce M. Boogaard,
City Attorney
cpf3.wp
April 16, 1.991
Revised Comounity Purpose Facility
Page 9
Ifp~)3
TOTAL P.lO
EXHI BIT A
STAFF CALCULATIONS FOR DETERMINING ACREAGE FACTOR
I. NON-SECULAR ACREAGE CALCULATIONS
.. ESTIMATED WORSHIP POPULATION
.. % ATTENDING AT ONE TIME (based on Task Force survey)
134 ,000
x 29.8% '
-------
39,932
x 54.9%
-------"
21,923
+ 140 '
-------"
157 ac.
.. CURRENT POPULATION
.. % OF WORSIllP ATTENDANCE (County-v.;de)'
.. ESTIMATED TOTAL ATTENDING SERVICE AT ONE TIME
.. NUMBER OF PEOPLE SERVED PER ACRE'
.. TOTAL NON -SECULAR ACREAGE PRESENlL Y NEEDED
II. SECULAR ACREAGE CALCULATIONS
.. TOTAL LAND AREA REQUIRED PER PROVIDER
.. FACTOR DERIVED FROM 1 PROVIDER PER 1,165 RES. (1,000+ 1,165 =0.86)
(Translation to per-l,ooo-residents)
.. TOTAL LAND AREA REQUIRED PER 1,000 RESIDENTS
.. FACTOR USED TO DETERMINE CURRENT CITY NEEDS
(134.000+ 1,000= 134)
.. TOTAL SECULAR ACREAGE NEEDED IN THE CITY"
134 ,000
115
-------"
1,165
19
x 400 sq. ft.
-------"
7,600 sq. ft.
+ 3,000 sq. ft.
-------"
11,400 sq. ft.
x 0.86
-------"
9,785 sq. ft.
x 134
-------
1,311,245 sq. ft. 30 ac.**
.. CURRENT POPULATION
.. TOTAL # OF PROVIDERS IN THE CITY
.. # OF RESIDENTS PER PROVIDER
.. # OF PARKING SPACES REQUIRED PER PROVIDER (I Sp.per2oo Sq. Ft.)
.. UNIT SIZE FOR EACH PARKING SPACE
.. TOTAL LAND AREA REQUIRED FOR PARKING PER PROVIDER
.. A VG. FLOOR SPACE PER PROVIDER
Ill. TOTALS
.. TOTAL NON-SECULAR ACREAGE NEEDED
.. TOTAL SECULAR ACREAGE NEEDED"
157 ac.
+ 30 ac."
.. TOTAL COMMUNITY PURPOSE FACILITIES ACREAGE NEEDED
.. FACTOR USED TO DETERMINE CURRENT CITY NEEDS (134.000+ 1,000 = 134)
187 ac.
134
.. RECOMMENDED ACREAGE FACTOR
I 1.39 ac.
,
- Based on the Community Purpose Facilities Task Force report
.. - Based on information provided by Ihe Human Services Council
'CPf<J.WKl
1 (" - J.J./
EXHIBIT B
CHULA VISTA HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
This proposal represents an effort to provide the City of Chula Vista with an organized, effective
process for planning and review of space allocations for Social Service providers and a knowledge
of the extent of Social Service needs in the area.
PROVIDERS: (MAJOR CLASSIFICATION HEADINGS TAKEN FROM THE SOCIAL
SERVICES PLAN DEVELOPED BY THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA IN 1987)
CLASSIRCATlONS NUMBER OF PROVIDERS
A. Alcohol Services 10
B. Basic Human Care Needs 16
C. Community Development Services 8
D. Drug Abuse/Misuse 10
E. Education Services 11
F. Employment and Training Services 11
G. Heatth Care 13
H. Mental Heallh Care 13
I. Organizational Development 7
J. Public Safety 6
K. Social Development 10
This proposal is most concemed with the needs of small, non-profit service providers who
rentllease locations. The proposal is not addressing the needs of the providers which are capable
of negotiating the purchase and construction of their own facility.
Social Services are delivered in Chula Vista through a diversity of organizations, from very small
volunteer or one person offices, to large, complex operations. They serve a population diverse
cullurally, socio-economically, and with mulliple needs. There are distinct sub-areas within the
City representing a broad spectrum of Ufe pattems with unique qualities of local identity.
Currently there are 127 Social Sel1lice providers falling within the A-K classification serving a
population of 134,000 in Chula VISta. However, since the inclusion of schools and governmental
agencies would distort calculations, they have been excluded.
Using a revised figure of 115 providers for the 134,000 residents, the need for a provider is
generated by every 1165 residents.
"
U -.:1.5
Page 2
Current average utilization of space is 3,800 square feet per provider. The actual range is 400 -
60,000 square feet.
Surveys conducted for the Social Services Plan most often identified three priority areas needing
further social service intervention:
.-
Alcohol and Drug Abuse
Child Care and latchkey Programs
Child and Spousal Abuse/Domestic Violence
The Chula Vista Human Services Council has reaffirmed these as priority needs.
PROPOSAL
In order to maintain the level of Social Services currently provided, it is recommended that prior to
Planning Commission approval of development plans:
1 . The population to be generated by the development be divided by
1165 which will provide a general indication of the number ot Social
Services providers needed to serve the additional residents.
2. The number of service providers needed should be multiplied by
3800 square feet to indicate generally the space which will be
required.
3. It is recommended, whenever commercial developments are planned, 5% of the
space be designated as low rent for non-profit Social Services providers.
Accessibility to transportation facifitieSlparklng facilities should be considered when space
location is determined. Many of the people who require Social Services are dependent upon
public transportation, and the frail elderly require nearby parking.
With a rapidly changing population, there will be a continuing need to review the effectiveness of
such planning policies, zoning and space requirements every 2-3 years, especially at those times
when developers submit their General Plan for large developments.
Future reviews of policy effectiveness should consider the changing demographics, cost of
property, changing population and muiti-use of facilities.
To assist in such reviews, it is recommended that the Chula Vista Human Services Council be
Included in the process.
12/90
ll.-l1,
.-. -.: I) ~ ~
EXHIBIT C
ASSOCIATED BUILDING INDUSTllY ENGINEEllING AND
GENERAL CONTllACTORS ASSOCIATION OF GENERAL CONTRACTORS
OF AMERICA SAN DIEGO COUNTY ASSOCIATION
eONSTBDOTION INDDSTBY rlDIB1TIOll
6336 GREENWICH ORIVE, SUITE F. SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92122 (619) 587-0292
February 5.1991
Honorable City Council members
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA
RE: Support Referral to Planning Commission
Oppose Recommendation of 1.5 acres per 1.000
The Construction Industry Federations appreciates this opportunity to again comment on the
proposed acreage amounts for Community Purpose Facilities.
Your Council will find below some basic fundamental questions which questions the findings
incorporated into the 1.5 acres per 1,000 population figure. The CIF respectfully asks your
Council to ask City Staff these questions below. Moreover, CIF would respectfully ask that
your Council direct City Staff to respond in writing to these questions to the Planning
Commission.
-
1. Does the proposed ordinance adequately account for the space needs of
youngsters attending religious services?
The Community Purpose Task Force Report concludes a one acre church site can serve 140
attendees per worship session. The report's model one acre site identifies the following space
needs:
Worship/Feilowship
Education
Other Structures
4,980 Sq. Ft
5,240 Sq. Ft
3,124 Sq. Ft
The Community Purpose Task Force Report also concludes that Chula Vista has a religious
population of 39,932 persons 1, This religious population includes all oersons who attend
reliaious services. adult and children not iust adult confirmed members2.
Thus, youngsters attending religious instruction on a worship day must be counted as part of
the total religious population served. That is, if 140 persons attend "Sunday school" in the
education space, the total religious population served is 162 persons.
It appears as if the ordinance's calculations do not adequately account for this portion of the
population served.
1 However, an actual phone survey of Chula Vista churches performed by Task Force
members concluded that the average total church attendance in Chula Vista totals 27,381
persons.
2 According to the 1980 Yearbook of American and Canadian Churches, 29.8% of San
Diego County population are "adherents." Adherents are defined as all communicants, confirmed
and full members and their children and an estimate of the other regular participants who are not
communicants, confirmed or full members. According to the same report, only 9% of the San
Diego County population are communicants, confirmed or full members of a church.
1(.~,,1
'.
f
2. Does the proposed ordinance adequately account for religious Institutions
which rent or lease church apace?
According to the September Community Purpose Task Force Report. 29% of Chula Vista's
churches occuov rented or borrowed soace. The January survey of local churches concluded
that 22% of Chula Vista's churches have an average attendance of less than 90 persons.
Another 18% of the churches did not respond, leading to the conclusion that they are likely to
be churches with very small congregations. It Is unlikely that many churches with smaller
congregations will decide to purchase land and construct a church facility. Yet, the draft
ordinance zones land as If all future churches will be free standing owner occupied facilities.
It appears as if the ordinance's calculations do not adequately account for churches likely to
locate in rented facilities.
3. Does the proposed ordinance adequately account for other community
purpose Institutions which rent or lease apace, and does It double count
religious schools?
The staff report recommends land be zoned for .other community purpose facilities. based on
the assumption that there are between 30 and 45 acres of land for these facilities currently
serving Chula Vista. The 30 acre amount is extrapolated from an analysis provided by the
Human Relations Commission. The 45 acre figure is basEld upon data from the land use
Inventory.
First, it is important to note that most human services entities cu"ently reside and are likely to
continue to reside in leased facilities. Thus, their needs can be addressed through the
provision of adequate supplies of land zoned for commercial or office professional uses.
Second, the land use inventory classifies religious schools (18.01 acres) as part of the .other
community purpose category.. As mentioned in the discussion above. these facilities are
already included in the church space analysis. Including them in this category effectively
double counts them.
CIF appreciates this opportunity to comment.
.I
1-~- 28
Feb. 15, 1991
TO: Duane Bazzel
RE: C.I.F. Letter dated 2/5/91
EXHIBIT 0
Duane,
The City of Chula Vista Church Task Force has read and reviewed
the latest letter submitted to you by the Construction Industry
Federation. We have met and concluded that a response is in
order.
To be completely honest, we believe that these issues have
already been addressed at various meetings of the Task Force and
at the workshops that have been held by you in the last 90 days.
But, under the circumstances, we will again attempt to resolve
these items, one-by-one, once and for all.
1. The Task Force report does not, and has never tried to imply
that a church of 140 people is the optimum church attendance. It
also does not define a one acre site as the ideal church site. We
have not tried to compile a "model" as indicated in the C.I.F.
letter. We have simply drawn a baseline from which to measure.
The space needs described in our report have come from very
substantiated sources. They are actual requirements for a church
to function properly. They are not assumptions, they are reality.
Every square foot of these facilities are absolutely essential to
the church in order for them to serve the community to the
fullest extent possible.
The religious population figure was arrived at through the
results of a national census. The property owners have accepted
this figure as accurate up to this point in time. The main reason
a phone survey was conducted was to determine how many people
were attending church services at "peak" hours within our city.
This allowed us to plan for the total amount of people attending
at one time.
The "youngsters" have always been a part of our calculations from
the beginning. That is why we have insisted on the separate
educational facilities along with the sanctuary. This is not for
"private" schools (as has been claimed by C.I.F.I, but rather to
orderly conduct the teaching of different age children as well as
adults.
The figure of 140 people represents the seating capacity of the
sanctuary, regardless of the age of those people. The fact that
some children mayor may not sit in the sanctuary during the
worship service is irrelevant. The C.I.F. is trying to tell the
church how to operate it's business. This is something that must
be left up to the various churches and synagogues in order to
maintain the right to practice freedom of religion within their
own faith as they see fit.
1
u~
".
The fact remains that with a seating capacity of 140, zoning
requirements state you need 1 parking space for every 3.5 seats,
(It doesn't justify this by saying that the seats must be
occupied by a certain age of person, or that one or more of these
people must be of driving age. You could have 140 children and
still have the same parking requirement>. This determines how
much property must be designated for parking and access drives.
Coupled with setbacks and other building requirements, we
arrived at the one acre figure.
If we were to use the C.I.F. figure of 162 seating capacity, we
would actually need to provide more land for parking and access.
This would result in a figure of 1.16 acres for every 162 people.
If staff would rather figure it this way, that is perfectly fine
with us. But, no matter how you look at it, the figures still
come out to 140 people per acre if you use 1 acre as your
IIbaseline".
2. The main reason that 29% of the churches in our
rent or lease is that there is not enough land
purchase and occupy, thus the effort to institute
master planned communities.
city currently
for them to
change in new
The fact that a certain percentage of churches have an "average"
attendance figure of +/- 90 is immaterial.
This claim is so obscure that it hardly warrants a response. But,
in the interest of fairness, we don't see the developers putting
a stop to housing construction because it is "unlikely" that many
people with smaller families will decide to'purchase a home. In
fact, they continue at breakneck speed just to keep up with
volume of people that move here every year, regardless of how
many people are contained in each family or, whether or not those
families can afford to purchase the homes.
This draft ordinance is the result of a comprehensive study done
over a period of 18 months involving many people. It adequately
provides for the expansion of social service type uses within new
communities. It will allow the people in each community to be
served by a facility within their own community, thereby cutting
down on traffic, noise and pollution associated with traveling
outside their community, which they are now forced to do.
The zoning of land for future church sites has nothing to do with
the fact that "all" churches will or will not be free standing
and owner occupied. The reason for the zoning amendment is to
insure that a proper place will be provided for the church and
other non-profit organizations to operate in the future. The
reality of ownership advantage by the church is seen in the
economic structure of social services in today's society.
..,
~
.:Ltc. - ,30
It is very expensive to rent or lease forever. The cost of living
continues to go up, new triple net charges are placed on tenants,
and the competition against for-profit organizations is a real
threat. This causes most social service organizations to limit
the types of services that they offer to the community.
In order for the church to become truly benevolent, it needs to
reach a place where it is essentially debt free. Then it can best
do what it is designed to do, namely, meet the needs of the
people in a vast array of methods that can only be accomplished
by non-profit institutions housed within their own facility.
In addition to this, all you need to do is look at some of the
latest developments to see that there is absolutely no rent or
lease space available for the church to occupy. The C.I.F. makes
the claim that churches should rent or lease as opposed to buy,
then doesn't even realize that this option does not exist either.
3. First, just because other social service centers currently
rent or lease does not mean that they will always do so, nor does
it mean they would not like to be in a lesser debt situation. By
providing this acreage for all "community purpose facilities" to
operate in, it would allow the opportunity for the different
service providers to coordinate their layouts and parking
facilities so that they can better serve the people at ultimately
a lower cost to all those involved.
Second, the Land Use Inventory does not classify "religious
schools", but rather it classifies "private schools" as part of
the "other community purpose category". Just because a school is
"private" does not mean it is "religious".
Also, the church, in itself, is not a "religious school". It is a
church. All churches need "educational" facilities to properly
operate, as previously indicated. These "educational" facilities
will also serve the community by providing the much needed space
to meet other social needs of the community (i.e., A.A., N.A.,
Day Care, Senior Programs, Shelters for Battered Women and
Homeless through Interfaith Shelter Network).
We do hope this clears up some final questions. It is time we put
these falsified claims and unsubstantiated allegations to rest.
This city is growing faster than anyone ever imagined. We need to
rise and meet the challenge. Staff has come to a solid conclusion
with their recommendation of 1.5 acres per 1000 population. We
are in full support of this and do hope that the figures are
incorporated into the zoning ordinance by the Planning Commission
and the City Council.
City of Chula Vista Church Task Force
~
~
1~-3l
EXHIBIT E
Risen Savior Gv. Lutheran (Shurch
~
Pastor Rick Johnson
Wednesday February 20, 1991
To: Planning Commission of the City of Chula Vista
Re: Draft Ordinance for Community Ordinance Facility Zoning Amendment
Delr Ladies Ind Gentlemen:
I regret that in all likelihood I will not bIt able to be at the meeting of th!! PlaMing
Commission to addr!!55 you personally on the matter of the proposed zoning am!!ndm!!nt for
Community Purpos!! Flciliti!!s in th!! PC zon!!. Unfortunat!!ly, the regular muting night is
Wednesday evening and that is I very busy night for putors Ind the church community,
t5pecially so during the Lenten suson that we now are celebrating. I 1m not sur!! how
many from the church community of Chula Vista will bIt pres!!nt but if the numbers ar!! low,
rlSt assur!!d it is a matter of sch!!duling and not lac~ of int!!rest.
For th!! put year and a half or so, I hay!! participat!!d in the Community Purpose Facilitiu
tas~ forc!!. WIt started as a Church Tas~ Forc!! that was a~!!d by th!! City Council to
d!!velop a plan to includ!! situ for church!!s in the dev!!loping ust!!rn t!!rritories. B!!caus!!
of th!! lac~ of information from other sources -- no oth!!r city has such a plan -- we
struggled mightily to arriv!! at an !!quitable and wor~ble solution. During this tim!!, th!!
major develop!!rs in our city w!!r!! invited to participate. Only Onl!, McMillin, sent a
representativ!!. When we finally r!!ported to Council, the d!!velop!!rs cri!!d foul b!!caus!!
th!!y had not had I chanc!! to participat!! in the process, even though they hid been invit!!d.
They also qu!!stion!!d the l!!gality of zoning for church!!s based on th!! 5I!peration of church
and stat!! claus!! in the Constitution. Th!! tu~ forc!! name and scope was broadened to
includ!! all 'not for profit" community s!!rvice organizations. A seriu of wor~shops w!!r!!
conduct!!d and what you hav!! before you in the final result of our efforts. The original
Church Tas~ Foret supports it. The nl!wer Community Purpos!! Faciliti!!s TaSK Force
supports it. The planning staff of the city supports it.
In fact, the only people who de net support it are the developers. For the past months,
they have had opportunity to provid!! imput. What they provided was by in large
opposition. On th!! night of th!! Planning Commission muting, I am sur!! that you will again
hear how unfair th!! proposed plan is, how in error, how costly, how unsubstantiat!!d. What
the plan really does is to provid!! for an integral part of our community fabric that has
bun negl!!cted and for which WIt will pay dearly if that nelgect is not r!!ctifi!!d. It dolts
not cost th!! city but will in fact saV!! the city money. It is not unsubstantiated but has
been well considered. As you ~w, the planning departm!!nt does not off!!r something that
is not well thought out.
I urge you to recommend for passage, th!! proposed ordinance as staff pr!!s!!nts it. It is
the right thing for our city.
1l~~~
Church Office:
391 Bey Leaf Drive Chula Vista, CA 92010
(619) 422-4944 - (619) 585-1773
1(.,-32.
\
EXHIBIT F
LAND .
Land Advocacy for Non profit Development
a special project of the
Southern California Ecumenical Council
.31891 Via Pato, Trabuco Canyon Ca. 912679
714/858-0600
IT I]@I] OWl] ~
~( FE8 25 1('(" ~
;' i\ .' -"
~ L
20 February 1991
ME 131\ 1:. IEL
Mayor Pro Tern Len Moore
Councilman Tim Nader
Councilman David Malcom
Councilman Jerry Rindone
Chula Vista City Hall
276 Fourth Ave.
Chula Vista, Ca. 92010
Subject: Church Task Force
Reference: Construction Industry Federation Letter dated: February 5 1991
Wherein CIF Oppose Recommendation of 1.5 acres per 1,000 people.
LAND would recommend that the City use at least 2
people be zoned for the exclusive use of the
profit institutions (independent sector.)
LAND would recommend that the City use the average number of
of the population attend church regularly, as reported in
YEARBOOK, in recognition of existing adverse conditions
exist in a growth community.
acres per 1,000
benevolent non
35%
the
that
Dear Honorable Councilmembers,
LAND has been asked to respond to the above referenced letter. Please note
that we are not a paid consultant. We have no financial interest in the
proposed development other than knowing that the citizens of Chula Vista
will fare better than the citizens of ORANGE COUNTY. Many of the citizens
of Orange County need the social services offered by the independent sector
and must suffer as a result of poor land use planning. You all should be
congratulated for your efforts in trying to create better communities.
ClF QUESTION:
1. Does the proposed ordinances adequately account for space needs of
youngsters attending religious services?
1
.1(,,-33
"
,
The answer is no. The question addresses only a one day use of the
l'lroposed facility.. The proposed ordinance does not account for all of the
needs of the youngsters nor all of the proposed use of the facilities.
Thirty five percent of ~ll congregations, across this nation are used seven
days a week. This data is reported by INDEPENDENT SECTOR in their 1988
report titled FROM BELIEF TO COMMITMENT. Many of the facilities that are
open seven days a week are.providing non profit child care, latch key care
and programs for youth. The list would go on and on if we were to list all
of the non profit service that are 'being provided by these facilities.
.
If we .were to address the space needs of youngsters in addition to the
classrooms included in the ordinance, we' should include 'playgrounds for
toddlers, playgrounds for children,. and playgrounds for latchkey children.
The majority of the population has both parents working ~nd many of these
parents can't afford'to pay for child care. We have a choice. We can let
the, children grow up in the streets or' we can provide an opportunity for
the Chula Vista community resource Benevolent Non Profit Institutions to
provide guidance and direction to these young people at this time in their
liv~s when they need supervision.
The response from the CfF Legislative Analyst is very confusing as he
appears to not understand the data that has been submitted. The analysis is
trying to determine the religious population of Chula Vista so that the
proper amount of proposed land will be set aside is based upon the correct
database.
. First we have two kinds' of data. We have the data that was collected by
GEORGE GALLOP GROUP ( Exhibi t 1.)' and the BARNA RESEARCH GROUP (Exhibit' 2. )
and the Prinpeton Research Center (Exhibit 3.) where the general population
is asked a series of questions. Both of these vary independent groups
report that (GALLOP GROUP) 61 percent, (BARNA GROUP) 60 percent, and the
PRINCETON RELIGIOUS RESEARCH CENTER reported 64 percent of the general
population identify with a denomination and Sqy that they are a member of a
specific religious community (church).
The second kind of data is collected from the denominations where they are
asked how many people are active (attend service each week) within each
congregation and how many people are adherents. First the reader must
understand that there are 225 specific denominations that are recognized by
the HANDBOOK OF DENOMINATIONS (Exhibit 4. ).. The data from CHURCHES AND
'CHURCH MEMBERSHIP IN THE UNITED STATES, (Exhibit 5.) list the population of
only 111 denominations and is estimated to list only 91 percent of the
population of the denominations listed in the YEARBOOK. The YEARBOOK OF
AMERICAN AND CANADIAN CHURC&ES (Exhibit 6.) only. list the number of people
who attend services regu~arly.
The YEAR800K reports that in the West only 35 percent attend church
regularly, vs 39% East, 42% Midwest and 43% South. The data from CHURCHES
AND CHURCH MEMBERSHIP state that in San Diego County 29.8 percent of the
major 111 denominations attend church regularly. The introduction to the
data states that the number listed, 29.8%. is only approximately 91 percent
of the faithful of the III denominations are included in that number. If
we were to increase that specific number to include the acknowledged defect
in the data we would find that' th~ City of Chula Vista should use at least
2
11.- 341-
,
as a minimum number; 32.7 percent of the population, as the number of the
citizens of Chula Vista attend church regularly.
We might ask why is this number for San Diego County below the Western
average and not 35 percent as reported in the YEARBOOK? The BARNA REPORT,
Exhibit No.7, shows that the white members of the congregations have been
. dropping out in Los Angeles County. We find that in Los Angeles County
that the white congregate successfully maae the move from the city to the
suburbs without dropping out of church. However when the congregate moved
from the suburbs to the planned community he dropped out of attending
church. We find that if.churches are not convenient, people will not go to
church. If churches are not planned into the 'community, churches will not
occur in the community. Only about one tenth of the number of churches
take root in planned communities when compared to communities that were
created prior to 1971, because of the obstacles and adverse conditions
created by the planned communities.
Across this nation we typically have one religious facility for every 830
people. In the growth areas of this nation we find that church development
lags new development for a period of three to ten years. If the community
grows very fast and does not plan for the independent sector to be a part
of the community, the independent sector does take become apart of the
community. The independent sector ~annot afford to compete with the income
dollars from the business sector nor the tax dollars of the government
sector in the purchase for land to build facilities.
Using the existing data, City population divided by the number of religious
congregations, which indicates approximately one church per 2,000 people
in the City of Chula Vista is defective because the number understates the
number of people who would attend church. The City has been impacted with
rapid growth. and lacks the average number of churches. This evidence
becomes very visual. when you count the large number of congregations that
need land to build churches. Many people wait for a congregation to have a
builaing before joining the congregation. Many families.do not enjoy the
hardships that a family must endure in a public school class room to
worship. It is suggested that the City of Chula Vista us~.a number of 35%
of the population as the number of people who would attend religious
services if facilities were available.
I have enclosed .the definition fOr adherents and communicant from the
CHURCHES'AND CHURCH MEMBERSHIP in the above listed Exhibit 5. Therein you
will find that each denomination has it's own definition for adherent and
communicant.
Mr. Seymour took most of his data out of context. With regard to footnote
No.1. The Church Task Force determined that 27,381 attended one service~
The number reported to the City by the Church Task Force did not take into
account the other religious services that were offered that day. nor the
attendance at those'later services. "
Mr. Seymour also is confused on his other facts. As'stated above the
YEARBOOK states that 35% of the people in ,the West attend church regularly.
The number 29.8% that he used is from the book CHURCHES AND CHURCH
MEMBERSHIP, and the corrected information has also been conveyed above.
3
1(.-35
elF QUESTION
i
2. Does the proposed ordinance adequately account
institutions which rent or lease church space?
for
religious
The answer is yes. The religious congregations that rent or lease land is
included in the ordinance. Almost all religious congregations provide an
opportunity to do unto others as they would have done unto themselves.
Almost all religious congregations instill within the congregation that to
become like GOD they must offer their services and their money to those
that are less fortunate then themselves. These teaching can be measured
and demonstrated when it is reported by the GALLUP GROUP that those who
attend services regularly volunteer 3.4 hours a week-vs 1.6 hours a week by
those that did not attend services. Those who attend services give 3.8% of
their income to' charitable causes vs 0.8% by those who do not attend
services. In general it can be stated that we have a far better caring,
community when there is a healthy independent sector in the community.
In -order for the congregation to maximize_ its giving to the community the
congregation must own their own parcel of land. If land does not become
available, as was reported in a study drafted by Rev. R. Turner, most
congregations will die if they do not purch~se land within eight years of
origination. It should be noted that the average congregation has
approximately $100,000 of benevolence that is ~irected to non religious
purposes and is applied to meet the social needs of the community. This
information is reported by INDEPENDENT SECTOR in it"s book titled GIVING
AND VOLUNTEERING IN THE UNITED STATES, pubiished 1~8B.
CIF QUESTION:
Does the proposed ordinance adequately ac~punt for other community purpose
institutions which rent or lease space, and does it double count religious
schools.
No, the data does not double count religious schools. Many of our Nations
finest schools, hospitals, health care facilities, senior ca~e and the list
goes on-and on were originated by various religious denominations but they
are considered non religious facilities.
The data within GIVING AND VOLUNTEERING from'INDEPENDENT SECTOR suggest
that the non religious benevolent non profit institutions provides
approximately 15% of the goods' and services required to meet the social
needs of the national community. The non religious benevolent non profit
institutions of Chula Vista occupied approximately 15% of the land.
INDEPENDENT SECTOR is currently completing a-national survey of the non
religious benevolent non profit institutions and that data is expected to
-be available in November of 1991. -
The Benevolent Non Profit Institutions are not here to provide a service
for the short run of a day or two, or for a year or two. Benevolent Non
Profit Institutions are here for the life_ of the community, the outlook is
4
~~
. for eternity. To maximize their benevolence to the community they must own
the land that is their base of operation.
Suggested reading for Mr. Seymour, possibly for the councilmembers and the
land pl~nners is Phd. Peter F. Druker "THE NEW REALITIES, Therein Phd.
Druker addresses the,value of the independent sector which he calls the
third sector. Thru a number of chapters, Phd. Druker"s theme is that the
unique element that separates the success .of America"s economy from the
economies of Russia and England is America"s third sector. Then on page
197:
The third sector is actually the country"s largest employer,
through neither it"s workforce nor the output it produces show up
in the statistics. One out of every two adult Americans-a total
of 90 million people- are estimated to work as volunteers in the
third sector, most of them in additlon to holding a paid job.
These volunteers put in the equivalent of 7.5 'million full-time
work years. If they were paid, their wages would amount to $150
billion a year; but of course they are not paid.' The third sector
largely explains why taxes in the United States are lowe~ than in
Europe. Spending on public and community purposes is actually
quite a bit higher in the United States, but a' substantial
portion, as much as 15 percent of GNP, does not flow through tax
channels. It goes directly as fees, as insurance premiums, as
charitable contributions, and as unpaid work, to non-government
third sector institutions.,
Then Phd. Druker states on page 205: "Even more important may be the role
of the third-sector institution in creating for its volunteer a sphere of
meaningful citizenship."
Phd. Robert N. Bellah in his book HABITS OF THE HEART, pg. 2~9. States:
"Religion is one of the most important of the mqny ways in which Americans
"get ,involved" in the life of ,their community and society.
We have tried to provide you with copies of the actual text of the sources
of data and highlighted the quotations. If we may be of assistance to
clarify any additional statements or provide additional inf~rmation please
contact LAND at 714/858-0600. We will try our best to provide whatever
ation you need.
t ~.- ~
Young f2
LAND: d vocacy for Non Profit Development.
Robert LeI er, Dire or of Planning
Duane Bazze , Senior Planner
B
D'
c :
5
1 G, -31/1' ',55
. /
.
.
,:.<::.<~.J~'- ':.'"p'~q"],, ~~rtfft,,'ti~ '::;';
. ~kSf;i;~~;:~'~.:;~~'~}M~1\~~1f;, ~~~~~(;f~..
,"~Ia""I1lIItO!I$","~~; ;i:>"~~:',."":~; :.":"'\'
. 79,3". a".: ...."...... .... -.......... "".' ......... " .,.'J '~.'.;"., :
~~...~Yt1,".,~~,~~ ....;, _ .:-'
54.911.949 willi f'~lI!qJl.f ~,,;;:...:.~ /-:.;,,; ,,' ::',. ''J:i-:,:
"'-lVV\nnn....... Un.".";; ............ '. ''''''. 1 ..~'..'..," .'.' . ,'" ".
u,uuu,-,..,.......,.".....HJ'"!""!...,..,I\', ~...',.......'.-.-,.".~._"':~._,...,' '. '_".'"
:~~=t.~=~.~;;;{;..::...". ,;:..<'
The . I'd K!IfI r tll .. ~ t'il!lf~IiJl "','
" ~~!i"$f;3'31~a'::lit~ P.f'~r"I'!~Jiq~.>:'~
. ....., ,.'-..:.' ~. ~ '. . ',- . " J -,"_, ,," , . '.',' ,,r. :.'. ' ~ ..... '..1
NU~ ~ _~ !i\llcifIiY"~II.f3 ~nl,':-; if}.
_ndod pwn:I! IlJ f~OJUl' !III ,"iff! w~~ in ,i.9. '.: .;-i/ ; ,'.
'. - - ',' -; <.;-',-:...- '-'.,.":...,~'.:';' ';"'::~;'::',"'i..~ ,_,,<:::;.:.;;;;:
v...,."....-................. .....Nt ooovl_ _", _... ,..' ;;, . ..
-'"6'.""'t"\'.....,~.,.m'....... ',,,,,'!"YPf_,y . .". .\.....
"'et)' wo4" Y\lI~ '" fVClI'Q' Ilr H Ilourf F m~; ~'f::'
~ do lIQU.lla teJy~ vPI"""1Il 'VFl'8JC pf llII1y I.li;';~.' '.
'. ~. Met. ~ .~IP.'''d 191P!. ~!" r"~ rll{,f!!ypl!'lllcfr,~."' '. ..' .
.... ~'I7QIiIIi~ i.!! 19a9~ '~.:".",;_:i' ;'.;:.,~,..... ': ',<. ;,
GiYiIIg:"'_'Plli~SlIfCa.47~~~~Y~I~ ,;<:~ :~,
pvc 10 C\IIri~.1l{ $S4.32 billion. I'fl'Qt 10 rc!i,iQU$ '.
insti~ i!l19~9. J!YFII ~1l1!I fAr jpfIa!illtl. 1IJi, t'II ~ .11 '..
~.l'CCOrlj. fcwty.~~ ~t I(~ c:otItri!ll!!ipp'$ \0 ...." , ....;'
. reli8JClUS '"'Il'Cpt!ons W~ dcil~lelI f!lr PlIIcr-IhI!l\- . '. "
rcU,ious bIImIn ~rvi~ fIId Ktivilicl i!I ~ p\!l!lic intc~L " '.'
Those Wbo ~~,*d ~ryic:p Nwcc~y or pearl)' W~~ly" , . ".
c:oIItributcd 3.1 }l'Jtl:nll1f tltcir jIo~bold~. . \0 ~tabl, . "
causes; ~ WJIll4id DO! attend .ay~ llII1y .8 pe~nl. . .
The ~rq.'-d fDi.1I of fllIIl1ibulill!1l in 1989 "'" ~ I ! i billis>n. > ;
PaniciplliQII in Ihc ~p and fmi~!lf a ~ptiOD '.., ,
makci . difft:rcnQC ill \be 'public interest- Ilcli.iQ\ls ..
CClllpepliOlllIOp \be Us, pr 24 !lrlani~liOlll ~!l1O be
lmprovinl wtIan lifc. OcoiJe Gallup notes Ihat~y arc
-ona Ihc aa,t C9S1~ff~live insti~tilll\l iIl!l!!l' ~iclY.lIld
rclicvc much pf IhI ':!X \lunIcD.".,.. " 00,;" ":' ..
.' . .-..... -:' .-.- ......';
Amon& AmclicW who "", "'" mcm~ 1>(' "'\iJlous
CClllpeplion: 73 pe~t attepde<l ~rvjccs. SlII!day, 01' S\,bbalh
IChooJ as a d1i14; 73 percenl Wlnllhcir ~~D Ii' ~ive '
religious 1tIiDiIl.; 69 pcn:cnIIlY rcliJion is "rm-" or "fairly" .
important in Ihcir lives. 'I is cstimatc4 t/Ia! fhm..-c 78 million "
persons wbo. by ~D of past experic~ &Ild ""l'CPI
ycaminas: arc ""'r 10 !If Wel~ i.!ll!! ""!if\l Qf , I~ -
IXlIIIl'Cptioo. . .,', <.'.:-', ..~ ; ,. ; ,i~.:::.. . ,.:' " . ,
Amona ~ ~,;r, IDCQIbc:n pf a ",Ii.i~ \. ,.'
IXlIIIl'Cptioo: ~ ~Yisilec! for ~ Mlli!ne wa'I~. .
fricod or relatlve IDvilCd ~m; I~ ~ W9l!I4 i!lvi~ !lIhc1$
IDjoin.lf~!ClllqlO. ... . ..;:.,
"'
"
'-',
'-.- :.
.:-,- .
'-t:
'J.
, ,
> -
."-,
.....ao.,.aoa..'~.~...;_Io....illlll_n.ci~ .'
-.1911; YqioIa A. I' '!.--....'-IfiId..c_."
.,.,---.....-c:.....", . ....U-~..I""!"d "
GInloI-r. ' ..... u.._..._ c..... H. ......1", r__ "
.--~"--",,,,,,.,,,,,~us..lfliI). .
'''Religion is one of the most important of
the many ways in which Americans 'get
;nvolved' in the life of their community
and society."
Raben N. Bellah. Hllbiu of 1M H..m
CO"',"'S
Prcsidcnl's Rcport I
From the Chainnan of the Board 2
Charles E. Wilson Awardee Elecled
Nalional Chainnan 3
Earle B. Pleasanl Award 4
Research Updale S
Invite A Fricnd Projecl Report 6
Volunleer Recognition 8
. Public Scrvice Advertising 10
Worship Directory Report II
New$ Highlighls 12
Board and Advisory Council Members 14
. Financial Re~rt 16
Member Religious Groups 17
. ',.-'-"
ll.~i. <t [;WiI8~*':t
I'
.'
, :11'\'11 llpdak
RIAL Board member George Gallup, Jr., writes, in Ibe
inUoduclion 10 his 1990 Repon on Religion In America,
-Religion In American Ufe (RIAL) UId !he Advenising
CUllJlCil recently unveiled an unprecedented volunteer grass
root:i movemenL..1O increase !he number of Americans actively
enll~lIed in worship, education, UId community service Ihrough
local congregations." He Ihen goes on 10 describe Ibe project
and repan IlII researcb, citing Ihe IalcSI survey data.
-The religious Jibeny mosl Americans cherish and celebrate
bas enabled religion 10 flourish in many forms, and 10 become
a profound sbaper of !he American cbaracler. Religious libeny
ba. .ootribuled vitalily and vigor 10 !he American oullook-an
cxuberance-a feeling !bal anything is possible-and often, Ibe
cour~se 10 bring about difficult bul needed change in sociely as
re\'.a1ed in !he high level of volunteerism.
-Many consider volunteerism, a key lrait of America, 10 be Ibe
besl hope for !he fUlure, and !he glue Ibal keeps our sociely
lO.:elh.r. A prime motivating factor in volunteerism is Ibe
religious spirit The strenglh oflbe nation's social fabric and il5
qualilY of life depend on volunlcerism in Ibe public inlerest
Our surveys repan Iballbree times as many panicipanls in
churches and synagogues are 'very active' in their involvement
wilh civic, social UId charitable aClivities as are
lKlQ.panicipanIS.
"Funher evidence Ibatlbe level of conlribulion of Ibe Iypical
cilizen 10 society is closely related 10 Ibe intensilY of his or her
failh is seen from Ibe following: Ibe proponion who filthe
calellory of 'bighly spiritually commined' are far more
involved in charitable activily Iban Ibeir counlerpans, as well
II> more concerned aboulthe benermenl of sociely, more
in\ "hed in trying 10 strengthen families, and far happier.
"Probilbly no olber inslilulion in our society bas had a grealer
illll'"CI for Ibe good Ihan Ibe church. From il have sprung
hospiliil>, DursinS homes, universilies, schools, child care
p"'llr~ms and, of course, concepls of human dignily; and above
all,lhe concepl of democracy. If il were nOI for the church's
role in dealing wilh many of our social ills, Ibe tax burden on
Ibe populace would be crushing. To a larse eXlenl, our
r.ligious instilulions do as Ibey say when il comes to helping
Ibe needy.
-kelisious spiri\, as already indicaled, apparently moIivates
lIIuch of America's organized charily, since church and
s,-lIagosue members are Ibe mosl involved in charilable
.'Ii\ ill'. Almost half Ibe church members did unpaid voluDlcer
"'or~ in !he 12-monlb period lesled, compared wilh only a Ihird
of DOII.members. Nine in len members gave money 10 a
cbarilY, compared wilb only seven in len non-members. Eighl
in ten members IBve food, clolbing or olber propeny 10 a
charilable organization, compared wilh Iwo-Ibirds of Don-
mcmbc:Oi."
AmonS!he many who reviewed Ibis data was Edmund T.
Pran. Jr., cbairman of Ibe board of Plizer Inc. He concluded
dIal "panicipalion in a religious congregation has
dclllOll>ltable civic benefils for !he counlry and for American
corporaliOll..-ven apan from strengthening moral and elbical
\'41IUC'~.-
..
.,.
Gecqe Gallup, Jr.
"Probably no other institution in our society
hashad a greater impactfor the good than
the church."
"Participation in a religious congregation
has demonstrable civic benefits for the
country and for American corporations--
even apart from strengthening moral and
ethical values."
....~ii.
Edmunol T. PrOIl. J..
s
.1.(" -'3"
.
...
,
..
:i
t
;-. .
'1
I'
tl
n
.
,
~ ~
,I
.'
I ,
I
,.
, ,
On Oc:fober 3. 1990, RIAL Board cbairman Rabbi Joseph B. Glaser
presided over bisloric ceremonies tbal bailed "the Jona souaht joining
of our Muslim brothers and sisters for concened religious activity on
bebalf of tbe American people." Rabbi Glaser U shown with (L to R),
Mr. Dawud Assad, presidenl of the Council of Mosques, a new
member of RIAL's Board, and Dr. Gutbi E. Ahmed, director of the
Muslim World League, a new member of RIAL's Religious AdviSOty
Council.
Fnun the Chairman uf the Hoard
"Holiness is knowing we are all God's
children--and in knowing that. knowing
God,"
'lbese are times of new strength and wholeness for Religion In
American Ufe. On an historic day in October, Muslims joined
our ranks. When Reliaion In American Ufe was first formed in
the 1940s, it was a Proteslant organiution. Catholics came
aboard, and it became a Christian organiution. When Jews
joined, it became a religious organiution. Now, with the entry
of Islam, we are a holy oraaniution.
Holiness u found mosl eminently in sharing, in love while in
the midst of differences, in regarding the other as a Thou and
DOl as an object Holiness is inclusive-it knows not fences.
Holiness u InISI and is caring far beyond one's parochial
boundaries. Holiness is knowing that we are all God's
children-and in knowing that. knowing God.
That day in October was imporlant for RIAL and a turning
point for our nation. We have broken a major barrier and the
benefICial effect may well ripple 10 other shores. It is long
2
overdue that our Muslim brothers and suters join in the
interreligious venture of Religion In American Life, which bas
a simple mission. lean and sp&re-to gel Americans 10 affiliate
with houses of worship--churches and sYn&&ogues and now
mosques-on the simple and continually proven theory that
religious people, by and large, are better members of society, at
least in America. How good it is to dwell toaelher in unity.
J'tI'd.
l.Co-3 f
"
~GIO..,
4t"_ 6 ~
. RIAL.
\ If
~II/o.~ v
Relil1ion In American Life (RIAL) is a nalional. non-sectarian.
illler-religious, not.for-profil organizalion. lis goals are 10
slrenl1lhen the nation's faith in God,lhe moral purpose of its
pcuple, and elhical values demonstraled in personal, business
and public maIte.... and 10 champion religious freedoms.
Tu lhese ends, RIAL provides the religious and business
communities and the general public with research, publications,
educalional programs, role model awards, worship directories
in hOlels and other public facilities across the nation, and helps
initiale local projects to increase panicipation in Ihe worship
"lid ..,evice of churches, synagogues and mosques. These local
inilialives are supponed by nationwide public seevice
ad, eni.ing campaigns conducled by RIAL in cooperalion with
thc Advenising Council.
Relillious instilulions of all faiths and the business communily
coupcMe in RIAl's governance and program adminislCation.
The fifty six religious groups now panicipating-Protestant,
C"lholic, Easlern Onhodox, other Christian, Unilarian, Jewish,
and Muslil1l-fepresent g4 percelll of all religiously affilialed
pcr.olb in Ihe U.S. Funding comes from panicipating religious
~"'Ul", corporalions, foundalions, gifls, and bequests.
Fur more infonnalion, please write: Dr. Nicholas B. van Dyck,
pic.iJcnl. Religion In American Life, Inc., 2 Queenston Place,
p, inc':lon, New Jersey, 08540. Or call, 609-921-3639.
. .
;~!~.m~rR'UJlpps ~f'P"ps
',.;}<---.:r-.: ~J:'7Y.: '-~;~: :<::.-.":-:0.:,.;..
'-'}:~~~Cb!m:b ' -..~
,:'_N*t9~~Mdi~f,p~lion~~ '-'
.;'~~~CII~VS.\
C:' ~ Bible $ociejy
. .,^oWoc~ onhodox ~ ~~ol~AmcriQ
. 4\nnePiIIl Cb!udt pf ~
. ~'lqIjb\ieSDt Ood .
.' ~ic ~1U'Ch in ~ VDitcd SlateS . .
;:;::~fcm,f~pf~CIII~'t. '"' ",'
n...:' n."-b tDiocinl... J n...:) ....
: -,"'..-t .......,~. .;',....'f~ III .......f! ,';-.
',ClI~pf~~I'f~!1 .. .',' . '.
'~~Ilf~"~I'" '<;:::~~>..;..i."
"',:RJ~ pf~ ,~, P'ij ....
'. C11111dl of J_ Clllillllf ~~ Sain14 :
~lIl'CltofIheN~. . .
- Plurcll W~n Upited . .
"r- ~il!lf P,1osq~m I\le Us.\ .' .: :~; .~.
.,.llpis\1opal CIIurcb ..' . '.' '. _,s,.. \
, JlYl!ll,eli.~ J.\I~ CIlllfl'lI in o\meriC!j' .
: , Denem ~otS,v~lIIy Ady~
.. ~ Orthodo~ AI'tb4i~ of Nonb and Soullt America
Q.. Pn/Iodo. PIIiIoplDCDf ~ielY
Jntemalional Council of C41mmuniry CIlurcbct
J.IlIhe~ Qlurch, MiUOllfi SynocI
. Mennonite Church .
Morayian QlIU'Ch in America
I,fuslim World Leag!IC ' .
. . ~aiioilal AuociaIiOll of CaIIFpti~ ClNtian Own:hes
,..~~ Council of CII~
N~iOllal EYllll.elislic ~iation
National Federation ofT~mple B~1fIoodt
. National federatiOll of Temple Sisterboods
PrIItodo. Church in Anio:rica
huli$t NalioDaJ ~c EyaoaelizatioQ Auociation
fplish Nati~ Catholic CIurclt of America
","byterialt CII\IfCh (USA)
frogreuiv~ Nati~ Papli51 CoqYellliOll,Inc.
!W>binic~ A1J~ of A!neriCl!
. ."bbiilical Auembly
Rabbirtical Council of Amo:rl\:a. Inc.
: Reformed C!turch in l\merica
llf'iJio~ f'pblic 1le\fli0ll$ C4lpncil,lnc.
. ~vatiOQ Mm)'
. . ~1l1 Jlapli5t CaIIY~iOQ
S~'98ue Qluncil of America
"'pion Of American Jiebrew CoopptillllS
lJpion of pqhodo. J~Wisb CaIIF,atillllS of America
. . lJpiOQ of Orthodol! Rabbit of ~ lJDited SlateS and Canada
J.lnilarjan UDivena1ist AuociatiOll
lJpiled Cburclt of Chrisl
VlIitcd Melbodi$t ClIurch
lJDi~ Slates QlIholic Conf~
lJDjtcd Synaaoaue of America
VllIUII/CCn of America
W.........ue for Ccuervatiye Judaism
VOIIIIJ W~'$ ClNtian AuociatiOll
.... ...
.. '.
.
17
lio~ 3 Z
- .
'. '~N' ~ - R~A::-.. .!- -, e:-'--D-ltl:T-.- -U A\:-
. - -n-V"V-J-~~-.I::lL crn--
l'
FROM THE BARNA RESEARCH GRaUp~.
Subject:
Contact:
1bc diffClQCCS berweea Los Anlelca County ~idenlS who aacad church 1114
diose who do IIOt -"en.;!
Ron Sellers
(818) 241-9684
Dille: September 19, 1990
For ~ale Release
.
4.." : ....).
A NEW n1JI)y or LOI AF:n .., CcxlN1T -S'CJI\ENTI fINDS IIGHIFICANT DIFRIENa:s hi "uN
ADllLlI WIIO A~ ~ca AND l1KlSIl WIIO IIO~, QluaCIII:D AlHL1I AU: fofOU UD:Ly '10
VOUlN1D:a TIj:EIa ma, u: INVOLVID IN ona:a -":1 u:~ .u::rmna IUCII AI a&ADIHG 11IE BIIU,
AND 114 VI: ro.lllYE fEI1.INGS Aaour LA. EVEN 11111: IlDIOGILU'IIICS or 11IE CIIIW:8ED AND 11IE .
UNCllfJaCIIDI AU DII1'I:UNT.
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
S
o
Church Attendance 10 LA. County
(People Who Usually Attead a Cbristlan Cburcb Eve!'J Week)
42%
AI AduJls
Blacks
fIspanica - Asians
Whites
.
. ,'''' .
. ~ . ;.
-MORB-
.~......,.
0" :.; ....1."1.... .......a_....-;.r._II;.." _....~.. ...~~..
..' . ~"'" :... '. .;.....;! . ...._.--, ...... .... . ~.
E"IJh$ir #2-
",... ".
-:-"
.....
.. -.
. . ........., .-.'
. -~ '
r.
.~ ., .
. .... p-"
Baraa aeuuch Group. 722 Weat 'roadway . Glendale, CaUfornia:;;':120. .
J..{,,- 33
~ It J
. .
2-2-2
Thrc:c: OUI oflen Los Angeles County adults (29'1>) aucnd worship services at a Christian
chW"Ch on a weekly basis. Anolherthree out often (3111) attend church. but go less frequently.
A research study of county residents lIlat is about to be released shows Ill.. lIlere are sisnificanl
differences between lIle people who attend church, and lhe 4OCJ, of all county residents who do
not attend church.
The survey of 600 LA. County residents, conducted by lIle Glendale-based Barna Research
Group, will form lIle basis for a day-long conference for county church leaden on October 27.
The findings of lIle study. and a companion study of over 1.000 L.A. churches. will be presenled
and discussed .. lIle conference.
The study shows IIlat churchgocn and lIle unchurched differ in IIlcir attitudes about Los
Angeles, in some of lheir activities and lifestyles, and especially in their demographic composi-
tion.
For instance. 5211 of all county residents who attend church every week volunteer at least
one hour a week to help organizations lIlat conduct charitable work or community service.
Among people who attend church less frequently, 41'1> clai"lcd to volunteer time to IIlcse organi-
zations. Among lhe unchurched, only 20% volunteer lIleir time. Likewise, 39% of all weekly
church attenders said that in lIle next year lIley plan to increase lIle amount of time lIley volun-
teer. Thirty-three percent of the less frequent attenders said they plan to increase lIle amount of
time they volunteer, compared to only 27% of lIle unchurched.
People who attend church also have a different view of Los Angeles lIlan do the
. .
unchurched. Sixty.five percent of all churched residents of the county agreed lIlat "it is easy to
meet people and make friends in L.A.... compared to 55% of the unchurched who felt lIlis way.
Thirty-six percent of lhe churched residents agreed that "L.A. is a good place to raise children,"
compared with 24% of the unchurched. While 57% of the unchurched adults said lIley "fcellike
you are pan of a community in lhe area where you live," 78% of the churched residents felt as if
lhey are pan of a community.
Ocor,e Barna, president of the Bama Research Group, noted that many of lIlese differences
can be directly attributed to church involvcmcnL "MaJiy of the churched people who are volun-
1eCrin, their time are volunteering it through lIleir church, either directly or indirectly" Barna
said. "Similarly. we know from O\D' national studies IIlal people who are involved in a church
-:_'..' ".
-MORE-
i~-3cf
F18
""11:..,.\", ~"IHttll. n ......
IttS"fl.IiUUU'".,
,
Religion
~gelenos:Are Less Likely Than Otllers to Go .to Ch~rch i.:
. . .
· 5lIrYey: A 1Ie\l' poll also ,........ ........ -..., ..,... r'"F"'OI.~":OS" .' .
. "" ...., hye. MCOfdinl to lhe f':tt:T;jj ~~ 1 to'
Iift"dsliha.t b11.~~s~."~ore "~'''''I .1.. """'" ,..., ,_ '.;iF'" '" f:":k~-'::
o en "\u h:u In "."Ilglon who Ii". tu l.o!. An~ll'1 Ctunl, ;. ... '......-:...'\'i..:
rhln a,., tht (nunrfs lhtnk lhal II Is . """cull Jlbee 10 ~:.. . ~,
......, Irit:tdJ. rllH chlldt~n Ind 1Ji V;
whill$ iUld 1.alinctS. "h I~rl in c'"1mmunil' 'CU"IUt:s. . I
.-- .-.-...-. .1Id .t.at II LKks _noRd lor lhe ~ ~l
II,'.USSF'. .. UA""lI.EKT tIdfti...'.....1 . '1' .. . .._. ... ".. /;,,:. i1
,...u .u........ ...,.t ~ _ __ JI!
R~;~~~':r:'..'::..t':::i:; ...0:': ~m:'= ":-:-~: ':i'.
18 au"" . U1I":" or 101 ~Id ..,Isla w.en ,"hertJ '-arhef by . jf .
......... than... f'aMltM.. 01 the .......... ......Wlton.. ...rket. ". f~
M!I!n .. . _ __I .. . ... _I". ..... .......b.... III; ,.
....IUI'Y.~, 10 be..... puthc Md ..... c"wehn. .' i
.-h. ....... who IiYII! 1.llht MOlt counl, ntIdentJ.N untn. :. .)
eDIIhl, .. f.... .... likel, to be 'Inned .boul dturchn ... lbttt ~;':J
\ .........In ,..........IdjYll~.lhlin. W'U; ArnDnJ lhou ....". 14'S ~ .' ., .
~""""'.nd"'lJft.& .....lhe'UdhOWr.howerfee:U.' .~ .t
:. 1iI.II...n........'35~oIl_ ProlUlahl churchn:.... hi lIwIr "':11.::
a.... Hutu .o18Iltnd ch"rd" won. and hall uW IheanM Ihtnts ..~ :.1',
. ........--.....'" _.......ClIhoIk........... r-1IImo
. ~tll.....__G"""'1n And .........,.......... ",.n --..
, L t_ -. ....1lI" ""... Loo"......Count,_._
. , ~ t:UcU. CIIIIDpaNd 10 21$ . . behne 1lronII, In lht.....tnct .
If ..... and "5 et LaUr.ol. .UI ".._Cod who" bel, 8nd ptf'fecl
......- . ...._,... _.- on.,:If"
. 0.-1. ... Aft..ln ~OUft" ,............, 'M' .... CIwUtloa
....... ..... . ... ~.,lIMftt church"","anL .
Ie......... .... f'IIiIIauI........ Rnc.on... IrofII ..n .t'''nlc
- Onl,>>,. ...1.... ......., ....... IIId _.0.""", '11IM
lMnI II Irnporbnllo be an oIClI.. were too lID.n 10 be MItHUalt,
churdI ~. .... 'f~r lIwI ......Uf'l. MId BamI rneuch
~ In ..... 1lfanII, lIeIif.c ....., MIOCUle Ron SeUert.
. .
~
~.
I:
~'
V\
~-:-M..inlil1e Protestant Ranks
; Continue Decline of the '60s
'- -
"- n-1I...s.n....
i.
..
.~...........aMII..__ ~.........,.........._.ft'...
~ J UJJ. .........1'nllM.Id~ wlwre Ute
a . .A:..__&Ntbltpn...Ihe....l...........
~ 1 ...... 10 the IIltIl 1'UfIM!c* If AmtncIn.....
~na.a....
;c_c.tIIoIc:I...... ...ir.~...A~......
--_.............In___...
. ....- """'llIunI-"'_'" "'...._
..;...; .......",...."......,....,..-. ...._IIIM
: .................,.,.. , . . .
: ....... Cllvaara, FIf
,
.
l
fino I/IlM M...... o.m. "Soato "......
......... ~....... >>--. tlJlltUtll
IUND.4Y WORSHIP' "-"'.11 ".M. AND' P.r.L
OI'lnriaC c.r. "'....-11.... o.....s..-,
,
.
--....,.......0-.._
...... 01 the 111'III, .. "one ..
..hen the tChrtJtilnJ churcb II
"'-1">lOMl'_...... ,......
IIon..nd _hkh Is etpK..JI,.isIbIt
In lAI -Ance'"_ Un"':.s pH)pIe 1M
Ih~ churth .. relt','..nt 10 their
Ilvn_and ...Ieu churches Cia
d'moMIr'le this reIt.an<<-tI ...11
conllnue to Wst around."
n I~e ".dln, .ntl S,,"..t~,.
IChwI .umoJance '-<<e I"""
10 be '.r .....e 'rtqtRnI ..mane
bI.tC1lI ... UIe rounl)" 1_ llIIOftI
~_.......'_A_31~'"
.1. Anplenos read tbe 11II", in .
,lven ..... COIIIpINd kI 41'4 If
"ulllMIIoMI"'. btll"~ 01 blKll:
C......1 r...m. hnil r~~,1 lhe
..... III 'M' per;od. '110 ....',......
This III. ..bf~ of 1M '1IUf'H 101'
_hitfl. 0111)' one.fourth of whom
.... ....,.............. ..........
Ihf Iftv"'" w"k..net ,... t..lInaI.
32....
Similarly. WICk cOllnly n:Mmts
Iff IIMtft IhIn I_e as IIkef, 10
ha,o,! .nendl!d. Sund.l' Mhoo)i or
Null education tl.u .1 . fhurch
durin!:, the pte\loo! ........ .S I~
..hllt:s f26'~ to 1Ic;t. J. Th. IlgUI't
lurL...'lnositI4o;:.
\\'IUum Plnlkl1. .." ,",.- ..~Ii'~
pro'euor II Fuller TltlNlo,J,.ul
5.:mtnM,ln PuaMna who directs
.... .,,.n,tl6CIIllChoI)I's IlUoJ, pro.
p.m lor blKk ,.,ton. aid thll
Illhot.ll:h he .,1 nol surpns.!'d .1
.... .ur"r,.' ,.nchllll .00..1 bI.ck
nMciOus paflkiplllon. he did not
aped lhe difffrtnbal wllh Olber
rxntDI"JOh~.
'The bllCk churc" occ..... .
IIIIft c:~tnl pIKe in thr llvet,
IhdIUOIU 'M .y.lo...., ..,....
,lei oflhue ~ tun In OlMr
.......... Pinnell "trI. -rtK bIlr.k
c:hurdI .. both Inlcarolled ...&8 lhe
Alriun.Amerkan cullure..nd 1111
I IEIUftf: 01 Sll'mcah lor .:ICIer..
end anmunll, .veloplHnt. . . .
Jf.1bt one conJIanllhlltllhtN. 01
B.~ .. turined br""
. ,.ndlnp. ""We'" alked .....
Ih.." KrOIS lite "'lion but ne",r
....... lhe Inknsll' 01 the .".Iudn
'" the....... III .... "0I.1n Coun.
I,. IMrUcularI, the IhILIHe-and
_Umes the outrt,hl MIM-
. for 1M c:hun:h," he ..MI.
He.1d tI w.s dlftlCUltlo sorllUl
.... ........ BuI ... point... .. -.
,........ "'rdi_...._......
IIwI Cttn.llolftll' . . . and Olher
....................0...,..... .
CoInt to murcia ""1 . papuIu
I.., hl do In LA,"
H. 8ddfd "loll he .'.J '"IcIt....
II)' .h~ fKt t"', LoI An,c'd .'Iend.
.. lit . kind 01' htll.-.thel for whit
.. ."", .. -. ...- ....
"'Iion. eHp.us mlnell II ........
II,..... .........,.....-
---.
RoI'-._
SURVEY oru. COUNTY RESIOEHTS
,l,flend t""th iI'I..........
Rod lhe &:lie 1ft......-nII
Sa, 'tIIC'iln " ..err tmpOrIanI to ...
U;.de a '.Jol!rwnII CDIIWI'IIIIfnenlnlO CfInIt
u._ _
- -
35" "'II
31 O'
.. -~_.
53 ..
-....-.- .....-
. ........ ... .... ..... .
AltfftCfd-.rtn ..111I..... In.......... 35" ~ sa. 371'
.........___.._ 31 25 II 32
..nlfld$l...u,tchOOI.....ctuchdnl ,.... 28 ..
....--.............................."..,..-----.
_ a'illet. -'i,. ........
....,. of IIw .11:....., 01 ,....... It
use. ... _'. ........ _
wit. e..... ... _ ....... 1IN.
.... ..., ,... w.. Oaoot II -....., .
-._IIIM.....,_ .
"'...._Indnnh.._.
ance.- . - .
... 11_ .... ... ........ IIlI .
.rn. ......n_..... eft......
,..,.. ....... .... .. ""I-llIiIIM
... ....... ,... ....... -...
....- lad )'OdIhluI_...........
In '.II.IfOWIn. churth ""(IIKIIII
...ch II lhe Cal..". CMpets. ....
V.ney.l'. ..etlow.hlps and Ute
H....CIta......
J'_......CoI_.._.
lhe v.n....,.. oIlOdat rMftII.
tII.m lhne rftIttYtI, new anqII.
.hidl ......11d 1Mre. ..".., ......
....., kind of ~ If Inttlflllll
reU,"", .m.ln. ,oun, peopll,"
1I,lltraMl
8II'M N6d .... ... .......,.
_hkh "'-a ........ ..... ... af .,
peket," .... conclllClfd 10 ....
IrO dturchn w . bellet JDb. ThI
suNDAY 9:GO A.M. o....c.. ~ For AI Apt
1O:~5 A.M. Dr. r~, P~IC"""
6:00 P.M. e;,lIlcfa, '._,\tip
. - .. ..-;.-... ....;.
. ...~ . ......... ..... ..., 01 ;..,
IJI63_ _. "I.- ;'
......... Ololtty. II. ...,..... _. I
_.._..........11<I. .
~ C.,....I~. ~.b'~~n r'.
11II-"" _.... .
-__III.IoLoo :'
"..-......... .
.Onl, . 1IlIr\I ......,.,... . ..
- .. - ...... .... -.
....... ........ '''''.111IIII UIt It
tto!',.........,......, ,.......,.;
1ft' . .... of 1M ............., In
....1Ch Ow, 1Itfe. Pan" Ih" NIIrIn.
Iaru ...... II tilt .rta.. ..... .
_..,-111I AId ...., ..._
the, ... ...-e ...... .he .. .,
......,.... . .'
Onl, ..11"'.._.........
......, ..... ...... - --
IltI'YK'd ... die eIdIrt,. .nd Ite;
"h ..,....'lUll.- AlltldIt Is a
.........e ,.,....chlldren.
"C'IMIdNn ifili .... ,Id .,.
1WI't....... II wltldl Itt. .'t'tll.
.., ..... . ,.,ucuw ....., ..
...... -. -..........- "..
.' ....:
YOU. YOUl fMaY NO YOUR fIIIN)5 _tMI!D TO ATlNl
. '.' "KEVER A VOT"
. MEMORIAL SERVICES'
..
EDEN .MEMORIAL PARK
.....,.lcpIln.ll D.,.....AM.
T_..._ml .
I ~"'_COfdKf<<l"":
1:.."'" "'.rn.lr,iCnt-ol If.,""" ,'to., ~f'tit.
;'
,
.
/'
.
4 1 .1
arc IQOI"C likely 10 anend), and aB~ (older people aremotc likely 10 go to church).
The stUdy will be discuss~ 'I !he Oc:toberconfertnce, Gaining New Grounti: Srralegies
lor Reaching LA. County lor Christ. The c:onf'eren~ is designed for paslors and lay leaders in
L.\. churches. A wrinen analysis pf lhe findings will be provided to all conference participants.
Gaining New Ground will be held Sanuday, October 27,1990, from 8:30 I.m. to 5:00 p.m.
The location is G1cndaIe Presbyterian Church (219'East Harvard). Rcpsuation for 1bc CODfer-
CIICC is handled by lhe Baml Research Group, P.O. Box 4152. Glendale. CA 91222-015i (818-
241-9684). lbe COSI ofregistratioll is $25 per person before Oc:tober 15, or $35 after the 15th or
lithe door. The COSI includes lhe full-day confcrenc:c, u well u two seminars on . choice of
rellleCllOpics, and the wri~en report. Gaining New Ground is being presented in co-operaDon
wilh pospcl Light Publishers of Ventufa.
for further information on the study of Los Angeles County, or on the conference, conllel
Ron Sellers 11818-241-9684.
Table of Data
Christian Church Attendance among L.A. County Adults
(n = 600)
rreqllCl1CY of Auendance
DemoV1'3nhic:: Gmun
Evrrv Week
. All L.A. COUDly .dullS :!9"
. Ale l"Oups:
18.24_____ .19
25 . 34 ....---_..____________.24
35 .44...._.__...__..____.___.___.._.27
45.64.....________...___._____.36
65 or older __.___..._.__..__._..____.42
, MUMI Sl8lus:
IIIUl'ied ..-------...._.________33
divortedlscpmlCd __ . 31
IiDpe (Dever married) _ _18
. EtlaDldly:
~IC _____ 24
bI8cIc ---__________42
llispanic: ----____.._______..__32
uia!l....----.--___.......________27
. Gellder:
IIIeD _
26
32
WWDeIl
-30-
ilo-'3b
u~c FrenulI!!ntJv Not 8t AU
31.. ..0..
41 42
28 48
40 33
27 37
24 34
35 31
29 40
29 54
'26 50
41 17
37 32
39 34
28 46
33 34
.
.. ".~. .-,
.
Church Membership
QUESTION: Ate)l'OU. ~ a member oIa church Of I)'nIIfIOf1us?
......,
.. II
... .. ...... .....~I*II
TOTAL 64% 35% 1% 2556
CHURCH STATUS
Churched 100 . . 1471
Unchurched 18 51 1 1067
SEX
Male 58 41 1 1270
Female 69 30 1 1286
AGE
Uncler30 53 45 2 548
18-24 years 53 46 1 228
25-29 years 53 45 2 260
30-49 years 65 34 1 1004
50 & older 71 28 1 881
RACE 34
WMe 65 1 2054
Black 64 34 2 436
Hispanic 57 42 1 363
REGION
East 64 36 . 811
Midwest 65 34 1 614
South 71 27 2 835
West 51 48 1 496
EDUCATION
Less than H.S. 60 39 1 603
H.S. grad. 67 32 1 979
Some college 66 33 1 453
College grad. 61 38 1 .. 513
IlAR/TAL STATUS
Married 69 30 1 1807
Single 49 50 1 501
DivorcedlSep./Wldowed 64 35 1 442
REUGlOUS PREF.
Proteslant 71 28 1 1497
Catholic 70 29 1 732
Other 50 50 . 139
SPOUSE'S RELIGIOUS PREF.
Same 74 25 1 1313
t Other 47 51 2 289
! PRESENCE OF CHILDREN ....,8
Any 67 31 2 859
, ....9 66 32 2 488
,
f 10-14 70 29 1 394
15-18 67 31 2 298
None 62 37 1 1684
-&..t IMn OM pen>>nt
8urwr oc.nl,. Q.24
17
1.L,- 37
.f. C.
. .
Contents
INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2
FINDINGS IN DETAIL................................. 5
ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.. 11
fINDINGS IN TABULAR fORM:
~unteerlsm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... 12
Emphasi$ on SeIl.Expression . . . . . . . . . . . . .'. . . . . . . . . . .. 13
Less Emphasis on Money. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 14
Sexual Freedom. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 15
liaditional Family Ties. .. .. .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. .. .. . .. ... 16
More Respect for Authority. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 17..
Less Emphasis on Working Hard. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 18
. Acceptance of Marijuana Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19
Premarital Sex. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 20
Beliefs About ChurcheslSynagogues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 21
Importance of Religion Today . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. .. .. . ... 22
Importance of Religion When Growing Up . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 23
Church/Sunday School Attendance as Child . . . . . . . . . . . .. 24
Beliefs about Jesus Christ. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 25
Religious Experience ............................... 26
Commitment to Jesus Christ. ......................... 27
life After Death. . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. .. . . ... 28
Beliefs About the Bible. .. . . . . . . . . .. .. .. . .. . .. .. . . ... 29
Good Christian or Jew. .............................. 30
PrayerlFrequency of Prayer .......................... 31
Religious Training as Child . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 32
Type of Religious Training. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 33
Special Training.................................... 34
Religious Instruction For Own Child. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 35
Children Receiving Religious Training. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 36
Church Membership. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 37
Invite Others to Your Denomination. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 38
When Last Attended Church/Synagogue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 39
Frequency of Church Attendance in Past Six Months ...... 40
Considered Becoming Inactive in Church. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 41
Stopped Attending Church/Synagogue for Two or More Years 42
Age When Stopped Attending Church . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 43
Reasons for Stopping Church Attendance. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 44
Began Church/Synagogue Attendance Again .. . . . . . . . . .. 46
Been Invited to Become Active in Church. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 47
Factors in Deciding to Attend Again. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 48
Approached More Than Once......................... 49
Approached by Friend or Relative. ..................... 50
Method of Contact. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. 51
Reaction to Invitation. ...............................52
Chances of Becoming Active Again . .. .. . .. . .. . . . .. .... 53
Attendance at Religious Meeting Not Held in Church. . . . . .. 54
Frequency of Attendance . .. .. .. .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. ... 55
Charismatic Religious Group. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " 5&
Felt Unwelcome Due to Race/Ethnicity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 57
Ever Been More Active in Church. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 58
Length oflnactivity .. . . .. . .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. . .. .. . .. ... 59
Reasons for Reducing Involvement with Church/Synagogue 50
Church Programs of Interest to Unchurched . . . . . . . . . . ... 61
TECHNICAL APPENDIX
Design of the Sample. . .. .. . . .. . .. .. .. .. .. . . .. .. .. .. 62
Sampling b1erances ............................... 63
MAJOR CONTRIBUTORS
The
Unchurched
American-
10 ~ars Later
The Unchurched American - 10 ~ars
Later, Is a publication 01 The Princeton
Religion Research Center. For more
Information write: The Princeton Religion
Research Center, Box 628, Princeton.
NJ 08542
Executive Director
George Gallup, Jr.
Auf.tant to Director
Marie Swirsky
Contributing Editor
Jim Castelli
Edltortal Conaultant
Coleen McMurray
Edltortal Aufatanta
Alison Gallup
Mary Hyer
Typography
L&B Typography of Princeton
Cover Art
Leslie Mullen
Printing
Trenton Printing
.".
11.- 3g
E f<1.h 6 If' -d- .J
:" " "IJHiJ
1MJ!) jj
.' liB is
i M I.t,5f~
.: I.II-:t I
~ J f Iii
. 11'lS1l1";i . ,
~li.rJ'i~ 'lSf) t
sill u~ i i
mjl.f~i w3:(;~
8 d! It d ~ ~ ~ 1M
Jfl1j~~ I;' :i
. .....-....
:" ~,:~~.,.:~....:,;~.. ..
,
i
; .
i
,
;
I
i
!
I
l
! .
;
. ,
. c.... 8 ~ ~m II p~~ *r:J1
; . .tu)"111'5 III II t 11 1
, fa 5 ~ ~ 11.11111111111 'lS J ~
· ::tlQ] ., .I;nl~ 111111 ~f!l:ld
. ..~-3
":t-
*t\
~
~
~
Iol1
Churches and Church
~embersWp
in the United States
1980
", . ~ .".. ;\.. I.;
I
""""""-='-"""-1 '.
~~ 'l~( ~I
......-~ - . y .. -, ....
;~l ~r -:-
,,' It A.. ".1
l~'",~!
....:J . -=--'/Il
---,- - ~
.........
~
- ..fit>
........U:I
~
u.
-
- .
BEIlNAJID Quuffl , HEawAN ~~!f :. ..MAa11N B~~_ .~.PAUL GoETl1NG . PIIGGY SIwvEa
E~J B I r lJ:- s--
1~-'Id
."
ICOPE OF THE STUDY
" This publication presents data reported by the
111 church bodies who partlclpated In a -'udy
IpOIlsored jointly by the Department of Records
and ReMarcl1 of the African Methodist episcopal
Zion Church, the Research Servlcas Department
of the Sunday School Board of the Southern Baptist
Convention. the Office of Research. Evaluation and
Planning of the National Council of the Churches
of Christ In the U.S.A.. the Lutheren Council In
the U.S.A.. end the Glenmary Research Center (e
Catholic agency). "
The sponsors Invited all church bodies that could
be identified as Judaeo-Chrlstlan to participate. The
111 groups that furnished data reportad 231,708
congregations With 112,538.310 adherents.' No
attempt was made to count strictly Indapendent
churches that hava no connection with a denomina-
tion.
The present -'udy Is related to two previous
Itudles.' The first reported 1952 atatlstics and was
aponsored and published by the National Council
of the Churches of Christ In the U.S.A. In 1956.
The second reported 1971 atatlstlcs and was spon-
sored by the Office of Research. Evaluation and
Planning of the Natlonel Council of the Churches
of Christ In the U.S.A., the Department of Research
and Statistics of the Lutheren Church-Missouri
Synod, and the Glenmary Research Center. It was
published In 1974 by the Glenmary Research Center.
t. for purpcIeeI D1lhla Iludy. ......... __ _ned .......
_., Inc:Iudlng lull memllerl, _r _r.n and .... eatl-
_ 1IUIIlbel' DI _ regular perlIclpan" whq er. not con-
_lid .. oommunlcenl. conllrmlld or lull memlle... lor .x-
....... lie 'IlapIIzIId,' _ not conftrmlld: _ not ellglblll
lor -..-no' and lie ...... 8M .DeIInInIl __Ipo"
......
I. L8urlI 8. Whllrnen end Glen W. Trtm..... CtNIrIlINNI end
CItu"", MemberIhIp In .... United ,.,..: An Eltllmeretion'
_ AneJpIa by Coun/les. h,.. end IteQ/ona (Hew York:
NIIIonel CoUncil DI .... CIlu_ DI CllrtsIIn .... U.S.A.. 1150-
1115I). SO IluIleIIna; Doug'" W. JoIlnaon. Paul II PIcard end
Bernard QuInn, CIIu_ end Clrurcll llemllerahlp In ...
UtoIIed ,.,.. 1871: An Enumeration by IteQ/on. ..,. end
CcuIIy (WMIllngIan, D.C" Glenmary RMMrch Center, 1174).
&:,~";vM..<"~,Y. j
IntroctuctioD. "
.,
".
" 1590
c-Ioria with Adtlerents
.100,000 10 .......
18. American Baptl-' Association
..
1~-41
'.
.
. . INTRODUCTION
27. Estonian Evangelical Lutheran Church
28. evangelical Free Church of America
29. evangelical Lutheran Churches, Aasoclatlon 01
30. Evangelical Lutheran Synod
31. Evangelical Mennon", Church, Inc.
.32. Evangelical Methodist Church ,
:13. FIre Baptized Hollneu Church, (W8Ileyan) ,
34. Free Lutheran Congregations. The Association
. 01 .
as. Genera' Church '01 the New Jerusalem
36. General Conferenca of Mennonite Brethren
Churches
37. Genera' Convantlon of the New Jeruselem In
.the USA "The Swedenborglan Church"
.e. Orace Brethren Churches, Fellowship of
(formerly Fellowship of Brethren Churches)
39. Holiness Church 01 Ood. Inc.
<10. International Church of the Foursquare Oospel
41. Conservative Judaism .
42. Reform Judaism
43. latvian Evangelical Lutheran Church In America
(formerly Federation 01 latvian Evangelical
Churches In America)
..... Metropolitan Community Churches, Unlve,rsel
Fellowship 01
45. Missionary Church
48. Old Order Amish Church
47. Open Bible Standard Churches, Inc.
4e. Pentecostal Free Will Baptist Church, Inc.
49. Presbyterian Church In "'merlca
50. PrImitive Advent Christian Church
51. PrImitive Methodist Church. U.S.A.
52. The Protes'tant Conference of the Wisconsin
Synod
53. Protestant Relormed Churches In "'merlca
, 54. Reformed Episcopal Church
55. Reformed Presbyterian Church 01 .North
America
58. Romanian Orthodox Church In America'
57. Separate Baptists In Christ
.58. SocIal Brethren
59. The Southern Methodist Church
eo. SyrIan Orthodox Church 01 "'ntloch (Arch-
diocese 01 the U.S..... and Canada)
'1. Ukrainian Orthodox Church of "'merlca
(Ecumenical Patrlarchata)
12. Un"ed Christian Church
13. UnItecI Zion Church
The t3 church bodies participating In 1980 but
not In 11171 reprasant a total of 7.6 million adherents.
The largest among the new participants are the
African Methodist episcopal Zion Church, WIth 1.1
, minion; the ......mblles of Ood, WIth 1.6 million;
_ end the Chutches of Christ, WIth 1.8 million,
DII..A~IiI~ lwtIalplHng 1ft i1171 but not 1110
1. Free Will Baptists
2. General Baptists (O_a' AasocIatlon of)
....
3. North American Old Roman Catholic Church
(Brooklyn)
4. Unity 01 the Brethren
5. Wesleyan Church
INCLUSIVENES. OF THE STUDY
The ltudy ldentlfted by county 112.5 million
',nlll...JrW u.~"''l9,~..}.QatlPnLlLli .Jibt . khOWl'
.' ercent lit tbta'"Ul:I.lilf-~'~dhlte"'''
. " .. . The dlfflcu"v la in 'b&tl1lr-'O
Ing an agree ~upon sls for determining the total
Judaeo-Chrlsllan eclherents for the whole United
States.
The Yearbook of Amer/can and Canadian
Churches' lists 53.6 million "full, communicant or
conflrmed members" reported officially by U.S.
church bodies. The present study reports 48.8
million full, communicant or conltrmed members.
~.()mp\h. ~;. =~~e, p. rasant study reported
",b r ' ,llQIIll1MI~
~tais o~i:~IiIIttIl~
.11I<<&1 ,-~1Itm .' '. '
h Is well kfiowidhal there are Independent and
community churches. as well as religious move-
ments and associations that might be considered
churches, whose memberShip Is not reported to
the Yearbook. Bacausa the membership 01 these
groups Is unknown, there Is no wey of determin-
Ing the percent 01 church membership the prasant
study would represent " these groups were In-
cluded In the total. (Some members of such
churches or groups do. 01 course, also belong to
denominations participating In the study and,
therefore. are accounted for In the CMS data
reported.)
"ewlsh Bodies. With the a..lstance of the
United Synagogue 01 America. the full members
(Individual adult members) 01 793 Conservative
synagogues were identified by county. For this
group, the number of total adherents Hated In
Table 1 01 this study should probably be Increased,
because the CMS method of astlmatlng adherents
adds children 13 and under to the full members;
whereas In this case. 18 and under Is probably
a better besls. With the ....stanca of the Union
of American Hebrew Congregations, the full
members 01 708 Reform congregations were also
identified by county. No county Information Is avail-
able on either full members or adherents of
Orthodox synagogues, although according to one
estimate. their total number of eclherents could
be as high as 1.3 million.' The general Jewish
population Is, of course, considerably larger than
I. Conotant H. .......... Jr., ed~, ,...",."". 01..-.. and
Canedllon ~ f.I 1'.......: AIlIngdon _, t.1),
pp. 225-232. .
4. In . 1I'1~" ..~.....IIol, wIlh .. *" of .. Iludy,
an Aprtl 20, tllZ, IlabbI AmIa Runcl of .. UnIon of OrtIlocIox
".".., Congregatlona 01 "'-Ica IlaMd that about 1.3 _
..... identity with ~.. adD. 8WTlIQ II 1'* or 1nIIItuIIon8.
1~-t.f2.
Ihe adherents of .ynagoguell or congregations.'
lIIack Chwch Member.. Four Black denomlna-
lions, accounting for 1.8 million adher,nts, partici-
pated In the Itudy.' The 107 other participants
_re ..ked to ..tlmate the number of Blacks
among their adherents. The 22 group. who re-
aponded reported a total of 1.8 million adherents.'
There II no way of telling how many alacks are
adherents of the remaining 85 denomlnatlon~
who participated In the .tudy.
The African Methodlllt episcopal Church had
hoped to participate, but lhelr county atatlstlCII
_re not ready for releasa In time to meet the
deadline. It Is expected that their .tatlstlCII will
lOOn become available. The Progressive National
Baptist Convention, Inc. and the National Primi-
tive Baptlllt Convention, Inc. had elso hoped to
participate, but their records were only partially
complete. Major efforts were made to enlist the
participation of the four other 'arge Black
Churches,' but without succass. The problem Is the
absence or Incompleteness of membership figures.
The 17 .mall non-participating Blacll denomina-
tions lilted In the Yearbook of Amerlcen and
Canadian Churches were, of coursa, elso Invited
to participate.
Orthodox Churc:hes. Four Orthodox bodies, ac-
counting for combined adherents of 55,000, partici-
pated In the study.' Although lizeable efforts were
made to obtain data for the remaining 17 groups,
both directly and with the assistance of the Stand-
Ing Conference of Canonical Orthodox Bishops In
the Americas (SCOBA), atatllltlCII were nol actually
obtained.
Other Group.. BeIIldes the denominations
mentioned above, there are 11 non-participating
church bodies that reported more than 100,000
members to the Yearbook of American anl~ Canadi.
t. TIle AlllerIcM JewIoh r.., Book "'" 1_ York: Anwlcan
......h Commlll8e. lSS0}. vol. Sl, p. 173, ,.porta 5.S million.
S. The African Methodlll Eplscopal ZIon Church. the Bible
Church 01 Ch,IIl. 'ne.. "'" Chrtatlan Methodlat Eplscopal Church
end "'" Flra Baptized HoII.... Church lW-ran).
7. TIle _ng groupa provided lnformaUon on _ mem-
llenhlp: American "pUll A... elation, BapU.t General Con-
Iorence. BapU.t MI..lonary AaoocIation 01 America. Catholic
Church, ChrtaUan and MluIonary A111anca, Chrllllan Church
IDilClpla.l. Chrl.lIan Chureha. and Chureha. 01 Chrl.t.
CIlriatIan RaIormad Church. Church 01 God l~nd, Tan-
-), Church 01 the __, Churchao 01 Chrlll, Con.
....UonaI ChrIolIan Churcha.. Conaarvat/Ye BapUIl _
alation 01 Amarlca, EpIscopal Church, Lutheran Church In
AmarIca, Lutheran Church-Mlaaourl Synod. MannonUa Church,
Praab~ Church In the U.S., RaIormed Church In Amarlca,
ao..nth-day AdwnUlla. UnIlad Church 01 CIvlol. Unllld PreI-
Ilytarlan Church In "'" U.S."'.
I. Hatlonal BapUIl Con_Uon, U.S.A., Inc.; -... BapUIl
ConvenUon 01 America; Church 01 God In CIlrill. In_onel;
Church 01 God In Chrlol.
e. ArmanIan Apootoltc Church 01 Anwlca l~ PraIacy),
Romanian Orthodox Church 'n Am.rlca, Syrian Orthodox
Church 01 Antioch 1__ 01 the U.S.A. end Canada),
UIuaInIan~xChurchol_IEcl ._....P__t.).
~-.~.-"~.....e..T!
.
. .
an churches: Jehovah'. Witnesses, United Pente.
coataI Church Internatlonsl, PoIl.h National Catholic
C.hurch of America, Genersl Aasoclstlon of Regular
ISaptl.t Churches, Free Will Baptists, Church of
God of Prophecy, National Council of Community
Churche., Reorganized Church of JesUI Christ of
La~er Pay Saints, Independent Fundamenlal
Churchell of America, Pentecostal Church of God
of America, Inc., -"d Ihe Wesleyan Church.
. PROBLEMS .
. DtfinIng M'mberlhlp. The molt critical method-
ological problem W8II that of defining church mem-
bership. Slnca there I. no generslly accaptable
atatllltlcal definition of church membership, " was
felt that the designation of members fIIIted finally
with the denomination. lhemselves. . .
In en effort to achieve comparability of data,
however, two major categories _re aalabll.hed:
. COMMUNICANT, CONFIRMED, FULL MEM-
BERS: regular members with lull memberahlp
.tatu.; and
TOTAL ADHERENTS: ell member., including
lull members, their children and tha eatlmated
"umber of other regular participants who are
not considered as communicant, confirmed or
. full members, for example, the "baptized,"
"lhosa not confirmed," "lhosa not eligible for
communion," and the 'Ike.
Of the 111 participating denomination., 64 re-
ported communlcents and adherents; two (CathollclI
and Latter-day Saints) reported adherents only;
and 55 reponed communicants only." For purposes
of this report, the church member.hlp Itudy .taff
eStimated the total adherenl. for the 55 IIrouPS
that reported communicants only. according to a
formula discussed below.
Participants _re slao rsquealed to lurnl.h de-
acrlptlve definitions of the atBtI.tlca they actually
submitted. Appendix A contains the definitions
submitted by the 87 IIrouPS that reaponded to thl.
request.
"Umating Total Adherents. Since It was planned
to use total adherents In computing percenl of
church membership to total population, for those
55 denomlnatlonll thaI reported only communicant
member., total adherents were ....meted according
to the following procedure. The total ~unty popu-
lation. wss divided by Ihe total county population
~ children 13 year. and under, and the result.
Inll figure was multiplied by the communicant
member.... The 1880 U.S. Canau. was used to
. 10. ConauIt T_ 1 III ~ _ ...._ rf; II NIl'-...:l
_.
11. ~ the _ _",ta In a -, wlIII _'pftn 01
1000' end 100 children 13 ...,. end under -*I be "'" -...
....- mambaro mulUpIIad by 1.11; _ adheronll In a
OQUnty with papulation 01 1000 and aoo cIlIIdrl!ll -*I be
lie -..munIcanl mambaro mulIIplIad by 1.41; end _ ....
.......ta In a oounty with __ 01 1000 end 500 _an
~ ~ ~ ~c....... mernbIn r~ by 2.00.
...
1,--1{.3
'.
........ODUCTlON
determine for each county the population 13 years
and under. An aterlsk after a flgure In the tables
indicates that total adherents were estimated
tflrough UN 01 this procedure. rather than reported
directly by denominations. .
The 65 denominations whose total adherents
__ MtImated In this way were asked to comment
. on the procedure. Of the 32 who responded. 25
approved the lormula. two had reservations. and
live did not approve. The comments aubmltted
are reproduced In Appendix B. .
LM8tlnll .ambe" Itr County. Membership
atattsttce are generally reported for the county
In which the church Itself Is located. rather than
for the county In which the member resides."
. In a meJorlty of cases the county of residence
wlll correspond to the county where the church Is
located. although modern mobility patterns ailggest
caution In accepting this assumption In every case.
c-tr Uatlngl. The church membership study
employed the same counties or county-equlvalents
. as the 1980 U.S. Census. Since the 1971 church
membership study was published. the new county
of Kalawao. HawaII (Iormerly a part 01 Maul Coun-
ty) has bean created; Washabaugh County. South
Dakota has bean absorbed Into Jackson County;
Nansemond County. Virginia has become Suffolk
City; and Chesapeake City and Portsmouth City.
Virginia are now part 01 Norfolk City. All 01 these
changes have bean Incorporated Into the 1980
church membership study.
In Virginia there are Independent cities that are
legally separate from the counties 01 thai state.
Since most denominations record location of
churches within the counties from which these
. cltles have bean separated. It was decided to
combine mosl of these cities with contiguous coun-
ties. A list 01 combinations and exceptions will
be found In Appendix C.
Because Alaska has no counties. the 1980
census areas and boroughs that lierve as county-
equivalents for "'tlstlcal reporting purposes were
employed In this study. These 1980 county-
. equivalents differ from those used In the 1971
church membership study. Appendix D provides a
comparattve listing 01 the two. The change In
geographic boundaries may be observad by com-
perlng the fold-out maps 01 the 1971 and 1980
church membership studies.
. "'plIrtlllg Data. The study ..s designed to
gather atatlstles as cIoae as possible to the April
1. 1980 U.S. Census date. Accordingly. the re-
quest to the denominations stated: "We are asking
that atatlstlce be reported to us by the month 01
September. 1980. We hope to receive data from
}OUI' _list/cat rear fhat end. anytime. during
tl. DsI.ohlll.sllol" __ _eel to ..... their genwaI policy
.. .e,.orlLo/l churcll .....m..rI. 01 the 12 who .-ponded to the
inquiry. .. bUt _ (Baplilt ~I c..o,hn.."",) ~~.
........,. fIf ~ -.....llDIInIJ fIf _1_.
IllY
1979; report earfler data only II that Is all that
t8 available by September. 1980."
Of the 90 denominations that atated that their
atatlstlce were valid as of a apactfIc date, 40 gave
December 31.1979 or January 1. 1980 as the date.
The dates for the ofher 50 ranged from October
31. 1978 to November 10. 1981. Saven groups
did not Indicate a specific date. but only the year
(1979 or 1980)."
Accurac:r of ReportIng Paaallluras. Most large
denomlnattons maintain national offices that receive
alatlstlcal raports from their individual congrega-
tions; these reports were combined to provide
the memberShip data for this study. On the other
hand. many amaller denominations. as well as
those In which local churches have a great deal
01 autonomy. only request and do not require
such reports. This means that dats for a few
denominations will not be as complete and current
as might be desired.
During the course of the study. the denomina-
tional offices lurnlshlng data were asked to com-
ment on the accuracy 01 their own reporting proce-
dures and to furnish copies 01 the forms they
used to collect the data. Forms were received from
37 denominations. and these are available tor study
at the offices 01 the Glenmary Research Center."
Commants were received from 55 denominations;
these comments will be lound In Appendix E.
Dual Affiliation. tn the 1980 church membership
study some attempt was made to ..sess tha extant
01 the practice whereby a local congregation al-
flllates with more than one denomination. The
denominations were asked: "Do any local congrega-
tions 01 your denomination maintain affiliation with
another denomination as well?" Of the 100 groups
that replied. 72 responded No. The comments 01
the 28 denominations who responded Ves are con-
tained In Appendix F. In many cases the comments
will also reveal how dual membership atatlstlcs
13. ",. IallowIno oocIe numberl C- AbbtwwIa_ lor cocIe
key) 1ncI1....the denomlnatlona who _ December 31,1070
or January I, 1180 .. the cIa1. 01_, _: 001, 015, 010,
02ll. 053, 055, 053, 071. 011. 053, 083, 105, 123, 157. 113,
164.115,183,201,208,221,281,213.287,213,205,313.335,
15e. 357, 387, 375, .,, _. 413, 415. 410, 443, 440, 453.
",. foHowInO cImu __ ...... by _ groupo: 10-31-78:
211; 12-31-78: 371. .3; 8-1-71: 1111I; 8-30-70: 213. 217:
I-zo.71: 011; 1-30-71: 237; 10-31.71: OIl: 11-1-70: 271;
11-15-71: 115: 11-30-71: 117; 12-21-71: 347; 1-15-80: 115,423;
1-31-110: 201; 2-11-80: 213; 3-12-110: 220; 3-14-110: In; 3-22-80:
_: 3-31-80: 320; 4-30-80: Oil, 383; 5-31-80: 133; 7-1-80: 421:
7-17-80: 451; 7-21-80: 323: 7.25-10: 107: 7-31-80: 017; 1-7-80:
140; 1-31-80: 233; 1-2-80: 210; 1-12-80: 201; 1-22-80: 203;
1-30-80: 127. 171, 353: 10-5-80: 247; 10-20-10: 040; 12-31-80:
274; 3-23-81: 015; ~1: 075; 4-17-11: 017; 5-7-11: 181:
8-11-11: 351: 1-30-81: 270; 7.ao-lll: 401: 7-31-11: 315: 8-31-11:
"'1; ,,.,0-1,: 101. ",. foIowlng groupo did not report IPllCIIlc
..... but only yen: 1171: 005. 175, 228. 215. 441: 1171-1110:
1157; 111IO: 117.
14. lee ~Ix E lor I 11II fIf ...._..II.sIIoI. ""-no
..... CIl". rtLon torma.
.1iD- 44
",
were handled for PUI'pOll88 of /Wportlng to this
Itudy.
llembenhip ..... 'I1aan 'lIp.lion. There
are 31 countles In this study reporting more church
adherents than census population: GEORGIA:
Franklin; HAWAII: Kalawao; KANSAS: Comanche,
Morton, Wichita; l<EtolTUCKY: Washington; MINNE-
SOTA: Farlbault, TraY8l'M; NEBRASKA: Greeley;
NEW MEXICO: Guadalupe, Harding, Mora, Taos;
NORTH DAKOTA: Hettinger, LaMoure, Rolette;
OKLAHOMA: Harmon; SOUTH DAKOTA: Douglas,
Turner; TENNESSEE: Hancock; TEXAS: Cottle,
Oallam, Haskell, Jeff Davis, t<nox, Motley, Starr,
Throckmorton, Wlllacy; UTAH: Morgan; VIRGINIA:
ftichmond. Reasons for the discrepancy wl/l no
doubt differ from county to county. But among
the axplanatlons the following might ba suggested:
U.S. Census undercount, church membership
overcount, or county of residence differing from
county 01 membership.
DATA PRESENTATION
This report consists 01 four tables and a fold-
out map. The Inlormatlon Is also available on com-
puter tape and, In combination with other data, In
the form of Church Planning Data booklets for
judicatories. ..
Table 1. The first table. NChurches and Church
Membership by Denomination, for the United States:
1980." presents for each denomination the number
of churches; the number 01 communicant, confirmed
or full members; and the total adherents for the
antlre United States. It also Indicates, for each
denomination, what percent 01 the U.S. population
and what percent 01 the total reported church
membership Its adherents comprise. Population
figures are from the U.S. Census 1980, Advance
Reports.
In all the tables. denominational names are ab-
breviated. A list of abbreviations will be lound on
the pages Immediately preceding Table 1.
Tele 2. The second table, NChurches and Church
Membership by Region and Denomination: 1980."
presents, for each of the nine census regions of
the United States, the total of churches and mem-
bers for each participating denomination. Both
communicant, conllrmed or full members and total
11. Inqutrtea ~dlng tile compuler,.". may be _r_
to tile Roper Cenler. 0fIice 01 Ill<< s._. Box U-lI4R.
Unl....lly 01 Connecllcul. 810rr.. Connectlcul 01288 Ilel.
Ill3 418 1 HO), Inqul.... ~dlng CalhoUc Churcll P!ennlng
Oetll _.... may be __ to tile Glenmery -':h
Cen..... 750 Piedmonl A.... NE, AlIanle, Gecrgle _ llel.
404-17B-e511). Inqulrle. regarding "rote.tent end other
Church PlannIng Dele _.... may be addr_ 10 tile 01-
Ice of .....rch. E..luallon end Planning, _onat Council 01
... Churcheo 0/ Chrlll In tile U.S.A.. 475 lU_e Dr., Hew
YorI<, N.Y. 1011511e1. 212-870-2581). ri-.' """,... ~,'
..
.
adherants are given, as wall as the percent of re-
gional population and of totslldherents that each
. denomination represents.
A map displaying the nine census raglons will be
found on the page Immediately pracedlng Table 2.
T'" I. The third table, WChurchas and Church
. Membership by State and Denomination: 1980:'
prasents for each state the total of churches and
members for each participating denomination. Both
communicant, conllrmad or full members and total
, adherents are gIven, as wall as the percent of state
population and 01 total adherents that each denoml-
. nation represents. States are arranged alpheatl-
cally within the table.
. tela 4. The fourth table, "Churches and Church
Membership by County and Denomination: 1980:'
provides the detailed data on Which the totals In
Tabies 1-3 are based.
For each county of the United States, there II
given the grand total of churches and members
reported. Both communicant, confirmed or full
members and total adherents are shown, as wall
as the percent of the county population that tha
combined total church adherents represent.
, ,In addition, for each county there Is a break-
down of data by denomination. showing for each
~ communion the number of churches; the number of
communicant, confirmed or full members; the num-
ber of total adherents; and the percant of county
population and of total adherents Its adherents
comprise.
, FoIcI.Otd Map. Accompanying this raport Is a
color map. 28" X 41", entitled Malor Denomina-
tional Families by Counties of the United States:
1980. By means of a color code. this map Indicates,
for each county of the United States. the partlclpat.
Ing group that predominates. In consultation With
the participating denominations. the various Ad-
ventist. Baptist, Brethren, Christian, Churches of
God. latter Day Saints. lutheran, Mennonite,
Methodist, Pentecostal, Presbyterian; and Reformed
church bodies ware grouped Into families... Catha-
18. The family groupo ..e .. 1oIIowo: ADVENTIST: Advent
Chrilll.n Churcll. Pri_ Advenl ChrIIIlen C/Iurch, S._Ih.
tIIy __: BAPTIST: Amortcen 8epIiII ~I,t'lllon. Amer-
Ican Baptill Ch_ In ... U.S.A.. 8epIiII Geller.. Con-
lor....... 8eptI1I ~ An,,111Ion of AmorIce. -...
Mlnlllerlef AIIocioIlon. Inc.. ~ IIopIIot An.,'.llon
of America, No"" Amortcen 8eptI.t Conference. 8eper... Bap-
.... In ChrIII, SevonIh Diy IIoptIII GeneroI ConIIrence. 8ouIh-
. ... 8eptI1I Con_lion; 8RETHREN: IIreIhren Church 1Athlond,
Ohio), Church 0/ tile 1IreIhren, r.~1Np 0/ Gr_ Brellven
CIIurchel; CHIUSTlAH: ChrIIIlen Churcll (DOIcIpleo of Chrtot).
ChriIIIan Churchel end Churcheo of CIvIII, ~ of CIvtIt;
. CHURCHES OF GOD: Churcll of God ...... ConIIrence
(Abrohemic Fol1h) Oregon. .... Churcll of God (Andoreon,
1ncl1enI). Churcll of God ISevenIh Dey) aen-, C%redo;
LATIER DAY SAINTS: Church of ....... CIlrtII (~).
Church 01 ....... CIlrtII of'LaIlor-tlly Bolnle; LUTHERAN: Amer-
, Ican LuIhoron ChurcII. Apootollc LultIoron Church of Amerlce.
.~ 1'f 1f' LultIoron IIreIhren of AmorIce. Church of ...
. ' ,
JlY
1/P -l/ ~
",
.
.
tn'RODUCTION
1Ic8, Congr.gatlonal Christians, episcopalians,
Frtends, Moravlans, and members 01 the United
Church of Christ _r. not grouped Into families
but wer. treated es Hparat. unlta.
The number or counties In which the above
mentioned families or units predomlnat. Is as
follows:
Baptist 1164
CathOlic 863
M.thodlst 374
Lutheran 227
. Lett.r Day Saints 74
Christian 52
United Church 01 Christ 8
Church.s of God 5
Relormed 5
Pr..by1erlan 4
M.nnonlte 2
Moravian 2
Adventist 1
Brathren 1
Frl.nds 1
Congregational Christian 1
Episcopal 1
A solid color on the map Indicates that a group
hes 50 percant or more of the adherents In that
county, as reported In the present study. W~en no
group has 50 percent, a striped shading Indicates
the largest group with 25-49 percant 01 adherants
In a county. The 217 counties where no group has
25 percent are left blank.
Th. percentages on which the map Is based
.,.. tak.n from Table 4, Column 5 01 this r.port.
"
Lutheran ConI_Ion. Elton"n Evallflllllcal Luther." Church,
AaoctaUon 01 Evangelical Luther.n Churches. Evangelical
Lutheran Synod, _.Uon 01 F_ L_.n Congreg.Uon.,
LatvI.n Evangelical Luther.n Church In America. Luther."
CIlurch In America, Lutheran Church-Mlaaourl Synod. Pro-
......nt Conler..... 01 the WloconaIn Synod. W10c0naln EvangelI-
.. Luther.n Synod; MENNONITE: e.chy Amlih Mannonlta
CllurdMla. Church 01 God In Chrlat (Mannon".I, Evangelical
M.nnonU. Br.thr.n Conl.r.nc., E..ng.llc.l. M.nnonlt.
Church. Inc., Gan.r.' Conl.r.n.. 01 M.nnonlt. Br.thr.n
Chu,""'. M.nnonlt. Chu,ch, G.n.,.' Conl.r.n.. 01 lha
......lOIo1ta Church, Old Ord., Amlih Church; METHODIST:
Nrtcan MaIhodIIl EpIacopal Zion Church, Chrlall.n MaIhodIIl
EllII ,~.I Church. Evangelical Methodlll Church. Fraa MaIhodIIl
CIlurch 01 North AmarIca, PrI_ Malhocllll Church In lha
V.SA, Tlla Southam MaIhodIIl Church. UnItad MaIhodIIl
CIIurch; PENTECOSTAL: Aaaambllaa of God, 8lbla Church of
Cllrta\, ..... Church 01 God (ClavaI.nd, Tan_I, Congr.
tatIoneI IloIInaa Church. -...-. Church of ... Fou,-
__ Goapal. Open B1bla _ani Churches. Inc., ,,-,", ..,.,
.... WIll IIaptlat Church, Inc., .............ta1 HolI_ Chu,ch,
Inc.: 'RESBYTERIAN: .....ocl.t. R.'o,m.d "..byt.,I.n
CIlurch fGanaral 8ynocIl, eum_nd PraabY\arlan Church,
CIII...du. PraabY\arIan Church, """"""'n Church In Amer-
... .....,_ Church In ... UnIIad 8taIaa, IIaIormad .....
......... Church (["I"Q,.,a/ s,nodl. IlaIonnad I'NIbylIrtan
Chun:II of North AmarIca, UnIIad ......l'Iarfan Church In ...
U.s.A.; I'IEFORMED: ~n ...."""*' Church, " I ,II'"
"""".....d ~ In AmarIca, _.....d Church In AmarIca.
"
. METHODOLOGY
The actual data collection ... carried out In the
offices or the Glenmary Research Center, which at
that Ume wu located In Washington, D.C. The data
coIlecUon wes managed ily WIlliam J, Goodwin,
atalf person for the study'1 executtve COmmittee,
und.r the lupervtllon of Bernard Quinn, who lerved
as committee Delson for that purpose. William
Goodwin also Ullsted In enllsUng denomlnatlonel
parUclpatlon and In e vartety or other administra-
tive and editorial tasks.
On August 8, 1979 an invitation" to participate
In the study was Hnt to all the Judeeo-Chrlstlan
church bodies lIIt.d In the Yearbook of American
end Canedlen Churche., plUI a few other. for
whom addr_s could be found. Each denomina-
tion wes uslgned a member 01 the study's executive
committee, whoee responllblllty was to encourage
participation, by p.rsonal contact l!nd oth.r
means, and to anawer questions. The Inltlel written
Invitation wes followed by four additional general
melllngs and by apeclal letterl. personel visits and
phon. calls. AI a r..ult of these efforts, which .x-
tended over a two-year period, 228 denomlnetlons
_re Invited, 111 actuelly partlclpeted, 21 .xpr....d
the Int.ntlon to participate but were prevent.d
from doing so, sa declined to parUclpet., and 80
did not respond,
Denominations agreeing to pertlclpat. w.r.
asked to appoint a contect person. and signify
their Intentions on a speclel lorm. Three forms
were th.n Hnt to the contact persons: Instructions
for r.portlng deta; a trensmlttal sheet to be Ilgned
and sent with the deta collected; and e ltate-county
form for Bstlng the atatlstles th.mselves. Th. con-
tact persons were given the option 01 submitting
th.'r own comput.r print-out according to a
prescribed tormat, or 01 using the forms provided
by the study.
Thll process put the major burden or work on
the denomlnatlonel offices, IInce they were asked
to compile deta by county for all their congr.ga-
tIons. In some ca_, however. denomlnetlons wer.
able to furnish Inlormatlon only In th.'orm of yeer-
books or other sources. Transf.rrlng yearbook In-
formation Into couniy data then became the r.-
~nslblllty 01 the CMS atalf. In a few cues the
denominations Instruct.d the CMS aialf to estlmlte
congregetlonel memberlhlp according to a lormula,
and approved the result... In alllnatanees, however.
the denomlnetlonal contact person reviewed the
ItlItlstles and IIgned the transmlttallheet.
17. ~ ... .........1/1 ... ... .. be found In Ap-
pendix o. .
11. Apoa\oIlc Lutheran Church of Arnertca. ...... .n In
ChrlIt Church, Ccl_ ..... -.ptIIl Aa~ c1aUcn of Amarlca,
....... c.......,1lon of ... New ........... In ... U.S.A. "The
""""'bofgIan Church", Old 0nIar _ Church, SocIaJ
8Nlhran.
at
. liP -1ft,
The eMS alaff employed the following Procedures
for checking the data lubmltted. The ltate and
national totals were first checked against the county
data and discrepancies adjusted. A prlnt-out wes
then made of all deta. To InllUre the accuracy of
data-entry Into the computer. the alate and national
IDtals were then compared to the original docu-
menta, II checked and adjulted. If the denomina-
tion participated In 1971 and the difference In a
given county's membership for 1980 was greater
than 20 percent, this was noted on the prlnt-out.
The prlnt-out was then lint beck to the denomina-
tional contact person, along with the lIaff's com-
_ WI. nyuu.. 11U..
. . '". .
. . ': b
.
nienta and questlonl. Only after all problema railld
by both the alaff and the denominational contact
peraon _e ~ved were the atatlatlca COIl8ldered
ready for publlcallon.
When the 1980 U.S. county flgur.. for p&raons
13 years of age or under were IWC8lved from the
. CenlUs Bureau on April 12. 11182, the total adherenta
for groups reporting only communlcanta were eatI-
mated. according to the formula described above.
The flnalllep was to run a ..ries of computer adit
testa to check for errors and to produce the print-
out of tables for this report.
)
'.~-- -~'t ~".,'~-"'. '"'J
.,.~..""~.I".W't.- .
1.1. -If. 7
.
....
"y County end o.no.nInmlon: 1880
T_ 4. Dlun:lleo end Chun:ll ~p t
--
-- - - - -
- - - - -- --.
- ..- - -
... 1:.. cow at . . ... .... ... ...
M, .... r-.L 1lM.. I ... ..,. t.. ...
..'n. ICTtI Qt.. . .. .,. 0
.1 nlf .'''.IT I ... - ... ...
... ,.111:...___... I - .... ... ...
a' It ... II 011 . to ... . .
.. MM:I ..,.... . lit .... 0 ...
~ .., "..... - . '07 .... 0 ...
1ft ICMIIY ....1'" . ... n,. . ...
Itl .'DIII ........ . - ..- ... ...
.. UlTM Ot .... . . .111 ..n ... ..,
.., w,.... "'" II .. .'" I.'. .., ...
IN .'10 elM 011 . lit lOt 0 ...
". lu.......n 04. . .. .. . .
I.' . .. lAP, cow I ... -- ... ...
"1II'h .flU: In . ... no 0 ...
lIS 011 """'M.. I .. ... . ...
n.... CIl." M.. . '" 1"2 ... t.,
... IliIUIlTlClll ..., . ... It, 0 ...
... .............. II . ft. . .... .., ...
." IO"''' COWW'.. .. ..... .9 'tll* I.' ...
.. ...".....-.. . no .... ... ...
._ .. C OF CMUI' . .... . ..:a_ ... ...
..... .tMODJn.. .. . '.6 . 6"- ... ...
.., .. ,.. CM .... II . .., It 62". ... ...
ut MIU.......... . - - ... ...
. ..,no .. .... ,- .... .....
eu......OF_. . ... ... ... ,.,
.. CAflCLlt...... . .. .... 17.' ....
II'tCMliulCL.lW, . to ... ... ...
It. L-I ...UI'..... . .. ... ... ,..
.., 011 Of c:tlll". . .. to ... ...
.., (.rlCO'......... . ... ... ... ...
In CIII '.'HIl",. . . . .., ...
... .............. . ... .... .., ...
".. 10..." COIA'.. . .. .... ... ...
.... .. ...'.maln.. . '07 .... ... ...
.., ... .... CM ... . ... .... ... ...
. .....110 - .. ... 11'12'. ..., "I.'
In .... ..n _ , ... .. ... ...
It. .... .." UM. .. .... . .... ... ...
129 ,.... &.&I'" 04. . . . .,.. . .., ... ...
., MIl_ or 101. .. .... . ... ... ...
., IAPT Kill COW. . 1.11 . .... ... ...
......, IUI'M'" . on 112_ . .
'" ,.,'''" III CI . ... ... .., ...
.. CAIlD..lt...... . .. ,.. us .... ....
... 011 . IU.. M.. . ., ... .., ..,
"I QII eM CIIKl. . .... I _S2 ... U
If? QtI CICNOII C:I .. .". I..... ... ...
'1. c...r......... . ... IU2_ ... ...
In Cldllt..... .,. . . ... .... ... ...
In Ql I0Il C....., . ... . ... ... ...
an eM lOll CD..C1II1 .. ... .... ... ...
UI eM IIlacll1n.1I . .. ... 0 0
'S' L-I 1A11l,..... It .. .. ... ... ...
NS eM Of' MIa.. a . ... .. ss:. ... ...
N' CMI or CHl1I1. It I'" . "' ... ,..
n. COlIS.... ..n... .. .." J l'n_ ... ...
.. CIMM"' ...... . .. .. . 0
.. rwM COY CM M . '" ". . 0
III n... 'IU tN.. . .It .... ... ...
In.... ""nun. . .. ... . .
III un .'MODIS' II n. . "' ... ...
a. n.tJIM-w., . . . .. ... 0 .
a.. MIla: I.TMUN . .. .... ... ...
a6J In 'DU8M 101 a ..... . ,.,. ... ...
mCMI.v......... . .. tI. . 0
If. ....M ......... . - . .". ... ...
.. urn. CM ..... . . ... . ... ... ...
IU &>>,..-.... 'T_ .. HU .m .., ...
_."llCllflTl:Df.. . .. Ita_ . .
.., __ IlII COMF. . .., ." 0 ...
... .,10 COM CMI . .. .. 0 .
... .nSIIOM.. tH. . . 'U 0 .
lit ePP Ilk.( ITa . ... - 0 ..,
.-. PlM' ....U.:... . .. ... 0 0
III 011 ......... . lot .It 0 .
8M ...u cae .... . . , , ,
... ftIOT ... CMI" . .. ... . .
171" CM lit 1lII.. . .. . ... ... u
.. ., ....-1:'1'.... . .. .. 0 0
"I ",vaTl.. AM' . .., '"~ ... ...
.., ...... ........ . II ... nua- ... ..,
..t III ..." I*ft'., .. It .... a '16_ .., ...
.. ............1'1' . no .,. - ...
.. lIIe .-ICMI:.IT II .tIt .m. ... ...
..., .. IIlTMDI.If.. .. . In ....... ... ..,
IIN .. .... CM .... " . Ul .... .., ...
- ..... ......... I .. ... 0 1.1.
. .IUlI ... """16 - .... .... .....
... M\Il.' 011 Oil. . ... .... - .
..... ZUlli...... . . ... . ... ... ...
..,........,,- . .. ISO 0 ..,
.., .... ..." .... . .... ., IIZ. ... ...
at .... U1'M 01.. II .... .. 125 ... ...
lit 11# C*: ClUMU . " ... 0
IA~,._. .. .... II n. ... ...
.1' ..., .. ..... II .- ..... ... ...
~
--
-- - - - -
- .. - - ..- ..-
- ..- - -
.. CII,..,.I:...... .. .. -- ..., ...
M! CItI. alII..... It ... . III ... ...
In Del at CIIIC.. II . ...1 . ". ... ...
""CItI~CI .. . ... ..... ... ...
a.. c....,......... . .n .... .., ...
... CIII"UM .... . .., .." ... .'.1
au 01 _ ._'1 . - .... ... ...
'21' CIt _ <<CLnII . - ... . ...
'II at _en,..... . .. ... - -
..., Of .. .I: ..IC) . . " . -
.::; ~......=~ .. .. II on ... ...
. ... - -
... at . MIA.. .. .tIt ... ... ...
,n CItI. eM",T. .. . ... .... ... ...
n. tIMO. CNt CIII. . M' - ...
......h..."... .. .... .- ... ...
"'_.v~... . . ... .- ... ...
I" IPIICOI'AL. . . . . .. .. ... .... ... ...
... nM cow at ... . ... .... 0 ...
IIIIYM no: Of.. . 'It .... - -
... IWlJI ICTM CII.. . to ... 0 -
a. ,.In: .''''IIT . It. no 0 ...
216 un.IIII......,. . 10' ..,. 0 ...
In .. QI ." ... . . It. - 0
lit ---......IM. . .. ... - 0
.... aMCt "''''111 . ... .... 0 -
161 IIn 'QUeM .. It . ... ..,. ... ...
I?t COIIII'V .AlM11It . .11 .... ... ...
81'1 lUNA ....11It . 'tIt ...,,. ... ..,
I"IlIun nAIII"""'.. . .. " . -
..IoIIfM Dl ME'.. .. .. 1.1 I... ... ...
Ia un....... ".... .. II n. 11- .., ...
If. .'110 ICCWI 011 . no ... 0 ...
It. ......ONA., CM. . .. " - 0
lit Of'fll lllU .,. . .. to 0 .
III tNI'M '.U CII. . ... -. 0 ..,
.., 1'111' ......... . III .... . 0
aJ CNt I.'.U... . ... - 0 ...
11""'OIIIlM.. . ... II. - ...
1n1U,..... . .. It . .
..1:1 .........UIM ."'1' . .., .no ... ...
... .............. It ".. . no. ... ..,
.., 10 ..." COIfY.. . .. ... .,... ... ...
... .1T1tI....-wlIV . ... ...... ... ...
., . I: .. CH.IIT . .... , .... ... ...
1M' WI .'MODII'.. .. II .., .. .... ... ...
'A .. I'U' oc ... II g," . I". ... ...
.., tIlL........... , .. . .., ... ..,
.... "llIlICllCO - to ... .. IllJ. It., .....
"'''' u....... . ." n. ... ...
u, ... "'1" 11M. .. . '111 I..... ... ...
.It 11M. ......T.. CtC.. . n. ,Ull .., A.'
... ...... Of' tGI. .. .... .- ... ...
US "'KIlN III C' . .11 ... 0 ...
h. CATICll..IC...... .. .. "" "' ".1 ....
ID CMIIII' "",. CtC It .. .
I - ::; :: :'."::~IC*;: ... ... . ...
.., ... ... ...
", CMI DIIKNI C' III .... ...
...e....r....."" .'I? . '''. ... ...
... CHII.ITIM 1lF. .It '"~ . ...
.,., CH lOt fC&.t\'[1 III U" . ...
.,. L-I SAlin.. .., .. .- ... .....
"' CtC ,. '.'MlIUI .. ... . 0
'611 CM LIlT.. tow.. ... It' . ...
... CtC Of' MI... '" '" 0 ...
.1' Del II' CMlII'. NO . .., ... ...
... QMK. ,..... 'It ... ... ...
." .PlICO'......... . . II. .... ... U
.ft "'OIUM l1.t.. . ... ... 0 ...
as. I"AIII COW' Dc ... . - .... ... ...
III 1""" ,.. CH.. . .. ... 0 .
III IYM UItW ..... . III ... 0 ...
21.'IlIIEI.'lClDIIT . .. ... . ...
.. 'IIIr.......... . .. ". - -
au.. Dc.".all . .. ... - .
.. ".IOOHIM. . III .... . ...
In ~.." ...,u'" . . .., . _n. ... ..,
n. ...DIfI .....1... . .... .-. .., ...
....u,'v..."""... . on ... ... ...
.. 1.11'. eM ...... . ... .- ... ...
au un....... .y_ . .1It .". ... ,..
.., .....u. CII.. . . ... 0 .
It. ICTlID COM CHI . ... . "' ... ...
lit .... IIILI: ". . n. ... ... ...
all.,. 'KII CII. . M ... 0 .
., _ "'TMKN.. . .. It. 0 -
RI _ tit IN M.. . ... ... 0 ...
INI "WAn.. ....'1' . ... I III ... ...
.11.............. . . .. . .... ... ..,
........"~,,.. It .- .-. ... ...
... ..n..I.....IV . - .... t.. ...
.1 ... C ,. CtCIIIIT . . .It ..... ... ...
., WI .."..IIT.. 07 . ... a.... ... ...
.., .. Hn OC ... II .n, . .... ... ...
.... ....... - to_ .. I.'" .... 'M..
HI... II....... . .. "' . ...
..17...''''''_ , .., ... ... ..,
'1. ,... "'PT ... . 1.1'1' ...... ... ...
lit... &.U'1'M tN.. . . ... 1111 ... ...
.,-"... II .- I.' ... ..,
,
i
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
~
~
"
-
to
.-
"
t:
t:
t:
..
.-
.-
..
..
..
"
..
..
"
..
II
..
t:
..
.,
"
..
..
It
It
II
II
~.___.I
.......----..-...
--
..------..----
it.-tli
.
~.
, "
" ."
i!
'"
.
" ~
~
, : ~
,,; ,
~
YEARBOOl( OF
tll
AMERICAN"~
CANAD.IAN
CHURCHES
1988"
M
'lft~"'" ....
."
i
. "
. ,
:. ,.
.~ .
,
.
"
. .
" ;
~nstant H. Jacquet, Jr., Editor
AIle. ".,..., EclllorIal Assoclat.
PreIIued ad edited in the Office of Rescan:h
IIIlf Evaluation of the National Council of the
Curcbes of Christ in the U.S.A., 475 Riverside Drive,
Now York, NY 10115
Dhhed .. DIstributed
" AW"ICIon ,.....
vIII.
1~-tf-q
~?J1-I1J J r:J;r (-. .
Mtuol
. .
,
.
.
" '"
A GUIDE FOR THE USER OF CHURCH STATISTICS
'Ibis pide K placed in a pJOIIIinent PDSition in each edition of the y...... to empbas/u the .
fact that c:hurdIllItlstics, Ilke thole o(manyother IfOIIPS, YIf)' peatly inqllllity IIICf .liability.
'l'bcrefo~, lICCCIIary q".li~tions CXIDlICrnm, them mlllt be IlIted AcarIy and 1riIbout
taervation. .
'Ibis year in Section DI, the SlItisticaI and Historical Section, the y....... of........
,.....ta" CIIarcIIeI reports dall from 220 U. S. .upolII bodies. Oftbele,l08 report curmat
data-dlat ill, dall for the years 1987 or 1986. Current dall, comprilina 49.1 pen:aat of all
IIpOrts, ~t for 74.6 pen:ent of RCOrdcd meiDbenbip. Concernina the dtnnmi...tioaI
ptherina llIt1stica, tome collljlllterize dall and have an ICCUfIte bank of information on carda
or IIpe.l'erhaps the laraest IfOIIP of denominations .rw pthers IlIt1stica by CODvendollll
tIand'lIblllation methods. Quite a few bodies ~ Iti1I opcratin. on the basis of "ecI"etted
~s" in many IlIt1sticallrClS. .
In addition to these aeneral observations, four major q1lllific:ations sbouId be 1IIIdc:
1) Chun:b llIt1sticurc always incomplete, and they pISS throllah many bands.1OIDC IkiIIod
pi! some not so 1ki11cd, and come up throuah many c:hanncls in chun:b buRiucraticllrul:tJuel.
2) Chun:b llIt1stics IR not always comparable. Definitions of membership, and of other
iIIIportant cate.ories, vary from denominatioq to dcnominatioll. Jewish ilJtlstics IR eatimalel
of the number of individuals in housebolds wbc. one or mo. Ie," reside and, the.foR,
lac1ude DOn.lewslivin. in these housebolds IS the mult of intermarriaae. The total number of
persons in lewillb housebolds is estimated to be 7 pen:ent larfCr than the IIlIIIIber of lewish
persoll$ residinl in these households. It should be noted that cslilllltes of numbers ofJC1n have
DOthinl to do witb membership in syDIfoaues. Roman Catholics and tome ProtcsllDt bodies
llDWIt all baptized persons, incIlldinl children,lS members. Other Protestant bodies indudc II
IICmbers thole woo make a dccIaration of faith and become baptized. This can happen II early
II.~ "
3) Chun:b llIt1stical dall .ported in the Yearbook IR not for alina1e year. Not only do the
IIpOrlina years differ from denomination to denominatioD, but tome bodies do not .pon
.autarly. Therefo. the .ports based on dall for the year 1985 Dr earlier IR "non-current"
.pons. Attempu to combme current and non-c:urrent dall for pIIfpOSCS of inICrprctation Dr
projection 1ri11lead to difficulties.' "
4) Many of the mo. important types of llIt1stical dalllR simply not available for alarF
piliP of denominatioll$. Records of Cbun:b attendance are not universally kept, and theR arc
DO socioeconomic dall Fneral1y available. SlItistics of DlCmbers' participation in ~
pvitics and proarams do not exist. " "
Statistics form an important part of chun:b ute and IR necessary for the IOIIDd development
ot p10nnileand ProlflDl. Therefore strona efforts should be made in eacb denomination to
llplrlde qllllity of jq IlItistic:s. InterdcnoD1lnatiollll ~peration leadina towanI
"lIIDtlardization of cateaones and sbarina of techDiqlles, it is hoped, will continue to arow. New
ways of adaptina to chun:b needs and ProlflDlS the dall pthered by the u. $. B~u of the
Ccasus mlllt be discovered and utilizcd. The use of survey methods to obtain yaJllIble
IDCiorellpollS information about American .lipolII ute should be encollfllcd and ,~~.
",'.
.... . ... .". '.' .,.i .~
II
. . fV~1:~- _
It.,~50
-- --
- -
, - . J .,'. ~..
-~ '~. ~ . f~:'; -~. ~---
"IS-iT'
· ,ur.. j ~ . '. I I !~ilJr .
Jifo.l!'J. !,!,:, "! ".I!' '" 'I! 1>>~1 o'J a~_
.; ~f~ H 1-' II i I! II I i II i i i I" II i II I ii ~rrtll J11111 8'
8 1~1f It I!! !!II ll! IIIII !ll I! I 1~1~ JI
· r J ir~~lt ! !! !!!! ! j !! !!!!! !!! !! ! i f 11.11 I
.. I . '. .... .,.. ....' ,,' ." B
II. . . I I' :!" ,:!' : 'I :!! II I '! I II' 'JII
. \A ...: :: :::: ::: I : ::: ::: ::'. iJ
r ...'....il' I iil iill 11!I" ii!!! i,li 111 ,!a. ~s 'f i
.. 1 ::, :.,: ::'. ",:, ,:' ,: I ..a. r
f '" ".. ..,. ':, I: "I ., I .:o~
: i: i::: :::: !:: i: i: i :. i s'
.. . '. .,:: ::.: ....: ::':. - ..
III? <11 i i! 1 1 I I I I ! I l!!! I . i l i I I! jl~IJ"J I~. j!
j l~ Ii!. ~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~~. ~~~ ~~ t I !~l~j~ J Ii E
'. t' ", . . f~L II
;:''.'''':v' . ~J' . ,.,.!..,~."".....,~:, . ". '. "Ji.J >11f
. . ~ ..."", '.. . ..." 1Il I
. ..,- -'~':"...,......- ."".:'. I.' .... . '_ . ,..
11"'''' .. . . t J
~ '. " . ,- .' . . 1(:'~"~\t.'1 0
,- -, . - 'f ....
".' ,- '. .". '. -e,; ',' _~,'. ...:_~ .
(If'I f mrrfl
1.1$1. I 1 1 r~l '1
,5.fl,I'1 J ! I 1 il II
8 . I I ! "I I I
l:a I : , "': : :
"J ,.'......
lih III ~I/ I
~tJt i i i 11 i i f
· ~~I tiff ! ! ! IS,! !! f
D If ;II III
f. . .. '.,
, Ii'" I"
I ~ !!! i!!
II. . ,. '.'
it . . ., '.'
Illl111r.111
. (' Iii i Ii ! .
j ., '-"
fi';"f ! ! ! 1 ! 1
J ~f"l 111111
ii i i i i
,,8 , , , I , ,
...!::j , , I : : :
HII ~Li.LL6~
(~:n!!j .
}flJ.l;Jf i .
-=f 8., ]1.
. J!1.(i i!!f'.'
J"lffin I ; .
1.1~'lli!}! ,
. f~,i~JrI w
· iTa II!t) ,
. fi=.i'j If" .
~ If "8 f
~ .f jff -
r II,{II
II r:t!::li
!i~~~~~i!!!iii
~l!l~I!U:~;;;;;~l!ll!ll!li .
.. f
----------- - .1
...----....o..~..~.f r
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-i f
~~~~~..............1
......w.........................-J
1./.lEJ1$~ R~71'L.N -z;;
.9.Q3 -060 c)
v~~v
;;).;l'1~-..;l. 1)t11~ 11;p.v
f l TOro
12.636
~;Z '7V ;;3z,u~~ x,t...U<;
FROM BELIEF TO COMMITMENT:
The Activities and Finances of Religious
Congregations in the United States
Findings from
A National Survey
Analyzed by:
Virginia A. Hodltkinson, Ph.D.
Murray S. Weitzman, Ph.D.
Arthur D. Kirsch, Ph.D.
Survey Conducted by:
The Gallup Organization
for
INDEPENDENT SECTOR
lS
NEU'aNT
5f:ClOl.
1828 L Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036
ifo-5z
,. I 'P
0&~ t~c:..~ t<.J.-.<.!.. ~(~All,,'\
,
1\ ,J
(2).s;:;::-((1:-- L, L~GI"tUc.;.>hlE...il~.
31 "7 /C? ~~!. <-~a7041 8.. '\lbc~)~.IN~
/ I - - ~ 7 ~,~ '^~
TABLE 3.4
PERCENTAGE OF CONGREGAnONS REPOAnNG SUPPORT FOR SERVICES
IN SELECTED AREAS OF ACnVlTY, BY LOCATION OF CONGREGAnON
Location of Congregation
Areas of urge Small
Activity City City Town Suburb Rural
Humen services
Day care (preschool) 37.1 32.6 27.0 34.3 22.1
Famllycouneeling 78.9 83.4 75.4 82.3 75.8
Housing for lenior citizens 18.9 18.0 18.3 19.6 19.1
Housing/shelter tor homeless 34.1 35.9 28.7 35.4 26.2
Meal services 43.4 40.5 36.3 38.0 31.1
RecreatiOn/camp programs!
other youth programs 71.4 79.3 81.2 79.7 79.2
"'emational
SupporVpromotion of education abroad 47.5 49.9 48.3 53.8 48.5
SupporVpromotion of health abroad 41.3 42.4 42.8 45.5 42.1
Promotton of friendly retations
Including exchange programs 39.7 45.0 40.9 49.3 39.1
Aefugee.related progr.ms 37.6 35.5 32.0 44.5 27.8
Relief abroad 67.8 70.6 73.6 74.8 89.7
Publlc/socletll benefit
CivU rights and social justice 47.1 42.0 38.1 46.4 35.8
Community development 48.2 42.6 42.3 49.7 47.0
F.mily planning/abortion 28.9 30.1 28.2 34.6 24.1
Right-to-life 47.3 49.4 41.6 51.5 46.1
Halllh
Institutional care (hospitals,
clinics, nursing homes, hospices) 54.3 55.1 57.4 58.6 55.0
Program assistance for mentally retarded
.nd physically disabled persons, crisis
counseling hoWnes. etc. 41.8 44.0 43.5 509 40.2
Public education on diseases 38.4 34.8 30.1 38.9 34.6
Arts and culture
Programs for historic preservation, choral
tinging (other than church choir).
Instrumental groups. dance groups.
theater, etc. 40.1 43.5 41.9 47.1 38.2
Education
Elementary education 435 38.2 33.2 38.9 35.4
Secondary education 351 33.7 29.5 29.9 34.2
Environment
Improvement of environmental qUllity,
beautification of urben Ireas. etc. 28.5 24.8 27.3 28.0 27.5
Note: Congregation could give multiple responses.
TABLE 3.5
PERCENTAGE OF CONGREGATIONS REPORTING SUPPORT FOR SERVICES IN
MAJOR ACnVlTY AREAS, BY 8IZE AND ORIENTATION OF CONOREGAnON
Size of Congregation- Orientation-
Major Very
Activity Arees All Small Medium Large Uberel ModerlIte Conservatiye Con.rvltive
Total 100.0 19.0 41.8 34.5 14.3 25.6 39.5 17.3
Aetigious minlstryl
education 89.3 1IB.5 89.9 1IB.9 100.0 89.4 89.3 1IB.5
Humin services/welfare 113.0 88.0 113.1 85.3 1IB.5 113.1 82.8 91.1
Internltional programs 75.0 60.7 76.0 81.5 88.1 n.7 73.7 81.8
Public!loeleta' benefit 71.8 64.4 71.3 77.4 85.7 72.7 88.5 67.1
Hallth 64.2 47.6 62.8 74.2 80.2 85.3 60.7 55.3
Education 45.0 45.7 40.2 58.1 53.5 45.9 43.4 38.0
Arts and culture 43.7 28.9 42.0 53.0 58.1 50.0 41.5 29.1
Erwtronmenl 29.0 20.8 28.7 33.4 44.6 33.8 25.1 16.7
NoIe: Ollie ere from 1,353 eongreglliions that respond to I more detailed questionnaire.
-excludes 4.7 percent of eongregltions that gave I "don't know" or "no answer" lor me and 3.3 percent 01 congregations that did not
report thlHr ortenlation.
22
110- S3
...
FlGURE U
PERCENTAGE OF CONGREGATIONS
REPORTING FREQUENCY OF DETAILED
ACTMTIES AMONG MAJOR AREAS OF
ACTIVITY, BY CONGREGATIONAL BIZE
OF MEMBERSHIP
Furthermore. the orientation or congregations affects
the overall kinds or activities and the level of involve.
ment of rongregations. as well as the type and variety
u programs in which they participate.
.
Sma"
_um
LArgo
The Use of Congregational Facilities
-
-....
;:------ 10.7
76.1
81.6
Respondents were asked how many days per week
their congregational facilities were used or available
for use for religious services. for use by other groups
within their congregation. or for use by groups outside
their congregation. Tables 3.9. 3.10. and 3.n show
the responses to these questions. Table 3.9 shows that
56 percent of congregations reported that their con-
gregational facilities were used for religious services
one. two. or three days per week. Some 36 percent
reported that congregational facilities were used or
available for religious services seven days per week.
1loIgiouI.-.oyl 0:--------' - - 16.5
_lion 19.8
96.8
__ ...--------.....0
.....r. 93.1
95.3
--.0'
_fit .
-.- ---.--'--".
".5
71.3
77.3
Use or facilities varied with the size or the congrega-
tion. More small rongregations (65 percent) reported
that facilities were available for religious services only
one. two. or three days per week than large congrega.
tions (47 percent). Larger congregations were far more
likely to report that their facilities were available for
religious services every day (45 percent) than small
congregations (27 percent). There were no major dif-
ferences in the use of facilities by congregational
orientation.
Ho.fth
-----.-. .7.5
62.7
701.2
EclucotIon
-----34.&
'0.2
56.0
_and
.......
The responses about the availability or congregational
facilities for grouPs within their congregations were
more varied than for religious services. as shown in
table 3.10. While 41 percent or congregations
reported that their facilities were available to congre-
gational groups seven days per week. another 20 per.
cent reported that their facilities were available one or
two days per week. and 30 percent responded that
their facilities were available between three and six
days per week. Only 6 percent of congregations
reported that their facilities were not available for use
by groups within their congregation.
[n..~",.i..~_,.l
-20.7
_2B.7
33.'
TABLE 3.9
NRCENTAGE OF CONGREGATIONS REPORTING NUMBER OF OIIya PER WEEK THAT CONGREGATIONAL
FACILITIES ARE USED FOR RELIGIOUS SERVICES, BY SIZE AND ORIENTATION OF CONGREGATION
Size. Orientation
DIY' ~ Very
""'week Tote' Smlll Medium Lorge Ublrll Moderll. ConIerv8tlve Conservative
0 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0
1 15.3 12.7 172 15.4 20.2 20.9 13.6 7.5
2 27.3 34.3 29.4 21.6 23.4 23.3 29.5 31.6
3 13.2 16.2 14.3 10.1 a.a 10.0 15.9 15.9
4 3.6 4.3 4.4 2.a 4.4 3.0 3.4 5.4
5 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.5 0.0 0.7 1.9 1.6
e 1.6 0.3 1.7 2.1 2.1 1.6 1.4 1.6
7 35.7 27.0 30.7 45.0 39.7 39.0 32.5 34.5
Oon'l know!
no answer 1.7 1.6 1.0 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.7 1.4
- - - - - - - -
Tote' 100.1 100.1 100.0 100.1 100.1 100.0 100.1 100.1
Note: Cotumns may not add to 100 percent because of rounding.
Question: How many days of the week are the congregational facH~ used or available for UN for rwligious servk:es7
26
j..l,.-stl
.
TABLE 421
NUllBER OF PERSONS. TOTAL AND AlIERAGE HOURS PERFORMED PER
MONTH FOR CONGREGAnONS, AND ACnVlnES OTHER THAN REUGIOUS,
MINISTRY AND EDUCAnON, RANKED IY TOTAL HOURS IN MAJOR ACnVITY AREAS
('roW hours.. In "'..ndI)
Hou..
Percent 01 Average
Amounl Percenl .. Afl Hours Hou..
All activities other than
"'Igloua mlnlllry/educatlon
Total 125.318 100.0 41.8 10.2
Clergy (pold end voIun...r) - - -
37.618 30.0 31.7 64.7
All paid employees 36.691 29.3 48.3 31.7
VOlunlee.. other lhon cIorgy 51.Cl09 40.7 47.7 4.9
Education
Total 43.485 100.0 14.4 3.5
Clergy (pold Ind voIun...r) 11.234 25.8 11.5 16.3
All paid employees 13.445 309 17.7 11.6
VoIun..... other then cIorgy 18,806 43.2 17.8 1.8
Human lervk:eslwelfare
Total 28.138 100.0 11.3 2.3
Clergy (paid end voIunleer) -
8.641 30.7 7.3 12.6
All paid employee. 8.685 23.7 88 5.8
Volunteers other than c&ergy 12.812 45.5 12.0 1.2
Heallh
Total 17.311 100.0 5.7 1.4
- - -
Clergy (paid end volunleer) 8.281 47.8 7.0 12.0
All paid employee. 1,686 11.7 2.2 1.5
Volunteers other than clergy 7,344 42.4 8.9 0.7
Public/societal benellt
Total 10.069 100.0 3.3 0.8
- - -
Clergy (paid Ind volunleer) 4,337 43.1 3.7 6.3
All paid employees 876 8.7 1.2 0.8
Volunteers other than clergy 4.856 48.2 4.5 0.5
Arts end cullure
Total 11.744 100.0 3.2 0.8
-
Clergy (poId Ind voIunleer) 1.823 18.7 1.5 2.6
All plld Imployee. 1.640 16.8 2.2 1.4
VoIun..... other lhon cIorgy 6.281 84.5 5.9 0.6
International
Total 11.378 100.0 3.1 08
- -
Clergy (paid end voIunleer) 3,383 36.1 2.9 4.11
All paid employee. 1.074 11.4 1.4 0.11
VoIunteefl other than clergy 4.1121 52.5 4.6 0.5
Envtronment
Total 4,3n 100.0 1.4 0.3
-
Clergy (pold end voIunleer) 2.369 64.1 2.0 3.4
All pold employee. 592 13.5 0.8 0.5
Votunteera other than clergy 1,416 32.3 1.3 0.1
Noll: See nota on table 4.14 end I) on Iabie 4.20.
nues for all rongregations and by size of rongregation.
The average revenues for all rongregations were
$172,800, of which 82 percent ($140,000) came from
individual giving. The other sources of revenue com-
pri~ing 18 percent of the total revenues were divided
among bequests (3 percent), contributions from
d~nominational organizations (1 percent), dues, fees
and charges for services (5 percent), sales of products,
such as literature (l pe..cent), endowment or invest-
ment inrome (2 percent, and miscellaneous income
(l percent). These findings reveal that rongregations
are primarily funded through individual donations,
45
J.(p. 5S
negative declaration
PROJECT NAME:
Zoning Text Amendment - Community Purpose Facilities in the
PC zone
PROJECT LOCATION: Not site specific - in the Planned Community (P-C) Zone
PROJECT APPLICANT: City of Chula Vista
CASE NO: IS-91-17
DATE: November 6, 1990
A. Proiect Settine
The project is not site specific and therefore, precludes any specific
descripti.on .of its setting. The proposed project would potentially affect
any land situated in the P-C zone.
B. Proiect DescriDtion
All land in each P-C zone, or any section thereof, shall be subject to the
requirement that adequate land be designated for .community purpose
facll ities..
A .community purpose facility. means a structure for assembly, as well as
ancillary uses such as a parking lot, within a planned community, which
serves one of the following purposes:
1. Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, and other similar organizations;
2. Social service activities, such as Alcoholics Anonymous;
3. Services for homeless;
4. Services for military personnel during the holidays;
S. Private schools;
6. Day care;
7. Senior care and recreation;
B. Worship, spiritual growth and development, and teaching of
traditional family values.
A total proposed range of 0.86 to 2.29 acres of net buildable land
(including setbacks) per 1,000 population shall be designated for such
facilities in any planned community, and shall be so designated in the
Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Planes) for each planned community. This
total acreage requirement may be reduced only if the City Council
determines, in conjunction with its adoption of a SPA plan, that a lesser
amount of land is needed. This decision would be based upon an
avail abl1 i ty of shared parki ng wi th other facil it i es or other communi ty
purpose facilities that are guaranteed to be made available to the
community.
~V~
~. -
~~~
city of chula vista planning department 01Y OF
environmental review Mctlon. CHUlA VISTA,
1iD-5'
-2-
C. ComDatibilitv with Zonina and Plans
The purposes of the P-C zone are to provide for the orderly planning and
long-term development of large tracts of land which may contain a variety
of land uses, but are under unified ownership or development control.
This would enable the entire tract to provide an environment of stable and
desirable character; give the developer reasonable assurance that
sectional development plans prepared in accordance with an approved
general development plan will be acceptable to the city; and enable the
City to adopt measures providing for the development of the surrounding
area compatible with the planned community zone.
The proposal is an amendment to the zoning text and therefore, is not site
specific, but does pertain to all land in the P-C zone, or any section
thereof. As such then, with regard to the purposes of the P-C zone, the
proposal should promote neighborhood unity and community identity.
Therefore, the project is deemed to be compatible with zoning and General
Plan designations.
D. ComD1iance with the Threshold/Standards Po1icv
1. Fi re/EHS
The Threshold/Standards Pol icy requires that fire and medical units
must be able to respond to calls within 7 minutes or less than 85% of
the cases and within 5 minutes or less in 75%-of the cases.
Since this is an amendment to the zoning text only, and is not a site
specific project, threshold standards are not directly applicable.
Therefore, the project is considered to be compatible with the City's
pol icy.
2. Police
The Threshold/Standards Policy requires that police units must
respond to Priority I calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an
average response time to all Priority I calls of 4.5 minutes or
less. Police units must respond to Priority 2 calls within 7 minutes
or less and maintain an average response time to all Priority 2 calls
of 7 minutes or less.
Since this is an amendment to the zoning text only, and is not a site
specific project, threshold standards are not directly applicable.
Therefore, the project is not anticipated to have a significant
impact and is considered to be compatible with the City's policy.
1~-57
-3-
3. Traffic
The Threshold/Standards Policy requires that all intersections must
operate at a Level of Service (LOS) "C" or better, with the exception
that Level of Service (LOS) "0" 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 "F" during the average weekday peak hour.
Intersections of arterials with freeway ramps are exempted from this
policy.
Since this is an amendment to the zoning text only, and is not a site
specific project, threshold standards are not directly applicable.
Therefore, the project is not anticipated to have a significant
impact and is considered to be compatible with the City's policy.
4. Parks/Recreation
The Threshold/Standards
acres/l,OOO population.
residential projects.
Since this is an amendment to the zoning text only, and is not a site
specific project, threshold standards are not directly applicable.
Therefore, the project is not anticipated to have a significant
impact and is considered to be compatible with the City's policy.
Pol icy for Parks and Recreation is 3
This threshold standard applies only to
5. Drainage
The Threshold/Standards Policy requires that storm water flows and
volumes shall not exceed City Engineer Standards [P]. Individual
projects will provide necessary improvements consistent with the
Drainage Master Planes) and City Engineering Standards.
Since this is an amendment to the zoning text only, and is not a site
specific project, threshold standards are not directly applicable.
Therefore, the project is not anticipated to have a significant
impact and is considered to be compatible with the City's policy.
6. Sewer
The Threshold/Standards Policy requires that sewage flows and volumes
shall not exceed City Engineering Standards [Pl. Individual projects
will provide necessary improvements consistent with Sewer Master
Planes) and City Engineering Standards.
Since this is an amendment to the zoning text only, and is not a site
specific project, threshold standards are not directly applicable.
Therefore, the project is not anticipated to have a significant
impact and is considered to be compatible with the City's policy.
1(,,-53
-4-
7. Water
The Threshold/Standards Pol icy requires that Idequate storage,
treatment, and transmission facilities Ire constructed concurrently
with planned growth and that water quality standards are not
jeopardized during growth and construction.
Since this is an amendment to the zoning text only, and is not a site
specific project, threshold standards are not directly applicable.
Therefore, the project is not anticipated to have a significant
impact and is considered to be compatible with the City's policy.
E. Identification of Environmental Effects
There is no substantial evidence that any significant environmental
effects will be created as a result of this project.
F. Mitiaation necessarv to avoid sianificant effects
Because there is no substantial evidence that the project will create any
significant environmental effects, mitigation measures are not deemed to
be necessary.
G. Findinas of Insianificant Imoact
Based on the following findings, it is determined that the project
described above will not have a significant environmental impact and no
environmental impact report needs to be prepared.
1. The project has the potential to substantially degrade the quality of
the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of I fish or
wildlife species, cause I fish or wildlife population to drop below
self-sustaining levels, threaten to eli.inate a plant or Ini.al
cOIIIIunity, reduce the number or restrict the rlnge of I rlre or
endangered plant or anillal, or eli.inate i~ortant exuples of the
-.jor periods of California history or prehistory.
The proposed project is not associated with any biological or
cultural impacts as these issue areas were not identified as
potentially significant in the initial study.
2. The project has the potential to achieve short-ter. environmental
goals to the disadvantage of long-ter. environmental goals.
The proposed project will not achieve short term environmental goals
to the disadvantage of long term goals, since these long term goals
will be achieved through conditions of project Ipproval and
compliance with the City's Threshold/Standards Policy.
Llo -5'1
, <
" ;
-5-
3. The project has possible effects which are individually H.ited but
cu.ulatively considerable. As used in the subsection, .cu.ulatively
considerable. .ans that the increEntal effects of an individual
project are considerable ..en viewed in connection with the effects
of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects.
The proposed project is not associated with any significant
cumulative impacts.
4. The enviro~ntal effects of a project will cause substantial adverse
effects on hu.an beings, either directly or indirectly.
The proposed project will not have an adverse impact on human beings
and no public health impacts were identified in the initial study.
H. Consultation
1. Individuals and Oraanizations
City of Chula Vista: Roger Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer
Ken Larsen, Director of Building and Housing
Carol Gove, Fire Marshal
Hal Rosenberg, Traffic Engineer
Applicant's Agent: Duane Bazzel
2. Documents
City of Chula Vista General Plan
Title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code
3. Initial Studv
This environmental determination is based on the attached Initial
Study as well as any comments on the Initial Study and the Mitigated
Negative Declaration. Further information regarding the
environmental review of the project is available from the Chula Vista
~ Planni ~t, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010.
E~ AL REVIEW COORDINATOR
EN 6 (Re . 3/88)
WPC 8545P
~(..- '0
~c ~-q\-Clr
~M~
~
~-=:~~
ill ~ @ ~ a ~-~..".>
w i~ W;
APR I I 1991
CITY COUNCIL OFFICES
CHULA VISTA, CA
ON OF
CHUIA VISTA
HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL
April 10, 1991
Honorable Mayor ProTem Len Moore and City Council
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Gentlemen:
An amendment to Titie 19 of the Municipal Code amending Sections 19.04 and 19.48 to include
definitions and criteria for the provision of land area within new Planned Communities for
Community Purpose Facilities will be included in the Public Hearing review on April 16, 1991.
Adoption of the proposed amendment would be a pioneering effort which clearly indicates that
Chula Vista is interested in the needs of all of its citizens. New growth must be tied to services in
order to maintain current levels of service or the City will continually be in the position of 'catching
up' with the growing and changing population.
The Human Services Council recommends that regular reviews of space allocation be made in
order to insure future adequacy and enable providers to keep abreast of service demands.
Human service agencies continually experience difficuny in obtaining space.
As new major developments are proposed, the Human Services Council requests that it be
informed and included in a review of the proposals and their projected social service needs as an
assistance to city planning.
At the Planning Commission meeting where the amendment was presented, the Council also
suggested that the current definition of Human Services be expanded to more accurately reflect
the scope of services which fall into this category, and would like to work with you in developing an
expanded definition.
The Human Services Council urqes support of the proposed amendment. Unless such an
amendment is approved for master planned communities, provision for the Human Service
requirements of all age groups will continue to lag far behind the burgeoning population.
1 ..... (
" (ltl. \ (J C\ j'J. \j l11iJlc
Chairperson
Human Services Council
r
>..
, .' I U 2.: 2 L cL
Vice-Chairperson
Human Services Council
'1,'[2 i cL cl--Cf, l~/
,
i
lj
360 THIRD AVE-CHULA VISTA. CALlF08NIA.9191Q (619) 691-5087
.1..b- , I
RESOLUTION NO. PCA-91-4
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE
ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 19 OF THE MUNICIPAL
CODE RELATING TO THE PROVISION OF COMMUNITY PURPOSE
FACILITIES
WHEREAS, the City of Chula vista directed that an amendment to
the Municipal Code to provide for community purpose facilities
within Planned Communities be referred to the Planning commission
for review and recommendation; and
WHEREAS, the Planning commission set the time and place for a
hearing on said amendments and notice of said hearing, together
with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of
general circulation city at least ten days prior to the hearing;
and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as
advertised, namely 7: 00 p.m., March 13, 1991, in the Council
Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and
said hearing was thereafter closed; and
WHEREAS, the Planning commission found that the project would
have no significant environmental impacts and adopted the Negative
Declaration issued on IS-91-17.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION
recommends the adoption of amendments to Title 19 of the Municipal
Code as shown in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy of this resolution be
transmitted to the City Council.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this 13th day of March, 1991, by the following vote,
to-wit:
AYES:
Commissioners Carson, Fuller, Martin, and Decker
NOES:
Commissioners Casillas and Tugenberg
ABSENT:
Chair Grasser Horton
~4(/' ~Adb
Susan Fuller, Vice-Chair
ATTEST:
1J,A.~~ ~
Nancy ipl y, ecretary
1.1.-.'1
EXHIBIT A
Proposed Amendments to Zoning Ordinance pertaining to
Community Purpose Facilities in the Planned Community Zone
I. Add section 19.04.55 to Chapter 19.04 (Definitions) as
follows:
Community purpose facility.
"Community purpose facility" means a structure for
assembly, as well as ancillary uses such as a parking lot,
within a planned community including but not limited to those
which serve the following types of purposes:
1)
Boy scouts, Girl Scouts,
organizations;
and other similar
2) social and human service activities, such as
Alcoholics Anonymous;
3) services for homeless;
4)
services for military personnel
holidays;
during
the
5) senior care and recreation;
6) worship, spiritual growth and development, and
teaching of traditional family values;
7) day care facilities that are ancillary to any of
the above;
8) private schools that are ancillary to any of the
above.
II. Amend Chapter 19.48 (Planned Community Zone) as follows:
A. Add Section 19.48.020 (c) as follows:
"C. All land in each P-C zone, or any section thereof,
shall be subject to the requirement that adequate
land be designated for "community purpose
facilities," as defined in Section 19.04.55. A
total of 1.39 acres of net usable land (including
setbacks) per 1,000 population shall be designated
for such facilities in any planned community, and
shall be so designated in the Sectional Planning
Area (SPA) Planes) for each planned community.
This total acreage requirement may be reduced only
if the city Council determines, in conjunction with
its adoption of a SPA Plan, that a lesser amount of
land is needed, based on availability of shared
1(.,- '2
parking with other facilities, or other community
purpose facilities that are guaranteed to be made
available to the community. Any shared parking
arrangements pursuant to this section shall be
guaranteed regardless of any future changes in
occupancy of facilities."
B. Add Section 19.48.040 B.6(d) as follows:
"d. Determination of the amount of acreage required to
be designated for "community purpose facilities"
pursuant to section 19.48.101 (c)."
C. Add section 19.48.090 C.1.j.(viii) as follows:
"viii.
Community purpose facilities:
-Location and acreage of sites, in conformance with
section 19.48.020C.
-A specific listing of types of uses to be included
in this category, which are compatible with the
permitted uses in the planned community."
(COMPURPS)
11.-'3
lJ"''''~-
_', "C'.""','. .r_"I.' ..~--".....,
. t:,_"':: f.: ,'-; .~"~ ....,.." !1
.. 'l. '-' C'" ,", r " ,,_
. u iii t.. ,_"_:' ",J", /]!', ~'r: J:';--.,..
"'...- '.' I". .... ,h' 'f"!-
~- 6~'~f.i~\..0(j&:~.
EXCERPT FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF 3/13/91
ITEM 4:
PUBLIC HEARING: PCA-91-04; CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO
THE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE PROVISION OF COMMUNITY
PURPOSE FACILITIES - City Initiated
Senior Planner Duane Bazzel stated that in August 1990 the City
Council accepted a report from the Community Purpose Facility Task
Force and directed staff to come back with an ordinance providing
for community purpose facilities within new development in the
city. Workshops were then held with representatives from the Human
Services council, the Community Purpose Facility Task Force, and
major landowners including the Construction Industry Federation
representatives. Mr. Bazzel explained the purpose and definition
of the community purpose facilities, and the types of uses the
facilities would serve. He noted that, during preparation of the
proposed ordinance, staff realized daycare facilities required
additional analysis in determining their ultimate needs. Staff
recommended that the daycare facility issue be referred to the
city's Child Care Commission and staff for further study and
recommendation.
Mr. Bazzel referred to a letter from the Construction Industry
Federation (CIF) which had been included in the Planning commission
packet. As a result of the inquiries made by the CIF, staff
examined the calculation of the private school acreage and
determined that this acreage was currently being partially utilized
by adjacent religious facilities. Since this land was being
accommodated in the staff formula, staff recommended that the
ordinance be modified to include private schools only if they were
ancillary to other community purpose facilities.
Senior Planner Bazzel then distributed copies of the proposed
ordinance revision. He explained that the amendment would be made
to Chapter 19 of the Municipal Code dealing with the P-C zone
standards, and a determination would be made at the SPA level
review of the proj ect' s proposed population. He explained the
method of calculations to determine the acreage factor of 1.39
acres per thousand population, resulting in the required acreage
which would be designated for a community purpose facility.
Mr. Bazzel stated that'staff recommended that the Commission adopt
the Negative Declaration, IS-91-17; and recommend that Council
adopt the proposed Municipal Code amendment, as amended; and
recommend to the Council that they refer the issue of the adequacy
1~-''f
PC MINUTES
-8-
March 13, 1991
of day care facilities in new developments to the Child Care
Commission and staff for review and recommendations.
Chair Grasser Horton asked for questions of staff.
Vice-Chair Fuller asked why private schools were excepted from the
list of uses, and private schools ancillary to religious
institutions, when some private schools may not fit into any of
those categories.
Senior Planner Bazzel explained that the Construction Industry
Federation had asked whether staff was double-counting private
schools and the acreage provided for religious facilities. Staff
examined the City's land use inventory and reviewed the acreage
which had been set aside for private schools and had determined
there was a total of 18.01 acres of property being used by private
schools. Further analysis showed that the schools were all in fact
religious schools immediately adjacent to religious facilities and
the space was being used by the religious facility for Sunday
School type activities which had been accounted for in the
religious portion of the community purpose facility acreage
calculations. Staff believed this acreage needed to be extracted
from the formula, which brought it down to a total of 30 acres of
non-religious facilities. Also, the use in the proposed ordinance
should be modified as ancillary uses.
In answer to Commissioner Fuller's question, Mr. Bazzel stated the
land use inventory listed no private schools without a religious
affiliation.
Commissioners Fuller and Tugenberg noted other schools which were
not listed in the land use inventory which they believed were
private and unaffiliated with religious groups. Commissioner
Fuller was uncomfortable with the exclusion of the private schools
in the definition of the community purpose facilities.
commissioner Tugenberg stated he believed alternate education was
an advantage both to the child who goes to an alternate school as
well as to the public school because of the competition given the
public school.
Commissioner Martin asked for clarification of the 1.39 acre factor
used in the calculations. Mr. Bazzel answered the extraction of
the 18 acres had effected the formula and the factor. Prior to the
extraction of the acreage, staff was using a 45-acre figure taken
from the land use inventory for the non-religious portion of the
community purpose facilities. When the 18 acres were extracted
from the 45 acres, the balance was 27 acres. Staff decided to base
their recommendation on 30 acres which had been recommended by the
l(,.,G
PC MINUTES
-9-
March 13, 1991
Human Services council for their future needs. This resulted in
the 1.39 acre factor.
commissioner Martin asked if medical facilities and hospitals were
not considered a community purpose facility. Mr. Bazzel replied
that the list of facilities in the proposed ordinance were
specifically directed from city council.
Commissioner Tugenberg, referring to Exhibit B of the Negative
Declaration, asked about the .86 to 2.29 acre range. Senior
Planner Bazzel explained that the factor was being adjusted through
calculations and staff felt it necessary to deal with a range of
possibilities with the assumption that the factor would fall within
that range. The Negative Declaration factored in as a worst case
the 2.29 factor and had determined there was no significant impact.
commissioner Tugenberg asked who would pay to maintain the property
zoned for community purpose facilities while awaiting sale. Mr.
Bazzel answered that the property would be retained in the
ownership of the developer, and it would be his responsibility to
maintain it until such time the property was transferred.
In answer to Commissioner Tugenberg I s query, Mr. Bazzel stated
there had been no religious groups in the community who had voiced
opposition to a community purpose facility zone.
Referring to the staff report, page 2, Commissioner Tugenberg noted
that major projects to date had provided land area for religious
facilities. He questioned the designation of property if it was
already being provided.
Senior Planner Bazzel concurred that the projects approved recently
by the City had included some acreage for religious facilities and
did not include adequate acreage for other facilities in addition.
The Planning Department had no guideline to determine the
appropriate amount of acreage which should be in those
developments.
Commissioner Tugenberg questioned the immediate purchase of 198
acres of land zoned for churches.
Mr. Tugenberg asked if Chula vista had experienced conditional use
permit applications from churches to justify this kind of demand
for acreage; is Chula Vista extremely inadequate in sites as it
applies to the applications for conditional use permits for
religious sites? How many applications do we have now for
conditional use permits for churches or any community service
purpose?
11,- ,,~
PC MINUTES
-10-
March 13, 1991
Assistant Planning Director Lee responded that it was not just a
case of having use permits. Several of the large-scale communities
are providing a number of these types of facilities, not just for
churches but for YMCAs, etc. However, many of the planned
communities have not planned for the full range of facilities.
There had been a steady flow of inquiries, but Mr. Lee was not
aware of any applications pending.
Commissioner Tugenberg was concerned that the zone overlay limiting
a site to a community purpose facility would preclude an increase
in the value of the property. He wondered if the churches had
considered these ramifications.
Planning Director Leiter answered that the issue had been brought
up by the Construction Industry Federation during the discussions
with the Community Purpose Facility Task Force, and consideration
was presented to the various churches represented in that group.
The consensus seemed to be that it was not a major concern or one
that changed their direction or approach on this issue.
commissioner Tugenberg questioned
attendance in Chula vista. Senior
method of calculation.
the average total church
Planner Bazzel explained the
Commissioner Tugenberg asked if a provision had been made for those
churches who needed to rent space rather than buy. Planning
Director Leiter replied that the ordinance provided that the amount
of land required could be reduced in recognition of available
rental facilities in a project.
Commissioner Decker asked for a definition of "services for the
homeless." Commissioner Tugenberg noted that there were a number
of churches in the community which provided services to the
homeless, taking turns feeding and providing sleeping quarters for
them.
Commissioner Decker asked about the services for the military
during the holidays but not outside the holidays. Planning
Director Leiter answered that these were examples of the types of
services provided by community purpose facilities. The City
Council, working with the city Attorney and staff, had tried to
define examples of the types of assembly uses that would fall
within this category. It did not preclude similar types of uses.
Services for military personnel outside the holidays would be
considered an allowable use as well. He emphasized the purpose of
the facilities would be to serve the communities in which they were
located.
i~-'1
PC MINUTES
-11-
March 13, 1991
commissioner Decker suggested "and other appropriate community
activities to be determined by the City Council" be included.
Commissioner Martin stated he wanted to applaud staff for grappling
with a difficult situation with no precedence.
Vice-Chair Fuller concurred that something which had started out as
one task had mushroomed into a pioneering area for the city of
Chula vista.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing
was opened.
Speaking in favor:
Pastor Rick Johnson, Pastor of Risen Savior Lutheran Church, home
address: 391 Bay Leaf Drive, Chu1a vista, noted that it was the
City Council's intention that this overlaying zone be primarily for
non-profit organizations. That was why for-profit private schools
were not included in staff's analysis. He noted that Sunday School
classrooms were not the same as regular classrooms, and the same
number of children would not be in the classes. Pastor Johnson was
not concerned with the property not increasing in value, because
churches could not pay the higher prices. He explained how the
Task Force had arrived at the church attendance percentage of 29%
by using the U. S. Census. He also noted there was no land to make
applications for conditional use permits.
Commissioner Tugenberg asked for confirmation that the 29% came
from the San Diego County Census. Mr. Johnson concurred.
Thomas Scholl, 184 Garrett Avenue, Chula Vista, encouraged the
Commission to recommend the largest amount of acreage possible for
the community services purposes--for social, physical, spiritual,
and emotional needs to be met.
Paula Coffev, 62 Vallecito Way, Chula vista, supported the
recommendation.
Pastor Don Schock, Pastor of Calvary Chapel of Chula Vista, home
address: 853 Blackwood Road, Chula Vista, noted he had applied for
30 conditional use permits and had been turned down on all of them
because of improper land use or parking area.
Assistant Pastor Dennis Breedlove (Calvary Chapel of Chula Vista),
4091 Chanute Street, San Diego, stated the Task Force had tried to
compile something that is needed in the community, not just a false
vision. He complimented staff on the excellent job and supported
the recommendation, but would like to have more land set aside.
1~w t/l
PC MINUTES
-12-
March 13, 1991
Emerald Randolph, 84 East "J" street, Chula Vista, representing the
Human Services council, explained the purpose of the Human Services
Council. She stated the Human Services Council felt this was an
important first step in looking at the designation of space for
social services providers, and would support a broader definition
of community purposes. The Human Services Council recommended
regular reviews of the recommended space allocation in order to
ensure future adequacy and to enable providers to keep abreast of
the service demands. Ms. Randall urged approval of the amendment.
Commissioner Tugenberg asked in what way Ms. Randall would have
expanded the definition of the list. She answered it was not
inclusive enough--present services include South Bay alcohol
recovery, drug rehab, senior groups: adult day care, Meals-on-
Wheels, literacy programs, domestic violence, child abuse, etc.
They are always in a catch-up mode and need help to meet the needs.
They had suggested to staff the list was not complete enough.
Bruce Younq, speaking for Land Advocacy for Non-Profit Development
(LAND), an affiliate of Southern California Ecumenical Council,
said they were experiencing a need of help. He noted there were
two different data bases. The churches list those who attend
church regularly, where people identify with the church they attend
infrequently. He referenced Orange County where there is a real
problem with no affordable housing for seniors, single parents, and
homeless because there are no churches, temples or synogogues
providing services. He noted that churches, temples and synogogues
provide services amounting to 46.7% of the actual offering of
294,000 congregations across the nation, not including time
volunteered. He supported the amendment, and appreciated Chula
vista being pioneers.
Commissioner Martin asked if any other place had done this, to
which Mr. Young replied that Chula vista is the pioneer, and he has
five cities watching Chula vista. He believed the ratios were
conservative; it should be closer to 2 acres.
Tim Jones, 978 Myra Avenue, Chula Vista, the Church Land Planning
Consultant to the Task Force and author of the Community Facilities
Task Force report, noted there was a general lack of information
regarding similar-type land uses and existing facilities. He
supported the amendment.
Commissioner Tugenberg asked why there was no data base for this
type of facility. Mr. Jones answered he thought no one had
challenged it. City Council had recommended that the definition of
a community purpose facility be maintained as a non-profit use, not
1~ - {p q
PC MINUTES
-13-
March 13, 1991
to allow profitable schools and daycare centers because they are
provided for in commercial areas.
Speaking in opposition:
John SeYmour, representing Construction Industry Federation,
acknowledged the fine work done by staff and the Task Force. He
stated they wanted to on record of supporting the community purpose
zone. They opposed the amount of acreage being set aside. He
suggested that 440 people would be able to use the property
concurrently, using the figures given above. He offered two
recommendations: the ordinance should assume some concurrent use
of religious facilities, and that the ordinance be revised to take
into consideration that some churches would rent or lease
facilities.
commissioner Tugenberg asked if the ordinance should include some
time limit terminology. Build-out is 50 years. Do we reserve the
property for 50 years or for perpetuity; is there a time limitation
on the SPA plan?
Mr. Seymour answered that they would support that, and that the
ordinance should be reviewed on a yearly basis to see if in fact
the land being set aside was being bought. If it was not, it
should be reduced; but if all the land was being bought, there may
be a need for more.
commissioner Martin asked if Mr. Seymour agreed with the formula
staff used? Mr. Seymour answered in the affirmative, except for
the 140 person per acre site.
Speaking in favor:
Reverend Charles Dobbs, 354 Roman Way, Chula Vista, Pastor of Park
Hill united Methodist Church, responding to Mr. Seymour's comments,
stated that the 440 people on a I-acre parcel of land would violate
the current parking code allowing one parking space for every 3.5
seats in the sanctuary. He supported the P-C zoning, but did not
support setting time limits on selling the property.
Speaking in opposition of amount of land designation, but for the
plan itself:
1~~70
PC MINUTES
-14-
March 13, 1991
Reverend Vauahan Lvons, Executive Director of the San Diego
Ecumenical Conference, opposed the amount of land set aside. He
said it was not enough land. He encouraged the plan's adoption,
and said the statistical data was good, basic data, borne out by
the annual report of the American and Canadian churches.
Speaking in favor:
Pastor Richard Hensaen, 893 Monserate, Chula Vista, Pastor of First
Baptist Church in Chula Vista, and Vice-Chair of the Task Force,
noted his church had an elementary school, a pre-school, and worked
daily with many of the community social problems.
Speaking in opposition:
Bill Hauf, San Miguel Partners, 4350 La Jolla Village Drive, San
Diego 92122, speaking as a developer said he agreed with John
Seymour that the acreage was too large. He said the Task Force
represented the smaller congregations; the two ministers of the
largest congregations who were originally members of the Task Force
had resigned early. He had attended the earlier meetings of the
Task Force, which had a combative nature, and the developers felt
they were being attacked. He commended staff on the excellent job
they had done on the analysis.
commissioner Tugenberg asked why
participate. Mr. Hauf answered that
that the developers were to be members
the developers did not
the Council did not direct
of the Task Force.
Commissioner Tugenberg was concerned about the possibility of
opposition by any of the religious community. Planning Director
Leiter said there had been no opposition expressed by the two
congregations referenced by Mr. Hauf. Mr. Leiter said he
understood it was an open invitation at the time the Task Force was
set up. certain members began to participate but left the
committee over time, so the membership changed. After the Task
Force issued its initial report, the format was shifted from a
formal task force to a series of workshops. At those workshops,
all of the ministers representing all of the religious
organizations, as well as the Human Services Council, were invited.
Mr. Hauf concurred that the ministers resigned nine months after
the task force was formed, basically because of the combative
nature of the representatives of the smaller congregations. The
letters are on file and could be made available. Mr. Hauf said he
had talked with both of the ministers and they agreed on the
conceptual plan; now it was a debate as to the size of the acreage.
The developers were never invited to be part of the original task
force.
i(,,- 71
PC MINUTES
-15-
March 13, 1991
Pastor Don Schock, with permission from the Chair, returned to the
microphone to speak to the amount of acreage. The concept of the
140 people per acre was based on the zoning ordinance. He noted
that the developers had been notified at the beginning of the task
force and McMillin Communities was the only developer who sent a
representative. His attendance was appreciated.
commissioner Tugenberg asked if anyone from the Baldwin Company had
shown up prior to the Task Force being changed to the Community
Purpose Facilities Task Force. Mr. Schock remembered no one except
McMillin and Great American (Sunbow) for the first nine months.
Baldwin became involved when it became the Community Purpose
Facilities Task Force. The report had already been done at that
point for the religious portion. Mr. Schock stated they were not
against the developer, but wanted land at a fair market price for
non-profit, community-based uses.
commissioner Martin asked Reverend Lyons of the Ecumenical
Conference, who had established chapels while in the military,
about the formula used, how big the chapels were, and what ratio
the military used. Reverend Lyons said they had a definite formula
which was too detailed to go into, but the Presbytery standard is
3.5 acres necessary to build a church and preferably 5 acres. They
will not build on a site less than 3.5 acres. He said that was the
position of many of the major denominations today.
Emerald Randolph returned to the microphone to clarify that the
Human Services Council represented mainly non-profit groups but the
social services provided separate from the churches. This
amendment incorporates the needs both of the churches and of the
non-profit agencies.
No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Fuller said they could certainly appreciate the time
and effort and sensed the frustration everyone had gone through,
both the participants and the Task Force, along with staff.
Commissioner Casillas commented that he fully appreciated the
discussion and the outstanding work that had been done. He was
concerned, however, that this issue would end up in court because
of the City being involved in providing private property. He would
not support the program.
Commissioner Decker commented he had also deliberated on the church
and state issue, and decided that the church was an entity that
provided a service and didn't feel there was a problem. He
believed this was a good program.
1~-.1Z
PC MINUTES
-16-
March 13, 1991
commissioner Tugenberg had discussed the proposed ordinance with
two former Planning Commissioners who were lawyers who were not
uneasy about the taking of property, but were uneasy about the
First Amendment.
commissioner Martin said he liked the idea of designating certain
areas, not necessarily for churches, but for non-profit
corporations. The developers will benefit when they show they have
a certain portion set aside at the time they come before the
Planning commission with a project.
Vice-Chair Fuller added that it needed to be looked at in the
broader scope of the community purpose facilities. She would like
to see the social and human services emphasized in the definition.
It is a need that should be recognized. It is difficult to
establish a human service activity in the community because they
were not wanted anywhere. She felt a lot of time had been spent on
the environment, but more time needed to be spent on the human
environment.
Commissioner Tugenberg thought that private non-profit,
unaffiliated schools should be put back into the list.
commissioner Carson believed there should be some time limit on the
amount of time a parcel could be held with this designation. She
agreed with commission Martin that it would benefit the developers
to have land set aside when they came in with a project.
commissioner Decker said he would like to add to the definition
"and other appropriate community services to be determined by the
City Council."
Assistant City Attorney Rudolf suggested that the motion should be
stated as follows:
"Community purpose facility" means a structure for
assembly, as well as ancillary uses such as a parking
lot, within a planned community including but not limited
to those which serve the following types of purposes:"
(with the list to follow).
commissioner Carson asked if Mr. Rudolf had some wording for the
review.
Mr. Rudolf suggested that Exhibit A is not the ordinance which
would affectuate that change. His suggestion was that there would
be another section added to the final form of the ordinance which
stated this ordinance would be reviewed annually by the City
11.-73
PC MINUTES
-17-
March 13, 1991
council to review the application of its terms. That change could
be made administratively before going to Council.
MSC (Decker/Carson) 5-1 (Commissioner Casillas voting against;
Chair Grasser Horton absent) that the commission adopt the Negative
Declaration, IS-91-17.
MSC (Decker/Fuller) 4-2 (Commissioners Casillas and Tugenberg
voting against; Chair Grasser Horton absent) that the Planning
commission recommend that the City Council adopt the proposed
Municipal Code amendments, as revised, and the Council refer the
adequacy of day care facilities in new developments to the Child
Care commission and staff for review and recommendations.
Assistant City Attorney Rudolf asked for clarification regarding
the addition of "human service" in section 1. There was no formal
amendment regarding the amendment of any of the other language of
section 1. Did the commission desire to change any of the other
eight subdivisions in section 1?
commissioner Tugenberg suggested that it should be reviewed with
the Human Service Council. The private school had been included
but had been taken out, but the other suggestions should be
discussed with staff at another time.
Attorney Rudolf clarified the final results of the recommendation.
staff had recommended the amendment striking private schools. Was
the motion for the staff recommendation or as originally presented.
Vice-Chair Fuller said it was for the staff recommendation with Mr.
Rudolf's rewording in the introductory language.
Vice-Chair Fuller did intend to suggest Item 2 would read "social
and human service" activities. The Commissioners had no objection
to adding that in.
No. 2 would then read "Social and human service
activities, such as Alcoholics Anonymous"
110- 7q
--
.
.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE
CITY COUNCIL of Chula vista, California, for the purpose of
considering an amendment to Title 19 of the Municipal Code amending
Sections 19.04 and 19.48 to include definitions and criteria for
the provision of land area within new Planned Communities for
Community Purpose Facilities. Community Purpose Facilities are
assembly structures serving one of the following purposes:
1. Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, and other similar organizations;
2. Social Service activities, such as Alcoholics Anonymous;
3. Services for homeless;
4. Services for military personnel during the holidays;
5. Private schools;
6. Day care;
7. Senior care and recreation;
8. Worship, spiritual growth and development, and teaching
of traditional family values.
An Initial Study, IS-91-17, of possible significant environmental
impacts has been conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator.
A finding of no significant environmental impact has been
recommended to the City Council and is on file, along with the
Initial Study, in the office of the Planning Department. copies of
the proposed amendment are on file in the office of the Planning
Department. Any petitions to be submitted to the City Council must
be received in the City Clerk's office no later than noon of the
hearing date.
If you wish to challenge the city's action on this amendment in
court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or
someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice,
or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at or
prior to the public hearing.
SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL on Tuesday,
April 16, 1991, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public
Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, at which time any person
desiring to be heard may appear.
DATED: April 4, 1991
CASE NO. PCA-91-04
Beverly Authelet, city Clerk
-v L/ 91
If $- '1'1
~;z: ydi..,~C~..-.-<. P-<'
~~-<-<-4..' 'rv? ~ 11,-11p
</6,
11 ?- if- .-
. .",',~?_,-'." --~
~I\'/"'I;I;) 1:1 Iw 11.:/ V4 <
6uie Corporation
Attn: Douglas Buie
16935 West Bernardo Drive
Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92127
Brehm Communities
Attn: Steve Hardison
2835 Camino del Rio South
San Diego, CA 92108
Chula Vista Investors
Attn: Bill Barkett
864 Propect
La Jolla, CA 92037
Fieldstone Company
Attn: Jim Hansen
5465 MOrehouse Drive
Suite 250
San Diego, CA 92121
Eastlake Development Company
Attn: Kent Aden .
900 Lane Avenue, Suite 100
Chula ViSta, CA 92013
Great American Development
Attn: Jim Carter
600 B Street
Suite 700
San Diego, CA 92101
Rancho del Rey Partnershi p
Attn: Craig Fukuyama
2727 Hoover Avenue
"ational City, CA 92050
...
Id V1Sta
..-"'
-
--
Patrick Development
Attn: Tim Kruer
2445 Fifth Avenue
Suite 400
San Diego, CA 92101
Stafford Gardner
Attn: Don Gardner
2445 Fifth Avenue
Suite 450
San Diego, CA 92101
Baldwin Company
11975 El Camino Real f20D
San Diego, CA 92130
Construction Industry Federation
6336 Greenwich Drive, Suite F
San Diego, CA 92122
Thomas F. Steinke
Seltzer Caplan Wilkins & McMahon
P. O. Box X33999
San Diego, CA 92163
5an Miguel Partners,
Attn: Wayne Loftus
4350 LaJolla Village Drive #930
San Diego, CA 92122
.
1l.-11
to
First Baptist Church
Pastor Dick Hensgen
494 'E' Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Wesleyan Church of the Valley
Sr. Pastor Jimmy F. Johnson
5305 Sweetwater Road
Bonita, CA 92002
Risen Savior Lutheran Church
Pastor Rick Johnson
3602 Bonita Road
Chula Vista, CA 91910
South Bay Pentecostal Church
Pastor Arthur Hodges III
4th & 0 Streets
Chula Vista, CA 91910
St. Rose of Lima Parish
Reverend Charles Fuld
293 'H' Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
First C. V. Christian Reform
1236 Third Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Cornerstone Christian
Community Church
Pastor Dave Chamberlin
102 Shasta
Chula Vista, CA 91910
.........
Chula Vista, CA 91911
.
Chula Vista Missionary Church
Reverend John Oien
341 Orange Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Wesleyan Church of the Valley
Assoc. Pastor David Dignal
5305 Sweetwater Road
Bonita, CA 92002
Calvary Chapel of C.V.
Pastor Don Schock
P. O. Box 2833
Chula Vista, CA 91912
Woodlawn Park
Elder Warren Clewis
124 Spruce Road
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Victory Luthern Church
Pastor Larry Rehlander
1338 Valencia Loop
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Park Hill United Methodist
Reverend Dobbs
545 East Naples Street
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Tracl1Y Clark
. _.P<I _
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Mike Gallagher
McMillin Communities
2727 Hoover Avenue
National City. CA 92050
J\P-l~
.
Bayview Baptist Church
Attn: Pastor Wilson
210 E. Jamul .
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Corpus Christi Catholic Paris
Father John Proctor
P. O. Box 1349
Bonita, CA 92002
'177Ad /V-tt<N"..l
91911
Community Congregational Chur
Frederick M. Bradley
276 F Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
C. V. Church of Christ
80b Yamada
470 L Street
Chula Vista, CA 91911
Bonita Presbyterian Church
Pastor John Garrisi
5111 Central Avenue
Bonita, CA 92002
Dr. Larry McConnell
Del Rey Bible Church
73 Bonita Road
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Adrian Landers
Human Services Coordinator
Bil 1 Castro
360 Third Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Human Services Council
Pamela B. Smith
380 Third Ave. Ste B
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Chula Vista City Schools
Emerald Randolph
84 East 'J' Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
David Harris
Community Development
OTC Employment Youth Services
Tris Hubbard
313 Windjammer Circle
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Bruce Youn9
LAND
31891 Via Pato
Trabuco Canyon, CA 912679
.
,
'-
fl
/.'
>:
- ";J
,......- -\
..'
~. ~..--:;
, .
r. '
..
.
l~-lq
Y' .<.~."
- ,~iI:',,,",'.
,....,...
.-:
"'l<t.~~
~
~t
~
~
3~
<V~~
ASSOCIATED BUILDING INDUSTRY ENGINEERING AND
GENERAL CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION OF GENERAL CONTRACTORS
OF AMERICA SAN DIEGO COUNTY ASSOCIATION
OONSTRUOTION INDUSTRY FEDERATION
~
1J ! ~,
6336 GREENWICH DRIVE, SUITE F, SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92122 (619) 587-0292 FAX (819) 455-1113
April 16, 1991
Honorable Mayor Moore
Honorable Councilmembers
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA
RE: SupDort Concept of Community Purpose Facilities Ordinance
ODDose Amount of Acreage Recommended
The Construction Industry Federation appreciates the opportunity to comment on the
proposed community purpose facility ordinance. While the Federation supports the
ordinance in concept, we continue to have significant concerns about the amount of
acreage proposed to be zoned for community purposes.
The methodology / assumption for determining the land needed for "other" community
purpose facilities is not questioned. But we are concerned about the assumptions
underlying the staff recommendations with respect to church lands.
As depicted in the attached chart, Chula Vista currently has about.62 acres of churches
per 1,000 population. The proposed ordinance is based on the assumption that 1.17
acres/1,OOO residents should be set aside for church purposes.
There is no reason to conclude that Chula Vista needs double the acreage of
churches in new communities as has been provided in existing communities.
The proposed standard is too high because the methodology does not adequately
consider that about one fourth of churches rent or lease church space. Nor does the
ordinance consider that some churches will choose to locate in zones other than
community purpose zones (residential, commercial or industrial) because they want
the price appreciation of the underlying zone.
It should also be noted that this ordinance is on the "cutting edge", a national model.
According to the staff report, no other county jurisdiction has enacted a similar
ordinance and national planning associations do not have any records of similar
proposals.
Accordingly, there is no established methodology for calculating the appropriate
amount of land to set aside for these uses. Therefore, the Chula Vista City Council
should be cautious and flexible in applying this new regulation.
It is therefore elF's recommendation that the ordinance be amended to replace the
inflexible 1.39 acres per 1,000 standard, with a range. Specifically, the ordinance
should be modified to require that future projects include 1 .0 acres to 1.40 acres
per 1,000 population for community purpose facilities.
/lP-g,
If the range were enacted, proponents of the ordinance would be assured that
planned communities would have proportionately more community purpose
acreage than Is currently provided In Chula Vista.
Furthermore, this flexible approach is more consistent with accepted planning practices
which zone land based upon legitimate land use consideration, such as location,
service consideration, access, topographic or environmental constraints. If a range
were adopted, the Council would have the authority to consider these very important
issues at the SPA level and apply the zone with flexibility.
Your consideration of these concerns is appreciated.
Sin/re~IY'
(',
------4c- ,C<-A-"'-~
Frank Panarisi
CEO/President
Construction Industry Federation
Attachment
I~ .. '0
Community Purpose Facility
Contrast Existing and Proposed
Existing
Proposed
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40
Acres per 1000 Residents
. Church Uses III Other Uses
,,-9/
April 8, 1991
TO: ALL CITY OF CHULA VISTA EMPLOYEES
FROM: PUBLIC WORKS OPERATIONS/QWL SUPPORT
SUBJECT: DELFINO AND MARY MARTINEZ CANCER TRUST FUND
This notice is being forwarded to each of you to make you aware of
fellow employee, Delfino Martinez, and his wife, Mary Martinez.
Delfino Martinez is a Senior Maintenance Worker for the Public
Works/Operations Department and has served as an employee of the City
of Chula vista for 12 years. This past year Delfino was diagnosed
with Hodgkins Disease, a form of cancer, and six months later his
wife, Mary, also found out that she had leukemia. They are both in
need of bone marrow transplants. Faced with heavy financial burdens
that their medical insurances will not cover completely, cancer trust
funds have been set up and fund raising events have been scheduled.
Delfino and Mary's share for their stay at the City of Hope in Duarte,
California (where they will go for their transplants and recovery) is
at least $15.000 each.
Those of you who would like to participate in support of Delfino and
Mary Martinez can make a contribution to the Delfino and Mary Martinez
Cancer Trust Fund at the city of Chula vista Credit Union (691-5240)
located in the City Hall Building between Personnel and Parks &
Recreation Departments.
There will be a softball fund raiser through Parks & Recreation and
Public Works Operations Departments on April 26, 1991, Friday from
3:30 P.M - 5:30 P.M. at Eucalyptus Park. The softball game will begin
at 4:00 P.M. and end at 5:30 P.M. The minimum contribution will be
$5.00. For more information please contact Sharon Wayland at #5247 or
Norma/Mary/Nancy at #5027.
There are other events scheduled including a walk-a-thon at noon, May
5, at Sweetwater High School in National City and a "Spirit of the
Barrio" luncheon sponsored by the Logan Heights Family Clinic. The
luncheon will be held Friday, May 17, and will cost $15. For
information on the walk-a-thon, call 477-5202. For information on the
luncheon, call 565-7024.
(DELMARCF)
,