HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991/06/11 Item 12
COUNCil AGENDA STATEMENT
Item J.Z.
ITEM TITLE:
Meeting Date 6/11/91
City Initiated Proposal to Amend General Plan and Zoning
Reclassification to Resolve Inconsistencies
Public Hearing: GPA-91-l/PCZ-91-C - City-initiated proposal
to amend the General Plan and rezone certain territory,
genera lly bounded by E Street, H Street, Second Avenue and
Third Avenue, plus an additional area east of Fourth Avenue
between "E" and Davidson Streets, to resol ve general
plan/zoning inconsistencies within the Central Chula Vista
community. The preci se territori al 1 imits, proposed
rezoni ngs, and proposed general plan amendments are depi cted
on attached Exhibits A,B,C, and D and Table 1.
Resolution
Vista General Plan
Approving an Amendment to the Chula
Ordinance
Exhibits A, B, C, and
and 'b'
Changing the zones as described
D and Table I, subject to conditions
in
, a'
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
Director of Planning
,)
City Managery}
(/
;PI!!
(4/5ths Vote: Yes___No-x-)
BACKGROUND:
This item involves amending the General Plan and rezoning an area referred to
as the General Plan/Zoning Consistency Study Special Study Area B-1 in Central
Chula Vista. The study area is generally bounded by "E" Street on the north,
"H" Street on the south, Second Avenue on the east, and Third Avenue on the
west. In addition, the study area includes a small area located east of
Fourth Avenue between "E" and Davidson Streets.
The study area includes approximately 50 acres and 219 lots and was divided
into three subareas to facil itate ana lys is and worki ng with the community.
Part I generally includes the southern area located between "H" and "G"
Streets, Part II includes the central area located between "G" and "F"
Streets, and Part III includes the northern area located between "F" and "E"
Streets as well as the small area adjacent to Fourth Avenue.
On June 19, 1990 the City Council directed the Planning Department to complete
the Speci a 1 Study Area B-1 of the General Pl an/Zoni ng Cons i stency Study and
Action Plan for Central Chula Vista, and to return with a work program for
Special Study Areas B-2, B-3, B-4, and B-5 of the project at a later date.
The purpose of the Consistency Study is to resolve general plan/zoning
inconsistencies within the Central Chula Vista community which resulted from
approval of the Chula Vista General Plan Update on July 11, 1989.
1.2-1
Page 2, Item Jt~
Meeting Date~
The area was pl aced in a speci a 1 study category because of the compl exi ty of
the land use issues given the existing patterns of land use, residential
density, zoning, and traffic circulation. It was anticipated that the special
study areas may require a combination of rezonings and plan amendments to
promote their orderly development and conservation. In undertaking this
study, the overall approach taken by staff was to closely review the existing
character and development patterns of each i ndi vidual neighborhood, and to
recommend General Pl an and zoning designations which would best preserve that
character.
Staff completed their initial analysis of Special Study Area B-1 in August
1990. Field surveys of the study area were conducted to inventory the
existing land uses within the study area. Existing zoning, lot sizes,
res ident i a 1 densit i es, and adjacent 1 and uses were also tabulated and mapped
to assist in the analysis. Based on this research, staff initially proposed
rezoning to R-3, R-2, and R-l. Three separate community forums were held with
the affected property owners in August and September 1990 to present staff's
prel iminary recommendations and to receive input. At the community forums,
many of the property owners expressed a desire to retain some type of R-3
zoning for their property instead of the R-2 or R-l zoning recommended by
staff.
Based on input received from the property owners at the community forums and
staff's i nit i a 1 research, staff then further evaluated four altern at i ve 1 and
use recommendations and their associated impacts. Staffs' alternatives
analysis evaluated the development potential in terms of the number of
additional lots permitted and the number of nonconforming lots resulting from
each of the alternatives. The potential impacts of each alternative were then
considered in the context of the existing development patterns within and
adjacent to the study area. In addition, concerns raised by the Chula Vista
School District about impacts resulting from additional development within the
study area were considered. Staff's revised recommendation which is before
the City Council in this report for the Special Study Area B-1 was presented
at a final community forum with the property owners on February 7th.
The Environmental Review Coordinator conducted an Initial Study, IS-91-13, of
potential environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the
proposed rezonings and General Plan amendments. Based on the attached Initial
Study and comments thereon, the Coordinator has concluded that this
reclassification would cause no significant environmental impacts as per the
Negative Declaration issued on IS-91-13.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Based on the Initial Study and comments on the Initial Study and Negative
Declaration, find that the proposed rezonings and General Plan amendments
wi 11 have no s ignifi cant envi ronmenta 1 impacts and adopt the Negat i ve
Decl arat i on issued on IS-91-13 for the General Pl an/Zoni ng Cons i stency
Study.
2. Adopt a resolution to change the General Plan as described on the
attached Exhibits A, B, C, and D and Table I.
12-2-
Page 3, Item 12-
Meeting Date 6/11/91
3. Adopt an ordi nance to change the zones as descri bed on the attached
Exhibits A, B, C, and D and Table I subject to the following conditions:
(a) The City of Chula Vista shall enforce any appropriate legal
mechanism sponsored by the Chu1a Vista School District and the
Sweetwater Union High School District to mitigate impacts on school
facil ities.
(b) A 11 exi st i ng nonconformi ng uses created as a result of thi s act i on
shall be allowed to be reconstructed in the event of destruction of
greater than 60% of the property's improvements upon review and
approval of the Planning Commission.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission held a public
heari ng on thi s matter on March 31, 1991, and then continued the heari ng to
April 10, 1991. On April 10, 1991, the Planning Commission recommended
approval as stated herein by a vote of 6-0-1 (Commissioner Martin abstained).
A total of four property owners spoke "for" the rezone and eight "against."
The Resource Conservation Commi ss i on cons idered the Negative Declarat i on on
January 9, 1991 and took no action.
DISCUSS ION:
1. Ad.iacent zoninQ and land use. (See Table II for Glossary of Zoning
Categories)
Primary area between Second and Third:
North CC,CCP,CO, Commercial, single family and
R-l, R-3 multi family residential
East R-l Single family residential
South R-l Single family residential
West CO, CC, CB, Commercial and multi family
R-3 residential
Area east of Fourth Avenue:
North CT Commerc i a 1
East R-3 Multi-family and single family
family residential
South CO Park, library, civic center
West R-l Single family residential
12.-3
Page 4, Item~
Meeting Date 6/11/91
2. Existino site characteristics.
The ent ire study area is zoned R-3 except for the small, i so 1 ated area
located adjacent to Fourth Avenue between "E" and Davidson Streets which
is zoned C-O and C-O-P.
[HISTORICAL NOTE: The Central Chula Vista District (Special
Study B-1) has been historically zoned R-3 (multiple family),
approximately since the late 1940's and early 1950's per Zoning
Ordinance 398 adopted by City Council, March 22, 1949.]
The study area is developed with a diverse mixture of single family and
multi family residences including:
a. single family homes on one lot;
b. duplexes;
c. lots originally developed with single family units which now include
an additional one to three units through garage conversions, or the
construction of additional detached or attached units;
d. larger multi-family apartment or condominium developments.
Because of the diversity of density and products types occurs throughout
the study area, the study area is very non-homogenous. Although the
study area does not consist of a well-defined single family or multi
family neighborhood, there are subareas within the study area which have
a somewhat consistent character.
The isolated portion of the study area located adjacent to Fourth Avenue
between "E" and Davidson Streets includes 8 parcels developed with
duplexes, multi family residences, and offices. This area is zoned c-o
and C-O-P, and is designated as High Density Residential (18 to 27 du/ac)
on the General Plan.
3. General Plan
The majority of the study area is designated as Low-Medium Density
Residential (3 to 6 du/ac) except for the southern portion which is
designated as Medium-High Density Residential (6 to 11 du/ac), a small
area located east of Church Avenue between "G" Street and Al varado Street
which is also designated as High Density Residential, and the area
adjacent to Fourth Avenue which is designated as High Density Residential
(18-27 du/ac).
ANALYSIS
The analysis provided below is divided into subareas based on the different
zoning and General Plan amendment recommendations proposed by staff. The
12-cf.
Page 5, Item 1. t,
Meeting Date 6/11/91
specific location of each subarea is illustrated in Exhibits A, a, C, and D
and the existing and proposed General Plan designations and zoning for all of
the subareas is summarized in Table I. Table III provides an overall
comparison of the number of additional units which could be built in this
study area under the recommended zoning, compared to existing zoning.
1. Part 1 - Subarea 1A.
Existing General Pl an: Low-Medium Residential
Proposed General Plan: Medium-High Residential
Existing Zoning: R-3
Proposed Zoning: R-3-P-22
This subarea includes 17 lots of which 7 include single family
residences, 1 lot includes 2 separate single family residences, and 9
include multi-family residences. The lots north of "G" Street are 6,135
square feet while the lots south of G Street range between 10,000 and
16,000 square feet in size with one 1.17 acre lot. Densities on existing
multi-family lots range from 13 to 43 dulac with an average density of 26
du/ac.
Under the existing R-3 zoning, there are 5 nonconforming lots and an
additional 38 units could be developed within this subarea. Under the
proposed R-3-P-22 zoning, there would be 5 nonconforming lots (no change)
and an additional 26 units could be developed.
The zone reclassification from R-3 to R-3-P22 (22 du/ac) would allow for
multifamily development but at a density which is lower than what is
allowed under the current R-3 zoning. The R-3-P22 density is compatible
with the overall character of the area which includes both single family
and multi family residences. It provides for design review in accordance
with the "P" Precise Plan Modifying District guidel ines. Under the
R-3-P22 zone, development of three units is allowed on a 6,000 square
foot lot which is the predominant lot size within this subarea.
The proposed R-3-P22 zone and Medium-High Density Residential General
Plan designation provide a good transition within the study area between
the single family residential area located east of Second Avenue and the
downtown redevelopment area located to the west.
2. Part 1 - Subarea lB. (Exhibit Al
Existing General Plan: Low-Medium Residential
Proposed General Plan: Medium-High Residential
Existing Zoning: R-3
Proposed Zoning: R-3-P-14
This subarea includes 19 lots of which 6
residences, 4 are lots with two single family
duplex, and 8 include multi-family residences.
incl ude single family
residences, one is a
Most lots are 7,000
12-5
Page 6, Item t.%
Meeting Date 6/11/91
square feet whil e 5 lots range ins i ze from 7,700 to 9800 square feet.
The average density on existing multi-family lots is 22 du/ac.
Under the existing R-3 zoning, there is 1 nonconforming lot and an
additional 30 units could be developed within this subarea. Under the
proposed R-3-P-14 zoning, there would be 8 nonconforming lots and an
additional 6 units could be developed.
There are several factors which support the proposed rezoning to R-3-P-14:
a. It allows for additional development at a density that is compatible
with the existing character of the area which includes a mixture of
approximately half Single family lots with one or two units per lots
and half multi family lots.
b. It provides a transition between the high density residential
development located to the north and south, commercial development
to the west, and proposed R-l zoning to the east, and existing
single family development immediately east of the study area.
c. It provides more flexibility in parking and building requirements,
and is better suited for lots already developed with one dwell ing
unit than the R-2 zone.
3. Part 1 - Subarea 2. (Exhibit Al
Existing General Plan: Low-Medium Residential
Proposed General Pl an: High Residential
Existing Zoning: R-3
Proposed Zoning: R-3
This subarea includes 6 lots all of which are developed with multi-family
residences. Four lots are 7,000 square feet in size with the remaining 2
lots being approximately 30,000 and 60,000 square feet. Densities range
from 25 to 74 du/ac with the average density being 38 du/ac. This
subarea is located adjacent to the commercial development along Third
Avenue.
All of the lots are nonconforming under the existing R-3 zoning since the
existing densities exceed the density allowed by the R-3 zone.
Consequently, staff is recommending retaining the existing R-3 zoning in
this subarea and amending the General Plan from low-medium to high
density residential to be consistent with the existing zoning and
development in the subarea.
4. Part 1 - Subarea 3. (Exhibit Al
Exi st i ng General Pl an:
Proposed General Plan:
Existing Zoning:
Proposed Zoning:
Low-Medium Residential
Low-Medium Residential
R-3
R-l
iz-t,
Page 7, Item 1.1,
Meeting Date 6/11/91
This subarea includes 24 lots, of which 19 are developed with single
family residences, 2 are developed with 2 single family residences on one
lot, 1 is developed with a multi-family residence, 1 is vacant, and 1 is
a church parking lot. Seventeen lots are between 6,000 to 7,000 square
feet in size. Six lots are between 7,700 and 12,600 square feet in size,
and the church parki ng lot is 51,150 square feet in si ze. The average
dens ity is 6 du/ac except for 3 lots with dens i ties of 11 to 18 du/ac.
This subarea is located adjacent to the existing single family
neighborhood extending easterly from Second Avenue.
Under the existing R-3 zoning, there are no nonconforming lots and an
additional 52 units could be developed within this subarea. Under the
proposed R-l zoning, there would be 5 nonconforming lots and only one
additional unit could be developed. No residential development of the
church parking lot is assumed.
Staff is recommending rezoning this area to R-l to retain the existing
single family development character of this subarea. In addition, there
is a lack of sufficient on-street parking to support development of an
additional 52 units within this subarea. This is the only subarea within
the entire study area which is single family in character and where staff
is recommending retaining the existing Low-Medium Density Residential
General Plan designation.
5. Part 1 - Subarea 4. (Exhibit Al
Existing General Plan: Medium-High Residential
Proposed General Plan: High Residential
Existing Zoning: R-3
Proposed Zoning: R-3
This subarea includes 18 residential lots all of which are developed with
multi-family residences except for 1 lot which is developed with a single
family residence. In addition, the northwestern portion of the subarea
is developed with the St. Rose of Lima church, school, and convent.
Lot si zes range from 11,000 to 66,200 square feet. The predomi nant lot
size for the area south of H Street is 21,759 square feet. Most of the
lots located north of H Street are between 21,800 and 31,500 in size.
Densities range from 9 to 64 du/ac with the average density being 28
du/ac. This subarea is characterized by high density large apartment
buildings located along H Street.
Under the existing R-3 zoning, there are 5 nonconforming lots and an
additional 68 dwelling units could be developed. Because this area is
characterized by high density residential development, staff is
recommending retaining the existing R-3 zoning in this subarea and
amending the General Plan from low-medium to high density residential to
be consistent with the zoning and development pattern. Development of
add it i ona 1 uni ts in conformance with the R-3 zone woul d be cons i stent
with the existing high density character of the area.
~'2.-7
Page 8, Item J.z.
Meeting Date 6/11/91
6. Part 2. (Exhibit Bl
Existing General Plan:
Proposed General Plan:
Existing Zoning:
Proposed Zoning:
Low-Medium Residential
Medium-High Residential
R-3
R-3-P-14
This subarea includes 59 lots of which 35 include single family
residences, 2 are lots with two single family residences, 5 are duplexes,
and 17 include multi-family residences. Most of the lots (34 lots) are
between 6,100 and 6,750 square feet in size, with 13 lots being less than
6,000 in size and 12 lots being greater than 6,750 square feet in size.
Approximately two-thirds of the lots are developed with single family
residences and duplexes with the remaining one-third developed with multi
family residences. The average density for this subarea is 11 du/ac.
Under the existing R-3 zoning, there are 8 nonconforming lots and an
additional 76 units could be developed within this subarea. Under the
proposed R-3- P-14 zoni ng, there woul d be 17 nonconformi ng lots and an
additional 28 units could be developed. For the R-3-P-14 zone, it was
assumed that a minimum lot size of 6,222 square feet is required to
qualify for development of two dwelling units on a lot. Consequently,
lot consolidation would be required to achieve a density increase on lots
consisting of less than 6,222 square feet.
The R-3-P-14 zoning allows for additional development at a density that
is compatible with the existing character of the area which is
predominantly single family and duplex units. In addition, the R-3-P-14
zone provides more flexibility in parking and building requirements, and
is better suited for lots already developed with one dwell ing unit than
the R-2 zone.
1. Part 3 - Subarea 1. (Exhibit Cl
Existing General Plan: Low-Medium Residential
Proposed General Pl an: Medium-High Residential
Existing Zoning: R-3
Proposed Zoning: R-3-P-22
This subarea includes 68 lots of which 26 include single family
residences, 5 are lots with two single family residences, 6 are duplexes,
30 include multi-family residences, and one is a parking lot. Most of
the lots (40 lots) are between 6,000 and 7,000 square feet in size, with
18 lots being less than 6,000 in size and 10 lots being greater than
7,000 square feet in size. Approximately half of the lots are developed
with single family residences and duplexes, and half are developed with
multi family residences.
Under the exi st i ng R-3 zoni ng, there are 10 nonconformi ng lots and an
additional 106 units could be developed within this subarea. Under the
1 z.-i
Page 9, Item 12
Meeting Date 6/11/91
proposed R-3-P-22 zoning, there would be 13 nonconforming lots and an
additional 74 units could be developed.
The zone reclassification from R-3 to R-3-P22 (22 dulac) would allow for
multifamily development but at a density which is lower than what is
allowed under the current zoning. The R-3-P22 density is considered to
be compatible with diverse character of the area which includes
approximately half single family and duplex units, and half multifamily
residences and provides for design review in accordance with the "P"
Precise Plan Modifying District guidelines. Under the R-3-P22 zone,
development of three units is allowed on a 6,000 to 7,000 square foot lot
which is the predominant lot size in this subarea.
8. Part 3 - Subarea 2. (Exhibit OJ
Existing General Plan:
Proposed General Plan:
Existing Zoning:
Proposed Zoning:
High Residential
Professional & Administrative Commercial
c-o & C-O-P
c-o-P
This subarea includes 8 lots of which 2 lots are developed with offices
and parking, 4 lots are developed with duplexes at a density of 13 dulac,
and 2 lots are developed with multi-family residences at an average
density of 26 du/ac. The average lot size is 9,000 square feet.
The proposed recommendation would retain the existing C-O commercial
zoning of this area but would add the "P" Precise Plan Modifying District
to provide development guidelines to ensure high quality design that will
be compatible with residences to the east and west. The commercial
designation for this area is more appropriate than the existing High
Density Residential General Plan designation given that this area is
adjacent to the commercial corridor along "E" Street to north and to the
south along Fourth Avenue, there are high traffic volumes along Fourth
Avenue, and a portion of the area is currently developed with commercial
office uses.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
WPC 9325P
12-9
Page 10, Item~
Meeting Date 6/11/91
TABLE I
EXISTING AND PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS AND ZONING
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Existing
Genera 1 Pl an
Part 1:
Area lA
Area IB
Area 2
Area 3
Area 4
Low-Medium
Low-Medium
Low-Medium
Low-Medium
Medium-High
Low-Medium
Part 2:
Part 3:
Area 1
Area 2
Low-Medium
High
Proposed
General Plan
Existing
Zonina
Medium-High
Medium-High
High
Low-Medium
High
Medium-High
R-3
R-3
R-3
R-3
R-3
R-3
Medium-High
Professional
& Administrative
Commerci a 1
R-3
c-o &
C-O-P
Low-Medium Density Residential
Medium-High Density Residential
High Density Residential
WPC 9325P
= 3-6 du/ac
= 11-18 du/ac
= 18-27 du/ac
1. "2..-1 0
Proposed
Zonina
R-3-P-22
R-3-P-14
R-3
R-l
R-3
R-3-P-14
R-3-P-22
C-O-P
TABLE II
ZONING DESCRIPTIONS
R-I SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONE: Permits single family dwellings, accessory
uses, and certain conditional uses.
R-2 ONE AND TWO-FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONE:
duplexes, and attached single family
conditional uses similar to R-I zone.
Permits single family dwellings,
dwell ings. Accessory uses and
R-3 APARTMENT RESIDENTIAL ZONE: Permits multi pl e dwell i ngs, townhouses and
duplexes, and accessory uses. Single family homes and other designated uses
permitted with a conditional use permit. 32 units per acre maximum density.
R-3-P-14 APARTMENT RESIDENTIAL ZONE WITH PRECISE PLAN MODIFYING DISTRICT. 14
UNITS PER ACRE: Allows uses permitted in the R-3 zone. New development
subject to Precise Plan applications including Design Review. 14 units per
acre maximum density.
R-3-P-22 APARTMENT RESIDENTIAL ZONE WITH PRECISE PLAN MODIFYING DISTRICT. 22
UNITS PER ACRE: Allows uses permitted in the R-3 zone. New development
subject to Precise Plan applications, including Design Review. 22 units per
acre maximum density.
CO ADMINISTRATIVE AND PROFESSIONAL OFFICE ZONE: Permits offices for
professions, administrative, financial institutions, prescription pharmacies,
and other offices of the same character. Accessory uses such as services and
sales for occupants and patrons are permitted, as well as designated
conditional uses.
COP ADMINISTRATIVE AND PROFESSIONAL OFFICE ZONE WITH PRECISE PLAN MODIFYING
DISTRICT: Allows uses permitted in the CO zone. New development subject to
Precise Plan applications, including Design Review.
WPC 9400P
12.-1
TABLE III
Summary of the number of additional units which can be built under existing zoning versus
proposed zoning, within each subarea, with totals for the entire B-1 area.
Existing No. of Proposed No. of
Zoning Additional Zoning Additional
Units Units
PART 1:
Area lA R-3 38 R-3-P-22 26
Area 1B R-3 30 R-3-P-14 6
Area 2 R-3 0 R-3 0
Area 3 R-3 52 R-l 1
Area 4 R-3 68 R-3 68
SUB-TOTAL 188 101
PART 2: R-3 76 R-3-P-14 49
SUB-TOTAL 76 49
PART 3:
Area 1 R-3 106 R-3-P-22 74
Area 2 c-o & C-O-P N/A C-Q-P N/A
SUB-TOTAL 106 74
TOTAL 370 224
(Table III)
12.-'-
. ..... I .. ............t, .-.
. . ..." t-!... ......'-. ~'-.
PARK WAJ__ l:~... ..... ~
!U i L~. .: ..' / , I
L.-; · . .~ '/ ~ ,
Ii. l'o.. .
C .,. !"
G SII1t:t;I
ni :::
. . . ' L ~ : ~ -- - j~t - --
"&1e.'l
-~--- ~~ ~ '~l
;6 ..
MADRONA
.. - . .. I
I ,
I !
.. I
I ;i ~._
,<
SUBA
I
. :'",
rY'
-sua~ 3
~r=
l--
,
. ..-
!
-; ~.
ROOSEVELT ST
-- -- - -*--
SUBAREA 1B
ALVARADO
-- ---J
.
!
.
,
--
,
.
. - - - ~
i
--
l
I
.... ---
- .
- -.. "1
SUBAREA 4
.'or...
H S~I
L__
~ -
. .
"--- -----'
i
. j
I l
I r : i
1 '; I !! l i
SHASTA
STAt:J:1
L~. rTD, G.
: " \ t-'r\ '\" .-
GENERAL PLAN/ZONING CONSISTENCY
STUDY - SPECIAL STUDY AREA Bl
PART I
N
..
SCALE: I'. 300'
L~JTIERI.McIN1YRE AND ASSOCIATES
~.
.
l ~ - ,.-
I !
..i
1
:~"
I
. I
. I
W'
. f/) .
._-~,.
,
:
~-----_.-
I.. __ ,.
l"' . - - -
~
;
r" -..
i .
.
r.'. ...
,
,"- .
1. _ . .
(' _.: i
-L-.1 '
---, ) I
_..._~
, '
-- 'v";-
... - -. .
EXHIBIT
A
I
I
:h
i
- - ... -t
,
i
,
..._-~
!
F S~I
::N~~~~~ I, I .---
t ,PA F; ~.'- I!I · ~
. .:.'~ .,' ~ - - j ~
~ -: '. .:.. =, . L-- - - - ~
.. :' ~ :.: - " J <
STRrqEET I ~~ -,- J Cf) - __
I I j ..___...Jlll: ___
-4- ; _-: - l - . - -, I ~
!~l j I' F~~~--~--.l!i-~~-
/---- I .
j I I I CYPRESS . Em1=: I
lj-. i ',' !
r' . - -
, I
.'. f
'.! i- . - - , I
~: L -. - - -- h . - - . -
I - - . : :
! " - "
~ i
- - <
- - ~
-- - ~
- - -'1
I
-- ...
j
- -1
- - I
CENTER
--,
~~li
, '
MADRONA
S~I
..,j
. ; I
Iii
I . i
1 ! I
I. I' I
I .
STItt: I
i
i '
- -,
I
G
N
.
GENERAL PLAN/ZONING CONSISTENCY
STUDY - SPECIAL STUDY AREA Bl
PART II
EXHIBIT
B
I5CAL2: I'. 2llO'
LETHERI.McIN1YRE AND ASSOCIATES
L'2. -.
J
.
I~
r = : =1 I :
... - - -I
. I
L--j
I. I
l---i----
I .
~I
I
I
H~;
I I
,
!
;
i
iLJ I
I
I I 1.
~ t - -
1 I
I I
! I
~--l I
.
;
i
,
I
I
I
it-__ i--
<I . , <
t _ _ _ _- - - - - _
I -----1 r-_
.- - - -~ - - - ~ I ..
I SUBAREA 1 i
- - - -I r -- - ., !
. ",.' - .'. I
~ .... . .....
DAVDSON STR=I
- . ."...
,
I
- '~--1
I
i
i~
~,
.
If/)
l~
10
'I,
-
.
II
F t
Ctlt'lt:l
I I
GENERAL PLAN/ZONING CONSISTENCY
STUDY - SPECIAL STUDY AREA Bl
PART III - SUBAREA 1
. LErnERI-McINTYRE AND ASSOCIATES
'2.-
N
..
E STRt:t:1
I
I
.~ -... ~
L _ _ ._.
I r---~-'
I r - - - -- -,
--ill : i
- --,
I
LANSELY WAY
. .
. I I
'j
- - - ~ , .
.
I 1 I
. r---
I i f
I ! ,
, I!I
,
--j !
I
I '~t
Ii
t
SCALI!: I". 2llO'
MONTEBEU..O
; I
_ _ _ .i .
I
I
- - - I
,
- --1
I
EXHIBIT
. C
-
'-
i
!
---i
i
E
I
I
I
-11
(~I
~~~t
..+
I
--1
i
...... n. .._n .._
,
.. ---1
i
.
I
- r-
I
,
I
L-..
i
!
DAVDSON
STREET
f
>l
-j
f
"'. '." C
l..\ji
"''''),,\-E-
\"'::";'1 ; ~
I,... ~ Ii
lr. .....
I
i
I
1
.
.
,
I
Ii
il(
I
S"T11= I
! ! Ii liF=
-1 ~--l ~"r:=
I' I
~, t----
I i.11 ! - -
. 1-____
I '-----;1 ~- ---
r--t, 1---
I I . ,
im. ;1
'~HI
I It
I FL' BR~Ry'(:'p~~~~'l L__l-
iii" --- "r . :.- . . 'I
I r ><;'~ :'..' ;: ~<"~~,, :J,:..
:< \.', ~.' . .,': ~ ., ._~'. r
I · .
I .
i
r
I
,
,
1---
i
r --
~_. -
I
I
(HULA VISTA
PUBLIC LIBRARY
N
..
GENERAL PLAN/ZONING CONSISTENCY
STUDY - SPECIAL STUDY AREA Bl
PART III - SUBAREA 2
EXHIBIT
. D
SCAl..e 1-. "Jar
LETIlERI.McINTVRE AND ASSOCIATES
-.J
MIH DR, -', il~..'::Jlr ,. - I I
!!L-jli':-In
"I .,," SnlEET
.' , ~~__! ;=5f-
, ~--.
>;'-' f--c ~ .- .,-
=J~u r f.
',1 f ' "
~i --
, 'ef::
-",' -
I --
'L.Jt:
51
" '.. "'" I' I
P. "Y,' ~&IIK, I"..
..".~ ~--. ~,-. '"r r .":
P'," ".' --....
P .;. ,""...-.
CIVIC
CENTE ettULA VISTA .
PUSLIC LIBRAI!tY I
Ii
... ~_._~-:"'...
~c
'.
i ,I II '
.-I '_
,
- RC-
,
)
1-
,
: I
~~, .DR, j
~t - ;. ~--I
HDR
. '-PRK' ,
. ", '"
. "'E"OR'AL PARK "',
-"" . ~ , ~ .
. ',' ....
1"l ~7'~:-~ I_
i! ! : .: :-;-1 I, !
: ,
lEI'
"!! ,
~I
;~I I;;; 11
~ ~:.:'-'---'--'--';'!
pap ,- f-!' . ~
I !- f--. i i'" t'J , I
~c, 5 v 'T
r-~ I !! i I .\
I II ! , ' ~,
h=dil ii,1 I
hi ':'1'
!,I-~',I!.
I! LU f1Pn
\ I' -mr[----iB
Ef-3 ~ . ~f-4~~ PAC
. -h ~~~t:::J
AY I
:
:
iERALi
I
:L__
,~-
5, .
H~-
~
OSP.
..' ,.
"C . .1
." '1 t::::J
, d::...d
-"- .",j
-- - = ,.~ 1=
-1,- I-
:: ~\~I~:~I;'."
==
= = .......
==1
- -
- -"
- 5= - ._ =
:U~l
il- ,
-- -
.. -
~t~:~,j
-i:t fr ,T [..... ."
III .. I-- ......, "
i" => I-- . ,',';'" ..
\Wf-- > ' rill:
.. c' ... . _. .
-, K "" ~ ,PART'
. ',:?:>.~ ,.,',. ,
1.'\1'~,': />/.~ ,"', l~' t
;~//I--
, . l'
oCl LiM DR
't !
I'
,
" .
" .
, ,
j', ; I
. , ,...;
......:I"""i ~ t"
'-l I--
==
- ---1
'.
% ..
'-'
" .
,
_L
'. '
,
"
"
fwrr I
Q
a: . ,
i
0-
I .,
.AS A I.!..I.!UlT
I I I I r' "I i i.J \
N
-0.
GENERAL PLAN/ZONING CONSISTENCY
STUDY - SPECIAL STUDY AREA 81
SURROUNDING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS
SCAI..E: 1-. 600'
LETIIERI-McINTYRE AND ASSOCIATES
1-2-1"
t u:G[ND
L{M DR 1Aw/Mediaa Dcaaily
, .. '.1 (U doll<)
NDR _DaoiIyR '. '1.'
r (~lldo/lC)
NtH DR N_1HiP Dcaaily
t D .. '.1 (11-18 dull<)
H DR HiP Dc.iry D .... "';.1
(18-27 dolo<)
RC __ r ....
pop PabIi< lid 0a0Ii Public
PAC fl, . .16. ..........:.,...uve
?,,:,..-vci&I
PRK Porblld_
i :- >- 'm~~~
.. l - . j~1-
r'..- . I-
'. , :r-~' "",,-
...~nl\"-
:::1 : · r..,IWI, gn L
F
" "', ' I J I , '
:- -.1.' r-'--:"'- ",.LL
... , T-
, W, o-l-I-
. _.-- I -'-
,,' :' ; . , ~ .
:! '. .! i Ii I---:- ~
yt, ST.I' l-
i,;'; -
...
::>
,Z
-- ...
>
c
;
i
, ,
'i;'!, 1- ~ I-
, 'I,
.
,
.
..
t z
l.J
..
-
'.
...-
',"
";,,.
';~ !~~:PIi' ~~
'~'C >?~'.I
i i i; I!. !....
; ; , ' . ';"1-- '-- ~ "'. .
.... ~ !!IllffiM..'
't-- i}/.
":> r" '....d I
.._.___" l..
:.:-::_> :::- ~CS::
..--. .--- I---:: '
_ -.- --- . -',. !""
-,~
.--J'i-- .,-'.
.H.
1
i
............
.., ',.-
...,.-
.., '--
..-
..I-
f-;
-+-HI III'-
-+- h-\,\ ii'
=i- ",. ,
.....-;~; ..,
I,~ ' ~~
11 '. ' '", I---.::
EXHIBIT
E
,
eTp1
!
I
f R2P
A-3..;f!
..\
r! 1(""
..,
~i
ee CCP CO~'i1
R2P
R-3
:I~\-
CT
. E"
~
~
.~
.eo_ -j
I
j
i i
i.__
,
, !
R3P
fl.oJi
i~i
i-..lf
~~: !~l
-PART _W
-'<0.,;'
;='~
;Z.
.'-'1.._...._
/,-'- '"-..,
~~:-~:ft :3.
,.
,
~ -1
...._i~1
:;:::!
, j,j
'....
, j:.l!
~ ::i
';:00'
"' ; ~,
:
,....,
~z
.- ..~.
':It ,--'I
;~':'j
';;1--
J
~~. ",:.,v\
! r---, (
~ .,..~... . .'
I :~ '""
. i......
...~
..~ ;~;
~..., 1'~
~~~>.:: -~- ' \
, -./
, :R-1
~ t--
:C':Ol'
~AR.. lI'tvf ....K ; '.
lie
.V,C co ' ,
:E~TEP 1 '~oIl'
I' c.." ',.,.r. ..~.
='-<" ~:e~t.~)'
i
, .
. ---. - ------
<:10
i
, i
! -
t~ a_
,
;-
0: .1
. :COPi
~--_.-
! ..-
'. .'
" '-:;':)
i
.,
"-:-1.
: 3k'r-'"
,
,CJ
=1
;
I ~
I
eal
;
!
,-
. /.-",
:' / '\, \
!"l:'
~:!i
~=i
~- t ..~.JiM.C.Ni
~-- R 3 HilA" ~ :
, I
ec
i i
""-t'
10.
i n_ .i~t-----..
iWI__. _"';i--/-
.:=Ii .'_
1~1
:>1
iCl
k!
ii,
. jj- ~
; ..
:-"1 "'.4
.;~ 1~
+
R3
HP
coo
w
j :;
Z'
Wi
>,
."
, ,
. ,
: t
',;-.",c-':'o
:':";:.:r::!-:s
~
"
t-:.__~~: -J~-
U- ,Z~ .;~
;".i .;1
nO r ~ I-
i . \" __ i
i'"-""~""-'""'''-''''''''''''"-'u_"",,~,...L._,.,..
,
>;
~;
PARK
\.~::MOR1~"l.L
.; to;,....; :: r~;..
;JI....
.. ::. ~
R~
. I
I', __
I f-----
i 1"",,[ ::::::
'01
t I~i--- / n
I~! ......-1 !
l'"r--R:1~~~[ ~~
r -=-~:._:,;;t ...-=-::
j i
1
i
I
\~
---~ l :
. \\
..,~'.
-,,//,'
'I ""'~
(~
\",i-...- .-.' .
jt.-_~
'.:r-\L
-=~j~~----=~:_~ ~
i.---.i ;
"I'"
. r--i r-i
11- :~f-= ~~I'.~ .
I r::-JI=-~'.~\../": .-:=
R-1 nm f.;,~ 0~i5. _.
I j -; r-'l \! f. -~-i !:H.'~." . '.=-.-.;1:'1 .~
,;
, I
R-3
'.':i
,~I
I!'
,~I
I .
, I
-tc
!
L- ,~.
'70:::
..c-
~.
':"L~'
..0
"'l ..
~I-
"r ......
. -- --j: .---
'0
I:
':C'Sf' '''f.L T
,Y
COP
"';-'
~ - ,. "'''.-
-,
I
l__
ERA,
I
j ! +-
,sp
PART I
:0:
~
.'
CQI-
1
I
'-'
P
i
I::::!-'---
W!----...
,>;....--
01-'"
CC
R-1 -
:,::.'7':.
N
..
GENERAL PLAN/ZONING CONSISTENCY
STUDY - SPECIAL STUDY AREA Bl
EXHIBIT
F
SCALE: 1-. 600'
SURROUNDING ZONING
LEITIERI-McINlYRE AND ASSOCIATES
:J. z-,L
ORDINANCE NO. ~~~~
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA REZONING CERTAIN
TERRITORY WITHIN THE CENTRAL CHULA VISTA COMMUNITY,
GENERALLY BOUNDED BY E STREET, H STREET, SECOND AVENUE
AND THIRD AVENUE, PLUS AN ADDITIONAL AREA EAST OF FOURTH
AVENUE BETWEEN "E" AND DAVIDSON STREETS, TO GENERALLY
REDUCE THE EXISTING PERMITTED DENSITIES FROM R-3 TO
LESSER DENSITIES, AS DEPICTED ON EXHIBITS A, B, C, AND D
ATTACHED HERETO.
WHEREAS, the Council has studied the feasibility and propriety
of replanning and rezoning an area referred to as the General
Plan/Zoning Consistency Study Special Study Area B-1 in Central
Chula vista which is generally bounded by "E" Street on the north,
"H" Street on the south, Second Avenue on the east, and Third
Avenue on the west and, in addition, includes a small area located
east of Fourth Avenue between "E" and Davidson Streets, and
described in Exhibit E, attached hereto, as Parts 1 through 3,
inclusive ("Study Area"); and
WHEREAS, said study area includes approximately 50 acres and
219 lots and was divided into three subareas to facilitate analysis
and working with the community; Part I generally includes the
southern area located between "H" and "G" Streets, which area is
represented in the map attached hereto as Exhibit A by the darkened
lines and the "subarea" designations; Part II includes the central
area located between "G" and "F" Streets, which area is represented
in the map attached hereto as Exhibit B. by the containment within
the darkened lines demonstrated thereon; and Part III includes the
northern area located between "F" and "E" Streets, which area is
represented in the map attached hereto as Exhibit C as Subarea 1,
as well as the small area adjacent to Fourth Avenue, which area is
represented in the map attached hereto as Exhibit D as Subarea 2;
and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator conducted an
Initial Study, IS-91-13, of potential environmental impacts
associated with the implementation of the proposed rezonings and
General Plan amendments and based on the Initial Study and comments
thereon, the Coordinator has concluded that this reclassification
would cause no significant environmental impacts as per the
Negative Declaration issued on IS-91-13; and,
WHEREAS, on April 10, 1991, the Planning commission recom-
mended approval by a vote of 6-0-1 (Commissioner Martin abstained)
of the revisions to the Land Use and Land Use Diagram of the Land
Use Element of the General Plan provided for in Council Resolution
No. 1 and of the rezoning of said Study Area in the
manner herein provided; and,
1
12.-11
WHEREAS, at the Council Meetings at which this Ordinan~e was
introduced, the City Council adopted Resolution No. ~
amending the General Plan to permit increased planning dens1t1es 1n
the manner therein provided ("General Plan Amendment"); and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the reductions
in densities permitted by this rezoning is consistent with the
increased densities permitted by the General Plan Amendment; and,
Now, therefore, the City Council of the city of Chula vista
does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. Rezoning.
That the Study Area is hereby rezoned so that subareas
denominated in the Table below, which are designated and described
on the named Exhibits (attached hereto), shall be changed from the
zoning designation in the column entitled "Existing Zoning" to the
zoning designation in the column entitled "Proposed Zoning":
Exhibit
Existing
Zoninq
Proposed
Zoninq
Part 1:
Area lA
Area IB
Area 2
Area 3
Area 4
Part 2 :
Part 3 :
Area 1
Area 2
A R-3 R-3-P-22
A R-3 R-3-P-14
A R 3 R 3 (No Change)
A R-3 R-l
1l.. R 3 R 3 (No Change)
B R-3 R-3-P-14
C
D
R-3
c-o & C-O-P
R-3-P-22
C-O-P
SECTION 2. Special Development Standard Requirements for Zone
with "P"-modifier relating to Destruction of Pre-existing, Non-
conforming Use.
For those above designated subareas containing the "P"
modifier in their zoning designation,2 as part of the development
standards that the city will incorporate into any precise plans for
the development or use of property within said subareas, one such
development standard shall be that, notwithstanding section
19.64.150 of the Chula vista Municipal Code, all existing uses
within the Study Area which are made non-conforming as a result of
this action shall be allowed to be reconstructed in the event of
destruction even if the degree of destruction is greater than 60%
of the property's improvements, subject to review and approval of
2
1z....ii
the Planning commission. The Council finds that this mandatory
development standard is necessary to accomplish the council's
objective in this particular case, to wit: to stabilize the
existing neighborhood from further increases in density.
SECTION 3. School Impact Fees Policy.
As a matter of policy, the city of Chula vista shall enforce
such legal mechanisms sponsored by the Chula vista School District
and the Sweetwater Union High School District as may be approved by
the City to mitigate impacts on school facilities.
SECTION 4: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full
force on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption.
Presented by
Robert A. Leiter, Director of
Planning
Bruce M.
C ty Attorney
studyb11.wp
Endnotes (Not Part of Final Ordinance).
1. Insert Council Reso No. on General Plan Amendments.
3
1:z.-ii(
PROOF OF PUBUCATlON
(2015.5 C.C.P.)
5T ATE OF CALIFORNIA,
County of San Diego:
I am a citizen of the United States and a
resident of the County aforesaid; I am over
the age of eighteen years, and not a party
to or interested in the above-entitled matter.
I am the principal clerk of the printer of the
CHULA VISTA ST AI-NEWS, a newspaper of
general circulation, printed and published
TWICE WEEKLY in the City of Chula Vista,
and the South Bay Judicial District, County of
San Diego, State of California, under the date
of Aug. 8, 1932, Case Number 71752; that
the notice, of which the annexed is a printed
copy (set in type not smaller than nonpareil),
has been published in each regular and entire
issue of said newspaper and not in any supple-
ment thereof on the following dates, to-wit:
6/22
all in the year 19.~..1......
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that
the foregoing is true and correct.
Dated at ......C.h.!JJ.iI..J..i.S.t.iI.............................
California, this2.2.. day oilun.e.............., 19 .9.1.
...~~....~~........
1J.-J.."jlJ.-
:xlstlng:uses,wittlln::'thEIr"f) ,A..:;-,,:: ,", .
conformrng as:aresultof.thl& "h8II,IJi.~" _ j
structed In the'ev8ntofdestn::lctfo~aV8rtiJ~~<l-::;r::....~ .,
tfon Is greater than 60% Qf the-Prci'p&rqf'S 'mplOve~_J8ct
to review and approval of the Pfaming, Commrselan:. 'll'teCpanclt
finds th,at this mandatory development atandardds nec:euat:Y to
accomplish the Council's Objective In thla panlcularCU8r;..tDrwft:. tD
slabiUe the,81'istlng neigh,borh~ from ~~}n_c::", cfe~~,
slty,. -$ - ~':' "-'''' "~'I - -..
SECTION3:::-&hQOllmp;ict~ pon~~:;;'-;'i':'-""
..:_- ." , c'',;,''~', :t~', , {/',_c,~<;
As a matter of polley, the C1~ofChula"""ta:sI!'l81l sUd't'
legal mechanisms sponsored the Chula Vista . District
and the Sweetwater Union HIgSchool OIstl'lct as.m~~.be ap-
proved by the CIty to mitigate Irnpactaornchootracllllies..." ",.
SECTION 4: ThlaardlnanC8-ahatUakaaftectalAdibaJn;Wlifbfce
on the thIrtieth day: from. aru:i.,:\~~~",~,:",;"M~.\IOn,
Presented by Approved as to form by' ," :'-";_;_-:/\'!:~'~"~itar ,.
>cc"-\-,/'".+,':"'E1:fMctor
"-BrtJCeM,~arcf
CI1y_OV-
Pfan~~
CV01939
Proof of Pub:icatian of
.... ...!J.r..ct...... 2.11.6.2.. .............. ..... ........ ..... ..............
ORDINANCE NO,2462
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA REZONING I
CERTAIN TERRITORY WITHIN THE CEN-TRALCHUlA VISTA
COMMUNITY, GENERALLY BOUNDED BY 3 STRE.ET, H
STREET, SECOND AVENUE AND TI-URD AVENUE, PLUS AN I
ADDITIONAL AREA EAST OF FOUR1H AVENUE BETWEEN
"E" AND DAVIDSON STREETS, TO GENERALLY REDUCE
THE EXISTING PERMITTED DENSITIES FROM R-3- TO lES"
SER DENSITIES, AS DEPICTED ON EXHIBITS A" B"C, AND D
ATTACHED HERETO.
WHE REAS, the Council has studied the feasibility and propriety
of replanning and rezoning an area referred to,as- th8:,Ganera~
Pian/Zoning Consistency Studv Spedal,StudyAreaB-11r.Lc::8ntral
Chula Vista which Is generalry bounded by "E" Street 'qry"the
north"H Street on the south, Secom:1- Avenue on,the. 88$t, and
Third Avenue on the west and,ln addltlan'~ Includes. a amalliarea
located east 01 Fourth Avenue belWeen"E"and Davidson I
Streets,and described in Exlbit E,attached hereto,as. ,parts 1
through 3,inciuslve("Study Area"); and ..... ~_ . .
WHEREAS, said study area Includes approximately 50 acres;
and 219 lots and was divided into threesUbal'888 to "facilitate i
analysis and working with the community;, Part I gen&rally In-. I
eludes the southern area located betweel\ "H"and ''G''.Streets,
which area is represented in Ihe map atlaC:l:ledhereto$s ExhlbltA
by the,darkened lines and the'''s-ubare~''deslwn:atlons:, Part U in-
cludes the central area located between "G. and, "f"',.Straets"
which area is represented In the map attact:led'ltr.aretQaS::E.xh1b1t
B. by the containment within the darkened'llnes,demlmslrated
thereon: and Part III includes the northern~ar..a.locatBGU;letween.
"F" and "E" Streets, which area Is rlipresented: 1q..U)a ~atta-
ched hereto as Exhibit C as Subarea t. _as well a ,tbaamait~"
adjacent to Fourth Avenue, which areali fepT8~, In;~,map:
attached hereto as ExhibitDas Subarea2~and ." ..,',< ;,__~.-,'"1'
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordlnatoac:oQdUcted
an Initial Study, IS-9t-13, of potentla~ envlronmentat I~aa-
sociated with the implementation of the. proposed: ~ezorJli'ltJ;,and
General Plan amendments and based- on' the- Inttlat StlKiY and
comments thereon, the Coordinator has conduded that' thl& ~..
classification would cause no slgnlflcant.envlronmentBt;lmpatts I
as per the Negative Declaration Issued on IS-91-13~anct,lio;',:;;>,-
WHEREAS, on April 10,1991, th8'Plannlng CommlsunJac.:
ommendedapprova~ by a vote of 6-0-1 (CammlsslonerMert;ln ab-
stained) of the revisions to the land Use' and Land Use-OlBaram
of the Land Use Element of the General Plan provided. tor In
Council Resolution No. 16199 and of the- rezoning. at safa.,Stt.tdy
Area in the manner herein provided; and",,~':'~ ~,-
WHEREAS, at the CoundF Meetings at whlch- tills. Ordinance
was introduced, the City Council, adopted ResoltltlOl:ltNo.
--amending, the General Plan to permit Increased pIaoninQ
desities in the manner therein provided ("General Pia"" Amencf,.
ment"); and, . '. . ~
WHEREAS, the Ci~ Council has determined tI:lat tl'reredUc-
tions in densities permitted by this rezoning Is ccnslstentwllilthe
increased densities permitted by the, GenEJraI; fllar--Am8I:'1Ument;
an~ow, therefore, the City Councll'of ttie Clty-of'ChUIB Vlsta:~ I
ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. Rezoning. ; ..' . ',.' -~ ,
That the-Study Area Is_hereby rezoned, SO matSUbar:eas,de-
nomlnated-' in the Table below, whiCh: ara>deslgnared ilndl Iii&-
scribed on. the named Exhibits (.ttachedthetero1~~.hall" be
changed from tl"Ie zoning designation 11');!he'columnlilflil1lW "(:ld&1;-
lng Zoning:' to;,the zoning-desfgnalfonirtthe CQ~umn,ntlJl~d "pr.o--
posed Zoning :'::;'c';, ,<-. .'.'-",:,~--,-,,<<'.':'.
EXHIBIT . EXiSnI!lG 'PilOPbsED
ZOI':lNG' .ZOfjI\I(G
,. ~,C~" ,,.'.c
R.J .R-3:P-22
R~ R-3-e'of4
R-3 R-t '"
PART 1:
Area tA
Area 1 B
Area 3
A
A
A
PART 2:
B R.J R-3-f>-t4
PART 3:
Arp';l1 C R-3 R-S-P.22
!u
~
~
IQ
~
~
;U
~
~
~
~
~
"\1 t-: ,~i~C:
PARKWAr ':~'" /:h
. :ILJ I ~ ld~,.,' '~.' ~
i ! I ' K-l
J I "I
G SIItCI
~ ~
, -1 l i
, ' 1 ~ l'
I J
LJ
. ~ } - --
i I
, ,
--~---~ :
, ,
-: ..
; }-
;~t ---
,< --
'0
~l
ROOSEVELT ST
- - - ---.l
,
MADRONA
SUBAREA 1A
SUBA
h//
---sua~ 3
~r=
<-
I
l--
,
---t
.-..---
i
_n_
.
__n__n_
I
----j t ~ -
~. . . -
.
.
t
SHASTA
f
I
SUBAREA 18
ALVARADO
SUBAREA 4
H S~I
- n. _ ~ ,
1. i
.. ' ,
I :~I
:~$.
i<1
,
.
I
,
t - .- .-
.
"4
~
;
- -.
1
I
l'
-
,---,..'
~i
->>J;
- -. '- . - - ..
_ _ m _ .. _. .. _ _
,
.
- - .. - ~
1-_._______
,-----
--.....
:r- - - - -
;._.~-,.-
0.-. .
L~8;
t----
! ;
---, /'-
V !
- - -. ,
SlRt:t:.1
rkI=' if
,_ r~ .~, L ,-1
- :, ~ ~ ~ '
N
~
GENERAL PLAN/ZONING CONSISTENCY
STUDY - SPECIAL STUDY AREA Bl
PART I
SCALE: t.. 300'
Lt;TnERI.McIN1YRE AND ASSOCIATES
.12. -23
EXHIBIT
A
! i
U<
~
i
F STItt: I
t N-~R~~ il. 1___ . ~
,P A Fi 1<-- ~ ~ J. ~ , - - - ~ ~
~ -~',.:_.'- - L - . - .- --Jj.: _-_-. ~ ~....l 0<
,- ,. r ~ .
, -' I - . J'
STREET Ii"
rrl I - . - _I - - - . - - .
, ~,' _1'. L, - -.:. - - ~; - - - . -- 4
.... . : ~o t
. r-.-------4 -- ---1
! i!l j
r- - - - -- -. 1 ~ !- - - ~ -- 1
~-_.- i j --~
I ;. !
CYPRESS SI ~ I
CENTER
~
I !,
I l~'
n~l
L - - - J !
~ . ~
~
I
r---
r - - -
I
L _ __
!
r---
I
----...-...----
MADRONA
SlHt:e1
,
,
, ,
I i
! I'
I i
t i
, ;
, ,
, ,
,
i '
;
G ~I
GENERAL PLAN/ZONING CONSISTENCY
STUDY - SPECIAL STUDY AREA Bl
N
..
PART II
SCALE: 1-. Dr
LETI1ERI-McINTYRE AND ASSOCIATES
1.:% .. Z.
I
--,
. - i i
_ _ ~ 8
--i>>J
I
- - - ..!
---....
,
I
- -t I
EXHIBIT
B
, ,
,- -
. I
I !
1 I
I I
I~
!
!
1
mt--- i~--
<I, <
; - - - -- - - - -, -
I - - - - .,
I ~~BiREA -~ ~ ~
~ r-----. ~:
_ __ _\ . I
~ : : =1 i,
~ - - - \ '
~--~
I '
L - - ~-- - -
I !
DAVDSON
S'TRt: I
!
,
!
j
~!
,
I
i~;
I I
I
i
I
- . " - ,
- . - - -1
1
I I
.
~~
el
i .
,CI>
!~
10
l~,
I
i
I
f
I
I
I I
F S1'Fa: I
I
...... " \ ..... -, "- "
:-- " .'
1.
I I
GENERAL PLAN/ZONING CONSISTENCY
STUDY - SPECIAL STUDY AREA Bl
PART III - SUBAREA 1
LETllERI.McIN1YRE AND ASSOCIATES
I
- - - ~
. i
I
E SI~1
I
f
I
... - - . """'l
i ;... - - - : .. .,",
. I
i r-- q-
I ~ I
--1~l ; .
- - -..
J LANSEI.. Y WAY
,
_ _ _ ~ i !
, .
!
-
.. }
I.
I ;
I
I
---1
I
i
~!l
I~t
t
:~
!~
MONTEBELLO
c---:
!
- - - .
I
- - - ..,
N
..
EXHIBIT
C
SC\J..E: 1-. 200'
~ l
i l----
-- -. -
,
L _ _ _..
I
, '. 1 ' ,
i.' ~ - ,6 or' , ~' . . ; I
~ ' .- ,j !
1 . .' ,".,', I I -,
! r :Ll ~~.A~Y ; ~ARK/! t~ -..
I ~ L ' .. ,"' "." . i
I j':" -: .'. i ';: ,-," -,' - ~,~ ,- I
I' "' r-
IlL ; .
I .
j
I
, '
-
I
1
,
!
ii
I
I
I
!
,
j
, - -,
i
E
SlRt:t:.1
I
'-
m -.: !
I
,
\~ t
-CCI
~e~
L
I
I
--,-~, - ~ r -
,
I
!---
I
I
I
I
,
I
r
I
[\ !ill
---1 ~'----l
, ,
. I
~ I ,;
I ,
I "
I '.1'
'H' :1
f
II
'~~i
I~Hl
I L
I
.. + .----t
i
-
~
.
J
DAVDSON
STREET
!
) I
"
f
l
I
-
r'\ "e
'-' ./i
"'~1o.'-E-
\."....;'t; ~
(HULA VISTA
PU8,L1C LIBRARY
1.- ~ Ii
ii. ....;
GENERAL PLAN/ZONING CONSISTENCY
STUDY - SPECIAL STUDY AREA Bl
N
"0-
EXHIBIT
, D
PART III - SUBAREA 2
SCALE: 1-. 200'
LETIlERI.McINTYRE AND ASSOCIATES
~----
...
,- --
.
i- --
i
r--
~- -
I
I
~
I MIH oRl-+ jlL -'- ..-7
I !:TUI :::-!!;:
L..lmt "EO STREET
1 r-Trr =~.. r=t""i pr-
_ !--I-::.i '
4- >>-'-, --' ~ '
3t ~" J l. ."-
, R'~'-' f... ~.
, . t.- c::
. '. ,'.,' 'I' I :-
, =iR lJu i'-- '-~
!Tlrn~; i .
ilki -- -~.
HI _.~:~- f--
'I 'l~'-~.-
. ,1-.
. ,.-
. : LUt::
1>-
~DA
-
-
-.
4
:>
_C
=>
. ..
==
-
. -
. --
. .-
~
~ p. r"~'PIy Jt~,
P"!P' .... .,.
Ci'~~CE ~ el-lULA VIST""
PUBI..IC LIBRARY
51
, . : ! ,,'
.. '~--~F ~C
. I '
Re-
, I H OR '~
, I, -
~r.J..'DR J ..,. :'~E~'J:f!~' PARi< .>-,
"'1- : .---! . '--. .:.. .' .... "",
,.
I J;l ;'
, -
h~ ~7--J f
I I I I
[
ai I: i
I
II'
_' .,11,;,
; . ~___'-l.-1..-'-,~.___
PQ~ ~, .':...'.'rn. .R : L__
I t:.:1i' !' I ,~
~OOSEV 1 srq
I' q, ,.In!~
II I ,J11 IS:r ~
I FR: ,---.. ,.>----i., ',~~ PAC
-"'1 ~~~p
t U:GEND
L/M DR Low/Mcdium Deasity
D ., "01 (3-6 clu/l<)
M DR Medium DcasilyR.......;.1
r (6-11 clu/l<)
MtH DR _/>tip Deasity
t D ... ":.1 (11-18 dujac)
H DR HiP DeaIiry p '" .....1
(18-27 clu/l<)
RC _ Ccamcn:ial
pop PubIi< IIIlI 0.. PubIi<:
PAC PrM---_1 ... .a..4_n.i...rativc
Ccamcn:ial
PRK _1IIlI_
. ... f-- ~- ' - '--10m' c-
.. -_ -, f- '- , . 1~. ii-
_""'"1 - - -r '. ~ : J;~
-5--i ~::~. :,' :. . . '"f~~ (\~-
:U5 ' I , ~ ...,:: ...,... anti I .
_ 't .o.~ ~. -- I- _ -I-, .~ : ,l fl-L
== I...~.~ '-.;:.:.:,; --- - - -~
E PA.. ru:: ;- H,,- ~ =
- '" l....I"'\.J-~_
-.- ~/ '-
~llfl ,.:.:... ".. ... ~ ~' :': ,'-
~ - f-'W . >1 II- -
z ---ii, -- .e i Jl,.,,~
'" := I~f- f-' , RE CYPRESS ST. ~ -
,.jC . i: ,i _~-
~:- t:: PART I: i, '
,~ '':::>;>- r ... RO~ ...
IK-'~t= .... ~ ""'" I-C-
. "K , . , ' , . ' "r ", i . . ' , i , ' ,"1 (
L'MDA l: "c.
, . .... ." " 1=-.
5'" . .~--, ", ,~QIf , . A=.?
X:J' t .::~?7~
- -.: z .... r_ ilIl5!!'...L ~
i-- ~ ".
. .' i I ~P__.~-~ri~~
.__~ O~
.~.::..:= --;-~
-:.~
. ,
I
.'1 .' I t::.j
~~
~_...,
-::::1.. ~
..~ f-
'Z f-
f-
[....
I""
-- -
z
...
:~. ~ ---1:;1 ::>..
.. ... t. ..
.- --
tt Fe
. .
_L.... .
---
, ,
, ,'.
-.
'f'"
PART I
...- -
- *H-
~.. ':::l- --i ! i ! I :'-
~ ..-----. i' '-E ' -,\,'.I!:1
"~TA' 'm,uT ::t= =r-- \ ~ ~rtD
r' : : j f r -; { ; u r-r-l ~~:ij "-<,,'~ ...'
N
~
GENERAL PLAN/ZONING CONSISTENCY
STUDY - SPECIAL STUDY AREA B1
EXHIBIT
E
SURROUNDING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS ~lO.~
LETTIERI-McINTIRE AND ASSOCIATES tz-zi
TInS PAGE BLANK
12-28
RESOLUTION NO.~
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE CHULA VISTA GENERAL
PLAN FOR SPECIAL STUDY AREA B-1 IN CENTRAL
CHULA VISTA TO GENERALLY INCREASE THE DENSITY
DESIGNATION IN THE LAND USE ELEMENT FOR SAID
AREA.
The City Council of the City of Chula vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, this item involves amending the General Plan
for an area referred to as the General Plan/Zoning Consistency
Study Special Study Area B-1 in Central Chula Vista which is
generally bounded by "E" Street on the north, "H" Street on the
south, Second Avenue on the east, and Third Avenue on the west
and, in addition, includes a small area located east of Fourth
Avenue between "E" and Davidson streets, and described in Exhibit
E, attached hereto, as Parts 1 through 3, inclusive; and
WHEREAS, said study area includes approximately 50 acres
and 219 lots and was divided into three subareas to facilitate
analysis and working with the community; Part I generally
includes the sou thern area located between "H" and "G" Streets,
which area is represented in the map attached hereto as Exhibit A
by the darkened lines and the "subarea" designations; Part II
includes the central area located between "G" and "F" streets,
which area is represented in the map attached hereto as Exhibit
B. by the containment within the darkened lines demonstrated
thereon; and Part III includes the northern area located between
"F" and "E" streets, which area is represented in the map
attached hereto as Exhibit C as Subarea 1, as well as the small
area adjacent to Fourth Avenue, which area is represented in the
map attached hereto as Exhibit D as Subarea 2; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator conducted
an Initial Study, IS-91-13, of potential environmental impacts
associated with the implementation of the proposed rezonings and
General plan amendments and based on the Initial Study and
comments thereon, the Coordinator has concluded that th is
reclassification would cause no significant environmental impacts
as per the Negative Declaration issued on IS-91-13; and
WHEREAS, on April 10, 1991, the Planning Commission
recommended approval by a vote of 6-0-1 (Commissioner Martin
abstained) of the revisions to the Land Use and Land Use Diagram
of the Land Use Element of the General Plan herein provided for;
NOW,
the City of
Designations,
Diagram, for
forth below:
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
Chula vista does hereby amend the Land Use
and the corresponding sections of the Land Use
the Land Use Element of the General Plan as set
j:z. - jJ
l.
"Subarea lAw
"Low-Medium"
For that portion of Part I as shown
and Subarea la, from a Land Use
to a designation of "Medium-High".
on Exhibit A as
Designation of
2. For that portion of Part I as shown on Exhibit A as
"Subarea 2", from a Land Use Designation of "Low-Medium" to a
designation of "High".
3.
"Subarea 3",
"Low-Medium"
For that portion of Part I
no change such that the
remains as "Low-Medium".
as shown on Exhibit A as
Land Use Designation of
4. For that portion of Part 1 as shown on Exhibit A as
"Subarea 4", from a Land Use Designation of "Medium Hight" to a
designation of "High".
5. For all of Part 2 as shown on Exhibit B, from a Land
Use Designation of "Medium High" to a designation of "High".
6. For that portion of Part 3 as shown on Exhibit C as
"Subarea 1", from a Land Use Designation of "Low Medium" to a
designation of "Medium High".
7. For that portion of Part 3 as shown on Exhibit D as
"Subarea 2", from a Land Use Designation of "High" to a
designation of "Professional and Administrative ommercial".
Presented by
ved as
~
Robert A. Leiter, Director of
Planning
8942a
i3z.-i8
RESOLUTION NO. 16199
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AMENDING THE CHULA VISTA GENERAL PLAN FOR SPECIAL STUDY AREA
B-1 IN CENTRAL CHULA VISTA TO GENERALLY INCREASE THE DENSITY
DESIGNATION IN THE LAND USE ELEMENT FOR SAID AREA.
The City Council of the city of Chula vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, this item involves amending the General Plan for an
area referred to as the General Plan/Zoning Consistency Study
Special study Area B-1 in Central Chula vista which is generally
bounded by "E" Street on the north, "H" Street on the south, Second
Avenue on the east, and Third Avenue on the west and, in addition,
includes a small area located east of Fourth Avenue between "E" and
Davidson Streets, and described in Exhibit E, attached hereto, as
Parts 1 through 3, inclusive; and
WHEREAS, said study area includes approximately 50 acres and
219 lots and was divided into three subareas to facilitate analysis
and working with the community; Part I generally includes the
southern area located between "H" and "G" Streets, which area is
represented in the map attached hereto as Exhibit A by the darkened
lines and the "subarea" designations; Part II includes the central
area located between "G" and "F" Streets, which area is represented
in the map attached hereto as Exhibit B. by the containment within
the darkened lines demonstrated thereon; and Part III includes the
northern area located between "F" and "E" Streets, which area is
represented in the map attached hereto as Exhibit C as Subarea 1,
as well as the small area adjacent to Fourth Avenue, which area is
represented in the map attached hereto as Exhibit D as Subarea 2;
and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator conducted an
Initial Study, IS-91-13, of potential environmental impacts
associated with the implementation of the proposed rezonings and
General Plan amendments and based on the Initial Study and comments
thereon, the Coordinator has concluded that this reclassification
would cause no significant environmental impacts as per the
Negative Declaration issued on IS-91-13; and
WHEREAS, on April 10, 1991, the Planning commission
recommended approval by a vote of 6-0-1 (Commissioner Martin
abstained) of the revisions to the Land Use and Land Use Diagram of
the Land Use Element of the General Plan herein provided for;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the
city of Chula vista does hereby amend the Land Use Designations,
and the corresponding sections of the Land Use Diagram, for the
Land Use Element of the General Plan as set forth below:
11...3J
1. For that portion of Part 1 as shown on Exhibit A as
"Subarea 1A" and Subarea 1B, from a Land Use Designation of "Low-
Medium" to a designation of "Medium-High".
2. For that portion of Part 1 as shown on Exhibit A as
"Subarea 2", from a Land Use Designation of "Low-Medium" to a
designation of "High".
3. For that portion of Part 1 as shown on Exhibit A as
"Subarea 3", no change such that the Land Use Designation of "Low-
Medium" remains as "Low-Medium".
4. For that portion of Part 1 as shown on Exhibit A as
"Subarea 4", from a Land Use Designation of "Medium Hight" to a
designation of "High".
5. For all of Part 2 as shown on Exhibit B, from a Land Use
Designation of "Medium High" to a designation of "High".
6. For that portion of
"Subarea 1", from a Land Use
designation of "Medium High".
Part 3 as shown on Exhibit C as
Designation of "Low Medium" to a
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Robert A. Leiter,
Director of Planning
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
11" 32..
MADRONA
- . - ~ ,
I ,
I !
I
:1.
I ,
I
, !I
, t---
! !
, .
-.....------1
. . ..
., .
I
I
-- - j~t -- -
. lil u
.
l ~ - -.-
I !
. . ~ i
1
, ' .
..~. :"
-(Yo
-sua~ 3
-JE
... --
!
---~
-----I
.
!
SUBAREA 1B
ALVARADO
"
.- :~l
~tHi
.-~""
SUBA
ROOSEVELT ST
',.. '. - ~ - - -
__ __ _ -s- _
.
---.
j
I
(7-
SUBAREA 4
- --. "l
........
I
;
~--------
I.. _. __
.
- - - - ~
1"'----
H S~I
i'..._
.
, -
.
.... . -
. .
, .
, .
'--- -----"
(" - . - -. ,i.
I l
I f
I .:,- I j if'
1 ! ; i
;
! -.. ,
1..__
. .
--H i
.. .. ....-.....
__oj /"-
to" I
.. - -. J
SHASTA
, I
. I
STFltt:1
- L~\\:;~.rs
: ~ ., '\ '\- 0'-,
GENERAL PLAN/ZONING CONSISTENCY
STUDY - SPECIAL STUDY AREA 81
PART I
N
..
EXHIBIT
A
SCALE: 1-. Dr
Lh'ITIERI.McIN'IYRE AND ASSOCIATES
I i I h
i - - .. ..
I I
I ,
I ---...
, !
F S~I
! t ::~'~~~~ I I .---
t . ,P A F;f~:-- ~
j ~~~.'.~ "'~ ~ L - -J~
I :..: '. -. ", . - - - - - - j ~
',;, ~ .",", . <
CENTER STRr=qEET , ~ _ _ ,_ J (/) _ _ _
I I j .- - - ~ ~ _ _ _
+ ; _-: - ;- . . n, I ~
',. r----.----i--
CYPRESS Slit!: I
b' :
. !
!~
~ i
- - <
- - ~
-- - ~
- - -'1
i
--...
j
- -1
I
.. "
i- . - .
I .... ----....-.-.-
L. _..
I
,- - - ;
i I
- -,
::' i
r - - -
.
. '
MADRONA STAt:t:1
i
, ,
I
i
.... I
. ; I I i I I
i ! .1 I I - -, I
, . ; I i
I , I I
.
G STFu::t: I
GENERAL PLAN/ZONING CONSISTENCY
STUDY - SPECIAL STUDY AREA Bl
N
..
EXHIBIT
B
PART II SCALE: 1'. Dr
LI;TJlERI-McIN1YRE AND ASSOCIATES .J. z.- '32
t
: t - -
-I I
I I
! I
rUl I
.
E S~I
- - -I i
. <
r - - - ·
i-- --1 '
L--i
I. I
l_ - - i- - - -
I .
~!
I
I
H~;
I '
.
!
;
!
I
I
I
i~ ---
I .
t _ _ _ ~
L _ _ __.
r---~..
I r . - " -- -.
--ill : ;
- --,
I
i --
<
. -.. --
I
uJ
I
,I
- - . - - 1
," p -~ - -- -I
SUBAREA 1
r - - -., I
\
- - - 1
.
~ .
,
- - - "I
DAVDSON
I
I
- ----1
I
i
II ~
~,
-
If/)
l~
10
'I,
i
i
l.J1
I . ........'..... .~. t
~ ..! . ....
I t.
-
.
I I
F t
STFt=1
~
I I
GENERAL PLAN/ZONING CONSISTENCY
STUDY - SPECIAL STUDY AREA Bl
N
-0.
PART III - SUBAREA 1 SCALE: I'. DI'
. LIHTlERI-McIN1YRE AND ASSOCIATES .1.Z-J3
L.AHSa y WA. Y
i
.
.j
.
I I :
r- 1;
'~i
. I :
I .. .
! III
I~'
.1
t
MONTEBEI.LO
; I
_ _ _.i .
I
I
- - - .
I
---l
I
EXHIBIT
. C
- \
,
I I
I I
I' .
.
! ~i
i I
j
I I i
j ! it(
! - - -;
I
E STFa: I
GENERAL PLAN/ZONING CONSISTENCY
STUDY - SPECIAL STUDY AREA Bl
PART III - SUBAREA 2
I
I
I
~I
;~I
~~at
; I
I
-1
I
.
.
i
-.
i
~
i
_.... -._. ~-
--~- -
I
I
-: r-
.
I
I--
.
I
-
,
-i
.
. t
,
i
DAVDSON
STREET
t
~ I
1
""".,...'c
. ~ I I
~. ....
,.. !:' ),,1 - E ....
'-' ~;'I i :-(
I .
IF. S I
I
, ,
. I
t t----
II Ii
__fC I__~
I r I
I ~
"
.! 'd
'H'l
. "I "i/ ~----
1,1 .
t- --
; ~ I . II ~ -- -=
~r----jl i 1----
I '1 . I
I LLlBR~Ry(p~~'~l -j--
i ~ i -' -- - ~ .,'.~. . . 'i'
I { ; .": ':~:'" - i <~(.,?;:<!~.
. . .
.
f
!
~-,. -
I I
1-____
.
i
I
, CHULA VISTA
PU8.,L1C LIBRARY
N
-
EXHIBIT
. D
SCAl.E: 1-. 200'
L.t;TI1ERI.McIN1YRE AND ASSOCIATES
1.2- - "3 t/
II'UtiI--
, I,!-
~DA
:= I,i
_. ~.,..-
NIH, OR} m + ~', .-J1L,- II
irUlli"l!,
-eo STREET
, -. E=("i ;=:if-
-. . It- ==1':::j =1 ,
->1-- .-. ~ n --,
~ ) ~:rJ p:~
, Ejt=J bJ ['" '.:
rnUrr1 ,
lill, r,' ':.
.e!.. -~
H'-'~'f ~f:~- -
I' I i--
, I-
.-
'Ut:
4
>
1-4 -
. '~f - ~
1-
51
.....: ','..,,'
p. fPlV P......,
,"C, .,'
CIVICP~P-' ,,','.
CENTE eHULA VISTA
PUBliC UBRARY
'.-J
; Ji:, /
" '~--~p,\C
, - I ',',
I
I
~,'RJMml, .DR I " "'PAK ~~
_ .. ~::', m" :"E~"ORIAL . PARK "-',
"I - ,,"-! "... .. ' .. " .. ' '
HDR
RC-
,
,
.-
~ !; - ~~' - ,j I
./.-..,......-~:--~ "
i Ii; .' --~1 I
~I
." I" ' , ,
i:1 ,I,
~II'" i
~ f::--'--'-~~:" -. ,
PQ~ ~,"N','tiR'R ' L,--
I ,t',i'! "
~OOSEV T ST~
AY' r ~ ,I i II I i ~. ! ~~-
'ERAL~: '~I'!'lli r-.,--
os. ' .;.....I !! :" iRe
'I t--- ! I ill' f--
,I ! ; II r'-
I L :~~~0
\ I "I 18 I ----l
~', -,! I c----, ,--d,=-: -' PAC
-" ' tR1Ilt ~ t:=-
-I- -~ c:::::!r~:;t=J
" ,': T....,
" 'I,] f:::oJ
Rt,!I,IU
u _ = I ~
=b
z -~i
...
>
-- .. 4f(
-
-
-
-i-
. .
=-
I-
t UG~ND
L/M DR ~/M_ Deuily
D .. ":.1 (3-6 dufac.)
M DR MocIiam. Dcamy p-=.... ...i.1
r (6-11 du/IC>
NtH DR _/Hip Deuily
~ R '. ".1 (11,18 du/IC>
H DR HiP DcaIiry D _-:..1 ';.1
(18-27 du/IC>
." RC _ Ccamen:iol
pop PabIic .... Ouaoi Public
PAC ""'---_I " "'1I_n.;ctratiYe
Ccamen:iol
PRK !'arb...._
;-.1 ~ -;:=m' 1zf-
, 11 , iii-
.... I" """-: . j~f=
,..j" ,,'( :r-~--!-'-
..L.L....I-l../a.~ r \ ,
"1 ; . ~/'''I, un I '
F"
, J~.-L
~tt=
/';, . ' - .-.- -
'--- -
. 1-'----
CY RESS ST, t:t: =
j .' -
,j' .
.
" ",J-c--i-
. -'--'
, , 1 (,
'r.'
.... " ~-
, -
, " ' J ,_-
J' , ~
t. . .:. J::::::?lt< ~ '"
.. ">-- - ~" ,
z ,.. __ ilIllll"El.t. '.
I~ ...... -i.tr1.
;.:.....:~~~ == 1(c2;
,m... -". r
..... -~
....'~ -:, '
", '.
"K'
o ' , ..., , I i "-
G:.... , "0 ,,",
~ I Asa ,'m;'!!WT :,'.: ~ >~~I
[ , , 'I I r ; [ : , J \ ',I .::1:1 HA . . ',i...,-< ~I
>1'"
cr '.___
:: ---;r~
-- --
.. H R
" "-.
=
-
='-G-
-1
--i
~lJ~ " I
-
-
-,.l.
-I-
, i
--
= t NO.~ ','-
- iio":J '".:.:.:.,
== , PRI'lI-'
- ...
-... . - :)
u. .._ Z
.. ...
.. . > .'
c 'i
... ~ar c2- ..~.::
~.. :l ~ _
z II- - ~
- &&.I:~ ...:....:....:.~r.- f--' "''(PRE
~ --~' I-.PARr I
......1- .:' .
,~:':'.:;:: MA R N~
' ~'j ~ r " t
f'., '",','
U LINOR =-
"
:r . :: ~: ,
<>
" ,
:' ; I
......-:,..1.
,..-\ h
=::::c
-~
, "
-,
,
,
,
I,....
PART I
GENERAL PLAN/ZONING CONSISTENCY
STUDY - SPECIAL STUDY AREA B1
N
"0-
EXHIBIT
E
SURROUNDING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS ~I'.~
LETIIERI-McINlYRE AND ASSOCIATES 12--35
RESOLUTION NO. GPA-91-lIPCZ-91-C
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNlNG
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE
APPROVAL OF GPA-91-lIPCZ-91-C CITY INITIATED PROPOSAL
AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN/REZONING, AND GENERALLY
BOUNDED BY E STREET, H STREET, SECOND AND TH1RD
A VENUES, PLUS AN ADDmONAL AREA EAST OF FOURTH
AVENUE BETWEEN E AND DAVIDSON STREETS, TO RESOLVE
GENERAL PLAN/ZONING INCONSISTENCIES WITHIN THE
CENTRAL CHULA VISTA COMMUNITY. THE PRECISE
TERRITORIAL LIMITS, PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENTS AS DEPICTED ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBITS A,
B, C, D, AND TABLE 1
WHEREAS, the subject proposal item involves amending the General Plan in an area
referred to as the General Plan/Zoning Consistency Study Special Study Area B-1 in Central
Chula Vista. The study area includes approximately 50 acres and 219 lots and is divided into
three subareas. The precise territorial limits, proposed general plan amendments as depicted on
the attached Exhibits A, B, C, D, and Table 1, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a hearing on said
rezoning application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its
publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City and its mailing to property owners
within 300 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least ten days prior to the hearing,
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a hearing on said
rezoning application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its
publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners
within 300 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least 21 days prior to the hearing;
and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 7:00 p.m.,
April 10, 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-91-13, and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT from the facts presented to the
Planning Commission, the Commission has determined that the General Plan
amendments/rezonings are consistent with the Chula Vista General Plan and that public
necessity, convenience, general welfare and practice support the proposed General Plan
amendment and rezoning.
12-21
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION recommends
that the City Council adopt an ordinance to redesignate certain territory as depicted on the
attached Exhibits A, B, C, D and Table 1, on the plan diagram of the Chula Vista General Plan
based on the following findings:
1. Based on the Initial Study and comments on the Initial Study and Negative
Declaration, find that the proposed rezonings and General Plan amendments will
have no significant environmental impacts and adopt the Negative Declaration
issued on IS-91-13 for the General Plan/Zoning Consistency Study.
2. Adopt a resolution to change the General Plan as described on the attached
Exhibits A, B, C, and D and Table 1.
3. Adopt an ordinance to change the zones as described on the attached Exhibits A,
B, C, and D and Table I subject to the following conditions:
(a) The City of Chula Vista shall enforce any legal mechanism sponsored by
the Chula Vista School District and the Sweetwater Union High School
District to mitigate impacts on school facilities.
(b) All existing nonconforming uses created as a result of this action shall be
allowed to be reconstructed in the event of destruction of greater than
60% of the property's improvements upon review and approval of the
Planning Commission.
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 10th day of April, 1991, by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
Commissioners Carson, Casillas, Decker, Fuller, Grasser-Horton, and
Tugenberg
NOES:
None
ABSTENTION:
Commissioner Martin
ABSENT:
None
J#1ir,PJt;~,/ ;:kr~
S ey ras r orton, C&aIr
ATTEST:
.
;{J:c;~Iiey?ec"J:r
(OPA-91-11PCZ-91-C)
1 z -3 f
Ur'r--
~'; W \..i...., .:..
--,C--'" ""'\ ""!
.-..:o..i......._-...;.~
rn l"l. ~. ......... ""'.... -- .---.....-
/,,":'1 PI;';'- , '.
",,,,ii~iij\, ~ -_..J
PC Minutes
-2-
April 10, 1991
EXCERPT FROM MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF 4/10/91
ITEM 1:
PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-91-C/GPA-91-1: CITY-INITIATED PROPOSAL TO
AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN AND REZONE CERTAIN TERRITORY,
GENERALLY BOUNDED BY 'E' STREET, 'H' STREET, SECOND AVENUE
AND THIRD A VENUE, PLUS AN ADDffiONAL AREA EAST OF FOURTH
AVENUE BETWEEN 'E' AND DAVIDSON STREETS, TO RESOLVE
GENERAL PLAN/ZONING INCONSISTENCIES WITHIN THE CENTRAL
CHULA VISTA COMMUNITY (continued from 3-13-91)
Contract Planner Lettieri noted this was a continued hearing from the agenda of March 13,
1991, involving the consideration of an amendment to the Chula Vista General Plan and the
rezoning of the area described. The study area includes approximately 50 acres and 219 lots,
divided into three subareas to facilitate analysis. Mr. Lettieri stated the item had been continued
from the March 13 meeting to more adequately respond to the Planning Commission's concerns
relative to school impacts.
Contract Planner MaryAnn Miller of the Environmental Section of the Planning Department
stated that an addendum to the Negative Declaration had been prepared reiterating staff's prior
determination that school impacts were not deemed to be significant. Staff's analysis concluded
that the project would result in an overall reduction in the number of dwelling units within Study
Area B-1 from 370 dwelling units to 200 overall, thereby decreasing the total number of students
generated from approximately 218 to 118. Letters of concern had been received from both
school districts basically disagreeing with the conclusions of the Negative Declaration.
Commissioner Fuller asked if the determination that there was no impact to schools was based
on any language contained in a Negative Declaration. The letters from the school districts
reiterate that they had advised the City on numerous occasions of overcrowding of schools in
the western portion of the City. With the responses received, was it a subjective opinion of staff
to not bring that out in the Negative Declaration?
Contract Planner Miller answered that the schools are impacted, and there is an overcrowding
impact in the schools within the Chula Vista school districts; however, determining whether or
not it is significant has to be dealt with objectively within the environmental review process.
They look at the proposed project and, in this case, the proposed project consists of an actual
reduction of dwelling units throughout the study area. The analysis is based on the overall
reduction of the dwelling units proposed with this project and a corresponding reduction in the
number of students generated within the study area. Staff concluded from this study that it was
not significant.
Commissioner Carson said she was not totally comfortable with that, but possibly some
recommendations could be made regarding this after the fact that would cause someone else to
pay more attention to the problem.
1-Z-'t::J
PC Minutes
-3-
April 10, 1991
Contract Planner Lettieri stated that in addition to the addendum to the Initial Study, staff is
working with both the Chula Vista and Sweetwater School Districts to see if there is a legal
mechanism that could respond to the school overcrowding situation in the developed western part
of the City. In a memo dated April 4 from Bud Gray to the Planning Commission, staff
recommended that in addition to the Commission's consideration on the precise zoning, that a
condition be added onto the "P" modifying district that states "The City of Chula Vista shall
enforce any legal mechanism sponsored by the Chula Vista School District and the Sweetwater
Union High School District to mitigate impacts on school facilities."
Commissioner Carson asked if this would be a fourth recommendation.
Mr. Lettieri clarified that it would be part of the overall recommendation for the "P" modifying
district.
Commissioner Casillas asked the significance of the ability of the City to enforce a legal
mechanism which sponsors; what was meant by "sponsored by the school district." If they have
the authority to insist on a Mello- Roos District, what gives the City any authority to enforce or
not enforce it.
Principal Planner Gray answered that staff had been advised that at the present time State law
preempts the ability of the City to impose additional conditions to require mitigation for
overcrowded schools. However, it had been recommended in the context of the Growth
Management Program by the Resource Conservation Commission that the City attempt to deal
with this problem through our State legislators to try to seek some remedy in the State law so
we would have some ability at the local level to address this issue. The recommendation is that
in the event there is a future change in State law that gives us that ability to deal with the
overcrowded school issue at the local level, we pledge our cooperation--our best effort--with the
school district to take whatever steps are necessary to carry out that mitigation measure.
Commission Casillas clarified that it was placing everybody on notice that if at a future time,
the City had the authority to enforce the mitigation, they would enforce it. Mr. Gray concurred.
Commissioner Martin asked how many more people there were between north of "L" Street and
west of 1-805, and when the last school was built in that area. Mr. Gray did not know what the
population increase had been, but the most recent development forecast the staff had issued in
the Planning Department indicated there were between 200 and 300 dwelling units constructed
on an annual basis west of 1-805 within the city limits of Chula Vista. At the last Council
meeting, Kate Shurson of the Elementary School District had indicated the last school had been
built approximately 15 years ago.
Commissioner Carson asked how the meetings in August or September 1990, and February 7,
1991 were noticed and how well they were attended?
12-'Jo
PC Minutes
-4-
AprillO, 1991
Contract Planner Lettieri clarified that Commissioner Carson was speaking of the public forums,
and stated there were three public forums in 1990 and approximately 30 to 45 people attended
each; the property owners of public record within the study area were noticed. The current
hearing was noticed to 300 feet of the study area.
After discussion by the Commission, it was decided Mr. Lettieri would give a general overview
of the project and then take public testimony on each section individually, voting on the entire
area at the conclusion.
Contract Planner Lettieri then gave an overview of the entire area and noted that on June 19,
1990, City Council considered a comprehensive zoning implementation program which was
intended to implement the General Plan categories adopted by City Council in July 1989. When
Council adopted the General Plan, it was identified that there were several areas within Chula
Vista that had zoning categories that were inconsistent with the General Plan categories adopted
in 1989. State law which was adopted in 1971 requires that the General Plan and the City's
zoning be consistent with one another. This was the first sub-area to be considered out of a total
of five that may have to be considered to achieve that consistency. Staff attempted to look at
these areas first with the intent to implement the General Plan category which was adopted in
1989; secondly, if based on the existing and surrounding land use, zoning, and residential
character, it appeared that the General Plan should be recommended for change, staff tried to
propose a General Plan category that would not impact the existing predominant character of the
area as well as the existing public facilities that were within the Central Chula Vista community;
and thirdly, staff was not recommending mid-point zoning classifications in Central Chula Vista
but the best fit between the General Plan, existing development, and other residential factors.
After presenting an overview of each sub-area, Contract Planner Lettieri proceeded with each
area individually giving the location and the general make-up of the area.
Part 1: Sub-area 1 A
Mr. Lettieri stated the existing General Plan designation was Low/Medium Residential (3-6
dwelling units per acre), which would be the existing General Plan designation on all the sub-
areas. Staff recommended a change in the General Plan designation to Medium/High Residential
(11-18 dwelling units per acre) and the R-3-P-22 zone. Under the existing R-3 zoning, there
are five non-conforming lots and an additional 38 units could be developed; under the proposal,
26 dwelling units could be constructed. Also, under the R-3-P-22 zone, development of three
units would be allowed on a typical 6,000 sq. ft. lot. On any area recommended to be changed
to R-3-P-22, lots consisting of 6,000 sq. ft. would have the possibility of constructing three
individual units.
Chair Grasser Horton asked what happened when a property was down zoned and no longer in
conformance. What happens if that unit burned down; what zoning would they have; what could
be built after that?
1z-41
PC Minutes
-5-
April 10, 1991
Mr. Lettieri replied that the specific zoning regulations is that if 60 % of the property burned
down, it could not be reconstructed. It would have to be reconstructed to conform to the
existing zoning.
Chair Grasser Horton asked if it would be difficult to get insurance or a mortgage on a home
in that situation?
Assistant Planning Director Lee stated staff had inquiries at various times when going through
different down zonings and even though it had been an issue, it hadn't hindered the mortgage
companies from lending on those properties. There would have to be at least 60% damage to
the residence, and then it would have to be rebuilt in accordance with the present zoning.
Chair Grasser Horton clarified that if they had three units on their property and the property had
been rezoned to R-l, if three of the structures burned down, under the new zoning only one
house could be built?
Mr. Lee concurred.
Mr. Lettieri added, for historical purposes, that when the Commission and Council were going
through the zoning implementation program in Montgomery, Council put a stipulation in the
approval that existing units of record as of the effective date of the ordinance could be
reconstructed to the density in the "P" modifying district to alleviate that potential problem.
This was applied selectively.
Chair Grasser Horton clarified that in that case, if there were three units which burned down,
three units could be rebuilt?
Mr. Lettieri answered that, according to the City Attorney, it was legal and it was actually put
into the Precise Plan Modifying District for Castle Park "B" which is the area just east of Third
Avenue and south of "L". The Precise Plan Modifying District permits the Commission to
recommend and the Council to adopt a recommendation that effectively changes the ordinance
to apply to a certain piece of property.
Chair Grasser Horton verified that the homeowner would be protected. Mr. Lettieri concurred,
if it were recommended by the Commission and adopted by Council.
Chair Grasser Horton then opened the public hearing for public testimony on Sub-area lA.
Sid Morris, Sr., 862 Cedar Avenue, Chula Vista, stated he owned a lot in the area and asked
for clarification as to the number of units which could be built on an area - 11 units or 18 units?
How many square feet of land would be required for each unit?
lz-tZ.
PC Minutes
-6-
April 10, 1991
Contract Planner Lettieri answered that one dwelling unit could be built for every 1,980 sq. ft.
under that zoning category. A 6,000 sq. ft. lot would permit three units.
No one else wishing to speak, the public testimony was closed on Part 1, Sub-area A.
Part 1: Sub-area lB
Mr. Lettieri noted this was the area on either side of Alvarado Street with most of the property
west of Del Mar Court. Staff recommended a change in the General Plan to MediumlHigh
Residential (11-18 dwelling units per acre), with the R-3-P-14 rone. Under the existing R-3
zoning, an additional 30 units could be developed; under the proposal, six additional units could
be developed.
Commissioner Carson asked if this was a new zoning attached taking into consideration what
would happen to the old Windmill Farms building and the vacant lot. What will happen on that
comer and when; if it is to be office buildings, where would there be parking. Alvarado is very
narrow; where would the parking be for additional development? How can we come up with
a proper identification that would make this fit into the General Plan and still be a quality of life
for the City of Chula Vista for those people?
Mr. Lettieri answered that when the staff recommendation was considered, they were looking
at the existing development on the lots which are developed multiple-family. To go to the R-1
zone did not seem to be a reasonable recommendation when looking at the existing character of
the area. However, the R-3-P-14 zone simply permits another unit. A total of six units as
opposed to 30 under the existing zoning would be permitted. All of the parking would have to
be on-site.
Assistant Planning Director Lee said the Agency had chosen an office complex, but staff had not
been given the specific proposal. They would have to comply with City standards regarding
parking and accommodated on-site. There may be some spill-over of parking, however.
Chair Grasser Horton re-opened the public hearing for testimony for Sub-area lB.
Jackie Smith, 271 Alvarado, Chula Vista, stated she had a small house at 265 Alvarado and
wanted to build three units. The R-3-P-14 would not allow that to be built, but the R-3-P-22
would. She proposed using off-street parking and requested the R-3-P-22 zone instead ofR-3-P-
14.
John Hillingsworth, 244 Alvarado, Chula Vista, wanted to build three units with off-street
parking which would be consistent with the General Plan. His lot contained approximately
7,700 sq. ft. With the R-3-P-14 zoning, he would be able to build 2.47 units; but with the R-3-
P-18, he would be able to build three units. He would propose to build three units with off-
street parking.
12.-f3
PC Minutes
-7-
April 10, 1991
No one else wishing to speak on Part 1, Sub-Area 1B, public testimony was closed.
Commissioner Decker asked staff why the P-18 or P-22 zoning could not be used.
Mr. Lettieri answered that the General Plan recommended a range from 11 to 18; staff
recommended 14 because they were taking the most conservative approach regarding
implementation of the plan. They are recommending an increase to better represent the existing
character of the area. It was an incremental decision that when looked at overall in Central
Chula Vista, they were concerned that an increase in the number of units would create an even
more difficult situation for the school.
Commissioner Tugenberg asked if parking was allowed on both sides of the street on Alvarado;
and if there was sufficient room for a fire engine to get through.
Senior Engineer Ullrich stated the street was 32' in width with parking on each side, which gave
a travelway of 16'. A fire engine could make it through--slowly.
Commissioner Tugenberg asked ifthe zoning could be changed to P-18 but not P-22 and remain
within the General Plan definition.
Mr. Lettieri stated staff would recommend not exceeding 18 but have recommended the P-22
zone in certain areas as being consistent because the General Plan is on a growth basis, including
streets where the zoning is on a "net." Street widths can be averaged and come up to a net of
18 dwelling units per acre; however, staff was making their recommendations on an area-by-area
basis, and the only reason they had ever gone to 22 du's per acre was if the general character
of the area warranted that. If the Commission wanted to change the recommendation, staff
recommended that the du's not exceed 18 in this area.
Chair Grasser Horton asked if lot 17 would then be a non-conforming lot under the new
proposal? She had visited that site with another committee and felt it was a nice project with
adequate parking.
Mr. Lettieri answered lot 17 would be non-conforming even under the R-3-P-22 zoning.
Part 1: Sub-area 2
This area is located on the north side of Alvarado, west of Del Mar Court and south of "G"
Street. Staff recommended the R-3 zone with the High Density Residential. The area is
developed to its maximum; there would be no additional units.
Chair Grasser Horton re-opened the public hearing for public testimony on Part 1, Sub-area 2.
No one wishing to speak, the public testimony was closed on Part 1, Sub-area 2.
12~q,t/
PC Minutes
-8-
April 10, 1991
Part 1: Sub-area 3
This area is designated Low-Medium Residential; staff recommended that it stay Low-Medium
Residential but rezoned as R-1 instead of R-3. Under the existing R-3 zoning, an additional 52
units could be built; under the proposed zoning, only one additional unit could be built.
Chair Grasser Horton re-opened the public hearing for public testimony on Part 1, Sub-area 3.
Theodore Tornesella, 443 Del Mar Court, Chula Vista, commended Commissioner Carson on
her comments. He had been a homeowner on Del Mar Court for 32 years. He said the children
on the block had nowhere to play except in the street. He asked for the Commission's
consideration of the residents' quality of life, noting the shortage of water and the water quality.
He said there had to be traffic enforcement on weekends, and the traffic problem was irritating
to the people who live there. Mr. Tornesella noted the ads which had been in the paper
regarding the number of rentals and for-sale units in the area.
Chair Grasser Horton advised Mr. Tornesella that Chula Vista had one of the lowest vacancy
factors for rentals.
Robert Moore, Del Mar Court, Chula Vista, stated there was an overflow of parking in the
evenings and weekends from the multiple family units. He spoke of the loss the owners of one
of the lots would incur with the down zoning and he asked if that lot could be left R-3. He
supported the down zoning to R-l.
John Murphy, 224 Alvarado, Chula Vista, said they had bought the property because it was
zoned R-3. The change would cause a financial loss and mental anguish for his family. The
down zoning would not have the benefit of an R-l residential area and at the same time would
not have the benefit of a multi-unit zone.
Sid Morris, Sr., 862 Cedar Avenue, Chula Vista, stated he owned a lot at 421 Del Mar which
encompassed between 11,000 and 12,000 sq. ft. and had one house. He didn't believe Del Mar
could support R-3 zoning; however, he didn't believe a small area zoned R-1 should be
surrounded by R-3. The land would be decreased in value by $1,560,000, using $30,000 a unit
as a basis.
No one else wishing to speak, the public testimony was closed on Part 1, Sub-area 3.
Part 1: Sub-area 4
Staff recommended that the General Plan be changed to the High Density Residential to
represent the existing character of the area. Under the existing R-3 zoning, there are five non-
conforming lots and an additional 68 units that could be constructed.
t Z...tf5
PC Minutes
-9-
April 10, 1991
Chair Grasser Horton re-opened the public hearing for public testimony on Part 1, Sub-area 4.
No one wishing to speak, the public testimony was closed on Part 1, Sub-area 4.
~
Mr. Lettieri stated Part 2 generally included the area between "P" and "G" Streets. The present
designation is Low-Medium Residential; staff recommended the Medium-High Residential.
Under the existing zoning, 76 units could be constructed; under the proposed R-3-P-14 zoning,
28 dwelling units could be constructed.
Chair Grasser Horton re-opened the public hearing for public testimony on Part 2.
No one wishing to speak, the public testimony was closed on Part 2.
Commissioner Martin declared he had a conflict of interest and could not vote on Part 3, Sub-
area 1, since he owns a business on Church Avenue abutting the area. At this point, he left the
dais.
Part 3: Sub-area 1
Staff recommended a change from Low-Medium to Medium-High with the existing zoning going
from R-3 to R-3-P-22. Under the existing R-3 zoning, there are 10 non-conforming lots and an
additional 106 units could be developed; under the proposal, an additional 74 units could be
developed.
Commissioner Carson asked if the zoning was changed to R-3-P-14 or R-3-P-18, how much
would it reduce the number of units?
Contract Planner Lettieri asked that Chair take public testimony while he calculated the answer
to the above question.
Chair Grasser Horton re-opened the public hearing for public testimony on Part 3, Sub-area 1.
No one wishing to speak, the public testimony was closed on Part 3, Sub-area 1.
Mr. Lettieri stated the R - 3- P-14 zone would affect the 26 lots which were developed with single-
family units; therefore, on a theoretical basis, it would probably be somewhere between 26 and
35 additional units as opposed to the 74 units. With the R-3-P-22 wne, a third unit is allowed.
Commissioner Martin returned to the dais.
lZ-V'
PC Minutes
-10-
April 10, 1991
Part 3: Sub-area 2
This area is located along Fourth Avenue, just north of Davidson on the east side of Fourth and
designated High-Residential on the General Plan. Staff recommended the Professional and
Administrative Commercial designation. The existing zoning is Commercial-Office and staff
recommended that the zoning stay the same with the addition of the Precise Plan Modifying
District. The proposed recommendation would retain the C-O zoning and staff felt that because
of the location of the property north of the Civic Center Complex between the Civic Center
Complex and higher density residential units adjacent to Fourth Avenue, it would make a logical
extension of the C-O zone.
Chair Grasser Horton re-opened the public hearing for public testimony on Part 3, Sub-area 2.
No one wishing to speak, the public testimony was closed on Part 3, Sub-area 2.
Chair Grasser Horton noted that the sub-areas had been finished, and asked if anyone wanted
to make a general comment.
Kate Shurson, representing Chula Vista Elementary School District, distributed a statement to
the Commission. She disagreed with a comment included in the addendum to the staff report
which found that approximately three times more students of school age were generated from
single-family units versus multiple. She expressed concern that the proposal would worsen the
overcrowding of the western and central schools. With the current zoning, no development
could take place because it was inconsistent with the plan. A development project would have
to request a General Plan Amendment and rezoning for their specific project. When that
happens, it constituted a legislative act and enabled the District to request full-cost
reimbursement mitigation for impacts on school facilities. Ms. Shurson said that by down
zoning this area absent the specific development proposal, the City preempts the District's
opportunity to fully mitigate impacts on already overcrowded schools in the western Chula Vista.
The District appreciated the intention of the language proposed to be added to the "P" Modifying
District by staff which would enforce any legal mechanism sponsored by the District to mitigate
impacts on facilities, and would like to see that type of language incorporated in City policy for
all actions. However, when the City is initiating the legislative action absent a specific project,
that language is meaningless.
Ms. Shurson asked the Commission to consider two options:
I) to adhere to the land use designation in the General Plan and process rezonings and requests
for General Plan Amendments on a case-by-case basis as these properties come before the
Planning Commission and request development approval. At that time, there would be a
legislative act and the District would have the opportunity to seek to mitigate the impact on the
schools.
12.,1/7
PC Minutes
-11-
April 10, 1991
2) to include a condition for all subsequent development in this rewned area which requires
compliance with school mitigation recommendations.
Ms. Shurson concluded that if this amendment and rezoning was approved as proposed more
development would be allowed to occur under the General Plan; school overcrowding would be
further exacerbated; and the School District would lose the opportunity to fully mitigate impacts
the rezoning would have on the already overcrowded western and central area schools.
Commissioner Carson thanked Ms. Shurson for coming forward and making that statement. She
said that with the fact that we are facing a lack of funds from the State in education, if this went
through and there were additional projects developed, would the only way to deal with the
overcrowding of the children be double sessions? And if you have double sessions, where would
you get the teachers when there is already a shortage?
Ms. Shurson answered that the District is busing 428 children; of that number, 385 are west of
I-80S. Last year, they did a study of eight schools with the idea of how to handle growth
considering multi-track. The community, with the exception of two schools, is opposed to multi-
track. Clearview School would be opening next year, but children will be transported from the
west over to that school which is in the Terra Nova area.
Commissioner Tugenberg reaffirmed the fact that the State requires the City to make these
changes. Mr. Lettieri concurred that the State requires consistency between the General Plan
and zoning. He said there were several options open to the Commission to achieve that
consistency:
1) to zone all the property R-1 consistent with the Low-Medium Residential designation.
Staff felt that because of the character of the area, that would not be a good planning
decision. Because of the reduction of density from 370 to approximately 200, staff felt
it would lessen the impact.
Commissioner Tugenberg asked if it was all zoned R-1, approximately 50% of the
dwelling units would be non-conforming? Mr. Lettieri confirmed, and reminded the
Commission had the right to recommend the wording be included regarding the non-
conforming units.
2) to change the General Plan and leave the zoning R-3-P-22, which would change the
General Plan to a higher density overall.
3) a recommendation which closely related the zoning to the existing character of the area,
which is what staff recommended or a modification of that.
Commissioner Carson asked if it could be a case-by-case amendment.
;L Z-(B'
PC Minutes
-12-
April 10, 1991
Mr. Lettieri said there was the issue of spot zoning which they would like to look at if the
Commission wanted to modify staffs recommendation.
Commissioner Tugenberg asked if there was any wording that could be put onto any changes
the Commission made to accommodate the School District's problem of not being able to
mitigate the cost of schools with additional buildings?
Contract Planner Lettieri answered that staff thought they had come up with wording that would,
if through the City Attorney's office it was determined that the City could legally put that kind
of condition on a project, that sometime in the future development projects would then come in
and would have to comply with those additional requirements. Mr. Lettieri understood that
development projects now have to pay the State fees, which would partially mitigate. The City
is trying to come up with another mechanism such as an overall Mello-Roos that would permit
additional financing possibilities when projects come in. It was his understanding that was not
legally possible at this time.
Assistant City Attorney Rudolf said the City is sympathetic to the school districts' problem and
has been working with them to try to come up with something. State law preempts the City
from being involved in the area, and the City is trying to come up with an innovative, creative
idea which would assist the school districts in alleviating their problem while working around
the State law preemption. He did not agree with the school district's proposal to zone
everything R-l in order to force the people to go into a Mello-Roos. He did not recommend
that to the Commission and legally would be seen as a subterfuge and would create litigation for
the City.
Chair Grasser Horton continued with the public hearing.
Candace Hooper, who lives a block and a half from the area to be rezoned, said she agreed the
General Plan should be left as is and the projects rezoned on a case-by-case basis. She is
President of the Rosebank School Parent Club, and noted that the school is a magnet school but
buses more students out than in. If the program should go multi-track, which is opposed,
students would continue to be turned away and they would not be able to afford a magnet
program.
Edward Aceves, Principal of Feaster Elementary School, said the children need space, and there
was space across the street. He asked the Commission to control the residential growth and help
them get space for schools. He invited the Commissioners to the school to witness the need for
more space.
Frank Lozaro, 95 "D" Street, Chula Vista, concurred with the previous speakers and urged the
Commission to recommend to the City Council to stop growth.
Sandra Rank, 45 Corte Maria, Chula Vista, said there is not a need for more apartments, but
there are not enough parks.
tz-t/9
PC Minutes
-13-
April 10, 1991
Lois Shadley, 236 "G" Street, Chula Vista, said that single families would be developing the
area; not developers. The taxes derived from the multi-units would help raise money for the
schools.
Ken Aden, owns two lots between "P" Street and "E" on Twin Oaks, roned R-3. He concurred
with staffs recommendation.
No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Tugenberg asked how long the State would allow the City to leave the conflict
between the General Plan and the existing zoning. Would it be possible to freeze the existing
situation until such time as the City and the school districts could make some accommodation?
Assistant Attorney Rudolf answered that the City had a legal duty to bring the zoning into
conformity with the General Plan, and the failure to bring it into conformity is a risk. The
City's obligation is to do so in a reasonable period of time.
Commissioner Carson asked Mr. Rudolf if he had a suggestion as to how to handle the school
situation.
Mr. Rudolf said the legal obligation was on the district to find some legislative or other legal
mechanism. The City is ready to cooperate with them as soon as they have done so.
Chair Grasser Horton added that the Commission was not approving a developer with 200+
homes. Many of the properties had already been multi-roned for years. She was concerned
about the school problem, but did not think what they were trying to do would create much of
an impact. She concurred with staffs recommendation.
Commissioner Puller said they were attempting to correct a problem that had developed over
a number of years in the central part of Chula Vista. The Commission was not trying to take
away people's retirements and economic livelihood, but to maintain a quality of life. She said
she strongly felt the City had to take a more proactive stance on helping the school districts
resolve the problem of overcrowding by going to the legislation, or by some other method. She
concurred with staffs recommendation.
Commissioner Tugenberg reminded the representatives of the school districts that the
Commission had tried for years to get the cooperation of the school districts when projects came
before them. The school districts never came before the Commission and always sent letters
stating they could handle the project.
Kate Shurson, representing the Elementary School District, assured Mr. Tugenberg she would
be attending future Commission meetings.
.tz. ..$0
PC Minutes
-14-
April 10, 1991
In answer to Commissioner Decker's query, Contract Planner Lettieri said the existing character
issue is one issue used to determine a precise roning recommendation. Staff tried to determine
as closely as possible the zoning designations that fit within the density ranges within specific
General Plan categories. In the definition of the General Plan, it states character issues within
each designation which have to do with dwelling unit types.
Commissioner Casillas summarized that the recommended change would reduce the number of
potential buildable units from 370 units to approximately 200, essentially a 50% reduction of the
existing zoning. Mr. Casillas said the most significant aspect was that staffs recommendation
attempted to tie the existing character of the neighborhood to what might be developed in the
future. He stated he would like to see some assurance given to property owners regarding
rebuilding to the same extent as existing. He asked that language be incorporated in the
Commission's recommendation similar to that in the Montgomery District. Commissioner
Casillas noted that he was going to visit Mr. Aceves' school; that everyone was very concerned
about the school issue. He was prepared to support staffs recommendation.
MS (Carson/Tugenberg) that based on the Initial Study and comments on the Initial Study and
Negative Declaration, find that the proposed rezonings and General Plan amendments will have
no significant environmental impacts and adopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-9l-13 for
the General Plan Zoning Consistency Study.
Commissioner Carson stated she would vote for the rezoning, but wanted to go on record that
she felt there was an environmental impact, because she is a teacher and works with the
children, and know that the most important that we have is our children.
VOTE: 6-0-1 (Commissioner Martin abstained)
MSC (Carson/Tugenberg) 5-1-1 (Commissioner Decker voted against; Commissioner Martin
abstained) to recommend that the City Council adopt a resolution to change the General Plan as
described on the attached Exhibits A, B, C, and D and Table 1.
MSC (Carson/Tugenberg) 6-0-1 (Commissioner Martin abstained) to recommend that the City
Council adopt an ordinance to change the zones as described on the attached Exhibits A, B, C,
and D and Table 1, amending the existing provision with regard to non-conforming use in the
event of destruction of the property greater than 60 % .
MSC (Carson/Fuller) 6-0-1 (Commissioner Martin abstained) to recommend that the following
language be included as a condition in the "P" Modifying District:
"The City of Chula Vista shall enforce any legal mechanism sponsored by the Chula
Vista School District and the Sweetwater Union High School District to mitigate impacts
on school facilities. "
t:z-~J
EXCERPT FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF 3/13/91
ITEM 3:
PUBUC HEARING; PCZ-91-C/GPA-91-1: CITY INITIATED PROPOSAL TO
AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN AND REZONE CERTAIN TERRITORY,
GENERALLY BOUNDED BY 'E' STREET, 'H' STREET, SECOND AVENUE
AND THIRD AVENUE, PLUS AN ADDmONAL AREA EAST OF FOURTH
AVENUE BElWEEN 'E' AND DAVIDSON STREETS, TO RESOLVE
GENERAL PLAN/ZONING INCONSISTENCIES WITHIN THE CENTRAL
CHULA VISTA COMMUNITY
Vice-Chair Fuller explained that the Commission was going to consider this a section at a time
in areas which had been defined: Part 1 with four sub-areas, Part 2, and Part 3 with two sub-
areas. The hearing would be opened and closed on each section.
(continued to next page)
J2,$2..
Planning Commission Minutes
-6-
March 13, 1991
Contract Planner Tony Lettieri gave an overall presentation, stating that the item involved the
consideration of an amendment to the General Plan and the rezoning of the area referred to as
General Plan Zoning Consistency B-1. The study area included approximately 50 acres and 219
lots.
Mr. Lettieri stated, regarding the assumptions, that staff approached each area looking at the
range permitted within the existing General Plan. In many cases, the recommendations made
were at the top of the range, not focusing in at the mid-point. No extraordinary benefits were
applied to the area. Staff also looked at existing land use and mix, the existing lot size, existing
densities, and predominant character preservation, and finally the meetings with the property
owners, residents, and their comments.
Commissioner Casillas interjected that in reading some of the correspondence received, he
believed some people didn't understand the rationale behind the study. He asked Mr. Lettieri
to explain to the people in attendance the reason for the study.
Contract Planner Lettieri explained that in July 1989 the City Council adopted a comprehensive
amendment to the Chula Vista General Plan. He said the zoning was inconsistent with the
General Plan, and State law requires ajurisdiction to have consistency between the General Plan
and the zoning applied on a piece of property. Based on that apparent inconsistency, the City
Council in June 1990 directed staff to go through a systematic public hearing process to bring
the zoning back into consistency with the General Plan.
Mr. Lettieri continued by showing slides of the first area, Part I - Sub-area lA. The existing
General Plan designation was Low Medium Residential (3-6 du/ac) with R-3 zoning. Staff
recommended that it be changed to Medium High (11-18 dulac) with R-3-P-22 zoning. Under
the existing R-3 zoning, an additional 38 units could be developed; under the proposed R-3-P-22,
an additional 26 units could be developed. Development of 3 units would be allowed on a 6,000
sq. ft. lot, subject to off-street parking and setback requirements and Design Review approval.
Vice-Chair Fuller explained that the format would be that the public hearing would be opened,
testimony taken, public testimony closed, discussion by the Commission, and tentative action
taken on each section individually.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened on Sub-area lA.
Jean Taylor, co-owner of 217 "G" Street, ChuIa Vista, said she was in favor of the proposed
zoning for the area. She felt the zoning was appropriate for that particular area.
JZ..,f53
Planning Commission Minutes
-7-
March 13, 1991
Sid Morris, Sr., 862 Cedar Avenue, Chula Vista, said he didn't object to the rezoning, but
objected to the fact that he thought the General Plan was changed illegally by the City Council
in July 1989. He received no notification that anything was being changed. Mr. Morris said
the City was doing leap frog zoning.
No one else wishing to speak, the public testimony on Part 1, Sub-area 1A was closed.
MSUC (Tugenberg/Casillas) 6-0 to accept staffs recommendations for Sub-area 1A to change
the zoning to R-3-P-22 and the density of 11 to 18.
Contract Planner Lettieri continued with Part 1, Sub-area 1B, noting that under the existing R-3
zoning, an additional 30 units could be constructed; under the proposed R-3-P-14, an additional
6 units could be developed. He then explained the rationale for the proposed zoning.
Commissioner Tugenberg asked if this was being done to reconcile the zoning to conform with
the General Plan, and if the City was required by the State of California to have the zoning in
conformance with the General Plan. Mr. Lettieri concurred.
Vice-Chair Fuller opened the hearing for public testimony on Part 1, Sub-area lB.
Carroll Smith, 13596 Portsmouth Cr., Westminster, CA, owner of property at 265-271
Alvarado, asked that the property be maintained as R-3. He then read a letter previously
submitted to the Commission.
John Hollingsworth, owner of 244 Alvarado, Chula Vista, had bought the property with the
intent of building four units. Subsequently, he had been told he could only build three, then two
units. He asked that the Commission amend their recommendation to R-3-P-17. It would allow
those with the larger lots of 7,700 sq. ft. to build three units and the smaller lots would still be
able to build two.
Commissioner Tugenberg asked staff to respond to the comments as they occurred, since some
of the letters had just been received by the Commission and they hadn't had a chance to read
them.
Mr. Lettieri said there was a mixture of residential uses. Staff had tried to stick as closely to
the General Plan as possible. They had originally considered the R-3-P-22 zone. The School
District was very concerned overall about what that recommendation would do to the number
of possible dwelling units that would be permitted. Even with the proposed recommendation,
there would be approximately 200 additional units that would be permitted within the entire
study area. With the existing zoning, there would be almost 400 units permitted. Staff felt that
the additional unit on each lot would be a good transition and would provide some development
tZ-5Y
Planning Commission Minutes
-8-
March 13, 1991
opportunity. There were also concerns regarding parking on both Del Mar Court and Alvarado
which had been considered in staff's recommendation.
Commissioner Tugenberg asked if the School District had given any generation figures for
students if the zoning went to P-22?
Theodore Tornesello, 443 Del Mar Court, Chula Vista, lived around the corner from the area
being discussed. He distributed some photographs of the area showing the cars parked on
Alvarado, and said that sometimes they could not get out of their street because of the traffic.
He was concerned with the traffic situation and water shortage.
Mrs. Carroll Smith said the picture Mr. Tornesello had shown had been taken on a Saturday and
the Church was having a large event. Their project would have 16 off-street parking spaces;
she was very much aware of the parking problem.
Mr. Hollingsworth returned to the microphone to comment regarding the parking. He said if
people only added another unit, the initial unit would not be taken down and it would add to the
parking problem. However, if three units were allowed, people would be more inclined to take
down the initial unit and put up three nicer units with off-street parking.
Commissioner Tugenberg asked if there was a way of requiring off-street parking if using a P-18
zoning. Mr. Lettieri believed it would be required.
Assistant Planning Director Lee noted that the "Po modifying district is not necessary to attach
to the R-3 other than it is a density designation. All projects go through the Design Review
Committee.
No one else wishing to speak, the public testimony was closed for Part 1, Sub-area lB.
Commissioner Tugenberg asked if staff had any objections to changing the five lots which
exceed 7,700 sq. ft. to an R-3-P-18?
Contract Planner Lettieri answered that staff had rather consider the entire area since they did
not want to get into a spot zoning situation. Under the R-3 zoning, there would be 30 units
possible. Six under the proposed "14" designation and 18 potentially under the R-3-P-18. It
would be in the General Plan range staff is recommending. This was simply looking at a map
without benefit of any development plan, all of the lots that are developed with less than three
units, without figuring if all of those lots met the minimum lot size.
Commissioner Carson asked how many lots would be left as non-conforming lots. Mr. Lettieri
answered there would be five non-conforming lots.
JZ.,SS'
Planning Commission Minutes
-9-
March 13, 1991
Commissioner Carson asked what happened to the non-conforming lots when the owners were
ready to sell. Mr. Lettieri answered they would be legal, non-conforming units and could stay.
Commissioner Carson said she had a problem with the fact that the Commission was approving
each sub-area because she was having trouble with the Negative Declaration in dealing with
schools, because schools already exceed 130% in that area. To her, the Negative Dec did not
justify any kind of adjustment. When multiple units are put in, there will be additional children.
At the present time, there is not the capability of handling any additional students. Chula Vista
High School and Chula Vista Junior are full to capacity. Chula Vista Elementary requested from
the City of Chula Vista that as a condition to approval for the future project within Study Area
B-1 and other areas proposed for redesignation and up-zoning, all projects be required to comply
with the School District's requirements, including but not limited to formation of or annexation
of a Mello-Roos community facility district, or other alternative mechanism to provide financing
for new facilities. According to the normal procedure, the Commission would approve the
Initial Study and Negative Dec and then go through and approve the various projects. With the
impact of the potential multiple units with the changes, she thought this needed to be re-studied
or something else still needed to be done in order to get the school to come into alignment.
Contract Planner Lettieri answered that the letters were early in the review process from both
the Sweetwater and the Chula Vista School District, and staff was considering at that time a
higher zoning category for the whole project.
Commissioner Carson asked where the most recent letter was saying it was okay.
Contract Planner Lettieri answered he didn't think the School District would give the City a
letter saying it was okay. They were concerned about this area and probably a lot of the
comments were still valid.
Commissioner Carson believed most of the comments were still valid and, therefore, in order
for her to approve the Negative Declaration, she would have to see another, more recent letter
dated March 13.
Assistant Planning Director Lee said that in staffs opinion, the zoning is all down-zoning. Staff
was trying to be consistent with the General Plan, but the basic action was a reduction as far as
the general densities were concerned from the zoning standpoint.
Commissioner Carson agreed but asked that the item be continued for two weeks to get a letter
from the School District so she could feel conscious-free to vote for a Negative Declaration that
she felt was qualified to be voted for. She felt she was being asked to vote against something
she felt was good, because she didn't approve the Negative Declaration.
tZ'~'
Planning Commission Minutes
-10-
March 13, 1991
After lengthy discussion, Assistant Planning Director Lee said staff had no objection to a four-
week continuance to return with a response to Commissioner Carson's concern.
Commissioner Carson asked how many units would be built in four weeks?
Assistant Planning Director Lee said he was not aware of any projects presently going on in the
area.
Vice-Chair Fuller asked the Commission's pleasure regarding the continuation based on the
inadequate fmdings of the Negative Declaration. She asked if they wished to continue with with
public testimony on the subsections, since there were people present who had come to speak.
Contract Planner Lettieri stated the only concern staff would have regarding taking testimony
was that it was a fairly complicated project, and they would be concerned that unless the
property owners were able to make their points again over a four-week period of time, their
testimony would not be fresh in the Commissioners' minds.
MSC (Tugenberg/Casillas) 5-1 (Decker voting against; Grasser-Horton absent) to continue the
public hearing to AprillO, 1991.
tz..57
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BY THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL will hold a public
hearing to consider the following:
PCZ-91-C/GPA-91-1: Ci ty-i niti ated proposal to amend the General
Pl an and rezone certain territory, generally bounded by "E"
Street, "H" Street, Second Avenue and Third Avenue, plus an
addi ti onal area east of Fourth Avenue between "E" and Davi dson
Streets, to resolve General Plan/zoning inconsistencies within
the Central Chul a Vi sta Community. (Contact Frank Herrera -
691-5094)
If you wish to challenge the City's action on this zone change and General
Plan (copies of reports and maps are available in the Planning Department)
amendment in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or
someone el se raised at the publ ic hearing described in this notice, or in
written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk's Office at or prior to the
public hearing.
SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL on Tuesday, June 11, 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: May 28, 1991
CASE NO.: PCZ-91-C/GPA-91-1
Beverly A. Authelet
City Clerk
I J -59
v
,
~
5662504000
~L/NANCY J
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5662511400
MACIEL MANUEL/AURELIA J
- - ...
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5680410100
ALANj RUSS~LEEN
CHULA VISTA CALIF 92010
5680410700
COMING TR T 06-05-90
HULA VISTA CA 92010
5680710600
~
SAN DIEGO CA 92116
680711800
F CHULA VIST
CIO r.:
276 FOU
CHU TA CA 9
5 80712200
C I STA REDEVEL AGEN
CY
C/O COMMU -LOPMENT
276 F AVE
CH ISTA CA 92010
5680720400
~ILEEN H
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5680720800
~/DIANA S
CARLSBAD CA 92009
5680721200
~T ~/MARIA
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5680721600
~ANCY M
~ 92010
5680722000
P
DEBO AH
~'~'""~'~,!~-',;:=""
'-~"~,,,~
5662510900
LACHANCE FRANCIS E/RITA A
~ CA 92010
5662511500
CLARK ~ID
CHULA VISTA
L/TERESITA
CA 92010
,5680410400
,~ESB
ISAN DIEGO CA 92154
15680411300
ICHULA VISTA CHAMBER OF COMMERC ~.
,E
:CHULA VISTA CA 92010 ~
5680711900
CIT F CHULA VISTA
C/O
276 FOUR
CHUL
TH L JR/JO LYNN
92010
5680720500
~
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5680720900
~
CARLSBAD CA 92008
J H
5680721300
~
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
D/NANC
5680722100
~~LCm,l;~!J.W S
CHU A VIS A 92013
....
1'.
I
f
{
(.
&
.
.
.
.
5662503800
~ONY/JENNIFER .
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5662511000
~ES P/LOLA P
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5662513200
BROWN JAMES W/BETTY A
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5680410500
~CKEL DONALD C/PAMELA B
CORONADO CA 92~
.
5680411400
ALAND RUSSELL/ILEEN
CHULA VI!TA CA~IF 92010
,
5680710800
TANAKA TERRY T/NAOMI
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5680712000
GRANT MARGARET E TR
.1
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5680712400
itl I ,~~ ~/ELAINE H
BONITA CA 92002 A
5680720600
MINEAR CLARA
-
BONITA CALIF
A
9~002
.
I
5680721000
~~RRERO RAFAEL/CAROLINA
CHULA VISTA CA 92011
,
5680721400
~
~
5680721800
~CARMEN H
~92010
r:J. -" I
5662503900
BECKER FAM~Y TRUST 08-30-90
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
ES H
BONITA CA 92002
5662513400
MONTELONGO ABEL G/AILEEN H
CHULA VISTA CA 920tf
5680410600
~R R/YOLANDA C
~ FRANCISCO CA 96346
5680411600
~F
~
T/NAO
A
56B0712100
CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT AGE~
CY
C/O COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
~92010
5680720300
~
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5680720700
MINEAR CLARA A <LE> MINEAR
ERT E
~92010
5680721100
~
SAN DIEGO CA 92112
5680721500
~Y/MARGARET
~92010
5680721900
GRANT WALTER/CHARLENE
~TIES
~92010
ROE
5680722400
~Y
TOPSHAM ME 04086
5680722500
~F/RUTH
~ 92010
L TRS
5680730101
~
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5680730102
~ELA E
~TA CA 92010
5680730105
CALE JERRY E/SYBIL
SAN OlIGO' "154
5680730106
~
~010
5680730109
CAZARES DlLCE M
~LA VISTA CA 92010
5680730110
~TT A/LYDIE
~A 92010
\.
,..,
5680730113
GASPERSON CHUCK
~2011
5680730114
GILLETTE R}iiARD H/JOAN L
~J~SBAD CA 92008
"
5680730117
~~ ~QOMAN A
SAN DIEGO CA 92122
5680730118
~BORAH K
~
5680730121
~ONFORTH JOHN A TR
CHULA VIs-PI ~A 92d10
5680730122
MC GINLEY DANIEL
~54
5680730125
~/PATRICIA L
~117
5680730126
~
~10
5680730400 5680730500
FANNING EDNA L <AKA SMITH EDNA ~
L>
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
CHULA VISTA CA 92010 ,.
5680730800 5680730900 ~
BROSZ JOSE A/ANGELA M ~ONE FRAN~OUISE N
1 CHULl VISTA CALIF 92010
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
,.
5680731200 5680731300 t
~TRUST 01-08-86 ~ BERNITA C TR
,
92010 C U A v1lrrA CA 92010 ,
.
f' !
,
,
5680740400 5680740500 ~
~ FLEMING NELDA T , !
C/O PATRICIA OSUNA
LEMON GROVE CA 92045 ~010 t
,
l
Ii}. -~~
5680722200
~ORGE
COTun MA 02635
E/CATHERINE
5680722600
APPA S GUS TR
CHULA VI A CA 92010
5680730103
~~~~!'!I~:~:A \z010
5660730111
~ANKA
~92010
5680730115
GASPERSON CHUCK
~A 92380
5680730119
TEWALT BERNARD B/MARY R
~
5680730123
ER MICHA
SAN DIEGO CA 92122
5680730200
LARSON EDWARD F/JESSIE
CHU~A visTA CA-1201 0
5680730600
~E/MARY E
~35
5680731000
SORENSON G~S
CHULA VISTA CALIF 92010
5680740200
~LIZABETH A
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
~
I~- ~3
5680722300
MACIE RICHARD F/MDNICA
PfBtA VISTA CJ'92010
5680722800
NAVARRO LINDA R
.~A CA 92010
5680730104
CAZARES ARMANDO
~C10
5680730108
~O
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5680730116
~PATRICIA L
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5680730120
FINNERTY FRANCES R
CHULA VISTA CA ~!010
5680730124
.IUAy UANA
CHULA VISTA
CA n010
5680730300
CRANFILL ROSE B TR
~~LA VIllI ~~'~2010
5680730700
VILLARINO ROBERT J/SOCORRO
I
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5680731100
~AVIS YERNON E/EDNA R TRS
LA MESA CA 92041
5680740300
GARRETT HARVEY N TR
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
_,M"...
~~..
:...
jt';...
...
k:...
'1..
.....
;.M.
e:
5680740800
~IUSJ
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5681612200
~THERINE J
CHULA VISTA CALIF 92010
5681613200
CHULA VISTA MEDICAL ENTERPRISE
i
CHULA VIST' CA 92010
568162020C
~R P/GINGER M
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5681620600
~ANICE
~FE CA
G
92067
5681621000
WATROUS ANSEL/MARJORIE W
CHULA OIS~ CA 92010
5681621500
CASEY J~SEPH A
~A VIST' CA 92010
5681622300
BURN~E A
CARDIFF CA 92007
5681630300
SCHATZ CAROL E
i/O BRAVBURGER NORfERT
SAN DIEGO CA 92110
R TR
5681630900
~7-90
~
5680741100
LIGHTHART LUCY <LE> MURPHY ROB
ERT M(1/6'/MC BRIDE CHARLOTTE
~HTHART
~CA 92010
5681612300
~
~
ENTERP SE
201
5681620300
TORTORA _R
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5681620700
~YT
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5681621100
~ROSLAV M 0
~A CA 92010
INC
5681621600
~
~
5681622000
~GLORIA A
~8
5681622400
ISMAJ ISRAEL/JACQUELINE
~A 92010
5681630400
~RTRUDE
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
B TRS
5681631000
HILLS RICHARD E/GEORGINE 0
SAN DIEGO ~I al,06
....--.,.,.Jy.
" .c-"'..----:...""'''''''.....''''''''.'
J~ - (,~
t
"',
.,.
..
..,
.
e
~.
(
L
5680740600
HOME F(D TRVj~1R
~EGO CA 92101
5680741700
~ E/MADELYN M
CHULA VISTA CALIF 92010
5681613400
PACIFIC SOUTHWEST REALTY cocce
RP)
C/O CORPORATE TAX H20-12
LOS ANGELES CA 90051
5681620400
ERwIN LAURENCE M
-
FOUNTAIN VALLEY CA 92708
REDEVELOPMENT AG ~
T
BONIT A
VISTA
5681622100
jOHNS~N mLRT
CHULA VISTA CA
G/GLORlA A
92012
5681630100
BRAVO ARTURO e/SYLVIA F
--
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5681630500
iil6N_iaVI~R(nSA~ELL J
BONITA CA 92002
5681630700
DEMARA CHRISTOPHER/THERESA
CHULl" VISTA CA 92010
l
~
JO
5680740700
~YL
CHULA VISTA CA 92011
5680741800
LE FRIANT JACQUES L TR
SAN DIEGO CA 921~~
568 12500
CITY LA VISTA
C/O CITY
276 FOURT
CHUL
5681620100
PROVENCE WINIFRED E TR
1I . ..I
CORONADO CA 92118
5681620500
~TR
~92010
5681620900
CH VISTA REDEVELOPMENT AGE~
eY
C/O COMMUNI NT
276 FD
e STA CA 92010
5681621400
~C/SUSAN K
~A 92010
5681621800
CARLSON DENNIS G/TERESA M
~
G/GLO
012
5681630200
DEMARA CHRISTOPHER/THERESA
~ALIF 92010
5681630601
MERCADO LEOPOLDO R TR
~N REAL TORS
~A 92139
5681630600
~VIeTORIA P
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
I~ -1,5
-1.
~~~~..
.Jt I' ...
II r r:...
ft.l..
~ 11-:...
1 1't..
f. );....
.)' .r.>e.
b
5681631500
~ENISE
CORONADO CA 92118
5081631900
MC MILLIN ~ACEY L JR
C/O PATRICK MC MILLIN
NATIONAL CITY CA 92050
5681632300
MERCADO JAIME TR
-
80NITA CA 92002
56~1640300
GALLASTEGUI
- ,
CHULA OIS A
MAR lA
CA 92012
5681640700
HAYDEN KENNETH TITHELMA
~HULA VISTA C~2010
5681641100
iUGGER MARGARET A
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5683310100
GARSH-PIPER ORAL/MAXILLO-FACIA
L SURGERY GROUP
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5683311000
SOUTHWORTH WILMA
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5683311400
DICKEN ON WILLIAM AIRAVELLA
CHULA VISTA A 10
5683312200
MEIA JESUS TITOMASA M
-- ~
CHU[A ISTA CA 92010
5683320300
FROETSCHER MARIE M TR
CHULA VIST~CA 92010
5681631600
HENDRIX ERNEST A
~12
5681632000
REGALADO ISIDORO AIESTER R
"JLA VISTA CA 92010
5681632400
LEONARD CHRISTOPHER LIMARION P
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5601640400
DAM
G
5681640800
SPENCER NORA P
ARLINGTON TX rd12
5681641200
JOHNSON ROBERT GIGLORIA
-
CHULA VISTA CA 92012
5683310500
~/MONICA L
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5683311100
HCLDERER RAYMOND GIN JOANNE
~INE CA 92001 .",
5683311500
ALLEN KATHLEEN A <AKA AVERY KA
THLEEN A>
-
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
56b3312300
AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS TH
IE..
SAN DIEGO CA 92103
5683320400
~VID/DEBORA
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
I~"'~~
...
..-
,.
.
,.
..
J
5681631100
~H JOHN ~(RAI ilE
BONITA CA 92002
j
5681631700
~
CHULA VISTA CALIF 92010
5681632100
~ARQUE~ CONSUELO A
CHULA VISTA CA 92012
5681640100
~NEY TROl M/KATHRINE
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5681641300
JC~~<-
CHULA A
5683310700
SCOTT ELECTA L
C/O G 8 CLAUSING
=A WA 98903
5683311200
GIL8ERT ALICE E
CHULA VISTA CA ~010
5683311600
BRAVO CARLOS/REFUJIO
~2011
5683312000
HART MICHAEL J/DARLENE G
~010
5683320100
~:
L
CA 92010
5681631200
~REOERICK
~A 92010
R TR
5681631800
ST~CHOWITZ GERALD R/ESTELA
~92011
5681632200
~IRGINIA
~686
5681640200
~HENRIETTA
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5681640600
~
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5681641000
WALTERS REGINALD L/KATHERINE A
TRS
SAN DIEGO CA 92i09
5681642300
~D
~92118
5683310900
~
~92010
5683311300
CAMPOS TRUST 08-14-90
~
5683311700
HARC.STY WILBERT L/MARY E TRS
CHULA VISTA CALIF 92010
5683312100
ST ONGE BARRY/LEONA M
~
56B3320200
~LVIA
~010
J( CV A)
/;).(."1-
0....-.-
-,.""').,..
~J ...
: r: l..
rr..
1 :...
I f..
X l! 1..
p;. --.
5683321400
~
~92010
5683321800
~ICEJ
(HULA VISTA CALIF 92010
5683322200
EID R ANNA
CHULA VISTA CA 9 010
5683340900
FIRST SOUTHERN BAPTIST CHURCH
~F CH~~LA VISTA_
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5683341300
WRIGHT JEAN R TR
~F
92010
5683500700
DESSER PETER ~RENZA
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
R/ DANIE
t
5683501800
RASO ANTHONY J/CATALDA <AKA R~
SO KITTY>
~CA 92010
,
5683503801
~LYN G
~ CA 92010
(
(
5683503805
~LE
~CA
L/ELEANOR
92010
(;
(
5683503809
GONZALEZ ABELARDO P
~92010
t
t
5683503813
ESTRADA JOSEPH
~A
A/GAIL L
92010
c
-'""""
"',
._.~~ ;:~i;<}~~?'~-'~~:Z'~/' "_~
<'~:'"
.,',,'."<-,',_.',;L
5683321500
POLLORENA JOHN E/YOLANDA E
~92011
5683321900
~O
5683322300
~SARA S
~
5683341000
~L EVELYN K
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5683341400
.tjU~VELYN
C:LA ~~
K
,<o~
5683500800
MADSEN JOHN R/DANIELLE M
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
H83501200
VA I/DOROTHY E
CHULA VISTA CA 92
5683501900
RAtO ANTHONY J~ATALDA
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5663503802
ELMORE DAVID'
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5683503806
CROOM LANCE D/ROBIN
IJ
CHULA VISiA CA 92010
5683503810
WHITE WALTER F
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5683503814
~
~65
5683321600
~
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5083322000
SPICE LOIS TR
"ULA VISTA CALIF
92010
5683331000
COMMUNITY CONGREGATIONAL CHURC
~ OF CHRIST CHUL
~92010
5683341100
SOUTHWESTERN CHRISTIAN ASSEMBL
LY
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5683341500
(LERA LIVING TRUST 11-01-89
CHULA {,:l!rA CA 92~10
5683500900
~':
HULA CA 9 I
'~
5683501600
--~ENCY INC
~A ,2010
5683502800
~LLE A
~
5683503803
~NAR
~ CA 92010
5683503807
~E
~CA 92010
5083503811
MUELLER AUDREY E
~010
5083503815
PACHECO PLACIDO B <DVA>
~ 92010
5683321700
~RILYN B
CHULA VISTA CALIF 92010
5683322100
LAIR MARY If
MeA VISTA
CA 92010
5683341200
~
~92010
5683500600
RoaSON LYNDA D
~03
~
MA IE
o
5683501700
~RANK A/LAURA R
~A 9211B
5683503300
~ES
~CA
F/ENIO M
92010
5683503804
~
~2010
56il3503808
~
~ 92010
5683503812
CONNER SUSAN-li
~ VISTA CA 92010
5683510700
~
J~- /, ,
'"'
'".
,-.
r,
!1
Q
il
,
5683510800
~BONNEY T
~10
5683511200
~ J JR/RONDA
~92010
5683511600
KNIESS HELEN l <lE> KNIESS
~NND
~010
5683520300
~
~2010
5683520700
~E/SHEIlA
~ 92010
M TRS
5683521100
~ G/EVA I
~011
5683521500
~CORA C
~A 92010
5683521900
~
5683522300
~
~
5683530100
MONC:Y JANE M TR
~Y
~92010
5683530500
~NGElA
~A 92010
5683530900
TEMPLE BETH SHOlOM OF
~CA 92012
CHUlA Vl
5683510900
~TINEZ ARMANDO/MARGARET E
~VISrr CA 92010
RAE
5683511300
LAMBERT CHARLES S/)ANICE A
CHUlA VISTA CA 92010
RIC
5603511700
~ONSTANCE ~
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5683520400
~
CHUlA VISTA CA 92010
5683520800
~HEN
~116
G TR
5683521200
~LOLINA G
~010
5683521600
SAFLAF PHILLIP E/MARILYN C
~10
5683522000
~GlICET C
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
56.3522400
CHUIDIAN EMILIO OROONEZ/RUSTIC
A 9
hULA vIs-K c! ~tbll
5683530200
~
~O
5683530600
~
~10
5683531000
~NTONIETA J
~TA CA 92010
J.J.- ?O
5683511000
MAR IN Z ARMANDO/MARGARET E
CHULA VISTA
5683511400
~
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5683520100
~
~010
5683520500
~GE
COTUIT MA 02635
EI CATHERINE M
5683520900
ROBLEDO ENRIQUE/ESPERANZA
100NITA CA 92'2
5683521300
WHALEY HASKELL M
~2010
5683521700
~IE
~CA
MARY
92010
5683522100
lEAFORO~LANO F/ANOREE T
CHULA VISTA ~IF 92010
5683522500
~R/BARBARA B
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5683530300
~OA
~92010
5683530700
~TERESA Y
~ 92010
5683531100
~ON/ANITA B
~ALIF 92010
5683511100
CORNISH GLADYS L
~ VISTA CA 9.010
5683511500
~4
5683520200
~M
TAVERNIER FL 33070
5683520600
~L
CHULA VISTA CALIF
BILOUISE H
92010
5683521000
~ISELLI A~FRnL J
SAN DIEGO CA 92117
5683521400
~PE JiYONEY
CHULA VISTA
J
CA 92010
5683521800
SCHUELKE JUAN H
~A WHITE
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5683522200
ARCIA CANDELARIO T/ROSA M
CHULA VI 92011
5683522600
EARLS GARY C/CONSTANCE L
~92010
5683530400
~AV/SUZANNE M
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5683530800
~MARCIE L
C~ULA VISTA CA 92010
5683531200
CESENA ILDROLFO 0 TR
""""TA CA 92010
1;2- 1-/
. .
f.l
.
..
(;
.
~
..
5683531300
PARKS JUANA 1
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5683531700
MORAN TERESA
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5683532100
MC DANIEL HARRY D/KAZUE
S CA
5684200400
MARIOTA JULIO M
CHULA VISTA CA ~2010
5684200000
JANUS ANTHONY JR
CHULA V~A CA 92010
5683531400
TAYLOR JEAN E
C~ULA VISTA CA 92010
5683531800
~ Ir.I/PATRICIA r-'
~A 92010
5684200100
~
~9
5684200500
CHASE fAR~/CHASE
.ONITA CA 92002
CHRISTINE
5684200900
MANALO RICHARD R
-~
SAN DIEGO CA 92
5684201200
~JOAN S
LA MESA CA 92041
.
5684202000
CONTRERAS MICHAEL/MARIA
CHULA V~~TA CA 92010
5684202500
6ELL CLIFFORD JOHN TRUST
_I U 92M~2 -
5684203000
SAFEWAY STORES
off -
LOS ANGEL CA
INC
S8051
5684203400
~A~Er MAURICE R/MARIE L
CHULA VISTA CALIF 92010
5684203600
MORRIS SIDNEY JR/ROSETTE D
CHULA VISTA CA 92011
5684204200
I~UJ~ RAUL/ROSE M
AN IGUEL N~ 88058
5684201400
CHULA ISTA
CY
C/O COMMUN
276 Fe
CHU~ ISTA
REDEVELOPMENT
e - T
VE
CA 92010
5684202200
OHARA EVERETTE
.v_, __
SAN DIEGO CA 92073
-
5684202600
~EZ JOHN R/RE~tA
SIDRO CA 92073
I
5684203100
CHU VISTA
CY
C/O COMMUN
276 FO
CHU ISH
VE
CA 92010
REDEVELOPMENT
5684203500
MOORE OBERT C/IRENE K
HULA VISTA CA 010
5684203900
~INC
~
5684204300
SPREKELMEYER EDWARD R/LINDA R
~010
1';;)-9-'d.
GEN
C TRS
=-
-.~-.,
5683531500
FAp~h. MYN~E D
CHUlA VISTA CA 92010
5683531900
TR
5684200200
~
CHULA VISTA CA
M/YOlANDA M
92010
5684201000
~EY 6/DORIS Q
~92010
568,201500
CHUlA VISTA REDEVElOPME~T
5~v..rJ '""0"5.
---
5684202300
~
~92011
5684202700
~ENCE T/ANA M
~CA 92010
5684203200
I3ROWN E~ETH E
CHUlA VISTA CALIF 92010
5684203600
ALCALA ENRIQUE V/FREDESVINDA
(DVAI
~A VISTA CA 92010
5684204000
~EDES
CHUlA VISTA CA 92012
5684204400
~
~10
5663531600
~ID R/DE88IE S
~A CA 92010
5683532000
~RMEN V
~011
5684200300
~/CATAlDA
~ 92010
5684200700
NEO~
CHUlA VISTA CA 92010
5684201100
~
~
A.GEN
5684201900
~O/AMAlIA U
~ 92201 00000
5684202400
~SEPH
~ACA
M
92010
5684202800
SMITH SARA E CORP
~
~06
5684203300
~E J/ClARA M
~92010
5684203700
P~M
~O
5684204100
~
~
5684204500
GONZALEZ MARIA
CHUlA VISTA CA
J A
92010
J~- T 3
.,
..
iJ
..
..1
~
~
dl
)
5684204600
HORNING THOMAS A
~10
5684205000
OLANO A~E~O J/TANiA J
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5684205400
HELM JOHN.fi.i[V
BONITA CA 92002
~
~
5684205800
~ITH LAURA
CHULA VISTA
F TR
C~ 92010
J
>>
5684502800
TANOS R~fOLFO/GUADALUPE
A. .... . _
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5684503200
SHI8UYA YOSHINDO/8ETTY T
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5684503600
~LAND CO
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5684504000
8URJET INC
-.-
SAN DIEGO CA
n~T
>>
I
:>>
5685110400
PALACIOS HENRY R/YVONNE
CHULA VISTA C~'9~~VO
(}
(
5685110800
~N GEORGE
CHULA VISTA ~1-v2010
5685111200
~ARGARITA P
~IF 92010
J;).- r'l
5684204700
FIRST CHRISTIAN CHURCH OF CHUL
A VISTA THE
~ULA VI!VI CA 92010
5684205100
NEEL K R/OPAL G
~CA 92010
5684205500
~ROSfTTE D
~A 92011
5684205900
~:
F TR
~ y..._An
5684502900
MC CA N P
ON ITA CA 92002
5684503300
~08ERT LIANNA C TRS
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5684504100
CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT
CY
C'~l~; ". "",,_MENT
276 FOUR ,
CHU TA' CA 92010
5685110100
~M
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5685110500
JOHNSTON RAYMOND FAMILY TRUST
~
~A 92010
5685110900
~UELO A
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5685111300
TH MPSON NORMAN L/SUSANNA 0
CHULA A A 92011
-
AGEN
..
ie
..
.
..
i.
..
'e
CHURC
CA
5084205200
BECKWORTH NORMAN/BETTY FAMILY
~UST iO-19-9~
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5684205000
SHADLEY...JJ\CQUES JlJDIS H
SAN DIEGO CA ,<11}
5684503000
LEARNED PHYLLIS E TR
CHULA VISTA CA 920fo
5684503400
~IIKAWA FRANKISUYE
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5684503800
R08ERTS EUG~NE
'nULA VISTA CA
E1A~ELlA 8
92010
5684504200
LA VISTA
C
CIO COMMU
276 F
C
REDEVELOPMENT AGEN
LOPMENT
9191
M
5685110600
~
~10
5685111000
~RACIELA
~2010
~
--
) ;l- r5
HUL
5684204900
HANSEN M~ C
CHULA VISTA CA
92010
5684205300
LADD JAMES L
CIO 8RICKRO~OPERTY MGMT
NATIONAL CITY CA 92050
5084205700
~NANCY L
SPRING VALLEY CA 91978
5684502400
~
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
1'1
o
5684503100
~CAROLYN
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
})
5
C
CY
CIO
276
CH
03900
VELOPMENT AGEN
T
COMMUNIT
FOU
STA CA 92010
T UNION
921
10
..
} ..
..
..
H TR c) ..
..
~ ..
..
5685110700
MONTGOMERY W ELVINIELINOR
S
~HULA VI~A 92012
5685111100
DEw O} FE ll.\WA D
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5685111500
~JACQUELINE R
~2010
5685111600
SMITH CARROLL L/JACQUELINE R
~HULA Vls+l Ctl92010
5685112000
CH VISTA REDEVELOP
CY
c/o COMM LOPMENT
27 HAVE
A VISTA CA 92010
5685120400
~MA
CHULA VISTA CA 92011
.
.
5685120800
CLARK--"ii~ A
BROOKLINE MA 02146
.
.
5685121600
DICKINSON JAMES F
~ -pr
HULA VIST CA 92010
5685122900
~
~
5685123300
HARWOOD CAROL TR
IAN DIEGO CA 92~15
BISHOP OF SAN
92138
.
5685124100
SEVER~ARL L/LILA T
LA JOLLA CA ~2037
.
.
5685124500
PODERICK RICHARD F/BARBARA J
CHULA VIS~ CA 92010
.
5690100500
BUTLER PETER M/DOROTHY V
~CA 92010
5690103400
~E
~92010
1:)-7" C.
5685111700
~TTE
~13
5685112100
.~
SAN DIEGO CA 92120
5685120500
~
~010
5685120900
MONTGOMERY W ELVIN/ELINOR H
S
~2012
5685121800
~ARYJ
~IF 92010
5~85123000
~M
SAN DIEGO CA 92103
ElJILL T
5685123400
~IRGIT G
~011
5685123800
C DIOCESE OF SAN DIEG~ EDUCATION
~
~138
5685124200
WI~S~N~NE M TR
f\ J LLA 92~
5690100100
~LH
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5690100600
~HERINE
~
5690103500
~
~10
t
5685111800
CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPME"
LOPMENT
VE
STA CA 92010
C/O COMMUN
276 FOU
CH
5685120200
~/SUSAN C
~
o ..~ -; 5685120600
'.t...~
O.l..~
,: a t; I
0., ;.
~(: r
O. . 5685121000
..~.t. !~AA
~ CHULA VISTA CALIF 92010
5685122400
~M
CHULA VISTA CALIF
92010
5685123100
~O/AUDREY
~ 65706
5685123500
,~
~
5685111900
GE" CHU STA REDEVELOPME"T AGEN
CY
c/o COMMUNIT ENT
276 FO E
CHU STA CA 92010
5685120300
~
~CA 92050
5685120700
~Rrf v,.:lR~rMARY
CHUL 010
/CATALDA
10
5685122700
~ES
~CA
o TR
92010
5685123200
~E
BONITA CA 92002
B TR
5685123600
ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP OF SAN 0
~2138
5685124000
EDUCATION ~
~92010
-
5685123900
~c OF SAN DIEGO
/WELF _
r.r.'-'~ A n138
c.
at: ~
C. 5685124300
rQI:~~
O..l.~
l ca C I
0_....;"
..
5690100200
~LYA
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5690101000
NICHOLS DENNIS
~
ClSUSAN UDVA)
92010
5690103000
~
~
J ;)- T r
5690100300
~E/STEPHANIE J
~CA 92010
5690103300
~EN
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5690103700
~
~
5130610400
RESLEY GEORGIA J
FU~~ERTON CA 92631
5730610800
(ORlF1 ~ICTaR Z/CANOICE S
(HULA VISTA CA 92011
-
5730620300
IIfOF"Y 'AOtp A"UA.ALUPE
CHULA VISTA AlIF 92010
IJ
I
..u
oq
5730620700
~~A .~FRE.
ULA ISTA
· 11
CA 2lJ'10
5730622300
..WA'.S A'lllll
CIJUL" VISTA CA
LlARLEIN ~
92010
5730720200
'OSE 0'" 'fTnSELLE
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5730730100
COLLE I In''F !
IA.oN CA 920 ,--
5730732000
OLSON RICllARO J/ELIZABETH G
lNUL" YI. . L"L" 92010
5730740300
"'FHNI F ,.... E
HULA VISTA CA
SR/KATHLEEN A
92010
5730610500
.~rltEr'lif'
A STA CA
LlANNA8ELLE
92010
5730610900
WILSON MARya
ClO MARY TH;BEAU
-ntorb. Nt 7932
5730620400
POLAN RO~ERT J/MARIA E
ll:llULA VISTA CA 92010
5730620800
~r JOHN'lrSE ·
A VISTA CALIF 92010
5730622400
DICKERSON ROBERT L/ANNA
LLO FUTURE REALTY
CHuLA VISTA C~ 92010
5730720300
~CA
92010
5730730200
~ O/NADINE T
~ 92010
5730732100
MC CRACKEN WALTER H/KATHERINE
.
~ULA VISTA CA 92010
5730740400
i'..'. JOHN
CHULA VISTA
G/OOLORES
CA 91010
5730610600
'",... ".., ...
(HUL.l, VISTA CA
G JR/IRENE
92010
5730620100
~E/8J.R8ARAJ.
~92010
5730620500
~CO
~06
N/ZULMIAA
5730620900
COPFI UMiOT A/CONNIE S
rRULA VI L~ ~l010
C TRS
5730622500
SCHULLER RICHARD E/DOLORES P T
os
CHULA VI5tA [ILIF 92010
5730120400
~CHAEL F/OENA 0
~A 92010
5730730300
WOOLWAY STEPHEN M
LNUL" ,.,," '" 92010
5730740100
GLENN DEARL A/GENEVA G
CHUL' YI"" ['LIF 92010
5730741900
HARRIS ALICE l
CHULA V.L:> I" l;1l,
n010
5730610700
~VAR
~F92010
5730620200 .
~
5730620600
R~K/MIYOKO
~910
5730622200
ULIBARRI ALF~ J'~ARY
,,""L' VISTA 92010
5730720100
BROWN ReBERT JOE
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5730720800
PRItKETT JEFFREY A/LORETTA G
~ULA VISTA !. 92010
5730730400
~AB
~92010
5730740200
S.ANTO~ "'A~
(HULA VIS CALIF
92010
5731003600
~O
~3
5693301100
HUHoLE "Ii' E
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5693301500
~EL
~CA
J/TERESA M
92010
5693410500
REYNOLI' linN L/CA'OL L
CHULA VISTA CALIF 92010
01
-.
0.5693410900
, ca COGSWELL iHARhH E/PRISCILLA A
~. CHULA VISTA CA 92010
~
al
~.~73 400400.
eOA
L .
5730401101
~INGER JACK ISA~AH E
ULA vIST A 92010
5730401105
LANTZ CLIFFORO S/EVELYN M
LA MESA CA 9ZU41
5730401109
OURBIN ERM.6
CHULA VISTA
L
IA 92010
5730401200
C'. SEAMAN HELEN fill
c. eHULA v"HIA 92010
o
~.
.:. 0: 5730501000
r O. TOqRES ORLANDO a/MELVA E
'-_ ca.
a. BONITA CA 92002
5730502000
HI GRlftl H LESLEY
LA JOLLA CA 92037
TR
-
5730610200
WEEN CHARLES R/SUSAN
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
I( TRS
I ~- rf:J
5693301200
HEAO RICHARD D/MAOELYN
",OLA VISTf CA 92010
5693410200
GOMEZ JULIO A/ROBLEDO-GOMEZ RO
SANNA E
APO MIAMI FL 34007
5693410600
VILLA GUSTAVO/MA GOT
TA CA 010
573C400100
COAST SAVINGS/LOAN
~'ANADA HILLS CA tl,..
/LOA
C
5730401102
ARGFRIS FRANCES
(HULA VISTA CA 92010
5730401106
OURSO MARION G
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5730401110
RUSSELL ROWENA
CHULA VISTA CA
,
92010
5730501600
rw: meo
CHULA VISTA
A/AURORA C
CA 92010
USAN
2010
5693300700
FERNANDEZ LOUIS A
ttULA VISTA CA 92010
5693301300
JOHNSON EDWARD H/CHRISTINE V
RS
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
l
5693410300
BLACK 11Mf:!: O/VIRGINIA L ns
(HULA VISTA CA 92010
c
e
5693410700
HELGESON EARL M(DELORES E
CHULA VISTA CALIF 92010
f
44
5730400900
SAN DIEGO HOSPITAL
SAN D!tbO ~A Y~I~J
ASSN <CORP)
5730401103
~
~2010
5730401107
JWAGfNAAR JACK K/SANDRA A
BONITA t.:A yLIIU .-
.
5730401111
FALKENTHAL
.,
(HULA Vl:>IA
(A 92010
RICHARD N/MARY J(D\'
.
.
5730500500
LARENCE T/HIROE TRS
CHULA VIS A A 9 011
r
5730501700
SENSON DAVID A/SUSAN A
~LTY
~92708
5730502200
LUM TOMIEVA
BONITA CA 92002
I ~ ..g 0
569330100C
~CHNHe MILDRED J
HULA ISlA CA 92010
5693301400
1 PETER' , ","IN
""'t1lULA VISTA CA
92010
5693410400
WILLARD ROBERT I~AROL L
ttbLA VISTA CA "010
5693410800
LAMOUREUX CHARLES A/CHERYL A
[IGel "'" e. v,b,o
57304003QC
---
'~44
5730401000
CArPRf:11 JEANNE
rrNITA CA \ltuJ.:~
8 TR
5730401104
WILLIA"l JELEN
nULA VIS A CA
,
92010
5730401108
MOREY PHILIP H/EETTY J
CHULA VISTA CJ"" 92010
57304C1112
AWTON AYMON E/ROSELLEN M TRS
Cl-fULA V
5130500600
~T11 TI"' FRANK JI"AR'
CHULA VISTA CA 9 U1U
A B TR
5730501800
CALDWELL JILL
SAN DIEGO CA YllUY
573061010')
HEN H E/SARAH
OJ '1>IA <>
E
92010
0.'"
,:e""' ~
o. '
IQ(; !
l!I!. t)
~ o t:" ,
o.
~.(_ I cr
ree.
c. ()
( OC I
~.
( OCt W.
o.
( cae I
oe '"
Ij--rl
5690103800
~ ,rOKe N
CH S1.. CAL.IF
92010
5690300100
r',",PRO:I I r.o~GORY fill/SUSAN 0
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5690302000
J"ll~/"" IHHlO:OT IUMAAY "'(OVA)
(HULA VISTA CALIF 92010
5691201900
GREEN RANCH APARTMENTS
11. O'EGO CA Y),U'
.
5691410300
SOL t c: r41HH JhiA
(HULA VISTA CA 92010
5690103900
~/MARGUERITE R
~IF9201D
5C9030Qi?QO
.,,,,, ~" , TO
(HULA ~A CA 92010
5690302100
.""" ,n"" J/DOROTHY M
(HULA VISTA CA 92010
LT.
56912C2000
~R
~2010
5691420100
OCONNI=I' lolll J TAM M JR
(HULA VISTA CA 92010
5691421800 5691421900
RODRIGUEZ FAMILY TRUST 11-29-S R
o
(HULA VISTA CA 92010
5691430300
~VAF~:'!!O!~UST
5692200100
Me lINTor, WILLIAM N
"HUL.A VIS A CA 92010
5692310200
YOUNG KATHRYN TR
~AN DIEGO CA 92106
5692510200
WARKENTIN REBECCA A TRUST 0&-1
4-90
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5692510600
o NEjhL JOHN J/HILARIA
-
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5693300300
ilT HERBERT R/LUDIVINA G TRS
.1 _
BONITA CA 92002
29-,
5691500100
~JUANA R
~CA92010
5692200200
~ T/OORI5 M
~A 92010
5692320100
~J/TAMIA
~92010
5692510300
~OODS fAMILY TRUST
CHUC' ""I c, .,010
E TRS
5692510700
SPARDY RAYMONO/LAVONNE M
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
TRS
""..-" "",...,7':' .. "'-7 I -u I.>
GENERAL PLAN: REZONE/PREZONING
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX)
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
5662401100
WI~LIAnS j~"'S HIJAH' H
BONITA CA 92002
5662403000
HaM LEO TR
(/0 IAH' O,-,",.IC'
SAN RANCISCO CA 94137
5662500400
HUFFMAN MARTH' J ~
IUBL. VIS,A l 92010
-
t.J
,
oa
9.J
5662501900
~Ef JAto"" I., CAr SlBOHIl
!ftULA V"TA CA 92 10
5662502300
wHITWORT~ GAIL G/R~MARY M
CHUlA VISTA CALIF ~10
566250:5400
~IL P.I"". I
N DIEGO CA 92107
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ x^^^^^xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxx XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX xxx XXX XXX xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXX XXX XXX XXX xxX xxx XXX xxx xxx XXX
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX xxxxxxxxxx~xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
5662402700
PACIfIC HOMES
WOODLAND HILLS CA 91364
5062402800
SOUTHLAND CORP THE
DALLAS TX 75221
5662402900
CENTER STREET APART~ENTS SITE
C/O MR RUHARD G ZOGOB
[~LL' VISTA CA 92010
5662500300
~STER JOYCE J(
LA _BrA" 92010
5662501800
HALIL LJ;O , JR/Hr" C
fHULA VISTA CALIF 92010
5662502200
WINE JA~ES A/JANET C
CH~LA VISTA CA YtU1U
5662502900
wILSON DAVI.2,_E'SANORA J
(HULA VIS~ 92012
5662503300
OllEY H.DRA
CHULA VISTA
J
o 92010
5662500100
HI'[ Irm "{]"'ij.' L
CHULA VISTA CA 9201
5662500200
DICKERSON DONALD f
(HULA VISTA CA 92010
5662503700
DENT GARY J/JULIA E
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5662501600
~ACHTER JAMES E/DOROTHA E
C~ULA VISTA CALIF 97010
5662501700
ADAMS JOHN E/MARY B
l:HULA VISTA CA YtUIU
5662502000
V,.,." KFlI1 !
C'HULA VISTA CA 92010
5662502100
LIPPE MARIE E
~HULA VISTA CA v,u10
5662502400
MEYER BEN S/CINDY
CHULA VISTA CA 92010
5662502800
WILSON DAVID f/WILSON SANDRA J
'H~L' VI"" " 92010
5662503100
NEVEU BRUCE A
!IN DIEGO CA 92104
5062503200
VALENZUELA RAYMOND E <OVA>
CHGLA VISTA CA 92010
5662503500
MEYER MARGARET
CHULA VISTA CA
5662503600
LOPEZ RAMRN
CkULA VISTA
, I.
92010
C
CA 92011
.,
~~-i.~l~ NOTICE OP PUBLIC BEARING
BY ...;.I-T-ar.1l1 .1.. ----I OF . 1>
_ II CH'OLA VISTA, CALJ:FORNJ:A -..::.:::-. C-~Ty' CDVAJC,L-
C flY I:c9WolGI c...
NOTIc~tIS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE
CITY ~AWiilT IJlII88I8U of Chula Vista, California, for the
purpose, of considering amendments to the General Plan and zone
changes~~onsistent with that General Plan. The area represents
approximately~O acres and is generally located in Central Chula
vista between "E" street on the north, Shasta Street on the south,
Third Avenue on the west, and Second Avenue on the east. There is
an additional area on the east side of Fourth Avenue, between "E"
and Davidson Street.
This public hearing will be held as a part of the General
Plan/Zoning Consistency study. Attached are Planning Department
staff recommendations. Please see Exhibits A, B, C, 0 and Table 1
which will be transmitted to the . _ .1 1 -for their
consideration. Copies of the staff report will be available in the
Planning Department office. -- . -1. If you would like a
copy of that report, you may obtain one at the Planning Department,
276 Fourth Avenue, City Public Services Building. If you have any
other questions, please call Frank Herrera-A at 691-5094.
If you wish to challenge the City's action on this zone change and
General Plan 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 I . ~ -8_ . '.. at or prior to the public hearing.
ciTY CL.E",*,S ~t=F\t"l!! 0
SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY ~~IIHI'l.1 on
Wednesday,~- . .1 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers,
Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, at which time any
person desiring to be heard may appear.
~'
DATED: _ Llll
CASE NO. PCZ-91-C/GPA-91-1
" .
-If- c: nr t:"OONcll-
@ ~.\,' "", l'if,,",
""'Ale t\ 1 \qq,
Jij~:~~3~~:-'YID
eRu.l-J. . is,. I' I.
--
'J
I ....__"., "''''..'
...::!u~ Z;; ~ 0 ,.3-;;s>.
~~ -3-/-7'(
I ~ - 1..3
/( io""d"'.'
p
-.1<-
DATE:
Mav 28. 1991
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Beverly Authelet, City Clerk
Nancy Ripley, Planning Department
Referral from Planning Commission meeting of March 13, 1991
Please schedule the following for Council consideration at the meeting of
June 11, 1991
Forwarded herewith: Public Hearing Notice(s) and Mailing List(s).
Forthcoming: Resolution(s)
/
PUBLl C HEARl NG:
PCl-91-C/GPA-91-1: City-initiated proposal to amend the General
Pl an and rezone Cel":a L.-i;',,"io'j t~l":', generally bounded by "E"
Street, "H" Street, Second Avenue and Third Avenue, plus an
additional area east of Fourth Avenue between "E" and
Davidson Streets, to resolve General Plan/zoning inconsistencies
within the Centrla Chula Vista Community
(Beverly, Frank Herrera says the
with the public hearing notice.
at 5094.)
law mandates that we notice these maps, etc.
If you have any questions, please call him
(
, ,
/ '.{
I
i 0'
, I
Jd-B'I-