HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports 2003/11/12
AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Chula Vista, California
Wednesday, November 12, 2003,6:00 p.m.
Council Chambers
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
CALL TO ORDER: Castaneda
Madrid O'Neill Hall
Cortes
Horn
Felber
ROLL CALUMOTIONS TO EXCUSE
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE and MOMENT OF SILENCE
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
October 8, 2003
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Opportunity for members of the public to speak to the Planning Commission on
any subject matter within the Commission's jurisdiction bLlt not an item on
today's agenda. Each speaker's presentation may not exceed three minutes.
1. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS 03-
04) and the following applications filed by the Our Lady of
Guadalupe Church for a church complex located at 345
Anita Street:
a. PCC 04-14; Conditional Use Permit to construct and
operate a multi-purpose facility in the church complex,
and allow an increase in building height from 28 feet to
32.5 feet.
b. ZAV 03-04; Variance to reduce the required front yard
setback from 15 feet to 5 feet.
Project Manager: Michael Walker, Associate Planner
Planning Commission
- 2 -
November 12, 2003
BUSINESS:
DIRECTOR'S REPORT:
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
The City of Chula Vista, in complYing with the American with Disabilities Act (ADA), requests
individuals who require special accommodations to access I attend, and/or participate in a City
meeting, activity, or service, request such accommodations at least forty-eight hours in advance
for meetings, and five days for scheduled services and activities. Please contact Diana Vargas for
specific information at (619) 691-5101 or Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf (TDD) at
585-5647. California Relay Service is also available for the hearing impaired.
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item:
Meeting Date: 11/12/2003
ITEM TITLE:
Consideration of a Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-03-004 and the
following applications filed by the Our Lady of Guadalupe Church for a
church complex located at 345 Anita Street:
a) PCC-04-0l4, Conditional Use Permit to construct and operate a multi-
purpose facility in the church complex, and allow an increase in building
height from 28 feet to 32.5 feet.
b) ZA V -03-04, Variance to reduce the required front yard setback from 15
feet to 5 feet.
The Applicant, Our Lady of Guadalupe Church, has submitted an application to allow the
construction of a multi-purpose facility, as part of the church complex, replacing the existing
assembly hall at the southeast corner of Fresno A venue and Tremont Street, and allow an increase in
the allowable height limit in the R-2 zone from 28 feet to 32.5 feet to accommodate a building design
more compatible with the existing church bui1ding.
The applicant is a1so requesting a variance to allow a reduction in the required front setback to allow
the facility to be placed within 5 feet ofthe north property line for a better use of the property and a
functional site design.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has prepared an Initial Study in accordance with
CEQA. Based upon the results of the Initial Study, the Environmental Review Coordinator has
determined that the project could result in significant effects on the environment. However,
revisions to the project made by the applicant would avoid or mitigate the effects to a level below
significance, therefore Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-03-004 has been prepared. The Resource
Conservation Commission recommended adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration on
September 21,2003.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission adopt the attached Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-03-004 and
Resolution PCC-04-014/ZA V-03-04, approving Conditional Use Permit PCC-04-014 and Zone
Variance ZA V -03-04 based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
Page 2, Item:
Meeting Date:1l/12/03
DISCUSSION:
1. Proiect Back!!round
Our Lady of Guadalupe Church was built under the San Diego County zoning regulations.
The church comp1ex, which consists of the sanctuary, an auditorium, classrooms and
administration offices, has been operating with a combination of on-site and on-street
parking. After the area was annexed to the City, the Planning and Building Department
processed a remodel and expansion of the church's sanctuary. The remodeled sanctuary has
a seating capacity of 548 (302 seats added) and a parking facility with a capacity for 65
vehicles (50 spaces adjacent to the Church sanctuary and 15 adjacent to the multi-purpose
room, across Tremont Street) (see Page 4, Attachment 4). Thus the required parking is
deemed to be satisfied with the above mentioned 65 on-site parking spaces and the current
use of on-street spaces avai1able along the surrounding streets. Figure I depicts the on-street
parking spaces available along Tremont Street, Anita Street, Montgomery Street, Fresno
Avenue and Fourth Avenue.
On July 21 , 2003, City staff conducted a neighborhood meeting to introduce the proj ect and
gather input from area residents approximately 900 feet to the east and south, 2,000 feet to
the north and 3,000 feet to the west ofthe project site before Design Review Committee and
Planning Commission hearings. The meeting was held at the existing church multi-purpose
facility, but only four residents attended. The area residents attending the meeting endorsed
the project as presented that night.
On November 3, 2003, the project went before the DRC, and was approved by a unanimous
vote contingent upon approval of this conditional use permit and variance, and subject to
certain conditions.
2. Proiect Settin!!
The Lady of Guadalupe church complex consists of 5 separate, legal parcels. The church
sanctuary and a 50-vehicle parking facility are located at the southeast corner of Anita Street
and Fresno Avenue, on a 40,000 square-foot parcel hereinafter referred to as the Northern
Parcel. The existing multi-purpose facility and rectory are located on two separate parcels at
the southeast comer ofTremont Street and Fresno Avenue. These two parcels and a vacant
parcel immediately adjacent to the south constitute the site for the new multi-purpose facility.
The combined 22,500 square-foot three-parcel site, which is the focus of this application, is
hereinafter referred to as the Southern Parcel (see page 6, Attachment 4). The following list
outlines the existing land uses within the project sites.
Page 3, Item:
Meeting Date:! 1/12/03
Current Uses (Northern Parcel. 345 Anita Street)
Church and parking facility
SanctuaryAdoration Chapel/Sacristy
Reconciliation/Reception
Offices
Crying Room
Religious Education Building
Classrooms
Breakroom/Office
Current Uses (Southern Parcel, 1603 Fresno Av)
Church multi-purpose facility
Church rectory (337 Tremont St)
Garage (337 Tremont St)
(Southern Parcel. 1611 Fresno Av)
Vacant
3. General Plan Land Use and Zoning
General Plan
Zoning
Current Land Use (See Locator Map)
Site: Residential
North: Residential
South: Residential
East: Residential
West: Residential
R-2P
R-2P
R-2P
R-2P
R-2P
Multi-purpose facility, rectory, garage
Our Lady of Guadalupe
Single-Family dwelling
Single-Fami1y dwelling
Montgomery Elementary School
4. Project Description
Conditional Use Permit:
The conditional use permit application requests approval of a 12,051 square foot multi-
purpose facility that will accommodate a 260-seat auditorium, classrooms, administrative
offices, a kitchen and a basement as part ofthe church complex, and an increase in building
height from 28 feet to 32.5 feet. The project also proposes on-site parking, landscaping and
street improvements.
The activities conducted in the church sanctuary inc1ude daily and Sunday mass. The
activities that will be held in the new multi-purpose facility include fellowship after mass,
religious education and other parish events. The hours of operation for the church complex
vary and range from 7:30 am to 7:45 pm on Sundays and 8:00 am to 7:45 pm Monday-
Saturday. All activities conducted in the church and multi-purpose facility will not be held
concurrently.
Page 4, Item:
Meeting Date:1l/12/03
Variance:
The project requires a reduction in the required 15-foot front setback (Tremont Street) from
15 feet to 5 feet.
The proposed church complex is outlined as follows:
Current Uses (Northern Parcel-no change)
Proposed Uses (Southern Parcel)
Church multi-purpose facility (1603 Fresno Av)
Assembly area
Office
Storage (main floor)
Classrooms
Basement Storage
Kitchen/pantry
Other (Foyer, restrooms, utility rooms, etc.)
The project will also provide 24 parking spaces and other on-site and off-site improvements
including, but not limited to: a new six-foot masonry wall along the eastern property line,
sidewalk improvements along Tremont Street and Fresno Avenue and a 4-foot widening of
the alley along the southern boundary (see page I, Attachment 4). The existing sanctuary on
the northern parcel will remain unchanged.
5. Project Data
Assessor's Parcel Number: 623-132-01,02,03 and 623-131-14
General Plan Designation: Low Medium Residential
Montgomery Specific Plan Designation: Low/Medium Density Residential (3-6
Du/Ac)
Current Zoning: R-2P, One/Two-Family Residence
Lot Area: 1.45 ac overall; (22,848 southern parcel)
REQUIRED/ALLOWED PROPOSED/PROVIDED
Parking: 74 spaces 74 total
Landscaping:
Parking area: 10 percent 10 percent
Site: 10 oercent 13 percent
Lot Coverage: 50 percent 39 percent
F100r Area Ratio (FAR): 55 percent 54 percent
Front Yard Setback: 15 feet 5 feet*
Page 5, Item:
Meeting Date: 11/12/03
Ext. Side Yard Setback: 10 feet 10 feet
Side Yard Setback: 5 feet 60 feet
Rear Yard Setback: 20 feet 35 feet
Height: 28 feet 32.5 feet**
*Requires a Variance
**Requires a Conditiona1 Use Pennit
6. Staff Analysis
The multi-purpose facility project is associated with the Our Lady of Guadalupe Church.
Pursuant to Chapter 19.26, R-2, One and Two-Family Residence Zone of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code (CVMC), Section 19.26.040, a church is an unclassified use. The project
requires the following entitlements: I) a Conditional Use Permit for the use and to increase
the allowable 28-foot height limit to 32.5 feet; and 2) a Variance to reduce the required 15-
foot front setback (Tremont Street) from 15 feet to 5 feet. These entitlements require
approval by the Planning Commission.
Conditional Use Permit
Height: The height limit within the R-2P zone is 28 feet or two and one-half stories. The
proposed maximum height of the multi-purpose building is 32.5 feet, compared to the
maximum height ofthe existing church, which is approximately 34 feet (excluding the tower
elements). The surrounding single-family building heights are as follows: the one-story,
single-family residence to the east is approximately 13 feet high and the two-story, single-
family residence immediately south of the alley is approximately 24 feet high. The highest
element of the multipurpose building is roughly in the central portion of the building, with
the rooflines slopping down towards the perimeter ofthe building (see Sheet 3, Attachment
3). The eastern portion ofthe building, which is nearest the existing single-family residence,
has a 16- foot high single-story element.
Based on the proposed building design, the location of the 32.5-foot high element of the
structure and the height transition from 32.5 feet to approximately 16 feet at the lowest point,
staff is of the opinion that the overall architectural composition does not affect the
surrounding residential neighborhood. Instead, the additional height provides a landmark
quality, which is characteristic of religious bui1dings.
Parking
The church was previously built under the County of San Diego zoning regulations. The
sanctuary currently has a seating capacity of 548 permanent seats and provides 65 on-site
parking spaces. The parking/sanctuary seating parking ratio is approximately one parking
space for each 8.4 sanctuary seats. This parking seating ratio was established during a
previous remodel ofthe church sanctuary in 1990. The ratio takes into consideration the on-
street parking available on Fresno A venue, Anita Street and the church complex street
Page 6, Item:
Meeting Date:l1/12/03
frontage (see Figure I).
It is important to note that for multi-use complexes such as a school campus with
auditoriums or similar facilities, as a City policy, the parking requirement is based on the
facility creating the highest parking demand, which in this case is the church sanctuary. The
existing multi-purpose facility has a seating capacity of337 seats, whereas the new facility
will have a maximum of 260 seats; therefore, no additional parking is required for the new
facility. However, the proposed project includes 24 parking spaces, thus increasing the total
on-site parking by nine spaces. The new total number of on-site parking spaces increases
from 65 to 74, and the parking/sanctuary-seating ratio improves from 8.4 to 7.4. The on-
street parking will remain unchanged.
The applicant has prepared an activity schedule matrix that demonstrates how the necessary
parking will be available for the church and the multi-purpose facility. The matrix shows
where activities will occur and the time and duration for each activity including a 45-minute
gap between the activities (see Figure 2, Schedule of Parish Activities). A condition that
limits conducting activities concurrently at the church complex has been incorporated into
the conditions of approval. By requiring the staggering of activities, the City would be able
to protect the character and quality oflife for the area residents in the least restrictive manner.
As indicated in the background section of this report, staff conducted a neighborhood
meeting at the church site to obtain input from area residents. The input provided at the
meeting was positive. For this reason and because the church has been operating with this
parking arrangement for a number of years, staffis recommending approval of this CUP as
requested by the applicant.
Vari ance
Building Setback: Tremont Street maintains a 25-foot wide right of way, as measured from
the curb, abutting the northern property line of the southern parcel. The project requires a
reduction in the required front yard setback from 15 feet to 5 feet. This building setback
reduction will allow a more efficient use of the property and a better site design. The
proposed 5-foot front yard setback will allow the multi-purpose building to maintain a 30-
foot setback from the curb. The Engineering Department does not anticipate the need to
widen Tremont Street in the future, and the frontage improvements, including landscaping
and hardscape within the street right-of-way and construction of a new curb, gutter, and
sidewalk in the current 10cation are acceptable to the Engineering Department. In the
unlikely event that the City widens Tremont Street. only the landscaping and street
improvements would be removed.
Conclusion
The granting of the conditional use permit and variance, as conditioned, allows for the
functional use of the facility while protecting the character and quality of life in the
Page 7, Item:
Meeting Date: 11/12/03
residential neighborhood. Based on the above, staiT recommends that the P1anning
Commission adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-03-004 approve Conditional Use
Permit PCC-04-014 and zone Variance ZA V-03-04 based on the findings and subject to the
conditions contained in the attached Planning Commission Resolution.
Attachments
I. Resolution PCC-04-14/ZA V -03-04
2. Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study
3. Project Plans
4. Figures
5. Disclosure Statement
J:\P1:mning\Michael\PCC Reports\PCC-04-014
,
y
I
1\
\
I I T II II i I II
LYNWOOD SOUTH I
MOBILE HOME I
PARK
---'---'---''VIII I 1m
m. I,lflll
~ '() I \ \
?8TTTTITlOJj
jjl
WlWW
II II I
IW
STRAWBER.RY
FIELD
! I
I I
I I
.
U
I
I
II
II
I
I,
i
Ll\\ \/ \
'"
Ii
hll~
uo 0 CL.Ll.J.-IJ
on n ~I ILJ
00 ': i I
DO R '
DO 8 H"
o R 0 PALM
ID ~ B i ~~:~~~::
1188 Ht1 (-l~ I
qQ 8 t:1 r;:J
IL5 I 1___ ---'~ I
,~:::: --":........" , I .
,'u 0, -
~\\\\
1_.lpIUJJECY' J [
I ,L,OC~TI,ON i ~
I I III II;~
MnrTTID Uillll III111 [] 1III Wm;[
I WlJ H III11II I ~ I ~~~l: II 1m [
c
I I ~ I II I ~ I I i Ii Iii! [
I ~1 ~IIDIID W! III~ t
~
,L I I I1I1 '~\\\ II\\~
mmmm~~~~~m I
! [3 ~~uB~L~E~~'~~ ~ H ('FABULOUS CALlENTE'
I r-; PARK , ~ V~ MOBILE HOME 1
.~ '---'--' i=W ~ PARK
[Iii [r-nH r::
~IIIIIIJ~8 ~ ~~~8J
1'1111 !J:n:5J n ::::Jut]
ANITA ST
MONTGOMERY
ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
TREMONT ST
~
J:
...
~ II
I
ZENITH ST
\
I
,
MAIN ST
MAIN SQUARE
AUTO
SELF
, \, STORAGE
\ \~ACILlTY
'-. '-
C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C) APPLICANT: REV. MARIO VESGA, PASTOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
PROJECT 1603/1611 FRESNO ST, Request: Our Lady of Guadalupe Church is proposing
AODRESS, 337 TREMONT ST and 341 ANITA ST construction of a new multipurpose building. ORC,
SCALE, FILE NUMBER: CUP,Variance and IS for environmental is required
NORTH No Scale PCC-04-014 for the proposed use.
J:lcherrylcllocatorsllocatDrs 03lpcm0330rev.cdr 07.0703
Attachment 1
Resolution PCC-04-014/ZA V-03-04
RESOLUTION NO. PCC-04-14 & ZAV-03-04
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION IS-03-004 AND APPROVING CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT PCC-04-014 AND VARIANCE ZAV-03-04 FOR A
CHURCH COMPLEX LOCATED AT 345 ANITA STREET IN
THE R-2P ZONE.
WHEREAS, on July 26, 2002, Our Lady of Guada1upe Parish
("Applicant"), filed a duly verified Conditional Use Permit application to allow the
construction and operation of a church mu1ti-purpose facility at 1603 and 1611
Fresno Avenue, and 337 Tremont Street ("Project Site") in the R-2P (One and Two-
Family Residence, Precise Plan) zone; and
WHEREAS, on July 26, 2002, the Applicant also filed a duly verified
Variance application requesting a reduction in the front setback requirement from
15 feet to 5 feet in order to locate a church multi-purpose facility on the Project
Site; and
WHEREAS, The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the
proposed project for compJiance with the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) and has prepared an Initial Study in accordance with CEQA. Based upon
the results of the Initial Study, the Environmental Review Coordinator has
determined that the project could result in significant effects on the environment.
However, revisions to the project made by the applicant would avoid or mitigate the
effects to a level below significance, therefore Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-
03-004 has been prepared. The Resource Conservation Commission recommended
adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration on September 21,2003.
WHEREAS, the Planning and Building Director set the time and place for
a hearing on said Conditional Use Permit and Variance applications and notice of
said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its mailing to property owners
and residents within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least 10
days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised,
namely November 12, 2003, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth
Avenue, before the Planning Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed;
and
WHEREAS, after considering all reports, evidence, and testimony present
at said public hearing with respect to the Conditional Use Permit and Variance
applications, the Planning Commission voted to adopt the Mitigated
Negative Declaration and approve Planning Commission Resolution PCC-04-014
and ZA V-03-04 approving Conditional Use Permit and Variance application.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission
does hereby adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve the Conditional
Use Permit and Variance applications in accordance with the findings and subject to
the conditions contained in this Resolution.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS
I. That the proposed use at this location is necessary or desirable to provide a
service or facility which will contribute to the general well being of the
neighborhood or the community.
The multi-purpose facility project is necessary and desirable because it will
replace the existing smaller facility, and will accommodate the same church
activities at the same location. The project will also provide improvements to the
public right of way and alley, which will improve the site and area and benefit the
neighborhood.
2. That such use will not under the circumstances of the particular case be
detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or
working in the vicinity or injurious to property or improvements in the
vicin ity,
The multi-purpose facility project will not be detrimental to the health, safety or
general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity or injurious to
property because it will replace the existing church auditorium, rectory and garage
structures, provide on-site parking and landscaping, and provide improvements
including curb, gutter and sidewalk. The granting of the conditional use permit
and variance, as conditioned, enables the City to protect the character and quality
of 1ife for the area residents in the least restrictive manner.
3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions
specified in the code for such use.
The project is associated with the church, which is an Unclassified Use in the R-
2P zone, and requires approval of a conditiona1 use permit. Conditional approval
of the project requires compliance with all conditions, codes and regulations for
Unclassified Uses in the R-2P zoning, as applicable, prior to the final issuance of
any permit or for the use as described.
The church was previously built under the San Diego County zoning regulations.
The existing parking/sanctuary seating ratio is one parking space for every 8.4
seats), which was established with the previous remodel of the church sanctuary
in 1990. The ratio takes into consideration the on-street parking available on
Fresno Avenue, Anita Street and the church complex street frontage. It is
important to note that in a church complex, as a City policy, the parking
requirement is based on the facility creating the highest parking demand.
Therefore, the project would be in substantial conformance with the municipal
code and other regulatory documents.
4. That the granting of the Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the
General Plan of the City, the Montgomery Specific Plan or the adopted plan
of any government agency.
The project will not adversely impact the General Plan, Montgomery Specific
Plan or any other regulations because the project will replace an existing similar
use that has been operating for many years. The project as conditioned, is in
compliance with the applicable codes and regulations. All conditions must be
satisfied prior to the issuance of building permits or final building inspection.
VARIANCE FINDNGS
I. That a hardship peculiar to the property and not created by any act of the
owner exists.
A hardship exists because the project site's north property line is approximately
25 feet from the sidewalk along Tremont Street that when added to the required
front building setback, results in a 25-foot bui1ding setback from the sidewalk.
However, the multi-purpose facility will maintain a 5-foot setback from the front
property line. Reducing the building setback to 5 feet will allow greater site
design flexibility without compromising the municipal code intent to provide a
30-foot building separation from the street. Thus the proposed location of the
multi-purpose building would be approximately 30 feet from the street.
2. That such a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of
substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same zoning
districts and in the same vicinity, and that a variance, if granted would not
constitute a special privilege of the recipient not enjoyed by his neighbors.
Tremont Street maintains a 25-foot parkway between Fresno and Third Avenues.
Due to the wider than usual parkway, most of the structures are located
approximately 5 to lO-foot from the front property line. The variance request will
allow a better use of the site while maintaining a similar setback. Granting the
variance will not constitute a special privilege because the facility will maintain
the same approximate setback as the other properties in the area.
3. That the authorizing of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to
the adjacent property and will not materially impair the purposes of this
chapter or public interest.
Granting the variance will not be of substantial detriment to the adjacent
properties because the project will be located in essentially the same area on the
property as the existing facility, and provide public improvements. The variance
will allow the property owner to use the property in the same manner that it has
previously been used.
4. That the granting of this variance will not adversely affect the General Plan
of the City or the adopted plan of any government agency.
The use is consistent with the General Plan and all adopted plans of the City Of
Chula Vista. The reduced setback will not cause the project to be incompatib1e or
inconsistent with the character of the neighborhood.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CONDITIONS
I. The project shall comply with the following codes: 2001 Handicapped Accessibility
Requirements; 200 I Energy Requirements; California Building Code:
. California Plumbing Code
. California Electrical Code
. California Mechanical Code
. California Administrative Code Title 24 - Handicap Accessibility
2. The Applicant shall submit a Soils Report to the Building Division of the Planning and
Building Department for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits.
3. The seating capacity for the auditorium in the multi-purpose facility shall not exceed 260
seats.
4. The church and multi-purpose facility shall not be used concurrently. A 45-minute gap
shall be maintained at all times between scheduled and non-scheduled activities held at
the church and multi-purpose facility as outlined in the attached Schedule of Parish
Activities matrix.
5. The Applicant shall pay all applicable fees including the following: Sewer Connection
and Capacities fees; Development Impact fees; and Traffic Signal fees prior to the
issuance of building permits.
6. The Applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit to perform any work in the City's
right-of-way, which may include, but is not limited to:
. The driveway approach per Chula Vista Construction Standard No. I
. Monolithic curb, gutter and sidewalk per SDRSD G-3
. Installation of a 20-foot wide, 6-inch thick concrete alley along the rear property
line. The Applicant may apply for a deferral of the alley improvements in lieu of
actual construction of the alley. A deferral will be accepted by the City and will
cover the cost of only half the width of the alley (10-feet).
7. Prior to the issuance of building pennits, the Applicant shall submit and obtain approval
of a lot consolidation for the three southerly parcels where the new multi-purpose facility
is proposed to be built.
8. Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall install a fire hydrant on-site. The
fire hydrant type, size and location shall be reviewed and approved by the City's Fire
Marshall.
9. A graffiti resistant treatment shall be specified for all wall and building surfaces. This
shall be noted for any building and wall plans and shall be reviewed and approved by the
Director of Planning & Building prior to the issuance of building pennits. Additionally,
the project shall confonn to Sections 9.20.055 and 9.20.035 of the CVMC regarding
graffiti control.
10. The Applicant shall develop and implement an integrated solid waste and recycling plan
acceptable to the Special Operations Manager. The plan shall be designed to divert at
least 50 percent of the waste stream generated by the project through participation in the
City's residential recycling, yard waste, bulky pick up and household hazardous waste
programs outlined in Sections 8.24 and 8.25 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code and the
Cali fornia Integrated Waste Management Act of1989.
II. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the final approved plans
dated September 18, 2003, which includes revised site plans, architectural elevations,
exterior materials and color board, and landscape plans on file in the Planning Division of
the Planning and Building Department.
12. The multi-purpose facility, parking area and landscaping shall be maintained according to
the approved plans unless modifications are approved by the City ofChula Vista.
13. The Conditional Use Pennit approval shall not waive compliance with all sections of
Title 19 of the Municipal Code, and all other applicable City Ordinances in effect at the
time of building pennit issuance.
14. The conditions of approval for this Conditional Use Pennit approval shall be applied to
the subject property until such time approval is modified or revoked, and the existence of
this approval with conditions shall be recorded with the title of the property. Prior to the
issuance of the building pennits for the proposed unit, the Applicant/property owner shall
provide the Planning Division with a recorded copy of said document.
15. Any deviation trom the above noted conditions of approval shall require the approval ofa
modified Conditional Use Pennit approval by the Director of Planning and Building.
16. The Applicant/owner shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend and hold
hannless City, its City Council members, officers, employees and representatives, from
and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims and costs, including
court costs and attorney's fess (collectively. liabilities) incurred by the City arising,
directly or indirectly, from (a) City's approval and issuance of this Conditional Use
Permit. (b) City's approval or issuance of any other pennit or action. whether
discretionary or non-discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein, and
(c) Applicant's installation and operation of the facility permitted hereby, including,
without limitation, any and all liabilities arising from the emission by the facility of
electromagnetic fields or other energy waves or emissions. Applicant/operator shall
acknowledge their agreement to this provision by executing a copy of this Conditional
Use Permit where indicated below. Applicant's/operator's compliance with this
provision is an express condition of this Conditional Use Pennit and this provision shall
be binding on any and all of applicant's/operator's successors and assigns.
17. This Planning Commission approval shall become void and ineffective if not utilized
within one year from the effective date thereof, in accordance with Section 19.14.260 of
the Municipal Code. Failure to comply with any conditions of approval shall cause this
pennit to be reviewed by the City for additional conditions or revocation.
18. This Conditional Use Pennit shall be subject to any and all new, modified or deleted
conditions imposed after approval of this pennit to advance a legitimate governmental
interest related to health, safety or welfare which the City shall impose after advance
written notice to the Pennittee and after the City has given to the Pennittee the right to be
heard with regard thereto. However, the City, in exercising this reserved right/condition,
may not impose a substantial expense or deprive the Pennittee of a substantial revenue
source which the Pernlittee cannot, in the nonnal operation of the use pennitted, be
expected to economically recover.
VARIANCE CONDITIONS:
19. The conditions of approval for the Variance shall be applied to the subject property until
such time that the Variance is modified or revoked, and the existence of this use with
approved conditions shall be recorded with the title of the property. Prior to the issuance
of the building pennits for the proposed additions, the Applicant/property owner shall
provide the Planning Division with a recorded copy of said document.
20. The setback encroachment shall be maintained in accordance with the approved plans
dated September 18, 2003, which include site plans and architectural elevations on file in
the Planning Division.
21. Execute this document by making a true copy of this letter of conditional approval and
signing both this original letter and the copy on the lines provided below, said execution
indicating that the property owner and applicant have each read, understood and agreed to
the conditions contained herein, and will implement same. Upon execution, the true copy
with original signatures shall be returned to the Planning Department. Failure to return
the signed true copy of this document shall indicate the property owner/applicant's desire
that the project, and the corresponding application for building pennits and/or a business
license, be held in abeyance without approval.
Signature of Property Owner Date
345 Tremont Street, 1603 and 1611
Fresno Avenue and 337 Tremont Street
Signature of Applicant Date
INVALIDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION
It is the intention of the Planning Commission that its adoption of this Resolution is
dependent upon the enforceability of each and every tenn, provision and condition herein
stated; and that in the event that anyone or more tenns, provisions or conditions are
detennined by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable,
this resolution and the pennit shall be deemed to be automatically revoked and of no
further force and effect ab initio.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING
COMMISSION does hereby approve Conditional Use Pennit and Variance
applications PCC -04-014 and ZA V -03-04 in accordance with the findings and
subject to the conditions contained in this resolution.
APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA
VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 12th day of November, 2003, by the following vote,
to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Steve Castenada, Chair
ATTEST:
Diana Vargas, Secretary
J:\Planning\Michael\PCC Reports\ PCC-04-014Reso
Attachment 2
Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-03-004
/
Mitigated Negative Declaration
PROJECT NAME: Our Lady of Guadalupe Catholic Church
Multipurpose Building
PROJECT LOCATION: 1603 and 1611 Fresno Avenue
337 Tremont Street
341 Anita Street
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: 623-132-01,623-132-02,623-132-03, and 623-131-14
PROJECT APPLICANT: Reverend Mario Vesga
Our Lady of Guadalupe Catholic Church
CASE NO.: IS-03-004
DATE OF DRAFT DOCUMENT: August 28, 2003
DATE OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION MEETING: September 15, 2003
DATE OF FINAL DOCUMENT: October I, 2003
A. Proi ect Setting
The 1.61-acre project site, comprised of four parcels located in the urbanized central
southwestern portion of the City of Chula Vista, is located at 1603 and 1611 Fresno Avenue,
347 Tremont Street and 345 Anita Street (see Exhibit A - Location Map). The proposed site
of the new multipurpose building is comprised of three parcels totaling 22,484 square feet;
one parcel containing the existing multipurpose building (1603 Fresno Avenue), one vacant
parcel (1611 Fresno Avenue), and one parcel that contains the church rectory and garage
(347 Tremont Street). The Our Lady of Guadalupe Catholic Church is located at 341 Anita
Street, at the southeast corner of Anita Street and Fresno Avenue, immediately north of the
existing and proposed rnultipurpose building site. The land uses surrounding the site of the
proposed expanded church complex are as follows:
North: Mobilehome park
South: Single- and multi-family residences
East: Single-family residences
West: Montgomery Elementary School
B. Project Description
The existing Our Lady of Guadalupe Catholic Church multipurpose building, which is
accessible via Fresno Avenue and the alley off Tremont Street to the south, contains 4,000
square feet of floor area; 14 off-street parking spaces exist on the site of the existing
multipurpose building. The existing Our Lady of Guadalupe Catholic Church site, located
immediately north of the existing and proposed multipurpose building site, contains a 50-
r~
]
STRAWBERRY
RELD
lJJllLJ
EEffiffiffi
~UNDERBIRD
MO::OME
PARK
'-'---'
OJ CIJ1]]
DO m
DO
00
DO
BB PALM
MOBILE
ESTATES
DO ffi
DO
DO
DO
0
PROJECT [
TREMONT ST
lOCATION ~
MONTGOMERY
ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
~
o
z
~ ~ ;~
~ ITfI]jj]tJ DillJIJI1IIJ DIIIDJI]];[
I I I I roo K flWl[hl ~~~~~ II rm [
Q
f6rrOj~~ ~
~
ZENITH ST
MAIN ST
MAIN SQUARE
AUTO
C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C) APPUCAIlT: REv. MARIO VESGA, PASTOR INITIAL STUDY
PROJECT 1603/1611 FRESNO sT, Request: Our Lady of Guadalupe Church is proposing
ADDRESS: 337 TREMONT ST and 341 ANITAST construction of a new multipurpose building. ORC,
SCALE: FIlE NUMBER; CUP, Variance and IS for environmental is required
NORTH No Scale IS-03-004(rev) for the proposed use.
3
Exhibit A
! .
. ,
'I .
: I -I :i:'
I~t.! .
. ~U,.
w ~I"
~: I i I .'
!;OI .li '.
<, .-
o.
~I
w.
0:.
~I
w.
z.
::;,
~:
I
.
.
u____ - -- u__ - -- - --- --- u _u -_.-. ---- - - - -- -- u_ u__ ._-. L.:' _ u_.__.. _u_. _ --1---'
! ~ I -- . _~.Ql.l!'mtIllPl__N CTRlIN:/TREMONTSTREET _~QIf." :
. roO&'UlCll_~~ IOE-..;Nlltii"! I
I I I .. I ,'""
: N _.~--/COIU1Q'"
I I .
i ""'" r.,.... e -" "..:.': i' . ..:.."......................:.... ~fll.T' jrl
i ~ :~:~~~~~.-~~:~~.: :'.:~~ >~'~':-::'~'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~;~:I' Jill! lilh lllh
: .+.+.+, +... '. . .'1- .. . ................................... I. ~.~. ~II ~II
............ .... ...... p'.. . : ",' .P..: '.' ........................ i5" BaC 151i'"'
""'- -... ............. ,....., .... .... '. .....................t I . G ~ G8: G8:
1 ......:... ......... .~.............._:...:~......:_:.......:........ ... .. ... ... ... t. -..... ... ... \: Q I &. -~iI ii~;
..r-.' PARCa.A...'.-...ENfRy......:t.."'!......:........!Q i... I~. .~.
...... .. ...Y....4---:-. ..4:-!t "J'J
. C" . . . ..... .... ! ~ M J..
:::'c:: :.....:. ". .....:..;,...: ~~ i~ 8 ; ;
. . .. -.- ,
~..:I:... ..... __.___
.-.C.. '. . _
. .'
.'
Wt~MI' (!
- ll! qt 'I
~ii~11 III II!~! i
"I ~ ~ ,ifiJ
I" I a ~ !
I
I IXIff_TOIWIIt..:Jt
I 1fTIl.~
I
:::~:- -: ~.
G ':" - '.~ ~
::~~ i::i P7'~ ~ ! ii fi 1 QP ~ ~ [] 0 [] 0 15
-:.t i; I: I " ~ i
:) ; '/ I I II il Ii nil 'IU~U ;.I~! In III I I in iil n I
~:.:;\ i~ I~ ~ I II il i~ :11 ~!!IU !il ~III III ~ I ~i Ii i
.', 6 i I .. ~i ~ I J! I
'.' 1". ..
: -:~ :
. .
:":r- !:', :
....f'.. .
-:.t-:. :
......1 ..... .
'.'c'. .'
.........., ...... "
'.,c'. '.
..... +~...... "
...... .............
... "',... .
.:.~...:.: .
.................. ~
. ,
Iii ~I;III II ii it II i I I' lillllli!1 I
Ii ";11 illS IIPP1d~~1
I Ui ;, iiU
h ~~';! I I d I ~ ~ i II!lljl
n dill i >>i. i! !hBQ~d
II Iii i ~ ~~ i IP~Jii~U
.' .>> ~! I .II~ i I
it Ii d I
.
------
~.QM-
/,RISH 'NEW MUL rlpURPOSE
RIll! niNe::
.- ..-- -. .----. ---)
-"JOSEPH -F. 6AM~ON. ARCHITECT INC.
6111 SANTA FE STREET, SUITE:101
SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNiA a21DQ
PHONE 16581 213-3200 FAX 186I12n-3201
7i-
space parking lot. The proposed project consists of the demolition of the eXlstmg
multipurpose building, rectory and garage and the construction of a new 12,051 square-foot
multipurpose. building (8,840 square-foot ground floor level and 3,231 square-foot basement
level) with 24. off-street parking spaces on the consolidated 22,484 square-foot site (see
Exhibit B - Site Plan). For activities occurring at the multipurpose building, the 50-space
parking lot on the church site in1mediately to the north will be available for use, totaling 74
off-street parking spaces"to serve the proposed new facility.
The proposed multipurpose building would contain an auditorium, an office, four classrooms,
a kitchen, restrooms, storage rooms on the ground level and basement storage area, which
would allow for the expansion of programs to meet the needs of the Our Lady of Guadalupe
parish. Additional proposed on-site improvements include a new six-foot masonry wall
along the eastern property line, landscaping, lighting, drainage facilities, and curb, gutter and
sidewalk improvements along Tremont Street and Fresno Avenue. In accordance with City
standards, a 4-foot widening of the alley along the southern boundary of the project site was
required; the p.roj ect design reflects the 4- foot widening along the southern parking lot.
The following deviations from the development regulations of the R2 Zone are proposed: (I)
an increase in the maximum allowable height of 28 feet to 32.5 feet; and (2) a reduction in
the minimum front yard setback.of 15 feet to 5 feet. A height deviation within the R2 Zone
requires the approval of a Conditional Use Permit, which will be considered by the Planning
Commission. The proposed setback reduction requires the granting of a Variance by the
Planning Commission. Furthennore, the proposal requires Design Review approval by the
Design Review Committee and the consolidation of the three lots comprising the
multipurpose building site.
C. Compliance with Zoning and Plans
The project .site is zoned R2P (One and Two Family ResidentiallPrecise Plan) and is
designated RLM (ResidentiaVLow-Medium Density) under the adopted General Plan. The
R2P Zone allows for the proposed height deviation to be considered through a Conditional
Use Permit, whereas the proposed front yard setback deviation requires the granting of a
Variance; based upon staffs evaluation, no aesthetic impacts or impacts tQ the character of
the neighborhood would result from the approval of the proposed height deviation and front
yard setback Variance. The project has been reviewed preliminarily by the Design Review
Committee and design modifications have been incorporated into the development plans that
include building articulations, building height adjustment, and the blending and matching of
architecture, materials and color to the existing church.
D. Public Comments
On November 2, 2002, a Notice of Initial Study was circulated to property owners within a
500-foot radius of the proposed project site. The public review period ended November 12,
2002. No written comments were received.
...
i /;
On August 29, 2003, a Notice of Availability was posted in the County Clerk's Office and
circulated to property owners within a 500-foot radius of the proposed project site. The 30-
day public review period ended September 29,2003. No written comments were received
from the publi~.
Community Meetin~
A Community Meeting.was held on July 21, 2003 at the existing multipurpose building to
present the proposed project and to solicit input regarding the proposal from residents in the
area. No environmental issues were identified by members of the public during the meeting.
E. Identification of Environmental Effects
An Initial Study conducted by the City ofChula Vista (including the attached Environmental
Checklist fonn) determined that although the proposed project could have a significant
environmental effect, there would not be a significant effect in this case because mitigation
measures described in Section F below have been added to the project. The preparation of an
Environmentaf Impact Report will not be required. This Mitigated Negative Declaration has
been prepared in accordance With Section 15070 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
TransportationlCirculationlParking
-
-.
Based upon the proposed increase in the size of new multipurpose building compared to the
existing, the proposal is projected to generate 245 average daily vehicle trips beyond the
volume of traffic generated by the current facility. Based upon the projected level of traffic
generation and the level of service of the surrounding street network, the City's Engineering
Department has determined that the proposal does not have the potential to result in any
significant traffic impacts; therefore, the preparation of a traffic study was not necessary.
Anita Avenue (Class II Collector) in the vicinity of the project site currently operates at level
of service (LOS) A and is projected to continue to operate at LOS A after project
development. Third Avenue (Class I Collector) in the vicinity of the project site cw;rently
operates at LOS B and is projected to continue to operate at LOS B after project
development. Fresno Avenue and Tremont Street are residential streets; no operational
problems are known to exist on these streets and none are anticipated after project
development.' .
Based upon the proposed maximum occupancy of the new multipurpose building of 260
persons, required off-street parking is 74 spaces pursuant to the Chula Vista Municipal Code
requirement of one parking space per 3.5 persons for assembly uses. Proposed off-street
parking consists of74 spaces, comprised of24 spaces on the multipurpose building site and
the existing 50 spaces on the church site immediately to the north. In the event that the
occupancy of the multipuipose building were to exceed the proposed maximum level, the
project would potentially impact on-street parking in the surrounding residential
neighborhood; therefore, the maximum occupancy of the facility will be limited through a
condition of approval, as outlined below in Section F. Similarly, if activities at the church
and multipurpose building were to occur simultaneously or with liitle or no gap between
them, impacts to the surrounding neighborhood Gould result; therefore, the project would be
conditioned to prohibit the concurrent.,scheduling of activities at the two facilities and
requiring a minimum 45-minute gap between activities, as outlined below in Section F.
3 7
Noise
The new multipurpose bhilding is proposed to be situated within the northwestern portion of
the site, fronting Fresno Avenue and Tremont Street, with parking provided along the eastern
boundary of the site between the building and adjacent residential development to the east
and to the south of the alley. The auditorium is proposed within the eastern portion of the
multipurpose building, buffered from adjacent residential development by space within the
building to be utilized for classroom, office, kitchen, and storage uses. Four non-fixed
windows are proposed along the western building elevation and the auditorium, facing
Fresno Avenue, more than 400 feet from the buildings on the Montgomery Elementary
School site to the west.
The activities to be conducted within the new auditorium are proposed to be the same as
those presently conducted in the auditorium of the existing multipurpose building.
According to City code enforcement records, no noise complaints associated with the
existing multipurpose building have been received. Due to the buffering of the auditorium
from adjacent residences by additional building area to the south and east ofthe auditorium
and the substantial distance between the auditorium and the buildings on the school site to
the west, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in any significant noise impacts to
noise-sensitive land uses in the immediate vicinity. Furthermore, compliance with the noise
control ordinance of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, which regulates the maxinmm one-
hour average sound level that can be generated at the property line, is mandatory for any
activities occurring on-site.
Aesthetics
.
The City's Design Review Committee provided input to the applicant during preliminary
review workshops. Based upon this input, the applicant made revisions to their proposal to
address the Committee's comments regarding building mass, height, and architectural
compatibility with the existing Church. The final revisions fo the original proposal include a
reduction in the maximum building height from 34 feet to 32.5 feet, architectural features to
eliminate the "box-type" style and blend with the architectural design of the Church,
movement of the location of the multipurpose building on the site, and reduction of occupant
seating inside the multipurpose building.
The height limit within the R2P zone is 28 feet or two and one-half stories. The proposed
maximum height of the rriultipurpose building is 32.5 feet, compared with the maximum
heights of the Church ofapproxirnately 34 feet (excluding the tower elements). The
surrounding single-family building heights are as follows; the one-story, single-family
residence to the east is approximately 13 feet in height and the two-story, single-family
residence immediately south of the alley is approximately 24 feet ill height.
The highest element of the multipurpose building is roughly within the western-central
portion of the structure, with the rooflines slopping down towards the perimeter of the
4
?
building. The eastern portion of the building, which is nearest the existing one-story, single-
family residence to the east, is equivalent in height to a single-story building. Furthermore, a
new six-foot high masonry wall and landscaping, including four trees, are proposed along the
eastern propeI:!Y line (with the exception of the front yard setback area) that provides some
aesthetic buffer.
Along Tremont Street (front yard), the property line is approximately 25 feet from the face of
the curb. The Engineering Department does not anticipate the need to widen Tremont Street
in the future; therefore, project and frontage improvements, including landscaping and
hardscape within the street right-of-way and new curb, gutter, and sidewalk in the same
location as existing are acceptable to the Engineering Department. Therefore, despite the
proposed 5-foot front yard setback, the proposed multipurpose building would be
approximately 24 feet from the back of the sidewalk.
Based upon the site layout of the proposed building along the frontages of Fresno Avenue
and Tremont Street, the lower project site elevation in relation to the adjacent eastern and
southern single family residential areas, the architectural compatibility with the existing
Church, the new masonry will and landscaping along the eastern property boundary, and
enhanced landscaping throughout the remainder of the site create a compatibility with the
existing surrounding single-family and multifamily residential community and would not
result in negative aesthetic impacts. --
Water QualitylDrainage
The applicant submitted a preliminary drainage study prepared by CDS Civil Engineers dated
January 3, 2003, which was deemed adequate by the Engineering Department. A final
drainage study will be required in conjunction with the preparation of final grading and
improvement plans. Based upon the findings of the preliminary drainage study, the '.
Engineering Department has determined that no significant impacts to the City's storm
drainage syst!;m would result from the proposed development. Properly designed drainage
facilities will be required to be installed at the time of site development to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer.
Construction and post-construction water quality Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be
required to be incorporated into the project in order to rninimize discharge of pollutants into
the storm drainage system, in accordance with the requirements of the City's adopted
Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) and Storm Water Management
Standards Requirements Manual. During construction, BMPs from the California Best
Management Practices Handbook, which have proven to be effective, will be implemented.
Examples of construction BMPs include silt fences, sandbags, and hay bales, which are
strategically placed around curb inlets, catch basins, and driveways in order to prevent silt
and sediment from entering the storm drain system.
The proposed project would not result in any significant water quality impacts or significant impacts
to the existing storm drainage system serving the project site. "
,.,
5" 9
F. Mitigation N'e:essary to Avoid Significant Impacts
Traffic/CirculationlParking
The following mitigation measures shall be included in Conditional Use Pennit No. PCC-04-
014 as conditions of approval and shall not be deviated from unless approved in writing by
the City's Environmental Review Coordinator:
1. The church and multipurpose facilities shall not be used concurrently. A 45-minute gap
shall be maintained at all times between scheduled as well as non-scheduled activities
held at the church and multipurpose facility.
2. The occupancy of the multipurpose building shall not exceed 260 persons at any time.
G. Consultation
1. Individuals and Organizations
City of Chula Vista:
Luis Hernandez, Planning and Building Department
Paul Hellman, Planning and Building Department
John Schmitz, Planning and Building Department
Maria Muett, Planning and Building Department
Michael Walker, Planning and Building Department
Harold Phelps, Planning and Building Department
Frank Herrera-A, Planning and Building Department
Carolyn Dakan, Planning and Building Department
Miguel Tapia, Community Development Department
Frank Rivera, Engineering Department
Alex AI-Agha, Engineering Department
Jeff Moneda, Engineering Department
Muna Cuthbert, Engineering Department
Silvester Evetovich, Engineering Department
Majed Al-Ghafi-y, Engineering Department
Jim Geering, Fire Department
Michael Meacham, City Manager's Office
Others:
Dee Peralta, Chula Vista Elementary School District
2. Documents
City ofChula Vista General Plan,'1989.
6 /0
Final Environmental Impact Report, CityofChula Vista General Plan Update, EIR No.
88-2, May 1989.
City ofCh.\lla Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, February 2003.
~
Drainage Study for Our Lady of Guadalupe - Chula Vista, California, CDS Civil
Engineers, January 3-, 2003.
Geotechnical Feasibility for Development - Our Lady of Guadalupe Multi-purpose
Building, 301 Tremont, Chula Vista - Geotechnical Exploration, Inc., September 10,
2002.
3. Initial Study
This environmental determination is based on the attached Initial Study, any comments
received on the Initial Study and any comments received during the public review period
for this Mitigated Negative Declaration. The report reflects the independent judgment of
the City ofChula Vista. Further information regarding the environmental review of this
project is available from the Chula Vista Planning and Building Department, 276 Fourth
Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910.
0~/c9~1'
Marilyn R. F. Ponseggi
Environmental Review Coordinator
Date: It;) 7 It; ~
. I
J:\Planning\MARlA \Initial Snady\lS.Q3-004Fin3IMND.dOc
7 If
ATTACHMENT "A"
".
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP)
Our Ladv of Guadalupe Catholic Church Multipurpose Buildinf! - IS-03-004
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared by the City of Chula Vista
in conjunction with the proposed Our Lady of Guadalupe Catholic Church Multipurpose
Building. The proposed project has been evaluated in an Initial StudylMitigated Negative
Declaration prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)and
City/State CEQA Guidelines (IS-03-004). The legislation requires public agencies to ensure that
adequate mitigation measures are implemented and monitored for Mitigated Negative
Declarations.
AB 3180 requires monitoring of potentially significant and/or significant environmental impacts.
The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for this project ensures adequate
implementation of mitigation for the following potential impacts(s):
-
1. Traffic/CirculationlParkIng-'
MONITORING PROGRAM
Due to the nature of the environmental issues identified, the Mitigation Compliance Coordinator
shall be the Environmental Review Coordinator of the City of Chula Vista. The applicant shall
be responsible to ensure that the conditions of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
are met to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator. Evidence in written form
confirming compliance with the mitigation measures specified in Mitigated Negative Declaration
IS-03-004 shall-be provided by the applicant to the Environmental Review Coordinator. The
Environmental Review Coordinator will thus provide the ultimate verification that the mitigation
measures have been accomplished.
Table I, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Checklist, lists the mitigation measures
contained in Section F, Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Effects, of Mitigated Negative
Declaration IS-03-004, which will be implemented as part of the proj ect. In order to determine if
the applicant has implemented the measure, the method and timing of verification are identified,
along with the City department or agency responsible for monitoring/verifYing that the applicant
has completed each mitigation measure. Space for the signature of the verifying person and the
'date of inspection is provided in the last colunm.
J:\Planning\MARlA \Initial StudylIS-03-004MMRPtextdoc
"
loZ
~
o
""
~
2
~
<>
q
q
!!!
->.
."
;!
en
-;;
."
.a
.,~
~
to
~
.~
;
.-.
-
,
g.
'"
~
13
Case No.IS-03-004
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Name of Proponent: Reverend Mario Vesga
Our Lady of Guadalupe Catholic Church
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
3. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 341 Anita Street
Chula Vista, CA 91911-4198
(619) 422-3977
4. Name of Proposal: Our Lady of Guadalupe Catholic Church
Multipurpose Building
5. Date of Checklist: August 28, 2003
PoteatiaDy
,,-
Im_
PocnitialJ,..
S'apificant
Un!...
Mitigated
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the
proposal:
a) Conflict with general plan designation or'
zoning? .
o
o
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction
over the project?
o
o
c) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g.,
impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from
incompatible land uses)?
o
o
'. d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community (including a low-income
or minority community)?
o
o
.........
,,_
Impact
o
o
o
o
N.
Impact
"
"
"
"
Comments: The proposed 12,071 square-foot church multipurpose building is consistent with the
existing R-2P zoning designation and the Low-Medium Residential General Plan designation of the
property. The established surrounding land uses are the church and auxiliary uses, single- and multi-
family residential uses and a public elementary school. The proposed project will not disrupt or divide
the physical arrangement of the established community. No agricultural resources are present on-site
or in the immediate vicinity.
IT
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the
proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population projections?
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either
directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an
undeveloped area or extension of major
infrastructure)?
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing?
PotmtiaDy
s;pif\<ut
1m"",
o
o
o
PotesatiallJ
S'apificaD.t
Val",
.........
o
o
o
.........
S.....iflant
1m.."
o
o
o
N.
1m,."
181
181
181
Comments: The proposed project would not create local or regional population growth. The proposal
includes the demolition of the rectory; the loss of the existing rectory is not considered a significant
loss of housing. The project would not require the extension of major infrastructure since there are
adequate water and sewer lines and access to the project site according to the Engineering Department.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
m. GEOPHYSICAL. Would the proposal result in or
expose people 10 potential impacts involving:
a) Unstable earth conditions or changes in geologic
substructures?
" b) Disruptions, displacements, compaction or
overcovering of the soil?
c) Change in topography or ground surface relief
features?
d) The destruction, covering or modification of any
unique geologic or physical features?
'.'
e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils,
Potentially
Slpifiaa'
1m,."
o
2
IS
.........1
SlplfkaDt
V.....
.........
o
o
o
o
..... !baa
Sipificaut
Im_
o
o
o
II
o
181
o
o
N.
1m"",
181
o
o
o
181
181
o
either on 01: pIT the site?
f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach '_
sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or
erosion, which may modify the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any
bay inlet or lake?
rJ
rJ
II
rJ
g) Exposure of people or property to geologic
hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud
slides, ground failure, or sirnilar hazards? .
rJ
rJ
rJ
II
Comments:
a) A geotechnical investigation of the project site was conducted by Geotechnical Exploration,
Inc., the results of which are contained in their report entitled "Geotechnical Feasibility for
Development - Our Lady of Guadalupe Multi-purpose Building, 30 I Tremont, Chula Vista,
California," dated September 10, 2002. The purpose of the investigation was to observe and
sample prevailing soil conditions underlying the site and to provide recommendations relative
to geotechnical aspects of the proposed development The scope of the investigation included
a site reconnaissance, field investigation, laboratory testing, and engineering analyses.
The field investigation was performed on August 30, 2002, and consisted of the advancement
of 7 exploratory excavations across the site. The excavations were advanced to a maximum
depth of 7'6" below adjacent grade. The soils encountered during the field investigation
consisted of undocumented fill and formational soils of the Bay Point Formation.
Groundwater was not encountered during the field investigation and is not anticipated to
significantly impact the proposed development The report recommends that existing
undocumented fill soils be removed from the site and replaced with imported, compacted,
clean fill soils.
According to the Engineering Department, the proposed project will require a grading permit
due to the anticipated 500 cubic yards of earth to be excavated and approximately 290 cubic
yards of fill. Based upon the results of the geotechnical investigatiqp, the proposed project is
considered feasible from a geotechnical engineering point of view provided the structure is
designed in accordance with the applicable building regulations and provided the engineering
reconnnendations contained in the report are followed.
b - g) See ill.a. above.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures required.
......tlaDy
$pifi<aDt
Imp'<<
..........y
SIpH\aDt
u.....
...........
Uss IhaA
S"...,J!Iw>t
Im_
No
Imp'<<
IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns,
or the rate and amount of surface runoff?
rJ
rJ
II
rJ
3 I ~
b) Exposure of people or property to water related 0 0 0 iii
hazards such as flooding or tidal waves?
c) Discharge into surface w.aters or other alteration 0 0 iii 0
of surface water quality (e.g., temperature,
dissolved oxygen or turbidity)?
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any 0 0 iii 0
water body?
e) Changes in currents, or the course of direction 0 0 0 iii
of water movements, in either marine or fresh
waters?
f) Change in the" quantity of ground waters, either 0 0 iii 0
through direct additions or withdrawals, or
through interception of an aquifer by cuts or
excavations?
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of 0 0 0 iii
groundwater?
h) Impacts to groundwater quality? 0 0 0 iii
i) Alterations to the course or flow of flood 0 0 0 iii
waters?
j) Substantial reduction in the amount of water 0 0 0 iii
otherwise available for public water supplies?
Comments: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures required.
PoteatiaDy
r-....y SIpifiaat L<u ....
5"opJ1\<aDt u..... 5"_ No
Impact MWoo.... Impact Impact
V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to 0 0 iii 0
an existing or projected air quality violation?
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? 0 0 0 iii
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, 0 0 0 iii
or cause any change in climate, either locally or
regionally? "
4 /7
d) Create obje~~ionable odors?
o
o
o
II
e) Create a substantial increase in stationary or
non-stationary sources of air emissions or the
deterioration of ambient air quality?
o
o
II
o
Comments:
a) Grading and construction of the proposed multipurpose building would temporarily create dust
and construction equipment emissions. Based upon the limited extent of site grading, short-
tenn construction-related dust and emissions' are not considered to be a significant impact.
Standard dust control measures would be implemented, including watering exposed soils and
street sweeping and required as construction notes on the grading and improvement plans.
According to the Traffic Engineering Section, the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes
projected to be generated by the proposed project is 280 one-way trips; this volume is not
considered to be significant and would not contribute significantly to the degradation of local
air quality. ..
b) See V.a. above.
c) The proposed development of the new multipurpose building on the project site wouldnot alter
air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate.
d) Neither development nor operation of the proposed multipurpose building is anticipated to
create any objectionable odors. The kitchen area within the building is separated from
residential development to the south by on-site parking and an alley. Compliance with the Fire
Department and the County San Diego Department of Environmental Health standards
regarding ventilation and installation of safety features is required.
e) See V.a. above.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
Paten...,
SipIfiaD1
Impact
--,
""""""""
U"""
MItlptctl
..... ....
SipU\<aat
Impact
No
Impact
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would
the proposal result in:
.. a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion?
o
o
"
o
b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
o
o
o
II
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to
nearby uses?
" 0
o
o
II
"
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site?
o
o
o
II
5
/7
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? 0 0 0 II
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting 0 0 0 II
alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)?
g) Rail, waterbome or air traffic impacts? 0 0 0 II
h) A "large project" under the Congestion 0 0 0 II
Management Program? (An equivalent of2400
or more average daily vehicle trips or 200 or
more peak-hour vehicle trips.)
Comments: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mitigation: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section F.
-,
Poteutially SlpificaDt Less tUD ....
U""'" S"~c:all.t No
Sapilicant Mitip... imP''' 1m.."
Impact
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the
proposal result in impacts to:
a) Endangered, sensitive species, species of 0 0 0 II
concern or species that are candidates for
listing?
b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees)? 0 0 0 II
0 0 0 II
c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g.,
oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)?
d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian and vemal 0 0 0 II
pool)?
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? 0 0 0 II
f) Affect regional habitat preservation planning 0 0 0 II
efforts?
Comments:
a) The project site is located within an urbanized area. The majority of the site is developed; the
remainder of the site was previously developed, but is presently vacant No habitat for
endangered or sensitive species, species of concern or species that are candidates for listing
exists on or immediately adjacent to the project site.
6 /1
b) See VILa. above.__No locally designated species are present on or immediately adjacent to the
project site.
c) See VILa. above. No locally designated natural communities are present on or immediately
adjacent to the project site.
d) See VILa. above. No wetland habitat is present on or in1mediately adjacent to the project site.
e) See VILa. above. The proposal would have no effect upon any wildlife dispersal or migration
corridors. .
f) See VILa. above. The proposal would not affect regional habitat preservation plarming efforts.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
PotmtiaDJ
$plIkan1
Impa"
....""""',
5"_
u_
Mi1.igated
l<u ....
5"_
Impa"
No
Impa"
VIll. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES.
Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation
plans?
o
o
o
t;I
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient marmer?
o
o
o
t;I
c) If the site is designated for mineral resource
protection, will this project impact this
protection?
0'
o
o
t;I
Comments:
a) The proposed project does not conflict with any adopted energy conservation plans.
b) The proposed project is subject to compliance with Energy Requirements of the Uniform
Building Code and, therefore, is not anticipated to result in the use of non-renewable resources
in a wasteful or inefficient manner.
c) The project is not located within an area designated for mineral resource protection as defmed
in the City's General Plan. No significant energy and mineral resource impacts would result
from the proposed project.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
,.
7
~!J
..........,
-..
Impad
PutaatlaUy
SIpIr-'
U"""
MIt......
Loa....
_.t
1m"",
No
imp'''
IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of
hazardous substances (including, but not limited
to: petroleum products, pesticides, chemicals or
radiation)?
o
o
o
iii
b) Possible interference with an emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
o
o
o
iii
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazard?
o
o
o
iii
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of
potential health hazards?
o
o
o
iii
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable
brush, grass, or trees?
o
o
o
iii
Comments: Project implementation would not pose a health hazard to humans. No significant hazards
to human health and safety would be created as a result of the proposal and no known hazards exist in
the immediate vicinity of the project site that would pose a potential health hazard to occupants of the
proposed faciJi ty.
Mitigation: No mitigatiGn measures are required.
Potmtially
...........' Loa....
PoIaItially U""" ...........' No
s;p;I\aDt ......... imp''' imp'''
Impad
X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? 0 0 iii 0
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 0 0 0 iii
Comments: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
"
8
;;1--(
..........,
. SipIIIaat Loa .baD
....- U_ S_ No
SipIf"~' Mitipt<d 1m.." 1m.."
1m.."
XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an
effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered
government services in any of the following areas:
a) Fire protection? 0 0 0 III
b) Police protection? 0 0 0 III
c) Schools? 0 0 0 III
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including 0 0 0 III
roads?
e) Other governmental services? 0 0 0 III
Comments: Both the Police and Fire Departments indicate that current levels of service would not be
impacted by the proposed project. The Sweetwater Authority issued an availability letter for this
project on August 15, 2002, and indicated that the fIre flow requirements would be met. The Chula
Vista Elementary School District has indicated that any facility used exclusively for
religious/educational purposes is exempt from the statutory school facility impact fees. The project
would not have an adverse effect upon or result in a need for new or altered governmental services.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
Potentially
SipificaDt
1m.."
PoteutiaUy
Sigoi/kaDt Loa......
u_ S"lpiticaat No
.......... Im_ 1m.."
0 0 III
XII. Thresholds. Will the proposal adversely impact the 0
City's Threshold Standards?
A5 described below, the proposed project does not result in signifIcant impacts to any of the
Threshold Standards.
" a) FirelEMS
o
o
o
III
The Threshold Standards requires that fire and medical units must be able to respond to
calls within 7 minutes or less in 85% of the cases and within 5 minutes or less in 75% of
the cases. The City of Chula Vista has indicated that this threshold ~tandard will be met.
The proposed project would_comply with this Threshold Standard.
.
Comments: According to the Fire Department, the current level of service to the project site can be
maintained provided the proposed development complies with the requirements of the Califomia Fire
Code.
9
~
Mitigation: No mitigatio!l. measures are required.
b) Police
o
o
o
till
The Threshold Standards require that police units must respond to 84% of Priority I calls
within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time to all Priority I calls of 4.5
minutes or less. Police units must respond to 62.10% of Priority 2 calls within 7 minutes
or less and maintain an average response time to all Priority 2 calls of 7 minutes or less.
The proposed project would comply with this Threshold Standard.
Comments: According to the Police Department, the current level of service to the project site can be
maintained with the proposed development.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
c) Traffic
o
o
o
till
1. City-wide: Maintain LOS "c" or better as measured by observed average travel speed
on all arterial segments except that during peak hours a LOS of "D" can occur for no
more than any two hours of the day.
2. West ofI-80S: Those signalized intersections which do not meet the standard above
may continue to operate at their current 1991 LOS, but shall not worsen.
Comments: The Traffic Engineering Section indicates that the LOS "c" threshold would be
maintained on affected arterial street segments adjacent to the proposed project. See Mitigated
Negative Declaration, Se.ction E, for a detailed discussion of project traffic impacts.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
Potcatially
Sipificuo' "".....
........, u""" S",..u;a.t N.
Sipificuot MWpted Impa" 1m,."
Im_
d) ParkslRecreation 0 0 0 till
The Threshold Standard for Parks and Recreation is 3 acres of neighborhood and
community parkland with appropriate facilities per 1,000 residents east of Interstate 805.
Comments: No park pad obligation will be required as the project site is located west of I-80S. No
adverse impacts to parks or recreational opportunities would result, as this project is not a residential
use.. Therefore, the parks and recreation threshold standard does not apply.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
"
10
c23
e) Drainage..
o
o
o
iii!
The Threshold Standards require that stonn water flows and volumes not exceed City
Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary improvements
consistent with the Drainage Master Plan(s) and City Engineering Standards. The
proposed project would comply with this Threshold Standard.
Comments: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Sect!onE.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
t) Sewer
o
o
o
iii!
The Threshold Standards require that sew~ge flows and volumes not exceed City
Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary improvements
consistent with Sewer Master Plan(s) and City Engineering Standards. The proposed
project would_comply with this T)1reshold Standard.
Comments: The Engineering Department calculates that the project would generate approximately
952 gallons of effluent per day. The proposed project is located in the Main Street Sewer Basin. There
are two 12-inch pipes running westerly on Tremont Street that connect to a 12-inch pipe running
southerly on Fresno Avenue; according to the Engineering Department, existing sewer facilities are
adequate to handle the proposed project. No significant sewer impacts would result from the proposed
project.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
g) Water
o
o
o
iii!
The Threshold Standards require that adequate storage, treatment, and lranSIDlsslOn
facilities be constructed concurrently with planned growth and those water quality
standards are not jeopardized during growth and construction. The proposed project would
comply with this Threshold Standard.
Applicants may also be required to participate in whatever water conservation or fee off-set
program the City of Chula Vista has in effect at the time of building pennit issuance.
Comments: No significant impacts to \vater storage, treatment and transmission facilities would result
from the proposed project.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
,.
11
(;LY-
, .........
__c Lao ....
..........., u...... S'tpificant No
Sipl/\cuc ......... 1m.." 1m.."
1m.."
xm. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would
the proposal result in a need for new systems, or
substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a) Power or natural gas? 0 0 0 !i1
b) Communications systems? 0 0 0 !i1
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution 0 0 0 !i1
facilities?
d) Sewer or septic tanks? 0 0 0 !i1
e) Stonn water drainage? 0 0 0 !i1
f) Solid waste disposal? 0 0 0 !i1
Comments: The proposed multipurpose building would not result in the need for new service systems
or substantial alterations to any of the above utilities.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
POI.cntially
Sipl/\cut Less than .
Potentially U""'" S'q:nlficant No
SipLificant . Mitigated 1m.." 1m.."
1m.."
XIV. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Obstruct any scenic vista or view open to the 0 .. 0 0 !i1
public or will the proposal result in the creation
of an aesthetically offensive site open to public
view?
b) Cause the destruction or modification of a 0 0 0 !i1
scenic route?
-
c) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? 0 0 0 !i1
d) Create added light or glare sources that could 0 0 0 !i1
increase the level of sky glow in an area or
cause this project to fail to comply with Section
19.66.100 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code,
Title 19?
~.
e) Produce an additional amount of spill light? 0 0 0 !i1
12 ~
Comments: See Mitigate~ Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. ";",
.........,
SipUIaa' ..... ....
......daII, u..... --, No
Sioaifiaot Midptcd imp''' imp'''
Im_
XV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Will the proposal result in the alteration of or 0 0 0 II!
the destruction or a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
b) Will the proposal result in adverse physical or 0 0 0 II!
aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic
building, structure or object?
c) Does the proposal have the potential to cause a 0 0 0 II!
physical change which would affect unique
ethnic cultural values?
d) Will the proposal restrict existing religious or 0 0 0 II!
sacred uses within the potential impact area?
e) Is the area identified on the City's General Plan 0 0 0 II!
EIR as an area of high potential for
archeological resources?
Comments:
a) No prehistoric or historic archaeological sites are known or expected to be present within the
impact area of the proposal. See XV.e. below. ..
b) The project includes the demolition of the church rectory and garage buildings. There would
be no physical historic or aesthetic effect as no prehistoric or historic objects are known or
exped~d to be present within the impact area. See XV .e. below.
c) The proposed physical changes would not affect unique ethnic cultural values.
d) No sensitive religious or sacred uses would be impacted by the proposal.
e) The project site is identified as an area oflow potential for archaeological resources in the
City's General Plan Em.. The project site was previously graded to acconu;nodate the existing
rectory, garage and multipurpose building and an on-site residence that was previously
demolished. Based on the level of previous disturbance to the site and the minor amount of
additional grading excavation that will be necessary to accommodate the proposed .
multipurpose building, the potential for imp'acts to archaeological resources is considered to be
less than significant.
13
~
(
'.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
".
XVI. PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Will the
proposal result in the alteration of or the
destruction of paleontological resources?
Potentially
S'lpIificaar:
Im_
o
PoIeatiaUy
S"~lCInt
U"""
Mi1Ipted
o
.........
Sipificaat
1m.."
181
No
1m.."
o
Comments: The project site is identified as an area of moderate potential for paleontological resources
in the City's General Plan EIR. However, based upon the previous disturbance to the site, the presence
of undocumented fill soils' on-site, and the limited amount of excavation within previously undisturbed
formational material that will be necessary to accommodate the proposed multipurpose building, the
potential for impacts to paleontological resources is considered to be less than significant.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
XVII. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or
regional parks or other recreational facilities?
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities?
c) Interfere with recreation parks & recreation.
plans or programs? .
Potentially
SipificaDt
1m.."
o
o
o
pgceDtially
Sipificaat
UoI=
Mitigated
o
o
o.
..... ....
S'q:nificant
1m.."
o
o
o
--
No
1m.."
181
181
181
Comments: The applicant would not be required to pay park fees as the project site is located west of
1-805 and is n9t a residential use. No impacts to parks or recreational facilities or plans would result
from the propos!,d project.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE: See Negative Declarationfor
mandatory findings of significance. If an EIR is
needed. this section should be completed.
P....tIaII1
SiplI\aDt
1m.."
14
C)-.7 .
,
Potea.tia1ly
SipiIkaD'
u....
Mllipted
.........
SiplI\aDt
1m.."
No
1m.."
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade
the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or WIldlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below
self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a
plant or animal community, reduce the number
or restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate important examples
of the major periods or California history or
prehistory?
Comments:
o
'0
o
I!!I
,
The entire project site was previously developed and is located within an urbanized area within the
City's Southwest Redevelopment Area. No known sensitive plant or animal resource impacts are
identified in the General PI,an EIR. No significant impacts to plant or animal species would result from
the proposed project.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
b) Does the project have the potential to achieve
short-tenn, to the disadvantage oflong-tenn,
environmental goals?
o
o
o
I!!I
Comments: The proposal would not effect the attainment of any long-tenn environmental goals and,
therefore, would not have the potential to achieve short-tenn environmental goals to the disadvantage
of long-tenn goals.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
c) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limiteii, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a project
are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of
,.otlier current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects.)
o
o
I!!I
o
Comments: The project does not ha:ve any impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively
considerable. No significant cumulative impacts would be created as a result of the proposed project.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
d) Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
, 0
o
I!!I
o
15
c2X'
(
Comments: The analysl~ contained in the Initial Study found no evidence indicating the project would
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or'indirectly.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required,
XIX. PROJECT REVISIONS OR MITIGATION MEASURES:
Project mitigation measures are contained in Section F, Mitigation Necessary toAvoid Significant Impacts, and Table
1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, of Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-03-004.
,.
. ..
1~'.
16'
~1'.
(
08/26/20~3 13:16
6194221056
PAGE 01
~OOJ
08.'2~: 2003 MOS 17: H F,~1
.
x..X. -~GREE!\U::vJ;.10 1i\ll'l.EMEJIoT :\UJ'1<.;Al'IO' ME,,\SL"lU:S
By .5tgi}:ng th~ hru:I>'} pro\"ict'd h<lo\\'. the P!'OpL~1)o Owner (lnd (Jrtn:1t(\T "\tJp1Jhlh: thiil (l':-Y h;1\'..- read. \:nclc:l'Sh)"J ~mJ
h;l\'l" thc.U' re.st)ecri'\'c: company's ;lumont)' \0 :il.nd do ~grre lI.1 the nllh~aholt tlil",';l~.ur.:') ~:I'lltaincd hcr~I:I. alld '.qn
Implcl11em same lOlhe s~tisf.ct;(1n o(lh. E.'lvirolL"l1enUlI Review Coordm:Hor. Fuilurc ~0 ;:gn rht Jin~i$) provjc0~ below
pnar to postmg of ~hi5 Mitigm"cd Ncgati....~ De,lanl1.1on with the Coun~y C:erk :;hal! Il'hh~J.1t: rhe Prnp~rry Owner';, and
(>per.tnt's d<SITC that the I'r<>jec\ be held in ~"c)'Jnce "'"hout appro\"al and :h..1 Ib< fro))'cl1: U..."tr and ()~r'\N .hali
kn;Y:;S,u".nla' [~'J'l Rer",r; .Y J.J-t J() O~
Priuled .--.<lI\e all<l Titk uf PI" I~ rt) O"'\1<r /. Date /
(or aUU\f)ri7-Cd ~pl"'.~~'::nmli....~) .
eN: A~ ',_ _,_
Sigl1"tur~ .,f I'r"portl' Owner ~
lur cnJl1)oriz.(~U represc:nrative)
C. a ~"-1.-L
PriOl"<I ~"~Titli-(,r Appli.:dilIiOp';';;;,;--
(if d:ffo:'eIlt from Properr', Owner)
"Y" I J-.? /.J- ().-:- 3
~ D=i-::
-_._----~~--
D""
s; tt ~.
SiglllllUIt of Appli~anLlOper.tO)r
I if diff.,enl fCllne Prort.ny Owner)
.---.. ----....-
Oat,'
XX. E:\\'I RO'\:'.1 E:\'....J, FACT(m, POTE:>;T! ALU' AFFECTED:
rhc; i:'n\,'ironmtntal ~a;;tu(~ du:.l:kt::u OL:iOW '.\l1ult1 h~ pOIt.'.ntlNlly a1Ji:.:.:tt.:'d by en;:., :In'']Ci.L tr1volv\ng ~t kasl or.c ~mpLJC1 th..H
IS ~ "Pctt:T\tie.l\y Sig.niticnm ~.1l1p:!1Cf' OT "POl:nli:Jl;J Si~rr:rf;I..'anr I :111l.'"S"i ,"lli..~'.ilkd." ~.:- indit::'1led i?y t.he' cn~d'J1~T or. th~_
[1..1110.....j"5 pages.
[1 1.4tnct L~3(" <,r.d Planning . TrarlS;>or~~tivIl:CirL'ul.J.jo1:
o t-'ubli\. St:l...i'.::L:'~
o POpl;!GtLOn ar:d HOi.1~Hi!:.! - 0 Bj~)h.l;l:c,,;iJ.l RCSl)Un:t:"~;
o LlJh~les i.:nd ~ervlI~..'
"yot;tc-m:,
U GCI>;)hysi~al
[J f'nC'rgy and )''lmL'r01; Rc::;our;::c::;
o .-\c....:t~1~'tIl;:=;
o w.w
o 1!',"MtI>.
o (l..ltur:.;1 R....,..ull!'Ce~
"
o A:r Q".lm
[I \OISo
o Rccr~~:lOn
[j Vd,,"omoJog..:"
o :Vbnda',(II) FinJmy;s 01 Sl!;nitican..:~
L'
1"
(
36
XXI. DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, 0
and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the .
environment, there win not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation
measures descrioed on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION win be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an 0
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but
at ]east one effect: l) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the
earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant
impacts" or "potentiany significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT is required, but it must analyze only. the effects that remain to be addressed.
o
Cc
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because a11 potential1y 0
significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to
applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR,
including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. An
addendum has been prepared to provide a record of this determination.
j~~Lt9~~f
Environmental Review Coordinator
City of Chula Vista
J~/7/0'-
DattG" /
J:\Planning\MARlA\Initia! Study\IS-03..()04chkJst.doc
.
I
18' 3/
Attachment 3
Project Plans
3d-.
Attachment 4
Figures
33
~-DTOlor:;Tir:~r;ril-il-=;r::;n--' ! \)~\~ LJ..J..UJilll\.
k:J LD1D10ID1DJDJUil__-i, ~ ~ ~ ~ IQ!1
~ []Till~~~~DD1~~-~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Qj [JjDiJJjP1ULLJ1illLDLL1LuJ rJ~ ~ ~ ta ~ ~
c:J 'DI~ r~ ~ ~. ~ ~(
~ E-;rD1 EJf~ fD1g ~. ~C2' ~ ~-~ ~ ~J...
~ jI-=W61 .-If.--:j /I-:-itE:::J' ~ t.-a ~d ~ l--~ ~-t:
1.:_::::1 c=J-- --~-- C:3i-=1 c:=::1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~c
R L-- ,9 L-C?,g H---i- i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ by
a ~l.Q E]~3 B-ra E:3 ~ 'G:a ~ ~ iDY
2' m-;r-JOr--- ~C:3 8 ~~ !a .(::;1 ~ ~\
,:,=1 .0,0" "I ~-_ B I ~ 1::/\1 ~ 1:::/11 I :::::I
~ [D' +n~D' D i ~~ led :-d ~ ~ ~ ~
9 Juj!:!LdJ___=.J QJ9 ~j (~ ~ ~ ~ t?~
i ~~ULrrrJ]101O ,(lJmIDill1DtJ~ ~__~__~__~__~~
..,.;;jI.......-:;IIIiII::I...IoIm..........___~... ANITA STREET 1oIII:31.1E11.a1oJ5l....1oIIr;:JI...1CI................~
r MONTGOMERY - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --,
~ 'I ELEMENTARY 0 1
~ i SCHOOL ~ STREET
~ i H ~ PARKING
:::)'
f2 I c:J PLAN
I
I
I
I
'd 111IIIIIIII. -..~
! I ... .. FT LoNO c.... .-
SPACE IN ~IOHT Of" WAY
(EXCWDe8 IU!stDENTW..
I ~~~~:
17 ", MONTGOMERY lIT,
. BJJ IOArf~~IIIO"'IIE.
I r--l D ~mH~&r
I L--.J ~ATrouftTHAVE.
I 148 TOTAL I
L_________________________j
NOV-04 2A03 1214:17 PM DAMERON ARCHITECT
STREEI PARKING
LEGEND
3;P
858 273 321211
P.Vl2
.ej ID'~
OUR lADY OF ' ,
! GUADALUPE I!l"
CHURCH 'L.rJ'
__.. _______ _L._
TREMONT STREET
I
I
I
~
MONTGOMERY STREET
Figure 1
On-street Parking
\..JIJ
Jl
)
C/J
o
:r
n>
0-
S
n>
o
....,
."1
"
~ - -----,
~
~ >(/)> . z ~ m
:I~~-o 0 m r :>>
m~ r
~ ~ r 0 ()
0 mom~ m ~ ~ 5 ~ ~
" p::! 5rn~c ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ e -1 0
" << " ~ z
e ~~ )o-lmz I " e r I 0 C <: c
~ ,,- ZOOQ m I ~ < ~ !< en
~ ~m ~~~o 0 m ~ ~ ~ ;:c
z -~ ;;; 0 ~ ~ '"
~ ~z ~
(ijcn~;! z ~ e ~ ~ ~
~ ~~ ~ B " ~ m ~ r
0 ~~ ~~m~ ~ m :>< ~ ~ )>
~ OO"t!"'T1 ~
~ ZO -om;;nO 0 ~ 0
O. m(/)O::U Z ~
Z ~~ ~ ~" ~ -<
~ ~~ cn"t!OJ:
m~ g~~c
e ~~ 0
0 <I cn2S0~ z z z
m ~m z~~~ m m m "TI
~ ):;;; ~ ~ ~
m O-l::i!c ~ i'J~ ~ ~ G)
~ mz ~~~;z e " e. e e
~ r~ " I ~~ " r r
r m~ )o:>CO e ~ 0 C
0 ~. ~~~)o ~ ~ ~z ~ " ~ "
< o~ (l)O::!-< e " -" e I e I 0 )>
m ~m C"'T1"t)~ ~ I !f~ ~ e ~ e )>
m e~ 5~~~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ -< 0
~ ~~ 0 ~ mm 0 " 0 " 6
~ mm )o~"t!cn ~ ~ et: ~ I ~ I )>
~ -<_Om m B -GJ m m
z om ~cncncn ~ r_ :z r
0 ~z m m 00 m m
< ~~ l;~~~ 0 e ~ -e e e C
I~ ~ r ~~ r r
" (l)cnc-o ~
~~ -og,Jr=~ r 0 0 0 -C
~ ~ z z z
0 m~ )oo2(/) ~ " " " m
~ ~m ::UzZm
~ 2S~CJZ ~ -C
m~ z . ~ Z
~5 " ~~ " ~ N Oz )>
ro Ciii:~~ 0 OC
Q~ ~ ~ 0 ;:c
z~ gi~~ m ~ ~ 0;::
"I 0 it 1 ~ ~ Cm
e e e ~ ~ ~ en
~~ 0 ::;m
~~ ;:;g~~ '" m m 0 0 0 m
m m zOJ I
z~ t100-oz 0 z z
m~ IIC$5CJ ~ ~ ....0
mm ~ ~ ~ "'."
oz ~:g2SZ m ,
mo cnZ;ZO ~
o~ -c-lCJZ ~ en
m~ :>~_o ~ - - - - ~::;
<" ~ ~ ~~n~ m - - - 0
~I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~i': (I). ;;n"'T1 m m m m m m m ....OJ I
~~~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -'"
~ 0-
~~ 0 ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ",z m
"'CK1!5 0 ~ ~ ~ ~
mo n(/)Z .. " 0
~o ~~"
r~e ~ '" C
~~ ~O~ 7:30A.M, T08:15A.M. r
~)o e~m ~ ~
z~~ m
~ OOI
m ~~~ . . 0
" 0 0 8:15A.M. TO 8:45A.M.
e ~~Cii
~ "TI
~ ~-z
Z ~zo ~ -C
" ,,~ ~ 9:00 A M. TO 9:45 A.M.
~ N )>
. ~ 9:45 A.M. TO 10:15 A.M ;:c
0 0 Z
OZ?' ~"N zm- z '" e: en
o~~ "0 O~C 0 C I
~ ~ I~Z ~r~ ~ ~ ~ 10:30 A.M. TO 11:15 A.M. Z ;;::
~~~ m~e m2m m ~ ~ ~ CD "TI
om~ ~
e~m mZ~ m )>
~o~ m~~ SOQ " -<
~~~ O~(/) 0 ~ ~ 11:15AM, TO 11:45 A.M. '" 0
z~~ z 0 0
m ~Q~ "I~ ~ 0
~~g em" Z r
~z~ ;;nor:: e "
Q~~ ~"m ;;n:I:~ m '" ~ 12:00 P.M, TO 12.45 P.M. ::!
~~ me- 9 ~ ~ 'U
~~~ ~"m z~m :>>
o)o;;n -I::!c ~,,~ m
~~m !i::5z . I~ ::c
~~ '1 N 1:00 P.M. TO 6:00 P.M.- en
m:;!:t ~m 1 ^
~,,~ ~~ z
U;z~ rom m" 0
~~" ~" ~I ~ G)
~~ mm ~ 7:00 P.M. TO 7:45 P.M.
f;J:Z rO N ~ 0
mm" <e (/)
~~o O~ er 'U 0
,,~ ~m . .
~~~ mO ~ ~ 8:00 A.M. TO 8:30 A.M. :>> C
mO >~ ;:: ()
0< zO -C
mO" ~m O~ 0 m
~~N ~~ ~Q )>
;t!::i!".jIo. ~O ~ m ~ 4:00 P.M, TO 5:15 P.M. Z (/)
H1~z ~~ mo 0 ::c z
)>
-t....~ ~~ ~" -< m -i
~> Co N ~
~~e -~ Qz 1 1 5:00 P.M. TO 10:00 P.M.- 0 r
$5....2 ~~ ~~
m- e:
~~e5 .z ot: 0
~" ~" .
E~ . ::c )>
,,~~ >~ ~ ~ 8:00 A.M. TO 8:30 A.M.
"t)~~ ~ ~m m 0
z> >m ....
>s- e" ~~ :I: 0 en
z ~ ~m ~m
. O~ m~ ,; ,; 10:00 A.M. TO 4:00 P.M. OJ.... 'U
Xiz m~ i!iz Oc m )>
m" ~m
~~ Cii@ !:(~ Cm ::c z
5:ti em N ,; m ~ 4:00 P.M. TO 5:15 P.M. "en -1 0
<0 ~" m :1:0
~~ ~m mI ;J?< 1i:
~~ Oe -C
~z ~~ 5:15P.M. TO 8:00 P.M. ~ m
mm ~z ~" ,; ,; )>
,,~ ~!2 II 'U ;:c
z~ m" ~~ m
m~ ..O~ ~ ::j ^
G5f) ~m co 'I , 6:00 P.M. TO 10:00 P.M.- ::c
Im I~ ~:i (5 Z
m~ mI ~m
o. f;~ ~~ . ~ 0 G)
~ 8:00 A.M TO 8:30 A.M.
Z ~~ ge ~ ~
" ~ffi ~ ~ r<< r
~ m~ '1 '1 m 0
~ 0; mC 9:00 A.M. TO 5:00 P .M.- ~
~ e~ C )>
~ .~
50 OJ 0
.~ ~ ~ ~
~m ~ 5:30 P.M. T08:15 P.M. ,. en
m ~ ~
~ "
;; ..
"' ~ ~ 7:00 P.M. TO 7:45 P.M. ~
~ ~
Attachment 5
Disclosure Statement
-3~
,
Appendix B
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
~
1
You are required to file a Statement of Disclosure of certain ownership or financial interests, payments,
or campaign contributions, on all matters which will require discretionary action on the part of the City
Council, Planning Commission, and all other official bodies. The following information must be disclosed:
1, List the names of all persons having financial interest in the property which is the subject of the
application or the contract, e.g., owner applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier.
Most Rev. Robert H. Brom, Incumbent, The Roman Catholic Bishop of
San Diego, a Corporation Sole
2. If c':1y person" identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all
individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest
'in the partnership. . __
Robert H. Brom
.>
3. If any person" identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profrt organization or a trust, list the names of
any person serving as director of the non-profrt organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of
the trust.
Robert H. Brom
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff,
Boards, Commissions, Committees, and Council within the past twelve months? Yes No ~
If yes, please indicate person(s): <
5. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or
independent contractors who you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter.
Rev. Mario Vesga, Pastor, Our Lady of Guadalupe Catholic Church
Joseph F. Dameron, of Joseph F. Dameron, Architect, Inc.
Christopher Dameron, of Joseph F. Dameron, Architect, Inc.
6. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contributed more than $1,000 to a
Councilmember in the current or preceding election period? Yes No x If yes, state which
Councilmember(s):
Date:.x I ~
~G
(NOTE: ATTACH ADDlTIONAL PAGES A}fifffSSARY) _~
II, d-ffUi- . X ~ ~
( . Signature'of contractortaPiJlicantU
Rev. Mario Vesqa, Pastor (applicant
Print or type name of contractor/applicant ..
37
. Person is defined C1S: "Any individual. firm, co-ptJf1nership. joint venlure. association. social dub. freaternal organi=a/ion. corporation,
estate, l~l. receiver. S'Vndicar~. this and anv otkr CDrmrv eirv nnd rnunt/"'V ritv munirinn/i,,; (j';<::rrirt n,. nth,.,. n,",fir;!"r" ~,,1.A;,,;<::;f'I" ",. """
,
Attachment 6
Disclosure Statement
~
'36
,
, ;
. ..
Appendix B
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
"'
\
"'
\
You are required to file a Statement of Disclosure of certain ownership or financial interests, payments,
or c:ampaign contributions, on all matters which will require discretionary action on the part of the City
Council, Planning Commission, and all other official bodies. The following information must be disc:1osed:
1. List the names of all persons having financial interest in the property which is the subject of the
application or the contract, -e.g., owner applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier.
Most Rev. R~bert H. Brom, Incumbent, The Roman Catholic Bishop of
San Diego, a Corporation Sole
2. If "a":1Y person" identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all
individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest
'in the partnership. . _ _'-- _
Robert H. Brom
-"
3. if any person" identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of
any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of
the trust
Robert H. Brom
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any memrer of the City staff,
Boards, Commissions, Committees, and Council within the past twelve months? Yes _ ND ~
If yes, please indicate person(s): <
5. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or
independent contractors who you have assigned to represent you refore the City in this matter.
Rev. Mario Vesga, Pastor, Our Lady of Gua~alupe Catholic Church
Joseph F. Dameron, of Joseph F. Damero~, Architect,.Inc.
Christopher Dameron, of Joseph F. Dameron, Architect, Inc.
6. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contributed more than $1,000 to a
Councilmember in the current or preceding election period? Yes _ No ~ If yes, statE! which
Councilmember(s):
Date:X "'I ~
~O
(NOTE: ATTACH ADDmONAL !,AGES AJPfTSSArflt ' ~ .
1I,d-EVL. X~r~~
. Signature'of c:ontrac:tor/at1PlicantCJ
Rev. Mario Vesaa, Pastor (aDDlica~t
:3 r Print or type name of contractor/applicant .-
(
~..{~,:...
. Person is aejifU!d as: "Any individua/.jirm. co-parr~rship. joint ven/we, tlSSociarlon., sociDI dub. /rt!~te17UJl organi=ation. corporation.
........_ ._.,., ....__.:..._ J._... . ... '" .