HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports /2007/06/27
AGENDA
MEETING OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
6:00 p.m.
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
Council Chambers
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA
CALL TO ORDER:
ROLL CALL I MOTIONS TO EXCUSE:
Planning Commission:
Felber Vinson Moctezuma Bensoussan
Tripp_Clayton_ Spethman_
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE and MOMENT OF SILENCE:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
May 9, 2007
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:
Opportunity for members of the public to speak to the Planning Commission on any
subject matter within the Commissions' jurisdiction, but not an item on today's agenda.
Each speaker's presentation may not exceed three minutes.
1. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: Request for Appointments to the Historic
Preservation Advisory Committee.
Presenter: Lynette Tessitore-Lopez, Associate
Planner
2. PUBLIC HEARING:
PCA 07-04A; Reconsideration of Amendments to
Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 19.07
Specific Plans and 19.80 Controlled Residential
Development. (Legislative)
This item has been pulled from the agenda.
3. PUBLIC HEARING:
Consideration of the following applications filed
by St. Rose of Lima Catholic Parish for 3.9 acres
Planning Commission Agenda
-2-
June 27, 2007
located at the northeast corner of Third Avenue
and H Street. (Quasi-Judicial)
a. PCZ 07-02; Zoning Application to establish
Precise Plan Modifying District (P) for the
underlying Apartment Residential Zone (R-3);
and adopt Precise Plan Standards for the
subject property.
b. PCC 06-42; Conditional Use Permit for the
renovation and expansion of an existing
church campus.
Project Manager: Jeff Steichen, Associate Planner
4. PUBLIC HEARING:
PCA 07 -06; Consideration of two
ordinances with proposed amendments to
Title 19 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code
relating to 1) the name and functions of the
Design Review Committee, and 2) the
procedures for the Resource Conservation
Commission to officially designate historic
resources within the City of Chula Vista.
(Legislative)
Project Manager: John Schmitz, Principal
Planner
DIRECTOR'S REPORT:
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
ADJOURNMENT:
To a Regular Planning Commission on July 11,2007.
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, 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.
MINUTES OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
6:00 p.m.
May 9, 2007
Council Chambers
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA
CALL TO ORDER: 6:08:50 PM
ROLL CALL / MOTIONS TO EXCUSE:
Members Present:
Felber, Vinson, Moctezuma, Bensoussan, Tripp, Clayton,
Speth man
Absent:
None
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: March 14, 2007 and March 21,2007.
MSC (Spethman/Moctezuma) (7-0) that the Planning Commission approve minutes
of March 14, 2007 and March 21, 2007 as submitted. Motion carried.
ORAL COMMUNICATION: Opportunity for members of the public to speak on an item
not on the agenda.
6:12:38 PM Frank Ohrman, real estate broker, stated that a client of his is attempting to
open a bicycle retail/warehouse facility in an eastern Chula Vista commercial center, but
has encountered obstacles. According to Planning staff, the Planned Community District
Regulations for these centers do not allow this type of use. Mr. Ohrman stated that the
master builders of the planned communities have done an outstanding job in
implementing smart-growth development concepts, where people can live, work, shop
and recreate in their own community. For this reason they have incorporating very nice
bicycle and pedestrian trails; the entire eastern region is optimal for bicycling. He urged
the Commission's intervention in directing staff to reconsider the uses in these centers
so that the community gets some of the services and retail businesses that they want.
Mike Olson, owner of three Trek Bicycle Stores in San Diego stated that Chula Vista,
has great infrastructure for bicycle trails and would be an amazing spot to open a new
south San Diego regional store. Their inventory takes a lot of space and they need a
large facility; typically their stores are located in areas where there are furniture stores.
They generate low traffic and high price ticket sales. They have found a location in
Chula Vista where other allowable uses are furniture stores, however, bicycle retail
stores are not an allowed use.
6:24:48 PM Wolf Bielas, CEO of RSI, a high-tech research and development company
located in the Eastlake Business Center stated they have been looking for the right
tenant to rent the space adjacent to their facility and they were approached by Trek, who
is interested in renting the space. Mr. Bielas indicated that they were very excited at this
Planning Commission Minutes
-2-
May 9, 2007
prospect because it would serve as a laboratory for research and development of their
inventory barcode and tracking technology. He too urged the Commission to assist
them in initiating a recommendation to staff, directing them to reconsider the uses at the
business center.
6:2919 PM
1. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: Beautification Awards Presentation and
Planning Commission Representative.
Nancy Lytle reported that the nominations for the 34'h Annual Beautification Awards
banquet is being kicked-off and is tentatively scheduled in October at the Olympic
Training Center. Ms. Lytle also indicated that the Mayor's Office is seeking to
establish a review/judging committee comprised of representatives from various
boards and commission, civic groups and neighborhood associations.
Cmr. Bensoussan commended Nancy Lytle for her involvement in the planning of
this event, and stated that the outreach effort with the community, as well as press
coverage, gives excellent exposure to Chula Vista,
MSC (ClaytonNinson) (5-1-0-1) nominating Cmr. Mike Speth man's name to be
submitted to the Mayor for consideration to be the Planning Commission
representative on the Beautification Awards Committee. Motion carried with
Cmr. Bensoussan voting against the motion and Cmr. Spethman abstaining.
MSC (Felber/ ) nominating Cmr. Bensoussan's name to be submitted to the
Mayor for consideration to be the Planning Commission representative on the
Beautification Awards Committee. Motion failed due to lack of a second.
2. PUBLIC HEARING:
PCC 05-44; Consideration of a Conditional
Use Permit for a carwash facility and
expansion/relocation of an existing
convenience store at a service station
located within the Terra Nova Plaza
Shopping Center at 350 East H Street.
At the request of the applicant, staff is recommending a continuance of this public
hearing to a date uncertain.
MSC (Tripp/Clayton) (7-0) to continue PCC 05-44 to a date uncertain. Motion
carried.
3. PUBLIC HEARING:
PCS 06-08; Consideration of a Tentative
Subdivision Map to subdivide .26 acres
into seven (7) condominium units for
individual ownership at 148 Fourth
Avenue.
Planning Commission Minutes
-3-
May 9, 2007
6:47:44 PM Background: Caroline Young reported that the applicant submitted a
Tentative Map application proposing to convert an existing apartment complex into
seven condominium units for individual ownership. The apartment complex is
approximately 18 years old and was originally approved by the Design Review
Committee.
The Design Review permit proposes no significant exterior structural changes, but is
recommending minor upgrades including repair or replacement of fencing, provide a
new landscaping area and a new trash enclosure. Each unit's interior will have new
carpet, tile, doors, windows and storage areas
6:51 :58 PM Commission Comments.
6:52:14 PM Cmr. Spethman stated that since the attic will count towards the storage
requirement, he asked if it would be a finished attic and will it have pull-down steps.
Cmr. Spethman expressed a concern with the lack of active open space within the
complex, where children can play or families can barbeque; instead, he noted that
the open space is simply landscaping areas along the perimeter of the project.
6:52:29 PM Luis Hernandez responded that the condominium requirements allow
the use of the attic to accommodate the storage space requirements, and that it
would be a Condition of Approval that the attic be finished and pull-down steps be
installed.
6:55:38 PM Cmr. Vinson stated that to his knowledge, condominium space is
confined to the areas that are within the walls, therefore, he asked if the attic storage
space would be recorded on the deed and title as such.
Luis Hernandez responded that the HOA is responsible for maintaining the integrity
of the building structure, i.e. roof trusses and common walls; the attic air space would
be considered as part of the condominium.
Cmr. Bensoussan inquired about:
. the unit sizes and the breakdown of storage square footage for each unit size;
. whether there is any indication if the apartment unit next door will be going
through a conversion, and
. does the proposed landscaping plan include any tall vegetation screening on the
north side of the property.
Mr. Hernandez stated that to his knowledge, there is no application on file for a
condo conversion of the adjacent apartment complex. With respect to the landscape,
there is not enough room to accommodate tree screening because its basically just a
walkway to connect the front and back property.
7:04:10 PM Cmr. Tripp asked what is the width of the dedication that the applicant
will need to provide for the right-of-way along Fourth Avenue, and if there are
currently and CIP efforts to widen Fourth Avenue.
Planning Commission Minutes
-4-
May 9, 2007
Mr. Hernandez responded that the dedication would be approximately two feet wide,
and to his knowledge, there are currently no CIP projects to widen Fourth Avenue.
7:07:25 PM Cmr. Speth man inquired if this project was reviewed by the DRC or was
it handled administratively.
Mr. Hernandez responded that when the project was built, approximately 18 years
ago, it did go through the Design Review Committee. The proposed conversion was
handled administratively by the Zoning Administrator and the complex was found to
be in very good condition.
7:11 :06 PM Cmr. Bensoussan stated that in past review of condo conversions, staff
and the Commission have recommended the replacement of traditional water
heaters to tankless water heater. Not only does it promote sustainable development
practices, but tankless water heaters also occupy a significant less amount of space,
therefore, Cmr. Bensoussan inquired if this is still an option in this project.
Mr. Hernandez stated that typically staff will make such a recommendation,
particularly when the water heater is located in a strategic area i.e. the balcony or
inside the unit. In this case, the tank is located in the garage, where the applicant is
proposing to install cabinets for additional storage space. Mr. Hernandez further
indicated that if the Commission would feel more comfortable to provide the
additional needed storage space in the area where the water heater is now located,
instead of the attic, they could make that a Condition of Approval.
Public Hearing Opened.
7:13:42 PM Michael Palumbo, applicant, stated that he purchased the building in
2000 because he liked the design and look of the building. Mr. Palumbo stated his
project meets all of the requirements, i.e. open-space, setbacks, parking and
storage. The strip along the north side that was suggested to be used to plant
screening material, is presently a strip of dirt that the tenants have used to plant a
vegetable garden. Mr. Palumbo indicated he would be amenable to planting some
screening material, as well as agree to finish the attic and install the pull-down steps.
7:20:03 PM Cmr. Bensoussan asked about the size of the units.
Mr. Palumbo stated that the average is 850 to 900 sf; there is one two-story unit that
is the largest that is 1,300 sf.
7:27:08 PM Cmr. Vinson asked if the applicant had had any preliminary title work
done to transfer the units in to individual ownership. Additionally, he is concerned
with whether the attic storage space would be included in the deed as part of the
condomium.
7:28:49 PM Phillip Diaz, realtor for the project, stated that the title and deed transfer
to individual owners has not yet begun, but the attic space that is in question will
certainly be adequately addressed. The attic storage could perhaps be handled
similar to the way private balconies are considered as part of the open space.
Planning Commission Minutes
-5-
May 9, 2007
7:29:39 PM Cmr. Felber asked if the applicant plans to have any type of financial
assistance or incentive for the current owners to encourage them to purchase their
unit.
Mr. Palumbo stated that they plan to give their tenants, who do not wish to purchase
their unit, a free last-month rent or possibly pay their first-month rent at the new
location they are moving to. They also plan to have a community meeting with a
financial lending advisor to walk them through the different types of programs and
first-time homebuyer programs they may be able to qualify for.
7:33:12 PM MSC (Spethman/Clayton) that the Planning Commission adopt
Resolution PCS 06-08 recommending approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map
to subdivide .26 acres into seven (7) condominium units for individual
ownership at 148 Fourth Avenue, with a recommendation that an additional
Condition of Approval be added that the applicant install pull-down stairs to
access the attic storage area.
7:34:07 PM Cmr. Tripp pointed out that the motion should include amending
Condition #26. of the City Council Resolution by removing the statement that reads,
"..No additional work is required to provide the storage within the attic space and the
storage area below the stairway."
The maker and second of the motion accepted the friendly amendment offered
by Cmr. Tripp.
7:34:38 PM Cmr. Felber offered a friendly amendment to the motion that the
proposed list of upgrades be added to the City Council Resolution and that the
condition to add the plywood flooring in the attic be added.
7:38:03 PM Call for the question.
Motion passes unanimously (7-0).
Director's Report.
7:38:39 PM Jim Hare gave an update on the progress for putting together the topics
of discussion for the procedures workshop that is slated in the near future. Mr. Hare
indicated that on the same night of the procedures workshop, there will be a
presentation given on our Code Enforcement Program.
7:50:21 PM Adjournment to a regular Planning Commission meeting on May 23, 2007.
AGENDA ITEM NO.
Informational Memorandum
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Planning Commission
Jim Hare; Assistant Planning Director
Lynnette Tessitore-Lopez; Associate Planner
Request for Appointments to the Historic Preservation Advisory
Committee
On May 22, 2007, Council approved the Historic Preservation Work Program and
authorized staff to commence with the implementation of the Work Program. As part of
this Work Program, Council authorized the formation of an Historic Preservation
Advisory Committee (Advisory Committee) to assist staff with the finalization of the
City's Historic Preservation Program.
Staff respectfully requests that, at its June 27, 2007 meeting, Planning Commission
appoint one member and an alternate to sit on the Advisory Committee. Staff will attend
this meeting to accept the appointments and answer any questions that the Planning
Commission may have. Once each standing committee and commission has appointed a
member and an alternate, staff will return to Council for ratification of appointments.
Committee member roles and reponsibilities, service commitment and appointment
citeria are provided below:
Committee Roles and Responsibilities:
. Recommend on content and structure of the draft historic preservation
program
. Participate in the drafting of a permanent ordinance
. Contribute to the development of a Historic Context statement for the City of
Chula Vista
. Draft process and procedures for a comprehensive citywide historic resources
survey
. To work with staff and/or consultants on any other functions related to the
development of a comprehensive historic preservation program.
Term of Service and Time Commitment
. The term of service will be through the adoption of the Historic Preservation
Program Document by Council and the commencement of a permanent
Historic Preservation Commission (approximately 18 Months)
. To complete the Advisory Committee review and input portion of the Historic
Preservation Program will require approximately two meetings per month for
approximately 9 to 12 months. The time and date of the committee meetings
will be subject to membership availability.
Appointment Criteria
Appointees with education, experience and or a special interest in historic
preservation, archeology, history, architectural history, architecture, and/or historic
architecture should be considered to sit on the Advisory Committee.
We know that each member's time is valuable and we appreciate any and all
consideration for participation in this exciting endeavor.
Attachment:
Historic Preservation Work Program- Approved by COlU1cil May 22, 2007
ATTACHMENT
- ---,.-"-.. --..-- .----=----=---- -~- -
Crn' OF CHULA VIsTA
HISTORIC
P :\rATION
WORKPR06RAM
PROPOSAL
.~.._-,----~_.-~~- ---_.._...~---:-:-_.-
, , ,,--~--,,---,---,-----=-=---'-~---~ ._-
---,.--- -
HISTORIC PRESERVATION WORK PROGRAM
I. Overview
Since the adoption of the General Plan in December 2005, staff has worked toward the
development of a comprehensive Historic Preservation Program (HPP) that would
incorporate policies of the General Plan, meet the needs of the community, and qualify
the City for Certified Local Government status (CLG). The recommended Work
Program is designed as a multi-phased approach to the development of the HPP,
allowing coordination between staff, city committees and commissions, and the
community at large, towards the goal of completing and adopting the Historic
Preservation Program.
This project work program is intended to identify and group tasks into manageable
parts, include the public and decision makers in the development of the HPP, and
provide a collaborative process that will address potential issues prior to adoption of the
Program. The proposed Work Program is comprised of three phases: 1) Preparation
Phase, 2) Approval Phase and, 3) Implementation Phase. These three phases, when
taken together, will result in the adoption of a comprehensive Historic Preservation
Program that has the support of the community and decision makers, as well as
qualifies the City as a Certified Local Government.
II. Certified Local Government (CLG) Status
The CLG program is a partnership among local governments, the State Historic
Preservation Office, and the National Park Service (NPS) in which the HPP of a local
jurisdiction is certified as eligible to receive technical assistance, grant monies and
access to other important resources necessary to facilitate local preservation efforts.
The benefits of CLG status help offset some of the costs associated with a Historic
Preservation Program.
To qualify for Certified Local Government status a jurisdiction must meet five
requirements:
1.) Adopt a Historic Preservation Plan;
2.) Adopt a Historic Preservation Ordinance;
3.) Establish an adequate and qualified historic preservation review commission;
4.) Provide for public participation;
5.) Maintain a system for the survey and inventory of historic properties.
III. The Proposed Historic Preservation Proqram
The product of the proposed Work Program will result in a tangible document,
comprised of at least 14 different parts. This document will be the City of Chula Vista
(HPP). Each part or section is further comprised of suggested resource allocations,
guidelines and procedures that address the following criteria:
2
1. Meet the requirements for Certified Local Government status;
2. Align with the policies of the General Plan
3. Are based upon the recommendations of the Ad Hoc Historic Preservation
Committee and/or accepted practices and guidelines of the State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO).
Although individually each section is important, the success of the HPP requires that all
the sections build upon one another and function collectively.
Since receiving Council direction in 2003, staff has spent a substantial amount of time
and effort developing the content and structure of the HPP. In addition to substantial
research, staff consulted with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) for
guidance and input on the development of the HPP and the proposed Work Program.
Both the HPP and the Work Program are strongly supported by SHPO.
IV. Work Proqram Approach
To finalize and implement the HPP, staff recommends a three-phased Work Program.
This approach, as shown below, outlines the necessary tasks for the preparation,
approval and implementation of the HPP.
-----_.---- --- -- -
-------- --_..,---
_.-------
Phase I
Phase II
Phase III
Preparation
Approval
Implementation
1, Formation of Advisory
Committee
2. Review and comment of
HPP Content and Structure
3. Review and Comment on
Draft HPO
4. Develop Survey Work
Program
1. Presentation of the HPP
2, Council Workshop
3. Approval of HPP Framework
a) Adoption of HPO
b) Approvalof Survey
Work Program and
Budget
4. Request to Initiate Permanent
HPC
1. Public Outreach
2. Establish Permanent
HPC
3, Apply For CLG Status
4. Initiate Survey Work
prog ram
------
.--.--.--.....---.--.---
--
A. Phase 1 - Preparation
The first phase of the Work Program is the Preparation Phase. This stage would
include the formation of an interim Advisory Committee tasked to review and comment
on each section of the HPP, review and comment on the draft Historic Preservation
Ordinance, and assist Staff in the development a survey work program for the City.
Task 1. Formation of Historic Preservation Advisory Committee (Advisory Committee)
One of the first steps Staff proposes is the coordination of staff, city committees
and commissions, and the community. This important step helps ensure
3
valuable public input is reflected in the goals and objectives of the program. To
accomplish this, staff proposes that an interim advisory committee be formed to
participate in the completion of the Historic Preservation Program (HPP).
Input from this advisory committee will be crucial to finalizing both the content
and structure of the HPP. The efforts of the Committee will ensure that diverse
public representation is included in the development of the HPP and that broad
based interests are addressed throughout the Work Program
It is recommended the Historic Preservation Advisory Committee (Advisory
Committee) be comprised of one person from each of the appropriate
committees and commissions (ORC. RCC, PC, TAVA, RAC, and the Heritage
Museum Board). as well as 2 members at large with qualifications or special
interest in historic preservation for a total of eight (8) members. In addition, it is
also recommended that one staff member from Community Development and
one staff member from the Library also attend committee meetings. Once each
committee and commission has selected a representative and alternate, staff will
return to COLlncil with the list of the proposed Advisory Committee members and
the operational guidelines of the Advisory Committee for ratification before
meetings commence.
As mentioned, all meetings of the Advisory Committee would be open to the
public and public participation would be strongly encouraged throughout all
phases of the Work Program. Staff anticipates the sitting members of the
Advisory Committee will provide status updates of progress to their respective
Committees and Commissions on a monthly basis.
The Advisory Committee would commence its efforts immediately upon approval
of City Council and will serve in its capacity if and until a permanent commission
is formed. The Advisory Committee would sunset upon formation of a Historic
Preservation Commission.
Phase 1 - Task 1:
Staff Resources: Existing staffing and resources (0.5 FTE Associate Planner)
Contract Costs: none
Timeframe: Summer 2007 (completed in approximately 1 month)
Task 2. Review and Comment on Proqram Framework (Content and Structure)
Staff has already prepared a draft of the content and structure for the HPP. Each
section of the draft HPP will be presented to the Advisory Committee, who will
then address any issues or concerns in a collaborative setting and offer
recommendations through consensus.
4
Finalization of the draft historic preservation ordinance and development of a
survey work program would necessitate approximately 15 meetings of the
Advisory Committee.
Phase 1 - Task 2:
Staff Resources: Existing staffing and resources (0,5 FTE Asso. Planner) and
Contract Costs: 10 hours of consultant services for assistance in establishing
the committee goals, objectives and tasks totaling approximately $1,000,00
Timeframe: The Advisory Committee will commence in August 2007. The
content and structure development will require approximately 15 meetings or 8
months with the Committee concluding its efforts in Spring 2008.
Task 3. Draft Historic Preservation Ordinance
The Advisory Committee would be introduced to the concepts and component
parts of the draft HPO and asked to provide staff direction on the more
contentious areas of the ordinance. Ultimately, the role of the Advisory
Committee would be to ensure that the draft HPO meets the needs of Chula
Vista and it's residents, and that the draft HPO would meet the requirements for
Certified Local Government status. It is anticipated that a consultant will be
needed to assist with the development of the Historic Preservation Ordinance.
Staff will return to Council for budget appropriation and approval of a contract for
Task 3 to be completed.
Phase 1 - Task 3:
Staff Resources: Existing staffing and resources (0.5 FTE)
Contract Costs: 25 hours of consultant services for assistance with regulatory
processes and model elements of effective historic preservation ordinances
totaling approximately $ 2.500,00
Timeframe: Spring 2008 completion (8 months)
Task 4. Development of Historic Resources Survev Work Proqram
Staff will work with the Advisory Committee to develop a historic resources
survey work program proposal that meets the needs of Chula Vista, as well as
qualifies the City for CLG status. The survey options consist of a comprehensive
citywide survey approach, a phased priority area approach, and a case-by-case
basis approach. The Historic Preservation Advisory Committee and public
participation will be instrumental in determining which survey work program
approach would be the most appropriate for Chula Vista. Funding of the survey
work program would not be required until Phase 3 of the Work Program; however
a professional in historic preservation may be consulted in the development of
the survey work program, as well. Budget appropriation for this task would be
brought forward with the contract for Task 3.
5
Phase 1 - Task 4:
Staff Resources: Existing staffing and resources (0,5 FTE Asso. Planner)
Contract Costs: 25 hours of consultant services for historic context
development, property identification, and preparation of survey guidelines
totaling approximately $ 2.500,00
Timeframe: Spring 2008 completion (6 months)
Summary of Phase 1 Total Resource Needs and Timeframes
It is anticipated that the total resource needs associated with Phase 1 will be
primarily supported within the existing Planning and Building Budget with partial
assistance needed for consultation with a professional in the field of historic
preservation. A summary of Phase 1 resource needs, costs, and an estimated
schedule is provided below:
Needs Summary Phase 1:
Staff Resources: Existing staffing and resources (0,5 FTE Assoc, Planner)
Contract Costs: 60 hours of consultant selVices for assistance with the Advisory Committee, draft
Historic Preservation Ordinance, and structure of a survey work program totaling approximately
$ 6,000,00
Timeframe: Phase 1 would commence approximately 9 months and would conclude in the Spring of
2008.
B. Phase 2 - Proqram Approval
The second phase of the Work Program is the Approval Phase, and involves the
coordination of Planning staff with other City departments, City committees and
commissions at large, to ensure that each has an opportunity to comment on the
Program prior to finalization. Staff will ensure that each department, committee and
commission is properly informed and has ample and opportunity to comment on the
Program prior to submission to Council.
Phase 2 also includes a Council Workshop on the HPP, adoption of a Historic
Preservation Ordinance, approval of a Survey Work Program, approval of the
comprehensive program document, and a request to form a permanent Historic
Preservation Commission.
Task 1. Presentation of the Draft HPP to Citv Departments, Committees and
Commissions
Staff will present information to the appropriate departments, committees, and
commissions, for comment and approval after the Advisory Committee has voted
to accept the Program. Since each committee and commission would have a
member representative on the Advisory Committee it is assumed that each would
have some familiarity with the HPP. Once comments are received and
6
necessary reVIsions made with the Advisory Committee, Staff will conduct a
Council workshop on the HPP.
Phase 2 - Task 1:
Staff Resources: Existing staffing and resources (0.5 FTE Asso. Planner)
Contract Costs: none
Timeframe: Summer 2008 completion (3 months)
Task 2. Council Workshop
Prior to proceeding to Council with a formal recommendation, staff would conduct
a Council Workshop on the HPP. The Council workshop on the HPP will provide
staff an opportunity to introduce the specifics of the HPP to Council prior to final
adoption.
Phase 2 - Task 2
Staff Resources: Existing staffing and resources (0.5 FTE)
Contract Costs: none
Timeframe: Summer 2008 completion (1 month)
Task 3. Approval of the Historic Preservation Proqram (Content & Structure)
Once finalized, Staff would bring the final draft HPP forward to Council for
approval. The proposed HPP is not static as it is anticipated that sections will be
updated and revised as needed to accommodate the future needs of the City.
The content and structure of the proposed HPP will allow for future modifications
and/or expansion of the HPP.
Task 3 a. Adoption of a Historic Preservation Ordinance
Staff proposes to submit to Council a draft historic preservation ordinance
that will serve to carry out the goals and policies of the city's general plan
and would qualify the City for Certified Local Government status. The
proposed ordinance will include input from the Advisory Committee, other
city departments, committees and commissions.
Task 3 b. Approval of proposed Survey Work Program and Associated
Budget
Staff will present Council with a recommended survey approach, as well
as potential survey options and alternatives, Staff will also provide a
scope, estimated budget and milestone schedule for all options for
7
Council's consideration and approval. Work for this task would not
commence until Phase 3 Task 4, as described below.
Task 3 c, Adoption of the HPP Document
Each of the sections of the HPP will be brought forward for Council
approval.
Phase 2 - Task 3:
Staff Resources: Existing staffing and resources (0,5 FTE ASSQ, Planner)
Contract Costs: Approval of minimum $60,000.00 for historic resources survey
(contract for services would be brought fOlWard for approval at a Jater date)
Timeframe: Fall 2008 completion (4 months)
Task 4. Establishment of a Historic Preservation Commission (HPC)
A qualified Historic Preservation Commission is required to obtain CLG status.
Staff will formally request Council initiate the formation of a permanent Historic
Preservation Commission. The Historic Preservation Commission, rather than
the Resource Conservation Commission (RCC), would be the advisory body to
the City Council on historic preservations matters with the roles and
responsibilities of the HPC adopted by ordinance. The HPC would have
authority on matters pertaining to historic preservation, such as the recognition,
preservation, protection and use of historic resources. Staff will work with the
Advisory Committee and the Resource Conservation Commission to find
qualified members to sit on the Commission.
CLG guidelines require the HPC have at least five (5) members, with interest,
competence, or knowledge in historic preservation and at least two (2) of the
members in the disciplines of history, architecture, planning, anthropology, or
related disciplines. Staff will request Council appoint qualified applicants as
members to the Commission for a term of at least four (4) years. The specific
membership roles, duties, composition and procedural guidelines of the
Commission would be specified through ordinance, and brought to Council as
part of this task.
The Advisory Committee will sunset with the establishment of the HPC.
Phase 2 " Task 4:
Staff Resources: Existing staffing and resources (0.5 FTE Asso. Planner)
Contract Costs: none
Timeframe: Fall 2008 completion (3 months)
8
Phase 2 Total Resource Needs and Timeframes
It is anticipated that the total resource needs associated with Phase 2 will be
supported within the existing Planning and Building Budget staff. A summary of
Phase 2 resource needs, costs, and an estimated schedule is provided below:
Needs Summary Phase 2:
Staff Resources: Existing staffing and resources (0.5 FTE Asso. Planner)
Contract Costs: As part of Phase 2, Staff will bring Council a budget request for consultant costs
associated with the historic resources survey that will commence in Phase 3.
Timeframe: Phase 2 would commence in the Spring of 2008 and conclude in the Fall of 2008 (7
months).
Phase 3 - Implementation
The third and last phase of the work program is the Implementation Phase. Once staff
obtains Council approval, implementation of the Program may commence. This stage
would include, commencement of the Historic Preservation Commission, submission of
the Certified Local Government application and initiation of the survey work program.
Task 1. Workshops
The success of the HPP relies upon public input and support throughout each of
the phases. In the spirit of consensus building and public outreach, it remains
important to educate the public on the topic of historic preservation, provide
opportunities for participation and to keep the public informed about events and
activities.
Staff would conduct approximately 3 initial public forum workshops (northwest,
southwest, and eastern Chula Vista) to introduce the HPP to the community.
These workshops would include the participation of members of the newly
formed Historic Preservation Commission.
Phase 3 - Task 1:
Staff Resources: Existing staffing and resources (0,5 FTE Asso, Planner)
Contract Costs: none
Timeframe: Winter 2009 completion (3 months)
------ --------
Task 2. Historic Preservation Commission Meetinqs (on-qoinq)
The Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) would meet bi-monthly. All
meetings of the HPC would be open to the public. The HPC would require an
annual budget comparable to that of Resource Conservation Commission for
miscellaneous expenditures such as water, travel, and training of the
9
Commission. This budget does not include staff and administrative support
services.
Phase 3 - Task 2:
Staff Resources: Existing staffing and resources (0,5 FTE)
Contract Costs: approximately $2,000 per year for miscellaneous Commission
expenditures.
Timeframe: It is anticipated that the HPC would commence in the Winter 2008
(on-going)
_________________________.._____n_________ ______.. _______
Task 3. ApplV for Certified Local Government Status
The proposed Historic Preservation Program would qualify the City for Certified
Local Government status. Upon approval of the HPP, the City would formally
apply for CLG status. Becoming a CLG would provide the City with special
technical assistance and training from the State Historic Preservation Office, as
well qualify the City for certain grants and resources necessary to further develop
the City's Program. Staff will work with the State Historic Preservation Office and
the HPC to compile all necessary documents to apply to CLG status and will
return to Council for approval of the CLG application packet.
Phase 3 - Task 3:
Staff Resources: Existing staffing and resources (0.5 FTE Asso. Planner)
Contract Costs: none
Timeframe: Winter 2008 (1 month)
Task 4. Initiate Survev Work Proqram
As a CLG, it is important properties that may be eligible for future recognition or
designation by the City of Chula Vista be identified and inventoried.. This
inventory will help the City evaluate the quantity and type of historical properties
existing in the City, which would be an important tool for future land use and
development decisions. Staff will initiate the preferred survey work program as
directed by Council. Although it is anticipated that the survey work program
would be directed and conducted by staff, local volunteers and the HPC, a
professional in the field of historic preservation would be necessary at least on a
limited basis. The expertise of a professional consultant would assist in
evaluating results and establishing the survey's credibility. Staff would retLlrn to
Council with survey options prior to commencement of any survey work. Ideally,
a historic resources survey would be brought up to date every five years. Future,
consultant needs are not included in the consultant costs associated with
initiation of the survey work program.
10
Phase 3 - Task 4:
Staff Resources: Existing staffing and resources (0.5 FTE Asso. Planner)
Contract Costs: 600 hours of consultant services for research, consultation,
historic property identification, and data evaluation totaling approximately
$60.000.00 minimum to more than $150,000.00.
Timeframe: Fall 2008
--------------------
--- ----- --
Phase 3 Total Resource Needs and Timeframes
Phase 3 will initiate the implementation phase of the work program. Staff will
commence public workshops and HPC meetings, as well as commence the
City's survey work program. A summary of Phase 3 resource needs, costs, and
an estimated schedule is provided below:
Needs Summary Phase 3:
Staff Resources: Existing staffing and resources (0,5 FTE)
Contract Costs: 600 hours of consultant services for survey work totaling approximately $60,000.00
minimum
Timeframe: Phase 3 would commence in the Winter 2008 and would continue through the Summer
2009.
Total Resource Needs for FY 08 and 09
Thus far, development of the proposed Program has been supported within the existing
Planning and Building Department budget (.5 FTE Assoc. Planner). Table 1 depicts
the task milestones by phase and fiscal year. Table 2 depicts the resource needs by
Phase. It should be noted the proposed HPP would be eligible for other sources of
funding, such as CDBG disbursements and related grant monies, once the City is
approved for CLG status.
Currently there is one half-time Associate Planner assigned to Historic Preservation.
The staff salary and benefits associated with this position exist in the Planning and
Building Department Budget and no further staff allocations are anticipated at this time.
In addition to the existing dedicated staff, the Work Program would require a
commitment of approximately one hour per week for most other departments, with the
approximate cumulative departmental staff hours (not including Planning staff) at 20
hours per month. The associated consultant costs, as shown below, are appurtenant to
the Planning and Building budget, with all supplies and services for the work program
absorbed by the Planning and Building BLldget.
11
. h.... ,.... ......
,I; en ......
...~' g......
.. . l:~...... .
~....~. ~......
_.... .~ ~......
.. ". .... i ...... ~
.. .. .... ~ ...... ~
~: .... i ...... ~
-<
;:z::
~ Q) '.... ~ ...... ~
~ g " .... ~ ...... ~
~ ~ . ..... * ...... *
~ ~ ". .... ~ ...... ~
:e ~ '. .... ~ ...... ~
.~ .... .... ......
IA.. ..' .... ......
..... .... ......
1IIIIt: .... ......
.... ......
.... ......
" 0.. 0 E
lJ 0.. 0.. E
:c :c '"
'E 1> - e
0
E ~ '1\3 0..
0 i!:
u .;; Q 0
i::' " ;;:
0 '"
~ ~
';; c:
~
II>
E
(;
...
<::
o _
"';:; ~
co
- ~ .
Q> [ .
en 0> .
III ~
.cD.
II. .
.....'ii
.... '~.
.... :E,(
.... 1
<,1S,
c'!.4
.....'I~
.... -it.
.... i
.... ..~
.... ~
.... I
.... i
.... i
.... ~
.... ~
.... *
.... ~
.... ~
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
'.. .. .u
. c
" ~
o
_ U
. .. 0
!:: ... I-'-
o' - E
:.;:. ::J
ro . 1>>
C . a::
-0>
=E
iii.!!!
en"-
IIIE
.c-
eI.
Table 2
Summary of Budget Costs by Phase
Work Program ,
Phase FY 08 ~\ldget Needs FY 09 BUdget Needs Total
I 0 N/A 0
2
$3.000 (consultant) $3,000 (consultant) $6,000
2/3 $2,000 per year (HPC $2,000 (HPC) + $60,000 $64,000
operatinq Budoet) (minimum consultant costs)
TOTAL $5,000 $65,000 $70,000
Conclusion
Staff has worked diligently over the past few years to develop a Historic Preservation
Program that would implement the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan and
qualify the City for Certified Local Government status. The proposed Program is based
upon policies of the General Plan, recommendations of an Ad Hoc Historic Preservation
Committee, and State accepted guidelines and procedures for the protection of
historical resources. Although to date a majority of the Program effort has been
completed by staff, to finalize the Program, it is important to receive input and public
comment on the specific proposal, most importantly to receive public input on the
historic preservation ordinance and survey work program. The Historic Preservation
work program, as proposed, would allow city committees and commissions and the
community at large to have ownership in a program that will shape the community for
years to come.
J:\Planning\L.ynncttc\hisloric prescrvation\Program\Rlueprint for the Historic Preservation work program\Council Presentation\5-22-07
documents\EB - Work Prog Rewrite 5-3-2007.doc
13
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item: 3
Meeting Date: Ol'i/2712007
ITEM TITLE:
PUBLIC HEARING: PCC 06-042/PCZ-07-02; Consideration of the
following applications filed by St. Rose of Lima Catholic Parish for 3.9
acres located at the northeast comer of Third Avenue and H Street:
a. PCZ-07-02-Zoning Modification Application to establish Precise Plan
Modifying District (P) for the underlying Apartment Residential Zone
(R-3); and adopt Precise Plan Standards for the subject property.
b. PCC-06-042-Conditional Use Permit for the renovation and expansion
of an existing church campus.
This is a request by Saint Rose of Lima Catholic Parish to allow for a phased redevelopment of the
existing church campus located at the northeast comer of Third Avenue and H Street. The request
includes a rezone to allow the establishment of Precise Plan Modifying District and special
development standards for the unique landmark quality urban setting of this project.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has conducted an Initial Study IS-06-013
in accordance with the CEQA. Based upon the results of the Initial Study, the Environmental
Review Coordinator determined that the project could result in significant effects on the
environment. However, revisions to the project made by or agreed to by the applicant would
avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would
occur; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared a Mitigated Negative
Declaration, IS-06-013 and associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt the attached Resolution to recommend that the City Council I) approve the Conditional Use
Permit to allow proposed master plan for St. Rose of Lima Catholic Parish; 2) approve Zoning
Modification to allow establishment of Precise Plan Modifying District to existing R3 zone, along
with Precise Plan Development Standards.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
On November 6, 2006, the project received a preliminary reVIew by the Design Review
Committee (DRC). On May 7, 2007, the project went back to DRC for formal review and
approval. The Committee approved the project by (3-0- I -0) vote subject to certain conditions
(see Attachment 10).
Page 2, Item:
Meeting Date: Of./?7f7007
On April 16, 2007, the Resource Conservation Committee (RCe) discussed the adequacy of the
Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for St. Rose of Lima Catholic Parish. Following a brief
presentation by the applicant and discussion by the RCC, two votes were taken. The first vote
(4-0-0-0 with Reid, Masek and Davis recused) found that the Initial Study was adequate with
regards to the MND. The second vote (4-0-0-0 with Reid, Masek and Davis recused) was a
request that the future architecture for the new church/sanctuary incorporate the current existing
architectural mission theme. This has been incorporated as a condition of approval outlined in
the DRC's Notice of Decision (See Condition 10, Attachment 10)
DISCUSSION:
Background:
On April 19, 2007, a neighborhood meeting was held to present the proposed project to the
surrounding residents and solicit their input. Although a notice was mailed to residents within
500 feet of the project site regarding the neighborhood meeting, no residents attended.
The site has been used as a church campus since the original church was constructed on the site
in 1921, at the southeast comer of Third Avenue and Alvarado Street. In 1948, the main portion
of existing school was added to the campus along Third Avenue. In 1950, the original church
was relocated to the southwest comer of Third Avenue and H Street. The only Conditional Use
Pennit on record (C-63-3) was approved by the City Council on August 19, 1963 for the
construction of a new church/sanctuary and to add office space to the existing rectory. This new
and relocated church/sanctuary facility currently exists along the southern portion of the site,
along H Street. The four conditions of approval contained in the approving Planning Commission
and City Council Resolutions were previously implemented and are included in this new
Conditional Use Pennit recommendations. No hours of operation were delineated. (see
Attachment 6).
Analysis
Project Site Characteristics:
Projed Description
a. Conditional Use Permit
The project consists of a new school, parish hall, church/sanctuary and other site
improvements including landscaping and a renovation of the parking lot area on the east
side of the campus. Off-site shared parking at the Gateway Center parking structure
directly west of the project side, across Third Avenue, is also proposed to meet the church
parking requirements (refer to shared parking discussion on page 8 of this report). The
Page 3, Item:
Meeting Date: nrynj7nn7
project is proposed to be implemented in three construction phases, more specifically
described below.
Phase 1
This construction phase includes the demolition of ,a portion of the existing school (3,650
s.f.) and construction on a new 23,226 s.f two story school at northwest comer of
campus. During this phase, the existing church, parish hall, rectory and pastoral center
will remain, along with existing parking lot area containing 178 spaces. Since a total of
229 parking spaces are required overall, 51 parking spaces are proposed off-site at the
recently constructed Gateway office complex to the west (see Attachment 7). A two party
parking agreement for the off-site shared parking spaces is required for this phase.
Phase 2
This phase includes demoliton of the remaining 13,422 s.f. the existing school and the
construction of a new 14, 027 s.f. parish hall. The on-site parking capacity will be
reduced rrom 178 to 165 to 165 spaces (for a loss of 13 spaces). The existing church,
rectory and pastoral center will remain during this phase. The off-site, shared parking
agreement would be modified to accommodate 64 parking spaces. Thus, a total of 229
total parking spaces will be provided as required for the first two phases and existing
development on the site (See Attachment 7)
Phase 3
Phase 3 will include demolition of existing 9,936 sq. ft. church/sanctuary (which has a
seating capacity of 800) and construction of a new 14,027 s.f. church/sanctuary with
1,500 seat capacity. The new sanctuary will be relocated to the southwest comer of the
subject property. During this phase, the project also proposes the demolition of the
existing parish hall and adjacent rectory building. Parking lot and landscaping will be
completely reconfigured. A total of 429 parking spaces are required at this build-out
phase. A total of 169 parking spaces will be provided on-site. The off-site shared
parking agreement would again be modified to provide a minimum of 260 off-site
parking spaces. (see Sheets A.O and Ao.2a and b, Attachment 1 I).
b. Operational Profile
Operational Profile including number of employees and hours of operation are described
in the following table:
Page 4, Item:
Meeting Date: O(,j?7j7007
OPERATIONAL PROFILE: Fxi~t;n~ Prop'"'''' (ph"<e T)
SCHOOL
Total Number of Students: 342 400
Pre-school 0 53
K -8th o-rade 342 342
Number of school employees
(includinp" teachers) 34 36
Before School Student Drop- M-F 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 Same as existing
Off Hours a.m.
School Hours M-F 8:00 a.m. to 2:30 Same as existing
p.m.; Saturday 8:00 a.m.
to II :00 a.m.
After School Student Pick-Up M-F 2:30 p.m. to 3:00 Same as existing
Hours n.m.
After School Care M-F 2:30 p.m. to 6:00 Same as existing
n.m.
OPERATIONAL PROFILE:
CHURCH/SANCTUARY
AND PARISH SOCIAL
HALL
rllllr"h/S"ndll"ry
Total Number of Employees
(includes clergy and lay) 28 same
Hours of Operation: S~rvlrp.~' Saturday 5:00 Sp.rvirp.~' Saturdays 7:30a.m to
p.m. and 6:30 p.m. 10:00 am; 5:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.
Sundays 7:00 a.m. to Sundays 7:00 a.m. to 8:30 p.m.
6:00 p.m.
Weekdays 6:15 a.m.; Weekdays 6:15 a.m; 8:00 a.m.;
8:00 a.m. plus 6:30 p.m. 5:00 p.m.-7:30 p.m.
on Thursdays
FlIner"k Monday-Friday FlInerHIs: Monday-Friday
9 a.m.; 11:00 a.m. 9 a.m. to noon
Werlrlings: Saturdays 11 Other T itmgjes: Saturdays 10 a.m.
a.m.; 1:00 p.m. and 3:00 to 4:00 p.m.; 7:0Op.m.-9:30 p.m.
p.m
Other group meetings Other group meetings/small
during evemng hours liturgies during evenmg hours
Mon-Fri. Mon-Fri
Tot"! Nl1mhp.r of M",jor 8 same
Wp.p.kp.nn Sp.TVlc-es
Page 5, Item:
Meeting Date: Ohf?7j?007
Porish So~iol Holl Monday-Friday 6:00 p.m. Monday-Friday 4:00 p.m. to
Hours of operation to 9:30 p.m.; Sat/Sun 10:00 p.m.; Sat/Sun 7:00 a.m. to
9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m 11 :00 p.m.
Upper floor used by Upper floor to be used by school
school during normal during normal business hours
school hours
P~~tnr;:ll rp.nter
Hours of Operation:
Parish Office Mon-Fri 8:30 a.m. to Monday-Friday 8:00 a.m. to 9:00
6:00 p.m. p.m.
Other Offices/ small chapel
(accommodates approximately Monday-Friday 8:30 a.m. Mon-Fri 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.;
33 persons) to 6:00 p.m.; Sat/Sun Sat/Sun 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
9:00 a.m. to 4:00 n.m.
c. Zoning Modfication
The applicant is requesting to modifY the zoning of the subject site to establish a Precise
Plan ModifYing District (P) to be added to the zoning designation. Precise plan
development standards are being proposed for the project due to the unique nature of the
site and surrounding area. The precise plan guidelines include development standards
related to building height/setbacks and shared parking provisions (see Attachment 9).
Project Data
REQTTTRFni A T.T ,OWED: PRFC'TSE PT .AN PROPOSED:
Existing = 183 P~rldn1? Proposp.rI P3rkin~ Proposed
P3rking Rpqnirpdl Allowpd: Phase 1= 178 spaces on-site Phase 1= 178 spaces on-site and 51
and 51 spaces off-site (total spaces off-site (total 229)
Phase I = 229 229) Phase II= 165 spaces on-site and
Phase I I = 229 Phase II= 165 spaces on-site 64 spaces off-site (total 229)
Phase III = 429 and 64 spaces off-site (total Phase III= 169 spaces n-site and
229) 260 spaces off-site (total 429)
Phase III= 168 spaces n-site
and 261 spaces off-site
(total 429)
Page 6, Item:
Meeting Date: OFof?7f?007
Seth3cks Required: Spth3..ks Propospl!' Spth3..ks Propospl!'
Existing required(H Street)= 5 to H Street = 0 H Street = 0
25 ft.
Existing required Third Ave)=5 Third Avenue = 0 Third Avenue = 0
ft
Existing required (Alvarado) = 5 Alvarado S1.= 0 Alvarado S1.= 0
to 20 ft.
Building Height Maximum Building Height Building Height Proposed: 54 ft.
Existing Maximum: 45 feet Proposed: 54 ft. (building) (building) 90 feet (top of spire)**
90 feet (top of spire)**
Interior Side Fence Maximum Interior Side Fence Height Interior Side Fence Height
Hei"ht : 6 feet Maximum: 8 feet Maximum: 8 feet
**Per Section 19.16.040 of Municipal Code, church tower is exempt rrom height regulations.
Surrounding Land Uses:
The following table summarizes the existing and surrounding land uses to the project site:
Site General Plan Existing Zoning Current Land Use
Orientation .
Site Transit Focus Area R-3 Existin2: church camous
North Transit Focus Area, UC1, R3, R3Pl4 Commercial/Single-Multi- Family Residential
Residential Hi"h
South Transit Focus Area UCl Commercial Office
East Residential- R3/R3Pl4 Multi-Family Residential
Medium-High;
Residential-Hi"h
West Transit Focus Area UCl Commercial Office
Page 7, Item:
Meeting Date: Ohf?7f?007
ANALYSIS
Conditional Use Permit
Church Campus LayoutlMaster Site Plan
The applicant is proposing that the three new/replacement buildings be sited with a pedestrian
orientation along the adjacent streets. This is consistent with the goal of the Urban Core Specific
Plan which surrounds the project site on three sides. This will open up most of the eastern
portion of the site for a centralized parking field rather then the segmented parking arrangement
that currently exists. The proposed school will wrap around the northwest comer of the site with
two wings, the larger area along Alvarado Street and the smaller along Third Avenue. The new
parish hall building will be located along Third Avenue just south of, and connected by second
floor pedestrian bridge to the new school to the north. The new church/sanctuary is proposed just
south of the new parish hall, where it will flank the comer of Third Avenue and H Street. The
only existing building which will remain is the pastoral center located on the northeast portion of
the site. Because the pastoral center is oriented towards, and takes its access off of, Alvarado
Street, it will not detract rrom the overall pedestrian orientation being proposed. The existing
parking area to the west and east of the pastoral center will remain, which also will continue to
provide the main ingress/egress for drop-off and pick-up of students. Said existing driveways
will provide access to the main parking field directly to the south.
Operational Profile/Hours of Operation
There will be minimal changes to the existing operational profile and hours of operation. As
discussed in the following section, the new school facility will accommodate two new preschool
classrooms. This will necessitate two additional teachers, increasing the total number of school
employees rrom 34 to 36. While the hours of operation will be increased slightly rrom existing,
the primary reason for such increase in hours is to accommodate and provide flexibility to the
actual hours of services. As noted in the table above, the total of number of weekend services
will remain at a maximum of eight. Any increase in number of weekend services will require
approval by the Zoning Administrator. Despite the doubling in size of the church/sanctuary
facility, no changes are proposed in terms of number of church employees.
Phased Development
The applicant is proposing a master plan which in broken down into three separate construction
phases. It is anticipated that Phase I will commence within six months of project approval.
Phase III, which involves construction of the church/sanctuary is anticipated to commence five to
seven years from the date of project approval. These development phases and the accompanying
changes in on-site facilities are analyzed in more detail below:
Page 8, Item:
Meeting Date: Ohf?7/?007
Phase I: Parochial School
A new two story parochial school will be constructed during Phase 1. The existing one story
17,072 s.f. school facility has existing on the project site since 1948 and currently consists of
three separate detached buildings. The largest of the three buildings, approximately 10,000 s.f.,
is located off of Third Avenue, the second building, approximately 3,650 s.f. is located at the
northwest comer of the site, and the third building, approximately 3,420 s.f. is located near the
center of the site. Rather than doing a major upgrade to the existing school facility and in order
to accommodate additional classroom space for a preschool, a new school building is proposed.
The new school will be 23,226 square feet and two stories.
Due to the proposed location of the new school, only the detached 3,650 s.f. structure at the
northwest comer of the site will be demolished during Phase 1. The two story facility will require
less building lot coverage on the site, which will provide land needed for additional playground
areas. While the new school will continue to operate one classroom for each grade (K-12), it will
also include two new preschool classrooms which can accommodate up to 56 students. As a
result, the student enrollment numbers increase rrom 342 to 400 students, to accommodate the
preschool. The school will continue its same operating hours and will increase total school
employees by approximately two in order to accommodate the new preschool.
Phase II: Parish Hall
The site contains an existing one story parish hall building which is approximately 9,400 square
feet in size. A new two story facility, approximately 14,000 square feet in size, will be
constructed during this second phase. The remaining portion of the exiting school (approximately
13,400 s.f.) will be demolished in order to accommodate the new and relocated parish hall. The
8,00 square foot first floor of the new parish hall facility will accommodate a large (320 dinner
seat) social hall with adjacent catering kitchen. The large social hall component can also be
partitioned off to creates four separate meeting rooms. The 6,000 square foot second floor will
be used as a multi-purpose room. A second floor bridge is proposed between the multi-purpose
room and the second floor of the school to facilitate the rooms use by student activities during
normal school hours.
Phase ill: Church/Sanctuary
The existing church/sanctuary facility is approximately 10,000 s.f. in size and contains 800 seats.
A new church/sanctuary facility approximately 25,000 s.f in size and will contain 1,500 seats.
The new facility is planned for the third and final phase of construction. It is anticipated that this
final construction phase may not commence for between five and seven years. Rather than doing
a major upgrade of the existing facility to accommodate the needs for a larger seating capacity,
the new church is being proposed. In addition, the church/sanctuary will be relocated to the
southwest comer of the site. The church is located in a prominent location in downtown Chula
Page 9, Item:
Meeting Date: Ohf?7f?007
Vista. Due to its location, the church anticipates the needs of a growing congregation size. This
growth is anticipated due to the proposed increases in residential densities of the immediate
surrounding areas as well as the increased population of the master planned communities to the
east. The relocation of the church/sanctuary facility rrom its existing location will 1) help to
facilitate a better on-site parking field arrangement, 2) better facilitate pedestrian access both
from parishioners who choose to park off-site at the Gateway Center parking structure to the west
as well as rrom surrounding residential areas.
The main entrance to the new church/sanctuary facility will be rrom an interior gathering area at
the northeast comer of the building. A secondary entrance to the church is being provided at the
southwest comer ofthe building to facilitate pedestrian access.
P~rklnp ~nil pp.r1f':~tri:m rirC:l1bt;nn
Pursuant to Chapter 19.62 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, parking demand is based upon
the seating capacity of the sanctuary, at a rate of one parking space per 3.5 seats. Based upon a
total of 1,500 seats proposed, a total of 429 parking spaces are required at the time the new
church/sanctuary is constructed (phase III). The applicant is proposing to provide for a portion of
the required parking on-site. The remaining parking will be provided off-site. The applicant is
proposing to utilize the Gateway parking structure directly west of the proj ect site, to provide all
required off-site parking. A parking study has been conducted to show that Gateway has the
necessary parking spaces available (see Attachment 8). Parking agreements between donor and
recipient and applicant and City are required prior to issuance of building permits. Provisions to
allow shared parking are included in the applicants request for a Precise Plan in conjunction with
the rezone proposed for this project (see Rezone/Precise Plan section on Page 12 ofthis report).
On Site Parking:
A total of 229 parking spaces are required to accommodate Phase I and II of the project and a
total of 429 are required to accommodate Phase III. A total of 178 on-site parking spaces will be
provided for Phase I and 165 on-site parking spaces will be provided for Phase II. Once the
parking lot is completely reconfigured at Phase III, a total of 169 on-site parking spaces will be
provided on-site (based upon the proposed reconfigured parking areas to be provided on the
eastern half of the project site). The remaining required (260) parking spaces will be provided
off-site.
Off-site/Shared Parking
A minimum of 51 off-site parking spaces for Phase I, 64 off-site phases for Phase II and a
minimum of 260 off-site parking spaces for Phase III are required in order for the project to
remain in compliance with the parking standards of the CVMC. These will be provided for at the
Gateway parking structure, located west of the project site (across Third Avenue). The applicant
Page 10, Item:
Meeting Date: Ohf?7/?007
has prepared a parking analysis for the Gateway structure in conjunction with their traffic study
(Attachment 8). The parking analysis indicates there is adequate parking available on weekends
to accommodate the required 260 parking spaces.(Refer to section on Shared Parking under
Precise Plan Guidelines)
The following table illustrates the project compliance with the applicable parking requirements:
PARKING REoUIREMENT BASED ON SEATING
Sanctuarv nronosed Seatin"
Total Seatin" 1500
Parkin" Ratio: 1 :3.5
Total Parkin" Renuired: 429
Parkin" Provided is nronosed as follows:
On-Site 169
Off-Site (Gatewav Parkin!! Structure) 260
Total Parkin" Provided 429
In order to further minimize parking impacts to the Gateway Center a parking. management plan
will be required, to insure that the church parking facilities are utilized first and Gateway Parking
Structure is used as an overflow parking facility.
Parking Agreement: Terms and Enforcement
A two party agreement between the applicant and the City is required to ensure that the required
off-site parking will be provided at all times. Failure to provide said off-site parking could
require the church to temporarily reduce the seating capacity ofthe sanctuary to a point where the
aggregate of on-site and off-site parking provides the number of spaces required by the CVMC,
based upon amount of seating within the sanctuary facility.
In an effort to prevent the above occurrence, the conditions of approval outline the process the
applicant is to follow if the existing Donor Site (Gateway) should choose at some point in time
to no longer provide parking for the church use.
Specifically, the following process must be followed by the applicant in the event the existing
Donor site being utilized for off-site parking will no longer be available. Failure to comply with
these steps will result in the applicant being required to reduce operations to a level where
adequate parking is provided by the CVMC:
1 A minimum of 90 days prior to termination of existing parking agreement,
Gateway ("existing Donor") must notifY St. Rose of Lima Catholic Parish
("Recipient") of intent to terminate agreement.
Page 11, Item:
Meeting Date: ohf?7/?007
2 Within ~ cloys of notifi~3tion of t"rminotion, applicant shall inform City of
existing Donor intent to terminate agreement. Applicant shall provide City with
alternative 10cation(s) they will propose to utilize to provide required off-site
parking. City will review proposed locations and determine if additional
discretionary approvals or additional environmental review will be required.
3 Within ,0 cloy" of notifi~3tion of t"rminotion, applicant shall provide City with a
Shared Parking Report demonstrating availability of excess parking on the new
Donor site which is available for used during hours of church services.
4 Within fiO cloy" ofnotifkotion oft"rminotion, applicant shall provide City with 1)
new shared parking agreement between new Donor and Recipient, and 2) Updated
agreement between applicant and City for on-going provision for off-site parking.
Pedestrian Access:
Pedestrian access rrom the Gateway parking structure will be provided via sidewalk along the
west side of Third Avenue with pedestrian crossing at the controlled intersection of 3'd and H
Streets. The main entrance to the church will be provided via an interior courtyard/gathering
area. However, a secondary entrance to the church will be provided at the southwest comer of
the building (facing the comer of Third and H Streets) to help facilitate pedestrian ingress and
egress.
Required Findings for Conditional Use Permit:
The existing church facility was established and has been operating since 1921 at this location.
The school was established in 1948 and has also been operating since then. The renovation and
expansion of the church campus is necessary to upgrade the facility to meet current and projected
future parish demands. The renovation/expansion of the church and school campus will also
result in a positive contribution, in terms of services and physical improvements to area residents,
to the surrounding neighborhood and overall area. Thus, approval of this conditional use permit
is necessary and highly desirable to continue providing religious and academic services to the
neighborhood and the community in general.
The facility renovation is extensive, but the expansion at build out is relatively minor except for
the church/sanctuary facility. While the school capacity will only increase by approximately 12%,
the seating capacity of the church will increase by 87%. Parking capacity will also be expanded
to insure parishioners have adequate parking available. This will be accomplished by both on-
and off-site parking. Over half of the required parking will be provided at the nearby Gateway
parking structure, accessible via pedestrian travel. With this additional capacity, the
church/school will be able satisfY the demand for school services and parish accommodations
without impacting nearby residential and commercial areas. Thus, approval of this conditional
use permit will result in a substantial improvement to this area and enhancement to the services
Page 12, Item:
Meeting Date: Ohf?7f?007
already provided by the applicant to area residents.
All aspects of the proposed master plan CUP will comply with the regulations and conditions
specified in the Chula Vista Municipal Code for such use. The use of shared parking to
accommodate the once a week requirements generated on Sundays will be the subject of an
agreement between the applicant and the City of Chula Vista. In addition, the project conditions
of approval require the operation to be in continuing compliance with all applicable city codes
and regulations. The project has been conditioned to either obtain a parking agreement (based
upon an approved parking analysis) proving they have sufficient off-site parking to provide a
total 429 required parking spaces, or to revise the sanctuary floor plan to reduce the seating
capacity in order to meet parking requirements.
Although the property is zoned R-3, Apartment Residential, the General Plan land use
designation is Mixed Use Transit Focus Area, which could accommodate a mix of residential,
office and retail land uses. Since churches are unclassified uses in the Zoning Ordinance and
may be located in any zone, provided a conditional use permit is approved. Based on this,
Conditional Use Permit complies with the General Plan, and the Zoning Ordinance.
ZONING MODIFICATION/PRECISE PLAN
Specific development request exemptions:
Off-site shared parking
Currently, Chapter 19.62 of CVMC contains no provisions for shared parking. This chapter
requires that each use "stand alone" in tenus of providing the required parking for each use. The
applicant is requesting that shared parking be allowed whereby required parking spaces for
another use, can be "shared" with the need for parking by the church. A parking analysis was
prepared for the Gateway Commercial Center. The results indicated that on weekends, at the
time the church is in need of 261 off-site parking spaces, this amount of parking spaces is
available for use by the church, without negatively impacting Gateways parking needs (see
Attachment 5).
Non-binding parking agreement
Section 19.62.040 ofCVMC discusses alternatives to on-site parking. The applicant proposes to
utilize the Gateway parking structure located just west of the project site and lies within the
required 200 foot maximum distance by publicly available pedestrian access rrom the site.
However, this section requires "...a binding agreement with the city as to the permanent
reservation of said space and access thereto..." The applicant is requesting that a binding
agreement with permanent reservation not be required.
Page 13, Item:
Meeting Date: Ohf?7j?007
Instead, the applicant is proposing a private parking agreement between themselves (to recipient)
and the Gateway (the donor) which will include a required 90 day notification as to the donor
dissolving the agreement. A separate 2-party agreement will be provided between the applicant
and the City. Staff has placed conditions ofthe project which outline a process which must be
followed in the event that off-site parking spaces at Gateway are no longer available.
Development standards: Building Setbacks and Height Restrictions
In addition to the above, the applicant is also requesting certain modifications be allowed to the
required development standards. These modifications are proposed to be included in the overall
precise plan guidelines being requested for this project. The applicant is requesting the building
setbacks be reduced to zero on all three street of the property. Currently there are required
setbacks for the site established by the Building Line setback map. These required setbacks
range rrom 5 feet along Third Avenue to between 5 and 25 feet along H and Alvarado Streets.
To develop the project in keeping with the surrounding existing Gateway office building across
the street along with anticipated redevelopment to the north and south, the applicant is requesting
a zero setback.
Currently the maximum allowable building height is 45 feet. The applicant requests this
maximum be increased to 54 feet as measured to the roofline of the proposed church/sanctuary
structure. This is consistent with the recently adopted Urban Core Specific Plan (UCSP) which
affects the adjacent properties to the north, south and west. Adoption of the UCSP has increased
the maximum building height of the surrounding parcels rrom 45 feet to 84 feet. While the
proposed spire for the church exceeds this 84 foot maximum height, it is allowed an exemption
fi-om the height regulations per section 19.16.040 of the CVMC.
The requested increase in fence height rrom six feet to eight feet along the eastern property line
will facilitate an additional barrier between existing residential use to the east with non-
residential use of the subject site. Increasing the height to eight feet will provide an additional
noise buffer for adjacent residents rrom the central parking field/basketball court usage on-site.
Required Findings for Precise Plan
Section 19.56.041 of CVMC states that the P modifying district may be applied to areas of the
city when one or more circumstances are evident. One of these circumstances states that..." the
property or area to which the P modifYing district is applied is an area adjacent and contiguous to
a zone allowing different land uses, and the development of a precise plan will allow the area so
designated to coexist between land usages which might otherwise prove incompatible."
The site is adjacent and contiguous to the newly adopted Urban Core Specific Plan (UCSP) on
three sides (north, south and west). The UCSP promotes a development patterns which facilitates
a compact urban environment which is pedestrian fiiendly. The project is being designed to
continue the development patterns promoted by the UCSP. In order to achieve these goals, the
Page 14, Item:
Meeting Date: Ohf?7f?007
proposed project requests development standards similar to those in the UCSP including: 1) zero
building setbacks 2) increased building height and 3) minimal on-site surface parking with
remaining parking off-site. The proposed structures will utilize a zero building setback line with
on-site parking to the east, behind the buildings which will :!Tont along the western portion of the
site facing Third Avenue and H Street. The proposed building height of 54 ft. will be similar to
that established by the Gateway structure (approximately 56 feet) to the west as well as by
anticipated building heights up to 84 feet as allowed under the UCSP.
Section 19.56.044 of the Municipal outlines the four required findings for the granting of a
Precise Plan ModifYing District. In addition to the above discussion, additional project
information is provided below which staff believes allows all said findings to be met:
Establishing the Precise Plan ModifYing District and Precise Plan Standards to guide the
redevelopment of the project site will provide the project designer with sufficient flexibility to
create a more efficient site design, suitable for an urbanized area. The precise plan standards
are intended to address specific site design constraints and opportunities and protect the
residential neighborhood to the east. Thus, establishing the precise plan modifYing district will
not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the
vicinity (see Attachment 9)
The requested deviations under the Precise Plan are necessary in order to achieve a consistent
urban-type development similar to the existing and proposed surrounding development to the
west, north and south. The surrounding UCSP promotes development patterns which facilitate a
compact urban environment which is pedestrian fuendly. The proposed precise plan
development standards include: 1 )zero building setbacks rrom all adjacent street sides 2)
increased building height 3) increased fence height to 8 feet along eastern property line and 4)
minimal on-site surface parking with remaining parking off-site. The zero building setback
line with on-site parking to the east will facilitate placing building rrontages along the western
portion of the site facing Third Avenue and H Street. The proposed building height of 54 ft.
will allow a building height similar to that established by the Gateway structure (approximately
56 feet) to the west as well as by anticipated building heights up to 84 feet as allowed under the
UCSP.
The Precise Plan ModifYing District and Precise Plan Standards will conform to both the
General Plan as well as the newly adopted UCSP, whose boundaries surround the project site on
three sides. The increased flexibility inherent in the Precise Plan Standards will guide the
development or redevelopment of the project site and will provide the project designer with
sufficient flexibility to create a more efficient site design, suitable for an urbanized area. This
is consistent with the goals and policies of the newly adopted General Plan.
Page 15, Item:
Meeting Date: Ohf?7f?007
DECISION-MAKER CONFLICTS:
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the Planning Commissioners and has found no
property holdings within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property that is subject to this action.
CONCLUSION:
For the reasons mentioned above, staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the
attached Planning Commission Resolution approving PCC 06-025.
A tto~hmp,nt<
1 Locator Map
2 Planning Commission Resolution
3 Draft City Council Ordinance
4 Draft City Council Resolution
5 Final Mitigated Negative Declaration
6 Prior Planning Commission and City Council Resolutions (1963)
7 Map of Construction Phases I and II with parking requirements for all four phases
8 Parking Analysis for Gateway Center
9 Proposed precise plan guidelines
10 Adopted Notice of Decision and Meeting Minutes from Design Review Committee
11 Project Plans
12 Ownership Disclosure Form
J: planning\casefiles\06IPCC\publichearingIPCC 06-049 PC Report V4finaldraft
ATTACHMENT 1
LOCATOR
LOCATOR
ATTACHMENT 2
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION
ATTACHMENT 3
DRAFT
CITY COUNCIL
ORDINANCE
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATNE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM IS-06-013, AMENDING ZONING
MAP OR MAPS ESTABLISHED BY (HULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION
19.18.010 TO ESTABLISH THE PRECISE PLAN MODIFYING DISTRICT AND
ADOPT PRECISE PLAN STANDARDS FOR 3.9 ACRES AT THE NORTHEAST
CORNER OF THIRD AVENUE AND "H" STREET, CURRENLY ZONED R-3,
APARTMENT RESIDENTIAL
1. RECITALS
A. Proj ect Site
WHEREAS, the area of land which is the subject matter of this Ordinance is
diagrammatically represented in Exhibit "A" and hereto incorporated herein by this reference,
and commonly known as St. Rose of Lima Catholic Parish, and for the purposes of general
description consists of approximately 3.9 acres at the northeast comer of Third A venue and "H"
Street. ("Project Site"); and,
B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approval
WHEREAS, a duly verified application was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning
and Building Department on September 21, 2006, 2006 by St Rose of Lima Catholic Parish
(Applicant), requesting approval of a zoning modification application to establish the Precise
Plan Modifying District and adopt Precise Plan Standards for 3.9 acres know as St. Rose of Lima
project. It is currently zoned R-3, Apartment Residential; and,
C. Prior Approvals
WHEREAS, the Design Review Committee held an advertised public hearing on May 7,
2007, at 4:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 276 Fourth Avenue and, after hearing staff
presentation and public testimony, voted 3-0-1-0 to approve DRC 06-50 contingent upon
approval of this Ordinance and the Ordinance entering into effect; and
D. Planning Commission Record on Application
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the Project
on June 27, 2007, and after hearing staff presentation and public testimony, voted xxxx to
recommend that the City Council approve the Project, in accordance with the findings listed
below; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Department set the time and place for hearing on said Project,
and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper
of general circulation in the City, and its mailing to property owners within 500 ft. of the exterior
boundaries ofthe Project, at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing; and,
Ordinance
Page 2
WHEREAS, the proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning
Commission at the public hearing on the Project held on June 27, 2007, and the minutes and
Resolution resulting there rrom, are incorporated into the record of these proceedings; and
E. City Council Record on Application
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for the hearing on the Project
applications and notices of the hearing, together with its purposes given by its publication in a
newspaper of general circulation in the City, and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet
of the exterior boundaries of the Project Site at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held an advertised public hearing on the Project on
XXXXXXXXX, at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 276 Fourth Avenue; and
WHEREAS, after hearing staffs presentation and public testimony, and receiving the
recommendation of the Planning Commission, the City Council voted _-_-_ to adopt the
Mitigated Negative Declaration, (IS-06-013) and approve the Project, in accordance with the
findings listed below; and
F. Discretionary Approvals Resolution Ordinance
WHEREAS, at the same City Council hearing, at which the Ordinance was introduced,
for first reading ( , 2007), the City Council of the City of Chula Vista approved
Resolution number _by which it approved a Conditional Use Permit for the Project Site.
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby finds,
determines and ordains as follows:
A. Certification of Compliance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and has conducted an Initial Study,
IS-06-013 in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Based upon the results
of the Initial Study, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the project could
result in significant impacts on the environment. However, revisions to the project made by or
agreed to by the applicant would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly
no significant effects would occur; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has
prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-06-013 and associated Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program.
B. Independent Judgment of the City Council
WHEREAS, the City Council considered Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-06-013
together with any comments received during the public review process; and
WHEREAS, the City Council further finds that on the basis of the whole record before
it,(including the initial study and any comments received) the project could result in significant
effects on the environment. However, revisions to the project made by or agreed to by the
Ordinance
Page 3
applicant would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant
effects would occur; and
WHEREAS, the Mitigated Negative Declaration and other related materials are located in
the Planning and Building Department and maintained by the custodian of said documents who
is the Director of Planning and Building. This constitutes the record of proceedings upon which
this adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration is based, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has exercised their independent review and judgment and
concurs with the Planning Commission, and Environmental Review Coordinator's determination
that Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-06-013), in the form presented, has been prepared in
accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State
CEQA Guidelines and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista and
adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
(IS-06-013).
C. The zoning modification of the Project Site is consistent with the City of Chula
Vista General Plan, as approved on December 13, 2005, and public necessity, convenience, the
general welfare and good zoning practice support the amendment to the Municipal Code.
D. The City Of Chula Vista Zoning Map established by Section 19.18.010 of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code is amended to modify the zoning of the Project Site as depicted in
Exhibit "A" rrom the R-3 (Apartment Residential) Zone to the R-3-P, Apartment Residential
Zone with Precise Plan ModifYing District, including Property Development Standards as
represented in Exhibit B.
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF REZONE AND PRECISE PLAN, INCLUDING PRECISE
PLAN STANDARDS.
pursuant to Section 19.56.041 ofthe Chula Vista Municipal Code, the City Council of the City
of Chula Vista finds that the following circumstances are evident, which allows the application
of the "P" Precise Plan ModifYing on the Project Site:
1. That such use will not under the circumstances of the particular case be detrimental to
the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity or
injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity.
Establishing the Precise Plan Modifying District and Precise Plan Standards to guide
the redevelopment of the project site will provide the project designer with sufficient
flexibility to create a more efficient site design, suitable for an urbanized area. The
precise plan standards are intended to address specific site design constraints and
opportunities and protect the residential neighborhood to the east. Thus, establishing
the precise plan modifying district will not be detrimental to the health, safety or
general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity.
2. That such plan satisfies the following principles for amendment of the "P" modifYing
district as set forth in CVMC 19.56.041:
The property or areas to which the P modifYing district is applied is an area
adjacent and contiguous to a zone allowing different land uses, and the
Ordinance
Page 4
development of a precise plan will allow the area so designated to coexist between
land usages which might otherwise prove incompatible.
The site is adjacent and contiguous to the newly adopted Urban Core Specific Plan
(UCSP) on three sides (north, south and west). The UCSP promotes a development
pattern, which facilitate a compact urban environment, which is pedestrian friendly.
These development standards include: 1) zero building setbacks from all adjacent
street sides, 2) increased building height, 3) increased fence height to 8 feet along
eastern property line, and 4) minimal on-site surface parking with remaining parking
off-site. The zero building setback line with on-site parking to the east, behind the
buildings, which will rront along the western portion of the site facing Third Avenue
and H Street. The proposed building height of 54 feet will be similar to that
established by the Gateway structure (approximately 56 feet) to the west as well as by
anticipated building heights up to 84 feet as allowed under the UCSP.
3. That any exceptions granted which may deviate rrom the underlying zoning
requirements shall be warranted only when necessary to meet the purpose and
application of the Precise Plan. Development of the lot using the development
standards of the R-3 zone would limit the ability of the applicant to propose a design
which:
The requested deviations under the Precise Plan are necessary in order to achieve a
consistent urban-type development similar to the existing and proposed surrounding
development to the west, north and south. The surrounding Urban Core Specific Plan
promotes a development pattern, which facilitate a compact urban environment,
which is pedestrian friendly. The proposed precise plan development standards
include: 1) zero building setbacks rrom all adjacent street sides, 2) increased building
height, 3) increased fence height to 8 feet along eastern property line, and 4) minimal
on-site surface parking with remaining parking off-site. The zero building setback
line with on-site parking to the east will facilitate placing building frontage along the
western portion of the site facing Third Avenue and H Street. The proposed building
height of 54 feet will allow a building height similar to that established by the
Gateway structure (approximately 56 feet) to the west as well as by anticipated
building heights up to 84 feet as allowed under the UCSP.
4. That the approval of this plan will conform to the General Plan and the adopted
policies ofthe City OfChula Vista.
The Precise Plan Modifying District and Precise Plan Standards will conform to both
the General Plan as well as the newly adopted Urban Core Specific Plan, whose
boundaries surround the project site on three sides. The increased flexibility inherent
in the Precise Plan Standards will guide the development or redevelopment of the
project site will provide the project designer with sufficient flexibility to create a
more efficient site design, suitable for an urbanized area. This is consistent with the
goals and policies of the newly adopted General Plan.
Ordinance
Page 5
F. The Precise Plan and Precise Standards as depicted in Exhibits B are adopted and
are supported by the required findings (CVMC Section 19.56.041, as outlined above.
II. APPROVAL OF ZONE MODIFICATION
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve the rezone to establish
the Precise Plan Modifying District and adopting Precise Plan Standards for the Project Site as
represented in Exhibit "B".
III. EFFECTIVE DATE
This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from and after its
adoption.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
James D. Sandoval
Planning and Building Director
Ann Moore
City Attorney
Exhibits:
Exhibit A: Zone Modification Map
Exhibit B: Precise Plan Standards
Ordinance
Page 6
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista,
California, this , by the following vote:
AYES:
Councilmembers:
NAYS:
Councilmembers:
ABSENT:
Councilmembers:
Cheryl Cox, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan Bigelow, MMC, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO)
CITY OF CHULA VISTA)
I, Susan Bigelow, City Clerk of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Ordinance No. _ had its first reading at a regular meeting held on the and its
second reading and adoption at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the _ day
of ,2007.
Executed this _ day of
,2007.
Susan Bigelow, MMC, City Clerk
- -----------. ---
EXHIBIT A
-",---_._------
-------_.~-~~-_.
Exhibit B-Precise Plan Guidelines PCZ-07-02
Minimum Building Setbacks: Third Avenue: o feet
Alvarado Street: o feet
H Street: o feet
Building Height: 54 feet (top ofroof)
90 feet (top of spire)
Fence Height: 8 feet height (along interior/eastern)
property line
Parking: 261 of required parking spaces allowed off-
site. Shared parking will be allowed III
conjunction the following: 1) parking study
showing excess parking available from
DONOR during time of applicants need for
such spaces 2) copy of agreement between
DONOR and RECIPIENT.
Off-site Pedestrian Access: Modification of Section 19.62.040 of
CVMC to require only a two party
agreement between applicant and City
required ensunng that off-site parking
spaces will be provided.
EXHIBITB 0 i
ATTACHMENT 4
DRAFT
CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION NO. XXXXXX
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AND APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT PCC-06-042 TO ALLOW THE RENOVATION AND
EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING CHURCH/SCHOOL
FACILITY KNOWN AS ST. ROSE OF LIMA CATHOLIC
PARISH LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF
THIRD A VENUE AND "H" STREET.
1. RECITALS
A Project Site
WHEREAS, the areas of land, which are the subject matter of this Resolution, are
diagrammatically represented in Exhibit "A" and hereto incorporated herein by this reference,
and commonly known as St. Rose of Lima Catholic Parish, and for the purposes of general
description consists of approximately 3.9 acres at the northeast comer of Third Avenue and "H"
Street. ("Project Site"); and,
B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approvals
WHEREAS, a duly verified application was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning
and Building Department on January 13, 2006 by St Rose of Lima Catholic Parish (Applicant),
requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit to renovate and expand the existing church/
school facility in three construction phases ("Project"); and,
C. Prior Discretionary Approvals
WHEREAS, the development of the Project Site has been the subject matter of various
entitlements, including Precise Plan guidelines adopted City Council Ordinance Number
on ; and
D. Planning Commission Record of Application
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the Project
on June 27, 2007, and after hearing staff presentation and public testimony, voted xxxx to
recommend that the City Council approve the Project, in accordance with the findings and
subject to the conditions listed below; and
WHEREAS, the proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning
Commission at the public hearing on the Project held on June 27, 2007, and the minutes and
Resolution resulting there rrom, are incorporated into the record ofthese proceedings; and
Resolution xxxxx
Page 2
E. City Council Record of Application
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for the hearing on the Project
applications and notices of said hearings, together with its purposes given by its publication in a
newspaper of general circulation in the city, and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of
the exterior boundaries ofthe Project sites at least 10 days prior to the hearing.
F. City Council Hearing
WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing on the Conditional Use Permit was
held before the City Council of the City of Chula Vista on July, 10 2007 on this Project and to
receive recommendation rrom the Planning Commission and Resource Conservation
Commission, and to hear public testimony with regard to same; and,
WHEREAS, the meeting was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 6:00 p.m.
July 10, 2007, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council and said
hearing was thereafter closed.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby find, determine
and resolve as follows:
II. COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and has conducted an Initial Study,
IS-06-013 in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Based upon the results
of the Initial Study, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the project could
result in significant impacts on the environment. However, revisions to the project made by or
agreed to by the applicant would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly
no significant effects would occur; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has
prepared a Mitigated Negative D~c1aration, IS-06-013 and associated Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program.
III. INDEPENDENT JUDGEMENT OF THE CITY COUNCIL
WHEREAS, the City Council found that Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-06-013 has
been prepared in accordance with the requirements ofthe California Environmental Quality Act,
and Environmental Review Procedures ofthe City ofChula Vista; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council considered Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-06-013
together with any comments received during the public review process; and
Resolution xxxxx
Page 3
WHEREAS, the City Council further finds that on the basis of the whole record before it,
(including the initial study and any comments received) the project could result in significant
effects on the environment. However, revisions to the project made by or agreed to by the
applicant would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant
effects would occur; and
WHEREAS, the Mitigated Negative Declaration and other related materials are located in
the Planning and Building Department and maintained by the custodian of said documents who
is the Director of Planning and Building. This constitutes the record of proceedings upon which
this adoption ofthe Mitigated Negative Declaration is based. and
WHEREAS, the City Council found that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflected the
independent judgment of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista and adopted the MND
prepared for this Project.
IV. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS/ APPROVAL
A. 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
COMMUNITY.
The existing church facility was established and has been operating since 1921 at this
location. The school was established in 1948 and has also been operating since then. The
renovation and expansion of the church campus is necessary to upgrade the facility to meet
current parish demands. The renovation/expansion of the church and school campus will also
result in a positive contribution, in terms of services and physical improvements to area
residents, to the surrounding neighborhood and overall City's urban core area. Thus, approval of
this conditional use permit is necessary and highly desirable to continue providing religious and
academic services to the neighborhood and the community in general.
B. 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 IMPROVMENTS IN THE VICINITY.
As indicated above, the church and school have been operating and serving the
community at this location since 1921 and 1948, respectively. The facility renovation is
extensive, but the expansion at build out is relatively minor except for the church/sanctuary
facility. While the school capacity will only increase by approximately 12%, the seating capacity
of the church will increase by 87%. Parking capacity will also be expanded to insure
parishioners have adequate parking available. This will be accomplished by both on- and off-site
parking. Over half of the required parking will be provided at the nearby Gateway parking
Resolution xxxxx
Page 4
structure, accessible via pedestrian travel.. With this additional capacity, the church/school will
be able satisfy the demand for school services and parish accommodations without impacting
nearby residential and commercial areas. Thus, approval of this conditional use permit will result
in a substantial improvement to this area and enhancement to the services already provided by
the applicant to area residents.
C. THAT THE PROPOSED USE WILL COMPLY WITH THE REGULATIONS AND
CONDITIONS SPECIFIED IN THE CODE FOR SUCH USE.
All aspects of the proposed master plan CUP will comply with the regulations and
conditions specified in the Chula Vista Municipal Code for such use. The use of shared parking
to accommodate the once a week requirements generated on Sundays will be the subject of an
agreement between the applicant and the City of Chula Vista. In addition, the project conditions
of approval require the operation to be in continuing compliance with all applicable city codes
and regulations. The project has been conditioned to obtain a parking agreement (based upon an
approved parking analysis) proving they have sufficient off-site parking to provide a total 429
required parking spaces, or revise the sanctuary floor plan to reduce the seating capacity in order
to meet parking requirements.
D. THAT THE GRANTING OF THIS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WILL NOT
ADVERSELY AFFECT THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE ICTY OR THE ADOPTED
PLAN OF ANY GOVERNING AGENCY.
Although the property is zoned R-3, Apartment Residential, the General Plan land use
designation is Mixed Use Transit Focus Area, which could accommodate a mix of residential,
office and retailland uses. However, churches are unclassified uses in the Zoning Ordinance and
may be located in any zone, provided a conditional use permit is approved. Based on this,
Conditional Use Permit complies with the General Plan, and the Zoning Ordinance.
V. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PLANNING & BUILDING DEPARTMENT
A. The following conditions shall be incorporated into the plan by the applicant prior to
issuance of building permits for this project, unless otherwise specified:
1. Prior to, or in conjunction with the issuance of the first building permit, pay all
applicable fees, including any unpaid balances of permit processing fees for
deposit account DQ-1299.
2. A parking management plan must be submitted to the Director of Planning and
Building, for review and approval. The management plan shall describe how
parking will be managed before and after services including the order in which
Resolution xxxxx
Page 5
the various parking locations will be utilized with off-site parking areas being the
last area to be parked. The plan shall describe parking management at each of the
proposed three phases of construction.
3. Applicant shall prepare and submit a revised site plan reflecting the required 9'6"
dedication along the entire H Street rrontage. Said plan shall shift the proposed
to-foot landscape strip shown between the two driveways along H Street behind
the ultimate right-of-way line, shifting the parking spaces accordingly. Parking
table shown on site plan shall be changed accordingly to reflect new distribution
between on and off-site parking.
4. Prior to issuance of first building permit for Phase I, applicant shall provide the
City with the following: 1) an executed copy of private parking agreement
between Gateway ("existing Donor") facility and St. Rose of Lima Catholic
Parish ("Recipient") 2) an executed two party agreement between City and
applicant whereby applicant agrees to provide for a minimum of 51 off-site
parking spaces. Said agreement shall be reviewed and approved by Planning,
Engineering and City Attorney.
5. Prior to issuance of building permits for Phase III, applicant shall provide the City
with the following: 1) copy of current executed contract between parking donor
and applicant for a minimum of 257 required off-site parking spaces, 2) new
Shared Parking Study to verify parking still available and 3) updated two party
agreement between City and applicant to provide all required parking.
6. Prior to issuance of building permits for Phase III, a final landscape and irrigation
plan prepared by a landscape architect shall be prepared and submitted for review
and approval by the City. Said plan shall reflect the changes of the revised site
plan noted in Condition 4 above.
7. The applicant shall implement to the satisfaction of the City Environmental
Review Coordinator and the City Engineer the mitigation measures identified in
the St. Rose of Lima Catholic School and Church Complex Mitigated Negative
Declaration (IS-06-013) and associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
ENGINEERING CONDITIONS
8. Prior to Phase III or any development along H Street property frontage, whichever
comes first, applicant shall obtain a construction permit rrom the Engineering
Department in order to widen H Street by 7' 6" with a transition to existing curb
line between the two proposed driveways. New sidewalk along H Street shall be
8 feet wide and transition to existing sidewalk as approved by the City Engineer.
Resolution xxxxx
Page 6
Relocation of any existing utilities such as storm drains or traffic signals as a
result ofthe street widening shall be the responsibility of the applicant.
9. Dedicate 9'6'" of right-of-way along the entire "H" Street project rrontage prior
to performing street widening described in Condition 8 above. The applicant
shall dedicate right-of-way as needed along any rronting street for installation of
new driveways and/or pedestrian ramps to meet current ADA requirements.
10. An improvement plan prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer showing the street
widening on "H" Street shall be submitted to the City and said improvements
shall be guaranteed by bonding before approval of any Phase III Building Permits.
Any additional improvements required as a result of the widening (storm drain
inlet relocation, traffic signal relocation, pedestrian ramp relocation, etc.) shall be
included on the improvement plans.
FIRE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
11. Building permits shall comply with 2001 Ca. Fire Code (or adopted code at time
of permit application), and applicable Chula Vista Fire Department regulations.
12. Prior to issuance of building permits for Phase I, an on-site fire hydrant shall be
provided on the Alvarado Street side of the proposed rolling gate for the middle
parking lot area. Said hydrant must be within 50 feet of the Fire Department
Connections.
13. Prior to issuance of building permits for Phase III, applicant shall: a) relocate the
proposed Fire Department Connection and Post Indicator Valve to the median or
other accessible location within the proposed parking lot, and b) provide an on-
site fire hydrant on the "H" Street side of the proposed rolling gates in the middle
of the parking lot area.
14. Buildings shall be protected by an approved fire sprinkler and alarm system, to
the satisfaction of the Fire Department.
15. The applicant shall comply with all other requirements of the Fire Department
including obtaining an operational permit for public assembly.
16. The applicant shall implement to the satisfaction of the City Environmental
Review Coordinator and the City Engineering Department the mitigation
measures identified in the St. Rose of Lima Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-
06-013) and associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Resolution xxxxx
Page 7
17. The applicant shall operate the church campus in compliance with the
Performance Standards, CVMC Chapters 19.66 and Performance Standards and
Noise Control, Chapter 19.68.
B. Upon certification by the Director of Planning and Building for occupancy or establishment
of use allowed by this Conditional Use Permit, the following conditions shall apply:
1 The conditions of approval for this permit shall be applied to the subject property
until such time that the conditional use permit is modified or revoked.
2 The project shall remain in compliance with all applicable conditions of approval
ofDRC-06-50.
3 The hours of operation for the project shall be as follows:
a. Before School student drop-off hours shall be Monday through Friday 7:00
a.m. to 8:00 a.m.
b. Parochial School Hours shall be Monday though Friday 8:00 a.m. to 2:30
p.m.; Saturday 8:00 a.m. to 11 :00 a.m.
c. After School student pick-up hours shall be Monday through Friday 2:30
to 3:00 p.m.
d. After School Care shall be Monday through Friday 2:30 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.
e. The church/sanctuary service hours shall be Saturdays 7:30 a.m. to 10:00
a.m.; 5:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.; Sundays 7:00 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. Weekday
services are 6:15 and 8:00 a.m.; 5:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m..
f. Funeral services in the church/sanctuary shall be Monday through Friday
9:00 a.m. to noon.
g. Other liturgies in the church/sanctuary shall be on Saturdays 10 a.m. to
4:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. to 9:30 p.m..
h. Other group meetings shall be held in the church/sanctuary Monday
through Friday during evening hours..
1. Parish Social Hall hours shall be Monday through Friday 4:00 p.m. to
10:00 p.m.; Saturday/Sundays 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. with the exception
of the upper floor which will be utilized during normal school hours.
J. Pastoral Center Hours of operation Monday through Friday 8:00 a.m. to
9:00 p.m. and Saturday/Sunday rrom 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
4 In the event the existing Donor Site (Gateway) being utilized for off-site parking
will no longer be available, the following process must be complied with by the
applicant to ensure all required off-site parking is provided (or cease operations to
level where parking is provided):
Resolution xxxxx
Page 8
a. A minimum of 90 days prior to termination of existing parking agreement,
Gateway ("existing Donor") must notifY St. Rose of Lima Catholic Parish
("Recipient") of intent to terminate agreement.
b. Within 5 days of notification of termination. applicant shall inform City of
existing Donor intent to terminate agreement. Applicant shall provide
City with alternative location(s) they will propose to utilize to provide
required off-site parking. City will review proposed locations and
determine if additional discretionary approvals or additional
environmental review will be required.
c. Within 30 davs of notification of termination. applicant shall provide City
with a Shared Parking Report demonstrating availability of excess parking
on the new Donor site, which is available for used during hours of church
services.
d. Within 60 davs of notification of termination. applicant shall provide City
with 1) new shared parking agreement between new Donor and Recipient,
and 2) Updated agreement between applicant and City for on-going
provision for off-site parking.
5 Applicant shall ensure operation remains in compliance with the parameters ofthe
use outlined in the application, the CVMC, and this Resolution, including the
following:
a. Maximum sanctuary seating shall not exceed 1,500 persons. Expansion of
capacity shall require approval of the Planning Commission.
b. School capacity (preschool-l2'h) shall not exceed a maximum of 400
students. Expansion of capacity shall require approval of the Planning
Commission.
c. All community service uses to be held on site shall take place entirely within
the building and shall be coordinated by the church. Periodic meetings for
civic groups shall not require individual review, however meeting sizes shall
not exceed the stated sanctuary or room capacity.
6 This permit shall be subject to any and all new, modified or deleted conditions
imposed after approval of this permit to advance a legitimate governmental
interest related to health, safety or welfare which the City shall impose after
advance written notice to the Permittee and after the City has given to the
Permittee the right to be heard with regard thereto. However, the City, in
exercising this reserved right/condition, may not impose a substantial expense or
Resolution xxxxx
Page 9
deprive Permittee of a substantial revenue source which the Permittee cannot, in
the normal operation of the use permitted, be expected to economically recover.
7 This permit 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 permit
to be reviewed by the City for additional conditions or revocation.
8 The Applicant/owner shall and does hereby agree to indemnifY, protect, defend
and hold harmless City, its City Council members, officers, employees and
representatives, rrom 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, rrom (a) City's
approval and issuance of this Conditional Use Permit, (b) City's approval or
issuance of any other permit or action, whether discretionary or non-discretionary,
in connection with the use contemplated herein, and 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
Permit and this provision shall be binding on any and all of applicant's/operator's
successors and assigns.
VI. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d)(1), NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that
the 90 day period to protest the imposition of any impact fee, dedication, reservation, or
other exaction described in this resolution begins on the effective date of this resolution
and any such protest must be in a manner that complies with Section 66020(a) and failure
to follow timely this procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set
aside, void or annul imposition. The right to protest the fees, dedications, reservations, or
other exactions does not apply to planning, zoning, grading, or other similar application
processing fees or service fees in connection with this project; and it does not apply to
any fees, dedication, reservations, or other exactions which have been given notice
similar to this, nor does it revive challenges to any fees for which the Statute of
Limitations has previously expired.
VII. EXCECUTION AND RECORDATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL
The property owner and the applicant shall execute this document by signing the lines
provided below, said execution indicating that the property owner and applicant have
each read, understood, and agreed to the conditions contained herein. Upon execution,
this document shall be recorded with the County Clerk of the County of San Diego, at the
sole expense of the property owner and/or applicant, and a signed, stamped copy of this
recorded document shall be returned within ten days of recordation to the Planning and
Building Department secretary.
Resolution xxxxx
Page 10
Failure to return said document to the Planning and Building Department secretary shall
indicate the Property owners/Applicant's desire that the proj ect, and the corresponding
application for building permits and/or a business license, be held in abeyance without
approval. Said document will also be on file in the City Clerk's Office and known as
document No.
~
Signature ofSt. Rose ofLima/293 H St.
Date
Signature of Owner's Representative
Date
VIII. CONSEQUENCE OF FAILURE OF CONDITIONS
If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur, or if they are, by their terms, to be
implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right to
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted, deny, or further condition issuance of all
future building permits, deny, revoke, or further condition all certificates of occupancy
issued under the authority of approvals herein granted, institute and prosecute litigation to
compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. Failure
to satisfy the conditions of this Conditional Use Permit may also result in the imposition
of civil or criminal penalties.
IX. !NY ALIDITY; 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 term, provision and condition herein
stated; and that in the event that anyone or more terms, provision, or conditions are
determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable,
this resolution and the Conditional Use Permit shall be deemed to be automatically
revoked and of no further force and effect.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Jim Sandoval
Director of Planning and Building
Ann Moore
City Attorney
Resolution xxxxx
Page 11
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista,
California, this xxxxx day of xxx xxx xx, by the following vote:
AYES:
Councilmembers:
NAYS:
Councilmembers:
ABSENT:
Councilmembers:
Cheryl Cox, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan Bigelow, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO )
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
I, Susan Bigelow, City Clerk of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council at a
regular meeting of the Chula Vista City Council held on the xxxxx day of xxx xxx.
Executed this _ day of 2007.
Susan Bigelow, City Clerk
EXHIBIT A
ATTACHMENT 5
FINAL MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Mitigated Negative Declaration
PROJECT NAME:
St. Rose of Lima Catholic Schoo] and Church Complex
PROJECT LOCATION:
293 H Street
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.:
568-5]2-37/39/48
PROJECT APPLICANT:
St. Rose of Lima Parish of the Catholic Diocese of San Diego
CASE NO.:
IS-06-0 13
DATE OF DRAFT DOCUMENT:
March 28. 2007
DATE OF RESOURCE CONSERV ATlON COMMISSION MEETING: Apri116. 2007
DATE OF FINAL DOCUMENT:
Mav L 2007
Prepared by:
Maria C. Muett. Associate Planner
Revisions made to this document subsequent to the issuance of the notice of availability of
the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration are denoted by underline.
A. Proiect Setting
The project site consists of a fully developed 3.9-acre project area located on the northeast comer of
H Street and Third Avenue; 293 H Street (see Exhibit' A '). The present development consists of the
St. Rose of Lima Catholic Church and Parochial School. The site is developed with on-site parking
and landscaped areas. The project site is presently served by four driveways, two on H Street and two
off of Alvarado Avenue (See Exhibit 'B'). Frontage roadway improvements are completed along
Alvarado Avenue.
Land uses surrounding the project site consist of the following:
North: Vacant land, Fast Food Restaurant, and Multifamily Residential
South: Medical and Professional Offices
East: Multifamily and Single-Family residential
West: Conunercial Retail and Commercial Office
B. Pro; ect Description
The project consists of the phased renovation and expansion to the existing St. Rose of Lima Catholic
Church and School. The site is fully graded and developed with a school (kindergarten to 8th
grades/342 students), a church sanctuary acconunodating 800 seats, a one-story parochial parish hall,
rectory and a pastoral center and paved parking area to accommodate 186 spaces. The buildings were
constructed between 1948 and 1955 and the church completed by 1965.
The existing St. Rose private schoo] will be remodeled and a portion of the school building will be
demolished and replaced with two story school buildings to acconunodate an ultimate enrollment of
400 students, in addition to faculty and staff personnel. The square footage for the existing seven
buildings is approximately 51,923 square feet and proposed development buildout is 69,115 square
feet; an increase of 17,192 square feet. Outside areas include existing sports fields and courts.
Proposed improvements to these areas include a small soccer field and parking lot/basketball court.
1
In addition to the four existing driveways, a new-gated pedestrian walkway access is proposed off of
TIrird Avenue. The project includes landscaped treatments, lighting, on-site drainage facilities,
pedestrian pathways, fencing, retaining walls, barrier walls, and interior chain link fences separating
parking Jots ftom school activity areas, and pickup and drop off areas. In compliance with City
Engineering requirements, the applicant will be required to dedicate additional right-of-way and
install street improvements along the northeast portion of Third Avenue and H Street.
The existing on-site parking provides 183 spaces. Project landscaping requirements will elinllnate
spaces leaving minimum 170 on-site spaces at the time Phase 3 is developed. The project applicant
has access to off-site parking at the Gateway Parking Structures that will provide 259 of the required
parking spaces. The total number of [mal parking spaces both on and off-site available to the
applicant is 429 spaces, which meets the Chula Vista Zoning Ordinance requirements. Further details
regarding the parking requirements, off-site parking and shared parking agreement are discussed
below 1lllder the TrafficlTransportation Section.
The Master Plan Phasing
The development consists of three phases to allow the renovation and expansion of the church and
school to meet current and future church and school needs. The phased development is outlined
below.
Phases I and 2:
Demolition of portions of existing private school buildings and replacement with new two-story
buildings to accommodate a total buildout of 400 students plus relocation of existing kindergarten,
computer and science labs. Construction of a new two-story parochial parish hall building with
second floor multipurpose room (net total 14,027 square-feet) and demolition of the existing Learning
Center, and school buildings.
Phase 3:
Construction of the buildout phase consists of demolition and construction of the new church
sanctuary to accommodate 1500 seats, completion of paved parking lots, landscaped treatments, and
site improvements. During this phase, the project proposes demolition of the existing hall and
adjacent rectory building.
Proposed fill grading will occur over the entirety of the 3 A-acre site. Amount of grading includes
approximately 1,300 cubic yards to be excavated for the buildout development; primarily Phase 1
(250 cubic yards), Phase 2 (800 cubic yards) and Phase 3 (250 cubic yards). Any excavated soil will
be relayered over the project site, if necessary.
It is anticipated that the phased master plan will take five plus years to complete. During the interim
periods, demolition of facilities will be phased to accommodate students and church related uses.
Hours of Operation - Private School
Existing and Phased Development
The current private school operational hours wilf not change ftom the current schedule. The project
planning and site plan call for a student drop off and pick up area to be functioning prior to school
startup and school closure. Students will walk to the nearby church/sanctuary for weekday services
2
(masses, prayer groups, etc.). No conflict between school operations and weekday church activities
will occur or create potential adverse conditions.
The existing and proposed preschool playgronnd, small soccer field and basketball court are for use
by the school students and church members only within the scheduled activity hours and in
accordance with the City Mnnicipal Code/Noise Ordinance, Chapter 19.68, standards and regulations.
Hours of Operation - Church/Sanctuary Complex
Existing and Phased Development
The existing church services and masses are 7:00 a.m., 8:30 a.m., 10:00 a.m., 11:30 a.m., 1:15 p.m.
and 5:00 p.m. on Snndays, 5:00 p.m. and 6:30 p.m. on Saturdays, and 6:15 a.m., and 8:00 a.m. on
weekdays, plus 6:30 p.m. on Thursday evenings. Confessions are 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. or by
appointment on Saturdays. There will be no changes in these hours of service during the development
phases or after all construction is completed. Therefore, no significant impacts have been identified.
C. Compliance with Zoning and Plans
The project site is located within the R3 (Multi-Family Residential) Zone and RH (High
Density/Residential) General Plan land use designation. The project is consistent with the regulations
of the Zoning Code and the General Plan land use designations. The project requires the approval of
a Design Review Permit by the Design Review COnmllttee, a Conditional Use Pennit and a Rezone
from RI-RIP to allow a Precise Plan with specific development standards by the Planning
COnmllssion.
D. Public Comments
On February 15, 2007, a Notice of Initial Study was circulated to property owners within a 500-foot
radius of the project site. The public comment period ended on February 26, 2007. No verbal or
written comments were received from the public regarding the proposed project or planning process.
On March 29. 2007 a Notice of Availability of the Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for the
proiect was posted in the County Clerk's Office and circulated to property owners within a 500-foot
radius of the proiect site. The 30-dav public comment period closed on April 30. 2007. No written
public comments were received during the public review period.
E. Identification of Environmental Effects
An fuitial Study conducted by the City of Chula Vista (including an attached Environmental
Checklist form) detennined that the proposed project would not have a significant environmental
effect because of mitigation measures incorporated into the project, and the preparation of an
Environmental Impact Report will not be required. This Mitigated Negative Declaration has been
prepared in accordance with Section 15070 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
Aesthetics
The proposed preliminary lighting plan addresses all proposed exterior lighting and types used. The
proposed lighting includes parking lot lighting, church complex and school buildings lighting, as well
as, walkway and low landscape area lighting. The lighting plan indicates that no lighting rays or glare
will spread onto adjacent or surronnding residential properties.
The applicant will be required to comply with glare regulations (Section 19.66.100) of the Chula
Vista Municipal Code (CYMC). Compliance with the lighting plan and City code regulations will
3
ensure that no source of substantial glare or light will result that would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area. No degrading of the existing visual character or quality of the site and its
surroundings will occur to the surrounding residential properties. No aesthetic impacts will therefore
occur as a result of the proposed project.
Air Qualitv
Short-Term
The proposed phased project could result in short-tenn air quality impacts associated with
construction and demolition activities. The anticipated length of time of the phased
development/construction activities for Phase 1 and Phase 2 is approximately 15 months each and for
Phase 3 is 21 months. The minimal grading of the site, demolition, building construction and worker
and equipment vehicles trips will create temporary emissions consisting of dust, fumes, equipment
exhaust, and other potential air pollutants. Air quality impacts resulting from the construction-related
operations are considered short-tenn in nature since construction-related activities are a relatively
short-tenn activity.
Demolition/Grading
Demolition activities are proposed during the following phases:
Phase 1 and 2
Phase 3
Demolition of portions of the existing private school.
Demolition of the parish hall, rectory building and existing church.
Anticipated amount of demolition materials to be removed: Phase I - 304 cubic yards, Phase 2 -
1,120 cubic yards, Phase 3 - 1,520 cubic yards and Post Phase 3 - 828 cubic yards; total of 3,772
cubic yards of demolition materials.
It is anticipated that the amount of grading proposed includes Phase I (250 cubic yards), Phase 2 (800
cubic yards), and Phase 3 (250 cubic yards). With appropriate dust control measures to control
fugitive dust generation during grading that includes watering three times daily, emission impacts
would be controlled and lessened to less than significant
Long-Term
In order to assess whether the project's contribution to ambient air quality is cumulatively
considerable, the project's emissions were quantified with respect to regional air quality. The
proposed phased project once developed will not result in significant long-tenn air quality impacts.
The project generated traffic volume would not result in significant long-tenn local or regional air
quality impacts. No area source or operational vehicle emission estimates will exceed the Air Quality
significance thresholds; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
Hazards/Hazardous Materials
Asbestos and lead-based paint
The existing school and church building structures may contain asbestos and lead-based paint. Prior
to any demolition activities the presence of asbestos and lead-based paint must be ascertained and
removed if present by a licensed, registered, asbestos and lead abatement contractor in accordance
with all applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations, including San Diego County Air
Pollution Control District Rule 361.145, Standard for Demolition and Renovation. The mitigation
4
measure contained in Section F below would mitigate potential hazards/hazardous material impacts
associated with the release of asbestos and lead to below a level of significance.
Hvdrolol!V/W ater Oualitv
The preparation of a final drainage study will be required in conjunction with the preparation of final
grading plans. In accordance with the City Engineering Department, the proposed drainage plan shall
be required to demonstrate that existing drainage conveyance facilities will have the capacity to
handle existing and proposed project stonn water drainage flows. According to the Engineering
Department, no significant impacts to the City's stonn drainage system are anticipated as a result of
the proposed development.
Based upon review of the project design, drainage improvements and fully developed site, the
Engineering Department has determined that there are no significant issues or impacts regarding the
preliminary proposed drainage improvements for the project site. The project proposes the
installation of a stonn drain system, filtering treatment system, backflow device and preventor, drain
piping, inlets and conceptual Best Management Practices that include gravel bags, landscaped
treatment areas and improvements to existing drainage facilities.
As designed, the proposed drainage will be directed away rrom the existing and proposed buildings
including adjacent properties. A fmal drainage study will be required in conjunction with the
preparation of the project grading plans and must demonstrate that the post-development peak flow
rate does not exceed the pre-development flows. The proposed drainage improvements shall be
designed in accordance with local and regional requirements. The drainage facilities will be installed
at the time of the site development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
The applicant will be required to comply with the City of Chula Vista's Storm Water Management
Manual and implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent pollution of the stonn water
systems during and after construction. The applicant will also be required to comply with the NPDES
Municipal Permit, Order No. 2001-01 and other permit requirements, identifY stonn water pollutants
that are generated as well as identifY appropriate BMP measures and prepare a water quality study to
be submitted with the final grading/improvement plans to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. These
measures are included as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (See Section F).
Storm or non-stonn water rrom the project area shall be properly treated and discharged into the City
storm drainage systems in accordance with Federal, State, and Local rules and regulations. No
significant impacts to the City's storm drainage system or water quality are anticipated to result from
the proposed phased project as a result of proposed mitigation.
Noise
To assess any potential noise impacts of the project, a Noise Impact Analysis was prepared by Giroux
and AssociateslEnvironmental Associates, Saint Rose of Lima Catholic Parish Master Plan, Chula
Vista, CAdated February 19, 2007, a copy of which is available for review at the Planning and
Building Department. The results of this analysis are summarized below.
Noise Standards
The acoustical analysis assessed the school activity noise generation with respect to the regulations
contained in Chapter 19.68, PerfOI:mance Standards and Noise Control, of the Chula Vista Municipal
Code (noise control ordinance) and the noise element of the Chula Vista General Plan. Pursuant to
5
the noise control ordinance, no person shall operate, or cause to be operated, any source of sound at
any location within the city or allow the creation of any noise on property owned, leased, occupied, or
otherwise controlled by such person which exceeds the established noise level limits (C.V.M.C. 9
19.68.030(A)(4)). The noise level limits of the noise control ordinance vary by land use receptor
category and time of day (daytime versus nighttime). Per Section 19.68.030 (B)(4) of the noise
control ordinance, if the ambient noise level exceeds the established noise level limit, then the
allowable noise exposure stmdard shall be the ambient noise level. The existing and potential future
noise-sensitive uses adjacent to the project site potentially affected by project-generated noise consist
of single-family and multi-family residences to the north and east.
Short-term Construction Noise Impacts
Construction activities have the potential to cause short-term noise impacts to noise-sensitive uses
adjacent to the project site (i.e., single family residences and multi-family residences). Noise
produced by construction equipment varies substantially depending upon the type of equipment being
used and its operation and maintenance. With each development phase it can be expected that
diverse noise levels will occur as a result of demolition, site preparation and construction activities.
Construction noise is exempt from the noise limits specified in Section 19.68.040 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code. However, pursuant to Section 17.24.050(1) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code,
construction work in residential zones that generates noise disturbing to persons residing or working
in the vicinity is not permitted between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Monday through Friday and
between 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. Saturday and Sunday, except when necessary for emergency
repairs required for the health and safety of any member of the connnunity. Compliance with the
Municipal Code will ensure that surrounding residents will not be disturbed by construction noise
during the most noise sensitive periods of the day.
School Atmosphere
Although construction noise is exempt from the levels specified in Section 19.68.040. Construction
noise levels were estimated in order to assess potential impacts to on-site receivers (e.g., students and
faculty). Cumulative worst-case levels associated with construction equipment were calculated for
the closest sensitive on-site receptors that include the phasing areas (i.e., classrooms/school buildings
or church facilities). The City of Chula Vista does not have fixed operation standards for these types
of construction activities, however, assessment is discussed below.
According to the noise study, construction activities are scheduled around the school calendar.
Temporary barriers are proposed for blocking out any temporary noise impacts. Because the school
administration oversees the construction scheduling and school operations, there is full discretionary
authority to control the potential short-term construction noise upon the school environment.
Although the City does not regulate construction noise during the day it should be noted that if noise
levels are found to be excessive enough to disrupt classroom activities, or impact students or teachers
in the classrooms or church buildings, onsite temporary noise barriers or other noise abatement
measures shall be implemented on a case-by-case basis to provide adequate attenuation to the affected
phased areas to the satisfaction of the City Environmental Review Coordinator.
Long-term Operational Noise Impacts
Existing traffic along H Street and Third Avenue was identified by the noise study as the primary
generator of ambient noise. Buildout traffic volumes were obtained from the project traffic study in
order to determine the existing and future traffic noise exposure footprint.
6
Potential on-site noise generators include recreational activities associated with the existing soccer
field, new preschool playground, basketball court, and redesigned student lunch/assembly area.
Based on the noise report, noise associated with the soccer field and student lunch/assembly area will
be adequately attenuated by the proposed location of on-site structures and the distance fi-om the
closest sensitive noise receptors.
The noise study analyzed the cumulative ambient noise conditions affecting the site and surrounding
area. Traffic generated noise was calculated at being 60dB, whereas the noise from the basketball
activities was calculated to be 58dB Leq. The noise report recommended that by expanding the
easterly perimeter solid wall to a height of 8-feet, potential traffic generated noise impacts would be
reduced to a level below significance.
The preschool playground was also analyzed with the primary noise source identified as being traffic-
generated noise fi-om Third Avenue and H Street. The inclusion of a solid 6-foot high noise wall into
the project design, to shield the playground from ambient plus project generated traffic noise, would
mitigate any potential noise impact.
The project design includes a garden area outside the church to be used as an exterior space for
passive activities. With the proposed project design of an 8-foot high barrier wall, impacts to this
area would be reduced to a level ofless than significant.
Stationary Noise Sources
Heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HV AC) equipment is proposed on the roof of the church
and school buildings. The noise generated by the machinery could vary depending on the type and
size of the mechanical equipment. Based upon the preliminary mechanical plans and lack of complete
noise assessment due to unavailability of [mal rooftop mechanical plans, the study concluded that
noise generated from the HV AC and rooftop mechanical equipment could exceed the City's noise
standard. Noise impacts related to the outdoor mechanical equipment are considered significant.
Therefore, careful site design to prevent noise impacts to sensitive noise receptors fi-om rooftop
equipment, food service, trash compactor is recommended. In addition, an additional acoustical study
will be required to demonstrate that the HV AC and other roof mounted equipment complies with the
City's noise ordinance requiring that noise be limited to 45dBA Leq at the property boundaries during
nighttime hours and 55 dBA Leq during daytime hours or ambient noise levels, whichever is greater.
The mitigation measures contained in Section F below will mitigate potential noise impacts to below
a level of significance. These measures are included as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program.
Public Address System/Bells
Typical noise sources generated fi-om school facilities and sports events include public address
systems and bell signal systems that are essential to a school facility. The City of Chula Vista Noise
Ordinance, Section 19.68.050, regulates these signaling devices. The school and church shall be
required to comply with the City's Municipal Code Section 19.68.050, allowing the church and
school to operate the bell as a signaling device and limits the sounding of these devices to no more
than two minutes continually in any 60-minute period or intermittent sounding over a five-minute
period in any hour. No significant noise impacts are expected to occur to any residential receptors as
a result of the operation of the public address system or bell signaling system.
The mitigation measures contained in Section F below will mitigate potential noise impacts to below
a level of significance. These measures are included as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and
7
Reporting Program.
Traffic/Circulation
To assess the potential traffic/circulation impacts of the project including proposed phasing, Rick
Engineering Company prepared a traffic study, Saint Rose of Lima Parish, Master Plan, dated
January 30, 2007 and subsequent addendwn dated March 14,2007. A copy of this study is available
for review at the Planning and Building Department. The results of this analysis are summarized
below.
Significance Criteria
The criteria utilized to determine if a traffic impact at an intersection or major street segments is
considered significant are based on City of Chula Vista traffic and circulation standards. Both project
specific and cwnulative impacts can be significant impacts. The level of service for unsignalized and
signalized intersections were based upon methodologies described in the 2000 Highway Capacity
Manual (HCM). Levels of services are based upon ADT thresholds outlined for roadway
classifications. The levels of services are only applied to circulation element roadways and not to
residential streets as they serve abutting lots, not carrying through traffic. The roadway capacities
utilized in the daily roadway segment analysis are in compliance with the General Plan Update.
Existing Conditions
Existing traffic analysis was conducted during peak hour and worse case scenarios of school and
church activities, including evenings. Calculated peak hour traffic within the period of each nearby
intersections, major streets, project driveways and turning movements were utilized in the study. The
existing traffic generated an average of 1,502 average daily trips (ADTs) with 407 AM peak hour
trips and 146 PM peak hour trips during a typical weekday. This resulted in an estimated trip
generation rate of 4.39 trips per student. Existing Sunday traffic generates 3,299 average daily trips
(ADTs) with 694 peak hour trips, equaling a rate of 3.59 trips per mass attendee.
School Pick- Up/Drop-Off Program
The school drop off peak period occurs 7:45 a.m. - 8:00 a.m. and the school pick-up peak period
occurs 2:45 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. Essentially the peak periods occur 15 minutes before the classes begin
and 15 minutes after classes are dismissed. It should be noted that queing during the school pick-up
period is maintained on-site to avoid stacking of vehicles on Alvarado Street during peak hour. The
combination of the existing traffic control monitoring (4-5 personnel) and the student pickup system
will continue after completion of the phased development and total buildout and will ensure the
smooth flow of vehicles.
Proi ect Trip Generation
The analysis of the phased conditions with the addition of the buildout phase provides an assessment
of the worse case scenario. The proposed project would generate traffic as follows, once buildout is
complete: phase III, 1,756 trips for weekday/school and 5,385 total trips for Sunday peak mass
attendance. This is 254 additional weekdaylschool related trips, and 2,086 additional peak mass
attendance trips than previously existed.
8
Cumulative Analysis
Cumulative potential impacts from foreseeable projects were also evaluated in the traffic study. In
this case, four projects within the project area (Urban Village, Seniors on Broadway, Gateway Center
and Espanada) were analyzed. The analysis showed the worse care scenario of existing plus
cumulative projects plus project traffic volumes of unsignalized, signalized intersections and major
roadway segments.
Level of Service (LOS)
Project Access Levels of Service
All project intersections, major street segments and traffic volumes under existing project and
existing plus project weekday conditions are expected to continue operating at Level of Service C
(LOS) or better during the AM and PM peak hours. Except for existing and project plus cumulative
conditions, turning in and out of H Street driveways have the potential to create a significant impact.
However with project redesign and traffic mitigation measures, that include adequate signage and
striping to prohibit left turns outbound and inbound at the H Street driveways, potential traffic
impacts are lessened to a level ofless than significant.
Parking Requirements
An analysis of the parking required for each phase of the project was completed. During each phase
and buildout the proposed parking as noted above in the Phasing and Parking Tables will satisfY the
City Municipal Code. The project applicant proposes to provide 165 parking spaces, during interim
phases prior to completion of the church. Upon completion of the phased master plan development
the on-site parking areas will provide 170 spaces. The remaining required parking spaces are
proposed as off-site parking.
The project proposes a total of 429 parking spaces (on-site and off-site parking) thus complying with
the requirements of the City Municipal Code. The City Municipal Code, Chapter 19, Section
19.62.040, allows for the provisions of off-site parking provided that the property where parking is
proposed is not more than 200 feet distance, is pedestrian accessible and subject to a binding
agreement with the City as to the permanent reservation of the required off-site parking.
The primary area identified for off-site parking is the Gateway Parking Structures across Third
Avenue, to the west of the project site. The total amount of parking spaces in the Gateway parking
structure available to them is approximately 700 spaces. Sunday peak hour demands will be met
through the provision of off-site parking. The applicant will be required to submit the binding
parking agreement to the City prior to Phase 1 as noted below.
Prior to Phase I:
As conditioned on the project, the applicant will be required to submit a contract showing the
allowance of the off-site parking areas for parking use prior to issuance of any entitlement permits
induding grading or demolition activities of Phase 1. All required off-site parking spaces shall be
provided during this pre-phase.
Phase I to Phase 3lbuildout:
No additional parking requirements are required during these phases. In the event of any project on-
site condition changes or off-site parking area changes, the project will need to be reevaluated to
9
identifY and ensure alternative off-site areas meet the requirements of the City Municipal Code and
provide the required parking. In addition, all phased development and/or construction activities shall
cease lll1til appropriate required parking has been met. If significant changes occur, additional City
discretionary and CEQA review may be required.
The mitigation measures contained in Section F below will mitigate potential traffic impacts to below
a level of significance. These measures are included as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program.
Pedestrian/Traffic Safety
Phase 1 to Phase IIIIbuildout
In view of the fact that a significant percentage of the required parking for Slll1day services is
provided off-site, special consideration to pedestrian safety and proper traffic circulation between
those off-site parking areas and the project site must be given by the applicant. With this in mind,
project design and City Engineering requirements and measures have been incorporated into the
proposed project. These include the widening of all driveways to the City requirement of 24-foot
width and preparation of a traffic management plan to facilitate pedestrian and vehicular traffic
during the Slll1day services and special events. Educational programs will need to be provided to
church members regarding proper crossing of H Street or Third Avenue encouraging the use of
signalized intersections or designated crosswalks. Continuation of proper driveway accesses,
educating the parents to utilize the Alvarado Street driveways as the primary school entrances for
student drop-off and pick-up and traffic control personnel monitor traffic on-site and minimize queing
on the adjacent streets during these period will all contribute to creating a safe environment for
pedestrians.
Buildout
In the event the proposed project schedule is accelerated resulting in project completion without
phases, all traffic mitigation measures, including off-site parking requirements, and off-site
improvements must be met prior to final occupancy.
The mitigation measures contained in Section F below will mitigate potential traffic impacts to below
a level of significance. These measures are included as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program.
F. Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant hnvacts
Air Oualitv
1. The following air quality mitigation requirements shall be shown on all applicable grading, and
building plans as details, notes, or as otherwise appropriate, and shall not be deviated ftom 1ll1less
approved in advance in writing by the City's Environmental Review Coordinator:
. Minimize simultaneous operation of multiple construction equipment lll1its.
. Use low pollutant-emitting construction equipment.
. Use electrical construction equipment as practical.
. Use catalytic reduction for gasoline-powered equipment.
. Use injection-timing retard for diesel-powered equipment.
10
. Water the construction area minimum three times daily to minimize fugitive dust.
. Stabilize graded areas as quickly as possible to minimize fugitive dust.
. Pave permanent roads as quickly as possible to minimize dust.
. Use electricity fi-om power poles instead of temporary generators during building, if
available.
. Apply stabilizer or pave the last 100 feet of intemal travel path within a construction site
prior to public road entry.
. Install wheel washers adjacent to a paved apron prior to vehicle entry on public roads.
. Remove any visible track-out into traveled public streets within 30 minutes of occurrence.
. Wet wash the construction access point at the end of each workday if any vehicle travel on
unpaved surfaces has occurred.
. Provide sufficient perimeter erosion control to prevent washout of silty material onto public
roads.
. Cover haul trucks or maintain at least 12 inches of fi-eeboard to reduce blow-off during
hauling.
. Suspend all soil disturbance and travel on unpaved surfaces if winds exceed 25 miles per
hour.
Hazards/Hazardous Materials
2. During any demolition activities, a licensed and registered asbestos and lead abatement contractor
shall perform asbestos and lead-based paint abatement in accordance with all applicable local,
state and federal laws and regulations, including San Diego County Air Pollution Control District
Rule 361.145 - Standard for Demolition and Renovation.
HvdrologylWater Oualitv
3. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a final drainage study shall be required in conjunction
with the preparation of final grading plans and must demonstrate that the post-development peak
flow rates do not exceed the pre-development flows as indicated in the Preliminary Hydrology
Study dated December 20, 2007, and as determined to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Additionally, the City Engineer shall verifY that the final grading plans comply with the
provisions of Califomia Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region Order No.
2001-01 with respect to construction-related water quality best management practices. If one or
more of the approved post-construction BMPs is non-structural, then a post-construction BMP
plan shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to the commencement of
construction. Compliance with said plan shall become a permanent requirement of the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program.
4. Prior to commencement of grading, temporary desilting and erosion control devices shall be
installed. Protective devices shall be provided at every storm drain inlet to prevent sediment ITom
entering the storm drain system. These measures shall be reflected in the grading and
improvement plans to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Environmental Review
Coordinator.
11
Noise
The following noise mitigation requirements shall be shown on all applicable demolition, grading,
and building plans as details, notes, or as otherwise appropriate, and/or shall be made conditions of
project approval where appropriate.
5. Pursuant to Section 17.24.050(1) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, project-related construction
activities including demolition shall be prohibited between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
Monday through Friday and between 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. Saturdays and Sundays.
6. If noise impacts are identified by the church and school administration during construction
activities, the applicant shall be required to comply with the appropriate mitigation measures
identified in the noise study. The measures may include temporary ceasing of construction
activities, installation of construction noise barriers to provide noise attenuation for noise impacts
to the affected classrooms, school and/or church buildings. In the event of construction noise
impacts to the phased classrooms or church buildings, noise barriers shall be placed between the
construction activities of the current phase and the impacted buildings of any previously
completed phase. Temporary construction barriers shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the
City Environmental Review Coordinator. A noise monitor during construction should be onsite
during these affected phases.
7. It is reconunended that the school, parish hall and church buildings contain air conditioning
systems to allow for window or door closure to offset any ambient traffic noise in accordance
with the noise study prepared by Giroux and Associates, dated February 19,2007.
8. Prior to approval of building permits, the applicant shall submit a subsequent noise study to the
satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator demonstrating that the final roof-mounted
IN AC and other roof mounted equipment complies with the City's noise control ordinance at the
property boundaries of 45 dBA Leq (one hour) during nighttime hours and 55 dBA Leq (one
hour) during daytime hours or ambient noise levels, whichever is greater. Upon review of the
additional noise analyses, if it is determined that there are potential noise impacts created by the
IN AC or other roof mounted equipment, then applicable mitigation measures shall be developed
to insure these impacts are lessened to a level ofless than significant.
9. All rooftop pumps, fans, and air conditionerslheating units on the church and school buildings
shall include appropriate noise abatement and be screened by a minimum three-foot high rooftop
parapet that blocks the line-of-site view from the backyards of the nearby residential properties to
the exposed roof and mechanical ventilation systems.
10. A 6-foot high solid noise attenuation wall shall be constructed around the preschool playground
along Third Avenue in accordance with the noise study prepared by Giroux and Associates, dated
February 19, 2007, to the satisfaction of the City Environmental Review Coordinator.
11. An 8-foot high solid masonry barrier shall be constructed along the eastern property line
separating the basketball courts from the nearby residences in accordance with the noise study
prepared by Giroux and Associates, dated February 19, 2007, to the satisfaction of the City
Environmental Review Coordinator.
12. An 8-foot high solid masonry barrier and stucco wall shall be constructed around the garden area
outside the church in accordance with the development plans (dated March 22, 2007) and noise
study prepared by Giroux and Associates, dated February 19, 2007, to the satisfaction of the City
Environmental Review Coordinator.
12
Traffic
13. Prior to demolition or building penuits issuance for Phase 1, a binding agreement between the
City and the applicant conceming off-site required parking areas shall be submitted and approved
by the City Planning and Building Department, City Engineer and City Attorney's Office.
14. Prior to occupancy of Phase 3, subnrittal of a striping and signing plan, prepared by a State of
California licensed traffic engineer is required. In accordance with the requirements of the traffic
study, dated January 30, 2007, the striping and signage plan shall analyze the need for signing
and striping of a left-turn restriction movement for inbound and outbound traffic onto H Street. If
it is detenuined that signage and striping are required, the installation of the required signage and
striping shall be completed by a licensed Caltrans-certified traffic control contractor to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer and at no cost to the City.
15. In the event, any off-site parking property owners are unable to provide the additional required
parking spaces, or meet their contractual agreement or in the event that significant project
modifications occur then, additional discretionary review and environmental review, in
accordance with CEQA, may be required.
16. In the event that the project is completed without phases, all nritigation measures and off-site
improvements shall be met prior to final occupancy of the project to the satisfaction of the City
Planning and Building Department and City Engineer
G. Consultation
1. Individuals and Organizations
City ofChula Vista:
Benjamin Guerrero, Planning and Building
Marisa Lundstedt, Planning and Building
Luis Hernandez, Planning and Building
Jeff Steichen, Planning and Building
Mary Venables, Planning and Building
Brad Remp, Planning and Building
Carolyn Dakan, Planning and Building
Enrily Novak, Planning and Building
Frank Rivera, Engineering
Silvester Evetovich, Engineering
Hasib Baha, Engineering
Jim Newton, Traffic Engineering
Dave Kaplan, Traffic Engineering
Sandra Hernandez, Engineering
Anthony Chukwudolue, Engineering
Justin Gipson, Fire Department
Richard Preuss, Police Department
Dave Byers, Public Works/Ops.
13
Applicant/Propertv Owner:
St. Rose of Lima Parish of the Catholic Diocese of San Diego
Agent:
David Pfeiffer, Principal AlA
Dominy and Associates, Architects
Others:
Sweetwater Authority
Chula Vista Elementary School District
2. Documents
City ofChula Vista General Plan Update, 2005
Title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code
Noise hnpact Analysis for Saint Rose of Lima Catholic Parish Master Plan - Chula Vista, CA,
and dated February 19,2007 (Giroux and Associates)
Traffic Study for Saint Rose of Lima Parish Master Plan and dated January 30, 2007 (Rick
Engineering Company).
Preliminary Water Quality Technical Report!Water Demand Exhibit for Saint Rose of Lima and
dated December 20, 2006 (Rick Engineering Company).
Preliminary Sewer Study for Saint Rose of Lima and dated January 25, 2007 (Rick Engineering
Company)
Historic Architectural Survey Report for Saint Rose of Lima Parish and Parochial School- Chula
Vista, San Diego County, CA and dated May 2006 (Galvin Preservation Associates).
Initial Studv
This environmental detennination is based on the attached Initial Study, and any comments
received in response to the Notice of Initial Study. The report reflects the independent judgment
of the City of Chula Vista. Further information regarding the environmental review of this
project is available rrom the Chula Vista Planning and Building Department, 276 Fourth Avenue,
Chula Vista, CA 91910.
Date: fv1;f\"( 'SJ 2007
Guerrero, Environmental Projects Manager
J:\PIanning\MARIA\fuitial Study\St Rose ofLiima\IS-06-013finaI1MND.doc
14
EX#IBfr A
c gro-'
I i~g _"_ --" ---"Qoi - ~~ o~- u>c
JJ::--,o:. .' d 'iJ- .' d ija::
40 _.' :__~~-:.."..~~"-":~=~~_~ ".:.~T=;JfF..~~~~~~~~.:
I
II ~
! I' "I i !
! ~ !~ h . I
~ ! I lii:' , !
~..i~!.~II!!I'!i~1
~"gIIJJ.lt1i.'!
~i!llll!j!l!lilj!
I!
i I-
i I
i i
!
I
~ ~
~ ~ ~
g J j 0
i I j ~
flUI, !
~!, I;, '"
a ~ ; ~
:i :i :i :i ~
~ :11 i f
lih
i II Ii
:?~ ;;
'" e if I! U:i
~ ~ ~ :l i':i
nl I ~
(:--::1 :r <:(
-II I:J!
Ii 9
d i ~ ~
~ ~ ~ c
:i!:i ! ::J
~ .. "' 0
i Ii i i
~ ~ ',j :i
:;; !. ~ ~
'1(1'1)1
i III hi
;
l
!
I
i
!
i
!r
d !
,: !
.!,Pi! I..
a 1~~lh $ .I!
z :: s:'; gj;;..o; ..
~ lijJ!!H 1
!
i
11
!~il
J ,I !'j
fi ~! '~i
Ii iU!1
. '!I'
n j"I,
~.JI:! ..
0
d
.~
It
(...
a:
.....
~
ffi ~
II! Ii
.'!
'11
"
I'
ill
a.
"I
"II
"I !
i ili
!, ,I
"!"'.....-.J~\'I"'t>
tpmI() :)!\oq:reJ =rIJO ;/S01[ 1S
m:[d ~~~-..:w: P:;ISOOOJd
j. H!l1I
. !~:n
j".' .
, !
j"" .
j'iii !!
111 ~ji I II!!
~
, l(u
- ----~---
! .
'i ·
lid
" '!
.i!!h
JJ!<!!!B!
ii,num
BB!.:::.
~mmml
'"
~
~~~~1H~~~s
"
~ :;; i
!rjTII~j~ JlJI\njJ
~ I' i-I,' 'z illd,ljH
~ .iidl IIi i ~ Ii !lilUI
i>
~
<
i~
,
,
,
,
,
1.._______-' "-1
,
"
1'---------1 ,__,..J
, .,
] ~.-.i
,
,
,
,
,
.
.
~
~ .
~>-~
~~.
iSW'l"
8.._~
~~:-
8' -
~._-~
:f.Dt
__ ___ _________ __ _ ___________.J
".Ii!M~
.,,'
it
ig~~
r,:'t-:"
"< "'I 'a:
"oJ
o:~
..------_..
,
..;,
.......-~"
ATTACHMENT "A"
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP)
ST. ROSE OF LIMA CHURCH AND SCHOOL ADDITION - IS-06-013
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared by the City of Chula Vista
in conjunction with the proposed St. Rose of Lima Catholic School and Church Complex project.
The proposed project has been evaluated in an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
prepared in accordance with the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and City/State
CEQA Guidelines (IS-06-013) 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. Air Quality
2. Hazards/Hazardous Materials
3. Hydrology and Water Quality
4. Noise
5. Transportation/Traffic
MONITORING PROGRAM
Due to the nature of the environmental issues identified, the Mitigation Compliance Coordinators
shall be the Environmental Review Coordinator and City Engineer 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 and
City Engineer. The applicant shall provide evidence in written form confirming compliance with
the mitigation measures specified in Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-06-013 to the
Environmental Review Coordinator and City Engineer. The Environmental Review Coordinator
and City Engineer will thus provide the ultimate verification that the mitigation measures have
been accomplished.
Table 1, 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-06-013, which will be implemented as part of the project. 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 column.
J :\Planning\MARIA \Initial Study\St Rose of Liima\IS-06-0 13MM:RPtext.doc
0")
o
,
CD
o
0.
"
o
""
U
'"
<(
"0
o
.c
o
(f)
'"
"
'"
.c
~
"
.c
o
'"
E
::J
-
o
Q)
"'
o
0::
u5
E
l'!
"
."
.s
'"
o
::;;
"
.Q
1'0
-
~
....
GI
:g
I'CS
~
'"
"
:g
~'5
~ ._((]
0"
() OJ~ c......
:;::,.S :6 ro ~
"~E"'E
B m t:: .S-e
=.5 m c: m
~~g-~ g-
<t:wOa..CI
><
><
><
"
",'"
-<="
,,"
"'.!!!
,,0.
"",
E.5..
,,'C Q)
"5 '5 19
g~ c.
....c::e
"",0.
~ciig.
~.s Q)
:;:::;"'0(1)
.- ",.~
E oQ)
~~:5
-.00
~r1rn
0"= en
~ 0. ~
"cu g. ~
"'- "'
"-,,
._ CIJ......
;:,,0
.201::
(5 c:: (J)~
-;:=
Q)o!9
.c.c"
.... ",-0
"
c.
"
:;
E
'5
"
_9
roo
a;~
0."
0"
"c
""
oE
~ .9-
21"
- cr
E"
-- "
,,0
~:g
'E5
.- "
""
~8
~ li
E u
0. '"
"g. 0.
" "'
" '"
o
'fl
2
<;;
"
o
"
'"
"
B
'E
.2
"
21
.:! ~
"&:5
"
~ "*
" "
" "
=> =>
.
"
~
0.
."
cr
"
"
o .E
1:5 c
2 g
<;; "
" "
o "
" ~
. .
"
~
~
o
0.
d>
.E
o
rd
'"
"
>--
-co
"'''
roE
"0.
~'5
=>iif
u
"
~
9-
"
"
"
u
,g
12
21
i'!
'"
"
~
'"
.9.,:
~:fi
c-E
-- 0.
m"3
=>iif
.
-'"
-0;
"
iiJ
E
"
"
"
.s
E
"
E
."
-E
'"
i'!
"'---'
,,"
0"
,,"
""
,,>
.J:3=
"'"
""
8-
(1).~
5E
11;:5
roE
:;:.s
B
"
:a
'in
"'
o
"-
"
'"
>-
'"
"
."
cr
"
'"
" -
",-
,,"
~"
",-0
-0"
Q):E;
-0._
"''''
~"
"'-
""
N.t::!
=E
.0 __
!9 .5
mE
.
.9
"
:a
'in
is
"-
Ii!
>-
'"
"
."
cr
"
'"
"
-0
'"
e
c
" .
~~
E"
,,"
o..t::!
"E
>"2
"'.-
o..E
.
Co
~
o
0.
E
$
'5
'"
m~
- .0
~l!!
.~.~
$",
0_
0.'-
~ci
""
;:--
0:9
0. "5
E.o
0'"
~.E
-"'''
0"
.""
00
,,-
-'"
,,~
,,"
,,"
=>8>
""
c:=
-.0
$"
,,0.
.- 0
'0::
-0
Q)'I:
.!10.
oS
0._
-"
-co
"0
"'--
4;0
..c2
;t5
>"
",8
0. "'_
0"
d3;S
~.~
:C:5 .
.!!!"'S
" 0."
>-- "
c.g?~
~~ e
.
______n_
.12
0.
"
e
0.
'"
-0
"
>
'"
0.
'"
9
-'"
"'"
1!'"
",e
'6'0
m:a
i'!"
,,0.
.c"
"0
~Co
Q)~
"
.c"
;:0
=:2
~~
.E.9
g
:a
"
c.
"0
Q) .
-Q)
~o
"'''
Jo~
9"
_E 8
-0
go
~"
" "
"'-
Jo"
".E
:aE
"Ci)o
"51;")
>>.5
ffi~
,,;:
1;$
E"
"i'!
oc;;
'5
-0
"
"
,,"0
5'!;!
ro~
.!: 3
0"
0.0
",-
" "
1jiii
",-"
"
5:2
:;:::;.c
g ~'ci
..b >. ~
",,-
""'''
8:= 8
~ ~~
--0'"
.c -".c
UJOCl)
~;:1!
-a;"5{g
~mm
.
.
------------
,
"
~
0..
c
'!;!
~
0.
.s
O'
-"-I'J
I: "'-
8i?
8g
._ .0
"' "
eO.
" 0
~-
" "
_0
,,-
.5'~
~ "
,,-
0.'"
cE
.~.a
0=
!E"
~Q
,,"5
-00
'>~
e '"
0..;:
'5 ~
" >
" i't
-fi "
.5 ~ ~:;
N=OO
T"':::J_J:
....ctS4)L.,
(I)..c > Q)
]! ~~ ~
_";::'t:J Q)
(I:I::IC=
c::"U ro E
]i '5 1! on
c:' eN.
om ~Ei
E- -1!
o~~ x
~g~~
g~'a-g
~ o~-;:
::;; ro:=
~rn-gm
....OQ)O
Q)..a a. ro
E;:R ~~
0-1=CI)CI)
.
. .
'"
~
o
<b
o
0.
"
g
'5
u
<(
o
o
.c
<.>
en
"D
"
CO
.c
<.>
:;
.c
<.)
CO
E
::J
'0
OJ
'"
o
a::
1i5
E
e
"
B
'"
o
:2
"
o
""
CO
-
::0
...
Q)
:c
lIS
I-
'"
<=
:Q
-:;.2;-
aJ._
"'"DO
c:; ffi~ g"E
:;:. Q)-;:: Q)
CC>>E;Q)E
r9.5-e CUt
~ c: ro.5 m
~~ fir g> g.
<CQ..OWO
"C OJ
2! 0 c
~Effi cg
-5.g"E u g:.a
eQ)8c.2E
uc.otUoo>
c= aJ (1,1 a.. 0
ro~.5 ~.... L..
uWi::=::($!
~:SQ)~.z.-e
c...... E Q) C rn
~gQ)u.~u
=.::s1U$!8"
ctIc.c-c l!J
.8 co " 0 en
m.....c nJ ~ I
;JC'(ijQ).-LO
"> Q) o..1Yo"<t
13g"C0ffi::=
tU'(U ~-:cnco
C..c ct:J ~CDM
g CIJ-9.Q.5~
:a-g-g~~& .
E~~.gO""'5
~uu 0.5:50:;::::0
.... c: c= R ro
>oromQ.cn.!!2>
I::(/)(/)Q.coa
tUootUo c:
CI...........=~O Q)
c:gJ~ctI_.::=rr:::
"I::;.a..c.t:: 5 c:u
6~~j~8g
'"
<=
32
-:;~
aJ._
~uu
.- c::;::' m-
OroCeC:
:;:. G),c Q)
<= "'E " E
i'J.5t: "t:
:= c CO.S ro
2t.m g. ~ go
<(Q..owo
Q)C, ~
c:>>g Q) ~ ".
ro ~:5 a. ",=,5 :E
.S to"" II) R'O-~"" c: ...... ~
~a.ro:5 a _om c: Q)
u~5u ~~~(/)~~~ ~ 2:5
1ija.$<1> Q)......-5'EuQ>..!.(/)Q) :5:-
C:Q)ctlQ)~.a_~-ctlQ)c;I)(I)o:5 WO.
~:5.::so EO.t::~oa.ctlOa. u......E
m ~~~~g(/)~m~ca.mB~c:~~
R:5 0"'" E Q):p........o.... E"U cu=.~ E Q)
~~Eg~oM~~~~......~~~B~E~2
~c:Q)o....U~S=C::s:(I)e ro.... sa..
Q) 0 -0" Il. Q) :Q 0).+=1 00 _ Q) a."': a. 0 0 tT 0)
a..,_ - -ClJC.t:: ~.ca.ctIQ)~OQ)C:
og~~.5~ww~b9bctl~~~.....~
~~E--c~Q)bJ=~=Q)OQ)Q)C:~o
~? ~~~~-o-~rn8m~~DVoV~
~. 8 -g :: ~ .3 ~ c. 5- N 5-- ~ = "5 :g ~ ~
~ mo_~-vE~ "~o,mrn~
rnc0~~~~~ovommco~wc~E~
_-- C~ C";:"-Q) _o-zm ~ f/) v C
o~mm~~B~l/)g~~oEccb~~ro
v~~Q)m~~~c>v ~~-ornrn
oS a O~Cm-~~~f/)aO_ C
~cr~~;~s2~~5S0~~~oQ)E~
v-VomQ)-~o mQ)~~~_ _
~-"CE~-u~c-~~c~~-c8~
~Q)m m u_ac~om~-v 0
-D~g~?~<~~2c~ccoE~~
Q)=-_Q)< ~ 00 OOCQ)
5m~~E~~~a~Q)~~~~gg~c
o~~Q)~Qm~roE~~~~~~Q)~g
~~Q)~~e~B~S&~:g~~~Ef/)~
~~~~~~g~Q)~38c~c8<=8~8EjE
~0o~uINW5UO a f/) a~
'"
<=
:Q
"5b
aJ .-
","CO
o ~:g ~~
~ Q)-;:: Q)
crnEQ)E
B.~ -e Q) t::
= C ro"S ro
~~ g-~g-
<(~awo
x
x
x
2
(ij
t5<=
"0
~:,;:::::
0"
c"
",:if
il:.=
'"
<= <=
."ffi c:a
-g-o'ffi !:!!b
~S E-o ~o ~
!:!!~.9E5Q).9
o...,.l/)oc:::5m
e-.8 ~u; ~ 'O,g
2'(ija;:E~5g
ci)~ 1U rn~ 13 0
_!: f/)"O"e ~~ ~
~Q)Q)Q) lOCI)
co 0,,- Q)+:;">
rn'~"> 1fi~ gj Q)
oueECiim~
cO a.o~-:;~
Q)~~~ m.s ~
58=<=-"'E
8c~~~~C::
cof/).-m~e:
~.U)f/)-gEQ)-">
!::oBID cc
gm">c:g~UJ
ou~Q)Q)Q)-g
".c.....>~>_
.....coQ)~l-o~
:5 0)> c.. . c..m
.9:5:goEE~
0=2:=2:0"0>
-;::[ge~~cc
~~~__ CI) roUJ
...j
'"
<=
:g
":;b
aJ.-
b~U
i:3 ~~ ~~
:;::. m"t: Q)
cO)EmE
B"S 1:: Q)-e
= c rn_S m
a5atJ)a
"'-" " <= "
<(~owo
'"'
.
"
~
'"
<=
[;;'
"C
13 ~-g
l!J:;;;;; Q)..cro
ID ->:5 aU)
5:g~5fi?
~~Q):5~
..c: 02:>.-
u13iL~~
Q);:Su c .
:6~20S
- c:::c:::2: ro
S.8:2E8
--0 e..:".
o Q).o. '" ex)
:g~.8g-g
..,f ~_,:.: (IJ
"!..!.o(ij-o .
~-~-;j ~ ~
c:: e c "0
g ~g ~ C2
o .= ao
cu-8Eoo~
~ 0 0 C
ou-8aQ)
-- ........ Q) .
C [ rn_}; U)
m._EOQ)ro
~o~ID.c"'C
~ -FS -= :;"'C c
~:E.~E ffi65
E
i"
t:
B
'c
o
;;:
t:
o
~
~
~
'"
;;
J,
a
0.
t:
g
'C
"C
<{
(5
o
.<::
"
r/)
"C
t:
'"
.<::
fe
:J
.<::
o
'"
E
:::;
-
o
"
en
o
OC
ii5
g>
:E
-s~
In .-
~-g ~ 0)-
Omccc
";:. Q).t: Q)
C:O>EIDE
~_!:t O)t:
= c: cu.S ro
8:~ ar g> g.
~a..DWO
><
><
.....
CI>
:c
CIS
r-
x
.sa
U;
:goo
" 0
J::.:o::i
O~
OOQ.
'" '"
a:E
o~Q) 2:-'0 c: 0 c:..c:: Q) Q) mE ~~
~ Q.E:E m 2~,g ~S:E -U"-> 0
(,) co cuou:::J '"
IJ) 8-- c.C::J CIJ.s"fi g-g~~~~
'Co~Eg5j ~rn....W('IJ-c~ c:
C:_IO: 2..!! = tJ) c 01: Q)ob 0
ctlu"!:!"mcoE08 Q)a>-(I)]j:o:J
.....;;:1 (I)..D (I)~ Cs 00 g
i3.~~"C~~e""'E roo. 0)....
:; ::::J.::=:..:! .- '0 U) 0 0 -0 -a. E E (;)
..c::gtng c~"'Ee~ g,gc:c8
u.... 0)._ _ _ Q) <.I) ('IJ..... 0 .
Q) Q) S gJ.gJ <..1 > rn c.. 5.i .2:-'iU-5: ~
:6.0 rn 1U'~.>"CQ).!!! t:: (I).c c: ~(I)
>.= m E"S; 0 Q) CD 0 Q) :J g U) w";:: ro
.c ro E U c..~5'C.c u.:;: ~~-a-E..
-o-5jc:81ct1o~. Q)"iijQ)~Q)._...."c
a).......0.... -cuS~.c~c.EoS2
Ij:; c: ~::J c: tI) ..c: (f.I CtI - (,)
'ErJ@t~oiDQ) .0. .....~"OQ)6Q)
Q)=~Q)~,,~51J) ~om_~E~
-ac..-e.... C)Q)Q) ....:;::i ,..
'.,... a.E .5 ctI.9.SS"E m'O,g Q) CD
Q) ro Q) Q) rn..o ::g (1]::::1 oo.~ U)
ro Q)~..c: Sc mtr5.9.o:~~..s g~
n:E 5.1- 'oro.c 0)0.5 U) c: C)
(,) -0 c: a..c-S.El ro:g: c.o<C c
",oo~ EooO .-8" -
0.22::>'0 C:'-Sroc: c-.5. g...:5
E ctI "'C 0 a. 0 ~- 0 "C
_..:=.:C02 :.:::I(J)-fiEu)=fl-cm~1UQ)
Q)CI)Q)CI)O)g~ -C)::JQ)....mc:~
.!!?:5S 0).5.0 g is Q)_5.bo &.w=e:g
gE5.El~~....~.Elg~[EQ)80
~ ~ .~ g B 8.E fij g B 8.E ~ :5 U .8
<6
0> 0>
" 00
:g :g
~E ~g
2:''UU ~'Uu
(3 C ~ 0)..... (3 c ~ 0).....
~ ro ijj.s ~ ::;:. ro ijj.c ~
ooO>E~E ooO>Ei6E
B.Se: IDt:: ~.S-E (1)1:
= c ro .5. ~ = c ro.S ttI
€t~ fir ~ CD €t~ g. g> g.
<(a..OWO<(a.DWO
0>
00
:g
~~
-"''Co
(3 fij~ g>"E
::;:. (1).;::(1)
CO)E(I)E
~.s1: (l)t::
= C ttI.5 ttI
€t~ g. g> fir
<(a.OWO
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
~
.
~
iij'
0..
.sa
u;
:goo
"0
""'"
0"
00 "
",1;J-
a:: 00
.sa
u;
:;;,
" 00
~g
0"
"
OOQ.
'" '"
a:: 00
.sa
u;
:goo
"0
""'"
0"
"
OOQ.
"''''
a:: 00
.em Q) B2'~ ~ (1)5
~ Ox =5_ C ~ ~i C .e =
::::J....~::::J co'Qro-cttl-.::::J 0 a>a.U)::::J ..... C
ti.Eoe ~c5$~~~~~~EQI C> roU) ~
'U ~ a:: .- ..... 0 CD C ::: 0....'... 2:-13 c.. (I) _ :5 >. t5 >. ~
~~g~ ~~i~~.e~I~ro~~~ ~Q)DQeE
_ttl_D =~~Ee~.c(l)ro~g'UQ) €~i~~'U
~ Q "c-c a. U) _ c: 0 (I) -5 (1).- (I) >" fI) 13 C ttI C C
.... _ on a.= ~ 0 _ C _ (f) (I) -c.c _ - -'= ttI
-,=(f)~C::~tU~oe8crgj5~~~tU IDCID=ID
(f)EE~OIDIDE IDID co 0 g~~~$O
iB~~~55Q)~~~g~~c~~..... ~~(f)c..oe
c.~~a.~ - U:5O<(...JaicCiiECI.I-g -gCI.IQ)~U)"'O
_- U) ra >-~ ~.9 6 0 cfg <( ~ g ~ - ~ c 8 U) D ~"'O m:
o 0).....1:J ?;. C >,-"0_'" eJ-.- Q) 00:J Q) 9>'0 "'~ 0
o Q)::::J ~'Uroc~~-CQ)"'O"'" U)U) ...~ca. a.
ti~U)~mQ)~sm~~~U)~o~m(f) ~~mo~x
U)o~Q)::::Ja.~EUUo~~ a.Q)Q)~ u3~~0Q)
IDE O.!!?.o ~ID 0<( Q) U)'U C~~:5 E ID cD ID o~ ID
5~sg~~~8~5~~~_roog~ ro~E~Q)5
(t; 0 ~ Q)"O =s g ~ j ~ U).~ 0 ~ O:;::J J!l U)-,g 2 .9:5.9
.eo::::J5(1)~""'Q)"O "C....c~Q)Uroo CotU.c U)
i!~~~~~~~I~~~!~~f~ :~!~~~~
"C-...~~rocr~oE.cQ)0"'5I - .a.roU)~~&Q)
ctUoQ)Q)>Q)-E ~EMC Q)Q)IDEE ~(I)>oU7IDC 0 0- e.2J9,.,!. 8t:::;:::I 0:.: 0"0:5:0 ~ ro::::J-5 c e.~... >.
EO"CcE1a.::::Jco Q).....::::Ja.Q) ca.coa....Q)~>a.(,/)
EO... ca 0 a. U) C1) 01:: c..'5E ~.5 >..~.....!E a.::::J..... -= Q) (ij C
S(,/)o"OoromE~IDe- ~.c~Q)~o.c~E~:;::Jo
C>~R~..9 croEa.cQ)...:t:"Ca.....~ot::o~::::Jcpc:o=
~~O~q ~e5c..Q)C>~2.Scai~gQ)oE~Q)~
(f)~~tU'U~.c~~3:5~~tU~rocBC...:5~~'~~
~B~ci~~~ag(t;~~~.(,/)~~s~~gi~B~~
'"'
m
<ri
'"
~
o
ID
o
0.
c:
:8
u
~
"0
o
.<:
o
C/)
u
c:
'"
.<:
~
::!
.<:
o
'"
E
:.::;
-
o
(])
'"
o
c:r:
i7J
E
~
c:
.;::
.8
-"
o
:2
c:
o
~
.,
~
'" '" '" '" '"
c: c: c: c: c:
:E :E :E :E :E
"S.?;>. '5~ ~~ '5~ '5~
~~U Z;-~U (D -_ (D__
~-g ~ 0)..... ""uU ~-g ~ 0)....
<3 c ~ 0)- (]fij~~c u c::;:;' 0)......
:;::. ro a3'2 ~ ~ro:B_!:;a:i :;:. CO :ii.s: :B Ococcc
:0::. G)'t:: Q) ~ 11)-;:: Q)
c: "'~"~ c: "'~"~ c: "'~ ~ ~ C:"'E-~ c: "'~"~
rJ.5 " B.s Q) B.s :B B.s t :B B.s C1I
= C ro.E ro =c ro.!:: CO = c: ca.!:: ro = C aI.E ro := c: ca.5ca
~~ at g> 15- 2:~ g- g at 8:~ at g' at 8:~ at g' g. 2:~ g.gg.
<(Q.. OUJ 0 c:(a..OWO <ca..OWO <(a..OWO <(a..OWO
X X X
X X X
......
Q) X X X
:c
CO
I-
2 2 2
en en en
c: tic: tI c: tic:
~.g " 0 ~g
-" =
()Q ()O ()O
c:" c: " c:"
",g- ",g- ",g-
0:..5 a:..s ii:.s
:g >- CD
-".oE
I-u
ge.9
.8.Q ~r-:'
<UQ)O
16-g a.~ 3:
ii :::J >'oi'~
=e"g"'-Q)
~ ~1i) ~a:::
c!!! ~ (tI2 jij
o 0.._ c
:0:2(5 o.c Q)
cuocQ)E
::I..cQ)lL
~O~-ge
~ ~:5ta-;;:
ro a,.'- '"C c:
::g III ~.uiW
-6:5 8s~
C-c c: coO
;g5~'gQ)
ge8~=
.cctJu<(o.
0)"'0 ctI C L..
:E(1)c:"CoB
.. 0'; ffiTI ~
O:::J >< 00--
.E~E:::J'(;)"E
cbcQ)2;10
<(8~am8
:::
N
~
...
'"
c:
:E
~~
""u ()
.- c::::' 0)-
~ (G ai.S a3
C:"'E~E
B.5t :R-e
= C cu.E cu
2:~ at g> at
<(a..OUJO
X
X
X
.,.
o
~
0..
2
en
tic:
"0
'<:'iJ
()"
C:"
"''''
0:..5
-0= a> (ij -c"Oc:
22::5-0 .c (1)cO
0_:5 Q) en ro ~.15
.s~'3=1ti (ijQ)'"C:::J.,$!
~ m ~"C~.?;> :;::5 ~-g:2
8.cc!fi.- R<DctI(!)(I).
Q) cu-() ts5!a.>.1J) 0
~:5"E'!!! Q) .a$"E..c~ro
- 0)8 g5 II) 5 Q)~""'.s
~~ tIS ~'5 -g ro [[ij.9'E
en ..... r:: 4. C ro ~ 0 c..,..: g
Qj CU_-o 0...: (j;:tOlDeO()
.- g. (/) c13 0.- C > 0.0
t::: U) Q) ro ro ro t::: Q) Q) >. C\I 3::
ctI 0 x- c ro'O'O'O -0)
.a Q) C :::J .(1) ._ .a '- Q) :::J 0) "5
~~~ 2~"E ~~:6tAT"' Q)
c;>..wC]c.?gca>..ca>2:-Cl:
01: a> Q) O..c-=(/)t'tIm
(/) Q) ... >..r:::. () (I) -=.~.- ::::J +:i
rn 0. >,..0 - 3:: rn"C 0..5 c
E2-e'O.9a>Ec~C:(1)a>
'tJ Q.ro Q) R.;; '0::1 c'OLL E
= a>(ijl'--a>=ernc-oc
oEca.Oo:: ocu"Oroa>2
U) 0) 0) 0)0 CI) ...1'--.......-
-5U)5 a.~19 -5-g 8g{g ~
'-"'E>.mc.-ouC\l _ill
.r:::.Q) "0"- O).r:::.::::Jrn _0
oQ)2::J~Eo':::'c:gJ2-
.E:5-U)rn5.E~:CJ::~0
cb g'.:g m 2.= cb 8 e u 0 ~
co::l.o.g~ C:Q).E(a~~
<([ij8C:LLill<(..oO~<(0
'0 -a -.... ...
~~~ ~'O ~oQ Q).90 ~ro
~ ~g'~. ~m ~;~ ~~!~ ~~~~
.... en.cE. .a.a5Q)Qa>EU) -~c8 COencgc
2a>~co ~~:5M~a>=i(/)80 ..."U)9~~~
~:5:g E! ~ U) rn :5 ~ 0) ~;;: .= 0"0 C c.: Q)"'O 3:
~ ~ ~~__ ~ en .c .~ g: :5 E - 5-.~':::' ro 3:: ~ Q) co Q)
::J"'-oOO o,Ea>fijQ)ga;e:sCg-g o~:5c.>
mbO) ~=o~~=Q)Q)CI) ~ ~"O~~~~
iG~~~ E8~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~
.-a>g>..... E_'-@roCUCl)Ig>CO<<!Q)2C"l::oQ)E
g:5....Qa> .g~ 'O=ffi!o.a.~J:I.~ Q.Q)Q)O !
Q) C Q) '0 ~ CI) 1ii ro >;...c E I:::S ro i C 0':: E 0 C Q)
a.Q)i~~ ri+:ic'OCI)::::JOCl)C~~ cctlQ)~e~
~I~ec Q)W-2c~o~g~b ~g~o~
:0 Q) 0 8:~ g} ~ -ri ~ ~j!ffi ffi -ci 8 u ~~ ~~ iji m
:S.Q~ co~ 5:..o~!E Q) (tIJ:I: Q) ~"C Q) Q)"C"ffiq;:-a"
~~-;-g~ o-g.~~ ~o-g ~.~~= ~ ~3:g @~
oESroc >'~~~~~~~~Bo ~5!~~~
5$~~~ gi~=CI)~B2Q)=g ~~8c~~:5
E ~oEi: ~a.Q) O-gE 15 ro:5 ro13 ro> .=0,-.-
(5 ra Cg E ~ ::I,.: ~ 2} ItS en....... :5 '5 .o>'_ro _ 0 ... e ":>0.. 3::
E~ ~Q) oro=cCJ)~c'Oc~en _L-~o.~.~
-O:.=_cnO g~CJ)Q)cmroQ)oQ)= a5~:5"E~c
-oCQ)O CE~ uE=_m .>-......rnOrn
SEBnE .SCJ)Q)!:sCJ)c:E~~U)_Q)~Q)o~-a
,-n__"O~....Eo-U)E::::J,-~a.Q)oQ).cQ)E~bg
~1tS~~~Eg~~5-Q)~BSU)E5Q):5ro u)'-
~~i~mo~~g~5~E~E8S5~~o~~~
ori
~
E
ro
~
C
-<:
~
'"
o
:;;
c
o
~
~
'"
;;
J:,
'"
0.
c
o
'"
'5
u
<(
o
o
L:;
"
(f)
u
r:
ro
L:;
~
:::>
L:;
()
ro
E
::J
-
o
'"
"'
o
cr
u5
.....
CP
:c
OS
I-
en C
0)= Q)
gJ~ ~
..r::0a>a)
;:- S -5 c..
5ai.9~
:5 E..... C>>
.~ ~ ~Ls
;:J e "e-;g
Q) .Co Co:::J
~ E Q)CD
a.~:s-g
Es ";n '0 ctI
It: >.. 0)
.!!! 0 g.~
u-g ~~
.~ ra :::J a:
~m8~
L.. 0._
~ ~(ijO .
+=>ttlCQ)CD
..... Q) 1;:::::::5 CD
(\]Eo c
;; -'0'2>
c50cc
(1)::::1'1: oW
> (\] c..:;::J~
:~Q)~(]
.cEE.~-o
E7ii~m@
<ri
~
-
""'
u
~
""
o
o
~
:s
?<
~
::J
9
'"
9
en
]
;:;
~
o
u
~
~
"
~
in
~
~
p
-a
p
"
~
'"
~!~
-r-
mY OF
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM OiUIA VISfA
1. Name of Proponent:
St. Rose of Lima Parish of the Catholic
Diocese of San Diego
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Chula Vista
Planning and Building Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
3. Addresses and Phone Nnmber of Proponent:
293 H Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
(619) 427-0230
4. Name of Proposal:
St. Rose of Lima Catholic Church
5. Date of Checklist:
March 28, 2007
6. Case No.
IS-06-013
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS QUESTIONS:
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
1. AESTHETICS. Would the project
a) Have a substaotial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 0 0 . 0
b) Substaotially damage scenic resources, including, but 0 0 0 .
not limited to, tress, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) Substaotially degrade the existing visual character or 0 0 . 0
quality of the site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of subs_rial light or glare,
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area?
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
D D . 0
Issues:
Comments:
a-b) The project site is located on the comer of Third Avenue and H Street, which is identified in
the General Plan as one of the official Gateways into the City. In accordance with the City of
Chula Vista Municipal Code and Design Standards, the project as designed with architectural
element to match existing architectural style and enhanced landscaped treatments would
ensure that there are no significant aesthetic impacts to this comer of the City. The project
site contains no scenic -resources, vistas or views open to the public, and is not in proximity to a
state scenic highway, therefore, would not damage any scenic resources, vegetation, nor historic
buildings within a state scenic highway.
c) The project site is located within a fully developed area with western Chula Vista that contains
commercial, office and limited single family and multi-family land uses. The proposed church
and school expansion is compatible with the existing architectural design and elevations of the
project site and surrounding areas. The proposed project would not degrade the visual character
ofthe project site or its surroundings therefore no significant aesthetic impact would occur.
d) The project proposal includes new lighting facilities in the parking lot including lighting
standards a distance of 15 feet from the east property line adjacent to the residences. The project
shall be required to comply with the light and glare regulations (Section 19.66.100) of the Chula
Vista Municipal Code (CVMC). Compliance with the regulations will ensure that no substantial
glare or light would affect daytime or nighttime views in the surrounding area or onto the
adjacent or nearby residential properties; therefore no impact would occur as a result of the
proposed project.
Mitie:ation: No mitigation measures are required.
II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. In
deten:nirUng whether impacts to agricultural
resources are significant environmental effects, lead
agencies may refer to the California Agricultural
Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997)
prepared by the California Dept of Conservation as
an optional model to use in assessing impacts on
agriculture and farmland. Would the project
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Fa.rml:md of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
o
o
o
.
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract?
o
o
o
.
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment,
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion ofFannland, to non-agricultural use?
o
o
o
.
Comments:
a-c) The project site and surrounding land uses are fully developed, consistent with the Chula Vista
General Plan and zoning designation, and contain no agricultural resources or designated farmland.
The proposal would not convert Prime Fannland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide
Importance to non-agricultural use and no impacts to agricultural resources would be created as a
result of the proposed project.
Miti!!ation: No mitigation measures are required.
III.AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance
criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution control district may be
relied upon to make the following detenninations.
Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
o
o
D
.
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute 0 0 . 0
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase 0 0 . 0
of any criteria pollutant for which the project
region is non-attainment under an applicable
federal or state ambient air quality standard
(including releasing emissions, which exceed
quantirntive thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant 0 . 0 0
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
o
o
o
.
Comments:
a-e) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Miti!!ation: The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
would mitigate potentially significant Air Quality impacts to a level ofless than significance.
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.
project:
Would the
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habirnt modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special srntus
o
o
o
.
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of
Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substmtial adverse effect on any riparian D D D .
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substmtial adverse effect on federally D D D .
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (1!1cluding, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
d) Interfere substmtially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
D
D
D
.
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
D
D
D
.
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
D
o
D
.
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Comments:
a-c) The project site is located within a designated development area pursuant to the adopted Chula
Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and is fully developed. There are no candidate, sensitive or special
status species, sensitive natural communities or wetlands present within or immediately adjacent
to the project site.
d) No native resident or migratory wildlife corridors or native wildlife nursery sites exist within or
immediately adjacent to the project site.
e) No biological resources are present on the project site and no impacts or conflicts with local
policies and ordinances protecting biological resources would result.
f) No impacts or conflicts with local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans would result ftom
the project since the project site is located in a designated development area pursuant to the
adopted Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and no biological resources are present.
Mitieation: No mitigation measures are required.
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the
project
a) Cause a substantial adverse change ill the 0 0 0 .
significance of a historical resource as defined in ~
15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change ill the 0 0 0 .
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to ~ 15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a umque 0 0 0 .
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
0 0 0 .
Issues:
Comments:
a) A Historic Architectural Survey Report was prepared by Galvin Preservation Associates (May 2006) for the
demolition of buildings at the St. Rose of Lima Parish and Parochial School. The project proposal includes
demolishing six of the seven existing buildings. Five of the seven buildings were constructed more than 45
years ago and required evaluation due to their age. These five buildings were originally constructed between
1948 and circa 1955 in the Spanish Colonial Revival and Modem styles. A sixth building was evaluated
because it would reach 45 years of age at the time of proposed implementation of Phase Two of the project.
This building was completed in 1965 in the Modem style.
ill order to assess potential historic resources on the project site, all aspects of historic resource compliance
under California State Law for the proposed project that includes resource identification, evaluation for
significance, and determination of effects in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) guidelines at Title 14 California Code of Regulations (CCR) SI5064.5 and the Public Resources
Code (pRC) 5024 was completed. The study results detemrined that alterations to the subject property and
proposed demolition of buildings are not potential historical resources as defined by the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and regional standards or criteria.
b) Based upon previous site disturbances and existing developed project site, the potential for significant
historical resource impacts or adverse changes to archaeological resource as defined in Section 15064.5 is not
anticipated.
c) Based on the level of previous disturbance to the site and the relatively limited amount of additional grading
for the proposed project, no impacts to unique paleontological resources or unique geologic features are
anticipated.
d) No human remains are anticipated to be present within the impact area of the project.
Miti!!:ation: No mitigation measures are required.
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the
project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential
substa.ntial adverse effects, including the risk of
loss, injury or death involving:
,.
Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
\
o
o
o
.
Issues:
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
E3fthquake Fault Zoniog Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on other
SUbSUUltW. evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology SpecW
Publication 42.
11.
Strong seismic grouod shaking?
111.
Seismic-related
liquefaction?
including
ground
failure,
lV. Landslides?
b) Result in SUbSUUltW. soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
uostable, or that would become uostable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in on-
or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table
18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating SUbSUUltW. risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of wastewater?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
No Impact
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Issues:
Comments:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
a-e The project site has been previously disturbed with the construction of the existing church and
school facility, storm drainage and site improvements. The preparation and submittal of a final soils
report will be required prior to the issuance of a grading pennit for the proposed project as a standard
engineering requirement. According to the Engineering Department, there are no known or suspected
seismic hazards associated with the project site. The site is not within a mapped Earthquake Fault
Zone. Therefore, project compliance with applicable Uniform Building Code standards would
adequately address any building safety/seismic concerns.
Erosion control measures would be identified in conjunction with the preparation of final grading plans
and would be implemented during construction. The implementation of appropriate and maximum
water quality best management practices (BMPs) during construction would be required in accordance
with the Chula Vista Standard Urban Stonn Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP). All portions of the
development area disturbed during construction would either be developed or would be appropriately
landscaped in compliance with the Chula Vista Municipal Code, Sections 19.36.090 and 19.36.110.
Compliance with SUSMP requirements would be ensured by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of
grading permits for the proposed project. Compliance with the City and regional standards would
lessen any potential impact to less than significant.
Miti!!ation: No mitigation measures are required.
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS. Would the project:
a)
Create a significant hazard to the public or the
envirornnent through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
o
.
o
o
b)
Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materia1s into the
environment?
o
.
o
o
c)
Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
o
.
o
d)
Be located on a site which is included on a list of
o
o
o
o
.
Issues:
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
e)
For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project
area?
f)
For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project
area?
g)
Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
h)
Expose people or structures to a significant risk
of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are
intemrixed with wildlands?
Comments:
a-c) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
No Impact
.
.
.
.
Miti!!ation: The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
would mitigate potentially significant hazards/hazardous materials impacts to level of less than
significance. In addition, refer to Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Air Quality Section,
and mitigation measures.
Issues:
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.
Would the project
a) Result in an increase in pollurnut discharges to
receiving waters (including impaired water bodies
pursuant to the Oean Water Act Section 303( d) list),
result in significant alteration of receiving water
quality during or following construction, or violate
any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
b) Subsrnutially deplete grOlU1dwater supplies or
interfere subsrnutially with groundwater rechaxge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (e.g., the production rate of pre--existing nearby
wells would drop to a level which would not
support existing land uses or planned uses for which
pennits have been granted)? Result in a potentially
sigoificant adverse impact on groundwater quality?
c) Subsrnutially alter the existing drainage pattem of the
site or axea, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river;t .in a manner, which
would result in subsrnutial erosion or siltation on- or
off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or axea, including through the alteration of the
course of a stteam or river, subsrnutially increase the
rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which .
would result in flooding on- or off-site, or place
structures within a lOO-yeax flood hazaxd axea which
would impede or redirect flood flows?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
.
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
.
.
.
No Impact
o
o
o
D
e) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
D D D .
Issues:
f) Create or contribute runoff water, which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stonnwater drainage systems or provide substill1rial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
D
D
D
.
Comments:
a-f) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mitie:ation: The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
would mitigate potentially significant Hydrology/Water Quality impacts to level of less than
significance.
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the
project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
D
D
o
.
b) Conflict with any applicable hnd use phn, policy, 0 0 0 .
or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over
the project (including, but not limited to the
general phn, specific phn, local coastal program,
or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation 0 0 0 .
phn or natural community conservation phn?
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Comments:
a) The project site and surrounding parcels are fully developed. The proposed remodeling of the church and
school facilities would not disrupt or divide the established community because they are part of an
existing permitted landuse. Therefore, no significant planning and land use impacts would occur as a
result of the phased project.
b) The project site is located in the R3 (Multifumi1y Residential) Zone and RH (High Density) General Plan
land use designation. The project is consistent with the applicable zoning regulations and land use
designations, therefore; no impacts are anticipated.
c) The project would have no impact or conflict with any applicable adopted environmental plans or
policies and would not conflict with the adopted Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, which designated the
proposed project site as a Developable Area.
Miti!!ation: No mitigation measures are required.
X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Result io the loss of availability of a known minetal
resource that would be of value to the region and
the residents of the state?
o
o
o
.
b) Result io the loss of availability of a locally-important
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
genetal plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
o
o
o
.
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Comments:
a-b) The proposed project has been previously disturbed and would not result in the loss of availability
of a known mineral resource of value to the region or the residents of the state and has not been
designated for mineral resource protection by the State of California Department of Conservation.
Therefore, no impacts to mineral resources would occur as a result of the proposed project.
Miti!?:ation: No mitigation measures are required.
XI. NOISE. Would the projectresult in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels 0 . 0 0
in excess of s_dards established in the local general
phn or noise ordinance, or applicable s_dards of
other ageocies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive 0 0 . 0
gtoundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels?
c) A subs_rial pennanent increase in ambient noise 0 . 0 0
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
d) A subs_rial temporary or periodic increase in 0 . 0 0
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
e) For a project located within aD. airport land use plan 0 0 0 .
or, where such a phn has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
1) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working
o
o
o
.
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
io the project area to excessive noise levels?
Comments:
a-d) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
e) The project is not located within an airport land use plan nor within two miles of a public airport,
or public use airport; therefore, the project would not expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels.
f) The project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip; therefore, the project development
would not expose people working in the project area to excessive noise levels.
Mitieation: The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
would mitigate potentially significant noise impacts to a level ofless than significance.
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the
project:
a) Induce substantial population growth io an area,
either direcdy (for example, by proposiog new
homes and busioesses) or iodirecdy (for example,
through extension of road or other iofi:astructure)?
o
o
o
.
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housiog elsewhere?
o
o
o
.
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
o
o
o
.
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Comments:
a-c) The project involves remodeling and expansion ofthe church and school facilities and does not
propose new residential development that would induce population growth or divide the
established community. Furthermore, no displacement of housing or persons necessitating the
construction of replacement housing or adverse impacts to population or housing would occur as a
result of the proposal.
Miti!!ation: No mitigation measures are required
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project:
Result in substantial adve.rse physical impacts associated
with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities, the construction of which
could muse significant envttonmental impacts, in order
to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for any public services:
a) Fire protection?
D
D
.
D
b) Police protection?
D
D
.
D
c) Schools?
o
o
o
.
d) Parks?
D
D
D
.
e) Other public facilities?
o
D
o
.
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Comments:
a) Adequate fire protection services can continue to be provided to the site without an increase of
equipment or personnel. The applicant is required to comply with the Fire Department policies for
new building construction, emergency circulation, fire hydrants and fire prevention. The City Fire
Department has detennined that the proposed project would not have a significant effect upon or
result in a need for significantly new or altered fire protection services. The City's Fire
performance objectives and thresholds will continue to be met.
b) Adequate police protection services and response times can continue to be provided upon completion of
the proposed project. The City Police Department has detennlned that the proposed project would not
have a significant effect upon or result in a need for substantial new or altered police protection services.
The City's Police perfonnance objectives and thresholds will continue to be met.
c) The proposed project would not induce substantial population growth; therefore, no significant
adverse impacts to public schools would result. According to the Chula Vista Elementary School
District letter dated January 27,2006, any facility used exclusively for religious purposes is exempt
rrom school fees.
d) Because the proposed project will not induce a substantial population growth, it would not create a
demand for neighborhood or regional parks or facilities or impact existing park facilities.
e) The proposed project would not have a significant effect upon or result in a need for new or
expanded governmental services and would be served by existing or planned public inrrastructure.
Miti!!ation: No mitigation measures are required.
XIV. RECREATION. Would the project
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities
such that substantial physical deterioration of
the facility would occur or be accelerated?
o
o
o
.
b) Does the project include recreational facilities
or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
o
o
o
.
Issues:
Comments:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
a) Because the proposed project would not induce population growth, it would not create a demand
for neighborhood or regional parks or facilities. The proposed project will not significantly impact
existing neighborhood parks or recreational facilities.
b) The church and school project contains its own recreational facilities and playground areas and
would not create significant increase or substantial deterioration to existing public parks or
facilities. The project site is not planned for any future public parks and recreation facilities or
programs. Therefore, the proposed project would not have an adverse physical effect on the
recreational environment.
Miti!?:ation: No mitigation measures are required.
xv. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC. Would
the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of
the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase
in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of
service standaId established by the county
congestion management agency for designated
roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design featw:e
(e.g., shatp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., fann equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
o
.
o
o
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
Issues:
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting altemative transportation (e.g., bus
turnouts, bicycle racks)?
Comments:
a-g) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
.
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
No Impact
o
.
Mitie:ation: The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
would mitigate potentially significant TransportationlTraffic impacts to a level of less than
significance.
XVI. UTiliTIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.
Would the project
a) Exceed wastewater treatmeot requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expanSlon of
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause siglificant environmental effects?
c) Requtte or. result in the construction of new storm
water drainage facilities or expanSlon of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
sjgnificant eovironmenW effects?
d) Have sufficieot water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or
are new or expanded eotitlements needed?
e) Result in a detennination by the wastewater treatment
provider wbich serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the provider's existing
commitmeots?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient pennitred
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
.
o
.
.
.
.
o
.
o
o
o
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
o
o
.
o
Comments:
a) The project is located within an urban area that is served by all necessary utilities and service
systems. No exceedance of wastewater requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board
would result nor significant impacts would occur as a result of the proposed project.
b) See XVI.a. The sewer facilities serving the project site consist of 8-inch sewer lines running along
H Street and Third Street. The proposed improvements include the extension of the existing sewer
mains rrom H Street and Third Avenue, later tying in with sewer laterals within the project site for
the different phases and separate school and church buildings. Based upon the preliminary sewer
study for the proposed project prepared by Rick Engineering Company, dated January 25, 2007, the
Engineering Department has detennined that these facilities are adequate to serve the proposed
project and no significant impacts are anticipated to occur as a result ofthe proposed project.
c) No construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities would be
necessary.
d) The project site is within the Sweetwater Water District service territory. Pursuant to
correspondence from the Sweetwater District dated January 27,2006, the project site may continue
to be serviced from existing potable water mains. No new or expanded entitlements are anticipated
for the proposed project.
e) See XVI.a. and b.
f) The City of Chula Vista is served by regional landfills with adequate capacity to meet the solid
waste needs of the region in accordance with State law. The project is not anticipated to generate a
significant amount of solid waste which would exceed the capacity of the Otay Landfill therefore
impacts to the facility are less than significant
g) In accordance with the Chula Vista Municipal Code, the applicant will be required to implement a
Recycling and Solid Waste Management Plan and comply with all federal, state and local
regnlations related to solid waste. Therefore, impacts are considered to be less than significant.
Mitie:ation: No mitigation measures are required.
Issues:
XVII. THRESHOLDS
Will the proposal adversely impact the City's
Threshold Standards?
A. Libr:u:y
The City shall construct 60,000 gross sq=e feet (GSF)
of additional libr:u:y space, over the June 30, 2000
GSF total, m the area east of Interstlte 805 by
buildout The construction of said facilities shall be
phased such that the City will not fall below the city-
wide ratio of 500 GSF per 1,000 population. Libr:u:y
facilities are to be adequately equipped and stlffed
B) Police
a) Emergency Response: Properly equipped and staffed
police units shall respond to 81 percent of ''Priority
One" emergency calls witWn seven \T) minutes and
maintain an average response time to all "Priority One"
emergency calls of 5.5 minutes or less.
b) Respond to 57 percent of ''Priority Two" urgent calls
witNn seven \T) minutes and maintain an average
response time to all ''Priority Two" calls of 7.5 minutes
or less.
q Fire and Em~<;y Medical
Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed fire
and medical units shall respond to cal1s throughout the City
witNn 7 minutes m 80% of the cases (measured annually).
D) Traffic
The TI:u:eshold Standards require that all mtersections must
operate at a Level of Service (LOS) "C" or better, with the
exception that Level of Service (LOS) "0" may occur
during the peak two hours of the day at sjgnalized
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
D
o
o
o
__ - __ _n____.___
Less Than
Significant
Impact
D
.
.
.
--- -----.--
No Impact
.
o
o
D
-- - ---, -------------
Issues:
intersections. Signalized intersections west of I-80S are not
to operate at a LOS below their 1991 LOS. No
intersection may reach LOS "E" or "P" during the average
weekday peak hour. Intersections of arterials with freeway
ramps are exempted from this Standard
E) Parks and Recreation Areas
The Threshold Standard for Parks and Recreation is 3
acres of neighborhood and commw:1ity parkland with
appropriate facilities /1,000 population east ofI-80S.
F) Drainage
The Threshold Standards require that stonn water flows
and volumes not exceed City Engineering Standards.
Individnal projects will provide necessary improvements
consistent with the Drainage Master Planes) and City
Engineering Standards.
G) Sewer
The Threshold Standards require that sewage flows and
volumes not exceed City Engine.ering Standards.
Individual projects will provide necessary improvements
consiStent with Sewer Master Planes) and City Engineering
Standards.
H) Water
The Thresbold Standards require that adequate storage,
treatment; and transmission facilities are constructed
concurrently with planned growth and that water quality
standards are not jeoparclized during growth and
construction.
Applicants may also be requjred to participate in whatever
water conservation or fee off-set program the City of
Chula Vista has in effect at the time of building permit
ISsuance.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
.
.
.
No Impact
.
o
o
o
-- -------.-
-----.---
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Comments:
a) The project would not induce substantial population growth; therefore, no impacts to library facilities
would result. No adverse impact to the City's Library Threshold standards would occur as a result of
the proposed project.
b) According to the Police Department, adequate police protection services can continue to be provided
upon completion of the proposed project. The proposed project would not have a significant effect upon
or result in a need for substantial new or altered police protection services. No adverse impact to the
City's Police Threshold Standards would occur as a result of the proposed project.
c) According to the Fire Department, adequate fire protection and emergency medical services can continue to be
provided to the project site. Although the Fire Department has indicated they will provide service to the
project as designed according to the current site plan, the project will contribute to the incremental increase in
fire service demand through the City. This increased demand on fire services will not result in a significant
cumulative impact. No adverse impact to the City's Fire and Emergency Medical Threshold standards would
occur as a result of the proposed project.
d) According to the traffic analysis, the surrOlmding street segments intersections will continue to operate in
compliance with the City's traffic threshold standard (LOS "C" or within identified threshold values) with the
proposed project traffic and buildout conditions. No adverse impact to the City's traffic threshold standards
would occur as a result of the proposed project.
e) Because the church/school expansion project is proposed for infill development and located west ofillterstate
805, this Threshold Standard is not applicable.
f) The proposed project includes drainage improvements designed in accordance with City standards. Based
upon the review of the project, the Engineering Department has detemJined that there are no significant issues
regarding the proposed drainage improvements of the project site as indicated in the Preliminary Hydrology
Study. ill accordance with City standards, post-developed flows shall not exceed pre-developed flows and a
final drainage study will be required in conjunction with the grading plans. No adverse impacts to the city's
stonn drainage system or City's drainage threshold standards will occur as a result of the proposed project.
g) The sewer facilities serving the project site consist of 8-inch sewer lines running along H Street and
Third Street. The proposed improvements include the extension of the existing sewer mains from H
Street and Third Avenue, later tying in with sewer laterals within the project site for the different phases
and separate school and church buildings. Based upon the preliminary sewer study for the proposed
project prepared by Rick Engineering Company, dated January 25, 2007, the Engineering Department
has detennined that these facilities are adequate to serve the proposed proj ect. No adverse impacts to
the City's sewer system or the Sewer Threshold Standards will occur as a result of the proposed project.
h) Pursuant to correspondence received from the Sweetwater Authority Water District, the existing
8-inch water main located along the frontage on H Street and Third Avenue, as well as a 6-inch water
main along Alvarado Street currently serve and will continue to serve the project site. The applicant
shall be required to coordinate with the Water District for proper design guidance of service sizes. No
significant impacts to existing facility systems or the City's water threshold standards will occur.
l\fiti!!ation: No mitigation measures are required.
Issues:
XVllI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the eovironment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to ch:op below self-sustaining
levels, threateo to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range
. of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that ate iodividually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
iocremeotal effects of a project ate considerable
when viewed io connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other curreot project, and the
effects of probable future projects.)
c) Does the project have eovironmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either direcdy or iodirecdy?
Comments:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
.
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
a) The project site is currendy fully developed and located io an established mbanized area within the
designated developable area of the adopted Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan. There are no known
sensitive plant or animal species or cultural resources on the project site. No substantial adverse impacts
would occur as a result of the proposed project.
b) No cumulatively considerable impacts associated with the project wheo viewed in connection with the
effects of past projects, other current projects and probable future projects (Urban Village, Seniors on
Broadway, Gateway Center, and Espanada) have been identified. As described in the Mitigated Negative
Declaration, project impacts would be mitigated to below a level of significance through the required
mitigation measures.
c) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E. Potential impacts to humans associated with the short-
term construction, air quality impacts, hazardJhazardous materials, hydrology/water quality, noise,
transportation/traffic would be mitigated to below a level of significance.
Mitigation: The mitigation measures conmined in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would
mitigate potential significant impacts to a level ofless than significance.
XIX. PROJECT REVISIONS OR MITIGATION MEASURES:
Project mitigation measures are contained in Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-06-013, Section F,
Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Impacts, and Table 1, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
XX. AGREEMENT TO IMPLEMENT MITIGATION MEASURES
By signing the line(s) provided below, the Applicant(s) and/or Operator(s) stipulate that they have each
read, understood and have their respective company's authority to and do agree to the mitigation
measures contained herein, and will implement same to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review
Coordinator. Failure to sign the line(s) provided below shall indicate the Applicants' and/or Operator's
desire that the Project be held in abeyance without approval.
John P. Dolan, Pastor
Printed Name and Title
e.
"3 / 2....JY I~ 7
Datel I
t~ e of Authorized Representative
N/A
Printed Name and Title of
[Operator if different ftom Property Owner]
Date
N/A
Signature of Authorized Representative of
[Operator if different rrom Property Owner]
Date
XXI. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at
least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "PotentiaIIy Significant Unless Mitigated,"
as indicated by the checklist on the previous pages.
o Land Use and Planning . Transportation/Traffic
o Population and Housing 0 Biological Resources
DGeophysical 0 Energy and Mineral
Resources
o Public Services
o Utilities and Service Systems
o Aesthetics
o Agricultural Resources
. Hydrology/Water
. Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
o Cultural Resources
. Air Quality
o Threshold Standards
. Noise
o Recreation
. Mandatory Findings of Significance
XXII. DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the 0
environment, and a Negative Declaration will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the .
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in
the project have been made or agreed to by the project proponent. A Mitigated
Negative Declaration will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, 0
and an Environmental Impact Report is required.
I find that the. proposed project may have a "potentially significant impact" or 0
"potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one
effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable
legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier
analysis as described on attached sheets. An Environmental Impact Report is
required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the 0
environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed
adequately in an earlier Em or Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards
and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier Em or Negative
Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the
proposed project, nothing further is required.
en]
Envir ental Projects Manager
CityofChula Vista
MIW "3,200,
Date
J :\Planning\MARIA \Initial Study\St Rose of Liima\IS-06-0 13cklstStRose.~oc
ATTACHMENT 6
PRIOR PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY
COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS (1963)
<
"~:;;
CONDITIONAL USE PERKIT RESOLUTION NO. c-63-3
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMiSSION
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNC1L
APPROVAL OF A CONDITioNAL USE PERKIT
Fm PERMISSION TO BUILD A NEW CHURCH EAST
.OF EXI5T'nm:'(;f1Uttt;trAi'~"~, ~TREEl ANI.)
TO ADD: OFFfcE SpACE TO EXI~Tir.t' RECTORY'
WHEREAS..'a duly verified &pplicatio1f1 for a conditlol'billl
with the P1811'1nilrl,9 Dep.9r~ent on August 7. 1963
LIse permi t Wf!I9 fi ted
,and
WHEREAS. said appliCGtion reque$ted that the applicant be granted's'condi-
t(onal U$\e permit to allow construction of a: new church east of the existing church
and to add office space to the existing reetorYa
0[11 property at .293 I'HII Street
de~c:ribed In the ilpp1fcation, Clwd which :is 2:oned K-j
more pmrticularly
.&nd
WHEREAS, THE Planning Commi~~ion ~et the tt~ mod place for a heoring on
~ard applicatIon ~~d notice of 58id hearing w~s given by the mailing of 8 Jetter to
prope~ty owner$ 'within 300 feet of the exterior boundsrie! of the property at least
ten days prior ~o the hearing, and
WHEREAS. the hear"ing W8$ held at the. time <!11M piece. Mmely 7:00 P.M. Monday,
\ " " ,
A~gust 19~ 1963 In Council Chamber., Civic Center, Chu1a Vista
P1sJ'ilnlng Commf5~lon and saId heari,n.9 ~JIJI! thereafter closed.
before the
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVEO THAT the PlannlngComml..lon find. os follows:
\
1. ThBt the gr:anting of the conditional U~e permit will not be mDte~JGlly
detrimental to the public hea1t~. safety or wa1fare~
So .tat~d.
z. The char.cteri~tlcs of the use proposed are re6$onably competible with
the types.of use parmitted in the surrounding areal.
,..
This Js an Improvement over the old site.
BE IT fURTHER RESOLVED that the'P1~~ning Commission recommends to. the City
Council tl1at iii conditiona1 use pennlt be 9rant~d to St. Rose 0' Lima Parish.
293.''''11 Str,eet for ,permissIon to"construct a new church and to add office
spece to tho exlSt.lng rectory. '
'.Approval of thi'! conditional use permit iSi r.ecofmlel':1ded .\'lubJect to the following
cond I t ions:
That a S foot hl,gh masonry wa,ll be constructed.a.tong tIE easterly property line
I.. of'.. the development.
.2. Thot a landscapa plan.be approved by the Planning Oepartment.
J. shall be surfaced with 2 Inch asphaltic concrete and s aces
4. Entrence on Third Avenue be closed, as far as 1.118 curb cut la concerned.
Virgi 1 D. Steven~on, Chairman
DATED:
ATTEST:
August 19. 1963
Secretilry
~
'p
nf' 3.,...ri ;:'lnn Iffl Tn ~r1ri;+inn_ nf"f'-5t\~P.+. In.'ioinC' and unloading: of Dassenp"ers i:::;
---enr;:~1""'~-gpri 'ky n,....;~ro1T"y'" ",lnng p;+'hp'r' ",in", nf' +.np r.r1111"'~'h f'rrITp 'HI St.th~~
"l~T?""':~._
Are the chgracte.i~tic~ of the U$e propo~ed re9$onably compatibTe with the type of U~e~
In the arcij?
v"'<:!
Section iV
i DECLARE, UNDER PENALTY 0, PER..IIJRY THAT "i'KE FOREGOIIiIG IS TRUE AM) CORRECT.
DA'fED_~\- /,19(., ,\T ~\..cS1.~ J,'-;,I[;-
C/Elliforni~
i:~~,~" ~ 9<'\~
S(g~&ture of pi iCQnt
'J -~.;;/II
RESOLUTION No. 3188
APPROV;.I, OF THE ClT'il COUNCIL OF TIlE ClT'il OF CHULA IllSTA, CALIFORNIA
TO TI!& PLANNING C~lISSION ACTION IN GRt.!>JTING CONDUlONAL
USB PBBMIT TO
Sf. ROSE OP UMA CRURCR
For construction of new church - add to office space
WHEREAS/) on August 19, 1963 the! Planning COmm:lssion
be14 oS Public Bearing on the application of St. Rose of Lima Church
for a Ccmdltional Use Permit for construct-laD of new church _ add to office space
on the prop2rty loc:.aced 293 "H" Street
"nd
EEREAS~ the Planning Ccmmission, following said hearing, adopted a
Beaolution, t11th findings/) recommending the granting of said Conditional Use
Permit. said permit being subjec.t to certain conditions, and
1:1HE1I&AS. pursuant ,to Section 16..54 of Ordinance No. '398 th~ said
rec:aanendat1on of 'the PLanning Commission appeared an the Agenda of the City
COuncil ~ and
WHIRKAS. the .said City Council has reviewed. said recommendation and
fin<<UDls of the Plann1ng Commission and all documents on fils 1n connection .
wiE:h said appl1cat1on for CoDdit.1onal Use Permit t
NOW. TIII1B.EFOU. be it resolved and the City Council finds as follows:
1. That said "Cion of the PUDDing Commission, together with
said f1D.dings recommending the granting of said .Conditional
Use: Permit, subject to the conditions set forth t.hereino to
S t a Rose of LUna Churcb for
cnn.o;truction of new church - add to of flce -8Dace
OD the prop_ty loeated;
293 "H" Street'
and more particularly described in tbo plat attacbed here~t 13
hereby affirmed 0 and sa1d Coa41t1oaal USG Permit is hereby authorized 4S recommended
by the PlaDDing Commission.
2. The City Clerk shall comply ",ith the provisions of Sectioo 16.56 ..
sub-paragrapb 2 of Ordiaance No. 398.
.~
PASSED AND APPBlWGI) b,- the CIl'Y 'OOUIiCIL of the cim- OJ;' Im!ILI\ VISTA, CALIJ.'OBNiA
thie 3H clay of
voteD toe&'it.:
AUS. OowIci1me..
NATES , Counc1lmea
ABSEI!r: COU1\C.$,.1miBD.
Septmloer. 1963
by tbo foUcodi1g
_..f. _IUater. _1
-
_1:uI. Sllith
. (e) Eaitb W. HeDGel
Mayor of tbe City of Chula Vista
A1'TEST,
(~""ft.'h ,. ~/~;; ".of/p
Cit)r CI....
STAT8 OF CALIPOI!I1IA )
00UIIn or SAIl DIIIGO )
CITY or' CIIm.A. VISTA )
..
I,JCimum Po CMiPBEU.o Cit.y Cli9rk'of..tbe City of Cbula Vista, california
DO BB1tDY CEIrI'IIY that ths' &bove aDd foregoing is a ful'l e true and. correct
eapJ' of
RARolutian Nft.']l88
aDd that the' sema bas 'not beea
_ed or rep....led.
DATI!D ;
SeDtember 3. 1963
d~ <~, Wf.~~/
ity CIerI:
",
'.
.........,.,
ATTACHMENT 7
MAP OF CONSTRUCTION PHASES I AND II
WITH PARKING REQUIREMENTS
FOR ALL FOUR PHASES
~u"".,.._,..""..,."
q:umL) :)'Ioq.ji:) "un", JO :}SOl[ ".IS'
h
.....
I.
lmld J:}!Si:W :a'UI1S!~H
-_.."-----=-.---~-
n
, , ,
c~,
0
.
8 "
"
~
,
U~
~~:;-;
!if?",
"
B
w..
h
~"
II
I +
'"I' ( !
1 ~~! '
I~ I! ii h~~
1 Is """",s
,,' 'lee
I <,) "! ~.
1 ~~ii 'I"
J ~iH"1 I
I~
y
w..
~."c
i'i2j;j'"
~~~~
B
~,~................._n_______. .....,_________........... ___..____-_.-.__
.-.,....---.......-
I~
10
:1
0,"
~I!
~ il j
~:~
-' Ii- :;i ~ ~ ~ ~ :i
21; ~~5~~~
; i' f
~i ~f:'
~ i U :i ;';:
i i" ? . H I I
e I. " "I; Iii
li , , h, , ~! ~! .~ ~
!I~ 1: r: : :li!Pljl
~i~ ' ! n n ~t~ I~ ~
!I~ :F"~~"~
";< L _ _ N" "
:i; ~;} ~ ~ ~.; ~
"I ~i
~ ! ~I . ~
~!\i11!1 :i
8i ~...
e I ~I
,! : ~!
! .....I!l \;"C
~i~ ! n n n!'!!!I'H =!H
~IB :- ~ : c :;n']l ~ ~
1J,j, i5 ~ , <.>31
~: ~ ~ : .:i.:i ~ ~
(,I); i ~ <.> ~: >:'" ! 6
~ll ! i t ~ ~ I ~. ~! ,,~
_,...""._"__....."""-O~~...:.~<.>_:--:....__".... _.""'.._..........",~
T'
" ,
,~,
8
"
,
'"'
~~
.-,
~e.
~
~m_a i
!HH !
I~
I~
I"";
an=
M
i
"
iL L
I'"" ,.
, ~;:! 'I'
"If:.'" 1/'
ri;L I L
ED
;r~
:~i
0'
! i~ ; .;
o. : " ' .
~;9 ' ! i 1:1.
'" '01: ; Jf :< ;::.
~;
.B
~
.,
.
.
~
~
~ ~
s i
g
~.
3"" . " :~
~I~:i H ~ ! H I
"" II: Q
~I" ~:~! ~n.. H .
~ i ~ ~ i ~ ~ i' ~~
<I
~!g
~:! ~:i ~ ~ ~ ~
0,. ~ ~ I ~ ~ ii
w,
~i
!Iu ""
wit"', S!
1 j'" ."'
~I"
i
f
~~
~ ~ ~
, ~i ~
~~ ~
" c. ~ 'i
~ :; :i: ~~ ~
, h ~, , ~i ~i ~ ~
n ~; ; ~:!!!.!'i! l-i1
! ~ ~ l S~. ~
! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~: .~
ffi
;[1
t
,
"
.
~
~
I
i
.
~
.
~
"
.
~
~
~
o
~
~
~
'"'
'"
! "
s
~ .r:
C)
. '"
~ '"'
, '"'
. <1J
~ "
" "
~ en
~ "
en
. '"
< "
~ M
P.
.
en
'"
'"
M
P.
H
H
H
"
en
'"
.r:
""
"'"
'"
'"
00
'"
.....
'"'
en
.....
>4
"
H
o
fo<
ATTACHMENT 8
PARKING ANALYSIS FOR
GATEWAY CENTER
RICK
r.~\
E:--JCiI;-.iEERING COMPANY
Trl.U1S{J(}rtdLir!n Division
March 14, 2007
Mr. Jeff Steichen
City of Chula Vista
Planning and Building Department.
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista; CA 91910
SUBJECT: 'ADDENDUM TO THE FINAL SAINT ROSE OF LIMA PARlSH MASTER
PLAN TRAFFIC STUDY DA TED JANUARY 30, 2007
(JOB NUMBER l4615-C)
Dear Mr. Steichen:
Pursuant to your request, a parking occupancy count was recently conducted at the Chula Vista
Gateway site (northwest comer of Third Avenue and H Street) to determine the parking
availability at this site on a typical Sunday. This is one of the proposed Sunday off-site parking
locations identified for the Saint Rose of Lima Parish Master Plan. The information provided in
this letter will serve as an addendum to the Final Saint Rose of Lima Parish Master Plan Traffic
Study prepared by Rick Engineering Company, dated January 30,2007.
SUNDAY CHULA VISTA GATEWA YPARKING OCCUPANCY COUNT
Parking occupancy counts were conducted by Turning Point Traffic Service at the existing Chula
Vista Gateway site on Sunday, February, 25, 2007. These counts were recorded at 30-minute
intervals from 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM. The site currently has a five level parking structure
consisting of 761 spaces and a 58 space surface parking lot (819 parking spaces total).
Appendix A contains the parking supply and occupancy record sheets.
Table 1 shows a summary of these Sunday parking occupancy counts. These counts show that
the total parking at this location peaked at 10:00 AM with a parking occupancy of 8.8% (72
vehicles parked, with 747 empty parking spaces). These low percentages are due primarily to
the limited weekend business hours of the Chula Vista Gateway tenants. Parking occupancy
averaged about 7% between the hours of 8:00 AM to 2:00 PM (hours that fall within the typical
Saint Rose of Lima Parish Sunday Mass times). This relates to about 58 vehicles parked, with
761 empty parking spaces. According to the final . Saint Rose of Lima Parish Master Plan
Traffic Study, 379 off-site parking spaces are needed to accommodate the Sunday peak parking
demand (544 parking space demand minus 165 on-site parking proposed = 379 off-site parking
spaces). Therefore. the ChulaVista Gateway site can accommodate these 379 spaces during the
Sunday peak period (761 > 379).
.'(J.20 Fri.H.. I{(),ld S.1Il Di(~g(\. C.\li!l)fI1i,1 q~lln..2';'I(, . '1>1'1) ~<lIII-(}_- . F_\x: IhIQI..2I)I..,llb"} . r'i(~"!1~jrh'l'ril1~.,(1In
SAN D (EGO
RIVERSIDE
OR.\t"JGE
Sc\CRA,v1ENTO
PHOENIX
TUCSON
Mr. Jeff Steichen
March 14,2007
Page 2
However, these current parking occupancy counts assume Chula Vista Gateway to be partially
leased out. Therefore, in conservatively assuming that doubling the peak parking occupancy
(8.8% x 2 = 18%) to represent a fully leased out Chula Vista Gateway project, this would relate
to 148 vehicle parked with 677 empty parking spaces on a typical Sunday. Even with this
conservative assumption, the Chula Vista Gateway site can accommodate the 379 off-site spaces
during the Sunday peak period (677 > 379).
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the Sunday parking occupancy count conducted, ample off-site Sunday parking for the
Saint Rose of Lima Master Plan can be provided at the Chula Vista Gateway site. As mentioned
in the Final Saint Rose of Lima Parish Master Plan Traffic Study, at least 544 parking spaces
(on-and off-site combined) would need to be provided to accommodate Sunday peak parking
demands. With a minimum of 165 on-site parking spaces proposed, an additional 379 off-site
parking spaces would be needed. Saint Rose of Lima Parish proposes to utilize the following
off-site locations to help meet the peak Sunday parking demand:
Offsite parkinQ: location
Alvarado Street
Sharp-Rees Steely Clinic
Chula Vista Gateway Site
Available parkinQ: spaces
70
76
819
TOTAL: 965
Appropriate parking agreements have been obtained to utilize both Sharp-Rees Steely Clinic and
Chula Vista Gateway off-site parking locations.
Should you have any questions, please contact me at (619) 291-0707.
G COMPANY
.<
/
./' .~
@~.J~~E~
mj)~xt\14615C.OO I.doc
Attachments
cc: Mr. Dave Kaplan - CityofChula Vista
Mr. Deacon Greg Smyth, Saint Rose of Lima Parish
'"
..J
co
<
....
;..
'"
<
:;:
:;:
;... :0
< en
> ....
Gj Z
.... :0
<;..8
~<;..
~ "'z u
in Z
_:0<
;>-"',,-
< ;:0
..J U
:0 U
:: 0
U 0
Z
g
'"
<
0.
':. >-.: - '. ..... ..... >..:.......1':':.:..:.::..,.. .:.:::::::::f:':...::::::f::',,:::::,.: ,... .::.::::i:":.::::.:::.I:..:.:.:..j....:.....:::J:...........f'::::::':."::!:'.:::"':': f'" '.:.:. f:....:. .... '::. ":.. :..i-.':.::..:.f:::.:.::{. '::'. ..:.:r:::::::.:.:'::.:.::.::.:r:::::::...f:.":...... .'i......:.
I.. "1 WI :...::'9:. 1/....., ...... . ..fl....j. .r... my I .. ..... . .'j..! .., Tfl ... .~""I
'\I~111iIJ~,;'iIJII,I~iIIJIII,lilil#iili~:it,r,I,I,fJi'fIIJi"Jijlil,ljllil'~il~
......."..> ^..... .<........ ....... ........~. ....t..m......................r.... .,...... ...'j........!............. r. .........'.... ....!.. .....,.... .............1..... ... .....!........1.......1........,. .....T........... ............
.. . ................ :;::::....:..1:.:_::.... .m.. .....h.. ...................... i.......t. ... ........ ".r:.::'" ...... .... ....r.:.....~........ ...... ......... ....". .....t.. t..... .
~
~ .
, >. 'B.
0:; <i ,
~ 2 c. H
..J , 0
W OJ on N '"
> m~
W m c ~
..J c :g
~ . ~
. "- .
"- t'
.
c.
I' I
~I~ ~ ~I~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
ala 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a
ill i
010 I 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 10 I 0 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 I 0
............"",..,............,..".. "..'......'j........'....' ......'....'1.'.."....,..
........::.::... ;::n:. .:-:.:.:.:.:.;.;.:.:.:.:-:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.;.:.:.: .:.:.:.:.:.:.:.::.:.:.:.:.:.:-:. '.:.:.;.:.:.:.:.:'.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:
u'if_ ......~... ........ ................:.;u ............... ................. ........ ........ ........u ........m ................. ................mu
iwi~JIII':'!I':::ii!i,!!I!'::II!'11ij:::I:!~J]!1JII'::!~t~:i!iJI!!
!2Z... ....}I..{i?.....~.... 'qpWBIg..BB'itITI@:fisI@iPiWIiDWiWiWl'HtmrWtWliill/!
"C I) I I
.~ I I i
j ~I~ ~ ~I~I~I~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '" '" * * '" ~ '" ~ ~ ~
I ~ ~ ~I~INI~ MjM ~I~IMI~I~IN NIN NIN NINIMIMI~
..... ... ...'g .?il'{?I.ii:"'j::iii?I.?il i{ ii iilry..,ij' inl ::i/tl?~r?
fJ:~it"I!f!!!i!'1'fri;'!fit!'riiii(f~t~i!iffiiiiti~i~iii~iiitill
, , 'I ~
~ l ': I ~
~i ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I'~~l
00 ~ ~ ~
en c:..... " ~
! ~ I ~ I ~ I ~ I ~ I g I ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ I ~ I ~ . ~ N I ~~I ~ Iw~ I ~ I NI~J
m :::::::-::: .:\;-:.::: f:':.:::f~:..r(:.: j ::.:J::::jl:'::::'::/I::::II fl.i! :::::.: Ii; '..liii.i:}i:l:ri..i:: ~
::~:~:-:.::::: ::-:-~Q,. I :::::}:{:::):::::::t:{:::::::::t::::;:::::, j . j t: t . 1 .... ...:.. ... ...1........ .... ... .......................... c:
b >. -, g: ;{! ~ ~:'::::-,.~{ "$.' ~r'~j~ . *' I ~ L ~ f. $' IIt;/;'Z ~ :;fl. ~: ~': :::{f':':7i::'. '::~::A:rf:"J:':~';'.r:'i.:-1::::~':'. 8
~ } ~ ! "'"'!"' ~ . ;!;! , ::1 :::i~J ~r.fJt.I":.::.~:::!,:::::~.;.t:::.:f~::J::::~/~:/$i:I(;:rif;:$i~i!!{:2;;{ltt::;{lr,'f;{If;i:~:t:~. ~
~ ~ ". . ,... . ....x :.....:: .. ).:...+..:....1:::..'..:,:.:1:::::-:.[::::::::.::-1...:::1:.:,.::::::1:::"::i:.:,..:..:".:.J:::: .......f::'.:.,. ..:...:::::::::.:....,.::..,:. .........!:.:,...:,..: [;-
I... . '.':'~{I';llgJ:'I'h...jE['-lg.f@ili.$j*t#:!*,I*,I.!i$f;ltIJ;f-:::f:f #.?f &JiFligII~!gl;% f
1:.:'::\::.: ,.:.", :.:.::.:::... .....,),....:::::::1::::::\:::>:............,. ... ..,.........)"..........1,...........1. ......... t:::. ....r:::::.:.:.::.I::::::.:.:::::[..,:...:.:.j:.........';:::::.:.:..,... ,.... .:.:,.:..., ...... ........-',....::.:..:,..:..:..:::.:1::::"..,'
. . I'. .::'. :::.L-_-_-:::. .-.-,-;-':. :::: ':..T-"_. :::-:-. -f:.:.:.:-:.: ..-r'-:::::. ..!: .::. '.-;.---"'-:::. :: '::.." ,.. . ,. :-.. '::::.:_. .':::'. .~.:-::-:.;.:.:.:t-:-:.:.:-:-:-:.: . '::::'-_.~':..:::_-.~'::":::" .j:: '::::. .::.-:::.-:t..:...".. '::',:. :r:::::.-.-.-I::: -:..:.-i... .. g'
::; ::; I ::; I::; ::; i::; ::; ::; ::; ::; I'::; ::; ::; ::; ::; i::; I::; ::; I::; I ::; I::; i ::; i::; ~
UJ o<{.:{ <( <( <( I <( <:( <::: <( <:( a.. a.. a.. a.. a.. I a.. a.. 0.1 a.. a.. a... I a. I a.. a..
~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 g g g g g goo 0 0 0 0 0 0 01010..
r- 0 C"), 0 C') 0 C'1 .... I.... 0 C") 0 C'} 0 C") 0 I C") 0 (") 0 (!)
r:..: r=-:jii:i1cc iriim ~;2:..... .....I~ ~.......... N'NI~ hi,;:: -<i!.(j ti'j:cD~
~
..J
W
>
W
.J
~
i! >.
" <i
~ g-
- on w
~ g'~
~ :g
, .
. "-
c.
~
.J
UJ
>
W
.J
-
APPENDIX A
Chula Vista Gateway Parking
Supply/Occupancy Record Sheet
\3->J-- CJ[)' >j~S LL v't. L s:
;)-(.,. /D IJ-
.5 18
,.- r
..:> /73
,~ /""J ~
11. ['V 11 L ~
I(: - \C
\-
(II
') s
...t rV~ i~e; LEo U 12. l-
~ f dd--
tfl Cf g'f-1. I{ gL{~t
.5 'IS g J I : 11 S ,/-' "
I <-I J
r ,..
I (yo.) ~
t . ~
9-3 <6 ~ /B
B I ~ TD \A. L
-
{t>oursiJ'L GADV~ rLDDt!,
r \>(\.Htj,.wil.,,\ ~ :>
r f -v\;:- 1//
:p I : I r I I . 1/
~ ~Iq c&/Cb I
~ f: I It I \'t-
t .1 I
'/ ~ iO-:-~~
LA;,\ l\ S(r-tt \'
ChuLK1 0S'[1"A, bA r€-04j
'?A e 'Cr to d-
6J.. - d-S- - D 7
..I:IJS1J.e. Le.veL 3
~ 1 J..-3
: Jr t ,; : t r t ,~: : I Jr l'
'i'
n
h
-.I
K
'"
/~
g
18
9-..
3
5 Ilr}9 g{l iJ L.f-Lf~ )
.s: l..y '1 e -!( T Lf' /';;z 1 \!) t
~t
..!
If)
/5
~
I <]
LE..\Je L i
( is
./
/
S ~ t ~f t t'+ a '-I 9~ i t. :c
5 "fib'; '1t;!.Lf Ii'
;?
~
>-
<!.
~4
'..-
v)
1 j Lf
'8
,J
~
,B
~
~
~
~
TABLE A
CHULA VISTA GATEWAY
SUNDAY PARKING STRUCTURE OCCUPANCY-COUNT SUMMARY
j~;~~~;k~~Ji
LEVEL 3
. ~;~~fi~~t:t
LEVEL 1
TIME
7;OD AM
7;30 AM
8;00 AM
8;30 AM
9;00 AM
9;30 AM
1;00 PM
1;30PM
2;00 PM
2;30 PM 1-
3;00 PM
3;30 PM
4;00 PM
4;30 PM
5;00 PM
5;30 PM
6;00 PM
Note: Parking occupancy counts conducted on Sunday, February 25. 2007.
Parking Supply:
(}
o
o
c5
fJ
o
o
o
o
6
D
o
D
o
LEVEL 5
parked
rn.':;~?ff~rke~ .
c
o
()
a
6
o
6
o
o
ATTACHMENT 9
PROPOSED
PRECISE PLAN GUIDELINES
PROPOSED PRECISE PLAN GUIDELINES PCZ-07-02
Minimum Building Setbacks: Third Avenue: o feet
Alvarado Street: o feet
H Street: o feet
Building Height: 54 feet (top of roof)
90 feet (top of spire)
Fence Height: 8 feet height (along interior/eastern)
property line
Parking: 261 of required parking spaces allowed off-
site. Shared parking will be allowed in
conjunction the following: I) parking study
showing excess parking available fi:om
DONOR during time of applicants need for
such spaces 2) copy of agreement between
DONOR and RECIPIENT.
Off-site Pedestrian Access: Modification of Section 19.62.040 of
CYMC to reqUIre only a two party
agreement between applicant and City
required ensunng that off-site parking
spaces will be provided.
ATTACHMENT 10
ADOPTED NOTICE OF DECISION
AND MEETING MINUTES
FROM DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
~{f?
~
~~
.-. -
Design Review Committee
NOTICE OF DECISION
CIlY OF
CHULA VISTA
Date:
Case No.:
Deposit Acct No.
Project Planner:
May 7, 2007
DRC-06-50
BL-765
Jeff Steichen
Notice is hereby given that on May 7, 2007, the Design Review Committee considered a Design
Review application filed by St. Rose of Lima Catholic Parish, requesting approval of a phased
renovation of the existing church campus ("Project") at the northeast corner of Third and H
Streets ("Project Site"). The Project is located within the R3 (Apartment Residential) Zone.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act and has determined, based upon the results of Initial
Study IS-06-013, the project could result in significant effects on the environment. However,
revisions to the project made by or agreed to be the applicant would avoid the effects or mitigate
the effects to a point where, clearly, no significant effects would occur; therefore, a Mitigated
Negative Declaration has been prepared.
The Design Review Committee; under the provisions of Section 19.14.582.1 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code, and based on the adopted development regulations and design guidelines, and
proposed precise plan guidelines (P 07-02) applicable to Project Site has conditionally approved
the Project contingent upon approval of Conditional Use Permit, PCC 06-42, Rezone, PCZ 07-02
and subject to the conditions listed below. The conditions of approval shall be satisfied to the
satisfaction of the City prior to issuance of building permits, unless otherwise specified on the
individual conditions:
Planning:
I. Prior to, or in conjunction with the submittal of plans for the first building permit, pay all
applicable fees, including any unpaid balances of permit processing fees for deposit
account DQ- 1299.
2. The colors and materials specified on the building plans must be consistent with the
colors and materials shown on the site plan and materials board approved by the Design
Review Committee on May 7,2007, or as subsequently modified per their direction
3. Window treatment of south elevation of second floor school administration building shall
be modified to incorporate the use of rosette window.
4. Prior to issuance of first building permit for Phase I, applicant shall provide the City with
the following: I) a copy of private parking agreement between the DONOR facility and
RECEPIENT ; 2) a 2 party agreement between City and applicant whereby applicant
DRC- 06-50
Page 2
agrees to provide for a minimmn of 46 off-site parking spaces. Said agreement shall be
reviewed and approved by Planniog, Engineering and City Attorney.
5. Prior to issuance of building permits for Phase III, applicant shall provide the City with
the following: I) copy of current contract between parking donor and applicant for a
minimum of 257 required off-site parking spaces, 2) new Shared Parking Study to verify
parking stiIl available and 3) updated 2 party agreement between City and applicant to
provide all required parking.
6. Prior to issuance of building permits for Phase III, A final landscape and irrigation plan
prepared by a landscape architect and submitted for review and approval prior to issuance
of building permits.
7. All ground mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc.,
shall be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a
combination of concrete or masonry waIls, berming, and/or landscaping to the
satisfaction of the City.
8. 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 permits. Additionally,
the project shall conform to Sections 9.20.055 and 9.20.035 of the CVMC regarding
graffiti controL
9. The Applicant shall develop, submit and obtain approval of "Recycling and Solid Waste
Management Plan" by the City's Conservation Coordinator. The synopsis of the plan
shall be included in the notes on the Building Plans. The plan shall demonstrate those
steps that the Applicant will take to comply ,with the Municipal Code, including but not
limited to Sections 8.24 and 8.25, and meet the State mandate to reduce or divert 50 % of
the waste generated by commercial, residential and industrial developments. The
Applicant shall contract with the City's fi:anchise hauler throughout the construction and
occupancy phase of the project. A "Recycling and Solid Waste Management Guide" is
available at the Planning and Building Department counter. The Plan shall include a
statement of how the Applicant will implement and participate in the Recycling and Solid
Waste Management Plan requirements. The proposed trash enclosure shall be designed
with appropriate screening. Said plan must include information to indicate how yard
waste will be diverted.
10. Prior to construction of Phase III, applicant shall return to Design Review Committee for
review and approval of !be church/sanctuary. Design approval shall be based upon
conceptual plans for church approved on May 7, 2007. In addition,. design shall
incorporate the existing architectural mission theme as well as color and material
elements of the Gateway Plaza to the west.
DRC- 06-50
Page 3
Engineering:
II. The following fees shall be paid based upon the final building plans submitted:
a) Sewer Connection and Capacities fees
b) Development Impact Fees
c) Traffic Signal Fees
12. The applicant shall obtain a construction permit fi:om the Engineering Department to
perform the following work in the City's right-of-way:
a) Sewer lateral connections to existing public utilities. The Public Works
Operations Sewer Section will need to inspect any existing sewer laterals
proposed to be used with the project and determine if they require replacement.
Any proposed future sewer connections should be shown.
b) All existing driveways or existing pedestrian ramps along the project fi:ontage
shall be removed and replaced to meet current City and American Disability Act
(ADA) standards. Any cracked or broken sections of curb, gutter or sidewalk
along the project frontage shall be removed and replaced as determined by City
inspectors.
c) Seven and one-half (7 \'2) feet of street widening along H Street with a transition
to existing curb line between the two proposed driveways. New sidewalk along H
St shall be 8 feet wide and transition to existing sidewalk as approved by the City
Engineer. Relocation of any existing utilities such as storm drains or traffic
signals as a result of the street widening shall be the responsibility of the
applicant.
13. Grading plans in conformance to the City's Subdivision Manual and a grading permit
will be required prior to issuance of any building permits. A drainage study and
geotechnical/soils study are required with the first submittal of grading plans. The
drainage study should show pre and post-construction storm drainage flows into the
public drainage system and/or streets. If the post-construction flow exceeds the existing
or pre-construction flow, detention basins may be needed to detain the additional flow
created by !be proposed project.
14. Dedication of sufficient right-of-way along H St to accommodate street widening
required by condition 12 above. Dedication of right-of-way as needed along any fronting
street for installation of new driveways and/or pedestrian ramps to meet current ADA
requirements.
15. An improvement plan prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer showing the street
widening on 'H' Street shall be submitted to the City and said improvements shall be
guaranteed by bonding before approval of any Building Permits. Any additional
improvements required as a result of the widening (storm drain inlet relocation, traffic
DRC- 06-50
Page 4
signal relocation, pedestrian ramp relocation, etc.) shall be included on said improvement
plans.
Storm Water Management
16. The applicant is required to complete the applicable Storm Water Compliance Forms and
comply with the City of Chula Vista's Storm Water Management Standards
Requirements Manual.
17. The applicant is required to implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent
pollution of the storm water conveyance systems, both during and after construction.
Permanent storm water requirements shall be incorporated into the project design, and
shall be shown on the plans. Any construction and non-structural BMPs requirements
that cannot be shown graphically must be either noted or stapled on the plans.
18. The City of Chula Vista requires that all new development and significant redevelopment
projects comply with the requirements of the NPDES Municipal Permit, Order No. 2001-
01. According to said Permit, all projects falling under the Priority Development Project
Categories are required to comply with the Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plans
(SUSMP) and Numeric Sizing Criteria.
19. Development of the project shall comply with all applicable regulations, established by
the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEP A), as set forth in the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requiretnents for urban runoff
and storm water discharge, and any regulations adopted by the City of ChuIa Vista
pursuant to the NPDES regulations and requirements. Further, the applicant shall file a
Notice of Intent (NOl) with the State Water Resource Control Board to obtain coverage
under the NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with
Construction Activity and shall implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP) concurrent with the commencement of grading activities. The SWPPP shall
include both construction and post-construction pollution prevention and pollution
control measures, and shall identify funding mechanisms for the maintenance of post-
construction control measures.
20. The applicant is required to identify storm water pollutants that are potentially generated
at the facility, and propose Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be implemented
to prevent such pollutants fi:om entering the storm drainage systems.
21. A water quality study will be required to demonstrate compliance with the requirements
of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction and
Municipal Permits, including Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plans (SUSMP)
and Numeric Sizing Criteria requirements, with the first submittal of
grading/improvement plans, in accordance with the City's Manual.
DRC- 06-50
Page 5
Fire:
22. Building permits shall comply with 2001 Ca. Fire Code, and applicable Chula Vista Fire
Department regulations. Contact Fire Inspector Gary Edmonds at 619-409-5851 for
specific requirements prior to permit submittal.
23. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a revised plans to the Fire
Department for review and approval which comply with the following:
a. Relocate the proposed Fire Department Connection and Post Indicator Valve. to
the median or other accessible location within the proposed parking lot.
b. Two additional (on-site) fire hydrants shall be provided, one on each of the street
sides of the proposed rolling gates for the middle parking lot area. Said hydrants
must be within 50 feet of the Fire Department Connections.
24. Buildings shall be protected by an approved fire sprinkler and alarm system, as required
by the Fire Department.
25. Comply with all other requirements of the Fire Department including obtaining an
operational permit of public assembly.
This Design Review approval shall be subject to any and all new, modified or deleted conditions
imposed after approval of this permit to advance a legitimate governmental interest related to.
health, safety or welfare which the City shall impose after advance written notice to the
Applicant and after the City has given to the Applicant 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 Applicant of a substantial revenue source which the Applicant cannot, in
the normal operation of the use permitted, be expected to economically recoVer. Approval of this
request 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 permit issuance.
The property owner and the applicant shall execute this document by making a true copy of this
Notice of Decision and signing both this original notice 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 prior to submittal for building permits to
the Planning Department shall indicate the property owner/applicant's desire that the project, and
the corresponding application for building permits and/or a business license, be held in abeyance
without approval.
Signature of property owner
St Rose of Lima Catbolic Parish, 293 H St.
Date
Signature of Autborized Representative
Date
DRC- 06-50
Page 6
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 7th day of May, 2007.
AYES:
Bringas, Calvo, Hogan
NOES:
ABSTAIN: Alberdi
4:52:59 PM
5;14:40 PM
4:54:31 PM
Design Review Committee
Minutes
5
Mav 7, 2007
3. DRC-06-S0
St. .Rose of Lima Catholic Parish of the Diocese of
San Diego
The project is located at 293 H Street.
Desiqn Review for the phased renovation and expansion of
the existinq St. Rose of Lima Catholic Church and Parochial
School.
Project Manager: Jeff Steichen, Associate Planner
Chair Alberdi recused himself for this item and stated Mr. Bringas would be leading this part
of the meeting.
Staff Presentation:
Mr. Jeff Steichen, Associate Planner, presented the project details to the committee. He
stated that the project is located at 293 H Street and proposes a phased renovation and
expansion of the existing St. Rose of Lima Catholic Church and Parochial School. He
added that as far as the parking is concerned, because the project is based upon the
Urban Core Specific Plan, the residential areas were taken out. Therefore, this project will
be processed based upon the Municipal Code standards and as a result, a total of 429
parking spaces will be required at Phase 3 build out. The applicant is proposing 169
onsite parking spaces and is in the process of obtaining a formal agreement with the
Gateway Center across the westside of Third Avenue to utilize their large parking structure
to accommodate the 260 required offsite parking spaces.
Aoolicant Presentation:
Father John Dolan, pastor of St. Rose of Lima parish, introduced himself, project manager
Deacon Greg Smyth and their architect, David Pfeifer with Dominy and Associates.
Deacon Smyth stated they are here to seek approval of a master plan for their conditional
use permit, which involves phased repiacement of their facilities. Mr. Pfeifer presented a
PowerPoint presentation to the committee.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
That the Design Review Committee approve of the project subject to the conditions stated
in the draft Notice of Decision.
Public Comments:
None
Design Review Committee
Minutes
6
Mav 7, 2007
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION:
5;15;02 PM
During discussions, the following were noted as Committee comments/major concerns:
. How was it determined where the arcade was going to be. It doesn't seem
consistent as to where the windows are squared and where there is an arcade.
a Mr. Pfeifer stated they did not want it to look like one huge building. They
wanted to retain the sense of it being a campus of smaller buildings. They
felt if they did a continuous arcade all the way around the building, it would
have made it feel too massive.
. Would like to see a circular element of a window on the fa~ade that faces the play.
area on the northern portion of the school site.
a Mr. Pfeifer said that was very doable.
. It looks like the arcade between the school and parish hall along Third Avenue will
be open to the street. Is the intention to have fencing or something closing off the
arches so pedestrians do not go through there.
a Mr. Pfeifer stated there are 12-foot tall arches in the center elevation and
the lower 6-feet of them will be solid wall. There will be security grills or
ornamental iron above that.
. Since there is no elevation or rendering with the tower on the opposite side, other
than blocking the entry courtyard, are there any other implications that will have.
a Deacon Smyth said the diocesan liturgical committee generally likes to see
a gathering area outside the front door in churches. With the tower in the
original position, it impinged upon the gathering area. By moving it over, it
made the gathering area larger. He also stated the City asked them to put
a right turn lane on H Street, which caused them to have to cheat the
building S to 8-feet north. The fact that the tower was moved over gave
them the luxury of doing that without hurting the gathering area.
. In looking at the corners on Third Avenue, H Street and Alvarado, they feel like the
back of the church and wondered if there was a way to make them feel more like
a corner point of view than what it is right now.
a Mr. Pfeifer stated that the church is S-years down the road. What they are
looking for at this time is the approval of the master plan of phases 1 and
2. When the church is designed, it would come back to the Design Review
Board and they would have really studied those issues. Deacon Smyth
added that Community Development stipulated that they had to have a
door there and there is an entry now incorporated in the floor plan of the
church. It is a work in progress and completion is contingent upon
fundraising.
. Are there any materials, colors or textures that could be used as accent points to
the Gateway Center without trying to be a mirror image in character, but being
complimentary to it.
a Father Dolan said from the onset, they wanted to make sure it would
compliment the Gateway Center. He felt they could include some of the
elements on their project.
Mr. Steichen clarified that tonight, the committee would be approving the master plan and
the architectural design of phases 1 and 2. They have added into the conditions of
approval, Item #10, that states prior to construction of phase 3, applicant shall return to
Design Review Committee
Minutes
7
Mav 7, 2007
the Design Review Committee for review and approval of the church sanctuary. Design
approval should be based upon conceptual plans for the church approved today. In
addition, the design shall incorporate the existing architectural mission theme and this
would be the appropriate spot if the committee wanted to add any additional language
regarding the church.
H;34 PM
MSC (BringasjHogan) (3-0-1-0) Approve DRC-06-S0 project as presented with
the condition on item #10 to incorporate accent colors and materials that
would be complimentary to the Gateway Plaza, which can be reviewed in the
future; and adding the rosette onto the phase 1 building which faces the play.
area.
J2:SS PM
Chair Alberdi rejoined the meeting at this time.
ATTACHMENT 11
PLANS (ATTACHED TO PACKET)
ATTACHMENT 12
OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE FORM
~I!?-
-,-
r __
P I ann
n g
&
Building
Planning Division J
Department
Development Processing
CITY OF
CHULA VISTA
APPLICATION APPENDIX B
Disclosure Statement
Pursuant to Council Policy 101-01, prior to any action upon matters that wiil require discretionary action by the Councii,
Planning Commission and ail other official bodies of the City, a statement of disclosure of certain ownership or financiai
interests, payments, or campaign contributions for a City of Chuia Vista eiection must be filed. The following information
must be disciosed:
1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the property that is the subject of the application or the
contract, e.g., owner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, materiai supplier.
OWNER: THE ROMAN CATEOLIC.BISHOP OF SAN DIEGO, A SOLE CORPORATION
DBA ST. ROSE OF LIMA CATHOLIC BARISH, 293 H STREET, CHULA VISTA, CA 91910
2. if any person. identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals with
a $2000 investment in the business (corporation/partnership) entity.
N/A
3. If any person. identified pursuant to (1) above is a non-profit organization or 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.
THE ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP OF SAN. DIEGO, A SOLE CORPORATION
DBA ST. ROSE OF LIMA CATHOLIC PARISH
FATHER JOHN ))OLAN
4. Please identifyevery person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or Independent contractors you have
assigned to represent you before the City in this matter.
FATHER JOHN DOLAN
DEACON GREG SMYTH
MR. j)AVID PFEIFER, AIA
MR. A. LEWIS'DOMINY, AIA
5. Has any person. associated with this contract had any financiai dealings with an official- of the City of Chula
Vista as it relates to this contract within the past 12 months. Yes_ No~
If Yes, briefiy describe the nature of the financial interest the official.. may have in this contract
6. Have you made a contribution of more than $250 within the past tweive (12) months to a current member of the
Chuia Vista City Council? No -.! Yes ~ If yes, which Councii member? .
176 Fourth Avenue
ChuJa Vista
California
91910
(619) 691-5101
~\r~
-p-
r -
planninG
o
& Building
Planning Division
Department
Development Processing
mY OF
CHUIA VISTA
APPLICATION APPENDIX B
Disclosure Statement - Page 2
7. Have you provided more than $340 (or an item of equivalent value) to an official" of the City of Chula Vista in the
past twelve (12) months? (This includes being a source of income, money to retire a legal debt, gift, loan, etc.)
Yes No--L
If Yes, which officlal** and what was the nature of item provided?
Date: 09 SEPTEMBER 2006
f Contractor/Applicant
REV. JOHN P. DOLAN, PASTOR
type name of Contractor/Applicant
Print or
*
Person is defined as: any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture; association, social club, fraternal
organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, any other county, city, municipality, district, or other
political subdivision, cor any other group or combination acting as a unit.
**
Official includes, but is not limited to: Mayor, Council member, Planning Commissioner,. Member of a board,
commission, or commitiee of the City, employee, or staff members.
....~----_._-_.
_...____._. .___ ._'J]~_. Lq~LL.b., .0y_~~~~..__L__s:~h_~_.La.._~~'~_~p___ .t._f~.!L~E~J~___L _.._~-~~. ~g ___._.L. !_~2.~.1..~_:'..:_~~._~_~~___._
". .--- ,-....-.....- -...-----.-..-..
CHULA VISTA
PLANNING
COMMISSION
AGENDA STATEMENT
Item: 4
Meeting Date: 6/27/07
ITEM TITLE: PCA-07-06, Consideration of two ordinances with proposed amendments
to Title 19 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code relating to I) the name and
functions of the Design Review Committee, and 2) the procedures for the
Resource Conservation Commission to officially designate historic
resources within the City ofChula Vista.
SUBMITTED BY: John Schmitz, Principal Planner
REVIEWED BY: Jim Hare, Assistant Director of Planning
BACKGROUND
The City Clerk has reviewed the sections of the Chula Vista Municipal Code dealing with the
City's various appointed citizen advisory boards and commissions and has discovered that not all
the rules and procedures are consistent, and that some are scattered in various sections
throughout the code. In an effort to provide consistency in how these boards and commissions
function, the City Clerk, in consultation with the City Attorney's Office and the departments
charged with supporting the board or commission, has prepared a series of ordinance
amendments that will place all appointment, terms and procedures in CVMC Title 2 -
Administration and Personnel. Some of these changes involve Title 19, which, according to
Sections 19.12.020 and 19.12.090, require a recommendation by the Planning Commission
before approval by the City Council.
ENVIRONMENT AL REVIEW
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that there is no possibility
that the activity may have a significant effect on the environment; therefore, pursuant to Section
15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no
environmental review is necessary.
RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission approve the attached resolution recommending that the City
Council adopt the two proposed ordinances amending sections of Title 19 to: I) rename the
Design Review Committee to the Design Review Board throughout, relocate certain procedure
PCA-06-02
Page No.2
requirements from Title 19 to Title 2, and make minor amendments to the design review process
and procedure requirements that will remain in Title 19; and, 2) relocate the historic designation
procedures used by the Resource Conservation Commission from Title 2 to Title 19.
DISCUSSION
As noted in the Background section of this report, the City Clerk's proposed ordinance
amendments are intended to be primarily "housekeeping" changes to provide consistency in
locating the regulations for how the various boards and commissions are appointed, meet and
conduct their business. This hearing is for the Planning Commission to consider two of the
ordinance documents that the Clerk has prepared because they involve changes to Title 19. The
Planning Commission is charged with reviewing changes to Title 19 and making a
recommendation to the City Council for consideration before taking action.
Design Review Committee (DRC)
The Clerk's primary goal is to get all the language dealing with the purpose, membership and
basic functions of a board or commission in Title 2 - Administration and Personnel. Currently
there is no chapter in Title 2 dealing with the design review advisory group and that all of the
ordinance "intent" and "function" language is in Title 19 - Zoning and Specific Plans. This
amendment would correct that by creating a Chapter 2.49 devoted to the "Design Review
Board." The Clerk also noticed that this appointed advisory body is the only one not officially
referred to as a board or commission. In consultation with Planning Division staff it was decided
that renaming the "committee" to "board" was appropriate and would be consistent with the term
used in many other local jurisdictions.
While working on this ordinance change, staff further noted that some of the findings and
procedures for the design review process are either not clear or do not reflect standard practice
for other discretionary applications processed within the Planning and Building Department. It
was decided that this would be an appropriate time to make some minor amendments to address
this issue. The proposed name change and procedural clarifications were presented to the DRC
for their review and comment on March 5 of this year. The DRC had only one objection to a
staff proposal that was intended to clarify what projects the Zoning Administrator could act
upon. This earlier proposal would have allowed the Zoning Administrator to act upon new
buildings up to 20,000 square feet in size. In response to the DRC's concern, and in keeping
with the intent that this ordinance amendment be a housekeeping exercise, not an extensive
rework of the code, staff has removed that section from consideration at this time.
Resource Conservation Commission (RCC)
The RCC has responsibility for considering whether a property is historically significant and
making a recommendation to the City Council on whether the property should be listed with
other recognized historic places in Chula Vista. Such properties could also receive a special
designation that would help preserve it by limiting the physical changes allowed, and making it
eligible for a Mills Act agreement to reduce the property taxes.
Currently the descriptions of the purpose and duties of the RCC are located in CVMC Title 2,
along with the procedures for how the RCC goes about reviewing and making a recommendation
on designating a historic property. To make the Title 2 language for the RCC consistent with the
PCA-06-02
Page No.3
other boards and commissions, the Clerk is proposing to pull the detailed historic designation
procedures out of Title 2 and place them in a new chapter in Title 19. This proposed change was
reviewed with the RCC at their meeting of April 16th and the commission had no objections.
DECISION-MAKER CONFLICTS:
Staff has reviewed the decision contemplated by this action and has determined that it is not site
specific and consequently the 500 foot rule found in California Code of Regulations Section
I 8704.2(a)(1) is not applicable to this decision.
FISCAL IMPACT
The adoption of this ordinance amendment will not alter the way design review or historic
preservation activities are currently conducted in the City of Chula Vista thus there will be no
impact on the City's general fund.
ATTACHMENTS
1 Draft Planning Commission Resolution
2 Draft Ordinances (2)
J:\PlanninglJohnS\ZO Update\Interim-Maint Issues\City Clerk Amcnd\StafT Reports\PC Agenda Statement.doc
PCA 07-06 Staff Report
A TT ACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. PCA-07-06
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
ADOPT ORDINANCES AMENDING PORTIONS OF TITLE 19 OF
THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE
NAME AND FUNCTIONS OF THE DESIGN REVIEW
COMMITTEE AND THE PROCEDURES FOR THE RESOURCE
CONSERVATION COMMISSION TO OFFICIALLY DESIGNATE
HISTORIC RESOURCES IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA.
WHEREAS, the City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista is proposing a senes of
housekeeping amendments to the Chula Vista Municipal Code (CVMC) to provide
consistency in where regulations are located and how the various appointed citizen advisory
boards and commissions function; and,
WHEREAS, Planning Division staff has worked with the City Clerk and the City
Attorney to review the existing regulations for the Design Review Committee and the
Resource Conservation Commission to determine what amendments would be appropriate in
keeping with the housekeeping theme of this effort; and,
WHEREAS, proposed organization and language changes to Title 2 - Administration
& Personnel, and Title 19 - Zoning & Specific Plans were developed and reviewed with the
Design Review Committee and with the Resource Conservation Commission at regularly
scheduled public meetings on March 5, 2007, and April 16, 2007, respectively; and,
WHEREAS, CVMC Sections 19.12.020 and 19.12.090 require that the City Council
receive a recommendation from the Planning Commission when considering any amendments
to CVMC Title 19; and,
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the proposed
ordinance amendment is exempt pursuant to Section l506l(b)(3)(General Rule) of the State
CEQA Guidelines; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a hearing on said
amendment and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in
a newspaper of general circulation in the City as least ten days prior to the hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely June 27,
2007, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning
Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of
Chula Vista that from the facts presented at the hearing it finds as follows:
Page 2
I. That the name of the Design Review Committee should be changed to Design Review
Board to be consistent with the language of the City Charter which only uses the terms
boards and commissions for appointed citizen advisory groups.
2. That the proposed organization and language changes for the Design Review Board and
the Resource Conservation Commission are necessary and appropriate given the City
Clerk's effort to bring clarity and consistency to the regulation for all the City of Chula
Vista's boards and commissions.
3. That the draft ordinances attached to this resolution and shown as Attachments "A" and
"B" accurately reflect the changes, if any, the Planning Commission deems necessary.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City ofChula Vista that it
recommends that the City Council adopt the ordinances, attached to this Resolution as
Attachments "A" and "B", amending portions of Title 19 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code
relating to the name and functions of the Design Review Committee and the procedures for the
Resource Conservation Commission to officially designate historic resources in the City of
Chula Vista.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City ofChula Vista that a
copy of this Resolution and its Attachment be transmitted to the City Council.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISION OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 27'h day of June, 2007, by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
Brian Felber, Chair
Diana Vargas
Secretary to Planning Commission
J:\PlanningVohnS\ZO Update\Interim-Maint Issues\City Clerk AmendIStaffReports\PCA-07-06_PC Reso.doc
PCA 07-06 Staff Report
A TT ACHMENT 2
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING
PORTIONS OF MUNICIPAL CODE TITLES 2, 15 AND 19
REGARDING THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AND
RENAMING THE COMMITTEE TO THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
WHEREAS, the City Clerk's Office provides support for all boards and commissions in
the member appointment and reappointment process; by collecting attendance and activity
reports; and by providing training to members and staff on meeting protocol, agenda and
noticing requirements, and operational rules and regulations; and
WHEREAS, the rules and regulations governing boards and commissions are currently
contained in the Municipal Code, Charter, Council Policies, and City Council minutes; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk has identified inconsistent, redundant, outdated, and
conflicting rules and regulations pertaining to the treatment of boards and commissions, which
has made it difficult to provide adequate training and which has resulted in inefficiency and a
waste ofresources in the administration of boards and commissions; and
WHEREAS, among the inconsistencies is the fact that the Design Review Committee is
treated in significant ways as a City board or commission; its rules are similar to those governing
boards and commissions; but it is created and governed by rules that are housed in chapter 19.14
of the Municipal Code, separate from the creating ordinances and rules governing other boards
and commissions; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk proposes that the Design Review Committee be re-designated
as the Design Review Board so that the rules governing appointment and reappointment of its
members and the administration of its day-to-day activities are clearly the same as those
governing other City boards and commissions; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk proposes to retain the substantive functions, duties, and
responsibilities of the Design Review Committee currently set forth in Municipal Code chapter
19.14 and to amend chapter 19.14 to remove the language governing the creation, intent and
purpose, membership qualifications, meeting requirements, and similar matters and place them in
chapter 2.49 of Title 2, which contains the establishment ordinances for other boards and
commissions; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk further proposes housekeeping amendments to other sections
of the Municipal Code to reflect the change in name from Design Review Committee to Design
Review Board; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Director and Planning Commission concur with the City
Clerk's proposals; and
WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes the significance of the problems identified by
the City Clerk and believes that it is in the best interests of the City to adopt the City Clerk's
recommendations.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City ofChula Vista does hereby ordain as
follows:
SECTION I. Municipal Code Chapter 2.49 is hereby created to contain language formerly
found in Municipal Code Sections 19.14.581, 19.14.584, 19.14.588, to read as follows:
Chapter 2.49
Design Review Board
2.49.010 Creation of Design Review Board.
In order to relieve the Planning Commission of certain routine functions
necessary to the proper administration of CVMC Title 19, to intensify this municipality's
efforts to improve its townscape, and to promote the orderly growth and amenity of the
City and environs, there is established a Design Review Board with such authority as is
granted by this chapter and CVMC sections 19.14.579 through 19.14.600. The provisions
of this chapter and CVMC chapter 2.25 shall govern this Board.
2.49.020 Purpose and intent.
The Design Review Board's purpose is to ensure that development within the City
of Chula Vista is orderly, of high quality, and consistent with City-approved design
guidelines.
2.49.030 Functions and duties.
The functions and duties of the Design Review Board are generally to review
plans and to review appeals of sign design rulings. The Board's functions and duties are
more specifically set forth in CVMC 19.14.582.
2.49.040 Membership.
A. The Design Review Board shall consist of five members appointed by a
majority vote of the Council. The membership shall be comprised of persons sensitive to
design consideration and interested in townscape matters. Persons qualified for
membership shall include architects, landscape architects, land planners, developers, and
other design professionals with suitable experience.
B. All members should be familiar with and able to read and interpret
architectural drawings; be able to judge the effect of a proposed project, structure, or sign
upon the surrounding neighborhood and community; and be able to determine the validity
of the cost/benefit reports submitted by applicants in the consideration of potential
modifications.
2.49.050 Regular meetings to be held twice a month.
The Design Review Board shall meet at least twice each month. The Board may
also call special meetings in accordance with CVMC 2.25.340.
SECTION II. Municipal Code sections 2.55.020 and 2.55.080 are hereby amended to read as
follows:
2
2.55.020 Purpose and intent.
It is the purpose and intent of the City Council in establishing the Chula Vista
Redevelopment Corporation to create a separate entity to serve as a resource to, and to
advise and make recommendations to, the City Council and Redevelopment Agency
regarding planning and redevelopment of designated territories and areas of the City. The
Redevelopment Corporation shall assume certain powers and responsibilities with respect
to planning and redevelopment that were previously delegated or assigned to the
Redevelopment Agency, the Planning and Resource Conservation Commissions, and the
Design Review Board of the City.
2.55.080 Previous Design Review Board functions.
Notwithstanding any provision of CVMC chapter 19.14, the Chula Vista
Redevelopment Corporation shall carry out the duties of the Design Review Board within
those geographic areas of the City that the City Council designates as areas within which
the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation has the authority to exercise planning and
redevelopment functions.
SECTION III. Municipal Code section 15.44.030 is hereby amended to read as follows:
15.44.030 Application for permit.
A. Whenever an existing building, house or structure is moved from its present
location outside the City to a new location within the City, or !Tom one location within
the City to another location within the City, the house mover or other person, firm or
corporation moving a house, building, or structure shall, prior to moving, file an
application for a moving permit with the Department of Planning and Building. The
application shall contain the following information:
I. Present location of building to be moved;
2. Location to which it is proposed to move the building;
3. Route proposed to be followed in moving the building;
4. A sufficient number of detailed plans and specifications of work to be
done that shall include and indicate all exterior and interior alterations
and decorating, elevations, additions and repairs, together with such
other plans and plats that may be required by any other ordinance of
the City;
5. Buildings to be used in multifamily projects shall also be subject to
design review through the Design Review Board, as provided under
CVMC 19.14.582. The fee shall be as specified in the master fee
schedule;
6. Colored photographs of building elevation before moving and
buildings immediately adjacent to the new building location;
7. A termite and fungus inspection report by a California-licensed pest
control company. Infestation and fungus, when found, shall be
corrected and a certificate issued by the pest control company doing
the work.
3
B. Upon receipt of a moving permit application and the payment of a plan check
fee, the Building Official shall cause an inspection to be made of the building or
structure. A report of the inspection shall be included with the permit records.
C. Any application for a permit to move any building, house or structure may be
denied by the Building Official if, in the opinion of the Building Official, the building,
house or structure cannot be altered or rehabilitated to conform to the Housing Code as
adopted by the City.
SECTION IV. Municipal Code section 19.06.030 is hereby amended to read as follows:
19.06.030 Implementation.
The systematic implementation of the general plan or any general plan element as
provided in Section 65303 of the Government Code of the state may be undertaken by the
adoption of specific plans, which shall include all detailed regulations, conditions,
programs and proposed legislation that may be necessary or convenient for such
implementation. The general plan may also be implemented by the adoption of zoning
ordinances that shall, in accordance with Section 65860 of the Government Code of the
state, be consistent with the general plan.
When a general plan amendment is adopted and existing zoning is thereby
inconsistent with the general plan, and the developer desires to develop the property in
accordance with the existing zoning, the developer must first submit a proposed
amendment to the general plan. All amendments shall be subject to public hearings by the
Planning Commission and the City Council. If the amendment is adopted, the developer
can proceed with the normal processing of the development proposal.
Notwithstanding the above provisions, those projects that have been substantially
processed consistent with existing zoning and that are affected by the general plan
amendment may proceed; provided that the Zoning Administrator issues, in each case, a
permit to complete processing based upon the findings that the effectiveness of the
general plan and the order and amenity of the community would not be substantially
impaired by the issuance of the permit.
Projects shall be deemed to be substantially processed where the property owners
have procured approved tentative subdivision or parcel maps, building permits,
conditional use permits, or Design Review Board approvals in furtherance of the
proposed projects. The Zoning Administrator, furthermore, may deem that projects have
been substantially processed where the involved property owners have submitted
tentative subdivision or parcel maps or applications for design review, but are awaiting
consideration by the appropriate City agency or official, as well as projects that have
been submitted to the Department of Planning and Building for design review
consideration not more than six months prior to the adoption of the general plan. The
property owner shall provide evidence to the Zoning Administrator not more than 90
days after the general plan adoption that the submittal of project plans has occurred
within the aforementioned specified period to qualify for this provision.
In addition, projects that have been submitted to the Department of Planning and
Building for design review consideration after the adoption of the 1989 general plan
update (July II, 1989) and before the adoption of Ordinance No. 2327 (September 5,
1989) may be processed; provided the property owners submit evidence that such
submittal has taken place.
Appeals to the Planning Commission from the actions of the Zoning
Administrator may be filed within 10 days after the dates of the actions of the Zoning
Administrator. Further appeals to the City Council may be submitted pursuant to the
provisions ofCVMC 19.14.110 and 19.14.130.
4
SECTION V. Municipal Code section 19.07.030 is hereby amended to read as follows:
19.07.030 Zoning implementation
A. Specific plans may be implemented through the adoption of standard zoning
ordinances, the planned community zone, as provided in this title, or by plan effectuation
standards incorporated within the text of an individual specific plan. The method of
implementing an individual specific plan shall be established and expressed by its
adopting resolution or ordinance.
If the specific plan is to be implemented through the use of standard zones,
any open space uses or other public uses so designated on the specific plan may be
allowed to be developed in a manner logically consistent with and in conformity to
adjacent and contiguous land uses as shown on the specific plan; provided, however, the
developer must show that such development, which must be residential, thus allowed will
not increase the overall density of the total area incorporated into the specific plan.
Further, in no case shall any designated open space land, or land designated for other
public use in the specific plan, be developed for any use other than residential. Should all
adjacent and contiguous land uses be designated for uses other than residential, the
underlying land use on such open space may be requested for development at no greater
density than that allowed in the R-E zone.
B. If any territory subject to an adopted specific plan is zoned P-C, the involved
property owners may register their concurrence with terms and provisions of the adopted
specific plan, and may proceed with development in accordance therewith; provided that
the required fees are paid and the procedural and substantive requirements of the P-C
zone are met. The registration of concurrence shall, by operation of law, establish the
adopted specific plan as the general development plan of the involved P-C zone. If the
property owners do not register their concurrence with the terms and provisions of the
adopted specific plan, they may proceed with the development of their property through
the use of standard zoning, as provided hereinabove.
C. When a specific plan is adopted and existing zoning is thereby inconsistent
with the specific plan, and the developer desires to develop the property in accordance
with the existing zoning, the developer must first submit a proposed amendment to the
specific plan. All such amendments shall be subject to public hearings by the Planning
Commission and the City Council. If the amendment is adopted, the developer can
proceed with the normal processing of the development proposal.
Notwithstanding the above provisions, those projects that have been
substantially processed consistent with existing zoning and that are affected by a specific
plan may proceed; provided that the Zoning Administrator issues in each case a permit to
complete processing based upon the findings that the effectiveness of the specific plan
and the order and amenity of the community would not be substantially impaired by the
issuance of the permit.
Projects shall be deemed to be substantially processed where the property
owners have procured approved tentative subdivision or parcel maps, building permits,
conditional use permits, or Design Review Board approvals in furtherance of the
proposed projects. The Zoning Administrator, furthermore, may deem that projects have
been substantially processed where the involved property owners have submitted
tentative subdivision or parcel maps or applications for design review, but are awaiting
consideration by the appropriate City agency or official.
Appeals to the Planning Commission from the actions of the Zoning
Administrator may be filed within 10 days after the dates of the actions. Further appeals
to the City Council may be submitted pursuant to the provisions of CVMC 19.14.110 and
19.14.130.
5
SECTION VI. Municipal Code sections 19.14.050, 19.14.579, and 19.14.580 are hereby
amended to read as follows:
19.14.050 Public hearing - Mandatory when.
A. The Zoning Administrator may, at hislher option, refer any of the matters on
which he/she is authorized to rule and/or issue a permit pursuant to CVMC 19.14.030 to
the Planning Commission for review. In addition, a project applicant may request that
any such matter be referred directly to the Planning Commission for action. In such
cases, a public hearing as provided herein shall be mandatory.
B. Pursuant to CVMC 19.14.030, any person who disagrees with the ruling of the
Zoning Administrator may appeal such ruling to the Planning Commission. In such
cases, a public hearing as provided herein shall be mandatory. y person who disagrees
with a sign design ruling of the Zoning Administrator may appeal such ruling to the
Design Review Board. In such cases, the sign project ruling under appeal shall be
reviewed by the Design Review Board in accordance with CVMC 19.14.582.
C. Notwithstanding the above provisions, the Zoning Administrator may, at
hislher option, or upon appeal, refer applications for carnivals and circuses on which
he/she is authorized to issue a permit to the City Council for review. In such cases, a
public hearing as provided herein shall be mandatory.
19.14.579 Precise plan approval - Multiple-family dwellings and commercial or
industrial projects.
Notwithstanding the provisions of other sections of this chapter, the review of
precise plans for multiple-family dwelling, mixed use, commercial, or industrial projects
shall be procedurally governed by the rules adopted by the Design Review Board, created
under CVMC chapter 2.49
19.14.580 Precise plan approval - Multiple-family dwellings and commercial or
industrial projects - Zoning Administrator.
Following the approval or conditional approval of a precise plan for a multiple-
family dwelling, mixed use, commercial, or industrial project by the Design Review
Board, or upon appeal by the Planning Commission or City Council, the Zoning
Administrator shall issue a zoning permit, as provided in CVMC 19.14.500 through
19.14.550, and the Building Official shall ensure that the development is undertaken and
completed in conformance with the approved plan.
SECTION VII. Municipal Code section 19.14.582 is hereby amended to read as follows:
19.14.582 Functions and duties of the Design Review Board.
A. The Design Review Board shall review plans for the establishment, location,
expansion, or alteration of uses or structures in all planned residential developments,
multi-family residential, mixed use, commercial, and industrial developments for all
areas of the City, except within redevelopment project area boundaries. For areas not in a
redevelopment project area, the Design Review Board shall approve, conditionally
approve or deny such plans. When projects are within the boundaries of a redevelopment
project area, pursuant to CVMC 19.14.592, the Design Review Board shall have no
review authority unless a project is specifically referred to the Board by the Chula Vista
Redevelopment Corporation for a recommendation.
6
B. The Design Review Board shall also review plans for the establishment,
location, expansion or alteration of multiple-family dwelling uses, major use permits and
commercial or industrial projects or structures located within the 1985 Montgomery
annexation area and governed by CVMC chapter 19.70.
C. The responsibility of the Design Review Board shall be limited to the review
of site plans, landscaping, sign plans or programs, and the exterior design of buildings for
consistency with City-approved design guidelines. In reviewing a project, the Board
shall consider the costslbenefits of any recommended improvement as reported by the
applicant and reviewed by the staff.
D. The Design Review Board shall review all appeals filed to contest sign design
rulings of the Zoning Administrator.
E. The Design Review Board shall base its actions upon the following findings:
1. That the project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the
Chula Vista General Plan.
2. That the project meets the development standards ofCVMC title 19.
3. That the project meets the provisions of the adopted design manuals of
the City.
F. The Design Review Board shall adopt its findings and actions in the form of
written resolutions.
G. The Design Review Board shall adopt operational procedures and bylaws.
H. The fee for a hearing before the Design Review Board is set forth in the
master fee schedule.
1. The Zoning Administrator has the discretion, with the concurrence of the
applicant, to act in the place of the Design Review Board in the following situations:
I. Minor projects, such as exterior remodels of existing non-residential
buildings, including signs.
2. Commercial, industrial, or institutional additions that constitute less
than a 50 percent increase in floor area or 20,000 square feet,
whichever is less.
3. New residential projects of four units or less.
4. New commercial, industrial, or institutional projects with a total floor
area of 20,000 square feet or less when such projects are located
within a planned community area with its own design guidelines and
design review process.
A decision of the Zoning Administrator shall be documented in writing with the same
finding requirements applicable to the Design Review Board, and may be appealed to the
Design Review Board in the same manner as set forth in CVMC 19.14.583. The fee for
Zoning Administrator design review is set forth in the master fee schedule.
7
SECTION VIII.
Municipal Code section 19.14.583 is hereby amended to read as follows:
19.14.583 Procedure for appeals from Design Review Board decisions.
A. Except on decisions involving redevelopment projects, the applicant or other
interested persons may file an appeal from the decision of the Design Review Board to
the Planning Commission within 10 working days after the decision is filed with the City
Clerk. The applicant has the choice of filing an appeal from the Design Review Board
directly to either the Planning Commission or City Council. The appeal shall be in
writing and filed in triplicate with the Department of Planning and Building on forms
prescribed for the appeal, and shall specify therein the argument against the decision of
the Design Review Board. If an appeal is filed within the time limit specified, it
automatically stays proceedings in the matter until a detennination is made by the
Planning Commission or City Council. All appeals regarding projects within
redevelopment projects shall be filed with the Director of Community Development and
forwarded to the Redevelopment Agency.
B. Upon the hearing of such appeal, the Planning Commission may, by resolution,
affirm, reverse or modify, in whole or in part, any determination of the Design Review
Board. The resolution must contain a finding of facts showing wherein the project meets
or fails to meet the requirements of this chapter and the provisions of the design review
manual.
C. The decision of the Planning Commission may be appealed to the City Council
in the same manner as set forth in this section for appeals to the Planning Commission.
SECTION IX. Municipal Code section 19.14.587 is hereby amended to read as follows:
19.14.587 Effect of Design Review Board's Failure to have a Quorum.
If a project is scheduled for a meeting of the Design Review Board for final
approval and a quorum is not available for the scheduled meeting, the applicant may
choose to have the matter considered by the Design Review Board at its next meeting,
may request a special Board meeting to consider the matter, may request that the Board
application be considered by the Planning Commission (at no additional cost to the
applicant) at its next available meeting (subject to public noticing requirements) for
action, or may request that the Board application be referred directly to the City Council
(at no cost to the applicant) at its next available meeting (subject to public noticing
requirements) for action.
SECTION X. Municipal Code sections 19.14.591, 19.14.592 and 19.14.600 are hereby amended
to read as follows:
19.14.591 Continuance of project.
Any action by the Design Review Board to continue a project shall be done with
the concurrence of the applicant. If the applicant does not agree to a continuance of the
project, the Design Review Board shall render a decision. If the project is denied, an
explanation of the reasons for denial shall be provided in a written resolution adopted by
the Board pursuant to CVMC 19.14.582F.
8
19.14.592 Implementation of Design Review Board functions in designated areas by
Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation.
In accordance with CVMC 2.55, and notwithstanding any provision of this
chapter, the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation shall carry out the duties of the
Design Review Board within those geographic areas of the City that the City Council
designates as areas within which the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation has the
authority to exercise planning and redevelopment functions.
19.14.600 Design review approval- Time limit for implementation - Extensions.
A. Design review approval will be conditioned on the plan being implemented
within one year after the effective approval date thereof. Implementation of the plan
would include completion of construction or proof of substantial efforts by the property
owner preparatory to construction. If building permits issued in reliance upon an
approved plan subsequently expire, new pennits shall not be issued until the project has
been issued an extension in the manner described in subsection B.
B. An application for an extension of time must be submitted to the Zoning
Administrator by the property owner or applicant prior to the expiration date of the
original plan, and shall be accompanied by the required fee(s). Upon proper notice of the
extension request, the Zoning Administrator may grant an extension of time for a
currently valid plan, provided that the original findings of approval can still be made and
there has been no material change of circumstances since the original grant of approval
that would be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public
welfare.
C. No more than one extension of a plan may be granted by the Zoning
Administrator, after which one additional extension may be granted by the Design
Review Board after a public hearing.
SECTION XI. The Municipal Code is hereby amended to replace the phrase "design review
committee" with the phrase "Design Review Board" wherever it appears in Municipal Code
sections 15.56.020, 19.28.060, 19.28.070, 19.28.190, 19.56.048, 19.58.0220, 19.58.345,
19.60.510, 19.60.520, 19.60.530, 19.60.540, 19.60.550, 19.60.560, 19.60.570, 19.60.580,
19.60.590,19.60.810,19.70.017 and 19.87.003.
SECTION XVI. Municipal Code sections 19.14.581, 19.14.584, 19.14.586, 19.14.588,
19.14.589, 19.28.180, 19.28.190 are hereby repealed in their entirety.
SECTION XVII. This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from
and after its adoption.
Submitted by
Approved as to fonn by
Susan Bigelow
City Clerk
Ann Moore
City Attorney
9
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING
CHAPTER 2.32 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICP AL CODE
PERTAINING TO THE CREATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF
THE RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION AND ADDING
CHAPTER 19.15, SECTIONS 19.15.010, 19.15.020, AND 19.15.030, TO
THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROVIDE A PROCEDURE FOR THE
RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION TO USE TO MAKE
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PLACEMENT OF SITES ON THE
HISTORIC REGISTER AND TO REVIEW HISTORIC SITE PERMIT
APPLICATIONS
WHEREAS the City Clerk has identified many redundancies and confusing
inconsistencies pertaining to the City's boards and commissions in the Municipal Code; and,
WHEREAS, in a separate ordinance the City Council is adopting general rules intended
to govern all the City's boards and commissions, thereby eliminating the need for many
redundant and inconsistent provisions in the individual Municipal Code chapters creating the
individual boards and commissions; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that current Code provisions in CVMC chapter 2.32
governing the Resource Conservation Commission will be greatly improved by eliminating
provisions that are now redundant with the new general rules in CVMC chapter 2.25 and by
making other minor changes that will improve the clarity of chapter 2.32;
WHEREAS, the Resource Conservation Commission has authority under CVMC chapter
2.32 to review and make recommendations regarding the placement of sites on the City's historic
register and applications for historic site permits, and;
WHEREAS, the City Council believes it is desirable for the Commission to follow
procedures prescribed by the Council in its review of sites for placement on the historic register
and of applications for historic site permits, and
WHEREAS, the historic site review procedures to be used by the Commission are
currently housed in CVMC chapter 2.32, which establishes the Resource Conservation
Commission; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council believes that it would be more useful to the users ofthe
Municipal Code if the procedures are placed in a portion of the Municipal Code that contains
land use procedures.
NOW, THEREFORE, The City Council of the City ofChula Vista does hereby ordain:
SECTION 1. That Chapter 2.32 of the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code is amended to read as
follows:
Chapter 2.32
RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION
2.32.010 Created
There is hereby created a Resource Conservation Commission. The provisions of this chapter
and CVMC chapter 2.25 shall govern this Commission.
2.32.020 Purpose and intent.
In establishing the Resource Conservation Commission, it is the purpose and intent ofthe City
Council to create a broadly based, multifunctional commission which is to provide citizens'
advice to the City Council in the areas of energy conservation, resource recovery, environmental
quality, historic and prehistoric site protection, and other related fields as determined by the City
Council. The Resource Conservation Commission shall also provide this citizens' advice to the
other boards and commissions, the City Manager and members of the City Manager's staff on
these matters.
2.32.030 Statement of City goals and policies.
The following are goals and policies of the City which relate to the duties of the Resource
Conservation Commission:
A. Create and maintain conditions under which man and nature can exist in productive harmony
to fulfill the social and economic requirements of present and future generations;
B. Take all actions necessary to provide the people with clean air and water, enjoyment of
aesthetic, natural and scenic qualities, and freedom from excessive noise;
C. Prevent the elimination of fish or wildlife species due to population intrusion, assist in
assuring that these populations do not drop below self-perpetuating levels, and preserve for
future generations representations of indigenous plant and animal communities;
D. Ensure that the long-tenn protection of the environment shall be the guiding criterion in
decisions by the City;
E. Encourage the utilization of alternatives to nonrenewable energy sources;
F. Maximize the conservation and efficient utilization of nonrenewable resources;
G. Seek equitable sharing of both the benefits of energy consumption and the hardships of
energy shortages;
H. Minimize any conflict with any national, state, regional or local energy goals;
1. Maximize the recovery, recycling and reuse of waste resources through City action and
cooperation with other public agencies and private concerns;
J. Safeguard the City's historic, aesthetic, social, economic, political and architectural past; and,
K. Protect finite cultural and scientific resources which provide the only record of our historic,
prehistoric and natural past.
2.32.040 Functions and duties - General.
A. The Commission shall provide the City Council with a citizens' assessment of the fol1owing:
I. The effectiveness of proposed goals, policies, procedures and regulations of the City in
accomplishing the purpose, intent and goals of this chapter;
2
2. The effects of individual projects being subjected to environmental review on the
implementation of the purpose, intent and goals of this chapter;
3. The extent to which the capital improvement program implements this chapter;
B. The Commission may submit recommendations to the City Council for new goals, policies,
procedures or regulations necessary to implement this chapter;
C. The Commission may recognize individuals or groups in the community who have
implemented notable measures to foster the purpose, intent and goals of this chapter;
D. The Commission may hold hearings relating to any matter under investigation or in question
before this Commission.
2.32.050 Additional functions and duties - Environmental quality.
A. The chair, or a member of this Commission designated by the chair, shall be a member of the
environmental review committee.
B. The Commission, its chair or designated member may review all environmental documents to
assure adequate Commission review, analysis and comment.
C. In conjunction with input on environmental documents, the Commission may make
recommendations regarding the environmental impact, energy or resource conservation, or
impact on historic resources of the project to the appropriate decision making authority. These
recommendations may include methods to mitigate adverse effects, reduce energy or resource
consumption, or other suggestions within the purpose and intent of the Commission.
2.32.060 Additional functions and duties - Energy conservation and resource recovery.
A. All proposed energy or resources conservation or recovery policies, programs, or regulations
shall be reviewed by the Commission so it may make recommendations to the City Council
regarding compliance with this chapter.
B. The Commission may make recommendations to City staff, other boards or commissions, or
the City Council regarding the Commission's review of policies, programs or regulations.
C. The Commission shall review and make a recommendation to the Council for the disposition
of appeals regarding the administration of CVMC Title 20, Energy Conservation, except those
portions which are within the scope of the functions and duties of the Board of Appeals and
Advisors and the Planning Commission.
2.32.070 Additional functions and duties - Historical protection.
The Commission shall:
A. Recommend to the City Council the designation of any site which it has found to meet the
criteria as a historical site. The Commission shall also recommend if the historical site pennit
process, as provided in CVMC chapterl9.l5 should be imposed on the site;
B. Inspect any site which the Commission has reason to believe could meet the criteria for a
historical site;
C. Explore means for the protection, retention and preservation of any historical site, including,
but not limited to, appropriate legislation and financing, such as the establishment of a private
funding organization or individual, local, state or federal assistance;
D. Recommend standards for historical and aesthetic districts and the establishment of such
districts within the City;
E. Coordinate its activities with the county, the state and the federal government as appropriate
to prevent duplication of efforts; and,
3
F. Provide direction to staff for the preparation and maintenance ofa register of all designated
historical sites. The register shall include a description of the site, its location, the reason for its
designation and other information that the Commission determines is necessary. The register
shall be distributed to City departments, the owners and/or occupants of designated historical
sites and other interested civic or governmental agencies.
2.32.080 Administrative functions and duties.
A. In the event that private funds or funds from other governmental agencies are made available
for special projects, surveys, educational programs or general program support, upon
recommendation of the Commission and approval ofthe City Council, the City Manager may
enter into contracts to use the funds to further the intent of this chapter and to accomplish the
duties and functions of this Commission.
B. The Resource Conservation Commission shall have no power or right to acquire any property
for or on behalf of itself or the City, nor shall it acquire or hold any money for itself or on behalf
of the City. In addition, the Resource Conservation Commission shall not have the power or right
to negotiate with any party for the acquisition of property designated as a historic site.
2.32.090 Implementation of Resource Conservation Commission functions and duties in
designated areas by Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation.
In accordance with CVMC chapter 2.55 CVMC, and notwithstanding any provision of this
chapter, the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation shall carry out the duties of the Resource
Conservation Commission within those geographic areas of the City that the City Council
designates as areas within which the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation has the authority
to exercise planning and redevelopment functions.
2.32.100 Membership
The Resource Conservation Commission shall consist of seven voting members and as many
general ex-officio members as the City Council deems necessary and may appoint from time to
time.
SECTION 11. That Chapter 19.15 titled "Procedure for Resource Conservation Commission's
Review of Sites for Historic Register and Historic Site Permits" is added to the City of Chula
Vista Municipal Code to read as follows:
Chapter 19.15
Procedure for Resource Conservation Commission's Review of Sites
for Historic Register and Historic Site Permits
SECTION 111. That sections 19.15.010, 19.15.020, and 19.15.030 are added to the City ofChula
Vista Municipal Code to read as follows:
19.15.010 Procedure for recommeudiug desiguation as historic site and recommending imposition
of historic site permit process.
Under CYMC 2.32.070, the Resource Conservation Commission has authority to recommend to the City
Council the designation of any site which it has found to meet the criteria as a historical site. Under that
section, the Resource Conservation Commission also has authority to recommend if the historical site
4
pennit process, as provided in CYMC 2.32.070, should be imposed on the site. This chapter is intended to
provide procedures for the Commission to use to implement that authority.
19.15.020 Procedure for designation of site on historic register
Ten (10) days prior to the consideration by the Resource Conservation Commission of any site for
designation as a historical site, the owner shall be notified in writing that the site is under consideration
for inclusion in the register. The notice shall include the date, time and place of the meeting. For purposes
of this chapter, the owner of such property is the person appearing as the owner of such property on the
last equalized assessment roll of the county. Such notice shall be mailed to the address shown on the
assessment roll, in order for a person to appear and
protest such inclusion. The owner shall also be notified of any subsequent discussion or possible
actions regarding the potential site by the Commission or City Council.
19.15.030 Procedure for historical site permit process.
A. The City Council may, after considering a recommendation by the Resource Conservation
Commission, impose the permit restrictions contained in this section.
B. No pennit for the demolition, substantial alteration, or removal of any building, structure or
site shall be issued without first referring the matter to the Resource Conservation Commission, except
where the City Manager detennines that demolition, removal, or substantial alteration of any such
building, structure or site is immediately necessary in the interest of the public health, safety or general
welfare. The building, engineering and planning departments shall notify the Resource Conservation
Commission in writing within five days of any request it receives for any such pell11it.
C. The Resource Conservation Commission shall have 30 days from the date of such notification
within which to object to the proposed demolition, major alteration, or removal of the trees, plants or
other major landscaping. The Resource Conservation Commission shall file its objections with the City
Manager or his delegate. Upon the filing of such objections, no pell11its shall be issued for the demolition,
major alteration, or removal of the historic site for a period of not less than 30 nor more than 180 days.
The City Manager shall notify the appropriate departments of the filing of objections by the Resource
Conservation Commission. Failure to file objections within the 3D-day period is a waiver of all
objections, and the pell11it shall be issued in due course. When the Resource Conservation Commission
files objections with the City Manager pursuant to this chapter, all such objections, upon their transmittal
to the City Manager, shall in addition be transmitted to the applicant for any pennit or entitlement to
demolish, perfonn a major
alteration upon, or remove any historic site or other feature protected by the tenns of this chapter.
D. Upon the filing of objections, the Resource Conservation Commission shall take such steps
within the scope of its powers and duties as it detennines are necessary for the preservation of the
historical site. No such action shall be taken by the Resource Conservation Commission, however, until
the same has been submitted to and approved by the City Council. At the end of the first 30 days, the
Resource Conservation Commission shall report its progress to the City Council which may, upon review
of the progress report, withdraw and cancel the objection to the proposed demolition, major alteration or
removal, and the necessary pell11its shall then be issued. If at the end of the first 100 days of the aforesaid
180-day period, it is found that the preservation of the site, building or structure cannot be fully
accomplished within the 180-day period, and the Resource Conservation Commission detennines that
such preservation can be satisfactorily
completed within an additional period not to exceed 180 days, the Resource Conservation Commission
may recommend to the City Council that a request for extension be granted. Such recommendation shall
set forth the reasons therefor and the progress to that date of the steps taken to preserve the site. The City
Council may accept such recommendation for good cause shown and, ifit appears that preservation may
be completed within the time requested, may grant an extension of time not to exceed 180 days. No such
request for extension shall be made after the expiration of the original 180-day suspension period.
5
E. No person shall remove trees, plants or other major landscaping /Tom any property designated as an
historical site without the approval of the City's landscape architect. The City's landscape architect shall
notify the Resource Conservation Commission in writing of any such request within five days of its
receipt.
SECTION IV. This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from and
after its adoption.
Submitted by
Approved as to form by
Ann Moore
City Attorney
6